Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 07 2013 at 12:51 |
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
So nothing to do with sales. |
No, not "nothing" - Pedro said "relative to sales" and he is right, it is relative to sales and that is something to do with sales. More people review an album that is more well known, it is more well known because it sold more copies to more people, therefore it gets more reviews because it sold more copies.
|
Nope. Sorry will have to just disagree. Don't want to argue further or you to hurt your head any more. |
You are not disagreeing. You are saying we're wrong wiothout giving an explanation of why you think we are wrong. |
I am disagreeing. I just did it. |
Then explain how it is nothing to do with sales. Explain why lesser known albums that sold fewer copies are not riding the top of the charts because they certainly have higher average ratings than all of the top 100 albums.
Edited by Dean - January 07 2013 at 12:59
|
What?
|
|
Aquiring the Taste
Forum Groupie
Joined: October 23 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 68
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 00:10 |
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
So nothing to do with sales. |
No, not "nothing" - Pedro said "relative to sales" and he is right, it is relative to sales and that is something to do with sales. More people review an album that is more well known, it is more well known because it sold more copies to more people, therefore it gets more reviews because it sold more copies.
|
Nope. Sorry will have to just disagree. Don't want to argue further or you to hurt your head any more. |
Bad analogy!
|
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.
Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, 1905
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 04:01 |
Aquiring the Taste wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
So nothing to do with sales. |
No, not "nothing" - Pedro said "relative to sales" and he is right, it is relative to sales and that is something to do with sales. More people review an album that is more well known, it is more well known because it sold more copies to more people, therefore it gets more reviews because it sold more copies.
|
Nope. Sorry will have to just disagree. Don't want to argue further or you to hurt your head any more. |
Bad analogy!
|
There is no analogy.
|
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 05:10 |
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
Dean wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
So nothing to do with sales. |
No, not "nothing" - Pedro said "relative to sales" and he is right, it is relative to sales and that is something to do with sales. More people review an album that is more well known, it is more well known because it sold more copies to more people, therefore it gets more reviews because it sold more copies.
|
Nope. Sorry will have to just disagree. Don't want to argue further or you to hurt your head any more. |
You are not disagreeing. You are saying we're wrong wiothout giving an explanation of why you think we are wrong. |
I am disagreeing. I just did it. |
If you: a) assume that everybody who has reviewed / rated the album has purchased it b) assume that the number of reviews and ratings for an album is proportional to its total sales (i.e. the ratio of the total album buyers who rate it in PA and those who don't is more or less equal for all albums), and c) you neglect the effect that reviews by Collabs, reviews by non-Collabs and ratings without reviews have a different weight so the relative proportion of each of them affects the final result
then Dean is right, albums with a lot of ratings [= most sold under assumptions a) and b)] will get higher position even if their average rating is the same or lower than other albums with less ratings.
However I admit that the 3 assumptions are rather demanding and reality surely does not conform to them, so the actual results are much watered-down. So QWR does reflect some loose relationship to sales but certainly very far from a direct relationship.
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 05:17 |
^A loose relationship yes, but not....
moshkito wrote:
Sadly, you are writing this on a fan board that has a "top ten" ... most of which is relative to sales instead of anything else! |
|
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 05:23 |
Snow Dog wrote:
^A loose relationship yes, but not....
moshkito wrote:
Sadly, you are writing this on a fan board that has a "top ten" ... most of which is relative to sales instead of anything else! |
|
Doesn't change anything. An album in the top ten still has sold more than an album in the bottom ten - just because we rate the album on Prog-quality or whether it has a red cover or the lead guitarist has blue eyes doesn't change that.
|
What?
