Quantcast
But I don't want to download my music! - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
But I don't want to download my music!
Old 1st February 2013 | Show parent
  #31
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOP ➡️
For me:
MP3 SUCK
Downloading anything ROCKs
...
I can virtually pop over to Smalls up there in NYC and listen to a vast catalog of live shows that happened there without spending any money.
Life is happening and the technology does help - it requires more work than just sitting down with a can of beer and screaming at the screen to find where it's at.
...
Anyway who cares if someone uses a ****ty mp3 player or a top of the line audiophile system if they can't tell a perfect 5th from a major 3rd.

While I think the web is great I remain a bit sceptical about these kind of "internet is the cure to the world's problems" and "my generation is better than the previous and the next ones" statements.

BTW what's a live show on a LCD screen and multimedia speakers?
if everybody is watching at home for FREE how long will live shows exist?
Be glad some still pay tickets and buy music, whatever their age...
A.

PS: Matyas please help me improve my music theory knowledge because at this time I can't really enjoy music, I'll teach you painting so you can go to exhibitions!

Last edited by Andy_bt; 1st February 2013 at 10:39 PM.. Reason: PS
Old 1st February 2013 | Show parent
  #32
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dizavin ➡️
Yeah. YouTube sounds like ****. Also, FYI: YouTube is the #1 sharing medium people use to expose eachother to new music.

You're missing the Forrest for the trees.

Yeah, the quality is crap... But that's beside the point: People listen to music there. If you want to remove yourself from that index for pretentious, snobby, music nerd reasons? Then fine. Have fun never being listened to by anyone other than the people on this forum.

Your call, either way. I really do not give a single **** what you decide to do... But I thought I'd point out that fighting against the public is an exercise in futility: you can state all the stats and numbers on all the different recording mediums you want... It doesn't make a difference.

People are going to share content via the path of least resistance that still resembles music. Period. End of discussion.

If you want to tell them they're wrong, I can lend you a cane and a wheelchair and an oxygen tank and you can tell them to get off your lawn yourself.. And I will sit back and laugh proceed to still not care about your opinion.

Because, if you're going to ignore the thousands of people sharing music on YouTube? GOOD! That leaves more for me.
Well yeah, if you want to sell your stuff to the masses - you're right, no other way. But if it's about me, being on the other side, consuming? Well, then your "millions of flies eating **** can't be wrong - so better start loving ****" somehow doesn't appeal to me. But I still appreciate those musicians who release a specially mastered uncompressed hi-fi version for people like me besides the obligatory 128 kbit crap for the masses.
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #33
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by matyas ➡️
As a proud card-carrying member of Generation X, I'm always bothered by "kids" vs. "boomers" comparisons.



I have a PhD in music theory. Therefore, I'm at least as bothered by the fact that people can't tell a perfect 5th from a major 3rd as I am by the fact that the market seems to be trying to foist products and services I don't want on me while failing to provide the products and services I do want.
I hear you brother, especially regarding the market not providing.

Important to note though that one could do relative ear training to graduate level using a mobile phone aplet, pre smartphone age too. It's the minds resisting - not a technological struggle at all I think.

I think listening to records even on the best systems is not ideal anyway.
All the stuff that really interests me is all done live at one point or the other anyway.
Most stuff I hear on BBC 3 radio since I can't afford to have a "collection" of my own and that is on a tiny sony radio, in mono, through a 4 inch speaker. I have a jazz collection for my research but that's about it.

Sometimes it's more difficult to see what is good for you and what is not.
I used to own organs of different types and now use VST grand pianos but never acoustic pianos of any type since I never could really afford to buy and more importantly maintain an acoustic piano.
I never bought a cheap upright or a grand and then avoid paying for tuning because it is better for the musical growth I think to have access to tuned instruments albeit sampled rather than just any odd acoustic stuff out there.

What makes me shudder for instance is seeing how the need for tuning is lost on the hobbyists.

The baby boomers are still in power I would say. Generation X was simply an ineffectual one, slacker playing on an endlessly repeating loop and I think that it's again baby boomers now old and in the money against post generation x perspective while the generation x'rs make funny podcasts about soliciting anal sex from wives.

To answer the other poster:
It is not a function of age, I just think that the annoying middle class blue peter family people are not in support of polite society anymore than the kid with the earbuds and impractical trousers.
I'd hire an uneducated youngster over the overeducated speckled aging yuppie who keeps on pushing some electronica crap on me, stuff that does not touch switched on bach and is branded as fresh yuppie spirit of the ages despite being conceptually older than bossa, anyday.

Nothing worst than an audiophile who can't hear and the yuppies en masse can't hear for ****.
Sure they have the expensive stuff and collect vinyls but they simply cannot hear and thus their involvement in the grand thing that music is, is as valuable as that of some high schooler with ear buds.
The difference is that they are usually way older than they actually admit and should know better.
The ear-budded but otherwise unspoiled individual is only a more decent system purchase away from listening to better sound and thus experiencing more of music however those with the systems but a fried egg for a brain are done for and are best fitted for furnishing coffee shops.

Also funny how when you go to a poor country, they have the worst radio to listen to yet have very good relative hearing.
All my friends from the poorer parts of africa can sing back melodies very accurately to me and when we talk about languages they always pronounce words they never heard before very accurately as-well yet my british friends struggle with the same immensely.

Whatever the delivery method, if you don't listen properly, a louder setup that pumps out fuller program material means only more noise and more distraction.
People still grow even though it's all in the background so they will dig the good stuff when they are older.

Also even someone who can hear will probably put on Marvin Gaye for some midnight lovin' rather than the complete works of Edgard Vareze and the way the record gets played has little consequence on it. Let people consume what they are hungry for!

