Like

Archive through November 25, 2004

 

Bronze Member
Username: Asimo

Post Number: 30
Registered: Apr-04
Hi to all

I am not a full time participant of the forum but read it from time to time. I did not drop lastly any notice because I was visiting the US.
My visit included a tour to Sony center N.Y and listening to a $17000 B&O speakers system at Medison Av. Unfortunately these speakers did not impress me at all.
I am happy to discover that I did not miss much and the debate about DVD-A SACD stereo still holds. The Stereophile article was an interesting one.

John A

Do you still use NAD 1000 Pre? I ask because I have a 15 years old NAD 7000 monitor receiver and I find it to be better than my NAD C350 or other new amplifiers

Ghia

What is your present stereo setup do you still prefer the MAC B&W stereo combination?

Larry R and others

You have to watch 2004 DVD release of Beethoven symphonies No 3 and 9 Berlin Philharmonic with Abbado This performance hypnotizes and absorbs you into the music. The vocal section of the 9th is even more impressive.
I also recommended Prokofiev opera "War and Peace" on DVD. Not the Kirov performance but Paris opera (2000) with G. Bertini conducting.
I did watch the DVD's in stereo mode and it was good enough for me but if somebody has also multi channels Dolby digital or DTS it will be interesting to have his impression.

J Vigne

Please add abstracts or summaries to your massages. Some of them are very interesting but I do not have much breath to read them all.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2486
Registered: Dec-03
Just to thank everyone for recent posts, and for ignoring my autobiographical ramblings.

Yes, I still use the NAD 1000, Asimo, and in fact it is now wired up to give the L and R "Ext 5.1" inputs to the receiver. This means I can have anything I like going in that route, not just DVD.

As regards separating out the issue of "hi-res" from the issue of "mutichannel"; try "Stereo PCM" on DVD-V discs (as on Asimo's opera discs), and on any DVD player, and compare with CD. "Stereo PCM" aka "PCM stereo" is two-channel DVD-A in all but name, without MLP. If your DVD player does not have DVD-A, you can still get "PCM stereo" digital out by choosing "PCM" (only) in the "Digitial Audio Out" set-up on the player.

Seems Blu-Ray will be stillborn.

On one disc:
CD 650 MB
DVD 4.7 GB
BLu-ray DVD 30 GB
MODS 1000 GB (equals one terabyte)

According to November "Gramophone" there is a system under development called "MODS" for "Multiplexed Optical Digital Storage" which uses four layer of 250GB each. One disc could hold 470 hours of DVD-video or 1500 hours of CD.

As I say, from time to time, discs of all sorts seem to be on the way out, really. Look at the new Hard-disc-based audio servers. I don't fancy this, myself, but it seems that people are very happy with iPod, iTunes etc., and there is no reason why this cannot be extended to CD-quality and to hi-res.

My Rantz,

"Perfect sound that lasts forever" seems completely clear, to me. Do you really think that what they intended to say was "Better sound that lasts for longer", and they were just a little careless with words......?

Don, Ojophile,

Good to hear from you!

This weekend I listened to a copy of a 1963 Mercury Living Presence Recording on CD (outstanding by any comparison), and a 1983 LP re-issue of a 1971 recording of Verdi's Requiem. The noise floor on the LP was not really acceptable, but I am told a better tonearm and cartridge, etc....

I agree about Cd. One benefit was extended dynamic range. I like wide dynamic range. It came at a price, in terms of resolution, that is now clear, it seems to me. The crazy thing is, to add to Jan's list of crazy things, yer average DVD player now comes with the ability to compress dynamic range. One thread I read had someone asking "which DRC setting is best for sound quality...?" It is as if everyone is going round in circles.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2487
Registered: Dec-03
Rick,

Before I forget (again): Glad you guys did not take that line in 1942! Same with the USSR.

A belated but heartfelt thanks. Only France seems still to have a problem with that, as far as I can see. And where would they, and everyone else, be, now, without the US?

Speaking someone else's language, that's for sure. And not just as an extra option, to accept or decline.

Any bona fide Old Dog who would like a copy of a Shostakovich "Leningrad" DVD-A, for sound quality evaluation only, please go to your local record shop, and, if they do not have it and cannot order it, send me an S.A.E. Composed in Leningrad (now and formerly St Petersberg) 1942. 5.1 Recording (DVD-A; DTS; DD AC-3) made in Moscow, 2002.

And MG-Rover will be Chinese-owned soon. Bought with income from making Western consumer electronics, most likely.

"Come Senators, Congressmen, please heed the call:
Don't stand in the doorway; don't block up the hall...."

Interesting times we live in!
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"J Vigne

Please add abstracts or summaries to your massages. Some of them are very interesting but I do not have much breath to read them all."






I'm sorry I leave you breathless. Quite honestly, no one has ever said that to me before. With or without a massage.









I would include abstracts but it always appears my comments are abstract enough if not down right delusional. And summaries? Good Lord, man, would you want a summary of "Ulysses"



http://www.bibliomania.com/0/0/29/61/frameset.html








Next you'll want bibliographies!!!!!













I wish more of you would listen to what Mercury achieved with three microphones and two channels in 1963. Then we could honestly discuss what technology has brought us in the past forty years. Not merely whether some of us like what we have now.




If anyone wants to hear one of these remarkable recordings I will gladly make a copy and send one off for your benefit, feature and advantage portion of today's seminar. Just let me know and we'll make arrangements.












Yes, DRC and all its variations are exactly what I am railling against. We are allowing the dumbing down of art and technology. I am certain Stan Freberg would not be happy about this state of affairs.


http://www.freberg.8m.com/









Welcome to Don RX-1. Did you bring your own flak jacket?


http://slate.msn.com/id/2109616










"When was the last time we had something that improves over what most
of use on a daily basis? even if it only improves
sometimes for some of us. It shows to me a trend towards giving
us something better then what we had. And that to me is something good to see."



Think California brown outs in 2002 and Enron profits. They took something that was used daily; made the situation better for only a few, and only occasionally; and, they benefitted from the situation immensely. Now that's progress!!!!










"(whether it actually improves or not at least it's someone trying)
To me that is technology 'trying to improve on what we had'"





Think nuclear power plants. Think Three Mile Island. Think Chernobyl.


http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/chernobyl.html










"I'd rather have that then stand pat with what we have!"


Moving forward is the light bulb. Change for the sake of change is a Rube Goldberg machination.


http://www.rube-goldberg.com/html/shop_window.htm










""Perfect sound that lasts forever" seems completely clear, to me. Do you really think that what they intended to say was "Better sound that lasts for longer", and they were just a little careless with words......?"


Here, here!!!










"I agree about Cd. One benefit was extended dynamic range."


Apparently you missed the class on dither and "the least significant bit".


















"DVD-A; DTS; DD AC-3"


AC-3????






I remember AC-3.















HOW OLD I FEEL!!!






 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 167
Registered: Oct-04
Welcome back, Don - welcome back, Asimo - and to all, heck, just "welcome!"
A busy, busy weekend, with even busier days ahead - so won't even try to play catch-up with all the postings.
On SACD, however, let me just say that from the discs I've heard on the new Yamaha - all 8 of them - the sound in every case eclipses anything I've got on "regular" CD. More natural, wider dynamics (often much TOO wide!) warmer and less strident on the high end. Of course, part of that is the new CD player, I recognize that.
But I'm sold on the format - except for the fact that I had to pack my bulging equipment cabinet with yet another set of five wires! Sigh. It's really an imposition, space-wise, and I think it just intimidating enough to put off many people who might otherwise invest in SACD.
Sorry, Rick, but I'm a failure. Been listening to a wide range of music with "cones on," and I really, really hear NO difference that I can put into words. There may, indeed, be someting that I'm hearing and not recognizing? I'm giving the cones a Big Try, but if another week or so of testing shows me nothing, they're toast!
Mer hates the look of them under the player, and says she can't hear any difference, either. Well, any comments and suggestions here would be welcome - I only want more accurate music reproduction, not a sonic epiphany!
Oh, yes - my doc-friend "made up" with his wife, but is still in a bit of a snit over loss of the Sunfire. But that wasn't all of his loss. For some reason, part of that sweet-coffee splashed into the AC plug where the Marantz CD player was hooked - and shorted it out. I guess he tried to replace a fuse (I know nothing about that player) but it failed to come back to life.
It's in a local hi-end shop - and we'll see. I asked him if he was going to replace the equipment, and he said to "wait and see." OK. . .
No other news, so I'll shut up!

More anon. . .
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1110
Registered: Aug-04
Jan,

So you decided to add "abstracts" after all!

Well, they certainly went straight over my head :-)


Oh, and it's "hear, hear!" not "here, here!" or you could use "there, there!" for a more calming effect.


And John,

You are entitled to interpret anything any way you like. You always do.

But tell me: WHAT IS PERFECT SOUND and WHO IS EVER GOING TO KNOW IF THEY HAVE EVER HEARD IT?

Also: WHO WILL HAVE THE HONOUR OF DEFINING WHAT PERFECT SOUND IS?

YOU?


ME?



ANY TAKERS?
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest




Um, ... Sony and Philips?






 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


It may be "hear, hear" in a country with Parlimetary Law. It may be "hear, hear" in Bartlett's book of familiar quotations:

http://www.bartleby.com/100/


But here in Texas it's "here, here!!!", meaning "look who I dun shot!" or "careful don't step in that!"




 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1112
Registered: Aug-04
"Um, ... Sony and Philips?"

Well then, I rest my case.


But here in Texas it's "here, here!!!", meaning "look who I dun shot!" or "careful don't step in that!"

Of course - straight from the Ranger's Injun translation handbook :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 168
Registered: Oct-04
My Rantz: I think it is you who should decide what is perfect sound. That will keep John A. occupied for about 1,476 years, and get him off our backs! (double grin)

Jan V. - based on your reply to the "hear, hear!" issue - that is why a lot - a VERY LOT - of us don't live in Tax-us! (triple grin)

House guests are out with relatives for the evening, and Mer and I are way, way, way over our typical input level on scotch. Aside from that, we haven't a clue. (hic) Wunnerful, this nice, 70-degree night in November!

More a(urp)non. . .



 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1114
Registered: Aug-04
Larry,

Enjoy the moment :-)

Glad to hear of your pleasure with the universal Yamaha player - great stuff!

Talking about guests - see next post.

 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1115
Registered: Aug-04
The Wonder of Hi-Res Surround Audio

For the first time since we completed our hi-res audio upgrade, we invited friends for dinner whom we knew would be interested in hearing what it had to offer. The male friend (now retired) once had a photographic/audio shop and has experienced an assortment of reasonable to high quality audio gear in his shop (and home) over the coarse of many years.

