flyfisher

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1357571274' post='1924644'] There isnt more compression generally these days, there si too much of the wrong compression in the wrong place IMO. Its a terrible shame too, and it has ruined hifi for a generation, left us in a world where people dont experience decent qualtiy playback at all for the majority if not the entirety of their lives, and at least in part given the poor old CD a terrible terrible name for itself. [/quote] This is the really ironic thing. My understanding is that vinyl has a dynamic range of about 55-65dB (it varies because of the varying effective speed of the groove under the stylus as it moves across the record) whereas CDs have a dynamic range of well over 90db - a huge improvement. Meanwhile, modern production is all about audio compression that wrings the dynamics out of recordings! (OK, there are exceptions of course, but the trend is fairly clear). Funny old world.

[quote name='paulpirie8' timestamp='1357566609' post='1924540'] It's no doubt down to nostalgia more than anything else but it just seems to me that people had an appreciation and respect for sound quality that is becoming rare nowadays. [/quote] Interesting point - I wonder if it's related to the apparent devaluing of music in general. When people can download or stream your choice of music for free, or listen to it mainly on their tinny smartphones, perhaps there's less incentive to invest thousands in a hi-fi system?

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357563353' post='1924458'] I don't think that's true, but even if you do believe some instruments are simply tools, IMO the basses that Mr Letts produces are special enough to be considered at least partially art - otherwise they would simply look like Fender clones. [/quote] I don't think the fact that something looks different to a Fender is a good justification of something being a work of art. Besides, what about the first Fender bass - would that be a work of art by your definition? There's no doubt that some basses are more 'refined' than others in the sense of the craft skills required to build them, but they are still tools of the trade for a musician - and we all know that some great music has been created using basic instruments. It's a bit like furniture. A chippendale may be a highly valued piece of craftsmanship but it's still only a chair. Indeed, it may not even be as comfortable (i.e. fit for purpose) as a simpler, more modern, chair.

I reckon the whole 'vinyl-vs-CD' thing is more to do with production methods and fashion than the actual physics of storage and reproduction. Also, many CD versions of original vinyl releases are 'remastered' which, to my mind, immediately makes any quality comparisons of the two completely impossible. That's not to say that vinyl can't be judged to sound 'better' than CD (or vice versa) because such things are subjective, but let's not get carried away with the idea that there is an absolute superiority involved when we're really just talking about personal preferences. Having said that, I tend to agree with the point that quality of sound is becoming less important. We know for a fact that data-reduced MP3 is a lossy format, yet that has not apparently prevented downloaded music becoming very popular indeed - which would seem to prove the OP's point. But there again, anyone who used to listen to Radio Luxembourg on their AM radios knows that sometimes it's not all about hi-fidelity reproduction. Sometimes it's all about the music.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357561535' post='1924413'] I would like to think that you consider the instruments you make in part at least art. Would they then not be better if you gave them away for free? [/quote] Not really - instruments are just tools. Like paint and brushes or a hammer and chisel. Anyone can pick them up and 'have a go' but few can use them to create true works of art. This thread is a good illustration of why this whole issue is so contentious - there are simply too many points of view for a consensus to ever emerge, no matter what the state of recording/production/distribution technology happens to be. As someone pointed out earlier, the whole concept of recorded music is a relatively new thing compared to music itself so why on earth should we expect some arbitrary 'morals' developed at the dawn of recording to remain the same forevermore? Things change and the times change with them. I can't see the problem. Well, I can really - it's a few superstar artists and corporates moaning that they can no longer make millions out of a few days work. Funny how we can get all uptight about bankers bonuses but think nothing about the likes of U2, Macca, Cowell et raking in the millions.

No pedal board here, but I use Velcro to keep my cables in good order. Velcro alone makes the moon landings worthwhile

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357505855' post='1923788'] Here's a thought. With the emphasis slowly moving away from the recorded version being the dominant product to the live performance, and streaming subscription services taking over from having a "local" copy of the audio file, what happens when a band coming up to renew it's streaming licences decides that the pittance being offered by services such as Spotify is no longer sufficient and from now on the only way an audience can continue to hear their song will be to pay to see them play live? [/quote] Interesting idea but do you really think that will happen? After all, there's nothing to stop bands from doing such a thing already. But my bet is that 'giveaway' streaming will be the main promotional tool to build up a big enough fan base of people willing to pay to see live gigs. Also, most bands WANT people to hear their music and are more than happy to post their stuff on line. Perhaps the real problem is that now it is so easy for bands to distribute their music around the world, there is an abundance of music out there to choose from. This will inevitably devalue music in financial terms. We all know there is a wealth of incredibly talented musicians and songwriters out there, so if one band decide to 'hold out' against the increasing tide of free music, then the chances are that they'll just disappear without trace as the public's attention shifts to another band offering their stuff for free. The interesting thing is that in most other markets, we'd expect the quality to fall as the price goes down, but that doesn't seem to necessarily apply when it comes to music. But, when all's said and done, do we want a world of music heavily regulated by a few big labels and studios or do we want a world where any band can put their music in front of thousands, or millions, of people without needing to sell their souls? [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357505855' post='1923788'] Streaming services still have a long way to go. If they are going to be people's sole means of listening to music. Myself and my friends spent Christmas away from home in a rented house. Despite only being an hour's drive from Nottingham we were in an area with no mobile phone signal, and no WiFi signal either free or subscription. Without local copies of the songs we wanted to listen to, we'd have been without music for the whole week. [/quote] They might have a long way to go, but that's a quite different thing to the time it may take. People seem to have short memories and forget that iPods, smartphones and music streaming were lab dreams only 10 years ago. Now they are ubiquitous. Why should we think future progress is going to be any less incredible?

