[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The prophet's song wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I do prefer records, but the only problem is they are so hard to come by here unless you live in the main centres, not to mention a record player will set you back nearly $400[/QUOTE]
i don´t think you must pay 400$ for a record player. buying a working used one from ebay or a second hand shop should not cost more than 50$, just make sure the needle is allright or better buy a new one (internet) for another 20-30$.nearly all regular queen lps were pressed in masses and should be easily found on flehmarkets even in nz for less than
5$,or buy a collection on ebay.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Do you think they sell record players for cars these days?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Treasure Moment wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]artemismoon wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Too true. Vinyl will always sound better than digital. Digital lacks warmth, analog will always beat digital. The good bands record on 2" tape, just like they used to in the good ole days[/QUOTE]
i agree analog is much better[/QUOTE]
I never thought I'm gonna write this, but I agree with you
i agree analog is much better[/QUOTE]
I never thought I'm gonna write this, but I agree with you
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I wonder if all those 'Digital sucks' people can pick out the one song from Made in Heaven which was recorded and mixed analog. [/QUOTE]
Too Much Love
If it weren't for digital technology, Made in Heaven wouldn't have been made. Digital has its good and bad, but lately it's been all bad. Some bands record in analog and then mix in digital, you keep some warmth that way. But man, there are some crappy bands producing some crappy sounding CD's.
Too Much Love
If it weren't for digital technology, Made in Heaven wouldn't have been made. Digital has its good and bad, but lately it's been all bad. Some bands record in analog and then mix in digital, you keep some warmth that way. But man, there are some crappy bands producing some crappy sounding CD's.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]radio_what's_new wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The artwork of vinyl is much better than the artwork of a cd, but a cd is more practical in use.
Modern new releases on vinyl are sounding the same as on a cd. That's because the music is recorded digital in the studio. When a digital sound is put onto vinyl it doesn't make any difference to a new cd.
It used to be a difference, but everyone who claims to hear a difference between a 2007 vinyl release which has been recorded digitally and the same music on a 2007 cd-release is talking nonsense. Vinyl only sounds better for the old anolog recordings. (for example the EMI anniversary re-release of A day at the races LP, the sound on vinyl is superb, but that's because of the pimped anolog recording)
[/QUOTE]
Actually I've wondered about this. I'm wondering if the recording COULD gain some of the analog warmth even though analog is entering in last.
The reason is the physical vinyl grooves wouldn't be able to reproduce much of the "jaggy" digital waveforms accurately, and would have to smooth them out into analog curves. Plus if there's an extra step in the recording going to analog tape before it goes to analog vinyl the sound waves may be "smoothed" out there as well. It would be interesting to see if the final waveform looks close to a smooth curved line or still has that jagged "step" look like digital has....
Modern new releases on vinyl are sounding the same as on a cd. That's because the music is recorded digital in the studio. When a digital sound is put onto vinyl it doesn't make any difference to a new cd.
It used to be a difference, but everyone who claims to hear a difference between a 2007 vinyl release which has been recorded digitally and the same music on a 2007 cd-release is talking nonsense. Vinyl only sounds better for the old anolog recordings. (for example the EMI anniversary re-release of A day at the races LP, the sound on vinyl is superb, but that's because of the pimped anolog recording)
[/QUOTE]
Actually I've wondered about this. I'm wondering if the recording COULD gain some of the analog warmth even though analog is entering in last.
The reason is the physical vinyl grooves wouldn't be able to reproduce much of the "jaggy" digital waveforms accurately, and would have to smooth them out into analog curves. Plus if there's an extra step in the recording going to analog tape before it goes to analog vinyl the sound waves may be "smoothed" out there as well. It would be interesting to see if the final waveform looks close to a smooth curved line or still has that jagged "step" look like digital has....
I don't get what's the problem with recording things with digital technology. If I record some stuff in a digital form and mix it all decently, like in the old days, shouldn't it sound at least as good as the analog records?
My band just finished recording in an all digital set up, I have the master CD and it sounds pretty good, but it could have been a lot better. It wasn't Protools, I can't remember what the name of the program our engineer was using but it was Mackie/Windows based. There are ways for one to tweak things here and there to make it sound better, but it's still not the same as analog. It's still missing that extra something.
I recorded in an all analog setting about seven years ago with a pretty well known (to people in the Tejano Music Industry), Grammy Award Winning producer in Texas. That recording session was awesome. He would use a splicer to cut and paste, it was awesome seeing him do all these wonderful things. The sound was incredible. I later worked with him in an all Protools environment, we called him the Master of the NTR; No Talent Required. Instead of going back in fixing little things here and there, he would use auto tune and various other tricks. That just didn't feel right, to me anyways. He even said it himself, Protools is cheaper, faster but you loose some quality. 2" tape sounds better, but it's much more expensive. You can get a good sound with digital, but it's still not the same.
