Beatles Mono vinyl box proves analogue superiority?

[Glacialpath]

Wow I'm guessing you didn't have triggers on the kit but had to get the the mic signal to trigger a midi sound? Was his playing in time at least?

 

[davedotco]

Wow I'm guessing you didn't have triggers on the kit but had to get the the mic signal to trigger a midi sound? Was his playing in time at least?

Not quite, midi was in it's infancy in those days so the mic signal was gated and used to drive the individual trigger inputs on the Linn directly.

The drummer was half ok, the major problem was the drum roadie who was permanently stoned. For various reasons he was unsackable so we had to work round him. Reggae bands eh......!

 

[cheeseboy]

No because not all people how enthuse over Hi-Fi know how things should sound. Some just gor for kit that produces a sound they like.

Real listeners IMO like to hear music from their prefered source to produce the same emotion or close to that of having the musician/instrument in the room and hearing the detail you would get if the band/musician was in the room.

What your deffinition of "Real Listeners"

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

 

[davedotco]

No because not all people how enthuse over Hi-Fi know how things should sound. Some just gor for kit that produces a sound they like.

Real listeners IMO like to hear music from their prefered source to produce the same emotion or close to that of having the musician/instrument in the room and hearing the detail you would get if the band/musician was in the room.

What your deffinition of "Real Listeners"

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

 

[matt49]

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

Absolutely right. Since when did it make any sense to say that appreciating the tools of the job means you can't enjoy the job itself?

 

[cheeseboy]

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

dave and yourself are indeed correct, so yes, in that respect I was wrong in what I said, but I was trying to simplify (wrongly) , I was just trying to make the point that they are not mutually exclusive. IE one can be heavily in to music, but not give a flying foo about hifi. One thing I have encountered quite a bit with hifi peeps is that some of them believe you can't be in to music unless you are in to hifi.

 

[matt49]

dave and yourself are indeed correct, so yes, in that respect I was wrong in what I said, but I was trying to simplify (wrongly) , I was just trying to make the point that they are not mutually exclusive. IE one can be heavily in to music, but not give a flying foo about hifi. One thing I have encountered quite a bit with hifi peeps is that some of them believe you can't be in to music unless you are in to hifi.

Fair point. And it does rather make a mockery of this whole idea of the "serious listener".

I've never met someone who was into hi-fi and wasn't also a lover of music. No doubt there are such (strange) people; but I've yet to encounter one. As Dave says, though, it's important not to confuse the hi-fi with the music.

 

[The_Lhc]

Historically studios did not just turn from analogue to digital overnight.

Digital equipment started to be introduced from the late 70s onward. It would be quite common for the tracking to be all analog, as indeed was the final mix. It was only at this stage that the signal was digitised to produce a 2 track digital master.

It is also worth remembering that by the early 80s, digital effects were commonplace and digital delay lines were routinely used for vinyl mastering. Pure analogue was as rare as hens teeth by this time.

What that's it? Out of that whole post of nonsense that's the only bit you're going to pick up on? You don't, perhaps, want to have a go at "if you record digital audio to tape it becomes analogue"?

Seriously, what's the point of appointing yourself resident forum know-it-all if you aren't going to do the job properly?

 

[The_Lhc]

I'm not confining my posts to just my kind of music and if you want to fully get where I'm coming from then you do need to take into account the background of my thought process. And where in thi post has "the perfect" system been mentioned. The discussion is why people might prefer analogue over digital. I don't know what thread you think you are reading but clearly not this one. Also "Live for the most part is considdered and amplified concert. Even unplugged use a PA system some times maybe only for the vocals. Classical, or say a pub gig can be classed as truely unplugged or an ensamble performece in a small venue where no amplification is needed. These are live of course because you aren't listening to a "Recording" the very opposite of live.

Can you *please* try to seperate the idea of a gig from the idea of recording the sound of an instrument (in a studio for example)? What technicians and crews do at gigs to create the sound has NO relevance to the conversation regarding "what records sound more accurately, analogue or digital?". That's the conversation *I* started after you claimed that digital recording can't recreate the interaction of the skull with what we hear, implying that analogue recording somehow can. Why you've decided to go off on this long treatise about how gigs are produced I've no idea but it has no relevance to the original question, I suspect you're deliberately avoiding that question because you know you can't answer it sensibly.

Point 6

I'm going by my observations and that is what I have stated. The people I know have nothing to do with the relevence of the conversation. I have no idea why you would even say that, what an absurd thought if you don't mind me saying. No offence intended.

