If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Record Store Day organizers are hoping that many new rare vinyl releases will bring customers to record stores on Black Friday, just as soon as people finish shopping at the Buggy Whip stores   (latimes.com) divider line 90
    More: Amusing, Record Store Day, Biz Markie, Jeff Buckley, Mark Mothersbaugh, Wii U, Captain Beefheart, Alexandre Desplat, Leonard Cohen  
•       •       •

903 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 22 Nov 2012 at 9:13 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-22 09:19:07 AM
The buggy whip stores shoukd be doing bang-up this year thanks to multiple shades of gray.

/better to give than receive
//boobies
 
2012-11-22 09:19:50 AM
Vinyl is infinitely superior than CDs. The human ear wasn't meant to hear music in such clinical clarity. It needs pops and crackles.

Link
 
2012-11-22 09:21:30 AM
I'm installing a WATS line that day.
 
2012-11-22 09:21:49 AM
No ELO no care.
 
2012-11-22 09:29:11 AM
I love listening to something for a couple minutes and then getting up and having to flip it over. I buy records just for that. I don't even listen to them. I just put it on my table and look at it until I feel like flipping it over. Then I stare at it some more.
 
2012-11-22 09:33:15 AM
Sorry, I'll be going to the 8 track emporium and then the hula hoop outlet store. Hope the crowds aren't too rowdy.
 
2012-11-22 09:38:45 AM

nursedude: Sorry, I'll be going to the 8 track emporium and then the hula hoop outlet store. Hope the crowds aren't too rowdy.


Sure, if you want crap.

Everyone knows the Edison wax cylinder store is where you get real music at.
 
2012-11-22 09:47:31 AM
The stores need more bike racks for the fixies that the hipsters will be riding to get there....

/has about 3k albums
 
2012-11-22 09:55:19 AM
Cool! I'll need to grab the yellow pages to find the nearest one.
 
2012-11-22 10:01:41 AM
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-22 10:02:15 AM
I'm ready!

www.granitecitygossip.com

/Vinyl is the superior medium if you want to really hear the music
//Obviously the least convenient
///I still buy vinyl on occasion
 
2012-11-22 10:28:32 AM
Vinyl does actually sound better with a really good system.

It is not, however portable, convenient or inexpensive and you can't make endless "free" copies and hand them out like m&ms on Halloween.

So, yeah, people don't much care about it anymore.

It is, however, still a very useful format for music, if not one for saying "OMG, this totally should be my ringtone!" It's simply moved upscale like anything that focuses on quality rather than convenience. Vinyl is largely for people with 34,000.00 stereo systems in acoustically neutral rooms who have the kind of money for that stuff. And, yeah, that's fine.
 
2012-11-22 10:32:19 AM

jj325: I'm ready!

[www.granitecitygossip.com image 358x609]

/Vinyl is the superior medium if you want to really hear the music
//Obviously the least convenient
///I still buy vinyl on occasion


Actually, doesn't Vinyl kind of obscure the music since you're hearing the white noise created by the equipment and the stylus cutting into the vinyl interfering with the playback?

Digital really is cleaner, and a more accurate representation of music than vinyl.
 
2012-11-22 10:33:19 AM
lol, tangible media. How quaint.
 
2012-11-22 10:42:27 AM

nekom: lol, tangible media. How quaint.


Yeah, I mean who wants to cop to "z0mg teh oldz0rs!1" when it's easier to act like the tail wagging the dog is the One True Way™ : )

Buy what you like and why, folks. But if you have to sit and argue two decimal places of noise floor per medium like somebody just peed on your shoe, you probably don't give a sh*t about music anyhoo. And, yeah, that's... nice.
 
kab
2012-11-22 10:46:01 AM
lol u gaiz are old! all mah music is in the clowd who needs records anyhow lol
 
2012-11-22 11:02:23 AM

SockMonkeyHolocaust: I love listening to something for a couple minutes and then getting up and having to flip it over. I buy records just for that. I don't even listen to them. I just put it on my table and look at it until I feel like flipping it over. Then I stare at it some more.


I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.
 
2012-11-22 11:02:50 AM

bunner: nekom: lol, tangible media. How quaint.

Yeah, I mean who wants to cop to "z0mg teh oldz0rs!1" when it's easier to act like the tail wagging the dog is the One True Way™ : )

Buy what you like and why, folks. But if you have to sit and argue two decimal places of noise floor per medium like somebody just peed on your shoe, you probably don't give a sh*t about music anyhoo. And, yeah, that's... nice.


It's been my experience that "audiophiles" just listen to music so that they can tell you what's wrong with the stereo playing it.
 