I recorded in an all analog setting about seven years ago with a pretty well known (to people in the Tejano Music Industry), Grammy Award Winning producer in Texas. That recording session was awesome. He would use a splicer to cut and paste, it was awesome seeing him do all these wonderful things. The sound was incredible. I later worked with him in an all Protools environment, we called him the Master of the NTR; No Talent Required. Instead of going back in fixing little things here and there, he would use auto tune and various other tricks. That just didn't feel right, to me anyways. He even said it himself, Protools is cheaper, faster but you loose some quality. 2" tape sounds better, but it's much more expensive. You can get a good sound with digital, but it's still not the same.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]artemismoon wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I wonder if all those 'Digital sucks' people can pick out the one song from Made in Heaven which was recorded and mixed analog. [/QUOTE]
Too Much Love
If it weren't for digital technology, Made in Heaven wouldn't have been made. Digital has its good and bad, but lately it's been all bad. Some bands record in analog and then mix in digital, you keep some warmth that way. But man, there are some crappy bands producing some crappy sounding CD's.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, it's Beautiful Day
Too Much Love
If it weren't for digital technology, Made in Heaven wouldn't have been made. Digital has its good and bad, but lately it's been all bad. Some bands record in analog and then mix in digital, you keep some warmth that way. But man, there are some crappy bands producing some crappy sounding CD's.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, it's Beautiful Day
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FriedChicken<br><font size=1>The Almighty</font> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Nope, it's Beautiful Day[/QUOTE]
No sir, you're wrong.
Excerpt from a David Richards interview from Rolling Stone 1995.
http://www.queenzone.com/resources/articles/files/256830121899.htm
Q: Was modern technology elementary to finish the album? or would it have been possible to complete the album also 10 years ago?
DR: Absolutely! Technology offers us the possibility to arrange songs new, but in this case we didn't arrange the songs new, so the recordings could have been done just as well ten years back with an analog recording machine. In fact "Too Much Love" was recorded on an analog recording machine. Brian wrote the song at a time when we were still using those machines, Freddie recorded it, cause he liked the song very much, but the track was never used, so " Too Much Love.." ended up on Brian's solo album. It's interesting to compare that one analog song to all the other digital MIH songs. The clearness in the analog recording is remarkable. It always takes us some time till we see where new technology takes us. We follow every technological revolution without knowing where it's heading.
Q. What does the band think about analog/digital recording?
DR: Roger called me yesterday, because I did an edit of "Too Much Love..." for a release in the USA. He asked: "what did you do with that remix? it sounds AMAZING!" I told him it was maybe because it was an analog recorded song that gave that amazing impression.
Nope, it's Beautiful Day[/QUOTE]
No sir, you're wrong.
Excerpt from a David Richards interview from Rolling Stone 1995.
http://www.queenzone.com/resources/articles/files/256830121899.htm
Q: Was modern technology elementary to finish the album? or would it have been possible to complete the album also 10 years ago?
DR: Absolutely! Technology offers us the possibility to arrange songs new, but in this case we didn't arrange the songs new, so the recordings could have been done just as well ten years back with an analog recording machine. In fact "Too Much Love" was recorded on an analog recording machine. Brian wrote the song at a time when we were still using those machines, Freddie recorded it, cause he liked the song very much, but the track was never used, so " Too Much Love.." ended up on Brian's solo album. It's interesting to compare that one analog song to all the other digital MIH songs. The clearness in the analog recording is remarkable. It always takes us some time till we see where new technology takes us. We follow every technological revolution without knowing where it's heading.
Q. What does the band think about analog/digital recording?
DR: Roger called me yesterday, because I did an edit of "Too Much Love..." for a release in the USA. He asked: "what did you do with that remix? it sounds AMAZING!" I told him it was maybe because it was an analog recorded song that gave that amazing impression.
Why Todays' CDs sound like crap
-------------------------------
you need to warm them up in the oven first...makes them sound much better ;-)
-------------------------------
you need to warm them up in the oven first...makes them sound much better ;-)
Baking analog tape and film is a small price to pay compared to maintaining a digital file.
[QUOTE]According to a 74 page study released by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAD) to a limited audience in early November, preserving a full-length digital movie can cost $208,569 (dramatic pause) per year. The reasons are exactly the same as for digitized documents, and the currently available means of preservation are the same as well.[/QUOTE]
The cost are less when it comes to audio files, but it still cost record companies millions of dollars to perserve audio files.
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20071223055232858
[QUOTE]According to a 74 page study released by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAD) to a limited audience in early November, preserving a full-length digital movie can cost $208,569 (dramatic pause) per year. The reasons are exactly the same as for digitized documents, and the currently available means of preservation are the same as well.[/QUOTE]
The cost are less when it comes to audio files, but it still cost record companies millions of dollars to perserve audio files.
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20071223055232858
i think you took my comment seriously...
did you not see the " ;-) " ?
did you not see the " ;-) " ?
Not really. I did see the wink, I'm just a little bored. LOL!
okay mate, so was i when i suggested it
So, how's the weather in Worcestershire?