| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Fighter 
Forum Newbie
Joined: October 30 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 14
|
 Posted: January 20 2013 at 16:19 |
|
lol im only 2 pages into reading this thread and the amount of misinformation is hilharious. i think some people might hate on the word 'digital' because it has a negative connotation without really knowing what they're talking about, or understanding that there isn't really a fine line between analog and digital.
|
 |
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 20 2013 at 16:25 |
 Fighter wrote:
lol im only 2 pages into reading this thread and the amount of misinformation is hilharious. i think some people might hate on the word 'digital' because it has a negative connotation without really knowing what they're talking about, or understanding that there isn't really a fine line between analog and digital. |
read the other 30 pages - it gets better worse, you will have tears streaming down your cheeks.
|
|
What?
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17529
|
Posted: January 20 2013 at 17:35 |
Dean wrote:
Fighter wrote:
lol im only 2 pages into reading this thread and the amount of misinformation is hilharious. i think some people might hate on the word 'digital' because it has a negative connotation without really knowing what they're talking about, or understanding that there isn't really a fine line between analog and digital. |
read the other 30 pages - it gets better worse, you will have tears streaming down your cheeks. |
The only part missing was that in the old days, if the ink dried on the paper before you were done putting things on the staff, you would likely have the wrong note, or chord listed on the scores! Or we can joke --- badly -- about the fool and the pogo stick!
|
|
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
|
|
grumpy
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 22 2013
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 3
|
Posted: January 30 2013 at 03:05 |
|
Hi everyone,
I'm a newbie here and I am growing into Progressive Rock from a New Wave / Indie direction.
I just wanted to say that the argument in these categories is roughly the same in these genres. "Analogue" is a kind of mythical overgod, very Silmarillion-esque in His overhumanly, detached sublimity, very little understood, very little experienced.
I'd rather put forward the thought that sound cannot be pauschalized in this way, neither can performance. It is all about taste, competence and intention of the artist, producer and engineers. There are lps that sound way too muddy because they were badly recorded on tape with 2nd rate tubes etc. There are cds that sound incredibly warm because the EQ buddies knew what they were doing, and good reverb was used. There are cds that sound harsh and cold because people did not have a clue or wanted to achieve that feel of sound.
The best example is Radiohead: People tend to refer to them as an example of analogue sound, forgetting that it is a lot easier to achieve their key sound feature - extreme sum compression - by digital means. It is also a lot more common since the rise of digital techniques!
So, I suggest you shouldn't fall for this. Think in qualitative categories like "warmth, depth, clarity, transparency, adequacy, crispness, punch..." - but don't connect them to the equipment used. That's simply not true.
Grumpy
(sorry for the longish first post)
Edited by grumpy - January 30 2013 at 03:12
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: January 30 2013 at 03:08 |
I agree with what Hartmut has said but since managed to delete. Shame, it was a good post.
Welcome to the forum.
Edited by Dean - January 30 2013 at 03:16
|
|
What?
|
|
grumpy
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 22 2013
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 3
|
Posted: January 30 2013 at 03:14 |
|
Thanx for the welcome!
I still can't use the whole thing correctly, but I'm hoping to learn. I erased the post on accident and had to roughly re-write it. Grmpf.
Edited by grumpy - January 30 2013 at 03:15
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: January 30 2013 at 05:06 |
|
Nice post Grumps!
|
|
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: January 30 2013 at 14:10 |
grumpy wrote:
So, I suggest you shouldn't fall for this. Think in qualitative categories like "warmth, depth, clarity, transparency, adequacy, crispness, punch..." - but don't connect them to the equipment used. That's simply not true.
Grumpy
|
Well said  and welcome!
|
|
grumpy
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 22 2013
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 3
|
Posted: January 31 2013 at 02:08 |
|
A few more things about that from an engineer's point of view:
The discussion goes back to the rise of CD / DDD-recordings back in the 80ies, if I'm not mistaken. I remember the "revolution" in sound gusto when "Brothers in Arms" came out. People praised the clear treble, the extreme clarity etc. I think almost every single listener today would so much want the album to be remixed, using tape (simulation), vintage equalizers and a lot more muddy reverbs. So in the core of the matter, there *is* truth after all: You can sound a lot colder using digital techniques than you can sound on analogue technique. (But engineers have learned since then, on the one hand, and there is no need to achieve such an extreme contrast to analogue sound anymore: CD has been established alright..!)
On the other hand, what Steven Wilson did to some classic recordings - remastering them digitally! - can only be called brilliant, and this is what you can achieve with *modern* digital equipment: He has retained the warmth and character of the original source, yet he has added the broadth and depth that modern reverb and phase manipulating devices can achieve. And he has very tastefully added a lot of loudness / compression - thereby adapting those recordings for "younger" ears - without losing dynamics. All of this is also possible with classic analogue gear - but not quite as well and it would be a **** of a lot more work and twiddling and chance would be involved and things breaking down or things interacting in strange ways etc.
