B
Beck
Guest
regebro said:Well, compared to you he is of course the perfect display of humility. But then, so are most people.
Yeah, I quess that's nearly everyone but you.
Ropa inte hej förräns du är över bäcken!
Just curious as to why still analog??
- Thread starter Tim Walker
- Start date
Yeah, I quess that's nearly everyone but you.
Ropa inte hej förräns du är över bäcken!
B
Beck
Guest
cjacek said:Ahh, the layers of "regebro" are peeling off .... finally ....
It's kinda like peeling an onion in that it makes you cry.
snow lizard
Dedicated Slacker
The mention of vinyl is kind of interesting here. (Sorry if this is off topic...)
Back in the old days, you could go into any Radio Shack and find a selection of no less than 6,000 different types of stylus to play your records on. Some were cheap. Some were exhorbitent. 5,982 of these models are now extinct. This was all part of the quest for better audio, or else something you could afford, which people have largely given up on be it analog or otherwise. There were also A LOT of very good bands signed to the major labels, and there were even more labels. The infection and subsequent plague which came to haunt the music industry is beyond the scope of this punked up rant, but many aspects have little to do with digital, analog, vinyl, or even George Clinton. Could he even imagine the shadow of The Village People on the horizon? I honestly don't know. I won't even mention MTV.
Vinyl had its own set of problems, similar to digital. Once people started figuring out how to make really good vinyl, the record companies decided to cheap out and not make the records so thick. This made for records that had poor bass response and generally lower sound quality. Also, the actual master plates that are used to stamp the records wear out during normal use, so the initial 10% pressed were the highest quality ones, while the subsequent 60% or so had less robust quality, but things held together fairly consistantly anyway. The tail ends of the runs to press this stuff were low quality, but there was still that long shelf in the middle where things were "ok" and fairly consistant, after a drop in quality from the first couple of hundred pressings. Sometimes the center hole for the turntable spindle ended up off center to the grooves for some absurd reason, resulting in pronounced pitch modulation effects. Very annoying.
The mastering process for vinyl production is unique unto itself, and highly specialized. You basically cut a spiral groove on a circular flat plane surface using a record lathe. Want the bass to pump harder? It'd cause the needle to warble too much, or in an extreme case actually kick it out of the groove.
Now for audiophile concerns, there are ways around this to an extent. You can increase the pitch (pitch in this case is the distance between the actual grooves, similar to a screw thread or airplane propeller) which actually makes the groove wider and deeper. It also reduces playing time. Imagine less than 15 minutes playing time per side on a very flat, concentric, heavy piece of vinyl. This is good.
Somewhere along the line, some very nice record company person came up with the idea of making the total playing time on a single piece of very thin (and usually always warped) vinyl equal to around 60 minutes. The result was fragile media, shallow, fine pitched grooves and much lower fidelity, thereby increasing the value to the consumer because the record company didn't bother with the expense of doing it right.
Surface speed also becomes a concern. When you drop the needle at the beginning of a vinyl platter, you're at the outside diameter. The RPM of the turntable is fixed at (let's say) 33 1/3. Surface speed is what you get when you use inches per minute instead of revolutions per minute. The fidelity of vinyl is much better at greater diameters, because there's more inches per minute. Think of it as a radial variation in sample rate. You record a song on a tape deck that's constantly slowing down - you start at 30 IPS and by the end of the song you're at 8.3 IPS. This is not how tape works, but it's exactly what vinyl does.
These days, truly audiophile vinyl is a niche market. Truly audiophile vinyl always has been a niche market throughout the entire existance of vinyl, by the very nature of the real life obstacles of how it's manufactured.
The 2 basic types of turntables are belt drievn, or gear driven (usually called direct drive). Belt drive turntables will create a static charge that the vinyl will pick up and retain, while direct drive turntables won't. Despite maintenance issues from replacing belts and discharging your vinyl before playing it, belt drive turntables run much more quietly, enabling more dynamic range, and therefore a more robust listening experience. Other things to look at on a turntable are the needle weight balance controls and anti-skate adjustments. Very essential if someone wants to take it to the next level and optimize the cartridge and stylus for best results. The cheap plastic turntables with no adjustments never sounded very good.
