|
Quote:
For years, record companies and recording artists have forgotten how to produce a proper record. The art of mastering a record album is becoming a lost art. We have Autotune and digital software that help producers create what is known as "music" these days. "Music" being sold off for cheap. What. $0.99/track? I bet record companies are still making a killing off of it. If you're old enough to, or have access to, pick out a CD from the 90s and compare it to something recent, like an iTunes file or a 320kbps MP3 file. It is very likely the CD will have much better audio quality than the MP3 file. Why? Because back then, record companies and artists gave a shit about how their album sounded. They played real instruments and were capable of actually singing. Audio engineers knew how to master the recordings onto a disc capable of reproducing some phenomenal sound and talent. This process costs a lot of money. But record companies are about profits because after all, they're a business, right? (Think RIAA and their affiliates.) Nowadays? Plug in your Macbook Pro, open up Garage Band, enable Autotune and throw on your Beats headphones and you're a recording artist. Nevermind the hipster on Main Street who just picked up a Roland drum machine and a 303 out of a dumpster. You already beat 'em to it while they waste away, lounging around Gene Coffee Bar for hours sipping on a large cappuccino and freeloading their WiFi. :rolleyes: |
Kids should listen to a vinyl record produced in the 70s or 80s to hear what real music sounds like. I feel sorry for kids these days - all they know is compressed and loud (ie. Limited dynamic range) music. Posted via RS Mobile |
I still buy the odd CD. Why? Because some music is hard to find, and if I like the album, $5-10 for 12-14 songs isn't a bad deal at all. And then I can choose my audio rip quality later when I'm home. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Vinyl records are physical imprints of sound, they give you the false impression of "warm" and quality because of it's characteristics. It will degrade every time the vinyl is played, any sort of interference will destroy the "true" quality, and by that time your next birthday comes, you'll hear more pops, low noise and skipped audio than the actual song itself. If you want to argue that the vinyl when fresh will create a higher sound quality than CD's/DVD's, yes they will, but the human ear cannot interpret the difference in audible range, no matter what anal audiophile tells you. The misconception that modern music sounds shittier than 90's CD's or old vinyl is hillarious. If you take a vinyl recorded now, you're simply putting on the mp3 copy onto the vinyl, this doesn't do anything, you're being a fucking hipster. REAL vinyl are pressed from the master vinyl, which is recorded from a DAT (Digital audio tape), not etched on with Skrillex. Sound quality in the new age is higher, allowing for better bitrate, more channels and lower/higher freq than your N'Sync CD. I'm not talking about your MP3, or iTunes file, I'm talking about a legit loseless codec sample of whatever the hell you like that weighs in at a hefty 150mb/song if done right, so 100 songs will bring in about 13GB's~ instead of a dinky 100mb. Only reason why it's so big is because it is a direct copy of what you have, with little to no compression to the quality depending on what you choose. Music nowadays is garbage, with synthesized sounds, and even your vocal (auto-tune), the only reason why you would think CD's from 2012 is shit compared to the 90's is because music itself is shit, the quality is not, it's higher than ever. The quality of headphones/speakers in general are lower than what it used to be, yet they are abundantly available at every corner of the eye. Nearly everything is packaged with headphones/speakers, they are of low-mid quality and don't do your ears any justice. Do yourself a favour, find a sound card (internal/external) for your laptop or computer, find a headphone amp for your music player or phone, find a proper analog/digital amp for your Hi-Fi speakers, find quality headphone/speakers and listen to your favourite track, regardless of it being a CD/Vinyl/Mp3/FLAC, the difference is noticeable as opposed to your apple ear buds ---------------------------------------------- The digital download era has killed CD's, and I don't feel sorry for it, we are slowly moving out of the pioneering MP3 phase and moving into a higher standard of quality of digital downloads with our storage drives nearly 100x bigger than the 90's. The main reason MP3 was introduced was because audio files were deemed too large, and needed to be cut down for the puny storage space we had. This isn't a reason any more, as we approach affordable 3TB/4TB hard drives, even 200GB flash drives. The audio engineers and masters have not faltered, they simply do what the artist desires and go from there. Artists give what the people want, and they want bass bumping repetitive songs. Not everyone wants to dance to Adele and Beethoven. |
Quote:
I can assure you there is none other than audio size and that FLAC won't work on your iPod. Save yourself the embarrassment and just stop here because you're making a bigger ass out of yourself. |
Quote:
Most new vinyl are stamped from the same digital masters as the CD, however there ARE some that are analog through and through (White Stripes' Icky Thump) and some that are stamped from a different (but still digital) master and sound much better (RHCP Stadium Arcadium). Which goes into how the mastering of the album greatly affects sound 'quality', not just the medium it's on. Most music nowadays are compressed at maximum volume at all times. There are no dynamics in the sound, it is just LOUD LOUD LOUD. The quiet parts are as loud as the loud parts. Example below are two masters of the same song: http://xc2.xanga.com/108a5310d303262.../z42138662.jpg When you compress (the waveform not the file) the song, everything becomes flat (both figurativelly and literally). There is no changing dynamicto the sound. The soft soulful whispers in one song sound the same as the loud angry screams in another. It becomes lifeless. It no longer becomes music, rather its merely sound (or noise). Below is tl;dr Xanga (lol) post I wrote back in '06 about this that got to the top of DIGG (lol) about this topic: Spoiler! |
Quote:
who would rather go outside and warm up their car... rather then clicking a remote start button... look at this forum, most of us drive cars when it is more economical to drive... just less convenient., who would rather go to a store and buy a cd when they can click a button from their computer... yes of course there are some.. but most like to do things more conveniently |
