cclragnarok Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 So (sarcastically) eliminate the sonic distortions + artifacts inherent in the recording process, by eliminating the sonic part altogether, and just record the players inputs! Piano roll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or Musical Instrument Digital Interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia FTW We can then engage in discussions as to whether mylar or paper player piano rolls have a warmer tone Why even use your ears? Just read the sheet music. That's what Beethoven did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFF Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 The problem with most cds and the benefits to lps is almost entirely in the mastering. You get a golden star! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Why even use your ears? Just read the sheet music. That's what Beethoven did. But then how do you get to tell your audio buddies, that your sonic imagination has a much wider soundstage, and MOAR BASS! than theirs? Never mind how can there be bragging rights if there is no cost involved. Clearly, this is madness! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirumu Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 But then how do you get to tell your audio buddies, that your sonic imagination has a much wider soundstage, and MOAR BASS! than theirs? Never mind how can there be bragging rights if there is no cost involved. Clearly, this is madness! Ah, but my sheet music is golf leaf printed on paper made from only the best Agarwood pulp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cclragnarok Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Ah, but my sheet music is golf leaf printed on paper made from only the best Agarwood pulp. Your reading glasses are probably the bottleneck of the system then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlSeibert Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 If you squash the dynamic range down to 10 db or so in mastering as is the fad nowadays, the music is hosed regardless. One of vinyl's advantages is that a lot of it was pressed in the dearly departed past, before that stupidity got out of control. Or maybe it's just that we don't play the really crappy pressings. -Carl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreadhead Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Hey, I'll start paying attention to measurements as soon as they match what I hear. It's not all about distortion. I'm just not one to succumb to that, "oh, distortion is high" or "signal to noise ratio is bad", therefore "...it must be bad". What kind of distortion is it, even order harmonics, all harmonics, nonlinear? What kind of noise floor is it, dither, hum, thermal? I can tolerate quite a bit of thermal, if that is all it is. Etc.Oh, hells yes -- it's the way I (piano) roll. Otay we agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Yea, I can tolerate a lot of distortion too... this is my home rig: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I don't read the results of this survey as the death or lack of real preference of fidelity more as a confirmation of the human condition. People will be come conditioned to whatever it is that they are most often presented with and become comfortable with that because we, as a species, are generally pretty complacent. If high fidelity recordings were the norm and mp3's the exception I'd wager the results would be reversed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I'd say it's convenience over condition, personally. I know more people with mid- to high-end stereo or 5.1 systems than people with boom boxes, and they all have DAPs. There's clearly still a fairly mainstream desire to have decent enough sounding music, but when the studios cater their recordings to the DAP market, there's not much you can do. I know we're dealing with survey results over opinion here, but I've been conditioned to look cockeyed at "statistics" and I'd say it's skirting the real issue - music is being produced poorly, people don't have a choice, and we'll listen to music over sound, plain and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopstretch Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 The file compression issue will probably go away eventually. When both bandwidth and storage are trivially cheap, there's really no reason to worry about file sizes. Crappy recordings are another story if the majority of the next generation of music consumers come to believe that's just the way it's meant to sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp11801 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 This type of article that is dissmisive of the youth population is not new. I would argue that we are entering a new significantly better age for music due primarily to the DAP and computer based audio. The filter of the media company is slowing fading and artists with a DIY ethos can make a recording that sounds great without the concerns of radio volume as it will be played back on a DAP or computer. Sonic arguement is BS as most people listen via marginal systems anyway and always have. Does it matter if it is a boombox, 8-track, rack system... Or mp3? I'd argue they all suck about equally. At the end of the day what's important to the kids is what has always been important to the kids, the music! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Does anyone remember the "fuzz" fad that was on head-fi a while ago? Don't know if it's still going on, might be, for all I know. Is that the same thing (as the "sizzle" mentioned in the article)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 not at all. Fuzz is musicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I don't know, but I can tell you I certainly don't get it. I assume the "sizzle" is the same flanged effect that keeps me away from compressed music in the first place? I'm interested too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 not at all. Fuzz is musicality.Really? I never got that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Wouldn't be the first time you didn't get something like that on the internet dusty The fuzz was definitely about musicality. About the magic in the music that some gear conveys better than others. Fuzz is why I like the esw9s more than the esw10s, for example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Ain't that the truth! And: from memory, I got a subconscious association of low fidelity with "fuzz" that I don't necessarily with "musicality" -- are they perfectly synonymous? PS I appreciate the answers -- I believe this is the first frank, honest, and open discussion I've ever read about the true meaning of fuzz. I think I even posted about it over there, but I'm not finding it right now...actually, come to think about it, it might've been over here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 It's not about lofi, it's about the music being about dropping focus and not paying attention to the details Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Fuzz is why I like the esw9s more than the esw10s, for example. Ok, that's all the explanation I'll ever need. Long live the fuzz! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaox2 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I read a commend on Slashdot comparing it to the distortion inherent of vacuum tubes. I hope no one argues in favor of mp3s someday like they argue in favor of the distortion of vacuum tubes. I'm firmly in the soft clipping camp without "sizzle". Those don't even seem comparable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Not a valid comparison. There's no way anyone who's heard SS distortion could agree with that sentiment, right? ...right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrice Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I know we're dealing with survey results over opinion here, but I've been conditioned to look cockeyed at "statistics"..... Statistics can be mean. Ba Dum dum.... I'll show myself out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlendaleViper Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Statistics can be mean. Ba Dum dum.... I'll show myself out. You've given me an excuse to link this for my own purposes! LiveLeak.com - Tumbleweed Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrice Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 don't worry about it, the bouncers will be happy to beat you and toss you out the back alley exit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.