Much more important than the numerous obvious flaws with the technology were the engineers that made it work regardless of the obstacles, and without blaming it on analog. The results were sweet and people listened.
sl
Back in the old days, you could go into any Radio Shack and find a selection of no less than 6,000 different types of stylus to play your records on. Some were cheap. Some were exhorbitent. 5,982 of these models are now extinct. This was all part of the quest for better audio, or else something you could afford, which people have largely given up on be it analog or otherwise. There were also A LOT of very good bands signed to the major labels, and there were even more labels. The infection and subsequent plague which came to haunt the music industry is beyond the scope of this punked up rant, but many aspects have little to do with digital, analog, vinyl, or even George Clinton. Could he even imagine the shadow of The Village People on the horizon? I honestly don't know. I won't even mention MTV.
Vinyl had its own set of problems, similar to digital. Once people started figuring out how to make really good vinyl, the record companies decided to cheap out and not make the records so thick. This made for records that had poor bass response and generally lower sound quality. Also, the actual master plates that are used to stamp the records wear out during normal use, so the initial 10% pressed were the highest quality ones, while the subsequent 60% or so had less robust quality, but things held together fairly consistantly anyway. The tail ends of the runs to press this stuff were low quality, but there was still that long shelf in the middle where things were "ok" and fairly consistant, after a drop in quality from the first couple of hundred pressings. Sometimes the center hole for the turntable spindle ended up off center to the grooves for some absurd reason, resulting in pronounced pitch modulation effects. Very annoying.
The mastering process for vinyl production is unique unto itself, and highly specialized. You basically cut a spiral groove on a circular flat plane surface using a record lathe. Want the bass to pump harder? It'd cause the needle to warble too much, or in an extreme case actually kick it out of the groove.
Now for audiophile concerns, there are ways around this to an extent. You can increase the pitch (pitch in this case is the distance between the actual grooves, similar to a screw thread or airplane propeller) which actually makes the groove wider and deeper. It also reduces playing time. Imagine less than 15 minutes playing time per side on a very flat, concentric, heavy piece of vinyl. This is good.
Somewhere along the line, some very nice record company person came up with the idea of making the total playing time on a single piece of very thin (and usually always warped) vinyl equal to around 60 minutes. The result was fragile media, shallow, fine pitched grooves and much lower fidelity, thereby increasing the value to the consumer because the record company didn't bother with the expense of doing it right.
Surface speed also becomes a concern. When you drop the needle at the beginning of a vinyl platter, you're at the outside diameter. The RPM of the turntable is fixed at (let's say) 33 1/3. Surface speed is what you get when you use inches per minute instead of revolutions per minute. The fidelity of vinyl is much better at greater diameters, because there's more inches per minute. Think of it as a radial variation in sample rate. You record a song on a tape deck that's constantly slowing down - you start at 30 IPS and by the end of the song you're at 8.3 IPS. This is not how tape works, but it's exactly what vinyl does.
These days, truly audiophile vinyl is a niche market. Truly audiophile vinyl always has been a niche market throughout the entire existance of vinyl, by the very nature of the real life obstacles of how it's manufactured.
The 2 basic types of turntables are belt drievn, or gear driven (usually called direct drive). Belt drive turntables will create a static charge that the vinyl will pick up and retain, while direct drive turntables won't. Despite maintenance issues from replacing belts and discharging your vinyl before playing it, belt drive turntables run much more quietly, enabling more dynamic range, and therefore a more robust listening experience. Other things to look at on a turntable are the needle weight balance controls and anti-skate adjustments. Very essential if someone wants to take it to the next level and optimize the cartridge and stylus for best results. The cheap plastic turntables with no adjustments never sounded very good.