Peace,
BOP
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #34
Lives for gear
 
matyas's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_bt ➡️
PS: Matyas please help me improve my music theory knowledge because at this time I can't really enjoy music, I'll teach you painting so you can go to exhibitions!
I don't know whether that was meant sarcastically or not, but I love teaching music theory. And I love learning new things. My appreciation for art definitely deepened after I took art history and tried to learn to paint.
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #35
Lives for gear
 
matyas's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOP ➡️
IGeneration X was simply an ineffectual one, slacker playing on an endlessly repeating loop and I think that it's again baby boomers now old and in the money against post generation x perspective while the generation x'rs make funny podcasts about soliciting anal sex from wives.
Yeah, uh thanks. Great way to stereotype everyone between the ages of 32 and 45.
Quote:
Also even someone who can hear will probably put on Marvin Gaye for some midnight lovin' rather than the complete works of Edgard Vareze and the way the record gets played has little consequence on it. Let people consume what they are hungry for!
As a fan of both Marvin Gaye and Edgard Varèse, I'm not sure I see your point. Different music for different occasions. Just like there is different beer for different occasions. Sometimes I want a stout and sometimes I'd prefer a pale ale. The delivery method does matter, though: from tap [draught], please, if possible!
The point of my original argument, however, wasn't to argue the superiority of certain kinds of music, or even that people shouldn't listen to whatever they want however they want. If someone else wants to listen to Rihanna on YouTube, that's their business and I don't begrudge it to them any more than I begrudge someone the right to drink Coor's from a bottle. I don't even care if you want to listen to Varèse on YouTube (although you'd be missing out on the enormous dynamic range of the music.) Hell, I even have content on YouTube!
The whole point I was trying to make is that we need options. Some people prefer physical media over streaming, and uncompressed audio over MP3/AAC/whatever. I don't care if physical media (high-res digital is my personal favorite in most cases) becomes a niche product. I just want it to be available, and ideally to be able to purchase it from a source other than Amazon.
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #36
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by matyas ➡️
I don't know whether that was meant sarcastically or not, but I love teaching music theory. And I love learning new things. My appreciation for art definitely deepened after I took art history and tried to learn to paint.
I agree some background is always a good thing for sure, I reacted to BOP's quoted comment which seems to imply people who aren't skilled enough can't appreciate music.
A.
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #37
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_bt ➡️
I agree some background is always a good thing for sure, I reacted to BOP's quoted comment which seems to imply people who aren't skilled enough can't appreciate music.
A.
I did not imply that.
Please stop trying to erect a straw man!

It's the moan zone, not "big talk" zone.
Old 2nd February 2013 | Show parent
  #38
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOP ➡️
I did not imply that.
Please stop trying to erect a straw man!
Sorry if I understood it wrong.
A.
Old 3rd February 2013 | Show parent
  #39
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by matyas ➡️
Yeah, uh thanks. Great way to stereotype everyone between the ages of 32 and 45.


As a fan of both Marvin Gaye and Edgard Varèse, I'm not sure I see your point. Different music for different occasions. Just like there is different beer for different occasions. Sometimes I want a stout and sometimes I'd prefer a pale ale. The delivery method does matter, though: from tap [draught], please, if possible!
The point of my original argument, however, wasn't to argue the superiority of certain kinds of music, or even that people shouldn't listen to whatever they want however they want. If someone else wants to listen to Rihanna on YouTube, that's their business and I don't begrudge it to them any more than I begrudge someone the right to drink Coor's from a bottle. I don't even care if you want to listen to Varèse on YouTube (although you'd be missing out on the enormous dynamic range of the music.) Hell, I even have content on YouTube!
The whole point I was trying to make is that we need options. Some people prefer physical media over streaming, and uncompressed audio over MP3/AAC/whatever. I don't care if physical media (high-res digital is my personal favorite in most cases) becomes a niche product. I just want it to be available, and ideally to be able to purchase it from a source other than Amazon.
I always get shafted when I buy physical digital media.

I bought my self a super audio cd a number of years ago and then found out that I can't listen to it on my workstation because of some bull**** licensing issues and was advised to buy a 3000 pound cd player.
All it was, was a dvd with proprietary encoding and compression.
Could play it in VLC if only people where allowed to make their own codecs for it.
I do want high quality uncompressed material and for that it might be worth to have physical media however anything below that, it's just a waste of space.

So what you want is a luxury and I can dig it - I just don't see it working for the common man out there.

To prod with the stick further because I am in the mood:
Generation X's are easy to generalise as being ineffective, their grandparents fought in WWII, their parents in Vietnam but they themselves watched the Gulf War on TV.
It's the american life as depicted in koyaanisqatsi.
There is wisdom in it all but again one that did not make that generation more effective on the world at large. Probably the biggest thing that came from it was the in-depended cinema of the 90ties most of which is almost completely self referential.
It's not a negative quality though - its this kind of odd flavour of non violence.
The draft was abolished when they where kids which probably had a big impact on how that generation turned out - they din't have to fight to abolish it, it just arrived.
The conch shell if at all passed from the baby boomers to post generation X's in my opinion.

I would not feel bad if I was you about that though since those of us born early 80ties are now dealing with this huge depression instead of taking identity classes and smoking copious amounts of herbal cigarettes.
Plus we embraced and mostly put together the technological terror of today and it is mostly us who have to deal with it while the Baby Boomers are swimming in money and the X's are still happy to take a step back and relax.

Old 3rd February 2013
  #40
Lives for gear
 
RRCHON's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
It is all fads and fashions; it will get worse it will get better and level out after a certain time, though once you loose a middle man, it rarely ever comes back.

Digital distribution is pretty much what we are stuck with now, there will be physical media with boxes, art, and pamphlets produced still, but it will only be for group spanning music where the risk of not recouping more than a fair share of the investment is very small.

