TerraMortim
New member
woah... I missed a whole bunch of crap. Didn't notice that the thread is 30 some odd pages. How in the hell did the subject get turned to this haha?
- Status
Dogman
Unkle Ticklefingers
Everybody knows Beeze is whacking his weiner....steve.h said:
N
NYMorningstar
Recording Modus Operandi
I belong to a Black Catholic Apostolic church that is unlike anythin you've experienced. I'm the guitarist in a 4 piece band with a 13 member choir. We do African, Latin, gospel and rock(my contribution) music for mass every week.pacman9000 said:
I don't have blind faith in the things I think you're talking about. That particular faith comes from me trusting myself and my ability to make informed decisions based on the research I do.
For example, I've been learning audio now for about 7 years straight and I decided, based on the information I learned plus my own education in computer electronics that Cubase SX3 is worth the $600 that I they ask for it so I purchased it. I could have pirated it but then I wouldn't feel good about me which is a primary consideration. I could have used freeware or cheaper software but I wanted the added funtionality and support that comes with the Cubase.
I took care of me, it's ok.
If I start making decisions based on blind trust of others I'd be bonkers and besides Christ already gave his life for all those misdeeds.
I care enough about myself to do the right thing. Until you do that, you will never truly love another. I pray to learn how to love others like Jesus does. That would be so cool.
You also need to trust yourself before you can truly trust another.
As far as faith governments and other people I have to admit I don't have blind trust in them. I have faith that God has my backside and I live without the fear of being jerked around. Again, education helps me to make informed decisions concerning those issues. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's.
This sounds materialistic. Everything in existance belongs to God. The more you value the riches, the more temptation creeps into your life. Our life is very short here on earth and we don't take the riches with us when we die.pacman9000 said:
Again, learn to love like Jesus and you will find forgiveness for yourself. It's no good to be feelin guilty or to live in the shadow of guilt. Here's a thought... Go earn some brownie points with God by helping out some homeless person. Christ says whatever you do for the least of my brethern you do for me.pacman9000 said:
T
Toker41
Better Than You
pacman9000 said:
Couldn't agree more. We were sold on the need for this better digital sound so that we would still pay $16 for an albums worth of songs. Now their weapon of mass deception has turned to bite them. We have gotten use the digital, but there is still a warmth that comes with analog that still can not be matched.
Last edited:
P
pacman9000
New member
Toker41 said:
If i could use one world to describe digital and one world for analog it would be...
Digital - Dull
Analog - Alive
It's really a shame, not to totally knock digital, it's editing capabilities has it's place, but it's truly a travesty that Analog is being completely phased out except in the most expensive studios that only the rich can record in.
It's capitalism at work, it's cheaper to make sh1tty digital products, and make up fagut ass corporate gimmicks like 1080i and 192khz, and the real travesty is that they have been able to convince the masses that digital sounds better and is better in every way which has accelerated Analog's extinction from the semi-pro consumer market...Digital is inferior in the most important way, the way it sounds...most people have no idea...The Strongest Bulwark Of The Capitalist System...
D
danny.guitar
Guest
pacman9000 said:
Have you not realized yet that no one gives a shit what you have to say?
Seriously, just save your time from typing shit that no one cares about.
Steve Henningsgard
New member
Perhaps if you looked at digital recording for the positive aspects (enhanced creativity: do you hate midi?), you wouldn't be so down on it.Toker41 said:
wheelema
Boner-obo
Omitting the half-assed diatribe...pacman9000 said:
Consider the signal chain as that component that moves the music from the point of capture (the microphone) to the point of consumption (where the customer listens to what he paid for... whether directly (buying a recorded medium) or indirectly (listening to adverts)).
Is that signal chain purely analog? No.
In the chain from the artist to the consumer there are numerous opportunities for the music to be converted into 0's and 1's... not the least of which is the stark reality that nobody is putting out music on LPs or 45s. I would be willing to wager that Pacman9000 wasn't even alive when the last vinyl record was shipped to a music store.
