Bob Dylan's take on modern recordings.
http://www.soundgenerator.com/news/showarticle.cfm?articleid=8190&CFID=17272961&CFTOKEN=87980737
Once again, he thrusts himself into a position to be either adored, or dismissed.... good for him, I guess. I was leaning a little into his argument until I got to the "cd's are small - ergo - there is no stature to them - ergo - they must, logically, sound likewise unsubstantial". That's a pretty adventurous paraphrasing, but I'm sorry, I smell a curmudgeon.
http://www.soundgenerator.com/news/showarticle.cfm?articleid=8190&CFID=17272961&CFTOKEN=87980737
Once again, he thrusts himself into a position to be either adored, or dismissed.... good for him, I guess. I was leaning a little into his argument until I got to the "cd's are small - ergo - there is no stature to them - ergo - they must, logically, sound likewise unsubstantial". That's a pretty adventurous paraphrasing, but I'm sorry, I smell a curmudgeon.
It's hard to say what his meaning by "CD's being too small". Dylan may have been taken out of context, based on the size of the article, and the media's preference for a sound bite.
1) Too small for proper art work? I sometimes miss LP's for this.
2) Too small for adequate sampling rates/ Technology has moved on in this area since the invention of CD's almost 30 yrs ago. Are you really happy with the quality provided with 16 bit/44.1KHz? I'm not.
1) Too small for proper art work? I sometimes miss LP's for this.
2) Too small for adequate sampling rates/ Technology has moved on in this area since the invention of CD's almost 30 yrs ago. Are you really happy with the quality provided with 16 bit/44.1KHz? I'm not.
"CDs are small. There's no stature to it."
You can probably read a lot into that, and I agree with all of it.
CDs sound small. There's no body to the music. The body of vinyl may be distortion and crosstalk and whatnots. But it sounds good. The last years have been in process of transforming my sound system from hi-fi to lo-fi. The CD still doesn't cut it.
CDs are small. Holding a CD in your hand is like holding nothing in your hand. People who don't care about vinyl still get impressed by vinyl. You can get lost for hours in a great collection. A collection CDs is a collection of nothing. "There's no stature to it."
Edit: Forgot the best part: "It ain't worth nothing anyway". $20 for nothing! You've got to be kidding.
You can probably read a lot into that, and I agree with all of it.
CDs sound small. There's no body to the music. The body of vinyl may be distortion and crosstalk and whatnots. But it sounds good. The last years have been in process of transforming my sound system from hi-fi to lo-fi. The CD still doesn't cut it.
CDs are small. Holding a CD in your hand is like holding nothing in your hand. People who don't care about vinyl still get impressed by vinyl. You can get lost for hours in a great collection. A collection CDs is a collection of nothing. "There's no stature to it."
Edit: Forgot the best part: "It ain't worth nothing anyway". $20 for nothing! You've got to be kidding.
"hard to say ..."
Infinia: " ... It's hard to say what his meaning by "CD's being too small". Dylan may have been taken out of context, based on the size of the article, and the media's preference for a sound bite. ..."
"Too small" now meaning too small segment in a very broad market, saturated with junk ... I believe Dylan referes [generally] to the fact that the music producers and engineers don't lend enough credence or weight to the value of the market place ... thus producing poor quality trash as opposed to trying to hit a higher level of performance / audio quality / production values.
This is correct, or close to my beliefs as well, engineers crank up the analog to digital levels (transcription to production CDs from the studio master) attempting to "punch through" the noise ... Line Level, headroom, undistorted reproduction no longer having any real meaning, etc., in the final production for sale.
And I believe he is correct about the producers (publishers) being uncaring about the audio quality, either, prefering to rush the "product" to market and maximize return, not caring about future sales, future of the musician, future of CD quality ...
Considering the high quality of Dylan's "Love and Theft" CD from Columbia (very tight backup band, generally quite high quality reproduction) compared to his latest new release on Sony ... he may be trying to pre-empt any complaints about quality ...
(For those of you into tubes & vinyl, it may come as a suprise that "Love and Theft" is, I believe, every bit as good as it gets, digital or analog recording wise ... check it out for yourself.)
