Is it live or is it Memorex?

Bukfan

"The law is wrong; I am right"
No, it's not the same, not even if you print out the original cover for the plastic case, but at least it's a physical copy. Of course, you could buy the original if you can't do without the label.

Btw, I doubt most LP's looks like the one in your example ;). They're mostly black, just like a CD is blank. Not that big a difference when it comes to looks, I think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

number6horse

okyoutwopixiesoutyougo
I think these LP enthusiasts are full of shit too. Looking for a WARMER SOUND than digital technology can provide..... no thanks. There's a reason my turntable lid has newspapers and mags stacked on top.

Wait. There's a reason my turntable is in the spare room to collect newspapers and mags in the first place. Oh yeah - outdated technology

Everything in my collection, except 70's-80's power-pop, is available on disc or file. And Cactus World News or Utopia is arriving soon anyway
 

nervas

more crickets than friends
glam.jpg
 

nervas

more crickets than friends
Hahah, Mark73, are you referring to the pic above? Because that's a man baby! None other than Bret Michaels, lead singer of Poison! Oh Yeah!
 
Yes, I was talking about the spandex lady above. She must have WASP Poison inside her lips. Why do beautiful women want to look like men?



Hahaha.
 
Sorry I'm gonna get technical...

Thought I would just interject here, being that I kinda do this thing in sound. So the idea that an LP might sound warmer has to do with the fact that you conceivably have no limits in frequency and dynamic range. (that is the theory anyway) The greater the dynamics the deeper the grooves and the higher or lower the frequency the smaller or wider the grooves.

In the world of Audio CDs the Red Book Standard is 44.1khz and 16 bits. That is STILL the standard today...
The idea is that the sample rate, 44.1 is double the Frequency range. They came up with that because as a Human you can only hear possibly up to around 18,000 hrz or 18Khz, and usually if you are older then say 20 you can't hear frequencies that high.
The bit depth is related to the Dynamic range, each bit representing 6 decibels, so 16 bits equals 96 db dynamic range. I.E. the threshold of hearing is around 130db. A loud rock band is around 130 db. A really fucking loud Rock Band.
With red book audio that is the standard. If you burn a Audio CD you are burning audio material at 44.1 k and 16 bits.

Today, as you record, prior to down sampling the Audio you have the choice to record at higher sample rates and bit depths.
Music tracks may be recorded at 192k or 96 k with a bit depth of 24. And then at the end of the mix or when you Master it, you down sample it to the Red Book Standard.
In most Film Sound the standard is 48k 24bits. The Production Dialog is almost always recorded at 48k 24bit. The original Sound effects may be recorded at the higher sample rates and then down sampled as it gets edited into the tracks.
The Score may be recorded at a Higher sample rate but the bite depth is for the most part 24 bits, which equals 144db of dynamic range.
I am working on a film now where the Score was recorded at 48k 24 bits, basically the logic behind it is that it will have to come to the mix at 48k 24 anyway so why not record it that way.

Although the technology is there with Blu Ray etc. to playback the higher sample rates, it is not as of yet wildly used. I must admit that music is more then likely recorded at higher sample rates and down sampled later.

The mp3 is a compressed medium of the one mentioned above. I.E. where there are duplicate digital bits it chucks the duplicate, making the file smaller.

The biggest difference between then and now is the way in which people mix. When Mp3s first came on to the scene people didn't mix for that medium, they were still mixing for CD and vinyl. And although they are not technically mixing for that medium now, they are much more aware of where it will end up and will take that in to account. Also now you have tools that give the mixers the opportunity to mix better for the medium. Mp3 is definitely an inferior quality, no doubt about it. But most of us, myself included, have come to accept the inferior quality due to convenience.

The live performance will always be the best, the higher the sample rate and bit depth the better the representation of the audio.
I think the Lp has it's place. And old recordings were based on ALL the technology at the time. Granted you have some great tube gear that totally kicks ass that is still in use today. The overall quality has been a growing beast. Mixing consoles today, if you are so inclined to go that way, are way better in some ways. The digital recorders and technology has evolved immensely. Today for what the end product is the tools have gotten much much better.

But... In the end it's the performance that does it for me.
Now you can have endless overdubs and make it feel like it has no feeling. Back in the day most of the musicians really had be able to play.
What you captured was a true performance. 1 or 2 takes and minimal over dubs if any. Musicians could really play. And above everything else that's what you hear and that to me is what spins my whinny.

Anyway sorry for rambling just thought I'd clear up the sample rate thingy.

Hope you all are having super cool holidays. :)
 

ROC

It is what it is
The live performance will always be the best...
Wrong.
But... In the end it's the performance that does it for me.
Well, that's a different thing to the previous comment, so maybe that's what you mean [?]
Musicians could really play.
Who?
This sort of smacks of 'Ah, those were the good old days!' Maybe your impressions, but hardly objective or demonstrable.
just thought I'd clear up the sample rate thingy.
Cool but...reproducing sound above 18,000 Hertz or below 20,000 Hertz influences and changes they way we perceive sounds in the audible spectrum. Hence true sub-woofers and super tweeters.

Also the threshold of pain is around 130db (depending on the individual). The threshold of hearing would be the figure at the lower end of the scale, no?
 

mjp

Founding member
strangegirl said:
Musicians could really play.
ROC said:
All of them.

ROC said:
Maybe your impressions, but hardly objective or demonstrable.
It's absolutely demonstrable. Put The Kings of Leon or MUSE in a studio, give them three hours to record a song on two tracks and see what you get (I'll give you a hint: they wouldn't even be able to get levels on the drum mics in three hours).

When recording was more primitive you had to rely on all of the musicians to get it right at the same time. That never, ever (ever!) happens in the studio anymore. And it rarely happens in a "live" concert, where a good deal of what you hear through the PA is pre-recorded, and the drummer is playing along with a computer in his or her earpiece. If they are playing at all.

The sad fact is a band doesn't have to even be able to play together as a band any more in order to record and perform. That's not an exaggeration. Can most of them play a live song? Well, sure. Are they as tight as bands used to be? No. Pull those magic little earphones out of the drummer's ears and most of them would wander all over the tempo (and instead of denigrating guys like Ringo, people would hail them as history's foremost percussion geniuses).

---

All the technical information is nice, but it's unrelated to the point, which is the way people hear music, and their unfounded medium biases. Again, most people wouldn't know the difference, couldn't hear the difference, and don't give a damn about the difference. But the same people will blab on and on about the greatness of vinyl records because they are sheep.
 

ROC

It is what it is
Ahhh, back in the good old daze.

Sorry.

I get snippy.

But maybe, just maybe, the new music you are listening to is simply not as good as the old. Maybe the musicians you are hearing perform it are worse than those of days gone by. But there are some unbelievably good musicians around today and the levels of skill and creativity is astounding.

http://www.amazon.com/Splay-Jim-Bla...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1262129941&sr=1-1

Hit play on 'Cheepa Vs. Cheep'. Better still, buy it.

But, then, maybe we are limiting this discussion to pop or rock music?

In which case we were never talking about a very high level of craft anyway.
 

mjp

Founding member
Sorry, I saw avant-garde jazz and experimental rock and lost consciousness for a few seconds. But I'm okay now...

No need to apologize. I didn't mean to suggest that all musicians suck now. Just all rock musicians. But it's still a widely varied field, so happily they all suck for different reasons, and you never have to be bored.

For example, MUSE is talked about around here, and I saw and heard them for the first time a couple Saturday nights ago. They may be fine musicians, I don't know, they only played a couple notes, but god damn it, they sucked the asses of diseased monkeys. What a barrelful of pretentious, unrelenting shit. I watch imbeciles like these and try to listen for as long as I can, trying to get what they're going for and give them the benefit of the doubt. But those boys are a waste of space and plastic or electrons or laser beams or however they sell that "music." It sounded like a 12 year old on his first day with a new computer music recording program. And that singing --- Jesus wept. Then he threw a beer can. Even Jesus thinks the MUSE singer is a miserable fag, and he loves everyone (and he invented fags, as well, so that's really saying something). (Now all you real fags calm down - TheBicycleTragedy, Bill Sikes, you lot - I'm not insulting you. I find your lifestyle charming and productive, and you are a tidy bunch, which is important - nuff respect! It was hyperbole. You of all people should understand hyperbole and grand overstatement used for dramatic effect. Get over yourselves, bitches!)

Well now this has spun off its axis, as these threads do. But since we're orbiting Jupiter now, I should also add that most of the musicians who play behind the prefab pop stars are "good," in the accepted meaning of the term. I don't think they're good, but they are schooled, and they can read music and all play the same song at the same time without ever making mistakes, and that's all that's really required.

But it's boring as shit.