2012-11-22 11:09:36 AM
I am presently mixing a demo, and two releases for a band and a solo artist from Seattle, and it has taken digital up until now to come with the horsepower to come anywhere near an analogue workflow as far as recording and production techniques. And the funny thing is, every time I turn around, somebody is trying to sell me some algorithmically gymnastic simulacrum of something they swear sounds JUST LIKE all the sh*t I was told to throw away. You know what else sounds like tape? And, that's fine. The digitzation music wasn't about music. It was about squeezing it into a cheaper, more portable and convenient format. And it seems to have worked. But nobody walks around selling 900.00 plug-ins that sound "just like digital!" : )
 
2012-11-22 11:11:21 AM

jake_lex: It's been my experience that "audiophiles" just listen to music so that they can tell you what's wrong with the stereo playing it.


There's some validity in that, much like there's some validity to the argument that people with brown skin sure do end up on the wrong side of the law, a lot, but it's not a one size fits all. That blanket never really covers everything.
 
2012-11-22 11:12:23 AM
I miss the warmth of analog video
 
2012-11-22 11:18:14 AM

Wasilla Hillbilly: I miss the warmth of analog video


Yeah, and the pops and crackles from when the tape got eaten by the VCR and you had to take it apart and try to smooth out the tape...

*sigh*

The good old days.
 
2012-11-22 11:25:43 AM

jake_lex: It's been my experience that "audiophiles" just listen to music so that they can tell you what's wrong with the stereo playing it.


There is a saying : People listen to music, audiophiles listen to the stereo.
 
2012-11-22 11:28:31 AM
Thread was over in one.

/I spend a lot of money at the buggy whip store, thank you very much.
 
2012-11-22 11:31:10 AM
The point of high fidelity is that you hear exactly what the mastering engineer signed off on. Period. Nothing more or less. True to the source. And with a sh*tty system in a sh*tty room, that's damn near impossible. And that's why, audiophile or not, you're sort of STUCK listening to the stereo. And for all of the utter malarkey voodoo that a lot of audiophiles subscribe to, the whole movement has managed to make listening to musical playback a little more pleasurable for everybody. Do you need a monster system with impeccable components in a completely inert room? No. Does music sound "just as good" on your iPhone speaker? No. It's about the music. Whatever makes the music work for you, go and buy that sh*t. And cast not great snark at those who buyeth otherwise.
 
2012-11-22 11:36:22 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Wasilla Hillbilly: I miss the warmth of analog video

Yeah, and the pops and crackles from when the tape got eaten by the VCR and you had to take it apart and try to smooth out the tape...

*sigh*

The good old days.


Great now I really do miss the good old days. My cassette tapes went through much abuse and repair. Oohh..remember when people would get pissed and throw their 8-track out the window leaving long streams of black tape along the roadside?

Farking kids and their general disrespect of lawns...
 
2012-11-22 12:01:37 PM
I just keep an 8 member band chained up in the basement. No recording matches live.
 
2012-11-22 12:11:21 PM

FeedTheCollapse: I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.


I see it a lot with ebooks vs paper books. "I like the smell of a paper book". Dude, that's mold and mildew.
 
2012-11-22 12:12:46 PM

AverageAmericanGuy: Vinyl is infinitely superior than CDs. The human ear wasn't meant to hear music in such clinical clarity. It needs pops and crackles.

Link


I don't listen to compact disques. Note that I didn't call them "CDs". CD is a nickname and nicknames are for friends and compact disques are NO FRIENDS OF MINE.

That said, I got Aeroplane Over The Sea on vinyl for my birthday and it's f--king fantastic. Other than that I'll buy one or two new a year (almost entirely local artists or indie folks who are doing a vinyl only release), I'll maybe get one as a present, and I'll pick up free/cheap ones for the heck of it and cause old school Motown vinyl that cost me a dime gives a dinner party way better ambiance than the iPod.

/I sound hipster
//whatever
 
2012-11-22 12:20:30 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: old school Motown vinyl that cost me a dime gives a dinner party way better ambiance than the iPod.


Love him or hate him for his business practices, Berry Gordy invented the modern day indie label template. Kept it in house, had staff writers, musicians, engineers, and did weekly focus group meetings where the song had to pass the sammich test. And he berthed life into the top 40 and brought more musical diversity to the public and radio than ANYbody else EVER did. Loves me some Motown / Tamla / Gordy / Stax / Volt. That's where I grew up. And it's still as good as it ever was because because can do that. Ask Beethoven.
 
2012-11-22 12:26:19 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: ... old school Motown vinyl that cost me a dime gives a dinner party way better ambiance than the iPod.
\


Yeah, but Berry Gordy mixed the Motown songs specifically so they would sound great on the shiatty, tinny transistor radio and car stereo speakers of the time.

So, they would still sound great on an iPod today, since those are shiatty, tinny little headphones.
 
2012-11-22 12:33:44 PM

FirstNationalBastard: StreetlightInTheGhetto: ... old school Motown vinyl that cost me a dime gives a dinner party way better ambiance than the iPod.
\

Yeah, but Berry Gordy mixed the Motown songs specifically so they would sound great on the shiatty, tinny transistor radio and car stereo speakers of the time.

So, they would still sound great on an iPod today, since those are shiatty, tinny little headphones.


Kinda.

He did understand that his stuff had to stand out.

He was sort of the advent of the loudness wars. Louder, more compressed, focused on midrange bandwidth. Some of those tracks are compressed well beyond saturation and THAT is something you can do with tape that you can't do with a .wav file. 0 dBFS is the devil's ceiling. And people are STILL flogging an endless array of plug-ins that are supposed to emulate that.

He didn't mix much of anything, but he did stand over his engineers telling them what to do until the song in his head came out of the speakers, and that's what a producer does.
 
2012-11-22 12:51:42 PM

FirstNationalBastard: So, they would still sound great on an iPod today, since those are shiatty, tinny little headphones.


I gave a colleague my Sennheisers to listen to as he still had the white iPod ones. 10 minutes later, he ordered a pair similar to mine. And these weren't some fancy pants audiophile shiat. You get cx200 headphones for about £15-20.
 
2012-11-22 01:19:38 PM
The best way for artists to release music going forward IMO, is high quality vinyl records with high quality art/packaging, something that will justify the space it takes up, and include a download link for the mp3s with purchase. most independent musicians can sell a decent LP package for 10-15 bucks and still make money with runs of a few hundred copies. 7-inches and 45s should cost 5-10 bucks. CDs can be more cheap to produce, but they're also.,.cheaper.
 
2012-11-22 01:20:46 PM

gnarlywizzard: The best way for artists to release music going forward IMO, is high quality vinyl records with high quality art/packaging, something that will justify the space it takes up, and include a download link for the mp3s with purchase. most independent musicians can sell a decent LP package for 10-15 bucks and still make money with runs of a few hundred copies. 7-inches and 45s should cost 5-10 bucks. CDs can be more cheap to produce, but they're also.,.cheaper.


...with superior sound, of course.

But, hey, you don't have anything to separate out the seeds and stems on.
 
2012-11-22 01:32:00 PM

FirstNationalBastard: gnarlywizzard: The best way for artists to release music going forward IMO, is high quality vinyl records with high quality art/packaging, something that will justify the space it takes up, and include a download link for the mp3s with purchase. most independent musicians can sell a decent LP package for 10-15 bucks and still make money with runs of a few hundred copies. 7-inches and 45s should cost 5-10 bucks. CDs can be more cheap to produce, but they're also.,.cheaper.

...with superior sound, of course.

But, hey, you don't have anything to separate out the seeds and stems on.


mp3s usually have CD quality sound, and ipod docks on stereos and in cars makes CDs redundant for the most part these days. the physical vinyl copy might sound a little worse but the point is for it to be a hip and collectible art object.
 
2012-11-22 01:46:59 PM

FirstNationalBastard: StreetlightInTheGhetto: ... old school Motown vinyl that cost me a dime gives a dinner party way better ambiance than the iPod.
\

Yeah, but Berry Gordy mixed the Motown songs specifically so they would sound great on the shiatty, tinny transistor radio and car stereo speakers of the time.

So, they would still sound great on an iPod today, since those are shiatty, tinny little headphones.


Motown on vinyl for entertaining people > iPod connected to our fairly respectable speakers
 
2012-11-22 02:22:49 PM
Comparing the recordings of today that are usually recorded and mixed with the CD or MP3 in mind is apples an oranges to the recordings made, I would say until the mid 80s or so. Maybe earlier. The creep of digital prevents a real demarcation.

I don't think the technical aspects of the recording method is the variable in the recording quality that people would suggest. Old analog multitrack was an ordeal and expensive and part "magic". The people involved by and large were more skilled as a necessity. Now, digital recorders, mixing software and all the rest is vastly cheaper and easier to use on a basic level, the barriers to entry to that field are almost nonexistent.

Not to say that there aren't great recordings out there. It is just that there are a lot more "fry cooks" out there when there was a time that the recordings we were used to, were made by "Chefs"...
 
2012-11-22 02:26:38 PM
Need to get the White Stripes stuff.
 