I mean personal music, in ones home without hiring musicians to play in your living room is not that old of a concept in itself. Back in the day if you wanted to hear Bach, you went to church, ect.....
Old 3rd February 2013 | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
matyas's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Here is a model of what I think good distribution should look like:

my bloody valentine - Official Webpage

The new My Bloody Valentine record is available as a CD, vinyl, or digital download. The download is available in MP3, 16/44.1 uncompressed wav, or 24/96 uncompressed wav formats. I will be ordering the vinyl/CD/96 kHz wav option.
I only wish it were available locally, rather than having to order it, but that's something of a minor quip.

BTW, there's a Gen X band for you if ever there were one!
Old 3rd February 2013
  #42
Here for the gear
 
🎧 5 years
This would probably not work in America due to all kinds of political nonsense, but in Korea they offer FLAC as a choice when you download your song on several of the main music portals. I use Melon. It's not limited to "one-all" solution like the Itunes monopoly here. Take your pick between a dozen, they all get calculated into the charts and all compete against each other for price.
Nice that, i could download the Mp3 and the Flac for ONE PRICE and if i lose the song somehow, i can re-download the same track (as long as its the same one). I got my latest hit track for 50c.

In addition, in order to encourage physical album sales, a CD purchase is required to see weekly music shows of your favorite artist. That is your ticket, the show is free to see all artists performing.
Just pick one line.
There's 5 weekly music shows and the artist will perform on all TV broadcasts. You use the same CD for the whole promotional cycle (lasts one month, comes 2x a year). You repeat this with different artists. During the promotional cycle, you buy another copy of the album and you receive a number to get an Autograph -meet and greet with the artist. That's why i have 2-3 copies for a good portion of my favorite dance pop artists :P All in all i counted i went to 76 events in a year and only costed me buying 2-3 cds a month
This is the advantage of being in a tiny country.
But the disadvantages:
Due to the tiny size of S.Korea, sales are still abysmal but can rival American artists for a few of them.
Old 4th February 2013 | Show parent
  #43
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzo ➡️
This would probably not work in America due to all kinds of political nonsense, but in Korea they offer FLAC as a choice when you download your song on several of the main music portals. I use Melon. It's not limited to "one-all" solution like the Itunes monopoly here. Take your pick between a dozen, they all get calculated into the charts and all compete against each other for price.
Nice that, i could download the Mp3 and the Flac for ONE PRICE and if i lose the song somehow, i can re-download the same track (as long as its the same one). I got my latest hit track for 50c.

In addition, in order to encourage physical album sales, a CD purchase is required to see weekly music shows of your favorite artist. That is your ticket, the show is free to see all artists performing.
Just pick one line.
There's 5 weekly music shows and the artist will perform on all TV broadcasts. You use the same CD for the whole promotional cycle (lasts one month, comes 2x a year). You repeat this with different artists. During the promotional cycle, you buy another copy of the album and you receive a number to get an Autograph -meet and greet with the artist. That's why i have 2-3 copies for a good portion of my favorite dance pop artists :P All in all i counted i went to 76 events in a year and only costed me buying 2-3 cds a month
This is the advantage of being in a tiny country.
But the disadvantages:
Due to the tiny size of S.Korea, sales are still abysmal but can rival American artists for a few of them.
Neat system;
Old 5th February 2013 | Show parent
  #44
Lives for gear
 
matyas's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by dizavin ➡️
My opinion on the matter is a non-opinion: people are pulling it out of their asses until a man in a lab coat at MIT can verify through testing that a claim exists. IE: the "physical media just sounds better" argument is 100% bull**** until a real scientist can demonstrate otherwise.
Here you go:

Human hearing beats the Fourier uncertainty principle

It doesn't prove that uncompressed audio sounds better, but it does prove that human hearing is an order of magnitude better than the limit of uncertainty, and must, therefore, be nonlinear. From the article:
As a result, most of today's sound analysis models are based on old theories that may now be revisited in order to capture the precision of human hearing.


I'm not a physicist or neuroscientist, but I think this proves that at least some people are capable of hearing subtleties not rendered well by current data compression systems, which are based on the "old theories" mentioned above. The article also points out that the best-performing test subject was, unsurprisingly, and electronic musician and audio editor. Maybe someone from GS?
Old 6th February 2013
  #45
Gear Addict
 
skinnypete's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
I have no prob w hearing files over CDs if they are equal quality uncompressed files.

If enough people b1tc4 they might start an Amoeba in Brooklyn or something. Then it will be way less iTunes for me.

Sent from my Droid
Old 8th February 2013 | Show parent
  #46
Gear Maniac
 
ZutaoElectronic's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by matyas ➡️
Here you go:

Human hearing beats the Fourier uncertainty principle

It doesn't prove that uncompressed audio sounds better, but it does prove that human hearing is an order of magnitude better than the limit of uncertainty, and must, therefore, be nonlinear. From the article:
As a result, most of today's sound analysis models are based on old theories that may now be revisited in order to capture the precision of human hearing.


I'm not a physicist or neuroscientist, but I think this proves that at least some people are capable of hearing subtleties not rendered well by current data compression systems, which are based on the "old theories" mentioned above. The article also points out that the best-performing test subject was, unsurprisingly, and electronic musician and audio editor. Maybe someone from GS?
I think you hit the nail on the head. A couple of years ago I uploaded a music video to Youtube and noticed a load scratchy noise in the compressed sound. I asked if others could hear it but they couldn't. If I had to describe it, it's a sort of bit-reduced scratchy Rolf Harris washboard at the point where a bass note ends and a kick begins, or a bass note begins and a kick drum ends. It was a compression artefact. I posted about it on Google's support forums and I made a music track specifically to test my hypothesis. The test track, with lots of bass and drums, sounded appalling and scratchy. Most people couldn't hear it but I began receiving all kinds of messages on my Youtube account from people who had made their own music to accompany their videos, and wondered if I had found a solution to the problem. Investigating it and trying to reduce this artefact compelled me to change some of the harmonic components in the sounds I was using to make music, when I wanted to upload something to Youtube. Note however that it was a sonic component that didn't affect the tonal information (i.e. the relative amplitudes of the harmonics and the dominant tone didn't seem to be affected). What it did was, to my ears, introduce a sound that wasn't there in the original version.