Much more important than the numerous obvious flaws with the technology were the engineers that made it work regardless of the obstacles, and without blaming it on analog. The results were sweet and people listened.
sl
arjoll
New member
This reminds me of an EP (12" 45rpm) that my brother bought 20 or so years ago. He was very much into Kiwi music (has a number of the original pressings of various Flying Nun albums including ones by Toy Love, The Clean, Bailterspace (sp?) and early Headless Chickens).snow lizard said:
Anyway this EP was the extended mix of The Narcs' "Diamonds on China" and I remember the grooves on this thing - widely spaced, and you could actually 'see' the music in the form of obviously wiggling grooves - probably deviating about 0.5mm from the nominal position of the track.
Amazing stuff - and the sound was incredible. Its a pitty he knows nothing about how to take care of his vinyl!
I guess the great thing about vinyl of NZ bands is that because of our small market there was a far greater chance of getting the first part of the pressing. I definately notice that quality seemed to drop near the 'end' of mainstream vinyl here after the last NZ plant was closed and everything was imported.
DamnYankee
New member
cjacek said:
They still make them. As of the last few years, my understanding is Great Britain has yet to convert to CDs. What was really cool was I got to pickup a couple of new, unopened remastered Beatles albums (Revolver and Hard Day's Night) for $11 off Ebay. There are U.S. importers who do still import albums for the audiophile.
Also, check for used record shops. We have one here in Metro Detroit a few blocks down from the 3 audiophile shops that I frequent. Most albums are a buck. I just scarfed an mint, unopened Boston Third Stage for $1.
DamnYankee
New member
1. The reality is, new turntable models are still being produced - about 50 new models a year!
2. Great Britain hasn't bought in to the CD revolution - they still make albums.
3. Direct drive turntables SUCK - period. That's why they're no longer made.
2. Static charge is a non-factor since most folks who still use turntables use of a mat.
3. My advice: NEVER buy a turntable made of plastic - they vibrate, cause rumble, all kinds of bad things. Although a Linn Soundek LP 12 ($12k new) and a Sota Cosmos III ($6k new) are incredible machines, Marantz made one or two nice wood based models that are available off Ebay.
5. Whatever you buy, get a good phono cartridge/stylus! Some names you may be familiar in the microphone world with continue to make excellent cartridges: Audio Technica (decent entry level) and Shure. Many of the higher end cartridges are so good with the diamond tips so perfect, that they can get down to the bottom of the grooves of a very scratched up record (avoiding all the damage) and play like a brand new album free of scratches, skips and pops. The technology for today's phono cartridges is amazing.
2. Great Britain hasn't bought in to the CD revolution - they still make albums.
3. Direct drive turntables SUCK - period. That's why they're no longer made.
2. Static charge is a non-factor since most folks who still use turntables use of a mat.
3. My advice: NEVER buy a turntable made of plastic - they vibrate, cause rumble, all kinds of bad things. Although a Linn Soundek LP 12 ($12k new) and a Sota Cosmos III ($6k new) are incredible machines, Marantz made one or two nice wood based models that are available off Ebay.
5. Whatever you buy, get a good phono cartridge/stylus! Some names you may be familiar in the microphone world with continue to make excellent cartridges: Audio Technica (decent entry level) and Shure. Many of the higher end cartridges are so good with the diamond tips so perfect, that they can get down to the bottom of the grooves of a very scratched up record (avoiding all the damage) and play like a brand new album free of scratches, skips and pops. The technology for today's phono cartridges is amazing.
snow lizard said:
regebro
Insane Genious!
Except for the most popular turntable of them all of course:DamnYankee said:
http://www.panasonic-europe.com/tec..._detail.asp?range=turntable&prodid=SL-1200MK5
But, ok, that's not an audiophile product, so that was unfair.
evm1024
New member
regebro said:Except for the most popular turntable of them all of course:
http://www.panasonic-europe.com/tec..._detail.asp?range=turntable&prodid=SL-1200MK5
But, ok, that's not an audiophile product, so that was unfair.
I'm Happy with my SL-1700 and Shure V-15-IV. Not bad but not on par with some of those massive peices of granet.
