Poll - Vinyl, CD, Squeezebox/MP3, Radio?

[Dave the bass]

Originally Posted by david counter

brings back memories of sitting in the bedroom in the 50s learning bass parts from 45s played on a record player

Thats great you've been through the same thing David, are you the original David The Bass ?

I started in the early 80's trying to play along with Rock, disco, reggae and ska "12 singles and LP's, Mark King (Level 42) and his slap/thumb technique was IT for me in the early days.

I've progressed to using all my fingers and CD, MP3 AND vinyl now (but I still need my thumb for a couple of parts tommorrow night).

DTB

[Dave the bass]

Originally Posted by JerryT

I'm still doing it!! I only picked up a bass guitar two months ago and I feel like I'm 15 all over again - playing along - picking out keys, parts and techniques. I prefer the older recordings because the tracks were usually laid down without 'help' that is were actually played live - old fool that I am!

Jerry

Hi ya Jerry,

Yeah, I know what you mean, I still love working out Bass parts note for note. These were played by proper 'hoomans', they're a good laff to play live.

Love Train
Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now
Superstition
Rock With You
Midnight Hour
Let’s Stay Together
Stand By Me
I Wish
Hard To Handle
Boogie Nights
You To Me Are Everything
First Last My Everything
You Sexy Thing

I Feel Good
Play That Funky Music
Carwash
We Are Family
Dock Of The Bay
My Girl
Blame It On The Boogie
Celebration
Get Down On It
Cuba
Expansions
Get Down Saturday Night
Sex Machine
Disco Inferno

I'm back playing with a drummer I used to play with for 3 years before I temporarily 'retired' back in 2004.

DTB

PS. Sorry for the thread hijack Richard <blushes>.

[Phil Y]

Hello Hardy, re sound quality of i-pod thingys, it makes a lot of difference what data rate you compress the music to. I was given an i-pod as a present and when i first tried it i thought it sounded pretty ropey and that i would not bother using it but a friend who knows about these sort of things, showed me how to alter the MP3 data rate. Mine came set to compress at 128Kb/s but after some playing around i have settled on 256Kb/s, double what it was set to. It now sounds acceptable(to my ears) for walkman use. It is allways possible that someone turned the data rate down on the one you heard to fit more music on, that would i'm sure have the effect you mention, or perhaps you are just more sensitive than some of us!

Cheers, Phil

[Hardy]

Originally Posted by Phil Y

Hello Hardy, re sound quality of i-pod thingys, it makes a lot of difference what data rate you compress the music to. I was given an i-pod as a present and when i first tried it i thought it sounded pretty ropey and that i would not bother using it but a friend who knows about these sort of things, showed me how to alter the MP3 data rate. Mine came set to compress at 128Kb/s but after some playing around i have settled on 256Kb/s, double what it was set to. It now sounds acceptable(to my ears) for walkman use. It is allways possible that someone turned the data rate down on the one you heard to fit more music on, that would i'm sure have the effect you mention, or perhaps you are just more sensitive than some of us!

Cheers, Phil

Possible...but any compression is gonna be heard....best not digitise sound at all....it's not what Mr Edison intended....

Give me a top quality turntable and an analogue recording any day!

One day in the future there will be a shock headline in the newspaper....

"Obscure engineer invents continuous sampling sound recording....results stunning"

Fortunately I already have a continous sampling system at home.....and it sounds fantastic....

Keep the needle in...........diamonds are forever..........

Rich.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Hardy

Possible...but any compression is gonna be heard....best not digitise sound at all....it's not what Mr Edison intended....

Give me a top quality turntable and an analogue recording any day!

One day in the future there will be a shock headline in the newspaper....

"Obscure engineer invents continuous sampling sound recording....results stunning"

Fortunately I already have a continous sampling system at home.....and it sounds fantastic....

Keep the needle in...........diamonds are forever..........

Rich.

To offer an alternative viewpoint I'd say that many people enjoy music without worrying about how it was recorded or the format. Vinyl records have been digitally processed for many years now (20+) and compression has been used in various amounts for ages, certainly in the vinyl era, to help that medium cope with the real dynamic range. A vinyl player these days is quite likely to be replaying a digital recording.

I had 15 years of variable quality vinyl from an era when most of it would have been all analogue. It was mostly poor with the odd stand-out recording. I've now had 15 years of CD from an era when most is digital. Some early CDs were poor transcripts from the old tapes. Most new sound is better than I ever heard on vinyl.