Regarding what others have said about audio amplifiers, sure modern amps of all types, solid state, MOSFET, digital etc. can be more than good enough from a signal-to-noise and THD perspective, particularly if they are powerful, not operating near their maximum output levels and the circuits are operating at optimum voltage with current on tap. I would not expect them to introduce much rubbish into the signal. But the listening (valve) amp I use right now is a 1950s design, not mathematically linear but pleasant anyway as it opens up the middle and top, and I frequently push it to its absolute limit. To my ears, it does push up compression artefacts when I can already hear them in a compressed file. Subjective but enough to make me dislike MP3s.
Old 9th February 2013
  #47
Deleted 6ccb844
Guest
For me it's never been a mystery, back in the 90's they looked for an easier way to sell and distribute music. At the time technology for the internet was relatively in it's infancy, 14.4K board dialup modems were in play, so the size of the file had to be smaller. Devices were built around this, I remember having an 8MB Mp3 player..

As popularity grew and technology allowed, higher bitrate .Mp3's became available. Personal audio devices grew to hold more music, so it offered advantages over the personal walkman / CD player. Then as personal audio became mass produced and outsourced to places like china in there big boom, cheap and accessible became the norm.

By the time technology caught up to the state we are in today, 100MB fibre piped to your home and the size of personal audio devices like the IPOD with 100's of GB's worth of storage, we hit a recession. Music became a commodity not as first and foremost as it used to be and the next logical progression of full lossless audio and the devices to be based around it became lost.

Maybe when things pickup again, we will see and end to it?
Old 10th February 2013
  #48
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
This is such an odd discussion for so many reasons. First, there is the disturbing and rampant ageism which I find just plain offensive. The dismissive and reductionist judgements about Gen X or people in their 40s is just wrong-headed and obnoxious. Similarly, comments about the "newer generation" and it's inexplicable contentment with lo-res music are plain misguided and imagine a golden age of audiophilia that never really existed. When transistor radios came out (long before my time) people walked down the street with them up to their ear, or with a single headphone, or set them down on the beach. When I was a kid I heard most of my music on an AM radio, I taped music off the radio, I put quarters in a jukebox, I taped albums that I borrowed from friends. I remember finding some of my favorite music tuning into a low-wattage college station and listening until the last remnants of any signal had dissipated to static just to hear what songs were playing. None of this stopped me from being able to recognize the sonic signatures of mastering engineers like Howie Weinberg and Bob Ludwig. And when I heard something I loved I went and bought a 45 or and album and listened on one of the decent stereo systems in the house. And when I was in high school I sold my comic books and bought a a budget audiophile system, with an NAD amp and Bang & Olfsun turntable and Polk Audio speakers. These different levels of sound quality are not mutually exclusive. These worlds can quite happily coexist.

Also, there is a difference between the quality of streaming music, which tends to be kind of crappy, and downloaded music, which can be quite high quality, often exceeding what one would get on a Redbook, 44.1 CD. So, the title of this thread is a bit off, I think, although the initial intentions are good. I fully appreciate the desire to collect a thing that is tangible and has a visual component. I have songs and movies that I have downloaded and also a lot of CDs, vinyl and DVD/Blu-Rays. People that appreciate good sounding recordings faithfully reproduced should have sufficient options in the marketplace. And no, you don't have to be an audiophile to be able to tell the difference. For instance, my sister who, a music fan and working mom, could immediately hear the difference between the remastered Abbey Road and the crap CD that his been around since the 80s.

Disavin, I don't know why you have to be such an aggressive and disagreeable bomb-thrower all the time (although I do appreciate a good crank) but as off-putting as your ageist remarks are, my main problem with many of your arguments is they just don't hold up. There is nothing contradictory about wanting to listen to Sgt. Pepper or Billie Holiday for that matter in a format and on a system that offers the highest possible fidelity to the original. And the OP didn't say that physical media sounds better. He said he dislikes files that are compressed from their original AND likes to collect physical media, not that physical media necessarily sounds better. And I don't remember anyone claiming that he refused to allow his music on youtube, just that most music on youtube sounds crappy. I love finding music on youtube. I do it every day. This doesn't stop me from wanting to get high fidelity copies of recordings of which I am particularly fond and listening to them on my home stereo or on my studio monitors.

On the other hand, you might just be reacting to the ageism aimed at the kids on lawns, the college kids who don't appreciate the finer things and the newer, I want it now generation that allows music to become Muzak or wallpaper. I can't think of a time when this wasn't the case. Music has always been everywhere: radio, jukeboxes, movie theaters before the show, restaurants, bars, etc. If young people want to hear music so badly that they will carry it around with them wherever they go I say hurray to that. When I am into a recording I do the same. I stick it on my phone, I play it in my car, I listen at the gym, on my computer speakers, on my audiophile stereo system, in my studio. I want it all day every day until I move on.