Furthermore CDs (the only medium most people under 30 have ever listened to) are mastered to 44.1KHz. The initial work may be recorded in 48, 88.2, or 96 but EVERYTHING gets dumbed down to 44.1. Thus the only true analog signal one ever encounters is at a concert or recital. Merely recording to 1/2" tape only provides delusional audiophiles with the opportunity to stridently claim that they can hear a difference, and since no one else has that particular set of auditory equipment their claims are moot and unprovable. And besides, turst me, as you age your ears will go bye bye. At sixteen I could hear my parents whispering into each other's ears from forty feet away. Now... well...
On the other hand digital has brought to the Great Unwashed the ability for most anyone who wants, to be empowered to record their creative efforts at a greater or lesser level of quality depending on their financial resources. This is a tremendous advancement in human achievment that has resulted in a virtual explosion of songs and effort. The deluge is so great that frankly slogging through all of the crap to find the jewels can be quite the effort.
So where is the greatest benefit to our world and our race? To embrace the past where only the privileged few ever had the opportunity to find themselves in a recording studio, or to embrace the future where a huge percentage of humanity may well find themselves empowered to put their songs... for however a brief period of time... before others?
How do I view analog vs. digital?
Analog... elitist
Digital... populist
punkin
Univalve & Avatar Speaks
78's sound better than 45's and fly way farther when you throw them
legionserial
New member
This sudden anti-digital rant sounds to me no less llike someone regurgitating something someone else said than those old anti capitalist soundbites and just as ill thought out. The desparately connecting the capitalism and the expanding use of digital sounds like a touch of unhealthy obession to me.
Did you think about the fact that analog equipment costs more to make in the first place? What you think the manufacturers are going to make their product at a loss? Seriously? Because that pretty fucking stupid. People need to be compensated for their labour and material costs, that's how they pay their bills.
Digital has exploded because yes, it is cheaper to use. You don't have to keep buying tape, not to mention the time factor of not having to rewind tapes and all manner of other things which work out more conveniently. It has also exploded because of many people like the ones here who don't want to spend a fortune on analog equipment, and because you can get some pretty good stuff for free...legitimately. (Funny that you don't want to use the legitimate free stuff though, and would rather steal the expensive stuff. This capitalism thing is just a lame excuse if you ask me)
It is perfectly possible to get very good sound from digital. To pass it off as crap just because it doesn't have that 'analog warmth' is pretty daft. Especially when you are complaining that digital costs too much. On one side of you mouth you are advocating software piracy, but then saying you'd rather spnd 3 times as much on analog gear. Or are you planing to steal all that too?
You complain about stuff costing money, and cost limitations stifling peoples ability to create, but don't you see people would be even more stifled without the affordability of digital. I know I wouldn't be able to afford making music if it was all analog.
Try thinking stuff through properly. Instead of just spitting out a bunch of other stuff some other guy said. Because all these arguments so far have been pretty half baked, and not made a lot of sense.
Did you think about the fact that analog equipment costs more to make in the first place? What you think the manufacturers are going to make their product at a loss? Seriously? Because that pretty fucking stupid. People need to be compensated for their labour and material costs, that's how they pay their bills.
Digital has exploded because yes, it is cheaper to use. You don't have to keep buying tape, not to mention the time factor of not having to rewind tapes and all manner of other things which work out more conveniently. It has also exploded because of many people like the ones here who don't want to spend a fortune on analog equipment, and because you can get some pretty good stuff for free...legitimately. (Funny that you don't want to use the legitimate free stuff though, and would rather steal the expensive stuff. This capitalism thing is just a lame excuse if you ask me)
It is perfectly possible to get very good sound from digital. To pass it off as crap just because it doesn't have that 'analog warmth' is pretty daft. Especially when you are complaining that digital costs too much. On one side of you mouth you are advocating software piracy, but then saying you'd rather spnd 3 times as much on analog gear. Or are you planing to steal all that too?
You complain about stuff costing money, and cost limitations stifling peoples ability to create, but don't you see people would be even more stifled without the affordability of digital. I know I wouldn't be able to afford making music if it was all analog.
