Bruce.
Can you explain to me how a CD actually works? I mean the mechanical process. Also, can you explain what the error correction algorythym actually does? Answer carefully.
About the whole deal of this being a home recording forum. Yes, I agree. So I ask you, why is every other post requesting "how do I get the sound (insert big time band name here) got on their (insert release name here) CD with (insert the latest gadget that sells for $100-200 dollars at Guitar Center, or Sam Ash, or wherever)? Then, everyone says "Buy a (insert yet another latest gadget for $100-200) cause it is just as good as anything out there"! Then, when someone comes along and says, "Hey, you ain't gonna get that sound with that piece", everyone jumps on them and argues it till they are blue in the face and plays the whole "Who do you think you are?" thing, and posts a bunch of rubbish "techy talk" bullshit (like the dude who says:
"Forget about the 20k amp vs the $100 receiver...
There is no difference according to my mechanical measuring instrument.
Forget about Lexicon vs the Behringer...
There is no difference according to my mechanical measuring instrument.
Forget about the Bose vs The Paradigms...
There is no difference according to my mechanical measuring instrument.
Forget about the Tascam vs The Studer...
There is no difference according to my mechanical measuring instrument.
Forget about the Fostex vs the Neve
There is no difference according to my mechanical measuring instrument.")
(by the way, may I suggest getting your "mechanical measuring device" calibrated. Some of those comparisons are just ludicrous, and in real life, just aren't true!)
Then, let's not forget the shit one can expect when they post that something may sound a little better then a Mackie!
Lighten up? How? I feel like I need hip boots around these boards sometimes! The norm seems to be some poster looking for justification on buying (insert cheap brand equipment here) and all the others who bought it say "Yup, it is the shit, and is as good as stuff twice it's price", yet, cannot honestly say that they are ever actually USED something twice the price to make that comparison with!
Sorry if that toys with my sensibilities just a tad friend!
Does this kind of scenario shock me? No. I have seen it on every other audio board on the internet I have visited. Will I just give in and say "Hey, buy a Marshall microphone, their amps sound great so their mics must be awesome too!". No.
If anything, I like the middle ground Bruce. I have been to the boards where everyone claims that you HAVE to have a Avalon mic pre to get a great track. I have argued against those flawed statements too. Often at those places, they just never have used any of the slew of "cheap" gear out there to make that comparison, so the whole thinking is the same as here, just on the opposite side of things, at least dollar wise!
Good sounding audio has a price. That price vs. quality is usually more then you want to spend. Yes, you can argue again the "diminishing returns" thing here. At a certain level, I will not disagree. But, much of the recommendations I see on these boards haven't came close to reaching that "diminishing returns" theory.
So to recap, everyone wants "CD Quality" for cheap! Great. Most digital gear records at 16 bit, 44,100 Hz sampling rate, and THAT is CD quality. Everyone wants a "professional mic preamp". Great. Mackies are used here and there for bottom snare mics, and hi hat mics, and the way far away ambient mic on a drum kit, or for the effect unit output to get burned to tape in "professional recordings", but "professional" only means that money was paid for the service, NOT that the delivered sound was any good. Just like those great Mackie ads where "the 1404 VLZ was brought into the session and (insert big named engineer) tried it on the vocal mic. The sound was so impressive (let's forget this was probably the 'scratch' vocal track) that it got recorded. But producer (insert big name here) decided that the (insert more commonly used high dollar preamp here) would be used". "wink wink. I actually thought the Mackie pre sounded better" stated (insert big named engineer here), but (big name producer) makes the decisions on this one. Great preamp man!". Great, the Mackie was used professionally as the MONITORING CONSOLE for the session. Scratch tracks were used here and there on the finale where the mackie was used. BFD!!! It could have been ANY console really. But there is Greg Mackie at the session throwing around a few bucks for a good word...
So, you get my point I assume. Why go on, most probably are not going to be swayed one iota by any of this.
Thus, why I post what I do!
Who cares? Most of you don't. Maybe all of you should lighten up just a tad and enjoy the ride a little more.
I like seeing posts where the person preambles it with the fact that they are not looking for "professional quality" with their (insert cheap brand equipment here). They at least have an idea that great sounding audio is not going to happen with the next $300 "wonder box". Thus, when you present the reality to them, they don't come flying back with arguementitive rubbish. They usually accept the limitations of said piece and ask a more pointed question.
Anyway, I tried the green thing, but with a little more realistic scenario. I had two disks I burned from a very reliable burner of the same material. I "greened" one, and didn't the other and popped them both in my car stereo.
Results? Unconclusive! The limitation of doing it this way is that you cannot switch between the two CD's fast enough to really do a A/B. With this in mind, I would suspect ANYONE who claimed that it worked unless they were able to play the same CD "greened" and "plain" through the same D/A converters, and be able to switch, and not know which is which when it is being switched. In fact, a better test would be to play them both and have another listener listen to both and not know what the whole thing was about. You just ask them if they heard any difference.
I will say that upon reviewing very specific parts of a song on both disks where certain transients parts really jumped out, the plain disk consistently sounded harsh, where as about half the time the "greened" disk actually had less "splash" in the sound. Interesting, but again, could be explained away by the media itself. I would need to try the same part with several different disks to see if a trend developed.
Good day!