It's entirely relevant when YOU say things like "Everyone I know prefers the sound of analogue", YOU mentioned the people you know first, YOU brought them into the conversation, that's the ONLY reason I mentioned them.

Seriously, if you can't even remember what you've said from one post to the next it's going to be impossible to hold a conversation with you. Even more impossible than it is now...

 

[davedotco]

Historically studios did not just turn from analogue to digital overnight.

Digital equipment started to be introduced from the late 70s onward. It would be quite common for the tracking to be all analog, as indeed was the final mix. It was only at this stage that the signal was digitised to produce a 2 track digital master.

It is also worth remembering that by the early 80s, digital effects were commonplace and digital delay lines were routinely used for vinyl mastering. Pure analogue was as rare as hens teeth by this time.

What that's it? Out of that whole post of nonsense that's the only bit you're going to pick up on? You don't, perhaps, want to have a go at "if you record digital audio to tape it becomes analogue"?

Seriously, what's the point of appointing yourself resident forum know-it-all if you aren't going to do the job properly?

To be honest, the nonsense was so deep and all encompassing that I really do not have the time to do it 'justice'.

It is easy enough to correct and inform on individual misconceptions but this is just too much. Anyway I am going to be overseas for a while, you are all just going to have to cope on your own.

I'm busy syncing a whole load of stuff to the iPad for the trip, I love Spotify Offline.

Which reminds me, I am syncing some late period John Coltrane, much of which was recorded in one take and mixed straight to two track, as of course was most of the great jazz of the period.

About as close as you can get to 'real' live recordings, you get a reasonable impression of what it might have sounded like, in the studio at the time.

 

[The_Lhc]

Anyway I am going to be overseas for a while, you are all just going to have to cope on your own.

What? You mean real life is more important than THIS?

GAH!!! I'm surrounded by nincompoops!

 

[Freddy58]

So, who won?

 

[cheeseboy]

So, who won?

 

[ID.]

5 Star Thread.

Brings the luls. Thanks everyone. Don't let it fade out now. I want to see this keep going *biggrin*

 

[Glacialpath]

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

dave and yourself are indeed correct, so yes, in that respect I was wrong in what I said, but I was trying to simplify (wrongly) , I was just trying to make the point that they are not mutually exclusive. IE one can be heavily in to music, but not give a flying foo about hifi. One thing I have encountered quite a bit with hifi peeps is that some of them believe you can't be in to music unless you are in to hifi.

So the use of "Real Listener" seems wrong in this case. How can I put it.

Of ccourse there are music fans who just love music and don't mind where it comes from as long as they can listen to music.

Lets for discussion sake call them "music lovers" and know what they like in a composition.

A Hi-Fi enthusiast if they are not that bothered about music does seem a little odd. I guess we could call the Techies.

Then the people I was refering to are the people who love music and care about the compositions but also care very much how it sounds in relation to real life, Live or unplugged. Which ever way you want to look at it.

No-one can spend all there time at concerts so they would have to listen to music on a Hi-Fi system at some point but in my mind would strive to achive as close a sound to "Live" (being there" as possible thus "Real Listeners" or one deffinition of a real listener.

Then there are the people who like Going to concerts, getting the best out of their home audio kit, and produce audio for a living. Maybe Dave would like to give that group of people a name even if that doesn't describe Dave to a T. I'm not trying to tell people who they are.

And last but not least the person who like going to concerts, having the best sound at home a they can, producing audio/music and actually partaking in live performences. Seeing as I stive to do all 4 I'll call myself and audio freak. I just can't get enough.

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

 

[cheeseboy]

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

the trick is to stop trying to pidgeonhole people. I don't have any thoughts on what a "real listener" is, i just object to this type of inference and use of words as it's usually used to try and elevate somebody over somebody else. Just say what you mean and don't try and make it to be something that it's not. If someobdy is in to music and hifi, they are in to music and hifi, they don't have to have a label.

 

[Glacialpath]

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

the trick is to stop trying to pidgeonhole people. I don't have any thoughts on what a "real listener" is, i just object to this type of inference and use of words as it's usually used to try and elevate somebody over somebody else. Just say what you mean and don't try and make it to be something that it's not. If someobdy is in to music and hifi, they are in to music and hifi, they don't have to have a label.