Regards
Seeker of Rock
Let’s Go Brandon!
Dr ZEE said:For what?
For an "enlightening revelation" about what he thinks about cheap gear. The point is: "If you do not have anything positive and usefull to contribute for a home recordist, but all you can do is to keep pointing out that all the problems are in the very fact of being a home recordist and using home recordist's gear, then just DON'T.
No, not for those reasons. I think he has a respectably detailed and intricate tracking process, and the overall mix to my ears sounds superb, that's why I personally have respect for what I've heard. But the end sound of his rock clips just don't do it for me, and that's subjective. And you're right, he can be a bit of a recording elitist, and that's annoying.
...then, it ain't gonna be 'home recording', man
If I had money and time, I would love to record at a large studio. Don't know that I would record at Blue Bear because pretty much all I do is rock-n-roll, the particular style that I found least attractive of his clips. If you've heard them, though, you have to admit the piano sound he got is sweet. Anyway, I would record somewhere where a person much more knowledgeable than me was at the controls and with a setup that included a treated room and decent gear, and a big 'ole fat 2" 24 track machine to track to...you know, a studio. Biggest studio I've recorded at about 15 years ago I believe was 24 track. Very nice studio, equipment, atmosphere. Guy at the controls liked processing, though, and it tainted the final product. I remember this little 8 track place that was pretty decent too. Anyway, not that I don't like my setup or my abilities, but they are not where I want them to be, though in time they will be. Setup is fine for me, just the abilities I need to improve on. So given the time and money at this point in my life, I would love to track in a top-notch studio under an experienced engineer. No, it wouldn't be home recording then, but I'm not married to home recording, it is just what I do and can afford right now.
You've got me thinking about Blue Bear ripping on cheap gear now. He is pretty elitist, isn't he? A hypothetical situation with me and Blue Bear...me: "Hey I just got a MSR-16, my first reel to reel!" a typical Blue Bear response: "too bad it's going to sound like shit because it isn't a Studer or a $5000 hard disk recorder."
Yeah that can be annoying Zee, I do not disagree with you for a second!
Last edited:
Dr ZEE
Anti-Pro Circles Insider
Seeker of Rock said:The worst part of it, that there is a very good chance, that (hypothetically speaking!Dr ZEE said:A hypothetical situation with me and Blue Bear...me: "Hey I just got a MSR-16, my first reel to reel!" a typical Blue Bear response: "too bad it's going to sound like shit because it isn't a Studer or a $5000 hard disk recorder."
(And of course, naturally, anything below the dead tree branch, upon which The Crow seats, can be and unavoidably will be shat over. Anything below - is cheap. Naturally.)
weather you married to home recording or is it just a secret affair, but home recording issues are the reason why your are blah-blahing here
Hey, man, When your 'dreams come true'..heh heh
/respects
Attachments
Seeker of Rock
Let’s Go Brandon!
Well, I don't have the money now, and probably won't in the forseeable future, so you guys may have to deal with me hangin' out here for awhile. It would be nice to do an outsourced recording project, but I must admit I like the experience of not only writing material, but also recording it as well. It is very satisfying. Plus, I'm having fun learning things. Learned a lot of valuable information in the Cave.