And BOP, you complain about people's "stories about how itunes did this or how someone lost that… because it is 100% user error" and then tell us later that you got SCREWED when you bought an SACD but didn't own an SACD player. Boo hoo.
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #49
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Trask ➡️
This is such an odd discussion for so many reasons. First, there is the disturbing and rampant ageism which I find just plain offensive. The dismissive and reductionist judgements about Gen X or people in their 40s is just wrong-headed and obnoxious. Similarly, comments about the "newer generation" and it's inexplicable contentment with lo-res music are plain misguided and imagine a golden age of audiophilia that never really existed. When transistor radios came out (long before my time) people walked down the street with them up to their ear, or with a single headphone, or set them down on the beach. When I was a kid I heard most of my music on an AM radio, I taped music off the radio, I put quarters in a jukebox, I taped albums that I borrowed from friends. I remember finding some of my favorite music tuning into a low-wattage college station and listening until the last remnants of any signal had dissipated to static just to hear what songs were playing. None of this stopped me from being able to recognize the sonic signatures of mastering engineers like Howie Weinberg and Bob Ludwig. And when I heard something I loved I went and bought a 45 or and album and listened on one of the decent stereo systems in the house. And when I was in high school I sold my comic books and bought a a budget audiophile system, with an NAD amp and Bang & Olfsun turntable and Polk Audio speakers. These different levels of sound quality are not mutually exclusive. These worlds can quite happily coexist.

Also, there is a difference between the quality of streaming music, which tends to be kind of crappy, and downloaded music, which can be quite high quality, often exceeding what one would get on a Redbook, 44.1 CD. So, the title of this thread is a bit off, I think, although the initial intentions are good. I fully appreciate the desire to collect a thing that is tangible and has a visual component. I have songs and movies that I have downloaded and also a lot of CDs, vinyl and DVD/Blu-Rays. People that appreciate good sounding recordings faithfully reproduced should have sufficient options in the marketplace. And no, you don't have to be an audiophile to be able to tell the difference. For instance, my sister who, a music fan and working mom, could immediately hear the difference between the remastered Abbey Road and the crap CD that his been around since the 80s.

Disavin, I don't know why you have to be such an aggressive and disagreeable bomb-thrower all the time (although I do appreciate a good crank) but as off-putting as your ageist remarks are, my main problem with many of your arguments is they just don't hold up. There is nothing contradictory about wanting to listen to Sgt. Pepper or Billie Holiday for that matter in a format and on a system that offers the highest possible fidelity to the original. And the OP didn't say that physical media sounds better. He said he dislikes files that are compressed from their original AND likes to collect physical media, not that physical media necessarily sounds better. And I don't remember anyone claiming that he refused to allow his music on youtube, just that most music on youtube sounds crappy. I love finding music on youtube. I do it every day. This doesn't stop me from wanting to get high fidelity copies of recordings of which I am particularly fond and listening to them on my home stereo or on my studio monitors.

On the other hand, you might just be reacting to the ageism aimed at the kids on lawns, the college kids who don't appreciate the finer things and the newer, I want it now generation that allows music to become Muzak or wallpaper. I can't think of a time when this wasn't the case. Music has always been everywhere: radio, jukeboxes, movie theaters before the show, restaurants, bars, etc. If young people want to hear music so badly that they will carry it around with them wherever they go I say hurray to that. When I am into a recording I do the same. I stick it on my phone, I play it in my car, I listen at the gym, on my computer speakers, on my audiophile stereo system, in my studio. I want it all day every day until I move on.

And BOP, you complain about people's "stories about how itunes did this or how someone lost that… because it is 100% user error" and then tell us later that you got SCREWED when you bought an SACD but didn't own an SACD player. Boo hoo.
We are not square college kids at a fondue party right now so why the white knight routine?
It's generally good to not generalise. - get it? Btw. why ageism? Not sure why you are lumping everyone as being ageists. No ageism from me as far as I can tell - I am very prejudiced against being prejudiced... no wait. ****. Before you jump in with "oh hey since we are generalising I just generalised the thread" take note that it is technically easy to look at what a handful of people said in such a short span of time in detail, as opposed to recounting with the same detail what each one of the hundreds of millions of people said and did over a whole decade or more.

Roaring 20ties, Boring 90ties - deal with it. The "culture artefacts" of the 90ties speak the loudest about how they can and will be generalised in the future. Sorry but it's not the maltese falcon, it's slacker and clerks.
As a jazz player I have to deal with 20ties being the "age of jazz" which is complete bollocks when you look into it as the 50ties is when Jazz hit the nail on the head.

The whole reason there is such a thing as fashion or mainstream culture or sub culture is because people can be generalised, generalise themselves, form groups, pyramids, sub groups and employ group think.
You jumping to defence of a whole generation employ strokes as broad as those who paint it in colours that you dislike - you are judging the same and just have a different opinion.
What I am hearing is "hey I don't like how you would sum it up so listen to how I would sum it up, cause everyone is special and my broad generalisation is taking that obviously into account".

Things just click into the collective unconscious and then it is there, hard to remove. It would not be so if in fact "everyone was special". People would not say that what I do is black music or ask to play smoke on the water on my prime archtop during the break, all same, all in unison if as human we where all and everyone oh so special.
Have you seen George Carlins standup on the topic of being unique?

Oddly enough I would also generalise the generation X's and the 90ties as a time where the obsession with being unique reached a peak albeit that was on the up since all of that ridiculous new age parenting.

Btw. if anybody wanted to construct a water proof argument they would not post in the moan zone, no?
We're shooting the ****. Curmudgeons of all ages.
I also generally prefer tortilla to bread. Many thousands of loafs are hurting from my preference as you read this.
What does that have to do with downloading music? Probably something, somewhere, to someone but hell if I can tell.

Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #50
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOP ➡️
We are not square college kids at a fondue party right now so why the white knight routine?
It's generally good to not generalise. - get it? Btw. why ageism? Not sure why you are lumping everyone as being ageists. No ageism from me as far as I can tell - I am very prejudiced against being prejudiced... no wait. ****. Before you jump in with "oh hey since we are generalising I just generalised the thread" take note that it is technically easy to look at what a handful of people said in such a short span of time in detail, as opposed to recounting with the same detail what each one of the hundreds of millions of people said and did over a whole decade or more.