So, all of those who still say that LP just sounds better, are really just saying that their ears were conditioned to a sound fashion established in the 60/70ies. Analytically speaking, this is in no way plausible. This, however, does not mean that they are wrong - I who say that I prefer CD was as much conditioned as them - but to CD sound.
|
|
Anaon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 01 2005
Location: Kobaļa
Status: Offline
Points: 849
|
Posted: February 20 2013 at 07:28 |
moshkito wrote:
Anaon wrote:
Well, as a home studio owner myself, I know what you mean. I can't really give you any real examples as you guess, I'd love to know how modern bands work today in recording studio. It's interesting to see that Steven Wilson records live in the studio his upcoming album, it's a new approach for him it seems and will certainly adds something to the overall sound. |
I always thought that PT, had a "live" sound to them, and you could see it very well in their DVD's ... which I don't think is new, or something that Steven was not familiar with ... at issue, would be the more difficult things to do on stage that you devised elsewhere ... and this is not big deal ... all the bands go through this ... the usual concern ... am I a different band live than what I am on the record. For the record, the most obvious part of it all ??? ... PT and Steven STARTED on a garage with cassette tapes ... so saying they are going to this new approach ... is nothing short of bizarre! He knows ... better than anyone else ... what that means! |
About the new approach, I didn't have any content to share about Wilson recording live at that time but if you read his interview in the latest Prog magazine, he explained what I was talking about :
"What you hear, apart from the vocals, is a live band playing", "Can you believe that? In 20 years of making studio records, I've never done that before. I've always cut the drums, you bring th bass player in and you cut the bass parts, and then add the guitars and the keyboards. And it's all done to a click track and everything's edited and put perfectly in time".
So it's not bizarre but quite suprising even though I don't find that PT sounds like a live band playing on records (which is quite logical as it's not).
|
|
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17529
|
Posted: February 20 2013 at 10:42 |
Anaon wrote:
... "What you hear, apart from the vocals, is a live band playing", "Can you believe that? In 20 years of making studio records, I've never done that before. I've always cut the drums, you bring th bass player in and you cut the bass parts, and then add the guitars and the keyboards. And it's all done to a click track and everything's edited and put perfectly in time".
So it's not bizarre but quite suprising even though I don't find that PT sounds like a live band playing on records (which is quite logical as it's not).
|
I disagree a bit. It was rather clear listening to this that things were overlapped on each other at the start. However, in the last 10 years, I really think there is a lot more band input to make it better, different and more interesting ... it might (still) not be the whole thing live ... yet! ... but it is quite close. This shows the "analog" process a lot more, so to speak, and less fooling around, until "after" everything is in there, because it would be too hard to nail down the "song" while it is still in your head, and tomorrow it might not be there! When you see any of their DVD's this band is tight, and generally fairly well rehearsed and the material is quite faithful to the original ... and generally that is NOT something that comes out of anywhere ... it has a source somewhere, and the way the band plays together, suggests that there is some pretty good work in the background, not only in a rehearsal. As a sordid (sort of eample), in 1999, Richard's Prophet 5 took a spill between the airport and the venue and when they got there, they opened up the thing, and a couple of folks kept trying to fix it, while some went after this and that in any electronics store they could find ... it didn't work. Richard spent a good 4 hours backstage while 2 other bands played setting up a couple other synthesizers, and when they came on at 8, they were still magnificent ... and I had no CD's at the time of them at all!!!! ... and I mean magnificent. A roadie was upset up and down that they sounded terrible, they didn't! But it tells you that there is a level of care, and musicianship in the band that is important, impressive and special, that helps their work ... and I doubt that many folks would have been able to redo things like Richard did on that day ... You can't do that, as Richard did, if he did not know what he was doing (#1), and the band weren't so well defined to the point where he had to spend that much time getting it right (#2), and then have had it rehearsed enough, that they would not miss a beat (#3) ... which tends to be a process that is much more akin and closer to the "analog" style. Steven's earlier material was not "complicated" because there were not 6 folks playing the same bridge part! Which, in many ways, made things easier all around! The idea, or Steven commenting on his never having recorded anything "live" is not true ... he has been the owner of all the tapes and concerts for his band, since he owned all the rights to everything from the start ... and I kinda doubt that he has not given his band any credit for playing "live" and recording things ... like none of the members can add anything to make the music better, which you know is not true! Steven learned a lot about mastering while watching the engineers work on Klaus Schulze' stuff with Lisa Garrard ... check out his interview with Klaus, and then catch the engineers working Pro Tools to add a very detailed moment to the live performance that you can only catch on the CD, and would never know existed on the live performance, that helped bring the whole thing even more alive than before! You don't think that Steven learned a bit more from that, do you? So digital has a place in life ... so does analog ... but the hardest part of Klaus' thing is that he does his own mixing on stage while playing, and this takes it out of other people's hands, thus making the editing of the work tougher all around, but it also makes it "live", not "memorex". The digital/analog thing is overblown and some folks think it's better here, there or somewhere else ... PT has always sounded "live" to my ear!