Try thinking stuff through properly. Instead of just spitting out a bunch of other stuff some other guy said. Because all these arguments so far have been pretty half baked, and not made a lot of sense.
C
Crumbles
Banned
This sudden anti-digital rant sounds to me no less llike someone regurgitating something someone else said than those old anti capitalist soundbites and just as ill thought out. The desparately connecting the capitalism and the expanding use of digital sounds like a touch of unhealthy obession to me.
Did you think about the fact that analog equipment costs more to make in the first place? What you think the manufacturers are going to make their product at a loss? Seriously? Because that pretty fucking stupid. People need to be compensated for their labour and material costs, that's how they pay their bills.
Digital has exploded because yes, it is cheaper to use. You don't have to keep buying tape, not to mention the time factor of not having to rewind tapes and all manner of other things which work out more conveniently. It has also exploded because of many people like the ones here who don't want to spend a fortune on analog equipment, and because you can get some pretty good stuff for free...legitimately. (Funny that you don't want to use the legitimate free stuff though, and would rather steal the expensive stuff. This capitalism thing is just a lame excuse if you ask me)
It is perfectly possible to get very good sound from digital. To pass it off as crap just because it doesn't have that 'analog warmth' is pretty daft. Especially when you are complaining that digital costs too much. On one side of you mouth you are advocating software piracy, but then saying you'd rather spnd 3 times as much on analog gear. Or are you planing to steal all that too?
You complain about stuff costing money, and cost limitations stifling peoples ability to create, but don't you see people would be even more stifled without the affordability of digital. I know I wouldn't be able to afford making music if it was all analog.
Try thinking stuff through properly. Instead of just spitting out a bunch of other stuff some other guy said. Because all these arguments so far have been pretty half baked, and not made a lot of sense.
Did you think about the fact that analog equipment costs more to make in the first place? What you think the manufacturers are going to make their product at a loss? Seriously? Because that pretty fucking stupid. People need to be compensated for their labour and material costs, that's how they pay their bills.
Digital has exploded because yes, it is cheaper to use. You don't have to keep buying tape, not to mention the time factor of not having to rewind tapes and all manner of other things which work out more conveniently. It has also exploded because of many people like the ones here who don't want to spend a fortune on analog equipment, and because you can get some pretty good stuff for free...legitimately. (Funny that you don't want to use the legitimate free stuff though, and would rather steal the expensive stuff. This capitalism thing is just a lame excuse if you ask me)
It is perfectly possible to get very good sound from digital. To pass it off as crap just because it doesn't have that 'analog warmth' is pretty daft. Especially when you are complaining that digital costs too much. On one side of you mouth you are advocating software piracy, but then saying you'd rather spnd 3 times as much on analog gear. Or are you planing to steal all that too?
You complain about stuff costing money, and cost limitations stifling peoples ability to create, but don't you see people would be even more stifled without the affordability of digital. I know I wouldn't be able to afford making music if it was all analog.
Try thinking stuff through properly. Instead of just spitting out a bunch of other stuff some other guy said. Because all these arguments so far have been pretty half baked, and not made a lot of sense.
Gorty
New member
watermelon said:
How long did it take you to type out that post watermelon? I didn't know you could put a few sentences together without mentioning the word "gay".
Oh.......I see now that you just copied and pasted!
I thought you might have had a little bit of brain in that melon of yours for a minute there!.....Phew!!!!.....I feel better now knowing you didn't post that stuff on your own!
C
Crumbles
Banned
I did it all in 4 key strokes you gay assGorty said:
Gorty
New member
watermelon said:
That's the melon I know and love!
T
Toker41
Better Than You
legionserial said:
Sorry, but analog does sound warmer. Digital has come a long way since I first experienced it in the early 80's, however, but still not the same.
As far as it being cheaper...
...that is my very point. We were sold on it as "needed", and "better". Remember when CD's first came to market? "INDESTRUCTIBLE" was the word used. Another lie used to sell us on it. Turns out that CDs are more sensitive than albums. Can't tell you how many cassettes I just threw away that are years old, and still played fine (just don't have a player anymore), yet I have CD's that are less than a year old that are no damn good now. You can only be so careful with them in a car while driving. There are now studies that show the average life of a CD is 10 years before it degrades to the point of being unplayable, where I have tapes, and albums that play as good as the day I bought them.