2012-11-22 02:48:42 PM
I love my vinyl. Your mileage may vary.
 
2012-11-22 03:02:56 PM

jake_lex: It's been my experience that "audiophiles" just listen to music so that they can tell you what's wrong with the stereo playing it.

 

There's a fine line between funny and insightful sometimes.
 
2012-11-22 03:04:05 PM
images.hhv.de

I bought this. Listened to it once, the novelty wore off. But at least they included a DVD, MP3 disc of the songs, and a T shirt
 
2012-11-22 03:13:31 PM
flickfeast.co.uk
 
kab
2012-11-22 04:19:40 PM

gnarlywizzard: mp3s usually have CD quality sound


Well.. no. They actually don't.
 
2012-11-22 05:51:23 PM

Jedekai: [flickfeast.co.uk image 320x238]


That took faaaaaaaaaaaar too long....

/say no more, mon amor...
 
2012-11-22 06:02:58 PM

swaxhog: FeedTheCollapse: I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.

I see it a lot with ebooks vs paper books. "I like the smell of a paper book". Dude, that's mold and mildew.


yeah, that's another one that perplexes me. I can udnerstand preferring a physical product to a digital product, but any arguments involving secondary characteristics or rituals in using the mediums just feel like a lot of bending-over-backwards defenses that come off more as stubbornness.
 
2012-11-22 07:18:21 PM

bunner: The point of high fidelity is that you hear exactly what the mastering engineer signed off on. Period. Nothing more or less. True to the source. And with a sh*tty system in a sh*tty room, that's damn near impossible. And that's why, audiophile or not, you're sort of STUCK listening to the stereo. And for all of the utter malarkey voodoo that a lot of audiophiles subscribe to, the whole movement has managed to make listening to musical playback a little more pleasurable for everybody. Do you need a monster system with impeccable components in a completely inert room? No. Does music sound "just as good" on your iPhone speaker? No. It's about the music. Whatever makes the music work for you, go and buy that sh*t. And cast not great snark at those who buyeth otherwise.


It will sound quite good if you plug some decent quality ear plugs into your iPhone though - not the crappy ear plugs that came with the phone.

Perhaps it's not true hi-fi because of the lossy compression used on the digital files from iTunes, but very few people would notice a difference.
 
2012-11-22 07:24:39 PM

kg2095: Perhaps it's not true hi-fi because of the lossy compression used on the digital files from iTunes, but very few people would notice a difference.


Probably not. but they should be very grateful that the recording industry still uses very high end gear, monitors, rooms and methods to produce the records they love so much on .mp3 or AIFF. Because if they ever start making records the same way people listen to them, it's gonna sound like a hippopliptimoose sh*tting gravel.
 
2012-11-22 09:40:00 PM
Cons: records develop hiss, crackles, pops, and skips.
pros: cds only develop one of these things.


I have ONE example where the vinyl sound quality is better than the cd.
CD: Communique by Dire Straits. Purchased in 1992. Most likely an 1980's cd version.
LP: Heavy gram vinyl re-issue. (note: just a re-issue, not a remaster).

The cd sounds like a typical 80's cd: quiet, slightly flat, slightly hissy. (compare to "Love Over Gold" or "Local Hero" soundtrack, which was recorded/engineered/mixed with Digital Equipment. Albeit early 80's digital equipment. They still sound crystal clear and great today)

Meanwhile the vinyl re-issue has a broad, louder, more full sound.
 
2012-11-22 10:08:16 PM
I might add that those who cheer digital and wax dismissively about everything else, yet bemoan the dearth of new, exciting independent artists - try and imagine the motivations one might have to spend months of time and the fees inherent in using a proper studio and talented engineers to produce something that - upon it's first few moments of release into the wild, will be run through some douchesocket's 64 kb .mp3 factory and handed out of free like so many refrigerator magnets at a political rally. Double edged sword, kids.
 
2012-11-22 10:35:55 PM

swaxhog: FeedTheCollapse: I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.

I see it a lot with ebooks vs paper books. "I like the smell of a paper book". Dude, that's mold and mildew.


That's why I will never tease someone for being an audiophile. It makes no sense to me, but at the same time, the thought of throwing out my physical book in favor of a nook or kindle makes me feel ill. We're all stupid about something
 
2012-11-22 10:46:30 PM
I don't like kindles or e-books as much as books because screens have a reflective surface, paper doesn't, the text and graphics are absolutely static and less fatiguing and I like being able to just toss a bevnap in the pages where I left off and pick it up later. That's what I'm comfortable with. And the notion that NEW! is always THE ONE TRUE WAY NOW™ seems a bit silly to me.
 