Infinia: " ... It's hard to say what his meaning by "CD's being too small". Dylan may have been taken out of context, based on the size of the article, and the media's preference for a sound bite. ..."
"Too small" now meaning too small segment in a very broad market, saturated with junk ... I believe Dylan referes [generally] to the fact that the music producers and engineers don't lend enough credence or weight to the value of the market place ... thus producing poor quality trash as opposed to trying to hit a higher level of performance / audio quality / production values.
This is correct, or close to my beliefs as well, engineers crank up the analog to digital levels (transcription to production CDs from the studio master) attempting to "punch through" the noise ... Line Level, headroom, undistorted reproduction no longer having any real meaning, etc., in the final production for sale.
And I believe he is correct about the producers (publishers) being uncaring about the audio quality, either, prefering to rush the "product" to market and maximize return, not caring about future sales, future of the musician, future of CD quality ...
Considering the high quality of Dylan's "Love and Theft" CD from Columbia (very tight backup band, generally quite high quality reproduction) compared to his latest new release on Sony ... he may be trying to pre-empt any complaints about quality ...
(For those of you into tubes & vinyl, it may come as a suprise that "Love and Theft" is, I believe, every bit as good as it gets, digital or analog recording wise ... check it out for yourself.)
16 bit v. what?
Infinia: " ... Too small for adequate sampling rates/ Technology has moved on in this area since the invention of CD's almost 30 yrs ago. Are you really happy with the quality provided with 16 bit/44.1KHz? I'm not. ..."
Me either.
Sony recently bought Columbia, everything: contracts, artists, production and distribution. My copy of "Love and Theft" has Columbia copyrights & logos on the CD and Sony copyrights on the jewel case jacket & litrature.
My guess is the Sony in its greedy heart has "messed with" or otherwise screwed up Dylan's latest CD ... and until I can get it and listen to it I might agree ... Sony could very well have produced it in 16 bit/44k quality or worse yet, MP3 quality ...
This is not the first time a recording artist has "dised" the Sony greedheads for screwing up a perfectly good album ...
Infinia: " ... Too small for adequate sampling rates/ Technology has moved on in this area since the invention of CD's almost 30 yrs ago. Are you really happy with the quality provided with 16 bit/44.1KHz? I'm not. ..."
Me either.
Sony recently bought Columbia, everything: contracts, artists, production and distribution. My copy of "Love and Theft" has Columbia copyrights & logos on the CD and Sony copyrights on the jewel case jacket & litrature.
My guess is the Sony in its greedy heart has "messed with" or otherwise screwed up Dylan's latest CD ... and until I can get it and listen to it I might agree ... Sony could very well have produced it in 16 bit/44k quality or worse yet, MP3 quality ...
This is not the first time a recording artist has "dised" the Sony greedheads for screwing up a perfectly good album ...
Re: 16 bit v. what?
Stereophile and the rest of the mouthpieces in the audio press have blurbed that digital sound reproduction has finally matured every month for more than a decade now. Somewhere down the line the truth and lie became inseparable.
But those things have nothing to do with what Dylan said. He doesn't care about bits and sampling rates. That's for the engineers. Dylan's an artist. And there's nothing ambiguous about what he said. The CD is small in every sense of the word. It makes everything small.
FastEddy said:
Stereophile and the rest of the mouthpieces in the audio press have blurbed that digital sound reproduction has finally matured every month for more than a decade now. Somewhere down the line the truth and lie became inseparable.
But those things have nothing to do with what Dylan said. He doesn't care about bits and sampling rates. That's for the engineers. Dylan's an artist. And there's nothing ambiguous about what he said. The CD is small in every sense of the word. It makes everything small.
Too small??
phn: "... But those things have nothing to do with what Dylan said. He doesn't care about bits and sampling rates. That's for the engineers. Dylan's an artist. And there's nothing ambiguous about what he said. The CD is small in every sense of the word. It makes everything small. ..."
What Dylan (and you) said is true for North American producers/publishers for sure. There are publishers who can put a full load on CD disk that will play on any player made for North America, but it takes a degree of sophistication that Mr. Dylan's current publisher (and most N.A. publishers) can not quite seem to get ... 24 bit x 96k multi channel audio ... CD technology is not really too small, it is the small minds of the publishers that can't see beyond the next release == Sony being a perfect example. Even Sony's own technology is not being utilized to the fullest as they are perfectly capable of doing the trick ... the greedheads at corporate apparently not!
Reference: http://www.harmoniamundi.com/uk/catalogue.php == all titles from this publisher are multi channel 24 bit x 96k (or better) with Dolby 5.1, etc. ... at least 1 hour of really great music with more than enough headroom / noise floor / dynamics for comparison to the best vinyl (or audio DVD). Their cost of manufacture may be a little bit more (around ~US$0.10 per CD), but this should not be outside the capabilities of these N.A. publishers who wish to produce a full album of music with the better quality on the "small" CD.
.... and of course there is always audio on DVD ... but with the p**sing match going on between the champions of the two or more competing DVD formats, this looks to be a futurist question. (One wonders if Sony, et al, are not deliberately making CD products of lesser quality in anticipation of the promotion for these audio DVDs == "look kids, our DVD audio quality is much better than our CD quality, so buy this ...")
phn: "... But those things have nothing to do with what Dylan said. He doesn't care about bits and sampling rates. That's for the engineers. Dylan's an artist. And there's nothing ambiguous about what he said. The CD is small in every sense of the word. It makes everything small. ..."
What Dylan (and you) said is true for North American producers/publishers for sure. There are publishers who can put a full load on CD disk that will play on any player made for North America, but it takes a degree of sophistication that Mr. Dylan's current publisher (and most N.A. publishers) can not quite seem to get ... 24 bit x 96k multi channel audio ... CD technology is not really too small, it is the small minds of the publishers that can't see beyond the next release == Sony being a perfect example. Even Sony's own technology is not being utilized to the fullest as they are perfectly capable of doing the trick ... the greedheads at corporate apparently not!
Reference: http://www.harmoniamundi.com/uk/catalogue.php == all titles from this publisher are multi channel 24 bit x 96k (or better) with Dolby 5.1, etc. ... at least 1 hour of really great music with more than enough headroom / noise floor / dynamics for comparison to the best vinyl (or audio DVD). Their cost of manufacture may be a little bit more (around ~US$0.10 per CD), but this should not be outside the capabilities of these N.A. publishers who wish to produce a full album of music with the better quality on the "small" CD.
.... and of course there is always audio on DVD ... but with the p**sing match going on between the champions of the two or more competing DVD formats, this looks to be a futurist question. (One wonders if Sony, et al, are not deliberately making CD products of lesser quality in anticipation of the promotion for these audio DVDs == "look kids, our DVD audio quality is much better than our CD quality, so buy this ...")
Re: Too small??
I'm missing your point about CD's with higher sampling rates. If it aint 44.1KHz it aint gonna play in the market near term. (IMO can't count computer as players). Also, just because one's an artist doesn't exclude one from taking sides with technical aspects. (If your ears determine somethings wrong then....). Mostly I agree with you, the problem is corporate greed. They still think nothing is broken so... no change.
BTW haven't you heard DVD-Audio is the winner over SACD.
Originally posted by FastEddy
Mr. Dylan's current publisher (and most N.A. publishers) can not quite seem to get ... 24 bit x 96k multi channel audio ... CD technology is not really too small, it is the small minds of the publishers that can't see beyond the next release == Sony being a perfect example. Even Sony's own technology is not being utilized to the fullest as they are perfectly capable of doing the trick ... the greedheads at corporate apparently not!
Reference: http://www.harmoniamundi.com/uk/catalogue.php == all titles from this publisher are multi channel 24 bit x 96k (or better) with Dolby 5.1, etc. ... at least 1 hour of really great music with more than enough headroom / noise floor / dynamics for comparison to the best vinyl (or audio DVD). Their cost of manufacture may be a little bit more (around ~US$0.10 per CD), but this should not be outside the capabilities of these N.A. publishers who wish to produce a full album of music with the better quality on the "small" CD.
.... and of course there is always audio on DVD ... but with the p**sing match going on between the champions of the two or more competing DVD formats, this looks to be a futurist question. (One wonders if Sony, et al, are not deliberately making CD products of lesser quality in anticipation of the promotion for these audio DVDs == "look kids, our DVD audio quality is much better than our CD quality, so buy this ...")
I'm missing your point about CD's with higher sampling rates. If it aint 44.1KHz it aint gonna play in the market near term. (IMO can't count computer as players). Also, just because one's an artist doesn't exclude one from taking sides with technical aspects. (If your ears determine somethings wrong then....). Mostly I agree with you, the problem is corporate greed. They still think nothing is broken so... no change.
BTW haven't you heard DVD-Audio is the winner over SACD.
I joined in only to defend Dylan. Not that he needs being defended. I'm not anti-digital. I like the portability of the CD. I always hated the cassette tape and the CD made it obsolete. I love the mp3, the format that promises nothing and delivers everything.
The only times I try to force an issue is when it comes to high-price cables and the likes. Not because I mind people buying that stuff, but because I hate to see, especially, newbies being suckered into it. People should do what they want and like. If anything, I want everybody to throw away his turntable so I can get all the albums nobody else wants for free.
You could write a book on why vinyl and tubes have gotten a revival, and it would start with Marx's theory of alienation and end with the postmodernism--the age of zero value. I think that's the explanation for Dylan's discontent with digital formats.
The only times I try to force an issue is when it comes to high-price cables and the likes. Not because I mind people buying that stuff, but because I hate to see, especially, newbies being suckered into it. People should do what they want and like. If anything, I want everybody to throw away his turntable so I can get all the albums nobody else wants for free.
You could write a book on why vinyl and tubes have gotten a revival, and it would start with Marx's theory of alienation and end with the postmodernism--the age of zero value. I think that's the explanation for Dylan's discontent with digital formats.
the costs have little to do with this ...
phn: " ... I love the mp3, the format that promises nothing and delivers everything. ... The only times I try to force an issue is when it comes to high-price cables and the likes. Not because I mind people buying that stuff, but because I hate to see, especially, newbies being suckered into it. People should do what they want and like. ..."
Correct: if you see no value there, then don't buy it. Personally I like the sound reproduced using higher quality cables than not. It is quite easy for you to use better quality cables without paying an outragious price ... that's why this web blog is called DIYAudio = make 'em yourself ... (This week I used THHN #12 commercial grade stranded copper wire and silver solder plus gold plated connectors on my new DIY speaker boxes = ~US$1.00 per foot + ~US$10 per connection = 8 connections = 2 speakers = ~US$100 ... and worth every penny = and you can hear the difference between the poor quality of some CDs and the great quality of others.)
... And that was also Dylan's main underlying point: He believes that CD's don't have enough room for good reproduction ("too small"). He has been lied to by his engineers and/or producers and publishers (Sony or whoever) ... CD's are not "too small" to carry all of the content. For an extra few pennies per CD, the bandwidth for full resolution is available = multichannel 24 bit x 96k = more than an hour of play time without resorting to complicated compression technics. ... but apparently his engineers and/or publishers (Sony or whoever) have told him otherwise = They Lie.
I also know of surgeons who can't use a computer, but manage excellent work without understanding how the MRI pictures were made. I now know that Dylan is a thinking musician (we all knew that going in) and wants something better for his own satisfaction and that of his fans. He should fire his current engineer(s) and jump ship to another publisher if they don't come clean and tell him the truth ... and Sony knows how to do it right, they just don't seem willing. (I'll bet the CEO of Sony is on a tear and I'll bet heads will roll for this embarassment. Dylan disatisfied = lost sales & lost contracts ... and not just Bob's contract either ...)
Infinia: " ... I'm missing your point about CD's with higher sampling rates. If it aint 44.1KHz it aint gonna play in the market near term. ..."