Not to mention, the cost of digital equipment 20 years ago, far outweighed the cost of analog. Time has made it cheaper, just like anything else. I've heard some damn good things done with cheap anolog 8 tracks. Sgt. Pepper was done on two 4 tracks. It's not what you have, it's what you can do with it. (why do I find myself having to repeat this all the time?)
Now to my point.....if it is so much cheaper....why does a CD still cost $16, and the artist, on average, still only sees about 10 cents per CD sold? Why are the "savings" not passed down to the consumer, OR the artist? We were sold on this idea by the industry so that they may profit more. Period. Not because it was "better", but because it was cheaper to mass produce.
Don't bother to feed me a bunch of crap about "marketing expenses", because I worked in the field for years, as well as in distributing, and I am all to aware of the mark up. "Pirating" is a hype word used as an excuse by the industry to inflate prices. Period. It does not have a measurable impact on sales. The industry can not prove that a person that "stole" the program, or music, would have bought it if they couldn't get it for free, and studies show that most would not. So how does one "estimate" the amount lost on sales that never would have happened, and work that into the price of the product, claiming it is to "recoup" the loss? Again, I don't see much of that "lost" money being put into anti-piracy measures to keep it from happening in the first place (which do exist, but are not widely used). No one here has yet to post a good counter point to that. It's kinda like the way Airlines, and insurance companies claim to lose billions of dollars each year, yet stay in business. Smoke and mirrors.
Also, being able to hear your parents whisper at 40 feet away, doesn't mean you can tell a warm tone from and icy one. There is a difference between "good' hearing, and "trained" hearing.
Steve Henningsgard
New member
Toker41 said:Sorry, but analog does sound warmer. Digital has come a long way since I first experienced it in the early 80's, however, but still not the same.
As far as it being cheaper...
...that is my very point. We were sold on it as "needed", and "better". Remember when CD's first came to market? "INDESTRUCTIBLE" was the word used. Another lie used to sell us on it. Turns out that CDs are more sensitive than albums. Can't tell you how many cassettes I just threw away that are years old, and still played fine (just don't have a player anymore), yet I have CD's that are less than a year old that are no damn good now. You can only be so careful with them in a car while driving. There are now studies that show the average life of a CD is 10 years before it degrades to the point of being unplayable, where I have tapes, and albums that play as good as the day I bought them.
Not to mention, the cost of digital equipment 20 years ago, far outweighed the cost of analog. Time has made it cheaper, just like anything else. I've heard some damn good things done with cheap anolog 8 tracks. Sgt. Pepper was done on two 4 tracks. It's not what you have, it's what you can do with it. (why do I find myself having to repeat this all the time?)
Now to my point.....if it is so much cheaper....why does a CD still cost $16, and the artist, on average, still only sees about 10 cents per CD sold? Why are the "savings" not passed down to the consumer, OR the artist? We were sold on this idea by the industry so that they may profit more. Period. Not because it was "better", but because it was cheaper to mass produce.
Don't bother to feed me a bunch of crap about "marketing expenses", because I worked in the field for years, as well as in distributing, and I am all to aware of the mark up. "Pirating" is a hype word used as an excuse by the industry to inflate prices. Period. It does not have a measurable impact on sales. The industry can not prove that a person that "stole" the program, or music, would have bought it if they couldn't get it for free, and studies show that most would not. So how does one "estimate" the amount lost on sales that never would have happened, and work that into the price of the product, claiming it is to "recoup" the loss? Again, I don't see much of that "lost" money being put into anti-piracy measures to keep it from happening in the first place (which do exist, but are not widely used). No one here has yet to post a good counter point to that. It's kinda like the way Airlines, and insurance companies claim to lose billions of dollars each year, yet stay in business. Smoke and mirrors.