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 05:36 |
^Not sure. Harmoniums album used to be pretty high in the chart and I cannot imagine it had sales that compare to others there.
|
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 06:23 |
Keeping in mind my previous remark that chart position has certainly a relationship to sales, for a big part it does indeed reflect the quality appreciation by the raters rather than sales volume. VDGG's Godbluff sits in position 10, PFM's Per Un Amico position 11, Anglagard Hybris 12. ELP's debut sits in position 73 and I guess that it must have sold many more copies than those 3 albums, and it's an outstanding album (such a low position is baffling for me but that's another point).
It's clearly a combination of both and probably impossible to break down how much is due to sales volume and how much due to intrinsic quality as judged by the raters.
So with these reservations I second Snow Dog in that Pedro's claim that PA charts are basically driven by sales is not fair.
|
|
Neelus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 346
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 08:56 |
I read a Jazz Times article on the recording techniques used for Michel Camilo's album Triangulo. I thought this article will be very fitting to this thread, as both digital and analog recording techniques were used on it.
Piano was recorded digitally: " After recording many albums with a highly produced sound, Camilo wanted
to finally capture an accurate representation of the piano’s acoustic
beauty, overtones and all. Friedrich knew that the way to grant Camilo
his wish was to record the piano digitally. “Some people like the way a
piano sounds on analog,” he explains. “For me, it clouds it up.”
Sounds like heresy, but sure enough, DSD keeps the piano clear
throughout every register. Even the low notes—frequencies often muddied
on lower-fidelity recordings—remain defined and punchy."
Drums and Bass were done analogue: "but Friedrich didn’t slack on the drums or bass, which were recorded in
analog on a Studer A-800 MK3 24-track tape deck reeling at 15-inches per
second and locked to the DSD stream to keep the instruments in sync."
Entire article here:
http://jazztimes.com/articles/19882-making-michel-camilo-s-triangulo
Edited by Neelus - January 08 2013 at 08:58
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 09:15 |
Gerinski wrote:
Keeping in mind my previous remark that chart position has certainly a relationship to sales, for a big part it does indeed reflect the quality appreciation by the raters rather than sales volume.
VDGG's Godbluff sits in position 10, PFM's Per Un Amico position 11, Anglagard Hybris 12.
ELP's debut sits in position 73 and I guess that it must have sold many more copies than those 3 albums, and it's an outstanding album (such a low position is baffling for me but that's another point).
It's clearly a combination of both and probably impossible to break down how much is due to sales volume and how much due to intrinsic quality as judged by the raters.
So with these reservations I second Snow Dog in that Pedro's claim that PA charts are basically driven by sales is not fair.
|
No one is claiming an exact correlation, just that it is relative. I don't believe Pedro did say they are basically driven by sales, rather that our chart favours the more popular artists. To enter the top 10 you have to be highly rated AND popular.
|
What?
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Online
Points: 17510
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 14:48 |
Gerinski wrote:
...
So with these reservations I second Snow Dog in that Pedro's claim that PA charts are basically driven by sales is not fair.
|
I stated relative.
In general, the music thing is too "fad"oriented for my tastes ... but then I can not say that the freedom rap in the 70's did not bite me, either! However, my ability to get into different things is related to other arts, and the "visual" in those arts, and this is the part that is missing in the music thing list for me ... and folks are taking some of these experiments THAT HELPED define OTHER arts, and did similar things in music ... and we are not capable of defining, or looking at those moments and details, and giving those artists their due and proper credit and understanding ... because all we can look at it is some top ten list ... that we end up thinking is a defining line for that this music is or could be.
In the end, they are a parallel to the time and place and other arts! Please note that I CONSISTENTLY mention theater, film and other events, as a PARALLEL so the music makes better sense ...
Thus, the list COULD BE considered a falacy ... it might be today, but not tomorrow, when you vote for another album!