Edited by moshkito - February 20 2013 at 11:28
|
|
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: March 31 2013 at 12:51 |
|
Moshkito,
Regarding your post on the ideology of individuality that has been lost on this culture, don't you think digital editing, midi and sound sampling had a significant contribution to the squashing of individuality in the creating of recorded music?
If a producer or engineer suggests using this or that kick drum sample ... it's not your sample. It's a move toward homogenization. "Play it your way... but it will sound like John Bonham on the low end... or Steve Gadd's perfectly tuned snare drum.
Spreading out a rhythm track across Pro Tools and using quantizing software to line up all the notes perfectly is homogenizing the music. Yes, I am aware there is software that adds "feel"... but again.. this is NOT the drummer playing his kit in real time sounding exactly like him. It's contrived into what someone else thinks it should feel lie like or even sound like.
Most folks think CD's sound fine.. and they probably do on solid state store line equipment. The few audiophiles here are going to argue for the non interrupted analog stream.... because they know it sounds better.
|
|
Phillips
Forum Newbie
Joined: April 08 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 4
|
Posted: April 09 2013 at 16:54 |
|
CD is rubbish, I love that warm sound of Vynil , It is how I first listened to Yes and King Crimson and is wonderfull
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: April 09 2013 at 16:59 |
Phillips wrote:
CD is rubbish, I love that warm sound of Vynil , It is how I first listened to Yes and King Crimson and is wonderfull |
You may love the warm sound...I hate the scratchyness and crackling. 
|
|
|
|
Phillips
Forum Newbie
Joined: April 08 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 4
|
Posted: April 18 2013 at 18:56 |
Snow Dog wrote:
Phillips wrote:
CD is rubbish, I love that warm sound of Vynil , It is how I first listened to Yes and King Crimson and is wonderfull |
You may love the warm sound...I hate the scratchyness and crackling. |
Ja ja I agree , but every rose has it “s thorn
|
|
libertycaps
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 19 2012
Location: PDX, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 72
|
Posted: April 18 2013 at 19:47 |
Another Newbie post. (And no, i'm not reading 30+ pages of this....)
We have to choose one or the other? I love LPs. I love CDs. Both have their positive/negative playback traits. If i had to choose one over the other, i'd go with CDs. The higher up the audio food chain you go (and i've gone a ways), the more digital becomes as lush and "warm" as analogue (w/o the surface noise distractions.)
The only major problem i have with this arguement is how so many contemporary LPs are being pressed using digital masters. Defeats the whole point and purpose of the benefits of analogue playback mediums like LPs. So in short: Buyer be aware.
|
|
dynaco THE FISHER Marantz Sansui Nakamichi Line Magnetic Oppo Yamaha Dynavector Sumiko Grado Denon Pioneer Advent Klipsch/Crites
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: April 19 2013 at 01:37 |
|
^ you don't have to chose one or the other, but kudos for dispelling the myth that audiophilists would chose vinyl.
|
|
What?
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: April 19 2013 at 01:58 |
libertycaps wrote:
The only major problem i have with this arguement is how so many contemporary LPs are being pressed using digital masters. Defeats the whole point and purpose of the benefits of analogue playback mediums like LPs. So in short: Buyer be aware. |
This is one of those arguments that we can never prove because there are no 'A' and 'B' versions of those recordings to compare against each other.
|
|
What?
|
|
Gerinski
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154
|
Posted: April 19 2013 at 03:16 |
Dean wrote:
libertycaps wrote:
The only major problem i have with this arguement is how so many contemporary LPs are being pressed using digital masters. Defeats the whole point and purpose of the benefits of analogue playback mediums like LPs. So in short: Buyer be aware. |
This is one of those arguments that we can never prove because there are no 'A' and 'B' versions of those recordings to compare against each other. |
I guess that what Libertycaps meant was that those 'audiophilists' who rejoice themselves in how genuinely analog they are because they purchase an album in vinyl, may be fooling themselves and may be unknowingly be listening to a digitally-sourced recording.
|
|
libertycaps
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 19 2012
Location: PDX, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 72
|
Posted: April 19 2013 at 04:44 |
Gerinski wrote:
Dean wrote:
libertycaps wrote:
The only major problem i have with this arguement is how so many contemporary LPs are being pressed using digital masters. Defeats the whole point and purpose of the benefits of analogue playback mediums like LPs. So in short: Buyer be aware. |
This is one of those arguments that we can never prove because there are no 'A' and 'B' versions of those recordings to compare against each other. |
I guess that what Libertycaps meant was that those 'audiophilists' who rejoice themselves in how genuinely analog they are because they purchase an album in vinyl, may be fooling themselves and may be unknowingly be listening to a digitally-sourced recording. |
Correct. I guess i'm proud to be an "Audiophilist" too. 
Really though, i just love MUSE-IC. She deserves THE BEST gear i can afford.....
|
|
dynaco THE FISHER Marantz Sansui Nakamichi Line Magnetic Oppo Yamaha Dynavector Sumiko Grado Denon Pioneer Advent Klipsch/Crites
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
the importance of analog sound in prog