We sat them in the prime listening position, put the Gaucho SACD in the tray, pressed play, gave the Marantz receiver some decent power and left them as we went off to prepare dinner (Tandori Chicken casserole on a bed of rice with tossed salad - beautiful!) as the first strains of "Babylon Sisters" erupted in the room.

We re-entered the living room halfway through the title track and saw two beaming faces before they acknowleged that they had never heard such wonderful, clear, full-bodied sound. We then gave them a smattering of the DSOTM SACD, the Kamakiriad, The Captain and Me and Greendale DVD-A's. We almost had to pry them off the sofa to lead them to the dinner table. Our friends were absolutely stunned by these formats. As the male friend stated: 'The first five minutes is like "WOW" then you really begin to appreciate the incredible resolution as the music completely envelops you from all directions.'

These two friends were recently infected by the travelling bug, they go on caravanning trips and use a small unit as home base. Much of the remainder of the evening was spent answering questions and discussing how viable a new hi-res audio system could be in their little flat.

The point I am making is that given the opportunity to "really" listen, many people would embrace these hi-res formats and all the doom phrophecies would soon prove to be nothing but smoke. The problem getting these formats well and truly "out there" as I see it is the aloofness of audio dealers, lack of advertising by the record companies and all the childish and negative rhetoric from the 'there is no other god but stereo' clan.


 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest



"The problem getting these formats well and truly "out there" as I see it is the aloofness of audio dealers, lack of advertising by the record companies and all the childish and negative rhetoric from the 'there is no other god but stereo' clan."




I have you there, Rantz, I'm an atheist.









But I have had occasion to think E.C. is God!










 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1119
Registered: Aug-04
"I have you there, Rantz, I'm an atheist."

Then you may live without guilt :-)



"But I have had occasion to think E.C. is God!"

Clapton is good, very good, in fact amazing, but imo not God. I thought "He" died when SRV went down in the aircraft?

 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1847
Registered: Dec-03
MAN, THE DOG'S ARE BARKIN NOW!!!

.

Who Let The Dogs Out!
---------------------

.

Who let the dogs out
(woof, woof, woof, woof)
(woof, woof, woof, woof)
(woof, woof, woof, woof)
(woof, woof, woof, woof)


Who let the dogs out (woof, woof, woof, woof)
Who let the dogs out (woof, woof, woof, woof)


(woof, woof, woof, woof)




 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1122
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger

Only four woofers?

:-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 505
Registered: Apr-04
The strangest thing is happening. Everytime I walk by the 7.1 receiver that's sitting on the bedroom floor unplugged, I swear it is talking to me..."neanderthal"..."imbecile"...it seems to have an Australian accent.

LR,

Congrats on the Yammy! It sounds like you are enjoying it.

Asimo,

The Mac has been paired with the MA's for the past few weeks but I'm going to give the B&W's equal time soon. I'm still trying to decide whether to make a complete break with the MC setup. If so, the MA's will likely be sold. If not, I'll keep them as the front 3.
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2489
Registered: Dec-03
"Perfect" as an adjective is usually taken to mean "incapable of further improvement", such as "God is the perfect being" etc.

In this context, from OED:

" Of a copy, representation, etc.: Accurately reproducing or reflecting the original; exact, correct."

Good word; simple meaning.

"Sound"

OED: "1. a. The sensation produced in the organs of hearing when the surrounding air is set in vibration in such a way as to affect these; also, that which is or may be heard; the external object of audition, or the property of bodies by which this is produced"

So "perfect sound" would mean "Accurately reproducing or reflecting...: the original...sensation produced in the organs of hearing when the surrounding air is set in vibration....; also, that which is or may be heard..." etc.

I wonder which part of "perfect" and "sound" I failed to understand?

Or does Sony use words to mean whatever it wants them to mean?
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1848
Registered: Dec-03
Just a thought but maybe what mr rantz was thinking they might have meant!

PERFECT SOUND:

Free of pops,clicks,hissis and whatever anamolies
many are use to in there setups!
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 169
Registered: Oct-04
My Rantz - great posting re the guests. We sat our guests down in similar fashion, only (sigh) they allowed as how they couldn't hear any difference, and wanted another scotch. Oh, well...

Ghia: yes, Mer and I are enjoying the "Yammy" very much - once we finally got ALL the wires hooked up, and figgered out ALL of the settings! Whew! I well remember Rick B's admonition about the "simple and elegant" life. HAH!!! Ain' no sech animule around heah now that I've got "hi-res" sound going around-n-up-n-down.
I finally determined that I have to take out the Yamaha, take out its shelf, and cut out some area in the back so that all the wires aren't in a bind back there. Whadda mess!

John A. - re Sony - remember one word here: "advertising." With that, you CAN say anything you want, anytime. Facts seldom get in the way of hype, as I'm sure all of you realize!

Doc-friend came over last night to give my system "another listen." Well, he drank some vodka, ate some shrimp, and listened for awhile. He allowed as how my system sounds very "shallow" compared to his - but that the new CD player had helped "measurably." (feet or meters?)
I guess, had I spent $30,000 USD on my system, as he had, I'd have "deeper" sound, also? (grin) Basically, the "deeper" here is his "deeper" pockets! I told him I make a practice of boycotting doctors just because they afford stuff that I can't dream about! He knew I was kidding - sorta. . .

OK - do I leave the cones on, or just take them off. Heck, I'm going out to do another hour-long test, then see. . . guests are away shopping (yes, again, for greaseness sake!) Maybe this time they'll buy ME some-ting? Nah. . .

More anon. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 170
Registered: Oct-04
Kegger: yes, I well remember all the fuss I used to make over LPs - anti-static cloths, brushes, liquid cleaners, anti-static "guns," and some sort of electronic "click and pop" filters that I hooked up between turntable and amp.
Well, all of it surely helped, but I still got more "disc-presence" than I really wanted! The LP sound, however, was (to me) always warmer and more natural than the CDs - especially the early CDs and players.
the Yamaha plays EVERYTHING much better, Kegger, and you'd hear the difference very quickly. Oh, it's not your Denon, fer shore, but from what I'm able to determine, it must come rather close.
While I've got your "ear," BTW - a QUESTION: Why, after my SACDs and CDs sound so much fuller and have much more, and tighter, bass, do the movies I play on the Yamaha have a decided lack of bass? I have to crank up the bass by at least 4 db for the soundtracks to sound good.
I've checked ALL the settings, and know that they are correct. The newest movies sound fairly full-bodied, but older ones recorded in Dolby stereo or surround just "lie there" and sound, like my Doc-friend said about my system in general: "shallow." Any thoughts?
Thanx in ad-vance. . .
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1849
Registered: Dec-03
That's a good question lar!

but 5.1 soundtracks to me do sound much much better then stereo or
regular dolby surround.

maybe try some different sound fields for those.

also on some recievers you can set different settings for different
inputs and different sound fields. so you may want to make some adjustments
in the reciever for "just" those playback modes.

I don't have much in the way of non 5.1 videos.

If a video is not in 5.1 normally I"m not going to pick it up
because the other sounds so much better. And if there is a choice of
dts verse dolby digital I go for the dts which for me sounds better still.

Maybe it's even possable the yamaha plays better then then the old
player which shows a larger difference between the two formats!

But if you fiddle with the settings on the reciever for those
that don't suit you maybe you can make an improvement.
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1123
Registered: Aug-04
John

"I wonder which part of "perfect" and "sound" I failed to understand?"

I give up - which part?

"Or does Sony use words to mean whatever it wants them to mean?"

Yep - no different to most other companies that advertise or do you only remove the blinkers for Sony/Philips?

I find the use of your dictionary quotations to ram the literal meanings of those words down my neck the stereotypical, condescending, response of a pompous academic. It is fortunate that all in academia are not afflicted as such and that they know the workings of the real world are seldom run by the book.

However John, I shall surrender and stand corrected before you on this forum and bow to your might. Yes, Sony/Philips should ask forgiveness for the use of such fraudulent copy. The perfect sound was not perfect after all and they should never have tried to con the man who is without sin.


Ghia

I may have been trying for a little fun with the prehistoric reference but never did I consider - or allude to - deficiencies in your grey matter. Sorry if you thought otherwise.

Larry,

Thanks for your kind words again. But I must say, if a friend of mine said my system sounded "shallow" by comparison to his (even if it was true), I'd ask him how he felt about a shallow grave :-)


Kegger

You are quite correct - again. Thanks my friend. But, that interpretation of "perfect sound' will not cut it with those endowed with superior knowlege.



To the good friends I have found here on the forum, and to your loved ones, I wish you all the very best for a joyous Christmas and hope the new year brings or maintains good health, happiness and prosperity in whatever form you deserve.

Cheers to all!

 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1850
Registered: Dec-03
Second mr. rantz's chears to all!

And may god bless!
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 172
Registered: Oct-04
Kegger: Thanks (as always) but quite a few of my DVD movies are "older" ones - many not even in stereo! Those that are in Dolby should have some fairly good sound - but again, they have a lack of bass and warmth. I'll try, try again, my friend, and see what pops up!

MR - great good wishes, and I second them - BUT aren't you rushing Christmas a bit here?!? I mean, I haven't even cleaned up my Halloween mess yet? And Thanksgiving (I know, a "foreign" holiday!) is only a-planning.
So give me a break, eh? (TRIPLE GRIN HERE)

Seriously - I think all of us are truly blessed, whether or not we have millions in the bank. And a few Good Wishes certainly helps "make the season bright." MR and Kegger - thanks.

More anon. . .
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest



Rantz - re: Where is God? I know E.C., in moments of humility (which don't seem that rare for him [and are rare for most other Rock Gods, another reason I like E.C.]) has said S.R.V. was the best he ever played with. When he did his Crossroads Guitar Festival here in Dallas this summer, he dedicated it to Stevie and had a large banner onstage with his name on it. It is one of those Rock Mysteries as to what S.R.V. would be doing now. Would he have sold out to commercialization like so many (too often E.C. himself) have done?








I am suprised no one on this thread mentioned the anniversary of the phongraph's invention. It occurred in 1877 on Nov. 21. Now that was progress!!! Am I left alone on this thread to be the Historian, Secretary and Treasurer? By the way, Larry, your dues are needed soon.

But it appears phonographs have been entirely forgotten by all but a few on this thread. (I'll raise a glass of Chivas with you, John.) Ghia, I'm wondering if Mr. Dual isn't talking to you with a Texas accent. Why not give him an anniversary present?