For Pete sake I sware you guys are like this on perpouse. I made a comment to give my opinion on something and used the best way I could think of to descibe it. There is no suggestion of elevating someone I describe a Real Listener over any other type of listener. You've just come to that conclusion yourself. So the word Real is a strong word. I could just have used Enthusiast but in my mind that can encompass more that one aspect. Excuse me for trying to compliment people on here by calling them real listeners. I'm obviously not aloud an opinion because not many people on here can tae it as that.

 

[cheeseboy]

For Pete sake I sware you guys are like this on perpouse. I made a comment to give my opinion on something and used the best way I could think of to descibe it. There is no suggestion of elevating someone I describe a Real Listener over any other type of listener. You've just come to that conclusion yourself. So the word Real is a strong word. I could just have used Enthusiast but in my mind that can encompass more that one aspect. Excuse me for trying to compliment people on here by calling them real listeners. I'm obviously not aloud an opinion because not many people on here can tae it as that.

no at all, I just disagree with your terminology and I've given you the reasons why.

 

[The_Lhc]

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

the trick is to stop trying to pidgeonhole people. I don't have any thoughts on what a "real listener" is, i just object to this type of inference and use of words as it's usually used to try and elevate somebody over somebody else. Just say what you mean and don't try and make it to be something that it's not. If someobdy is in to music and hifi, they are in to music and hifi, they don't have to have a label.

For Pete sake I sware you guys are like this on perpouse. I made a comment to give my opinion on something and used the best way I could think of to descibe it. There is no suggestion of elevating someone I describe a Real Listener over any other type of listener. You've just come to that conclusion yourself. So the word Real is a strong word. I could just have used Enthusiast but in my mind that can encompass more that one aspect. Excuse me for trying to compliment people on here by calling them real listeners. I'm obviously not aloud an opinion because not many people on here can tae it as that.

Honestly, you are possibly the ONLY person here that would hold that opinion.

Have you really never heard anyone say something like "Oh, well what would you know, you're not a REAL football fan" or, "no, he only plays twice a year when the weather's good, he's not a REAL golfer" or anything like that? Any time the word "real" is used like this it implies that the "real" person is better or more qualified than someone else and that's exactly the context that "real listener" is typically used in on this forum (including this thread).

 

[davedotco]

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

dave and yourself are indeed correct, so yes, in that respect I was wrong in what I said, but I was trying to simplify (wrongly) , I was just trying to make the point that they are not mutually exclusive. IE one can be heavily in to music, but not give a flying foo about hifi. One thing I have encountered quite a bit with hifi peeps is that some of them believe you can't be in to music unless you are in to hifi.

So the use of "Real Listener" seems wrong in this case. How can I put it.

Of ccourse there are music fans who just love music and don't mind where it comes from as long as they can listen to music.

Lets for discussion sake call them "music lovers" and know what they like in a composition.

A Hi-Fi enthusiast if they are not that bothered about music does seem a little odd. I guess we could call the Techies.

Then the people I was refering to are the people who love music and care about the compositions but also care very much how it sounds in relation to real life, Live or unplugged. Which ever way you want to look at it.

No-one can spend all there time at concerts so they would have to listen to music on a Hi-Fi system at some point but in my mind would strive to achive as close a sound to "Live" (being there" as possible thus "Real Listeners" or one deffinition of a real listener.

Then there are the people who like Going to concerts, getting the best out of their home audio kit, and produce audio for a living. Maybe Dave would like to give that group of people a name even if that doesn't describe Dave to a T. I'm not trying to tell people who they are.

And last but not least the person who like going to concerts, having the best sound at home a they can, producing audio/music and actually partaking in live performences. Seeing as I stive to do all 4 I'll call myself and audio freak. I just can't get enough.

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

Nope, the current Mrs DDC has no interest in listening to recorded music, sure I can sometimes gee her up to listen to the odd thing but it is pretty much on sufferance.

But live, thats a different matter entirely, anything from Covent Garden to the Bulls Head in Barnes (very easy for us). Since the Ealing Jazz festival at the end of july, we have had a couple of blues evenings in Barnes, travelled to north london to see a band called Alvvays and been to three proms, fairly quiet for us. She will go for anthing live, as long as the performers are competent she loves it.

 

[matt49]

She will go for anything live, as long as the performers are competent she loves it.

 

[davedotco]

She will go for anything live, as long as the performers are competent she loves it.

Clearly caught her jigging about to Balakirev at the end of the concert by the Istanbul Philharmonic last month.

