PaulWarning

[quote name='chardbass' timestamp='1357239505' post='1919718'] And yes I want to post a link to this on FBook but I fear he may hunt me down and kill me. Great ranting though. [/quote] already done that, not many likes though

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1357212336' post='1919063'] I haven't met Sacko, but I like him! [/quote] yep, he's serously un PC, he's the guitarist with Sack Sabbath and In for the Kill, you ought to have seen the text we got from him about the manageress who double booked us and In For the Kill the other month lol

just read this months Sacko's sh*t list in the local music/gig guide freebe from my area, made me smile, but I'm not easily offended, don't agree with the Fairytale in New York comment though. [url="http://www.mickmoonshine.co.uk/Issue%2057.pdf"]http://www.mickmoons.../Issue%2057.pdf[/url] scroll down to near the bottom

trouble with asking people on here is we're such a nice bunch of people nobody likes to criticise, nice track but reminds me of something else can't think what though, anybody? and did the guitarist do the mixing?

great stuff, I only asked whether anybody else turned the treble down for CD's. Imagine what would happen if we tried this discussion down the pub after a few pints

[quote name='Leonard Smalls' timestamp='1355492525' post='1899153'] It's the music I'm listening to, not the hifi! [/quote] Couldn't agree more, used to go in a pub with a jukebox and Suspicious minds sounded amazing, no top end but I loved listening to it on that crappy jukebox

[quote name='Cosmo Valdemar' timestamp='1355111249' post='1894215'] Fantastic! Hope there's some live stuff and not just mimes totp appearances. [/quote] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVMygJ90UK0

been doing a bit of experimenting with different formats and I've come to the conclusion that vinyl can sound better pecisely because it's not got such a wide frequency response, my amp tone controls cut bass at around 100hz and treble at 10khz, turning them down when listening to digital stuff initially sounds a bit dull and lifeless but I soon realised it was easier to listen to, and I can hear what the bass player's up to better because it cuts the low frequency around bass drum etc, a bit like the advice that is constantly given on here about cutting through the mix, low mids are your friend. Having said all that my hearing is shot so it might be a load of bollocks

there's no Slade on spotify

[quote name='gjones' timestamp='1355327462' post='1896985'] I do it all the time. I don't like the unrealistic hi fizz of hi-hats and cymbals. Most albums these days are mixed for noisy environments like cars with extra lows and hi end added. [/quote] post 165 and somebody's answered the original question

[quote name='bob_pickard' timestamp='1355149369' post='1894607'] Hugely underrated band and a very underrated vocalist Mr Holder is too. I had tickets to see them at Hammersmith Odeon in 1985 or so but they sadly cancelled at the last minute and then Noddy left. Next I just need people to remember how bloody good Status Quo were before Rocking all over the World screwed everything up and I will be trendy and cool once more.... [/quote] check out http://basschat.co.uk/topic/193918-who-loves-the-quo-then/ completely agree about rocking all over the world it all went wrong with that album, back on form with Quid Pro Quo though

[quote name='steantval' timestamp='1355255501' post='1896073'] I used to like their stuff in the 70's. But sadly they have turned into a cabaret act. [/quote] Yeah they did go through a really dodgy patch with their covers period but I think they're over that now, like I said check out Quid Pro Quo, it won't cost you owt on spotify

big Quo fan up to Rocking All Over the World , then they got some poncy pop producer in instead of doing it themselves, the bass disapeared along with all the guts, when I'm talking to people a bit younger than myself I tell them "Before Punk all we had was Quo" they think I'm mad but it's more or less true, I got tickets for reunion show next march and checked out Quid Pro Quo, if you like the early stuff I think you'll like that check it out, it's on spotify

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1355227946' post='1895550'] The CD versus vinyl debate is silly - haven't you heard, both are dead and gone! There's this new thing called mp3, also flac and wav files etc. and they are the biggest development in music recording and distribution ever. They sound great, they're better for the environment, they're cheap, you can send them down a phone line and share or stream them on line. You can store thousands of songs in a tiny space and they give access to music to far more people around the world. As musicians, you might also like that you can now record and distribute your music freely with ease in a global market. Most youngsters take them for granted nowadays, so come on people - keep up [/quote] Another can of worms, music is now so cheap and plentiful it's been devalued, at one time when you'd spent your hard earned on a LP or CD you made sure you gave it a good listen or two now if it's not grabbed the listener in the first 10 seconds it's onto the next track or artist

don't confuse punks with skinheads, generally punks are a lot like hippies with shorter hair and tighter trousers, although these days some of them look like skinheads cause they've gone bald and shaved their heads

I use dunlop nylon black 1mm picks, nice grippy bit on them

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1355133624' post='1894354'] Debates about which medium is 'best' are as pointless as debates about 'best' songs because such things are a matter of personal preference, so there can be no absolute right or wrong. [/quote] or which is the best bass, this is absolutely true, but it gives us something to chat about

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1355105913' post='1894200'] Strangely no - I've never even heard of the RIAA, let alone any curve they've been on! Given that I have no idea about how CD compression then it should be fairly obvious that I'm no technical acronym expert Maybe if I rephrase - to my ears a lot of CD's sound harsher and less natural than their vinyl counterparts. Some CD's seem to 'jump' out at you when you first hear them but, to me, can become wearing with repeated listening. Just felt to me like this could be a 'compression thing' as that's what I thought a typical side-effect of a compressed mix was [/quote] This compression thing is confusing, there's 2 types, the compression the studio puts on the recording to make it sound louder as described on post 14 and the compression used to make a digital file smaller, is that right? CD's and vinyl will have the first one but not the second one. How does vinyl stand up against CD's on modern digital studio compressed recordings?

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1355073659' post='1893676'] CD s days are beginning to look numbered anyway . A few of the most significant hifi manufacturers such as Linn and AVI have stopped making CD players a long time ago now and are concentrating on MP3- based playback systems as that is going to be the way of the future . The next big format development will have to be a leap forward in the quality of broadband-based audio playback , because that is increasingly how people are buying and listening to their music . [/quote] I saw a gadget show, last year I think, where they set up a blind listening test using an allegedly top end HiFi listen to Floyds dark side using vinyl, CD and 320kbps mp3, the mp3 won.

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1355073210' post='1893663'] has this topic been bumped from 1992? [/quote] may have been, and it still seems to divide opinion just as much now as it did then. Me? I can't make up my mind, nothing new there

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1355064178' post='1893524'] The whole contentious question of what sounds better depends on what CD-based system versus which vinyl - based system . If your talking about in ultimate -or even modest- hifi terms , both formats are capable of superb results ( and bloody awful ones too if you get it wrong ) but it depends on the synergy of the components as much as the ultimate limitations of the actual format . BRX is right that vinyl was / is a finnicky format prone to all kinds of error and inherently fragile . Its also an expensive way to listen to high fidelity music as quality turntables have to be extremly accurate pieces of precision engineering , and that never comes cheap , plus turntables need maintainance and accurate adjustment to keep working at an optimum level . Put simply , it's a lot of pissing about to do it properly . CD is a lot more convenient but can be slightly harder to get musically pleasing results . My favourite way to listen to vinyl is on someone elses very expensive system . Vinyl is much harder to spell than C.D too! The O.P would also find that if he were to audition a few newer C.D players in his existing system that he would be able to find one that sounded fairly organic like his turntable without having to turn down the treble on his amp . [/quote] Ah, you remember the discussions about my speakers

[quote name='Spike Vincent' timestamp='1355056401' post='1893359'] Never Mind The Bollocks Here's The Sex Pistols on vinyl sounds exactly the same as it does on CD,apart from all the scratches,through my not exactly shabby Studio Monitors.Sounds better on cassette though. [/quote] I may be wrong, but wasn't Never Mind the Bollocks one of the most most compressed rcordings ever, at the time

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1355053500' post='1893316'] I hate vinyl. Personally I think that well-recorded digital formats are the best thing that has happened to music since the first recording was made. I can't understand how a format that actually wears out every time it is used (no matter how good the playback equipment is) can be held in such high esteem. I'm certainly not going to shed any tears for the missing hiss, pops, clicks, scratches, wow and flutter, and jumping styluses in my digital music collection. I do get the impression that the vinyl apologists are either displaying very selective memory, or they were lucky enough to never encounter any of the appalling excuses for pressings that littered vinyl releases from the mid 70s to the late 80s. Records that were full of unwanted aural artefacts from the first playing, pressed on vinyl so thin it nearly qualified as a flexi-disc. Discs pressed so badly off-centre they made you sea-sick when you listened to them. That feeling of dread when you invariably had to return a faulty pressing to the record shop, knowing that you's have to endure the 3rd degree regarding your vinyl handling and the equipment you were using to play it on before they'd even consider an exchange. And then the disappointment at discovering that either your damaged copy was the only one the shop had, or that all the other copies in the box were equally bad - so you had to either take it with all its faults or go without that particular record. Vinyl also puts a lot of restrictions on what can actually be reproduced. Anything interesting with phase and stereo imagery is likely to result in a recording that can't even be cut to vinyl let alone played. A digital file has no such issues. And that's before we get into the comparison of bandwidth, dynamic range and signal to noise ratios. Hopefully 5im0n will be along shortly to contribute to this thread with more detail, but a well recorded and masters CD outperforms vinyl all round, and while it's not indestructible it is a good deal more robust. As for over-compression and the loudness wars blame the record companies (and the artists who seemingly allow it without protest) not the format. Volume on vinyl (within limits) was a trade-off with running time. Louder signal meant wider grooves and consequently less of them inch diameter of the record and therefore less running time. You could get a significant increase in volume by cutting the running time of each side of the album from just under 20 minutes to just over 16. With CD once you reach 0dB (that's all 16 bits set to 1 - all of them set to 0 is silence) there's nowhere else to go. The only way you can make the recording sound louder in digital is to limit the peaks and make the average signal level higher. This of course leads to the over-compressed sound that lots of CDs display. There's no reason for it other than it's what record companies think their consumers want (and a lack of complaints by most consumers). In fact if anything the dynamic range of the CD is too big for home listening. This is certainly a complaint I've heard from some classical music listeners who have difficulty balancing the quiet passages against the loud ones on CD in a typical home environment. In the end though, I can't help thinking that the people who complain about modern music formats, have lost sight of the most important thing - the actual music itself. So long as the delivery medium isn't intruding on the listening experience then the format being used doesn't matter. [/quote] all this is true of course, that's what makes me think it may be a nostalgia thing, or it could be analogue is cutting out 2 processes which could be responsible for a loss of something, the conversion from anaolgue to digital and back again. I'll perhaps go out and buy a modern recording on vinyl and see what that sounds like, anybody done this?

[quote name='KingBollock' timestamp='1355014533' post='1893077'] Bah! It's all about the Cassette! Actually, isn't vinyl written from tape? When I was a kid I used to rip all my vinyl onto cassette because it doesn't take long before vinyl starts to sound ropey... EDIT: I have to admit that the first part was meant tongue in cheek but the bit about ripping is true. [/quote] Well, cassettes are analogue too, but stuff isn't recorded onto tape anymore its all done by computers, maybe that's why modern music is rubbish, or it could be I'm getting old

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1355013973' post='1893073'] CD's are compressed and limited (I really don't understand the technology behind this!) and never seem to sound as open and natural as vinyl to me. However, your signal chain is really important. Without a quality turntable, arm and cartridge you may find vinyl doesn't sound as good as a mid level CD player. CD's can sound a lot more 'immediate' though and possibly more appealing to begin with. Vinyl should let you listen to more music for longer without tiring your ears Mind you, a really good CD master and a high end transport can sound pretty damn good too! [/quote] [quote name='Fionn' timestamp='1355014451' post='1893076'] Back in the day I recorded much of my vinyl onto mini-disc. It sounded amazing! Because there is so much compression a lot of the more extreme artifact from the vinyl is removed, but somehow the goodies stay intact. It's an interesting sound. [/quote] Compression is the scourge of modern music, as with CD's it sounds better initially but it takes all the space away from around the diifferent instruments. Why is Dark side of the moon still held up as a brilliant recording (don't like it myself, the record not the recording) even with the advances(???) of modern recording equipment?