[Clive]

Originally Posted by Richard

To offer an alternative viewpoint I'd say that many people enjoy music without worrying about how it was recorded or the format. Vinyl records have been digitally processed for many years now (20+) and compression has been used in various amounts for ages, certainly in the vinyl era, to help that medium cope with the real dynamic range. A vinyl player these days is quite likely to be replaying a digital recording.

I had 15 years of variable quality vinyl from an era when most of it would have been all analogue. It was mostly poor with the odd stand-out recording. I've now had 15 years of CD from an era when most is digital. Some early CDs were poor transcripts from the old tapes. Most new sound is better than I ever heard on vinyl.

There was a period in the 70's and early 80's where vinyl quality was pretty bad. A lot of the early CD problems I thought were more to do with engineers not knowing how to work with red book and thinking that the new format offered so much quality that they could take liberties with it.

If you are finding that new CDs sound better than your vinyl from years back, it could be that:
- your system has developed since then
- your auditory memory may not be up to this impossible task
- modern vinyl recordings are also usually to a high standard, indeed the vinyl version will often be less compressed and processed sounding than the CD version
- yes digital has been used for recordings for year but it's much better than red book so we shouldn't lump all digital technologies together and then over-generalise

[Darren D]

I haven't bought many new records or CD's of the last few years.

But I have taken a couple of CD's back to the shop as the quality was so bad.

The best comparison I have is a recording on both formats of a Goldfrapp album.

This CD is well recorded but there is simply no comparison, the vinyl is so much better. Much more dynamic with extension to both extremes without those notes that make you wince !!!

[Dave the bass]

Originally Posted by Richard

To offer an alternative viewpoint I'd say that many people enjoy music without worrying about how it was recorded or the format.

I spoke to my kids about this. They agree, to them it doesn't matter. Also they're not too fussy about how 'hifi' the sound is only that its 'OK and I can hear whats going on'.

Having said that they liked hearing WD88 cranked up when the neighbours were away, they hadn't heard System of a Down like that before.

Maybe thats just it.

It's just us (and 1000's of others) that take music reproduction one (?) step further.

DTB

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Clive

There was a period in the 70's and early 80's where vinyl quality was pretty bad. A lot of the early CD problems I thought were more to do with engineers not knowing how to work with red book and thinking that the new format offered so much quality that they could take liberties with it.

If you are finding that new CDs sound better than your vinyl from years back, it could be that:
- your system has developed since then
- your auditory memory may not be up to this impossible task
- modern vinyl recordings are also usually to a high standard, indeed the vinyl version will often be less compressed and processed sounding than the CD version
- yes digital has been used for recordings for year but it's much better than red book so we shouldn't lump all digital technologies together and then over-generalise

Hi Clive, Yes I'd agree with most of that. I hope you'll also understand that I've listened to vinyl along the way (not just 15 years ago!) and am not impressed. Possibly less impressed in fact than back then. After living with CD for so long the shortcomings of vinyl are more obvious.

Not that this should matter to anyone who enjoys vinyl. It makes great sense partic if they already have a collection. I often remember going to the NEC Vintage Comms fair and overhearing 2 old boys chatting about a 78 player with a horn. "Lovely tone", "Yes probably the best". Each to their own.

This wasn't intended to be a debate about sources. Anyone can start another thread for that. My post was to offer an alternative view to Hardy from a happy CD listener.

What interests me in this poll is what sources we use - no debate - no justifications. It seems we have many members who haven't polled or just a few members of which more than half use vinyl. This may mean 2 channel audio in general is virtually dead. Or this bb is populated by only a few active members of which a majority use vinyl. My concern is that newcomers are not visiting, posting and becoming involved in 2 channel as we once did.

[vitalstates]

Originally Posted by Hardy

I guess I (and a few of my friends) find it difficult to enjoy music unless it's played on equipment of a reasonable quality. I tried listening to someone's IPOD and I could bearly make out what was playing it was so mashed up and compressed. I'm used to hearing everything similar to real world with genuine hi-fidelity. Don't you think people are missing out?

Always open to other's opinions of course....

Rich.

Hi Rich

this is my second post in response to this, mainly because I think we missed the point. From your subsequent posts I gather it is compressed music that you are down on, and not ipod per se. I have never put compressed music on mine(its a creative zen by the way) and that may be why I've had such positive responses from listeners at eggfests(where are you all in defense of the humble mobile music)....so again I say I think you are being a bit harsh in criticism of the IPOD...as I said before its not £2k of front end but its very versatile and certainly not unlistenable....

this is Ed championing the little guy again.....

I would say that its not my source of choice tho!!!