planetorange
New member
blue idiot
I have just gone back and read some of the things people have posted and some of the shit blue bear has said. I have to say that this whole argument is lame and obnoxious. Blue bear is a "professional". Which means his only goal in art is to turn a buck. He only cares about what clients will like so he can make money and be known and in being known, make more money. But these people who record analog with "cheap" stuff are recording for the art and pleasure of it. And i wil take art over money every day of the week until i die. Screw clients. Screw fidelity. I know thats absurd to 99 percent of people here in recording forums because everyone takes ten times the damage from words people say to them. But i think it is the end of the argument to say that people like blue bear are part of the problem in this world of music. His mentality is what spawns the type of songs and recordings that have driven real music into the underground while lame ass pseudo rock and rap are becoming the only thing people know. No classic albums are being released these days. 99 percent of it is terrible no matter what any hype tells you. We will not be listening to creed albums in the future with as much respect as the beatles and all the other classic rock and classical recording. We are in a dark age for pure true music and artists. Anyone good is in the underground. Do you think i want to hear your shitty ass music you are making in your rich ass dads music studio? We dont even count that shit as music man. How does that feel? To know that there are people in the world who consider you part of what is KILLING music? Post your songs blue bear. I want to hear what is so great about being an old rich fart with nothing but money to throw at his lack of talent. The more i hear what is passing for popular music these days the more i want to produce my entire record with just shit i either made or found at pawn shops. Because I want to distance myself from anything resembling the sound of rich fat old men. Hey im sorry for this angry post but this argument has gone on too long, and people believing that art is about how much money you can spend is sickening. SICKENING. I say go low priced as you possibly can. Because these days the only true rebellion, the only true rock and roll is saying "fuck you" to all this marketing and bullshit regarding equipment. ANYONE WITH EARS AND HANDS HAS THE ABILITY TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT MOVES PEOPLE. Its not in a dollar or in a chip. Hey didnt the kinks cut a tear in the speaker of a home made amp to get the sound for some of their tunes? "You really got me" i think. Well now that song is used to sell cars to fat old men going through midlife crisis. But of course in the commercial its rerecorded by some other "modern" band sounding ridiculously over produced. Every nuance of extra loud fret noise and every breath of that singer is way too loud and it almost seems like parody. Its HORRIBLE. Thats the difference between money music and real music made by common folk like you and me. Real music sells itself. Recording great songs from the heart with whatever you have is like a beautiful young chimney-sweep girl. Yeah shes covered in soot and maybe not as perfectly squeaky clean as she could be. But the beauty is undeniable. There is undeniable charm despite the soot. Recording things like blue bear does is like a 60 year old fat run-over old bag trying to look beautiful by putting on 300 dollar a bottle perfume and a 10,000 dollar dress. Lost in a world of trying to fix things by buying them. Living in a make believe world where she is perfect looking. But the more her face sags the more expensive the clothes and makeup gets. I dont mean blue bear is fat. I just mean people try to fix shitty music with effects and expensive shit. Its bullshit. I am 25 years old.
I have just gone back and read some of the things people have posted and some of the shit blue bear has said. I have to say that this whole argument is lame and obnoxious. Blue bear is a "professional". Which means his only goal in art is to turn a buck. He only cares about what clients will like so he can make money and be known and in being known, make more money. But these people who record analog with "cheap" stuff are recording for the art and pleasure of it. And i wil take art over money every day of the week until i die. Screw clients. Screw fidelity. I know thats absurd to 99 percent of people here in recording forums because everyone takes ten times the damage from words people say to them. But i think it is the end of the argument to say that people like blue bear are part of the problem in this world of music. His mentality is what spawns the type of songs and recordings that have driven real music into the underground while lame ass pseudo rock and rap are becoming the only thing people know. No classic albums are being released these days. 99 percent of it is terrible no matter what any hype tells you. We will not be listening to creed albums in the future with as much respect as the beatles and all the other classic rock and classical recording. We are in a dark age for pure true music and artists. Anyone good is in the underground. Do you think i want to hear your shitty ass music you are making in your rich ass dads music studio? We dont even count that shit as music man. How does that feel? To know that there are people in the world who consider you part of what is KILLING music? Post your songs blue bear. I want to hear what is so great about