Like I said, modern music is more concerned about volume and bass drops, then it is for actual quality. Almost every single top 20 on the radio has some sort of stupid fucking bass "wubs" and drops, or bass so heavy you can't even hear what else is going on. I would wait for new Codec and new compression software, I personally think we're at a turning point in the industry to convert out of MP3, it's already starting. Disclaimer I'm not one to be concerned about what's being played, but every single pop song has the same tempo, same rhythm, same sound, same repetition. I may not like it, but I sure as hell won't stuff some stupid indie band down your throat because I don't enjoy the radio. |
Quote:
Quote:
Here's a quote from the man himself. “I choose a lazy person to do a hard job. Because a lazy person will find an easy way to do it.” ― Bill Gates Quote:
|
Quote:
Find an old Toni Braxton CD from her earlier days and give it a try on any hi-fi system. I even dare you to compare it to one of Mariah Carey's latest CDs. I'm confident the mastering of the Toni Braxton's CD will blow your mind. |
Quote:
u said it urself.. i wasnt wrong was i? did i say anything was wrong with convenience.. the lazy will go the easy route.. easy route being convenient... see what i did there? |
So what if a hardworking man finds an easy route, its more profitable and quicker. Does that make him lazy? its like taking the highway to get somewhere rather than going through the city. Am I lazy because I am using the convenience of the highway over the city route? Anyways this is getting way off topic lol Quote:
|
.. |
1 Attachment(s) Quote:
Anyway, I'll just leave this here. |
Quote:
|
I have 2-channel audiophile system with a Technics turntable from 1977 with a modern Shure MMC. I also have vinyl records that were pressed from analog masters. For example, I have a 1980s pressing of Thriller. Did Quincy Jones use DATs back then? I doubt it. I also have a variety of .flac media. I can tell the difference between the digital and analog media, even with the scratches and dust on my records. Posted via RS Mobile |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
On one hand, good. Fuck old technology. I feel the thing keeping us from hoverboards and robots is everyone wanting to hold on to the old days and old technology. Everything has to be legacy compatible. Like when I bought my MBP, people were like "What are you going to do with no optical drive!?" Oh, I don't know...never use DVDs again like I've been doing for probably the last 5+ years? On the other hand, well shit...there goes another part of my childhood. So much of my younger days were spent in HMV and such. Kids these days will have no idea what a Walkman was. It's like taking pictures on film, which I want to do a bit. Not because I want to be one of those "Oh, I only shoot film. Fuck digital soullessness." hipsters but because like the CD, this is something that will probably die in my lifetime and it might be the last chance I have to experience some nostalgia. |
Blame the iPod |
Quote:
Makes you feel old when you realise that such a popular form of media storage (CD's) will go extinct not too far from now. Anyway, I feel as though people are confusing shit music with loss of sound quality on modern media storage mediums. "Artists" have tons of electronic assists nowadays, what you hear is rarely what is actually recorded raw. What you end up with is a song that is not as genuine, artists don't have to try as hard to make their creations sound good enough for sale. All of these electronic assists improve overall smoothness, but decrease the human element when you listen (sometimes it's easy to tell). It's not the technology, it's the shitty music that people like to rape their ears with nowadays. It doesn't help that half of them can't actually sing that well, which forces the electronic assists to salvage some sort of song out of it. |
Quote:
Wow, I should just start every post with that. Anyway...dukes=wrong. Go. You are looking at it like the industry is pushing digital, and I take it the exact opposite way. They were pushed/pulled/dragged into digital distribution and did not want to go there. They sued, like everyone. It's been covered to death. Don't want to dwell there. But here's my take. In the 90's, relatively speaking, they had a bit of a heyday in their system. Big phat fucking studios cranking out music on CD's...a beautiful little system of being cheap as borsht to produce top quality results. MTV cranking out a generation of kids that lived this shit like no other. It wasn't "buy the new Elvis record" it was "buy Backstreet boys AND No doubt AND N*sync AND spice girls" Even better..the parents that got THEIR parents the jobs at EMI are still buying. Plus concerts. Great time to be alive. So why would someone change it? They were gods in their own demain. Fuck, once a year they even get on tv and celebrate how fucking awesome they are. So Napster/metallica/internet/riaa/kazaa/ happens. I just summed up 7 years of entertainment news in one sentence. Do you think they are now going to say, "oh gee. You were right. We were unfair. Let's all play nice now" Hell no. Music for the masses now has the staying power of a television commercial. It's white noise. Sure, some make it to the top, but think about the 1 hit wonder. It's now so common, its unreal. No one really cares. Push out a bunch of shit and see what sticks. Some go up and become bigger, but a lot just fizz out. We have AI and X Factor pumping out 2 new singers a year, plus a couple out of the finalists branch on their own. So the game now is cheap out. Why create an album of b-sides? Just release a track, and if it goes somewhere, release some more. I think eventually it will turn around, much like grunge was an answer to 80's hair bands, there will be a new spin on the whole thing that will hopefully be based on quality. (I'm talking mainstream music here...I know you can name 50 bands that are 'tite' and all, but I'm talking the masses of music consumers...teenage girls, mid-20's type buyers) And if my case hasn't been made... will.i.am and the black eyed peas. Perfect example of mass marketed fuzz. |
It's okay. Some people just have no clue. I spent years in the industry. But that's okay. Done here. :) |
I don't even think you read it that fast. Where am I wrong on my assessment? I think its a pretty established fact that they were not pushing digital. They aren't happy to give apple 30% of their money. I think its pretty logical to assume that they are going to be changing something to keep their money coming in. This is labels. The merchants of physical distribution are on their own. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net