[quote name='redstriper' timestamp='1357482249' post='1923164'] More and more people don't want to 'own' stuff anymore, they don't want CDs or DVDs or even mp3s. Everything is streamable now, so 'ownership' isn't necessary. It's still useful to download music from i tunes, but even that will decline with the increase of quality streaming, higher bandwidth and universal access. [/quote] [quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357485467' post='1923239'] Streaming is all very well, but although these days server space and bandwidth are relatively cheap, they aren't free nor are they infinite. Your choice of music is completely dependent upon the whims of the provider of the service. Just because something is available today doesn't mean it will still be there tomorrow. Plus it's reliant on you having an internet connection of some kind. Once you get outside urban environments there are still plenty of places where that is flakey at best. [/quote] Two interesting points and I don't really have any argument against either of them - at the present time. However, let's not forget that the web is only about 20 years old, maybe only 10 or so as far as effective streaming of music is concerned, and the changes we've seen are really quite astonishing. Yes, BRX is right about the current state of bandwidth provision, rural areas etc, but do we really believe that will last for long? Who can tell what will be the norm in another 10 years time? I don't watch much TV but it seems to me that the days of the video recorder (even HDD ones) are pretty much numbered because of all the 'on-demand' services available to catch up on anything we miss and broadcast schedules are becoming less and less important for that very reason. A similar thing is happening with music. It's now quicker to stream a song or video via YouTube than it is to dig out the CD/DVD from a collection and put it inthe appropriate player. Us 'old school' types may still like our gatefold vinyl ablums and CD collection but our kids are growing up in an age where they can get immediate access to pretty much whatever they want using their smartphones! 10 years is a hell of a long time in technology terms! The music industry couldn't predict - or effectively deal with - the impact of the internet so I see no reason why we expect they - or anyone else - will be able to predict how things will pan out in another 10 years time. The ironic thing is that many of us now seem to be decrying the freedom, democratisation, anarchy - call it what you will - that many 'angry young musicians' used to bang on about that is being enabled by the internet and associated technologies. it seems to me that the very last thing we should be wishing for is for some sort of governmental or corporate control of all the freedoms that the web affords us all. Sure, there will be some downsides - like bands having to actually tour and play to make money instead of just living off royalties in their tax havens - but I'm convinced the balance is for good. It has never been easier for bands to get their music out there in front of millions of people. Long may it continue that way.

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1356255427' post='1908360'] Depends which brand - deposits vary by supplier. There are certainly some that demand 50% up front before they will begin to build a bass. There's also loads of suppliers who will not give any credit and insist on advance payment before shipping. In fact of the, better, ones I've worked with recently I can think of only one that gives any form of credit. [/quote] All of which is a very good reason for using a credit card. I know many people are 'scared' of using credit cards but used correctly they can offer many advantages. In the example of a deposit, paying it by credit card gives you a contract with the card company and so it the shop goes bust before delivering the ordered product you can get your money back from the card company. If you pay be cash or cheque then you have to join the queue with all the other creditors when a retailer goes bust - meaning you'll get virtually nothing back and have to wait for years even if you do. Plus, as been mentioned before, sensible use of a credit card will enhance your credit rating. Using a credit card doesn't mean taking on debt. All you have to do it pay off the full balance every month and there is no interest to pay, even though you get 4-5 weeks of free credit and, with the right sort of card, 1% cashback for everything you spend. So really, unless you are hopelessly useless with money, credit cards give you many advantages.

[quote name='Evil Undead' timestamp='1356193714' post='1907817'] I'm the sort of person who likes to have a firm goal to work towards. Setting things aside gives me a clear goal. [/quote] Why not set aside the monthly payments then? Isn't that a clear goal? Combined with a 0% credit deal that would seem to be the best of both worlds. AND, your credit rating will be boosted by making the regular monthly payments. Win-win-win??

Just checked, and the hotmail address I used for registration also received that spam email. I didn;t set it up specifically for BC, but I hardly ever use it these days. Hmm.

Surely no one can doubt that CDs will sound better than vinyl after such treatment? End of the thread, I'd say.

What? On Brussels sprouts? Yeuk!

Yeah, but car reviews ARE about as crappy as Hifi reviews aren't they?