being an old rich fart with nothing but money to throw at his lack of talent. The more i hear what is passing for popular music these days the more i want to produce my entire record with just shit i either made or found at pawn shops. Because I want to distance myself from anything resembling the sound of rich fat old men. Hey im sorry for this angry post but this argument has gone on too long, and people believing that art is about how much money you can spend is sickening. SICKENING. I say go low priced as you possibly can. Because these days the only true rebellion, the only true rock and roll is saying "fuck you" to all this marketing and bullshit regarding equipment. ANYONE WITH EARS AND HANDS HAS THE ABILITY TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT MOVES PEOPLE. Its not in a dollar or in a chip. Hey didnt the kinks cut a tear in the speaker of a home made amp to get the sound for some of their tunes? "You really got me" i think. Well now that song is used to sell cars to fat old men going through midlife crisis. But of course in the commercial its rerecorded by some other "modern" band sounding ridiculously over produced. Every nuance of extra loud fret noise and every breath of that singer is way too loud and it almost seems like parody. Its HORRIBLE. Thats the difference between money music and real music made by common folk like you and me. Real music sells itself. Recording great songs from the heart with whatever you have is like a beautiful young chimney-sweep girl. Yeah shes covered in soot and maybe not as perfectly squeaky clean as she could be. But the beauty is undeniable. There is undeniable charm despite the soot. Recording things like blue bear does is like a 60 year old fat run-over old bag trying to look beautiful by putting on 300 dollar a bottle perfume and a 10,000 dollar dress. Lost in a world of trying to fix things by buying them. Living in a make believe world where she is perfect looking. But the more her face sags the more expensive the clothes and makeup gets. I dont mean blue bear is fat. I just mean people try to fix shitty music with effects and expensive shit. Its bullshit. I am 25 years old.
FALKEN said:
You are absolutely the stupidest person I have come across in a looong time. You understand nothing in the recording world. Your posts tell a story about how you listen to dumb ass experts and why you choose the equipment you choose. You will always be a loser and listen to dumb ass people about what you should buy.
What a loser.
Dr ZEE said:The worst part of it, that there is a very good chance, that (hypothetically speaking!
(And of course, naturally, anything below the dead tree branch, upon which The Crow seats, can be and unavoidably will be shat over. Anything below - is cheap. Naturally.)
weather you married to home recording or is it just a secret affair[/i], but home recording issues are the reason why your are blah-blahing here
Hey, man, When your 'dreams come true'..heh heh
/respects
You are not fit to kiss Blue Bear"s ass fuckwad.
The Ghost of FM
Banned
I really tried to avoid this thread but was sucked in by the vacuum!
I've been a home recording enthusiast for about 25 years at this point.
When I started out there was only analog gear available to me as a home user and I did introduce certain digital components to my set up as the technologies became decent and affordable.
As for why I stuck with analog for tracking and mixing, it largely because I enjoy the tactile feel of an analog mixer versus a flat, fake picture of one on my computer screen and as far as the sound goes, I like what analog tape does in capturing my efforts and the reliability and storage longevity of the medium.
To me, analog is a mature technology; stable, workable, fixable and pleasurable to listen to.
I don't hate digital. I just don't find it as friendly a medium to work with.
In the end, it's all about the music you create with your gear, what ever your gear is and just as painters prefer different mediums to produce their works of personal expression, analog recording gear should be viewed as just another brush or type of paint.
Something else to consider, once you're dead a buried and gone from this world, no one will care how you made your music, just that you made it at all.
Cheers!
I'm not sure if staying on the original topic is still relevant at this point but I'll give it a shot.Tim Walker said:
I've been a home recording enthusiast for about 25 years at this point.
When I started out there was only analog gear available to me as a home user and I did introduce certain digital components to my set up as the technologies became decent and affordable.
As for why I stuck with analog for tracking and mixing, it largely because I enjoy the tactile feel of an analog mixer versus a flat, fake picture of one on my computer screen and as far as the sound goes, I like what analog tape does in capturing my efforts and the reliability and storage longevity of the medium.
To me, analog is a mature technology; stable, workable, fixable and pleasurable to listen to.
I don't hate digital. I just don't find it as friendly a medium to work with.
In the end, it's all about the music you create with your gear, what ever your gear is and just as painters prefer different mediums to produce their works of personal expression, analog recording gear should be viewed as just another brush or type of paint.
Something else to consider, once you're dead a buried and gone from this world, no one will care how you made your music, just that you made it at all.
Cheers!