Some kids realize that, most don't. Nothing ever changes. Every gaggle of malcontents that start every new musical movement or fad are disaffected and unsatisfied (are those the same thing?), so they tear down the status quo and replace it with something else. One in every ten of those tear-downs results in the building of something that is actually interesting. The rest of them are just change for change's sake. We are deep in a change-for-change's-sake cycle, and have been for many years, but it will end some day.
 

jordan

lothario speedwagon
when i was first getting into non-mainstream music as a teenager, i had this thing about going to shows "where you could see what kind of shoes they were wearing." meaning, the performances were so intimate that there wasn't the room or the money to deck everyone out with in-ear monitors and such. heck, some shows you were lucky if they even mic'd the amps through the PA. most of the music i listen to now is from current bands (even though they may be old farts like nomeansno), and those fuckers can still play. they just can't be packaged enough to fill arenas. i'm not talking about experimental jazz or prog rock noodlefests either - straight ahead stuff like avail or harvey milk doesn't have crazy guitar solos or anything like that, but you see them live and know that it's 100% the playing that you're hearing, and nothing else. to me, that's what kim was talking about - not how good the jonas brothers sound live, but the bands who do actually play, and the drummers who do actually play without in-ear computers, and the singers who do actually sing without auto-tune.

mjp you old fuck, have you been to a concert in the last 25 years? or do you just watch the musical guest on saturday night live every week and use that as your barometer for the state of music today?
 

jordan

lothario speedwagon
my dad, at 62, has just started listening to NOFX. he borrowed their new album from my older brother and then asked for a compilation of some of their older songs.
 
B

BicycleTragedy

The aesthetics are superior, sure. There's more to hang on to. If you like how it feels or makes you feel that's a whole different bag of fish than sound comparisons.

I don't know about the experience though. I hated flipping albums, trying to play individual tracks --- and a double or triple album? Oy. Records were a pain in the ass. I thought CDs were the greatest invention of my lifetime back in the day. But music as computer files kinda bugs me (though I use them). I need something physical. I have thousands of MP3s here and it's too abstract, all these files. CDs take up as much space as vinyl LPs, but I like having them there. I can look at the mass of spines and see what's going on.
Our other quibble temporarily notwithstanding, your posts in this thread are dead-on and I could not agree with you more.

No.

41R4EXG6QML._SL500_AA240_.jpg

ace6024128a033c8a8502010.L._SL500_AA200_.jpg
 

ROC

It is what it is
Sorry, I saw avant-garde jazz and experimental rock and lost consciousness for a few seconds.

Longer than a few seconds, I fear.
Is seeing what some wanker writes about the band enough to put you into a feint?

It's music.... it goes in the ears, not eyes.

I didn't mean to suggest that all musicians suck now. Just all rock musicians. But it's still a widely varied field, so happily they all suck for different reasons, and you never have to be bored.

Well OK then. :)

Oh, and I'll pay for all you faggots to come to my house. We'll get drunk and I'll force you to listen to my shit and you tough guys can duke it own on my lawn. When it's all over you can come back in, share a beer and a hug and behave like ladies again.
 

jordan

lothario speedwagon
anyway, can we focus on my amazing dressing-down of that old coot mjp? come on - i really let him have it. the geezer.
 

justine

stop the penistry
mjp you old fuck, have you been to a concert in the last 25 years? or do you just watch the musical guest on saturday night live every week and use that as your barometer for the state of music today?
just wanted to repost this in case mjp missed it ;)
 

hoochmonkey9

Art should be its own hammer.
Moderator
Founding member
faggot party, my place. New Year's Eve. everyone come on out!

no gays, please.
 

mjp

Founding member
mjp you old fuck, have you been to a concert in the last 25 years? or do you just watch the musical guest on saturday night live every week and use that as your barometer for the state of music today?

just wanted to repost this in case mjp missed it ;)

YEAH! mjp that cantankerous brittle old cunt. Woohoo!! :D

Come out to play, mjp3.
What a bunch of fags!

By "concerts" do you mean those things with rooms full of other people all standing next to me and touching me and shit? Jesus christ, what kind of masochist do you take me for?

Well, I would have been at Spaceland seeing First Aid Kit in October if their U.S. tour hadn't been squashed - is that pomo enough?

But for the most part, going to see some band I've never heard is too painful. There is no point to it when you know in advance that you are quite likely to want to gob on the miserable fag singer, and stand in front of the guitar player and point and laugh. I can do both of those things right over on Colorado Blvd. in Old Town Pasadena. Not to guitar players and singers, but to garden variety clueless douchebags.

Besides, you fag creeps, I did my time on that circuit. I've seen more bands play than any of you homos, and what did it get me? A headache most of the time. Especially when that fag from the Dickies whacked me on the head with a big, heavy rubber caveman club, and Iggy Stooge whipped me repeatedly with his vile, sweaty tshirt. I still have nightmares about those horrible, tragic incidents. That and seeing the Plasmatics 20 or 30 times. You didn't have to endure that! It would have scarred anyone.

Besides, a 50 year old guy shouldn't be hanging around places like the Whiskey unless he's trolling for young boys. You know, like a fag.

I hope that answered any lingering questions that you fags might have had.

Fags.
 
Top