In the ongoing battle of what should be taken away from the all too well remembered slogan, "Perfect sound, forever". (Another glass of Chivas for us, John, since we appear to be the only one's who remember that catchy little ditty.) I would venture the guess that the error came in translation. Originally written in Japanese by a Samurai Warlord ... I'm sorry, by a Sony Advertising Manager, the slogan went through the same translation process that Sony owner's manuals follow. So after the translation went through the Norwegian, German, Hebrew, Chinese (Mogolian, rather spicy), Spanish, Yugoslavian (they were still a country), Transylvanian (no joke about blood suckers), Russian, Dutch, French, Italian (it really lost here when they weren't allowed to use their hands), Arabic processors; it finally arived at the desk of Maury Shwartz in Brooklyn, New Jersey. Maury looked at what he had and, with a flash of brilliance (or, he thought later, it could have been the cream cheese and lox he had earlier; a bit off, not unlike Sammuel Mueller to try to pass off yesterday's leftovers to him, may his Mother get the gout), Maury came up with, "Perfect sound, forever". What the original phrase had started out as was, "The sound of us squeezing your balls for a long, long time (or until we come up with something that will make us more money)". This, of course was the beginning of Down Sampling.



The Japanese, who had been listening to 180 Lb. Micro Seiki turntables for years, knew that as a turntable system got more rigid, and micro vibrations were eliminated, the sound of a turntable had very little of the "disc presence" that Americans were used to, since Americans bought $89 Sony turntables (with a cartridge installed) and played $5.99 records on them; and, a top notch turntable will be amazingly quiet. Well, they knew they really didn't have much claim to a sound that was "better" than LP. But they knew they could produce a product that could sell for $29 for the player but raise the price of the material used in that player to five times the profit that was being made on an LP. The humanitarian aspect of bringing CD quality sound to the starving masses of the world just overcame them. Now every child in the world could go to bed hungry but playing a Sony Discman and listening to U2 "Rattle and Hum". And that is how the phrase, "Perfect sound, forever" came into our lexicon.






Before we leave our last foray into what amounts to progress, let me wish an early Good Thanksgiving to my American brethren. And a wonderful what ever you're celebrating this Thursday to those not giving Thanks to the Lord for an entire day of Professional Football in High Definition TV (or not for those too cheap to give your family the quality of reception they deserve). And I do hope everyone will gather with their loved ones to feast on a turkey force fed antibiotics and growth hormones to the point the bird can't walk and has to be confined in a pen standing up 24 hours a day, injected with a "broth" that has more chemicals than Ortho has in stock, and a cute little pop up timer*. Have a big helping of mashed potatoes with some saturated fat and cholesterol fuelled milk and butter (get the unsalted variety, the salted type uses the same sodium chloride they put on the roads to remove ice). Have some green beans that have been genetically altered so the large scale factory farmer can spray them with the herbicide Round Up (the same thing we use in overhead spraying of the coca plants in South America which leaves the ground unfit for planting another food crop and causes health problems in the indigenous people [a claim denied by Ortho] and fouls the water supply making it unfit for drinking for years if not decades). Rest assured they will look marvelous because they have been sprayed with chemical pesticides, many containing arsenic, which wipe out all life including any beneficial insects that might have eaten the bad bugs before thay ever did anything to the crop that would not be infested if it weren't in stress from all the sodium in the chemicals in the soil, and fertilized with ammonia nitrate (the stuff that blows up buildings) and urea (the stuff that ... well, we'll leave that alone). Be careful driving out there. More people are killed on the highways in the holiday period than any other time of the year. Oh, and if you have side and head air bags, don't worry. Those type air bags have mostly only killed small children (mostly). Have a wonderful, progressive holiday! Rest assured, technology has made things better for some people some of the time.





* Amazingly (to me at least) in his four years as President, George W. Bush has pardoned more White House Turkeys than he pardoned Death Row inmates when he was Governor of Texas.







And, finally, just for those who care:


On Nov. 22, 1963, President Kennedy was assassinated while riding in a motorcade in Dallas. Texas Gov. John B. Connally was seriously wounded. A suspect, Lee Harvey Oswald, was arrested. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn in as the 36th president of the United States.

















 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1851
Registered: Dec-03
I like cd's and ( U2 "Rattle and Hum" )
 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 339
Registered: Mar-04
Larry wrote:

quote:

re Sony - remember one word here: "advertising." With that, you CAN say anything you want, anytime. Facts seldom get in the way of hype, as I'm sure all of you realize!


I guess advertising is quite a bit like politics in that regard.



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest



"I like cd's and ( U2 "Rattle and Hum" )"

We know.



 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 643
Registered: Dec-03
Hi All,

Sorry I am so long between posts. Right after my last, my cable modem died, and the replacement just arrived. Lets see, where were we?

Jan,

I finally have to give in to isolationism, because I am like most American patriots, tired of helping the world, and then being _ _ _ _ on, for our efforts and blood. I will not make another political comment on this forum, I need to keep the few remaining friends I have here. As to the turkey rant, thanks, I just lost my appetite for the bird and the rest. I think I'll just have a little pasta and salad instead.

Rantz,

Oh no you don't! It sounds to me like your last post was a I'm outta here post. No how, no way, my friend, if that is your intent. I won't let you do it. I'll track you down. I'm good at it. So what do you say? Show me a little love............................

To all the other "DOGS"................Cheers!
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1852
Registered: Dec-03
Jan likes 2 channel and phonogpaph's!
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2491
Registered: Dec-03
My Rantz,

You asked me "How do you know what what the advertising slogan makers were thinking?".

I don't. All I know is what they said. I thought I would look the words up, to see who is making a mistake. That was why I replied in that way. I thought it would be constructive. But you've got all angry.

I find the use of your dictionary quotations to ram the literal meanings of those words down my neck the stereotypical, condescending, response of a pompous academic

Well, thanks. OED gives a record of usage. I am afraid I can't think of what else there is go by. Except:-

- are you psychic or just all knowing?

Precisely. It seems that you can see beyond the words people use, MR. I know I can't.

Larry,

John A. - re Sony - remember one word here: "advertising." With that, you CAN say anything you want, anytime. Facts seldom get in the way of hype, as I'm sure all of you realize!

So what counts as an advertisement? As distinct from a "Technology Overview", such as:-

"For 25 years, digital audio systems have used a technology called Pulse Code Modulation, or PCM. Unfortunately, the PCM process exposes the music to a "decimation" filter during recording and an "interpolation" filter during playback. These two filters can smear the sound, corrupt the sense of space around the instruments and sacrifice the subtleties of live music.

CD is PCM. But CD is "Perfect sound", they said in 1982.... Ah, sorry, I see, that was just "advertising"...

Meanwhile, in the "Technology Overview"...

...
Super Audio CD eliminates these problems by eliminating the decimation and interpolation filters. Super Audio CD uses Sony's Direct Stream Digital process, which records a 1-bit signal at an astonishing 2,822,400 samples per second. This is 64 times the sampling frequency of standard Compact Disc. The result is more than just superb frequency response and dynamic range. It's a quantum leap in music reproduction.

The Direct Stream Digital pulse train "looks" remarkably like the analog waveform it represents. More pulses point up as the wave goes positive and down as the wave goes negative.

Direct Stream Digital sound is remarkably like analog. The DSD bit stream even resembles the analog waveform. As a result, Super Audio CD combines all the precision, durability and convenience of Compact Disc together with the warmth, ease and musicality of analog sound. Super Audio CD is an audiophile's dream.


Source Sony SACD Music - History.

So, er, there was something in analogue recording, after all...?

MR, Kegger, Larry. Do you really TRUST these guys to deliver on their promises? Do you not recognise bullshit when you read it? You don't feel even a little ripped off by all this...?

I know I do.

Jan,

I was going to predict Nov 22. Got distracted by the "perfect sound" issue.

Thanks, anyway.

I know where I was. It was a Friday. About 6.15 p.m. when I heard the news. I remember from whom, where, who else was there, and under what circumstances.
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 173
Registered: Oct-04
John A. - gee, I hope your blood pressure medicine is kicking in! You're all upset about stuff for which there is no cause to be upset.
When I referred to "advertising," I was referring to the "Perfect Sound Forever" slogan. The last paragraph in the article you quote should be considered "advertising," the rest an attempt at electronics explanation, in my very, very humble opinion.
Kegger can - and will - speak for himself on the issue of "ripped off." Let me just say that when I put on an SACD and sit back to listen to music reproduction very close to what I used to get on LPs, well, I just plain honestly cross-my-heart don't care if Sony is in a conspiracy to take over the audio world, or whatever. The music sounds so much cleaner and accurate, and that makes me happy. Happy that something came along to upgrade the CD format. Happy that I can hear the difference. Happy that Mer sold some art and said that the money should go for a new CD player. Happy that she's here to share the experience. Happy that she hears a major difference. Happy that I don't live in the Middle East! End of "happies." (grin)

Jan: On Nov. 22, 1963, I was working for an NBC station in Denver - eating lunch at the Green Lantern restaurant with some news crews - saw the newsflash on TV - called the station - they sent me down to Dallas that night, and I worked "backup" for an NBC correspondent named Tom Pettit - at Parkland hospital. Will never forget it, needless to say. . .

Kegger: (SSHHHHHHH) Psst - Jan V. eats ever-so-slightly undercooked turkey late at night, in his bedroom, under the covers, with pesticide-sprayed cranberry sauce and liver-killing "spirits." Pass the word. . .



More anon. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 174
Registered: Oct-04
Sem: After years covering "politics," YEP - U R right, sir - advertising is politics is advertising is politics is advertising is politics. Simple as dat! (grin)
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1853
Registered: Dec-03
LARRY:

"Kegger can - and will - speak for himself on the issue of "ripped
off." Let me just say that when I put on an SACD and sit back to
listen to music reproduction very close to what I used to get on LPs,
well, I just plain honestly cross-my-heart don't care if Sony is in a
conspiracy to take over the audio world, or whatever. The music sounds
so much cleaner and accurate, and that makes me happy. Happy that
something came along to upgrade the CD format. Happy that I can hear
the difference. Happy that Mer sold some art and said that the money
should go for a new CD player. Happy that she's here to share the
experience. Happy that she hears a major difference. "

....................Y E P ...................

That's all "I've" been trying to say.
It gives "me" something better than "I" had.
That's all "I've" wanted, a move towards better sound than "I" had.

To "me" the new digital age is just starting to create great things!
And "I" believe that is a good thing! And hope it continues to grow!

My latest universal player's give me much pleasure with cd's along with
the new hi rez formats! And "I" believe it will only get better!

"I" believe tech (right now) is at a crossroads of affordable quality
digital sound reproduction!
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 644
Registered: Dec-03
Kegger,

I almost forgot. You "woof" truly fine so a "not so old dog." (LOL!)
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1854
Registered: Dec-03
RICK! I don"t worry about you, your allways there in spirit! buddy!
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2494
Registered: Dec-03
Jan and Rick, especially, but everyone here, really;

Cheers!

Jan, that last, long post sums it up. No need for a summary. The original meaning was "Lost in Translation"; I see that, now.