2012-11-22 10:47:40 PM
Also, I've never had a battery in a book fail. : )
 
2012-11-22 10:54:00 PM

bunner: I don't like kindles or e-books as much as books because screens have a reflective surface, paper doesn't, the text and graphics are absolutely static and less fatiguing and I like being able to just toss a bevnap in the pages where I left off and pick it up later. That's what I'm comfortable with. And the notion that NEW! is always THE ONE TRUE WAY NOW™ seems a bit silly to me.


the only time I've ever had a glare while reading was using an actual book. I don't think I've ever had that problem on my Kindle.

I think there's valid reasons to prefer books over Kindles (I would say yours is valid, even if I don't think it's correct), but stupid shiat like "I like how books smell" is just silly and doesn't really argue on any kind of technical level. I feel the same way about quite a lot of vinyl enthusiasts.
 
2012-11-23 12:23:39 AM

FeedTheCollapse: I think there's valid reasons to prefer books over Kindles (I would say yours is valid, even if I don't think it's correct), but stupid shiat like "I like how books smell" is just silly and doesn't really argue on any kind of technical level. I feel the same way about quite a lot of vinyl enthusiasts.


Perhaps, but the ostensibly unimpeachable technocracy was founded by people who read a lot of books and if reading is a pleasure, I find no fault in whatever peripheral enjoyment may be derived by the people who use them. It requires, in my humble opinion, no argument, no defense and certainly no justification on a "technical" level. That notion, to me, seems equally as silly as "I like how books smell".
 
2012-11-23 12:35:50 AM
We must, after all, remember that the simulacrum is based upon the actual article and successful emulation does not equal validity or relevance, let alone superiority.
 
2012-11-23 02:07:51 AM

bunner: I don't like kindles or e-books as much as books because screens have a reflective surface, paper doesn't, the text and graphics are absolutely static and less fatiguing and I like being able to just toss a bevnap in the pages where I left off and pick it up later. That's what I'm comfortable with. And the notion that NEW! is always THE ONE TRUE WAY NOW™ seems a bit silly to me.


Paying a hundred-some-odd dollars for a device so that I can then turn around and pay full price for the books I want anyway just doesn't seem like a very wise purchase. I'd rather have a little bit more space on my shelves taken up.
 
2012-11-23 02:10:02 AM

Third_Uncle_Eno: Cons: records develop hiss, crackles, pops, and skips.
pros: cds only develop one of these things.


I have ONE example where the vinyl sound quality is better than the cd.
CD: Communique by Dire Straits. Purchased in 1992. Most likely an 1980's cd version.
LP: Heavy gram vinyl re-issue. (note: just a re-issue, not a remaster).

The cd sounds like a typical 80's cd: quiet, slightly flat, slightly hissy. (compare to "Love Over Gold" or "Local Hero" soundtrack, which was recorded/engineered/mixed with Digital Equipment. Albeit early 80's digital equipment. They still sound crystal clear and great today)

Meanwhile the vinyl re-issue has a broad, louder, more full sound.


So you discovered that newer media works better in general. Interesting.
 
2012-11-23 07:41:33 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Paying a hundred-some-odd dollars for a device so that I can then turn around and pay full price for the books I want anyway just doesn't seem like a very wise purchase. I'd rather have a little bit more space on my shelves taken up.


I do agree that the price of e-books, while cheaper than regular books, is still fairly outrageous considering there's almost no cost-justification.


thought there's *ahem* ways around that...
 
2012-11-23 07:51:46 AM

FeedTheCollapse: The My Little Pony Killer: Paying a hundred-some-odd dollars for a device so that I can then turn around and pay full price for the books I want anyway just doesn't seem like a very wise purchase. I'd rather have a little bit more space on my shelves taken up.

I do agree that the price of e-books, while cheaper than regular books, is still fairly outrageous considering there's almost no cost-justification.


thought there's *ahem* ways around that...


So paying for the content and the author who created it is for suckers since there's no *thing* there? Does that apply to software, too, or just books and music?
 
2012-11-23 07:58:58 AM
I have a theory.

In a society where everything is indexed to bank notes, if you de-monetize something, people stop making it.

I don't know if I'd be comfortable in a world where music was made by some lunkhead with a copy of Garageband, a Casio and his little sister caterwauling into a Radio shack mic.

Let alone museums full of sh*t scribbled in MS Paint and sh*tty blogs as literature.
 
2012-11-23 08:02:16 AM

bunner: Vinyl does actually sound better with a really good system.

It is not, however portable, convenient or inexpensive and you can't make endless "free" copies and hand them out like m&ms on Halloween.

So, yeah, people don't much care about it anymore.

It is, however, still a very useful format for music, if not one for saying "OMG, this totally should be my ringtone!" It's simply moved upscale like anything that focuses on quality rather than convenience. Vinyl is largely for people with 34,000.00 stereo systems in acoustically neutral rooms who have the kind of money for that stuff. And, yeah, that's fine.


i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-11-23 08:03:32 AM

kab: lol u gaiz are old! all mah music is in the clowd who needs records anyhow lol


503 Not Authorized

/Your music? Cannot haz.
 
2012-11-23 08:05:34 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Wasilla Hillbilly: I miss the warmth of analog video

Yeah, and the pops and crackles from when the tape got eaten by the VCR and you had to take it apart and try to smooth out the tape...

*sigh*

The good old days.


There were other kinds of analog video...
www.shebytes.com
/Yes it was analog
 
2012-11-23 08:06:26 AM
 
2012-11-23 08:12:25 AM

FirstNationalBastard: gnarlywizzard: The best way for artists to release music going forward IMO, is high quality vinyl records with high quality art/packaging, something that will justify the space it takes up, and include a download link for the mp3s with purchase. most independent musicians can sell a decent LP package for 10-15 bucks and still make money with runs of a few hundred copies. 7-inches and 45s should cost 5-10 bucks. CDs can be more cheap to produce, but they're also.,.cheaper.

...with superior sound, of course.

But, hey, you don't have anything to separate out the seeds and stems on.


the problem with vinyl made today is all the mastering equipment is digital... so you are going through this process:

A-D then D-A then A-D then D-A (Original Audio, Recorded on Master, Master to Vinyl, Vinyl played on Stereo, Stereo to Ears

instead of:

A-A then A-A then A-A and A-A (Original Audio, Recorded on Analog Master, Analog Master to Vinyl, Vinyl played on Analog Stereo, Analog Stereo to Ears

of course, today (if you could go analog all the way to the stereo, you would still have an A-D converter in the stereo and a D-A converter going to the speakers on any modern stereo equipment.

The only way to get pure Analog is to get older equipment or build it yourself.
 
2012-11-23 08:13:59 AM

FeedTheCollapse: swaxhog: FeedTheCollapse: I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.

I see it a lot with ebooks vs paper books. "I like the smell of a paper book". Dude, that's mold and mildew.

yeah, that's another one that perplexes me. I can udnerstand preferring a physical product to a digital product, but any arguments involving secondary characteristics or rituals in using the mediums just feel like a lot of bending-over-backwards defenses that come off more as stubbornness.


Humans use all 5 senses....
How does a digital library smell compared to an actual library?
 
2012-11-23 08:17:26 AM
Or you could just get a pair of Futterman Atma Sphere OTL monoblocks, a pure analogue preamp and a really good table. They still make all that stuff, but oddly, it seems to be astoundingly expensive compared to digital gear. Much like hand made leather shoes compared to Chinese vinyl, "my feet hurt" sneakers at Target.
 
2012-11-23 08:20:11 AM

bunner: HindiDiscoMonster:
[i50.tinypic.com image 500x333]

What a 6 disc changer looked like in '61


OMFG that is so cool! I love it!
 
2012-11-23 08:20:47 AM
We, your corporate masters, are here to make you live better.

What would you rather have? Stuff that sort of works, sort of fits, looks / sounds like ass, breaks easily, isn't repairable but IT'S B*TCHIN' CHEAP - or a lot of stupid expensive stuff that, if you buy it, actually works well and would lift the domestic economy up eventually?

Yeah, that's what we thought.

It's black friday, kids! Get out there and stuff those stockings!
 
2012-11-23 08:23:11 AM

bunner: FeedTheCollapse: The My Little Pony Killer: Paying a hundred-some-odd dollars for a device so that I can then turn around and pay full price for the books I want anyway just doesn't seem like a very wise purchase. I'd rather have a little bit more space on my shelves taken up.

I do agree that the price of e-books, while cheaper than regular books, is still fairly outrageous considering there's almost no cost-justification.


thought there's *ahem* ways around that...

So paying for the content and the author who created it is for suckers since there's no *thing* there? Does that apply to software, too, or just books and music?




Yeah, fark libraries! Only True Fans have an opinion on a piece of art because they spend money!
 
2012-11-23 08:23:26 AM

bunner: Or you could just get a pair of Futterman Atma Sphere OTL monoblocks, a pure analogue preamp and a really good table. They still make all that stuff, but oddly, it seems to be astoundingly expensive compared to digital gear. Much like hand made leather shoes compared to Chinese vinyl, "my feet hurt" sneakers at Target.