My point (and yours) is that 44k can and are be used to produce cr*ppy CDs, but broader bandwidths are available. I completely agree with you: 44k isn't enough bandwidth for anything but overly compressed noise = not when Dolby encoded "stereo" requires a minimum of 48k for almost decent FM radio broadcast, 96k is much better ... and multichannel 24 bit x 96k per channel is readily available to all recording engineers and publishers ... And there is bandwidth available from some publishers that will play on all modern CD players (IBID: http://www.harmoniamundi.com/uk/catalogue.php and many other publishers).
... the defence rests ...
phn: " ... I love the mp3, the format that promises nothing and delivers everything. ... The only times I try to force an issue is when it comes to high-price cables and the likes. Not because I mind people buying that stuff, but because I hate to see, especially, newbies being suckered into it. People should do what they want and like. ..."
Correct: if you see no value there, then don't buy it. Personally I like the sound reproduced using higher quality cables than not. It is quite easy for you to use better quality cables without paying an outragious price ... that's why this web blog is called DIYAudio = make 'em yourself ... (This week I used THHN #12 commercial grade stranded copper wire and silver solder plus gold plated connectors on my new DIY speaker boxes = ~US$1.00 per foot + ~US$10 per connection = 8 connections = 2 speakers = ~US$100 ... and worth every penny = and you can hear the difference between the poor quality of some CDs and the great quality of others.)
... And that was also Dylan's main underlying point: He believes that CD's don't have enough room for good reproduction ("too small"). He has been lied to by his engineers and/or producers and publishers (Sony or whoever) ... CD's are not "too small" to carry all of the content. For an extra few pennies per CD, the bandwidth for full resolution is available = multichannel 24 bit x 96k = more than an hour of play time without resorting to complicated compression technics. ... but apparently his engineers and/or publishers (Sony or whoever) have told him otherwise = They Lie.
I also know of surgeons who can't use a computer, but manage excellent work without understanding how the MRI pictures were made. I now know that Dylan is a thinking musician (we all knew that going in) and wants something better for his own satisfaction and that of his fans. He should fire his current engineer(s) and jump ship to another publisher if they don't come clean and tell him the truth ... and Sony knows how to do it right, they just don't seem willing. (I'll bet the CEO of Sony is on a tear and I'll bet heads will roll for this embarassment. Dylan disatisfied = lost sales & lost contracts ... and not just Bob's contract either ...)
Infinia: " ... I'm missing your point about CD's with higher sampling rates. If it aint 44.1KHz it aint gonna play in the market near term. ..."
My point (and yours) is that 44k can and are be used to produce cr*ppy CDs, but broader bandwidths are available. I completely agree with you: 44k isn't enough bandwidth for anything but overly compressed noise = not when Dolby encoded "stereo" requires a minimum of 48k for almost decent FM radio broadcast, 96k is much better ... and multichannel 24 bit x 96k per channel is readily available to all recording engineers and publishers ... And there is bandwidth available from some publishers that will play on all modern CD players (IBID: http://www.harmoniamundi.com/uk/catalogue.php and many other publishers).
... the defence rests ...
DVD = which format is that?
Infinia: " ... BTW haven't you heard DVD-Audio is the winner over SACD ..."
Which one is that, The Blue Ray from the Blue Meanies??
I have not been buying many CDs lately as the producer and publishers are "too small" minded to do a decent job. DVD music videos, however, do have pretty good audio bandwidth, generally multichannel 24 bit x 48k ... some even do a good job of kicking the engineers in the pants and making 'em pay attention to the digital VU meters ...
Ya' wanna see a mixing engineer's crime in action? Check out (but don't bother buying) Eric Clapton's "Me and Mr. Johnson". Here is a perfectly wonderful acoustic set, renditions by a master guitar player of the source material of most modern blues ... and the mix engineer, one Mick Guzauski, totally screwed up the transcription to digital by cranking up the levels, overdriving the compressors and introducing way too much distrotion ... a crime, clear and simple. I'm sure Mr. Clapton listened to the masters, but I doubt if he listened to the finished CD before it was too late and published.
This was the illadvised technical and immoral equivilent of ruining an otherwise decent decent work.