Roaring 20ties, Boring 90ties - deal with it. The "culture artefacts" of the 90ties speak the loudest about how they can and will be generalised in the future. Sorry but it's not the maltese falcon, it's slacker and clerks.
As a jazz player I have to deal with 20ties being the "age of jazz" which is complete bollocks when you look into it as the 50ties is when Jazz hit the nail on the head.

The whole reason there is such a thing as fashion or mainstream culture or sub culture is because people can be generalised, generalise themselves, form groups, pyramids, sub groups and employ group think.
You jumping to defence of a whole generation employ strokes as broad as those who paint it in colours that you dislike - you are judging the same and just have a different opinion.
What I am hearing is "hey I don't like how you would sum it up so listen to how I would sum it up, cause everyone is special and my broad generalisation is taking that obviously into account".

Things just click into the collective unconscious and then it is there, hard to remove. It would not be so if in fact "everyone was special". People would not say that what I do is black music or ask to play smoke on the water on my prime archtop during the break, all same, all in unison if as human we where all and everyone oh so special.
Have you seen George Carlins standup on the topic of being unique?

Oddly enough I would also generalise the generation X's and the 90ties as a time where the obsession with being unique reached a peak albeit that was on the up since all of that ridiculous new age parenting.

Btw. if anybody wanted to construct a water proof argument they would not post in the moan zone, no?
We're shooting the ****. Curmudgeons of all ages.
I also generally prefer tortilla to bread. Many thousands of loafs are hurting from my preference as you read this.
What does that have to do with downloading music? Probably something, somewhere, to someone but hell if I can tell.

Well, I'm not sure what you mean about square college kids at a fondue party but it's very funny. And I'm not sure what about my post is White Knight-ish.
I never called you an ageist but there are numerous cross generational attacks in both directions in this thread. you participated in your share of it. A fair amount of this thread is of the "what's the matter with kids these days variety" and a fair amount attacks on curmudgeonly folks in their 40's or baby boomers. Maybe I just wandered into the wrong room. I didn't realize this was The Moan Zone until it was too late.

I was around in the 90s and i have to say, I am not sure that I saw both of the movies you mention but I did see almost all of the films on this impressive list: http://tinyurl.com/9zmz8jn

Which generation did I come to the defense of? Mine or yours?

By the way, I don't think anyone thinks of the 20s as the age of jazz. They call it the jazz age but that's a general cultural reference. I think of the 50s, too, and the Big Band era, and 60s avant garde. the 90s had great work by the M-Base collective (Steve Coleman, Greg Osby, Cassandra Wilson) and Matthew Shipp and great Henry Threadgill music.

If i offended you, whoops. It is the Moan Zone, I've been told. I'm not sure why pointing out that there is a place for streaming, downloading, ear buds and hi fi all at the same time is so awful? Or why pointing out at that every third or fourth post is an attack on baby boomers, students or the newer generation, or Gen X is somehow the offense.

What do you play?
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #51
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Well, I DO want to download my music.
Convenience is not an arbitrary factor.
Neither is price.

I bought a Korean-made Epiphone Casino last year. I love that guitar, and I found a good representation of it on ebay. If I was living with the mindset of "well, there's no point buying a Casino unless I can afford the real deal Elitist model", then I wouldn't have a Casino at all right now.

Same thing is true of buying albums. I'm much more apt to buy digital copies of music when not only is the album itself most likely a few bucks cheaper than a physical copy, but I also don't have to find more storage space for a growing CD collection.

I have never lost any of the digital files I've purchased. I HAVE however had literally hundreds of CDs stolen from my car, and have lost a handful of others over the years due to unintentional damage or simply misplacement.

Several years ago, back when I got my first ipod, I spent a good several hours A/Bing aac rips and wav files on my dad's Genelec medium format monitors (can't remember the model number, but I know that they're 3-way, have ribbon tweeters, and are now discontinued). The conclusion of that test was that I ripped my entire CD collection at 192kbps. I was thrilled when itunes went to 256kbps, and I'll be thrilled again when they most likely start offering uncompressed files.

I still buy CDs when absolutely necessary. For instance, I saw a concert of piano and electronics music recently at the university I work at, and I was so into the music that I broke my unofficial rule of never buying physical media in order to immediately own a recorded copy of the pieces played that night. I also buy vinyl every so often for special listening experiences. For instance, I'm currently really into listening to 20-minute-per-track doom metal on vinyl (i.e. Sunn O))) or Earth) or albums that have a particularly interesting sonic or aesthetic character (i.e. Talk Talk's Laughing Stock or Low's C'mon).

TL; DR: Why can't we have and enjoy both?

By the way, since we seem to be interested in presenting credentials, I am a 31-year-old with a bachelor's degree in music and, while it's too early to have received acceptance letters, have applications in to 6 non-recording based music technology graduate programs around the country (with an interview already set-up at U-MI). I can't claim professional recording experience, though I have recorded and released a handful of albums over the last few years.
Old 11th February 2013 | Show parent
  #52
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Trask ➡️
Well, I'm not sure what you mean about square college kids at a fondue party but it's very funny. And I'm not sure what about my post is White Knight-ish.
I never called you an ageist but there are numerous cross generational attacks in both directions in this thread. you participated in your share of it. A fair amount of this thread is of the "what's the matter with kids these days variety" and a fair amount attacks on curmudgeonly folks in their 40's or baby boomers. Maybe I just wandered into the wrong room. I didn't realize this was The Moan Zone until it was too late.