1982; "CD gives perfect sound".
2004; "SACD gives extraordinary sound". (See link in my last post).

So, what is "ordinary"? Why, CD. Which is "perfect". So SACD is imperfect?

2026; ...?

Well, whatever is "ordinary" then, will be what Sony has made the industry standard, if it gets its way.

So, watch out, in 2026, for "technical overviews" pointing out why DSD is cr•p and the new format, whatever it is called, gives a closer approach to the original PCM.

Of course, that will be advertising, too, probably. So only fools will think they mean it.

I wish it were easy to detect when people are saying something they believe themselves. It would save a lot of trouble. They could still be wrong, of course. But they will usually try, fairly seriously, to convey their intended meaning. Just so as to avoid any misunderstanding.
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Rick - Sorry if I ruined your meal. I left out the part about buying it from the Big Box Chain Store that pays its employees minimum wage and has them work off the clock with no benefits. And I forgot to tell everyone to bundle up in the coats made in a third world country by indentured employees who bring home $2.00 a day. And I didn't mention ... oh, well, another time.


Anyone with the slightest interest in what you are consuming should watch "Super Size Me". It is about a man who ate three meals a day at McDonalds for 30 days.





As to be unappreciated for our efforts, it is frustrating. But I think there is an admonition to turn the other cheek, how you treat the least among you and several others that need to be remembered. But enough on that also.




Larry - I notice you didn't mention being happy for brass cones.




I won't belabor the point right now (but don't get me started again); but, I do believe anyone who would listen to the Mercury recordings wouldn't think what we have now is all that great.



Mr. Kennedy was shot when I was in 7th grade. Walking home after being dismissed from school a friend's mother stopped to give me a ride home. I remember asking why anyone would want to kill the President.

After I moved to Dallas I found out all too well why.




 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 506
Registered: Apr-04
On Nov 22, 1963, I wasn't born, yet. Still, I often wonder how the world might be different today if JFK had lived.

This morning, I saw a report about a sickening new video game called "JFK Reloaded."

JohnA,

You take a lot of grief from this forum, sometimes. My hat's off to you for the grace with which you handle it.

MR,
My response was intended to make a point but was intended to be a little tongue in cheek too. That would have been better conveyed had I not overlooked the smiley face. Maybe I should assume that when you poke at the "childish and negative rhetoric..." etc that you are just targeting John and Jan? :-)

Jan,

Mr. Dual pouts every time I walk by. He knows I'm scared of him and takes it personally. He shouldn't. This is my problem.


LR,

I, too, had to cut a big, rectangular hole in the back of my should-not-be-used-as-audio-cabinet to approximate the size of the back panel of the NAD T763 in order to allow for the multitude of cables. Since my "simplify" decision, I like the balance I have of hearing hi-res but in stereo. It takes out the hassle of dealing with all the connections and the bass management etc. Speaking of which, you mentioned the lack of bass...maybe this is occurring because you don't have sub but the Yammy is set up to send bass to sub (i.e. 5.1 - and the .1 is missing in your system?)



 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1855
Registered: Dec-03
JOHN: What is the point to your last post?

Do you believe sacd/dvd-a are no better then what weve had?

And if I believe it is better but others don't am I being duped?
Am I wrong for seeing an improvement?

If it is better for "me"! should I not want it?
If larry likes it better then what he had, is he wrong?
If mr. rantz likes it better then what he had is he wrong?

You guys can deny the fact it's not an improvement for you all you want.
But you can't deny what we are hearing and liking!

So I still see no point to this!
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 645
Registered: Dec-03
Jan,

November 22, 1963. I was a freshman in gym class. We were playing basketball that day. I took a hard fall going up for a rebound and took off most of the skin on my right elbow. Ordered to go to the nurse's office, I entered to find her crying. She looked at me and announced the President Kennedy had been shot and killed in Dallas.......................................................................... ......................................................FYI: President Kennedy was the biggest advocate for the then young US Army Special Forces. He gave approval over the displeasure of the regular army for the men of Special Forces to wear the green beret. Anyone whoever wore that headgear, still holds a place in his heart for the man. Yeah, I still care. Always will.

Anyway, what's wrong with pasta for Thanksgiving?
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1124
Registered: Aug-04
Rick,

No my friend, I am not 'outa here', I was 'only outa' here last night before I said somesome I might truly regret.

All,

The early Christmas wishes were sincere but I thought of them at that moment as I realised there are some things far more important than knocking my head against a brick wall over some trivial subject in a never ending unwinnable debate with someone carrying an obsessive distrust of certain corporations and telling us over and over what we already know: big business has and will continue to show disregard for the people who may pay good money to enjoy their products or services. But they are not all evil and fortunately, there are checks and balances in place to ensure the sneeky ones can't go too far in their misguided directions - well, at least some of the time.


People are free to listen to whatever music they like using whatever format they like on whatever machine they like which passes signals through whatever type and number of speakers they like. And I for one have never (unless having a joke) critised anyone's choice in any of the above. Music is the name of the game even if one requires a hearing aid to listen - how lucky are we to have such a phenonemon. How lucky we are to be able to listen to it in a home, car, boat, train or plane or while riding a bicycle or running in the park. How lucky are we to be able to share it with our loved ones and friends. There are so many evil things going on in the world of which we can hardly conceive yet we can spend our time whining about some product that wasn't quite all it was cracked up to be or living in fear of being conned into using a better one. Well poor us!

I like hi-res stereo or multi channel music whether on DVD-A or SACD. I like CD stereo music and I have liked music played with records on turntables, Which is best?

There is only one answer: the one(s) I prefer. There is no other, yet it will differ from yours.


I enjoy our discussions and I respect opinions, however this is a forum for audio enthusiasts. We should be enthusiastic rather than dwelling on the negatives. We should be grateful to those who go to great lengths at times to share their knowlege and help in solving problems. We should share our experiences and have a good laugh along the way.

"It is fine thing to share one's knowlege it is something else entirely to assume others have none." M. Rantz 2004

Jan,

I thoroughly recommend the DVD video concert "Tribute To Stevie Ray Vaughn." Apart from the contributing talent including his brother Jimmy, the short interviews with the artists all basically resulted in a similar theme: that unlike anyone else, he had a special channel - or conduit - to where the music came from. Clapton was quite humble in defering to SRV's magic.

John A

I'm sorry and although some obviously disagree, I do find you sometimes appear to talk down to a few of us on this forum. Maybe it's not intentional - I would hope not. We became friends of sorts here a while back; something I value very much as I do with a few others here and would like it to continue. You're obviously a fine and knowledgeable person but sometimes lately I feel I am reading the ramblings of a pompous A$$ and I react accordingly - admittedly perhaps in too much haste at times. In order to prevent any more deterioration on what friendship remains, I may not jump in on some of your more high-winded posts. If you feel I am totally off base then that's fine too and in such case I apologise, but I cannot at present feel otherwise.

 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1125
Registered: Aug-04
Ghia, I almost forgot . . .

"the childish and negative rhetoric from the 'there is no other god but stereo' clan."


No, I was not targeting John, Jan or yourself, but if the doffed hat fits . . .



I was refering to those old 'stereo only' zealots who preach their gospel in some of those stereovile magazines. :-)
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1856
Registered: Dec-03
I've said it many times just like others have.

How we listen to our systems should not try to convince others that
they should do the same.

Also I do agree with john we should not take everything that
corporate throws at us as "what is best for us" blindly without questioning it.

But like mr. rantz has said and larry earlier if we like what we hear
then for some of us that is the bottom line and we need not argue all
the time if one is right or wrong!

It's fine to point things out and ask questions but to basically say
that someone is listening to something that is inferior and wrong is
not in my oppinion how friends should communicate with other.

I have no problem with real questions and trying to figure something out
but a lot of what get hashed around in the debate of todays tech
seems to have many undesireable undertones to it!

Weve gone around and around and around on this same ferriswheel that I
think the bearings are going to give out and leave shrapnel flying
that no flackjackets can absorb. WITH NO END RESULT OR IN SIGHT!

I think we need some new topics and quick!

I appolagize I tried to ask some questions on weather anyone felt
digital was getting better or weather it could. But that led us back
to jabbing at each other. I'm sorry!

Anyone have any good topics?

Or am I completly off in my thinking and just need to shut up?
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1127
Registered: Aug-04
Kegger,

You are neither off in your thinking nor need to shut up. Ever!

And you have no reason to apologise to anyone here my friend. Apart from providing some refreshing and humorous moments your knowledge, has helped many, many people including myself. So please - never shut up!

And what you said in the above post is right on as usual.



 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1857
Registered: Dec-03
Appreciate mr. rantz:

Just don't want to overstep boundaries, get on a soapbox and step
on anyones feet!
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


I have accepted the fact that we are all going to like what each one of us likes. I learned that when I was selling. Everyone has their own preferences. It was not my intent to suggest that you should only like what I like and never allow any other music, format or technology across your threshold.
I think Kegger's question is fine but will inevitably lead us back to our beginning point.
I have no doubt that many of you like and prefer your hi rez, multi channel set ups. And I hope you have not taken my posts as a bleating to remove them before they render you sterile. (They can do that you know. But so can inhaling too much vapor from solder and hearing marsupials scream.)
What I would prefer to present to you is a concept of what recording could have been. What it would have been if 32 track mixers had never entered the scene. How a recording could be made when all the performers were playing together in the same space at the same time. Mostly how music was made before the bean counters and the Rock Gods got hold of it and dragged it through the muck. Because drag it they did. There are good sounding albums out there. There always have been and there always will be. They are made by dedicated artists and producers that care about the product they present to the public for consumption. But there are many more albums that could sound much better than they do if only more people cared. (The original Steely Dan albums that you like in hi rez were introduced as standard fare albums and then, later, released on half speed masters; the original can and was improved upon.)
As with the tubes and the Mac gear I would like to share what I have heard that I think is better than what we are being given on a regular basis. Not all of you rushed to buy tubes. Rick ventured into the Mac and brought Ghia along with little input from me. I'm not here trying to convert everyone. But I have heard something better than what we presently have and would like to share it with any one that is interested. And I would like your feedback on what has happened to the recording process.
It's not about telling you what you hear is wrong or inferior. It's about saying I think you might enjoy this if you listen.
You don't have to eat pasta because I do. But if there's something really good made with pasta, wouldn't you like to try it?




Rick - There's not a thing wrong with pasta and a salad. It is merely a matter of where they go in the meal. It is antipasto (appetizer), primo (pasta), secondo (main entree), condimento (side dish), insalata (to cleanse the palate), dolci (something sweet or fruit with cheese and wine) and finally digestive (a little Anisette or Grappa). You can start with the meal I suggested to Larry for the Vivid tests. It will make a fine Thanksgiving Day dinner. That is, if you're not very hungry.




 

Lone Ranger
Unregistered guest
" But I have heard something better than what we
presently have "

What is it, and who says it's better?
Have you heard the best that is available today?
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 646
Registered: Dec-03
Jan,

What you describe was a typical family Sunday meal at Grandmothers house. Did you forget my mother was born in Sicily?

"That is, if you're not very hungry." Very good Jan. (LOL!)
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 175
Registered: Oct-04
G-mornin' all - from Swampville - here we go.

Jan: (blush) I totally forgot to give thanks for the brass cones! They did give me a severe challenge, which I'm still trying to meet. . .
On the issues of simplicity in recording - hear, hear (or ere, ere, as you choose!) and I have certainly heard the Mercury recordings - in their original form. Have on order three of them from Amazon - in SACD format now. Expect to hear what I remember as "sonic heaven." Two or three mics - you bet! As an aside - -
Years ago, the Chicago Symphony used to come out to WGN-TV (where I worked) for a live concert once a month. It was a smash-hit program, and everybody commented on how "good" the musicians sounded.
Well, I once went into the studio just before rehearsal, and noted with great interest that the entire orchestra was being broadcast with ONLY TWO MICROPHONES - hung by wires up and slightly in front of the podium, or what passed for one in the studio. That was it - no giant mixers, no thousand-cable layouts, nothing of the sort. I guess them must have taken some cues from Mercury? Who knows. . . Anyway, Jan, it points up what you've said many times - that we've over-processed nearly all of our recordings anymore.

Ghia: Thanks for the comments. Yes, I have double-checked the settings on both player and receiver, and have set the sub setting to "off." I do notice that the bass response is pretty darned good for such movies as "Master and Commander" and others with DTS format - but very lacking in the older movies.
I did note with interest on the Onkyo manual that they have a "re-eq" setting - they say that many movies are equalized for theatres, but don't play accurately at home. Thus, they have some sort of equalization circuit in the Onkyo. I've tried it, and it does, indeed, make the sound a tad more natural in many older movies, such as the Bogart ones that Mer and I love so much.
Cabinet-"tweaking" is always so much fun, ain' it? Two slips of the old saw and you have firewood! (grin)

BTW - Mer and I will be having grouper (fish) in a Caribbean sauce, tiny fresh ORGANIC green beans, some ORGANIC couscous, some ORGANIC cranberries (ok, I know they don't really go with the above, but we love them) and some key lime pie for dessert. The key limes are grown locally, but don't know FOR SURE if they're pesticide-free. Naturally, the pink champagne we'll drink has nitrites in it, so we may lose a few liddle gray cells there. SIGH. Nothing is forever. . .

I'd LOVE to get another topic started - am so tired of give-n-take on this Perfect Sound and Sony is out to get us stuff.
Kegger - let's start an underground movement to Ban the Banter, OK? Maybe the combination of Young Audiophile with Old Phart will carry some weight here?? (double grin)

And to the unregistered guest - I wouldn't know the "best that's available" - but Jan might. He, unlike me, DID sell the stuff, and thus has a better handle on such things.
However, to hear the best you have to have a totality of parts - from the CD/tape/LP itself to the listening room, which, as we all know, can skew any and all sound conditions.
Jan probably HAS heard the best - to his hearing. Lucky you, Jan! But it doesn't take the absolute "best" to tell the difference(s) between recorded sound. Good is OK, better is, uh, "better" and best is what one thinks it is.

Getting back to Jan V. - what he was obviously referring to was the Mercury series, and both their sound quality and the techniques used to get there. He has a good point. And, aside from myself, who among us has, indeed, heard them?

My Doc-friend (he of the fizzled Sunfire) has his "special" room all doo-dahhed up with custom sound and video. Watching a movie there is an awesome experience.
But in his living room he has Martin Logan speakers - Very expensive. But I never liked the sound of those speakers. Why? Couldn't say for sure, they just never sounded "right."
Jan may scold me if he wishes - because those speakers always get great reviews. But to me, well, they always drew attention to themselves, rather than to the music. That's the problem.

Out of steam - more anon. . .
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 176
Registered: Oct-04
Ghia: Just HAD to follow your link to the JFK "game." All I'll say is I agree with Ted Kennedy: "despicable." Not quite strong enough, though. Sigh.
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 177
Registered: Oct-04
My Rantz: after another of my "let's review the forum to see what I've missed" escapades - I just have one thing to say to you, sir.
In reading your description of your music reproduction setup, it seems to "me" that it must sound rather, well, "shallow."
(laughing a bit too hard for my own good here)

Kidding, OK?
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


I don't remember you telling me about your Nona's place of birth. Or else I did totally forget. In either instance you have my most sincere congratulations. Having an Italian grandmother is better than having a great sounding hifi. Mangia!!!



To the fake Lone Ranger - Taken at face value, your questions seem rather insulting. I don't know why people prefer to challenge someone on this forum and then hide behind a screen of anonymity. There is a tendency on this forum for people to get themselves worked up into a lather over what are, more than likely, innocent remarks made by others. So I will dismiss your attitude with the conviction that you are nothing more than a dithering bit of the least significance.
Now, if you would care to present yourself in a fashion that allows me to address you, I will answer your questions. But first you will have to define what you feel is the best available today and who, to your satisfaction, defined it to be such. You nattering fool!


We do seem to be going in circles here. Whenever an idea is floated that suggests SACD/DVD-A or digital as a whole is less than what some of us were hoping for, the answer is always, "but I like it" or "it's better than what I had". And that is meant to end the discussion. That, my friends, is what just got a President reelected. I'm beginning to wonder how many of you are supporting multi channel because of "moral value" reasons.



The problem with Kegger's question is that it presupposes that digital is OK. If, by some chance or means, one day, at any time in the future, you should hear, or read about someone who has heard, a digital format that they think is "good"; wouldn't that prove, at least in that instance, that digital can be, if not in every case, but, in this case that you heard or read about, prove that digital can be "good'?

I'm not picking on you, Kegger. But there isn't any apparent middle ground in this discussion. It is approached with the concept that what I like is what I like, and, what you like is what you like. Now we've all agreed that there is no way to tell anyone else what they like is wrong; but, that doesn't mean it's right either.



I was referring to the Mercury recordings in my last post; but, there are many that I believe fall into a category of, "why aren't they doing things like that anymore?" But that places me in the category of not wanting to move forward. I assure you all I do not ride around in a horse and buggy and I do have more of those new fangled light bulbs than I have oil lamps. But here I am with vacuum tubes and a turntable. Decidedly out of step with the younger generation. Even Larry has embraced the new technology more whole heartedly than I. I'm betting he dosen't even have a Royal typewriter anywhere in his house any more.




A few of us are committed to the idea that the music industry should have a standard that they aim to meet when they introduce a new format or just make a recording. A few feel that as long as you like the results, that is sufficient. And a few others seem to be ambivalent about the whole matter. We seem to be the audio version of Red and Blue States.





It is a problem that has been in audio since its very beginnings and will probably have no answer when we all have chips implanted in our skulls. (Well, maybe by then it won't matter.)





So it comes to what will we discuss that has relevance to all of us? I am not certain there is a topic which will bring us together as much as this simple question of whether music sounds better in two channel has divided us. I will leave it up to wiser souls in this group. I will wait over here.






















Unless anyone wants to discuss what cable I should buy for my subwoofer.






 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 329
Registered: Feb-04
Rantz,

Your post #1124 to All was especially well said. I whole-heartedly agree. Sometimes the debates on this thread remind me of late night arguments had in college. It's fun to engage in the skirmishes at times, but at other times your senses take over and you just want to go to sleep. I personally don't feel anyone oversteps his/her bounds on this thread. It's one of the most civil forums I've come across.

Larry R.,

Thought you might like to know that I'm on an opera kick. Just listened to Turandot and Der Rosenkavalier over the weekend. I'm now interested in getting some operas on DVD. My first choice is Le Nozze di Figaro. If you have a recommendation, it would be most welcome.
 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 330
Registered: Feb-04
Jan,


All of the above.


Music transcends good and evil, right and wrong.


It just doesn't matter.
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 648
Registered: Dec-03
Yes Jan, both Nona and Mamma were born in Sicily. I'm lucky to have any cheeks left at all. (LOL!)

I'm afraid too few are old enough to remember the Mercury recordings. They were something special. I think that's why I like the Mapleshade recordings. Not many are following in the old, well placed two or three mic's recording methods today. If we can't agree on how many channels, tubes or solid state, and so on, I think we CAN agree we want good quality recordings. Regardless of format! So let's move on to who is giving us what we want, or is at least trying.


PS Forget the subwoofer cable. I don't ever use the sub for music..........................................................................J ust give me a minute to get this flack vest on for all the anticipated incoming. Cheers!
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 507
Registered: Apr-04
Jan,

Ever since I realized you are on my side of the politcal divide it seems as if you've been right about everything. If Jan says it, it must be true as far as I'm concerned. LOL. Just kidding, guys.

You wrote: Rick ventured into the Mac and brought Ghia along with little input from me. I'm not here trying to convert everyone. But I have heard something better than what we presently have and would like to share it with any one that is interested.

While Rick's post is the one that piqued my interest in the Mac, the subsequent research turned up JV posts sharing your insight into Mac's. So, the two of you together influenced my decision - even if you didn't know what I was considering until after the fact. I, for one, am grateful to you guys for always sharing your knowledge and hope that you will continue to do so.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ghiacabriolet

NC

Post Number: 508
Registered: Apr-04
I have not heard any of the Mercury 3ch recordings but have seen them advertised on SACD. Believe I will get one on order and give it a spin. Does it work ok in stereo or will the MC receiver need to be hooked up? Don't get me started on another comparison test...I've used up all my vacation time. lol
 

Silver Member
Username: Larry_r

Naples, FL

Post Number: 178
Registered: Oct-04
Two Cents: God Bless You, Sir!
Trying to get some computer time in between guest arrivals and departures for - guess - MORE SHOPPING! Lord love a duck - these people have more money to spend than I have in my humble savings account!!!!

OK - here we go. On the "Der Rosen -whatever" the one I have and love is a 1985 recording with Kiri Te Kanawa (be still my heart!), Barbara Bonney, and Solti (total respect) conducting. Check it out on Amazon.

Second choice - none at this moment.

Turandot: Oh, my - now you've struck a discordant note, my friend! There are lots of fairly good Turandots on CD - but in my VERY humble opinion, NONE on DVD-video. The "best" one is the Marton, Domingo, Levine 1989 disc - but by that time, Eva Marton's vibrato had got so wide as you could drive a dump truck through it. Unstable. Yep.

DO NOT buy the "Turandot Project" with Zubin Mehta and all recorded in the "Forbidden City." All hype and no substance - IMHO.

Dat's it - I have NO Turandot on DVD-video, and am waiting for a good one to emerge. Youze shud uze yer own jujment on dis! (triple sigh)

Marriage of Figaro (aha!) I have and love the very unknown Opera National de Lyon DVD, with totally unknown singers - released in 2001, with conductor Paolo Olmi - great performance!

BUT - also great performance - though 1973 taping - with Te Kanawa (be still my heart) Cotrubas and von Stade - in a trouser role, no less! Very, very good - even great - DVD. But beware that it was recorded a LONG time ago!

Whew! I think I've about ended that thread - and hope I've helped a bit.
Find opera either on Amazon or ArkivMusic on the 'net - and have a good time - with my blessings, my friend!

Still reveling in the Mahler 2nd from SanFran chaps-n-gals - and only problem I have with it, as I have with so many SACDS - the levels go all the way from under-whisper to L O U D and back again. Really too much for "general" listening. Maybe I need to hark back to my own desires and stick with smaller groups instead of "sonic blockbusters?" Yep. (do I hear an echo here?)

OK - guests are returning from gauche-american-spending spree, and must get salmon, asparagus, couscous and key lime pie ready for their enjoyment. And a third scotch for me!

Luv and stuff to all of you - Mer says you make our lives "more interesting." Fer shore!!!
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1133
Registered: Aug-04
"So let's move on to who is giving us what we want"

Hokay Rickorio my frienda, whosa givin you whatta you wanta? Do you hava telephona number?

:-)


"If Jan says it, it must be true as far as I'm concerned"

What! an athiestic God?

:-)


I thought the Lone Ranger post was from the "real" one playing a little joke on us. But, as it appears this one is a ring-in I still think we should look among the Old Dog pack for the culprit. Maybe this is a task for Holmes.

Two Cents,

Thank you - when all is said and done, the folk pervading this thread are a pretty decent bunch - most of the time!

 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1134
Registered: Aug-04
Info for the four Universal Mecury Living Presence 3 Channel SACD releases.

http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=19507526


 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1135
Registered: Aug-04
Jan,

Please explain the following:

"I'm beginning to wonder how many of you are supporting multi channel because of "moral value" reasons."
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1859
Registered: Dec-03
well just got home from work , long day and no time for internet.
Probably won't have anytime tomorrow either.

There is so much I want to respond to but I feal not upto it.
And it seems I can't convey my thoughts correctly anyway as everytime
I post something on my thoughts of digital media they get all twisted
out of shape. By someone who thinks they know what I mean! Or what I
should believe.

As noone knows everything about any given subject.
But some feel that their can't be something that maybe there not
aware of that could be better then what the've previously heard.

I believe that technology has advanced farther then "ALL" of us
have heard. So saying that obviously we can't discuss it because we hav'nt heard it!

Personally I don't like records "not the records themselves but the annoying
things (to me)" So in my oppinion digital is a superior format.

And I'm not "MEARLY SETTLING FOR IT'S GOOD OR ALLRIGHT"
I believe that sacd/dvd-a are the 2 best audio formats that have ever
been commercially available. 2 channel or multi!

Jan you believe that your lp's produce better music then my digital.
I believe my digital produces better music then your lp's.
"And will only get better as the high priced electronics come down!"

Big deal were not going to convince one another!
Because we can't! We listen for different things!
You value certain things higher then I!
I value certain things higher then you.
And each one lends it's strength's to the particular format.

Sorry to use you jan, but we make good oppisite ends of the fence.
Someone asks you and me for advice, we may give some very simular but
we will also very from time to time. To me that is not right and wrong.
But mearly a difference in taste!

We seem to agree on tubes but beyond that maybe quite a bit apart.
I don't think we even agree on how we like our tube sound!

But that doesn't bother me as long as one of us doesn't try to say
that what the other believe's is not correct!
Because who is the athaurity? Who is the all knowing music god?

 

God
Unregistered guest
"Who is the all knowing music god?"


Why I am of course - there is only one and thou shall have no other!

And I say DVD-A and SACD in 2 or multi channel is the most heavenly music available. I should know, I endowed man with the brains to produce these angelic musical formats. LP's slipped by me when I was having a bad day and I allowed CD's so people could get used to the small disc.

So, be warned, the all knowing God will be watching to see who embraces these new wonderful musical formats. Those that do will earn extra points.

Bless all of you.






 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 342
Registered: Mar-04
Aw jeez. Now you've gone and PO'd God, (perhaps the Nun has a direct line to Him/Her). Y'all just couldn't leave well enough alone. Why can't you just check your silly preconceptions at the door and just sit and listen to the music - in whatever form you choose, and be happy with it? That's what really counts, isn't it?

 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1136
Registered: Aug-04
Sem,

"listen to the music - in whatever form you choose, and be happy with it? That's what really counts, isn't it?"

Of course it is!

But, that's okay until someone says you are a fool for buying into to the way you listen to it.

Kegger, myself and some others have been pushing your point all along but there those who just can't (or won't) leave it at that. Even though they may sometimes agree - it's superficial, the manner in which they do is either a little condescending or with some provisional addendum.

So around and around it goes. Obsessions or the will to be always right always seem to resurface.



 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


Rantz - Short answer by an old dog: It is an inside joke to my fellow Yanks and those who pay attention to what is going down in American Politics.



Long answer by a Democrat: I assumed when I posted it there would be some questions asked since American Politics is a subject that can wear anyone out very quickly. I didn't expect all of the old dogs to get the reference; but, it refers to the, mostly evangelical, right wing of the Republican Party in the US. Part of what W. calls his base. When the vote totals were in on election night, the group that claimed the most responsibility for Bush's win was the Christian conservatives who voiced their support for his "everyman values" and their "rejection" of the "morals of Hollywood". Over 20% of voters said their main concern in choosing a President was based on "moral values".


The United States is becoming embroiled in a culture war, as the pundits state it, which is placing the Red states against the Blue states. Or, more appropriately, the rural against the urban voters. That is reflected in the narrowness of the vote. The Republicans are claimimg a mandate was given to Bush as he recieved the largest number of popular votes ever given a Presidential candidate. The 49% of the electorate that did not vote for Bush are trying to remind the administration that he also had more votes against him than any presidential candidate in history. In the mean time the social conservatives are flexing their muscles and, if I may interpret here, intimidating television networks into moral decisions such as preempting the broadcast of "Saving Private Ryan". There was fear of a backlash by conservatives and fines by the FCC for the language and violence the film displays. This following the outrage over Janet Jackson's bared breast at the Super Bowl (an obvious connection I'm certain I didn't have to point out to you). It was to have run on Veterans Day here in the Ol' US of A.
One side feels the Ten Commandments and Jesus are being removed from society and, in particular government buildings and institutions that have, for years, used a reference to God in everday business. The other side feels we are living in a secular society that has embraced a multitude of cultures and religions in the past 130 years. That side feels references to God and Jesus in government is pushing the separation of church and state for the benefit of some and not for all. A recent Supreme Court case dealt with removing the words, "under God", from the Pledge of Allegiance. The case was brought by one of those pagan atheists. It and the removal of a Ten Commandments monument inside an Southern Red State courthouse have become rallying points for both sides of the debate.

The religious right sees W. as being placed in office by God's will. The secular left is uneasy with the right's sometimes fervent belief that "the end of days" has started with W. rearranging the Middle East to suit Apocalyptic references in the Christian Bible (Book of Revelations).

The left was made even more uneasy by the publication of this letter of congratulations from Bob Jones, the founder of Bob Jones University. B.J.U. is a Christian university that "discourages" dating between the races. W. campaigned there in 2000.


http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=Bob%20Jones/George%20W.%20Bush








Rick - I would agree we need a list of labels that are providing consistently good sounding recordings. But, I would think it would be a pretty short list.



Ghia - Why, I don't know how to respond; other than - wash my car?


The Mercury SACD's are recorded, as you will see in the link, with two SACD tracks. One is the original two cahnnel mix that was issued on LP. The other is the original three track master that was done at the time of the original recording. Three tube mics were used across the front of the stage and fed to a three track tube based tape deck or early video tape machine. The original three tracks were folded into two for the restrictions of LP. The three track masters have never really been released before this time. The early reviews indicate comparisons to the original masters make these three track versions the most faithful release to date. The discs I have are the Starker, the 1812, The FireBird suite, Dvorak #7, Stavinsky conducts, all on regular CD. Each of these is an exceptional recording. I would be happy to make copies and send them to you since many of these will not be available as SACD for a while. I would suggest you also look at the RCA Living Stereo SACD's which mostly share the same techniques with the Mercury's. The "Pictures at an Exhibition" got a great review recently. I have the Beethoven/Mendelssohn and the sound is very, very good.


http://www.highfidelityreview.com/news/news.asp?newsnumber=11865621






Kegger - I'll have to think awhile on what I want to say in comment to your post. We have agreed we can all like different things and have no problem with that. I don't think that my LP's always give better sound than your digital. As we have reached consensus on the fact that the mix is what is the most important part of quality sound, I have lots of LP's that I think sound horrible. I'm not attempting to get anyone to buy a turntable (though I can't believe Mr. Dual hasn't started to haunt Ghia's dreams; you know, the turntable with one arm under the bed and all that). And most of my listening right now is through digital because of the convenience. So I'm not wishing CD's and all digital formats would go away. That would be very unproductive. I am always amazed, however, at the faith that peole seem willing to put into digital.




I'm fighting a battle that doesn't need to be fought, tilting at windmills, looking for Dulcinea. What I find to be excellent recordings no longer are being made or they are made by small labels that can't have a Steely Dan in their bullpen. They record small groups and artists that most people have never heard of and music that sometimes is less than popular (and sometimes less than listenable). Labels such as Mapleshade, Chesky, Reference, Wilson and a handful of others that you have to search to find. What these labels do is similar to how recordings were made all the time not that long ago. But the bean counters got their hands on things. And the producers became "artists". And more recordings turn out to be less than what they could have been. It is a paradox that has been in audio for the past 30 years at least. It goes along with the electrifcation of all types of music to the point where most people don't know what a cello, or a single voice singing, sounds like in a room without a speaker amplifying its sound.




The Chet Baker and the early recordings on the Elvis disc are examples of this manner of recording "live" in a studio. If you want a really great sounding recording you will likely have to go to a group you have never heard of before. If you want Steely Dan you will buy it in the format the large record companies want you to buy it in. (Conspiracy theories abound!)



I want the audio version of Ansel Adams, not the equivalent of "US" magazine. Not everyone can be an Adams; and, more copies of "US" sell. But I can't help wondering how many people have an Adams on their wall vs. how many "US" magazines are thrown away each month.



Rick - How about telling more about Mapleshade and the recordings you have that you listen to frequently.







 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1137
Registered: Aug-04
Jan,

I appreciate the explanation. And I thought our brand of politics is bad enough! It seems you Americans are much more "obsessive" whereas we Aussies seem to be a little too laid back about it all. Once the fat lady sings it's really all over here. Maybe we'll live longer or something - depending on our nation's security and whether our friends across the Pacific feel like being our 'Big Brother' again, of course.

BTW - In your enviable position I would thought of something other than "wash my car."

Perhaps you did! :-)


 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1138
Registered: Aug-04
Just to add to Jan's "Living Stereo" info for those interested:

http://www.livingstereo-sacd.com/index.jsp
 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 120
Registered: Jun-04
Here are two more links.

http://www.deccaclassics.com/music/mercurylivingpresence/

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/256006

MR,

The RCA "Living Stereo" logo brings back fond memories. Thanks for the link.

Cheers!


 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 121
Registered: Jun-04
Jan, great posts on 11-22-04/10:50 pm and 11-23-04/ 1:31 pm. Thank you for explaining the "That, my friends, is what just got a President reelected. xxxxxx... "moral value" statement." I was scratching my head trying to figure what the heck that meant. Of course, being a non-American and not interested in political affairs south of the border, I didn't quite get the joke until I read your reply to MR. Oh, well.



 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1139
Registered: Aug-04
Don,

A pleasure, I found that link near the end of the article in highfidelityreview linked from Jan's post. Although I'm not into the classics (still getting my head around Mahler#5) I think it's wonderful to see the good things that are happening to preserve worthy recordings.

Yes, Jan had me well and truly wondering back there, I was thinking - 'oh no, not again' but, luckilly I was on the wrong track. They sure go all out over there!

 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 122
Registered: Jun-04
I think most of the debates on this thread reached an impasse a long time ago.

MR, reading your last line there ("...to preserve worthy recordings"), I went back several posts to read Jan's Nov. 22/10:50 p.m. posting, "They [good sounding albums] are made by dedicated artists and producers that care about the product they present to the public for consumption." I then thought of some of the names of producers that I have become very familiar with in the last 25 years: Creed Taylor (jazz and jazz fusion; his own CTI label), Rudy Van Gelder (Blue Note label), Orrin Keepnews and Helen Keane (mostly of Bill Evans' recordings), James William Guercio (the first few Chicago albums), and George Martin (Beatles and others). Yeah, these are some of the producers, I think, who really gave a damn about the product they were selling to us. Years later, we are benefitting from the reissues just as we are from the Mercury and Living Stereo catalogues.

Jan, the articles pertaining to Bob Jones III (never heard him before) were, as always, disturbing but not surprising. So, America is not only divided between white and black, but also between red and blue? I know this is not the proper forum to say that. My apologies.


 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1860
Registered: Dec-03
I'm not sure if I want to post something or listen to some music
or do a little building/tweeking.

Humm what will I do.....
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1861
Registered: Dec-03
AAAAHHHHH I think I'll stay away from the pc for awhile!
Let it cool off.

Probably check in with you guy's and gals tommorrow!

Ghia I'm still holding second place!
How you doin?
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"BTW - In your enviable position I would thought of something other than "wash my car."


Euphemisms, Rantz, euphemisms, to suit a moral values landscape.


You'll spend a lot of time trying to get your "head around" Mahler's 5th and I'm not sure you'll have much to speak of when you're done. The only thing that comes to mind when I think of Mahler's music is cymbal crashes.





Don - I have heard of Creed Taylor but not heard his music. I don't do much fusion, Miles Davis lost me in the 60's, but I worked with a fellow that loved fusion. Am I correct that Rashand Roland Kirk (?) fits into that genre? I have several of his recordings that I used to listen to and haven't pulled them out in ages. Stanley Clarke and Billy Cobham were quite popular as demos when I first began selling audio. Corea and Romantic Warrior albums are in my LP's somewhere.



Almost ever Blue Note that I have or have listened to was a masterpiece of production. Even their "live" on site recordings had more in them than most studio albums could muster on Columbia, RCA or most any other label. What is happening with their reissues? Anything on hi rez?




As I think about some of the labels that almost always had great sound many of them were started by artists frustrated by the "factory" labels.




I know not many on this thread listen to Country; but, the LP's Patsy Cline made with Chet Atkins as the producer are worlds away from a George Strait album. It is a matter of a producer who thinks the performer makes their job easy and a producer who thinks the performer is just the beginning of the work.




Politics needs to stay out of this forum as much as possible. But, to let you know what I think Democrats and Republicans both see happening in the US right now. We are becoming more and more divided between black and white, red and blue, evangelical and secular, hawks and doves, the powerful and those with no one to speak for them, and, the rich and everyone else. We are fearing the browns that are moving into the country to fill low paying jobs and the browns that are moving our jobs overseas. More than anything else, we are becoming a country divided between debtors and creditors. And, though many don't seem to realize it, our debt is going overseas.




 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1862
Registered: Dec-03
Jan: I can relate to how well the recording is
made makes all the difference in the world.

I think most of us have agreed that it takes a proper mix on the hi rez
formats for it to be any good "or possably better"
John has said that on many occasions!

And I wonder if maybe that is why people like myselsf and mr rantz
have embraced these formats so much because him and I seem to share
simular taste in music and the disks that both of us have come across
for the most part are recorded really well.

Maybe the masters or the recording equipment or the person doing
the original recording of what we seem to like did a good job.
And many have noticed the surround mixes that a lot of us agree on
to be very good were done by the same people.
 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 123
Registered: Jun-04
Jan,

"Jazz fusion" was panned, as expected, by jazz purists (me included) when it came out in the '70's. The motive? Money, of course. And that one important thing in the music business --- survival. So, mainstream artists like Grover Washington, Bob James (who played piano on several Paul Desmond albums), arranger-horn player Tom Scott, and of course, Miles Davis joined the movement. But Miles was seen as a revolutionary figure at that time; today, his fusion works are regarded by a few as nothing more than excesses in artistry. Chick Corea's Return to Forever graced the scene with an ephemeral impact, quickly gravitating towards the same excesses that Davis and the other fusion artists had embraced. Also, if you recall, at that time, the Moog synthesizer was introduced, and Corea was one of its active emissaries.

One artist that shook the complacent jazz scene was the Brazilian self-taught arranger and keyboard player, Eumir Deodato, who reworked Richard Strauss's "Zarathustra" into a jazz funk chart. He followed it up with Glenn Miller's "Moonlight Serenade" and Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue." His musical credibility had already been established long before that, with arranging and recording assignments for Frank Sinatra, Astrud Gilberto, and his fellow Brazilian artists.

Today, of course, much of that jazz fusion music is played on elevators, in supermarkets, and doctors' clinics. Yes, Muzak with a funk.

Columbia released Dave Brubeck's seminal "Time Out" album on SACD a while back. Same with Billie Holiday's "Lady in Satin." I haven't seen any RCA or Blue Note hi-rez issues; maybe they haven't reached our shores yet.


 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 124
Registered: Jun-04
Two more record producers that are worth mentioning are Norman Granz and George Avakian.

To paraphrase the Lexus slogan, had it not been for these gentlemen's "relentless pursuit for artistic excellence," the jazz world would be empty and barren today.


 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1140
Registered: Aug-04
Maybe not THE hi-res but Blue Note have a catalogue of 24bit remasters from thelonliestmonk to john coaltrain etc.

http://www.bluenote.com/rvg_promo.asp



 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 331
Registered: Feb-04
Blue Note has released Coltrane's Blue Train on SACD. I haven't heard it yet, being content with the vinyl and CD versions. Also, the controversial Norah Jones SACD (see related thread) is a Blue Note release. I think there may be a few other high-res Blue Notes out there.

I would add to Don RX-1's wonderful list of notable record producers Bob Thiele, who produced many of Coltrane's classic records on Impulse! The two dozen or so Impulse! recordings I have on vinyl and CD possess excellent sound quality. What is it about jazz recordings from the sixties?
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


My guess would be "Blue Train" has had more reissues than any other recording. I know I have at least four different versions.



 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 333
Registered: Feb-04
I would guess you're right. Other contenders might be "Kind of Blue" and "Dark Side of the Moon"
 

Silver Member
Username: Ojophile

ON

Post Number: 125
Registered: Jun-04
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
(or how the heck could 4 horses sing in harmony?)

PC speakers must be "on".

http://svt.se/hogafflahage/hogafflaHage_site/Kor/hestekor.swf

 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 344
Registered: Mar-04
Don,
Saw that a while back...cute. :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 649
Registered: Dec-03
Wait a minute.........................I was told Clapton is God. (Although great, I always had two words for you-Jeff Beck!) Now am I to understand Ghia tosses Jan's name into the mix? Holy _ _ _ _ Budda, we're in it pretty deep right now. Bill, Rev. Jesse and Al, Ms. Pelosi I am truly sorry.....................................

Before I forget, Happy Thanksgiving to all my fellow countrymen and countrywomen.

I don't have the time now, but I'm putting together a year end ramble for all very soon.

Jan, I'll include a list of Mapleshade recordings.

The only NEWSFLASH I'll share with you is CREAM will be doing a reunion tour in 2005. I have this info from a corporate sponsor. Definitely a tour and maybe a new material CD. Rehearsal's to begin late January '05.

I remember a few posts back Rantz commenting on Stevie Ray. For those of you who have not heard of Jimmy Lane, check him out. He is an absolute guitar monster. He just did a CD with Double Trouble backing him. I have been a lover of the blues first and formost. I mean real blues like Robert Johnson, Leadbelly, RL Burnside, and the Wolf, and so on. Check this guy out, he's the real thing.

Cheers!
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1141
Registered: Aug-04
Rick,

"I have been a lover of the blues first and formost"

Well, well, well! Guess you have great musical taste too!

In the House Of Blues there IS more than one god!

The Cream reunion! That means Ginger and Jack are still alive? I keep thinking it must be getting near dawn for some of these geysers until I realise I'm around the same age. Heavens to Mergatroid!

I'll keep an eye out for Jimmy Lane - there was nothing sweeter than watching (and hearing) Vaughn - whether he was out of it or straight!

 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 650
Registered: Dec-03
Rantz,

I hope it's REAL LONG night my friend. I would like to move on to my next incarnation having heard Cream live, one last time. I'll pass along the info as I get it.

PS The last I heard, Ginger was raising polo horses in Wales or Scotland. I can't remember where. Funny, the was time I saw him he could barely sit upright on a drum kit stool. (LOL!)
 

Gold Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 2497
Registered: Dec-03
Just to say I have been reading but have little time to write. I am not avoiding questions etc. But thanks for the warm comment, Ghia. Will write some more at weekend.

December HiFi News has a thorough review of the Denon 3910 and says the sound, for sure, is nowhere near as good as that of the Denon 2900 it is intended to replace: buy a 2900 while stocks last. Hope this reassures MR, Ghia, 2c and others with recent 2900s, as it should. Ken Kessler asks "What has happened to the audio industry?" after listening to his late father's LP collection from the 50s and 60s. Mercury Living Presence new releases get great reviews on the music pages.

I do agree with Jan that the Mercury Living Presence stereo CDs transfered from 40+ years ago are something anyone could consider as a point of reference for evaluating "progress" in sound recording. How the CD and SACD tracks compare will be interesting to know. I am not sure they used three mikes with the intention of playing three channels, there was only stereo and mono at that time, but perhaps Jan can answer this.

Just my opinion, as always.
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1142
Registered: Aug-04
John A,

Thanks for the info re the 2900. I was a little upset when I discovered the 3910 is the same price as the 2900 was: $1999 (existing stocks can be had for around $1500 here now). That news makes me happy with my decision. It's amazing how they add a few more options, keep the price down and cut down where right where they shouldn't - on the sound quality. Brilliant!

 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 334
Registered: Feb-04
Three mikes were used for Mercury Living Presence recordings. The sound from the center mike was remixed to the left and right channels for the stereo releases. The SACDs restore the original center channel. Jan can probably in fill in the details.

The original stereo LPs are much in demand, as are the RCA "Living Stereo" LPs. At the local used record shop, they sell for around $30 per LP. It could be about sound quality; it could be some kind of audio f e t i s h.
 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 345
Registered: Mar-04
I actually met Jack Bruce a couple years ago. Nice man and could still put down a mean bass line.

Tidbit - It was widely assumed Bruce's 2003 album, "More Jack Than God" was an intentional jab at Eric Clapton, but in fact it was the recording engineer suggesting changing the levels during the final mixing, there should be more Jack than God, referring to (Alan Parsons Live guitarist) Godfrey Townsend who played lead guitar on the album.

Townsend, a NYC native, occasionally performs a tribute to Clapton around NYC, called "Clapton is God(frey)" where he wows the audience with some amazing guitar licks.



 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1143
Registered: Aug-04
Two Cents

Good info - thanks. Getting one on SACD to sample could be interesting and possibly, very worthwhile. As would one of the new (old) Elton John albums on the SACD reissues. The MC mixes will have the center carry John's voice only.

Sem

I hope Godfrey sterilizes his guitars :-)

Interesting trivia!


 

Silver Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 335
Registered: Feb-04
Rantz,

Sometimes I wonder why I'm wasting brain cells on this info. I think I have a couple of Mercury Living Presence CDs. If I pick up an MLP SACD, I'll post a comparison of the two formats. As always, I'd be interested in hearing your impressions if you beat me to the punch.

I'm counting the minutes before Thanksgiving, a four-day weekend for folks in the U.S. I send my best regards to you and your fellow Aussies. I thank you for the times you've lifted my spirits during my travels abroad. Aussies seem to be all over the globe, especially where beer is to be found ; )

And Happy Thanksgiving to my fellow Americans on this forum, blue and red!
 

Gold Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 1144
Registered: Aug-04
Two Cents,

Thanks for your kind thoughts and the same to you and yours. As far as the brain cells go, I'm sure you can spare them :-)


All,

Although we don't celebrate Thanksgiving downunder - we should and do so every day. I wish all the best to my forum friends and all in the US and elswhere.

Yes, we ARE known to be drawn to beer - like moths to a flame, though we seem survive most of the time :-)

 

Silver Member
Username: Rick_b

New York USA

Post Number: 651
Registered: Dec-03
Rantz,

Right back at you my friend.

Cheers to all, everywhere!
 

J. Vigne
Unregistered guest


"I think most of us have agreed that it takes a proper mix"


Kegger - What we are talking about here has nothing to do with "the mix". There were rudimentary mixing consoles when these recordings were made but not at all what you are used to in today's recordings. Most of these recordings were made with every musician in the room at the same time playing "the song". Listen to the Baker or Elvis that I sent you. These are recordings where the "mix" is shoving a blanket into the kick drum because it's too loud; or, asking the upright bass player to back off a bit because he's coming on too strong. These are recordings made with a real live band playing a whole song through. No overdubs, multitracking, gating, doubling, phase shifting or anything! This is before Wha-Wha pedals on electric guitars.

That is a large part of what makes them special. The musicians were communicating with one another while they recorded. It was done at one time and that was the recording. If they screwed up they started over. The Blue Note jazz albums were a terrific example of this. Mostly out of necessity from lack of equipment the records were made in as few takes as possible. Editing, what there was of it, was done with a razor blade and a splicing block.

It is a technique that only classical music even begins to approach today. And even that is over produced to suit the time and budget constraints that are the reality of the music industry today. If you listen to the Mercury and RCA classical recordings of forty years ago you will be amazed at the presence of the sound. Obviously the engineers who did the reissue in SACD felt there was nothing that could be added by remixing the originals into "surround sound".


This is what upsets me about the way music is recorded today. If what was accomplished all those many years ago with three mics is as good as these recordings sound (and the originals go for more than $30 usually, partly due to the sound and partly due to saying you own them), what has happened to the recording industry? Why does a drum set need ten microphones on it?

I know it's not the music you listen to but these recordings are something everyone should hear for a reference point in audio.

My understanding of the reason three channels were used for these recordings is a matter of format. When the recordings were made the thinking was that the "new" format of open reel tape would be the next wave of improved audio. The tapes could be made from early generation master tapes on a one to one basis. The quality of these tapes, if you ever heard one, was far superior to LP. But making tapes was a time consuming affair that cost more money than pressing an LP. So the three channel format that had been pioneered by Bell labs since the late 30's was used in the recording format but had to be scrapped for the limitations of the LP. Three channel tape decks quickly faded from use and were replaced by two channel in deference to the LP. Three channels kicked around for awhile, but, as the LP gained in popularity due to its convenience over open reel tape, an inferior format dictated what would be the norm for the music industry. I understand there were some three channel tapes sold of the Mercury recordings but I have never seen or heard any of them. All these recordings were made before Ray Dolby introduced his Type A noise reduction systems in the early 70's. As engineers tried to get good sound on tape decks the medium advanced, and recordings were made with 2" tape running at 30" per second in an effort to get the best sound. But by then mixing boards were growing and the number of mics were keeping up with the number of channels.


It is the over production of recordings that I lament. Even the classical labels have gone to dozens of mics fed to a 32 or 64 track mixer. The sound of the 70's and 80's DG recordings that Larry comments on so frequently are the "best" (?) examples of how not to make a recording. And there isn't a pop or rock album made today (that I know of) that isn't potted and panned into what now you accept as a "good recording".

All this made recordings like DSOTM possible but took down the art of making a simple recording. There are labels that still try to make really excellent recordings but they have (largely)unknown musicians and sometimes music that isn't what you were expecting.

But when you hear these really great recordings it is like getting to drive a Ferrari Testarosa around the block and then having to accept the best you can have every day is a Camry.




 

Silver Member
Username: Sem

New York USA

Post Number: 347
Registered: Mar-04
To all, thank you for all the knowledge, advice, the help, the laughs, and the serious thoughts as well. But most of all, thank you all for the sense of friendship I feel when I come here. I used to come here to gain home theater knowledge. I come here now, for so much more.

And with that here's a Thanksgiving joke. I hope you all find this as amusing as I do.

PARROT

A young man named John received a parrot as a gift. The parrot had a bad attitude and an even worse vocabulary. Every word out of the bird's mouth was rude, obnoxious and laced with profanity.

John tried and tried to change the bird's attitude by consistently saying only polite words, playing soft music and anything else he could think of to "clean up" the bird's vocabulary.

Finally, John was fed up and he yelled at the parrot. The parrot yelled back. John shook the parrot and the parrot got angrier and even ruder. In desperation, John threw up his hands, grabbed the bird and put him in the freezer.

For a few minutes the parrot squawked and kicked and screamed. Then suddenly there was total quiet. Not a peep was heard for over a minute. Fearing that he'd hurt the parrot, John quickly opened the door to the freezer.

The parrot calmly stepped out onto John's outstretched arm and said, "I believe I may have offended you with my rude language and actions. I'm sincerely remorseful for my inappropriateness and transgressions, and I fully intend to do everything I can to correct my rude and unforgivable behavior."

John was stunned at the change in the bird's attitude. As he was about to ask the parrot what had made such a dramatic change in his behavior, the bird continued, "May I ask what the turkey did?"


HAPPY THANKSGIVING
 

Gold Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 1863
Registered: Dec-03
JAN: In response to.
"I think most of us have agreed that it takes a proper mix"

Kegger - What we are talking about here has nothing to do with "the mix". "

-----------------------------

"Kegger - I'll have to think awhile on what I want to say in comment to your post. We have agreed we can all like different things and have no problem with that. I don't think that my LP's always give better sound than your digital. As we have reached consensus on the fact that the MIX is what is the most important part of quality sound"

Then what was that? As you mention the importance of mix!

________________________________________________

And I'm not going to say that recording a band all at once or individual
is the "correct or wrong" way to do it.

It sounds like you believe this is "the proper" way to record!

"That is a large part of what makes them special. The musicians were communicating with one another while they recorded. It was done at one time and that was the recording. If they screwed up they started over. The Blue Note jazz albums were a terrific example of this. Mostly out of necessity from lack of equipment the records were made in as few takes as possible. Editing, what there was of it, was done with a razor blade and a splicing block.

It is a technique that only classical music even begins to approach today. And even that is over produced to suit the time and budget constraints that are the reality of the music industry today. If you listen to the Mercury and RCA classical recordings of forty years ago you will be amazed at the presence of the sound. Obviously the engineers who did the reissue in SACD felt there was nothing that could be added by remixing the originals into "surround sound".


This is what upsets me about the way music is recorded today. If what was accomplished all those many years ago with three mics is as good as these recordings sound (and the originals go for more than $30 usually, partly due to the sound and partly due to saying you own them), what has happened to the recording industry? Why does a drum set need ten microphones on it?"


"There is no way to say this without it sounding
bad but I don't see any other way to word it!"

What makes you the athority on how something should be recorded?
Because you like the sound?
Because others agree?
Because you believe this is the proper technique?


What about all the engineers who use multiple mics and mixing channels?
They like the sound!
Others agree with them!
They believe it is the proper technique!

So it sounds to me you believe something should be recorded a certain
way and that you like the sound when it's done this way.

Does that mean any other way of doing it is not correct?
And that people who use other techniques don't know what they doing?

And there isn't possably a technique that has come about from
technology that benefits from multiple mics and mixing channels?
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Facebook

Shop Related Deals

Directory

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us