Thus my preference for considering ALL of that top ten list ... as ARTISTS only, instead of 4 or 5 albums by one group ... which, to me, tends to lower the artistic ability of a band ... because it was famous for one album and not the other. Stravinsky did great on Firebird, but poop'y on something else? ... but do we ignore his ability and talent because of it? Is Ravel any less of a composer and a pop music person after Bolero? See my point? ... my main contention is that I want all of these termed as "artists" because they all represent a time and a place ... but as long as we are just preferring the 9th Symphony and the other 8 are crap ... I could easily say .,.. you never heard them anyway and you are just sticking to your favorite band! ... thus DT gets one or two albums and the rest is crap. It is NOT! And they deserve the "artist" credit, just like anyone else!
Edited by moshkito - January 08 2013 at 15:05
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
|
|
Surrealist
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 12 2012
Location: Squonk
Status: Offline
Points: 232
|
Posted: January 08 2013 at 21:42 |
Robert Plant on Analog Sound:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEOvfI5uhLM
|
|
reformationband
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 13 2013
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 10
|
Posted: January 13 2013 at 09:15 |
I disagree with the OP. It's entirely possible to have an album completely digtally recorded that sounds totally analog. Check out my band's album to see what I mean:
Edited by reformationband - January 13 2013 at 09:16
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: January 13 2013 at 10:15 |
I think that part of the discussion often gets lost in the translation (so to speak...). I mean, people (including myself) post things like "analog is better", "digital is better" or whatever without specifying to which steps of playing / recording / storing / reproducing music they are referring to (or to the whole process if that would be the case).
In my personal opinion, in the playing process I prefer analog instruments if they are supposed to be analog, I mean that the original analog instrument will nearly always produce a warmer and more natural sound than any sample. Of course if the instrument to be played is a genuinely digital instrument (say a modern digital synth patch or electronic drums etc) I have no problem with it being digital.
Next comes recording. You may play analog guitars and drums but record them into a digital media. Or you may record fully analog to tape. I am no sound engineer / producer so I will not make any judgments here. My DAW is the crappy Cubasis and surely the recordings of my analog instruments into wav files sound poorly but I'm quite sure that with top-end equipment the recordings can preserve the purity of the original analog signals.
Once the music has been recorded, it comes to storing it and playing it back. Vinyl or CD? For me CD quality with a good playback equipment is preferable, and much more practical and long-lived (mp3's, Ipods etc are another discussion as Dean has repeatedly pointed out, they are not the definition of "digital").
So the answer is not a simple statement "analog" or "digital". In my case I would say "play analog but give it to me in CD".
Edited by Gerinski - January 14 2013 at 02:12
|
|
docall27
Forum Newbie
Joined: December 22 2012
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Status: Offline
Points: 35
|
Posted: January 13 2013 at 23:15 |
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is dynamic range. A vinyl disc at best can deliver a dynamic range of 60Db which is okay for most rock - there really isn't a very large dynamic range. In classical music however, the dynamic range between ppp and fff is more like 90Db and only a digital signal in the form of a CD can reproduce that sort of range. In classical music, analog does NOT equate with better and classical CDs blow away their analog counterparts.
Edited by docall27 - January 13 2013 at 23:15
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 14 2013 at 06:23 |
^I think the way the Classical world has embraced the CD is very telling.
|
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: January 14 2013 at 06:56 |
Snow Dog wrote:
^I think the way the Classical world has embraced the CD is very telling. |
Indeed, that's what I meant in my previous post, play analog instruments (if that's the meaning) but deliver the music in CD.
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 14 2013 at 07:10 |
^ I wouldn't go that far even. I have no problem at all with digital instruments either.
|
|
|
Surrealist
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 12 2012
Location: Squonk
Status: Offline
Points: 232
|
Posted: January 17 2013 at 01:41 |
I disagree with the OP. It's entirely possible to have an album completely digtally recorded that sounds totally analog.
You need to upgrade your stereo so you can hear the difference. Ignorance is bliss... but not accurate. A digitally recorded album sounds digital. If you have a good system, you would know this to be true.
If Dean ever upgrades his analog system, he will leave the dark side as well.
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 17 2013 at 02:01 |
Piss off.
|
What?
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.