I was around in the 90s and i have to say, I am not sure that I saw both of the movies you mention but I did see almost all of the films on this impressive list: http://tinyurl.com/9zmz8jn

Which generation did I come to the defense of? Mine or yours?

By the way, I don't think anyone thinks of the 20s as the age of jazz. They call it the jazz age but that's a general cultural reference. I think of the 50s, too, and the Big Band era, and 60s avant garde. the 90s had great work by the M-Base collective (Steve Coleman, Greg Osby, Cassandra Wilson) and Matthew Shipp and great Henry Threadgill music.

If i offended you, whoops. It is the Moan Zone, I've been told. I'm not sure why pointing out that there is a place for streaming, downloading, ear buds and hi fi all at the same time is so awful? Or why pointing out at that every third or fourth post is an attack on baby boomers, students or the newer generation, or Gen X is somehow the offense.

What do you play?
I have the miss-fortune of playing guitar. I might have picked it as the main instrument due to some deep resentment for my own self - I bet I will find that out once I go over the hump of the mid life crisis.

Dazed and Confused on that list was directed by Linklater, the guy that did Slacker. If you dug D&C then it makes for a good link to check out Slacker.
Clerks was the first flick Kevin Smith did. I follow Smith a lot as he is to some degree my kind of peoples. I think Wes Andersons flicks are more 00's than 90ties except for bottle rocket which has a distinct late 90ties vibe.
Smiths movies for me encapsulated the "forever junior college" quality of those years, I know a great deal of people who have spent their time from early 90s until the depression hit a few years ago, bouncing between courses of all kinds, freelance work and house parties never really moving on. Clerks 2 addresses that nicely which was a chilling experience for me as I've made that observation before the movie came out which further reinforced my view that the world is flat when you look at it from the right angle.
The X's who I've meet when I first arrived "in the west" after getting out through the little hole are still very much in that stasis after years of me knowing them.
Between Linklater and Smith I think the vibe of the 90ties is painted well, with Linklater being more on the reporting side of things and Smith more imaginative... blah blah blah.

X's are "kids in those days" existing in "these days" so them going "kids these days" is just rubbing my sensible gland a bit too much, numbing it in the process.
I blame the boomers for not letting the X's take over when they should.
Most of the people I know which are bona fide X's and not immigrants like me from some silly, distant Gullivers Adventures land are only now slowly coming into their own as the drunk with power post war generation is finally, slowly letting go.

I think goodfellas is spiritually a very late 70ties movie as if it was lost and then frozen in ice for a decade before being found in 1990.
It's the great equaliser. Everybody digs Goodfellas and Bill Evans, even Robert Crumb said its good.
Always a good way to get curmudgeons to agree to something is bring up goodfellas.

Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #53
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Jazz guitar. Yeah, that's unfortunate.

I will confess to being a bit disingenuous when I claimed not to have seen those movies. I saw them the weekend they came out and I remember enjoying them and thinking that these were directors to watch, which was of course true. But I never revisited them so my recollection is vague. But I find it funny that people would think of the characters of those films as defining the character of Gen X when really it was the directors. Building of the college rock scene and independent film movement of the 80s, the late 80's and 90's were a time of incredible DIY spirit. New directors making films outside the studio system, indie bands and indie labels in every city selling records and t-shirts and building their own mailing lists and touring. When you look at that list of films, you see so many directors either coming into their own, experiencing a career resurgence or coming out of nowhere to begin long, important careers. It was actually a pretty exciting time, always looking out for the next auteur director or a special new band. We really were't slackers, so much.

And yeah, everyone loves Goodfellas. I agree that it harkens back to the 70s but it really couldn't have happened any other time than it did. It was a product of it's moment, just like Money Jungle or Such Sweet Thunder couldn't have happened in 1941. I remember thinking at the time that "Do The Right Thing" kind of lit a fire under a lot of older director' asses.

OK, enough about that. You play jazz guitar. There aren't a lot of great role models but there are a few. What sort of stuff do you play? Are you into hard-bop or cool jazz, since you mentioned the 50s, or are you into a more modern thing? Play with a group? Record on your own? inquiring minds want to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BOP ➡️
I have the miss-fortune of playing guitar. I might have picked it as the main instrument due to some deep resentment for my own self - I bet I will find that out once I go over the hump of the mid life crisis.

Dazed and Confused on that list was directed by Linklater, the guy that did Slacker. If you dug D&C then it makes for a good link to check out Slacker.
Clerks was the first flick Kevin Smith did. I follow Smith a lot as he is to some degree my kind of peoples. I think Wes Andersons flicks are more 00's than 90ties except for bottle rocket which has a distinct late 90ties vibe.
Smiths movies for me encapsulated the "forever junior college" quality of those years, I know a great deal of people who have spent their time from early 90s until the depression hit a few years ago, bouncing between courses of all kinds, freelance work and house parties never really moving on. Clerks 2 addresses that nicely which was a chilling experience for me as I've made that observation before the movie came out which further reinforced my view that the world is flat when you look at it from the right angle.
The X's who I've meet when I first arrived "in the west" after getting out through the little hole are still very much in that stasis after years of me knowing them.
Between Linklater and Smith I think the vibe of the 90ties is painted well, with Linklater being more on the reporting side of things and Smith more imaginative... blah blah blah.

X's are "kids in those days" existing in "these days" so them going "kids these days" is just rubbing my sensible gland a bit too much, numbing it in the process.
I blame the boomers for not letting the X's take over when they should.
Most of the people I know which are bona fide X's and not immigrants like me from some silly, distant Gullivers Adventures land are only now slowly coming into their own as the drunk with power post war generation is finally, slowly letting go.

I think goodfellas is spiritually a very late 70ties movie as if it was lost and then frozen in ice for a decade before being found in 1990.
It's the great equaliser. Everybody digs Goodfellas and Bill Evans, even Robert Crumb said its good.
Always a good way to get curmudgeons to agree to something is bring up goodfellas.