Here's another example of technical crime: the movie "The Bourne Identity" in which the director & cameraman conspired to "improve" the action sequencies by shaking the camera. Director Doug Liman should get sued for ruining Matt Damon's career ...
... end of rant ...
Infinia: " ... BTW haven't you heard DVD-Audio is the winner over SACD ..."
Which one is that, The Blue Ray from the Blue Meanies??
I have not been buying many CDs lately as the producer and publishers are "too small" minded to do a decent job. DVD music videos, however, do have pretty good audio bandwidth, generally multichannel 24 bit x 48k ... some even do a good job of kicking the engineers in the pants and making 'em pay attention to the digital VU meters ...
Ya' wanna see a mixing engineer's crime in action? Check out (but don't bother buying) Eric Clapton's "Me and Mr. Johnson". Here is a perfectly wonderful acoustic set, renditions by a master guitar player of the source material of most modern blues ... and the mix engineer, one Mick Guzauski, totally screwed up the transcription to digital by cranking up the levels, overdriving the compressors and introducing way too much distrotion ... a crime, clear and simple. I'm sure Mr. Clapton listened to the masters, but I doubt if he listened to the finished CD before it was too late and published.
This was the illadvised technical and immoral equivilent of ruining an otherwise decent decent work.
Here's another example of technical crime: the movie "The Bourne Identity" in which the director & cameraman conspired to "improve" the action sequencies by shaking the camera. Director Doug Liman should get sued for ruining Matt Damon's career ...
... end of rant ...Perhaps he ment the sound was too small, not the acual size of the media.
Face it, CDs suck compared to vinal, but vinal has it's major draw backs. They warp if they get too warm, they wear out the more you listen to them. I acually can't afford a great LP player at the moment, but I've heard them, and they kick the ever living snot out of CDs.
I'm stuck in the middle with SACDs. A great tool for the poor music lover. Unless I get lucky at a garage sale or astate sale, I will probably never own a good LP player. They just cost too much now days.
Face it, CDs suck compared to vinal, but vinal has it's major draw backs. They warp if they get too warm, they wear out the more you listen to them. I acually can't afford a great LP player at the moment, but I've heard them, and they kick the ever living snot out of CDs.
I'm stuck in the middle with SACDs. A great tool for the poor music lover. Unless I get lucky at a garage sale or astate sale, I will probably never own a good LP player. They just cost too much now days.
phn.. I wonder what format you'd choose to archive those LP's before they are worn out, not MP3 I hope.
It's funny all those gorgeous tube and TT gear sold in trendy boutiques. Hmm..what the elitists want you to think they know. Marx be damned.
I love any media format that allows me to be the DJ and lets me share the joy of music with others. Cassettes were cool for that in their time and I'm grateful to that. The thing that makes me angry is the total lack of archival quality of CDR's. I still have Mix tapes that outlived alot of my homemade CD's.
It's funny all those gorgeous tube and TT gear sold in trendy boutiques. Hmm..what the elitists want you to think they know. Marx be damned.
I love any media format that allows me to be the DJ and lets me share the joy of music with others. Cassettes were cool for that in their time and I'm grateful to that. The thing that makes me angry is the total lack of archival quality of CDR's. I still have Mix tapes that outlived alot of my homemade CD's.
infinia said:
Acually, with the right software and soundcard http://www.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=1&subcategory=207&product=14619
you can archive with very high detail. I've looked in to it because I want LPs for the best play back, but I want to mainly keep them stored and only listen to the original every once in awhile.
You could use a hacked Xbox with a much larger HD and you can get media play back software as well. From what I understand, the Xbox acually has a very good sound prossesor in it. You could hook it up to a cheap mini LCD screen and use a remote and have a clean install. Or buy a one of the very expensive media play back devices on the market. You can spend over a grand on them.