[quote name='cheddatom' timestamp='1356020826' post='1905865'] EDIT: Also, like Si, i've had my mind changed on this forum, and I'm much better educated from reading these in depth discussions [/quote] Me too. In fact, these sorts of discussions are always better when people provide background facts/references to back up their points. Meanwhile, the pathetic attempts to calm things down by diverting our thoughts towards custard/cream/ice-cream/parsnips/whatever have completely overlooked possibly the biggest culinary controversey at this time of year. . . . namely: Brussels sprouts - yes or no?

[quote name='Big_Stu' timestamp='1356009021' post='1905599'] Therein is the rub! 11 pages of pat-a-cake pat-a-cake; who's knows what, who can refer to the most facts, as though it's a battle of wills as to who's going to prove factually, no matter how many repetitive pages it takes, what is - like all music forms - a matter of personal taste as to what sounds better to some people, until the other person with other figures concedes. It's like going to a gig & a punter says "It's too loud", you wouldn't reply with "No it isn't, my decibel meter says otherwise" There's more & more of such on this forum (as has been commented on by others, not me, in recent days). If it's not here it's repeated ad nauseum on whether someone should mix 10" drivers with 15s, no matter how recently the same answer was given to a similar thread shortly previously. You can bang on until you've made it 111 pages of facts & figures, you will not change the personal preference of the media folk choose to prefer for their own reasons. [/quote] I suspect there are crossed purposes at work here. I don't recall anyone arguing against anyone's personal preference when talking about reproduction systems. The issue seems to kick off when it's claimed that vinyl is a better reproduction system than CD. Since no-one can (reasonably) argue against personal preference, it's left to the science to get at some real facts. But I entirely agree that even if all the test equipment in the world can prove that digital reproduction is scientifically better than analogue but it has no bearing on someone's personal preference.

[quote name='Leonard Smalls' timestamp='1356002001' post='1905459'] What I understood it to say is that some beating frequencies are as a result of resonance within our skulls, i.e. bones etc, so while it may not be an actual recorded sound, our perception shows it to be there, or not there. So if frequencies above the Nyquist limit cause this, they won't appear on a digital recording unless the sampling frequency is increased to accommodate it. . . . . . So he's not arguing for or against vinyl, just for higher sample rates! [/quote] But what is the upper frequency response of a fully-analogue recording chain ending in a vinyl recording and replayed on a decent hi-fi system? 20kHz? 22kHz? If that theory holds true then surely analogue/vinyl systems would also need a much higher frequency response? As previously pointed out, most adults struggle to hear 10kHz, so a music reproduction system capable of twice this sounds like a reasonable compromise. I wonder what the response would be to an 'improved' television system that worked into the ultra-violet spectrum? Would we expect this to give us higher quality pictures?

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1356000906' post='1905442'] Stu, art is art, music is art. Music [i]reproduction[/i] is science and engineering. [/quote] A very good point. And the science and engineering isn't limited to recording media either. What about all our electric basses? This forum is full of topics agonising over the 'tone' of their bass . . . all of which is down to science and engineering - what sort of pickups, passive or active, valve or solid state amps? etc etc. None of these are 'best' it's just personal preference. Just as vinyl or CD is a personal preference. Which is fine, but it all get's a bit daft when one or the other is touted as being 'the best' or 'superior' without taking account of the underlying science - or worse, invoking a load of peudo-science.

Pack My Jack by JJ Cale. Not exactly 'poppy' but a personal favourite and a great walking bassline to play over. Track starts at 7:50 . . . [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg1mfu_ouSw[/media]

This thread has already survived the Nazi thing so it's probably immortal . . . unless we can find its heart and drive a stake through it, or perhaps a sliver bullet would do the job. Either way, it's getting a bit scary now.

I suppose it depends on the nature of the break but when FF junior broke his forearm they pinned the end of the bone in place while it healed but removed them after about six weeks and he was left with no metalwork. Or perhaps it's a case of bone not knitting back together so well as we get older? Whatever, here's hoping you can start excercising things properly now the cast is off and will soon recover full movement.

[quote name='umph' timestamp='1355843441' post='1903529'] English people are crap at haggling, I put high prices on all my stuff with the intention of people lowballing me [/quote] Are you offended if they don't?

[quote name='Stacker' timestamp='1355839385' post='1903414'] I.m with you on that one, but what's it got to do with lowballing? [/quote] Well, neither are worth getting offended about for a start.

[quote name='Stacker' timestamp='1355838256' post='1903372'] An opinion is just that and everyone is entitled to one. [/quote] That's an interesting point. Is someone entitled to believe the world is flat? It's harmless enough, I suppose, but says a lot about the person holding such an opinion.

[quote name='Stacker' timestamp='1355837632' post='1903360'] Don't patronise me, man! You never answerewd my question: WHY did you bring those two topics into the conversation? [/quote] I don't want to speak for StingrayPete but my interpretation of his post was that he was trying to inject a sense of perspective into discussion.