Old 12th February 2013 | Show parent
  #54
BOP
Gear Addict
 
🎧 5 years
Hey Stephen,

Since I've already hijacked the thread I might offer a few vague answers:

I did a tiny bit on my own but my group experience was cut short when my health went to ****. I'd rather not reveal to much detail about that though as I suck at the moment and was never really that good to begin with so I rather not sell my self at all before I can get my chops back in order and get a respectable project going.
I am in the process of getting my self sorted out properly so that I can get my health back together which involves leaving the west (which was a hard decision to make as I dig it here). I needlessly bought my self 3 polytone amps to cheer my self up.

I would say mostly bebop for me. Using Rosenwinkel and Scofield as an excuse in order to avoid being forced to Freddie Greening it so I suppose it could be Hard Bop. I never really understood what Hard Bop was about that much though.
Very much into Bill Evans trio type of rhythmic approach - I hate being locked into one groove or following the progression verbatim. Latin/Clave/Compound Meeters ala Brubeck is also something I want to pursue further.
At one point learned the whole omnibook. Got the Slonymsky but given the unfortunate instrument limitations I've spent more time figuring out how to actually play music on the damn thing than getting into all that modern stuff.

So yeah I am in the process of rejuvenating my jazz life.
With a studio and possibly a small underground label I will probably get more into arranging, hit ear training again until it is flawless and try to raise funds to run a project as a leader.
I never enjoyed the idea of being a mercenary sort of musician and since I lost my chops I don't know if I want to focus too much on remembering 1000 standards so I can furnish the soundscape of steak houses. Trying to raise up to these old romanticised levels of versatility is partly what got me in trouble the first time around!
I like studying harmony but melodic chops seem to happen so much easier for me and a day by the piano seems more productive harmonically than a month behind the guitar.

It sounds ridiculous but I might put together a quartet, comp on the piano and improvise melody on the guitar. If you play horn it's hip to be Roland Kirk but guitarists are hanged for anything else than big band voicings.

So yeah not very hip from the point of view of the cats that study at the conservatoires and win awards but I think I can do more good and actually produce more quality music by putting together a platform and in the long run an actual, running in the black at least business. Much rather produce/engineer exciting talent in between my own artistic escapades than hit the bottle every day on a cruise.
I am a big fan of the modern Smalls and what they are doing with it over there in NYC.
Ideally I want to do something similar, record, publish, use all the potential of the internet.

Blah blah blah,
BOP
Old 1st May 2013
  #55
Gear Guru
 
theblue1's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by matyas ➡️
I just had a very heated argument with a fellow musician friend of mine. He is very enthusiastic about modern downloadable and streaming distribution methods. To say that I am not is an understatement.
I love physical media. I like to collect things. What's wrong with that?
I also dislike compressed audio files. I will concede that the difference is not enormous with bandwidth-limited, dynamic-range limited pop music, but I also record and listen to classical and avant-garde music, much of which has an enormous dynamic range and subtle tonal contrasts and is not (I feel) well-served by compressed audio formats. For pop and rock, I tend to prefer vinyl.
But even the much-maligned CD has a special place for me, and I'd far rather buy a CD of anything than even an uncompressed downloadable file.
I previously worked in an archival facility, and that experience taught me not to always trust data backups, which further makes me wary of audio files which exist outside of the physical medium.
I hate the fact that record stores are not as widespread as they used to be, and although there are a few good ones in my hometown as far as pop and rock go, none have a decent classical section.
It bugs me that in the future, we may not have an option for physical product, except for possibly vinyl (which, as I mentioned, I like for pop and rock, but not always for classical). I also lament that high-res digital never really caught on. I know that some companies are providing high-res downloads, and that might become more common in the future, but I like discs!
I'm not sure what there is to fight about, as long as neither of you was arguing that the others' preferred delivery system should be outlawed.




I can certainly understand your worries that your preferred media might go away -- after all, we saw what appeared to be a near-disappearance of grooved record production a while back and, of course, when the vinyl fad is over for the trendies, leaving the committed behind, the economics will shift again.

I can sympathize because, even as a fan of streaming media (I use the all-320 kbps US-based MOG), and a subscriber since 2004, I've noticed a depressing phenom: the pop tech writers lavish praise on whoever spends the most PR money and that service tends to get the buzz and the customers and other, possibly far superior services languish. And of course, it's been Spotify that's been throwing around the PR 'street money.'*

So, that part, I get.


But as long as your pal wasn't saying they ought to take all the stamping plants and turn them into tire factories and you weren't saying they ought to rip up all the cables from the internet and melt them into pennies, I'm thinking there's room for a kind of vive le difference approach.



*Spotify which is, to my thinking, greatly inferior to MOG (because, at least in the US, they have fallen far short of their one-time, now apparently abnegated promise to move to all-320). And the masses tend to follow -- which is why you hear so much about Spot but a lot less about the arguably superior MOG. (MOG's even cheaper, if you're willing to forego mobile, you can get all 320 kbps streams to your desktop for $5 a month.)

As a consequence, MOG is the fourth service I've subscribed to. The first one (MusicMatch OnDemand) was bought by the second one (Yahoo Music) who bought it to get the tech expertise as well as to get it out of the way of their subsequent, arguably inferior service. When the clueless bozos at Yahoo couldn't figure out how to get any subscribers they folded it and sent me over to Rhapsody, who actually had things pretty together, except for the fi part, which at something like 160 kbps, was not so hi. Now that I'm on MOG, I'm worried that their new owners Dre Beats/HTC just bought it to get the tech and get it out of the way of some bright new idea from them...
📝 Reply
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump