Am I the lone music computerphobe?

[stoo schultz]

Here's a studio option, any takers:

 

-Steinway D

-1957 B-3 refurbished

-Mark 1

-Clavinet C

-Vox Continental

-Farfisa Compact Duo

 

With:

2" tape reel-to-reel recording system

8-track tape converter

 

And for your listening pleasure:

Vintage 1965 Ford Mustang with built in 8-track tape player

[Loufrance]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

So, thinking out loud, I guess we could sort in terms of overall sonic quality, from best to worst:

 

2" tape, vinyl

4-track, 8-track tape

cassette tape

CD, DAT, minidisc

mp3 etc.

 

So one could say that the listening formats have been slowly deteriorating over the last 50 years. And in reality we'd be much better off with that much-ridiculed 8-track tape format than the current array of digital options . . . another reason to be nostalgic for the 60s

LOL.. you put cassette tape before CD's are you nuts? Sometimes I think people's hearing getting worse is why they think this older format sounds better then the new ones.

 

I will agree though that mp3's are of a lesser quality. I remember a few years ago when people said you could rip a cd to mp3 format at an extremely high bitrate and the mp3's would sound better(yeah right).

 

 

Common sense tells you that you can't make the final product of a better quality then the source without some kind of processing. Even with processing whether the final product "sounded better" or not would very from person to person.

[stoo schultz]

LOL.. you put cassette tape before CD's are you nuts?

Yeah, I'm nuts But it's been probably 20 years since I actually listened to a cassette tape, so my memory could be a little off . . .

[burningbusch]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

So, thinking out loud, I guess we could sort in terms of overall sonic quality, from best to worst:

 

2" tape, vinyl

4-track, 8-track tape

cassette tape

CD, DAT, minidisc

mp3 etc.

 

So one could say that the listening formats have been slowly deteriorating over the last 50 years. And in reality we'd be much better off with that much-ridiculed 8-track tape format than the current array of digital options . . . another reason to be nostalgic for the 60s

I can't agree with that list in the least. If you have the 2" masters AND the tape machine perfectly aligned AND the masters have been warehoused in absolutely optimum conditions AND there is not a lot of bleed through on the tracks (AND probably a bunch of other things) then 2" tape might make it high on the list. Talk to engineers who worked through that period and ask them if they want to return to it. Yes tape can add warmth, read: distortion, but that's something that isn't in the original and it's always there whether you want it or not. And let's not forget hiss which is present in all tape and the various mechanisms like Dolby and DBX that try to reduce the hiss. Also, 2" typically means 24 track machines. That's not the best format. I believe there are 1" two track machines which were used (and a few still are) used in mastering. Tape is not a great medium for archiving. It is constantly degrading. I've got four track 1/4" tapes in storage that will no longer play through a machine. Hollywood had to get the original films into a digital format because they were deteriorating past a point of no return. We seem to be forgetting there are a lot of with issues.

 

I'm sorry, vinyl is crap. Pops, clicks, etc. The recordings had to be compressed just to keep the needle from junping out of the groove. I did have some direct-disc records that sounded MUCH better than your average LP, which just goes to show much the music was compromised in the process of going from the original recording to mass market LPs.

 

My list, considering the positive and negatives of the various mediums, would look something like this:

 

192K digital

88K digital

44.1K digital

wide track tape

narrow track tapes

compressed digital

direct-to-disc vinyl

mass market vinyl

....

cassette tape

 

Busch

[stoo schultz]

Thanks for the feedback, Busch; the only recorded music I've heard in the last 20 years has been CDs, radio, and my own Sound Forge piano recordings.

 

I have heard though from many audiophiles that vinyl (in good condition) and 2" tape are noticeably superior to digital, so I'm surprised to hear that this "warmth," at least in the tape, is due only to distortion.

[Loufrance]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

Thanks for the feedback, Busch; the only recorded music I've heard in the last 20 years has been CDs, radio, and my own Sound Forge piano recordings.

 

I have heard though from many audiophiles that vinyl (in good condition) and 2" tape are noticeably superior to digital, so I'm surprised to hear that this "warmth," at least in the tape, is due only to distortion.

*waves flag of joy and peace*

I wasn't trying to offend you, and I understand. I was just stating my opinion.

 

One thing we can all agree on is everyone's opinion of what sounds better/worse is subjective.

[synthizen2]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

I have heard though from many audiophiles that vinyl (in good condition) and 2" tape are noticeably superior to digital, so I'm surprised to hear that this "warmth," at least in the tape, is due only to distortion.

Opinions may differ on varying formats and their quality, but it's an indisputable fact that what people consider "warmth" in tape is, in fact, distortion and nothing else. High bit-rate digital gives the most accurate playback result of what went into it. Audiophiles initially got put off by the sound of CD recordings because the crystal clarity was more than they could handle. When you have a history of 30 or more years of hi-fi vinyl and tape playback systems leaving an impression in your ears, your mind mis-interprets THAT as a superior sound as soon as a technological advance renders it obsolete. Also keep in mind the great recordings of the 60s which to this day have left an indelible impression on all of modern pop music is largely characterized by this 'distortion', 'saturation', noodling with electronics and devices for purposes they weren't created for, etc. etc. These things are often taken for "supieror sound" instead of trendy distortion properties. High-end digital just gives you the truth back to your ears, whether you like it or hate it.

[stoo schultz]

*waves flag of joy and peace*

I wasn't trying to offend you, and I understand. I was just stating my opinion.

No problem, I'm learning a lot from you guys, hopefully I'm not the only one

 

The reason I posted is that I have a couple acquaintances who swear by the superiority of vinyl, one owns a record store that has 1000s of classic LPs, and the other is an opera buff with 6' speakers in his living room, and plays only vinyl. That prompted my question.

 

Anyway, sorry for the diversion, carry on!

[Garrafon]

From a live gigging standpoint, my aversion to computers has been: (1) another thing to lug around; (2) another power eater; (3) instability of Windows; and (4) lack of beer-proof laptops.

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by garrafon:

lack of beer-proof lapots.

Ummmmmm, counsel... whatza lapot?

[Garrafon]

You, of all people, don't what a lapot is? Why, its a laptop after you've spilled beer all over. Ok, I've gone back and fixed my egregious typographical error. I promise it won't ever happen again...until such time as it actually happens again.

[ITGITC]

 

Woe is me...

 

Daughter. First year in college. Calls home last weekend to report:

 

"Dad, I spilled apple juice in my new $2,500 IBM laptop."

 

 

I already have a problem with not getting enough light during the winter months.

 

She took it to the computer services folks at school. I don't know the outcome.

 

Whazza Dad to do?

 

I know, I know...

 

Pony up $$$$$

[MidLifeCrisis]

Originally posted by Is There Gas in the Car?:

"Dad, I spilled apple juice in my new $2,500 IBM laptop."

That is why god invented the extended service plan

Of course I never opt for those plans myself

 

Are you like that guy in the pizza commercial? Your family only gets a few minutes of lights on time per night How do you practice in the dark?

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by MidLifeCrisis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Is There Gas in the Car?:

"Dad, I spilled apple juice in my new $2,500 IBM laptop."

That is why god invented the extended service plan

 

I haven't heard from her about the damages yet, but as far as I'm concerned, if you spill apple juice into a laptop, you might as well throw it away.

 

I'll report back when I hear from her. I'm still too PO'd to talk about it.

[MidLifeCrisis]

The manufacturer's warranty certainly wont cover the apple juice. Some of the extended plans act like insurance. You break it, you drop it, you lose it and you are covered. Also, did you check into your homeowners?

[hichakhok]

High bit-rate digital gives the most accurate playback result of what went into it. Audiophiles initially got put off by the sound of CD recordings because the crystal clarity was more than they could handle. When you have a history of 30 or more years of hi-fi vinyl and tape playback systems leaving an impression in your ears, your mind mis-interprets THAT as a superior sound as soon as a technological advance renders it obsolete. Also keep in mind the great recordings of the 60s which to this day have left an indelible impression on all of modern pop music is largely characterized by this 'distortion', 'saturation', noodling with electronics and devices for purposes they weren't created for, etc. etc. These things are often taken for "supieror sound" instead of trendy distortion properties. High-end digital just gives you the truth back to your ears, whether you like it or hate it. [/QB]

Cd is not high end digital, good analog systems have a much greater range than cd, furthermore early Cds often sounded terrible. There is no absolute "truth" to a sound, it is completely relative to context and desired result. The important thing is if it is musical and expressive. Call it either "superior sound" "trendy distortion properties ( a trend that shows no sign of fading after 50 years) people find distortion pleasing.

[Markyboard]

Originally posted by stoo schultz:

 

I have heard though from many audiophiles that vinyl (in good condition) and 2" tape are noticeably superior to digital, so I'm surprised to hear that this "warmth," at least in the tape, is due only to distortion.

That wouldn't per chance be the same group of idiots spending $7000 on a pair of speaker cables would it?

[Garrafon]

Originally posted by Is There Gas in the Car?:

quote:

---

Originally posted by MidLifeCrisis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Is There Gas in the Car?:

"Dad, I spilled apple juice in my new $2,500 IBM laptop."

That is why god invented the extended service plan You see the irony here, don't you? You should have bought an apple computer. I would presume that apple computers like apple juice, no? And let's be honest, do we really believe that someone in college was drinking apple juice and not some sort of alcoholic beverage (what goes well with apple juice)?

 

And yes...insurance, insurance, insurance. If no specific insurance you bought from the school, there is always homeowner's insurance which ordinarily covers kids while away at institutions of higher learning (for a reasonable period of time anyway). Here, here to someone else paying for our stupid mistakes!!!

[synthizen2]

Originally posted by hichakhok:

Cd is not high end digital, good analog systems have a much greater range than cd, furthermore early Cds often sounded terrible.

The bad quality of early CD systems were due to poor DA/AD converters, not the bitrate or kHz range.

 

There is still an ongoing debate about digital systems higher than 16-bit/44.1 kHz and whether or not they actually make a difference to the human ear. Since the human ear cannot detect anything outside of the 20Hz to 20kHz range, the only "evidence" offered up by the audiophile crowd is that..... "there are artifacts (due to sampling errors and such) in lower sampling rates that are perceived but not necessarily 'heard' by the human ear."

 

I am not quite sure what the difference between 'perceived' and 'heard' is. It's all subjective and, I suppose, just use whatever makes you happy.

[hichakhok]

 

There is still an ongoing debate about digital systems higher than 16-bit/44.1 kHz and whether or not they actually make a difference to the human ear. Since the human ear cannot detect anything outside of the 20Hz to 20kHz range, the only "evidence" offered up by the audiophile crowd is that..... "there are artifacts (due to sampling errors and such) in lower sampling rates that are perceived but not necessarily 'heard' by the human ear."

[/QB]

Leaving aside interpolation, jitter and the widely varying range of quality between multi and single bit converters used in common cd players one does not need to be an "audiophile" to hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit. There are errors in higher systems too. Look at the SACD converter.

 

Trumpets, cymbals parts of the piano all produce higher frequencies which are lost at 16 bit 44khz. You can claim waving a piece of graph paper these freqs are not heard and therefore not needed, but you cannot claim that the resultant 22khz recording is a "truthful representation of the actual sound", when it is, infact, a partial one.

 

There is audible intermodulation caused by the higher frequencies above 20k which manifests within the range of human hearing. My humble Fender Rhodes creates striking intermodulations in certain note combinations which are not created when 44 16 bit corresponding samples of the same notes are used playing the same chord. I have found this also applies to nearly every soft synth I have tried at 16/44. (In isolation, one square to another good job, sounds close, in combination,big mess.)

 

Although audible resultant intermod can be of course directly captured on a 44khz recording, it sounds more natural if created in the ambience of the playback location by the high freqs present on a higher bitrate. This implies that the ear is sensitive to sounds that depend on freqs up to 40khz for their complexity,we are sensitive to minute fluctuations in volume and pitch to a very high degree.

 

Our hearing perception provides sensations much finer than our language can express. Often someone uses the non scientific term "feels wrong" "lacks warmth" because we do not have the vocabulary, and resort to words such as 'air' depth" It is foolish to pooh pooh such opinions and terminology as mere delusions or "trends" due to an incomplete understanding of how sounds are heard, and our inability to express in speech what we feel we hear. We see colours not waves. I think digital is great, but as in nature, every short cut has a price.

[Loufrance]

Originally posted by hichakhok:

 

There is still an ongoing debate about digital systems higher than 16-bit/44.1 kHz and whether or not they actually make a difference to the human ear. Since the human ear cannot detect anything outside of the 20Hz to 20kHz range, the only "evidence" offered up by the audiophile crowd is that..... "there are artifacts (due to sampling errors and such) in lower sampling rates that are perceived but not necessarily 'heard' by the human ear."

Leaving aside interpolation, jitter and the widely varying range of quality between multi and single bit converters used in common cd players one does not need to be an "audiophile" to hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit. There are errors in higher systems too. Look at the SACD converter.

 

Trumpets, cymbals parts of the piano all produce higher frequencies which are lost at 16 bit 44khz. You can claim waving a piece of graph paper these freqs are not heard and therefore not needed, but you cannot claim that the resultant 22khz recording is a "truthful representation of the actual sound", when it is, infact, a partial one.

 

There is audible intermodulation caused by the higher frequencies above 20k which manifests within the range of human hearing. My humble Fender Rhodes creates striking intermodulations in certain note combinations which are not created when 44 16 bit corresponding samples of the same notes are used playing the same chord. I have found this also applies to nearly every soft synth I have tried at 16/44. (In isolation, one square to another good job, sounds close, in combination,big mess.)

 

Although audible resultant intermod can be of course directly captured on a 44khz recording, it sounds more natural if created in the ambience of the playback location by the high freqs present on a higher bitrate. This implies that the ear is sensitive to sounds that depend on freqs up to 40khz for their complexity,we are sensitive to minute fluctuations in volume and pitch to a very high degree.

 

Our hearing perception provides sensations much finer than our language can express. Often someone uses the non scientific term "feels wrong" "lacks warmth" because we do not have the vocabulary, and resort to words such as 'air' depth" It is foolish to pooh pooh such opinions and terminology as mere delusions or "trends" due to an incomplete understanding of how sounds are heard, and our inability to express in speech what we feel we hear. We see colours not waves. I think digital is great, but as in nature, every short cut has a price. [/QB]

And so goes the ongoing battle of digital vs. analog, join us next week for "Return of the Codec's When Digital Strikes Back"

[Mr. Nightime]

Originally posted by garrafon:

lack of beer-proof laptops.

Actually, to a certain extent you can beer proof a laptop. I work on computers for a health-care organization as a day job, and we have plastic skins that go over the laptop keyboard to protect them, and make them easier to disinfect. While it doesn't completely beer proof it, at least a little apple juice spill shouldn't totally trash it.

[Garrafon]

Originally posted by Mr. Nightime:

Originally posted by garrafon:

lack of beer-proof laptops.

Actually, to a certain extent you can beer proof a laptop. . . . we have plastic skins that go over the laptop keyboard to protect them, and make them easier to disinfect. While it doesn't completely beer proof it, at least a little apple juice spill shouldn't totally trash it.

That's a great thing. I guess, as I think about it, I have seen things like that. I would think that something along those lines would be essential for a gigging laptop and laptop manufacturers (or someone in the secondary market) should consider making such things available. I know some companies make "tough" laptops (for drops and the like) and some, I seem to recall, even have some waterproofing abilities. But, I think the price was sort of high. The unfortunate reality of playing the bar/club scene is that moisture happens.

 

Check out this link for a totally moisture proof laptop...but PRICEY!!!

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2080546/

[ITGITC]

Thanks for your posts about the laptop.

 

As of today, my daughter hasn't heard back from the IS group at UNC regarding the laptop. She has a loaner. I haven't had the opportunity to study the insurance policy again, but will do that as soon as I hear from her.

 

I'm not mad at her. Stuff happens. But the timing of all this hit me like a smack to the back of the head.

 

So let's wait until she gets the machine back and see what the damages are.

 

Oooooomph.

[gangsu]

She feels worse than you do, Gas. Afterall it was hers.

Hey, that's a heck of quote you've got going. Was it something I said?

[GuitarPlayerFL]

Originally posted by garrafon:

From a live gigging standpoint, my aversion to computers has been:....(4) lack of beer-proof laptops.

Here's your beer proof laptop...

 

Beer Proof Laptop

[ITGITC]

Originally posted by gangsu:

She feels worse than you do, Gas. Afterall it was hers.

Hey, that's a heck of quote you've got going. Was it something I said?

I know. You're right, Sue.

 

Stuff happens and it's not a big deal.

 

Are you talking about the current quote that replaced yours? So sorry. I like to rotate them in and out all the time.

 

Hope you've got plenty of warm blankets. I hear it's cold 'round your parts these days.

 

Take care,

 

Tom

[gangsu]

I am sorry about that laptop. I'd be sick about it, too.

 

Yes, I was talking about your current quote. I see it's been ammended. I hate to admit it, but I do approve. Hope it hasn't cost you any points.

 

Like i need a blanket...