I know... it's sick isn't it? Vacuum tubes (good ones) are outrageous... but worth it. There is no sound on earth like analog.

"T i s t e p o l m w t i i a u i ."

^^^^ That reads "This is the problem with digital music." --- in digital :P

Can't seem to get people to understand that digital is sampled. Maybe that will help.
 
2012-11-23 08:25:19 AM

FeedTheCollapse: Yeah, fark libraries! Only True Fans have an opinion on a piece of art because they spend money!


That wasn't my question. I hope you don't mind me setting fire to your strawman before you could get it to my lawn.
 
2012-11-23 08:30:19 AM
I think it has something to do with why a Mercedes Benz costs more than a Pontiac G6.
 
2012-11-23 08:38:10 AM
For anyone who is interested in the truth about Analog vs Digital...

An analog waveform looks like this:
1.bp.blogspot.com

A digital waveform looks like this:
thedawstudio.com

Note how the analog waveform has smooth peaks and valleys where the square wave has sharp peaks and valleys. The reason is simple. An analog waveform has infinite resolution and a digital waveform is either all on or off - binary. The analog waveform sounds more natural because in the real world, all audio is analog. This is why, on digital media, sound may be technically good and always reproducible exactly the same way every time, but it will always sound harsh by comparison with the exact same music in an analog format. Each format has its pro and con sides. Analog sources tend to degrade over time (noise, hiss, pops, crackle, etc) and Digital either works or doesn't, but has problems like resolution, rounding errors, etc.

Here is a primer.
 
2012-11-23 08:39:35 AM
If you ask a person who is involved in making things in this country, why they don't make them BETTER in order to compete, eventually, they are going to say "hey, the guys upstairs don't give a sh*t as long as they get their bonuses." American workers aren't lazy or stupid. Unions aren't dismantling the viability of American business. Fat, greedy cocksuckers in nice suits who do next to NOTHING involved in producing the products they sell, other than trying to make it cheaper every year, are.

112west.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-11-23 08:44:02 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: Note how the analog waveform has smooth peaks and valleys where the square wave has sharp peaks and valleys. The reason is simple. An analog waveform has infinite resolution and a digital waveform is either all on or off - binary. The analog waveform sounds more natural because in the real world, all audio is analog.


No! You can't use science to defend old stuff because everybody knows science is computers and computers are digital. DUH!
 
2012-11-23 08:44:55 AM

bunner: HindiDiscoMonster: Note how the analog waveform has smooth peaks and valleys where the square wave has sharp peaks and valleys. The reason is simple. An analog waveform has infinite resolution and a digital waveform is either all on or off - binary. The analog waveform sounds more natural because in the real world, all audio is analog.

No! You can't use science to defend old stuff because everybody knows science is computers and computers are digital. DUH!


I'm sorry... I forgot where I was...
 
2012-11-23 09:25:38 AM
I will be doing my black friday shopping at Princeton Record Exchange. Long live analog.
 
2012-11-23 12:30:22 PM

Son of Streak: swaxhog: FeedTheCollapse: I know you're joking, but I've heard arguments that mirrored this almost exactly. I mean, arguing over the soundquality of vinyl vs. digital is one thing, but the "I just like the ritual that comes from listening to vinyl" is one of the saddest arguments I've ever read.

I see it a lot with ebooks vs paper books. "I like the smell of a paper book". Dude, that's mold and mildew.

That's why I will never tease someone for being an audiophile. It makes no sense to me, but at the same time, the thought of throwing out my physical book in favor of a nook or kindle makes me feel ill. We're all stupid about something


Up until a couple years ago when the national book club went out of business, I was still buying the paper book and an ebook. Putting the paper book on my bookshelf and never opening it but still in the habit of having to own one. I have since went 100% digital the same as I did with music and video years before. Having all your reading material on a single sd card and using a good e-ink reader is far better than carrying around even 1 hardcover.
 
2012-11-23 02:38:10 PM
Wifey and I both have Kindle Fires but hardly ever use them for reading. Hers is used 100% for video (mostly TV series) and mine split about 50/50 between video and Fark or email. We both love books.
 
2012-11-23 04:37:49 PM
i.qkme.me 

i.qkme.me
 
2012-11-23 05:35:53 PM
chriskresser.com

All my mp3s are backed up in THREE PLACES!
 
2012-11-23 06:13:09 PM

bunner: FeedTheCollapse: Yeah, fark libraries! Only True Fans have an opinion on a piece of art because they spend money!

That wasn't my question. I hope you don't mind me setting fire to your strawman before you could get it to my lawn.


very well then: I did not say that paying for MP3s, epub/mobi, etc. is for suckers; I stated that I think that the minute price differences for the digital products is rather absurd considering there's not as much cost put into the product as there is for the physical versions (i.e. printing, artwork, packaging, etc.). It's certainly not like the cost savings for the digital version is then defrayed to the author/artist.

though as an aside, I do think the idea of "only True Connoisseurs pay for music" to be a generally absurd notion that's nothing but snobby self-congratulatory bullshiat.
 
2012-11-23 06:37:00 PM

FeedTheCollapse: though as an aside, I do think the idea of "only True Connoisseurs pay for music" to be a generally absurd notion that's nothing but snobby self-congratulatory bullshiat.


And that's the strawman.

You attributed that to me.

Music, literature and film are not things that are glued up like a collage out of available 1's and 0's and a film song or a book emerges. It's not a matter of the hard copy cost. There's is a relatively minor expense added when making a disc or a hard copy book or DVD, admittedly, but that's not what you're paying for. You're paying for directors, writers, producers, engineers, studio time, grips, CGI farms, actors, set design, editors, producers, promotion, hotels, trucking and transfer and about a jillion other things that go into making a file or a record that, oddly, do not fall out of the sky, either. When you de-monetize something, the people who are capable of doing it well stop doing it because they have bills to pay.

I might also add that I find the "if it's to gotten for free, cool, I will and, like, f*ck all that stupid sh*t I don't care about" to be not exactly the mark of a true fan, either. I've heard every, sniffy, "whut UVER" argument to endorse the idea that as long as people are stupid enough to make things that cost money and can be gotten for free, it's their f*cking problem and I can't really justify it, personally. I picked up a few pieces of warez and some .mp3s in the day before I figured out I was basically eating out of the fridges of the artists I claimed to enjoy so much. I don't do that anymore. YMMV. I'm not on a pulpit and trying to put me on one isn't gonna fly.
 
2012-11-23 11:49:35 PM
But will the analog signal work over my gold plated Monster Cables?
 
2012-11-24 12:51:36 AM
Z

Gleeman: But will the analog signal work over my gold plated Monster Cables?


No.
 
2012-11-24 07:28:19 AM

John Buck 41: ZGleeman: But will the analog signal work over my gold plated Monster Cables?

No.


True fact.

Monster, aside from being a lawsuit happy corporate whorehouse, makes the 1/4" ends on their guitar cables just *little* thicker than normal.

So, once you buy one and use it, the little tip connector thingy in the jack gets spread out and other brands of cable have a tendency to not seat correctly in the jack anymore.

Lovely bit of engineering, eh? Avoid those.
 
2012-11-25 12:46:53 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: For anyone who is interested in the truth about Analog vs Digital...

An analog waveform looks like this:
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 446x304]

A digital waveform looks like this:
[thedawstudio.com image 496x304]

Note how the analog waveform has smooth peaks and valleys where the square wave has sharp peaks and valleys. The reason is simple. An analog waveform has infinite resolution and a digital waveform is either all on or off - binary. The analog waveform sounds more natural because in the real world, all audio is analog. This is why, on digital media, sound may be technically good and always reproducible exactly the same way every time, but it will always sound harsh by comparison with the exact same music in an analog format. Each format has its pro and con sides. Analog sources tend to degrade over time (noise, hiss, pops, crackle, etc) and Digital either works or doesn't, but has problems like resolution, rounding errors, etc.

Here is a primer.


Someone understands. Excellent.
 
2012-11-25 12:52:18 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: For anyone who is interested in the truth about Analog vs Digital...

An analog waveform looks like this:
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 446x304]

A digital waveform looks like this:
[thedawstudio.com image 496x304]

Note how the analog waveform has smooth peaks and valleys where the square wave has sharp peaks and valleys. The reason is simple. An analog waveform has infinite resolution and a digital waveform is either all on or off - binary. The analog waveform sounds more natural because in the real world, all audio is analog. This is why, on digital media, sound may be technically good and always reproducible exactly the same way every time, but it will always sound harsh by comparison with the exact same music in an analog format. Each format has its pro and con sides. Analog sources tend to degrade over time (noise, hiss, pops, crackle, etc) and Digital either works or doesn't, but has problems like resolution, rounding errors, etc.

Here is a primer.


But this is a more accurate look at how it works in the real world. You definitely loose the subtleties that analog has.

But this is fark. Someone will call me out on this. Someone who has no idea how electronics work.

wiki.hydrogenaudio.org
 
Displayed 90 of 90 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report