Talking of Turkey, we are hoping to be in the Antalya area in a week or so, will try to pick up tickets to the opera.

http://www.aspendosfestival.gov.tr/

Tosca (I know.....) in the open air in a 10,000 seat ampitheatre that is two thousand years old.....*dirol*

 

[Covenanter]

She will go for anything live, as long as the performers are competent she loves it.

Clearly caught her jigging about to Balakirev at the end of the concert by the Istanbul Philharmonic last month.

Talking of Turkey, we are hoping to be in the Antalya area in a week or so, will try to pick up tickets to the opera.

http://www.aspendosfestival.gov.tr/

Tosca (I know.....) in the open air in a 10,000 seat ampitheatre that is two thousand years old.....*dirol*

Aspendos is wonderful. I did a touring holday many years ago roughly following the route taken by Alexander the Great and Aspendos was a highlight. I'm sure it will be a great occasion. Enjoy!

Chris

 

[Glacialpath]

if people are trying that desperately to get the sound as if the musicians are in the room then one could argue the only "real listeners" are those that go to gigs and *don't* care about hifi because they listen to their music live.

Seriously, when people try to refer to things are "real listeners" or "serious" or anything like that it's just a way of trying to make themselves sound elevated, an quite frankly it's rubbish. People listen to music in lots of different ways, and those that strive for a hifi sound are in to hifi first and the music second, as if they were truely in to music they would listen to it any which way as the music would come first, not the equipment.

Point of order. You can actually be interested in both.....*dirol*

I love my music and have a huge interest in the whole recording and playback process.

The trick is not to confuse the two.

dave and yourself are indeed correct, so yes, in that respect I was wrong in what I said, but I was trying to simplify (wrongly) , I was just trying to make the point that they are not mutually exclusive. IE one can be heavily in to music, but not give a flying foo about hifi. One thing I have encountered quite a bit with hifi peeps is that some of them believe you can't be in to music unless you are in to hifi.

So the use of "Real Listener" seems wrong in this case. How can I put it.

Of ccourse there are music fans who just love music and don't mind where it comes from as long as they can listen to music.

Lets for discussion sake call them "music lovers" and know what they like in a composition.

A Hi-Fi enthusiast if they are not that bothered about music does seem a little odd. I guess we could call the Techies.

Then the people I was refering to are the people who love music and care about the compositions but also care very much how it sounds in relation to real life, Live or unplugged. Which ever way you want to look at it.

No-one can spend all there time at concerts so they would have to listen to music on a Hi-Fi system at some point but in my mind would strive to achive as close a sound to "Live" (being there" as possible thus "Real Listeners" or one deffinition of a real listener.

Then there are the people who like Going to concerts, getting the best out of their home audio kit, and produce audio for a living. Maybe Dave would like to give that group of people a name even if that doesn't describe Dave to a T. I'm not trying to tell people who they are.

And last but not least the person who like going to concerts, having the best sound at home a they can, producing audio/music and actually partaking in live performences. Seeing as I stive to do all 4 I'll call myself and audio freak. I just can't get enough.

Have you own thoughts on what a "Real Listener" of course. We all have differing views but that is my version of a real listener.

Nope, the current Mrs DDC has no interest in listening to recorded music, sure I can sometimes gee her up to listen to the odd thing but it is pretty much on sufferance.

But live, thats a different matter entirely, anything from Covent Garden to the Bulls Head in Barnes (very easy for us). Since the Ealing Jazz festival at the end of july, we have had a couple of blues evenings in Barnes, travelled to north london to see a band called Alvvays and been to three proms, fairly quiet for us. She will go for anthing live, as long as the performers are competent she loves it.

Fair enough Dave so I didn't take into account the people who love music but are not bothered with listening to recorded music. I guess my comment was aimed at what I imagine is the majority of people.

 

[lindsayt]

What I don't get with these threads is someone opens with something like

"I've got the vinyl version and the CD version of (some great classic recording). The vinyl sounds better."

To which you get the inevitable reply:

"You like distortion... CD's technically better. Yada, yada, yada."

Followed by debates about live sound and what the mixing engineer hears in the studio etc etc etc.

To which I'm thinking "Who gives a proverbial? If it sounds better it is better and stuff what anyone else says."

And why is it that these objectivists that go on about the technical superiority of CD so often have such anodyne sounding systems? Is it because their left brains dominate so much of their thinking and listening that they end up with left brain systems?