Archival quality CDR
http://www.discmakers.com/shop/ItemDetails.aspx?ItemID=CD-030-00033
Kodak used to make them but have since stopped and Mitsui has taken over. Definitely worth the price if you care about your data.
http://www.discmakers.com/shop/ItemDetails.aspx?ItemID=CD-030-00033
Kodak used to make them but have since stopped and Mitsui has taken over. Definitely worth the price if you care about your data.
warped CDs?
gvr4ever: " ... Perhaps he ment the sound was too small, not the acual size of the media. Face it, CDs suck compared to vinyl, but vinyl has it's major draw backs. They warp if they get too warm, they wear out the more you listen to them. I acually can't afford a great LP player at the moment, but I've heard them, and they kick the ever living snot out of CDs. ..."
That was my point about Dylan's complaints = bad reproduction of the master transfer to CD = bad engineering and/or bad production and/or bad publishing ... There are producers who do a very good job ... I wonder what Sony is thinking?
Infinia: " ... I wonder what format you'd choose to archive those LP's before they are worn out, not MP3 I hope. ... I still have Mix tapes that outlived alot of my homemade CD's. ..."
MP3 for recording? Certainly not! Infact I intend to "transfer" a bunch of the old Edison platters music to CD (I have an eighty year old upright Edison and a large collection including that old favorite "Where did Robinson Caruso go with Friday on Saturday Night?"). I will be using two high quality microphones and a M-Audio FireWire "Audiophile" for I/O ( http://industrialcomponent.com/maudio/maphile.html ) === 4 channels at 24 bit x 96k >>> Apple Mac & Pro-Tools.
grv4ever: " ... Acually, with the right software and soundcard http://www.creative.com/products/pr...7&product=14619 you can archive with very high detail. ..."
Well, yes ... except for the power supply noise of your PC and the USB being anemic, bandwidth wise. The professionals all use external FireWire D to A & A to D devices 'cause the bandwidth will handle more than 8 audio channels at 24 bit x 96k ... in either direction in or out.
astouffer: " ... Kodak used to make them but have since stopped and Mitsui has taken over. Definitely worth the price if you care about your data. ..."
That stuff is generally not used in production CDs, but your point I believe is that there is media out there that lasts a long time and retains the data ... I still believe that the engineer and producer are at fault for failing to make the decent transfers from the studio masters to production CDs.
gvr4ever: " ... Perhaps he ment the sound was too small, not the acual size of the media. Face it, CDs suck compared to vinyl, but vinyl has it's major draw backs. They warp if they get too warm, they wear out the more you listen to them. I acually can't afford a great LP player at the moment, but I've heard them, and they kick the ever living snot out of CDs. ..."
That was my point about Dylan's complaints = bad reproduction of the master transfer to CD = bad engineering and/or bad production and/or bad publishing ... There are producers who do a very good job ... I wonder what Sony is thinking?
Infinia: " ... I wonder what format you'd choose to archive those LP's before they are worn out, not MP3 I hope. ... I still have Mix tapes that outlived alot of my homemade CD's. ..."
MP3 for recording? Certainly not! Infact I intend to "transfer" a bunch of the old Edison platters music to CD (I have an eighty year old upright Edison and a large collection including that old favorite "Where did Robinson Caruso go with Friday on Saturday Night?"). I will be using two high quality microphones and a M-Audio FireWire "Audiophile" for I/O ( http://industrialcomponent.com/maudio/maphile.html ) === 4 channels at 24 bit x 96k >>> Apple Mac & Pro-Tools.
grv4ever: " ... Acually, with the right software and soundcard http://www.creative.com/products/pr...7&product=14619 you can archive with very high detail. ..."
Well, yes ... except for the power supply noise of your PC and the USB being anemic, bandwidth wise. The professionals all use external FireWire D to A & A to D devices 'cause the bandwidth will handle more than 8 audio channels at 24 bit x 96k ... in either direction in or out.
astouffer: " ... Kodak used to make them but have since stopped and Mitsui has taken over. Definitely worth the price if you care about your data. ..."
That stuff is generally not used in production CDs, but your point I believe is that there is media out there that lasts a long time and retains the data ... I still believe that the engineer and producer are at fault for failing to make the decent transfers from the studio masters to production CDs.
I acually just posted a quick link on the first product I found just as a example of what is avaliable on the market without breaking the bank.
Also, USB 2.0 would be good enough for stereo. I'm not aware of any LPs that had 8 channels. I thought the subject was backing up vinal.
As for power PC noise, that is a thing of the past. At least if you have the right equipment. My brother n law is stuck in the MP3 generation, but he is going to school for comunications and he already owns a buisness. He has made a few local comercials and is acually up for a Emmy Award.
Anyway, he knows more about the technical side of MP3s then I do and he has some VERY nice sounding ones. I've heard some of his collection played back from his computer through respectable Sennhesier open air head phones and the sound card didn't have ANY background noise. My current computer doesn't either. My older computers did. You could hear a background wine, but the newer sound cards must have filters on them or something. Computers are becoming more of a media play back center and they can do some pretty amazing things now days. New video card drivers even work with HD TVs. I use a Sony HD tube as a 2nd monitor and often play back HD content on it from my computer via a DVI port.
Also, USB 2.0 would be good enough for stereo. I'm not aware of any LPs that had 8 channels. I thought the subject was backing up vinal.
As for power PC noise, that is a thing of the past. At least if you have the right equipment. My brother n law is stuck in the MP3 generation, but he is going to school for comunications and he already owns a buisness. He has made a few local comercials and is acually up for a Emmy Award.
Anyway, he knows more about the technical side of MP3s then I do and he has some VERY nice sounding ones. I've heard some of his collection played back from his computer through respectable Sennhesier open air head phones and the sound card didn't have ANY background noise. My current computer doesn't either. My older computers did. You could hear a background wine, but the newer sound cards must have filters on them or something. Computers are becoming more of a media play back center and they can do some pretty amazing things now days. New video card drivers even work with HD TVs. I use a Sony HD tube as a 2nd monitor and often play back HD content on it from my computer via a DVI port.
good enough but not great ...
" ... Also, USB 2.0 would be good enough for stereo. ..."
Yes, for playback (output), but not capture (input) ... USB 2.0 can barely handle two channels at 24 bit x 96k plus Dolby encoding. Ask any professional studio musician that knows his electronic stuff = "FireWire rules the studio, man".
" ... As for power PC noise, that is a thing of the past. At least if you have the right equipment. ..."
Not! ... unless you stick to SPDIF Optical (TosLink) for total optical isolation or get very high end external USB DAT with super filtering ( Example: http://wavelengthaudio.com ) ... You can see the cr*ppy PC power supply noise on any "sound card" analog connector with a 'scope, any PC or Mac ... and every PC has this problem, even when converting to higher performance power supplies ala DIY PCs.
" ... he knows more about the technical side of MP3s then I do and he has some VERY nice sounding ones. ..."
... MP3 or whatever, the PC power supply problem is constantly addressed on several DIYAudio forums. Sorry, them PC switching power supplies are just plain dirty ...
" ... and the sound card didn't have ANY background noise. My current computer doesn't either. ..."
I'll take that bet and give you odds ... grab an oscilloscope and check it out.
" ... Also, USB 2.0 would be good enough for stereo. ..."
Yes, for playback (output), but not capture (input) ... USB 2.0 can barely handle two channels at 24 bit x 96k plus Dolby encoding. Ask any professional studio musician that knows his electronic stuff = "FireWire rules the studio, man".
" ... As for power PC noise, that is a thing of the past. At least if you have the right equipment. ..."
Not! ... unless you stick to SPDIF Optical (TosLink) for total optical isolation or get very high end external USB DAT with super filtering ( Example: http://wavelengthaudio.com ) ... You can see the cr*ppy PC power supply noise on any "sound card" analog connector with a 'scope, any PC or Mac ... and every PC has this problem, even when converting to higher performance power supplies ala DIY PCs.
" ... he knows more about the technical side of MP3s then I do and he has some VERY nice sounding ones. ..."
... MP3 or whatever, the PC power supply problem is constantly addressed on several DIYAudio forums. Sorry, them PC switching power supplies are just plain dirty ...
" ... and the sound card didn't have ANY background noise. My current computer doesn't either. ..."
I'll take that bet and give you odds ... grab an oscilloscope and check it out.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.