Also, being able to hear your parents whisper at 40 feet away, doesn't mean you can tell a warm tone from and icy one. There is a difference between "good' hearing, and "trained" hearing.
Dude, c'mon now. While I agree CD's could be much cheaper, don't lump digital recording in with the RIAA. In the last 20-30 years, computers have gone from semi-advanced calculators to the center of our entertainment and media worlds. Digital recording was just a natural progression, just like putting movies & TV on our computers.
I just don't think it's fair to blame digital recording alone for the steady decline in the quality (both fidelity- and content-wise) in music. There have always been a metric-ton of shitty bands trying to make it with whatever recording & distribution mediums they had available. The difference now is that it has gone from nearly impossible to get your music heard outside of your home town, to ridiculously easy and inexpensive. While computers have enabled this to happen, they certainly aren't to blame for shitty bands! On the flip-side, talking about CD sales/the RIAA and their relation to digital recording: I think the issue isn't the quality or 'warmth' of the recording, it's the fact that the industry has been moving closer and closer to genetically engineering the "perfect song", and they're damn close. Just listen to 99% of the top hits out there from pop bands: they all use the same structure, the same exact chords, the same harmonies, etc. That's what is degrading music in general. Don't blame computers.
B
boingoman
New member
Toker41 said:
That is such retard logic. Pirate, don't pirate, whatev. But come on.....you sound like pacfuck9000.
T
Toker41
Better Than You
boingoman said:
Studies show what they show. Fact is, there is no way to measure the loss from piracy. Simply can't be done. It's a guess. Period. I have 11 gigs of music on my hard drive. Paid for some, not so for others. The ones I could not have gotten for free, I simply would not have, and would not miss. I would not have spent one dime on them. How did that company lose any money by my action? In fact, because of a lot of those that I downloaded, I actually went out and bought the CD's those songs are on. Downloading caused me to buy music I would not have if I hadn't heard it first. A lot of what I have on digital, I had on LP. I just threw away well over 500 LPs a couple weeks ago. Did I steal those songs? I might ad here that it has always been illegal to copy Lps, or songs from the radio to cassette. This is not a new problem.
If I'm not hearing the music, I'm not buying the $100 concert ticket, and the $50 concert T-shirt, or any other merchandise. There are 2 reasons the industry hypes piracy. 1. It is an accepted reason to inflate prices. 2. They are very afraid that they can no longer control what the public listen to, and are exposed to. It's hard to dump a ton of money into a few select bands you want to sell to the public when they now have unlimited, uncontrollable choices. I read an interview with the president of Sony records, and he openly admitted this. The music industry needs to change it's view, and adapt to the way things are going, or they will be left behind. The last thing they want is for it to be so easy for any unsigned bands to do things on their own, and pretty much skip the label altogether.
I feel the need to say here, that I still believe stealing is stealing, and I do not try to justify it at all. I'm simply stating the facts.
B
boingoman
New member
Toker41 said:
Yeah, I know, so stop saying piracy doesn't cost anyone any money.
P
pacman9000
New member
wheelema said:
more accurately
analog sounds better
digital sounds worse
albums recorded in the late 60's and early 70's sound far better then today's recordings with all the "new technology" because they were recorded through analog mixer to analog tape (mmmm) and you and digital are full of sh1t (yuck) whether it be sh1tty digital artifacts or the sh1t in your draws, you're both disgusting.
and the music industry could use a good dose of ELITISM...maybe good music would once again become popular now and then as in the past, maybe it wouldn't be all justin timberfakes and fluff mommy's...or that godawful whiteboy gushing that passes off from rock n' roll these days, of that aweful kill yourself music like radiohead, or that aweful emo sh1t...now even greenday classified as punk rawk, what's the world coming to...most musicians are too tolerant of their own metiocrity, they need a dose of elitism by all means.
there were plenty of poor people recording on analog reels, they were models within reach, and they would have become even cheaper if they continued to make them instead of switching to strictly digital for the semi-pro consumer market.
Also, there are artists who still ship vinyl to record stores to this very day, so once again you are festering pool of defecation.
Last edited:
- Status