| Author |
Thread: Archive through October 10, 2004 |
    
Classical 1 Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 02:29 pm: |
|
John A. - your point is very well taken, sir. Yes, I DO try to find the best recordings possible, and yet have given to local libraries literally hundreds of discs which I feel did not meet my standards of "good" recordings. I have found many DG discs, for example, which I felt were badly recorded. Especially ones up to the very late 80s.
I understand that Chanticleer, for example, previews every master, and OKs or not the final recording. That is one reason they are perceived as being "so good."
I had the good fortune recently to be in San Francisco, where Michael Tilson Thomas was performing the Mahler 2nd. Oh, my! What a wonderful recording that SHOULD be! We'll see how the SACD matches up to my perception of the original, "live" performance. I was on the main floor, just off-center, about half-way back - my usual "favorite" position. There, I get the hall reverbs as well as the straight path from the stage. In cases such as this, I'm afraid that the SACD "ambiance" will make for a more accurate reproduction than my 2-channel system will show. But - again - whenever the CD comes out, I shall buy it, and close my eyes, and remember. . .
Looking back over the past 25 years, I must have spent way, way too much money on concert tickets! Oh, yes, and opera, also. Houston was especially fine - San Francisco a revelation - Chicago Lyric always top-notch, though the seating is rather cramped, and I'm rather large!
But I have extra-special memories of the tiny little opera house in Central City, Colorado where, every summer, they produce quality operas in an historic building with, I believe, only about 700 seats. I always try for balcony, center front - where I nearly hang over the stage! The singers may not be quite up to Renee Fleming, but they give it their all - and it is magical. I once saw "Faust" there - and broke down in tears with Margarite's aria from prison, as did most of the audience. It was THAT good!
Unfortunately, sir, I do not and cannot get a recording of Central City performances. I think that you, with your obvious history of European concert performances, would be enchanted.
So - yes, good recordings are essential to top-notch memory-journeys, IF they are available - but I find that most of the performances that I yearn to "reproduce" are available in quality recording form. So far, anyway!
More later. . . |
|
Relevant Product Info
|
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 02:50 pm: |
|
Rantz - In response to:
" ... well recorded/engineered hi-res multi-channel music suprasses stereo for my enjoyment levels. I am well over the ghee whiz factor ..."
I'm not trying to suggest that no one should enjoy MC, in fact I want to encourage as many as possible to explore this format and hopefully find a satisfaction level that I have yet to encounter. And that should be possible no matter what equipment you own. I have known a fair number of musicians and conductors that have a system that I would consider no more than mid fi but they find the enjoyment in the music because of they way they listen to music. I don't think it is too difficult to achieve satisfaction from whatever system you enjoy listening to, it certainly doesn't have to be Krell or Mac. One of my favorite things as a salesperson was to sell a small, inexpensive system to someone who wanted better than the big box stores offered. I seldom saw them again for more audio gear but they often stopped to pick up more music. I never had anyone who was unhappy with their purchase.
But I come at the MC world from the unfortunate vantage of a former audio salesperson who heard the promises of the industry for over twenty five years and had to justify a purchase to those clients who wanted to know about the new toy. Whether it was CD4, bucket brigade delays or Dolby Digtal the promise was always to bring the listener and the performer closer toegther. The early Yamaha and Sony digital delays had dozens of preset surround modes that both manufacturers claimed were modeled around their own extensive tests in various venues that, when selected, would give a perfect representation of that space. Both, in their desire to have more buttons and functions than anyone else, had the ability to move your seating location or change the number of people listening with you and so on. These also gave poor results and have faded from memory. So my recollection of SACD and DVD-A is they represent yet another attempt to bring listener and performer together in the same space.
Now my argument is if the format cannot perform this function any better than two channel what is the purpose of the format? I understand SACD started as a two channel format that was intended to be a higher resolution format than red book CD's. The conversion to surround came as an answer to the commercial pressures from DVD-A. But, in both formats, is the reason for MC no more than because the speakers are already there? I would hope there is more to it than that. If not then I'll just stick to two channel.
Industries change for three reasons, I believe, though not being an economist there could be more. First, they change for economic reasons (profit); second, they change because someone has a better idea and the abiltiy to get it to market; third, they will change when forced to (legislation). It is unlikely the MC market will change due to the third factor; but, that is how cars became safer, the workplace became safer and products and our environment became safer. The first factor is the most common reason for change. This is why we have CD's and why John rails at Sony's marketing. I feel that CD's got a hold in the market not because they represented better sound but more likely, due to economics (read bean counters), the state of LP manufacture had sunk to such low levels of quality. The convenience of CD's and the lack of the problems of LP's meant consumers were willing to pay more money for the same music they already owned. (As we have discussed, this was when consumers owned the music they purchased.)
But the market for a better product had existed, if only in small quantities, for years before CD was invented. And that market was looking for recordings that put the listener more immediately in touch with the performer. The market that developed from that desire was created by those who thought they had a better way to make a recording; one that would offer a sense of the performance occurring in front of the listener. This is the very basis for High End Audio.
In my opinion this product did its job quite well on many occasions. As Classical 1 suggests the memory of hearing a performance filled in enough holes in the technical side of playback that I could be quite satisfied with the results.
Therefore if I have a product that suits my needs and I am asked to replace that product with another that does the job no better; why should I be expected to make that change? Like the manufacturer I have no economic reason to do so. If I am presented with a product that, to my opinion, actually performs the job at a lower level of quality (guitars split in two and splashed around the room) than I already have; why would I ever change?
There exists far too much equipment and too many recordings for me to say that MC is a failure from my limited experience; but, in my experience so far I have heard nothing that makes me want to have this format at an added expense to myself. I hope that changes because from the first time anyone hears a surround demonstration the possibilities are enticing.
How will it change? Only if the format is allowed to progress will there be a chance that the sound may improve. If the format withers from inattention of consumers then no one wins and the money spent by consumers will have been thrown away most likely. So please continue to enjoy the format. Be exhuberant, joyful, and ready to share the mesage with all you meet. And I will wait patiently on the side. If the economics of the format allow, someone with a better idea will eventually come along and make a better product. Until then I'll stick with my two channels and more money for music.
As to those who just don't care; may your lives be filled with Corvairs and Vioxx.
Kegger - Understanding Mr. Lucas' relationship with Doby Labs will explain why the Star Wars reissues are in Dolby. DTS is a verbotten subject at Skywalker Ranch.
|
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 781
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 06:28 pm: |
|
Jan,
Thanks and your opinions are well stated as usual. Just a couple of points:
"in fact I want to encourage as many as possible to explore this format and hopefully find a satisfaction level that I have yet to encounter."
Great, good to see. Not only do I think we all should encourage all audio lovers to explore their favourite formats, but also to desist in denegrating them - unless it's about a particular recording.
Unfortunately, I can't prove to you that I've found a satisfaction level with hi-rez MC that you are yet to encounter. But, there's no real point. Satisfaction levels could be like one's pain threshold - it differs with everyone.
"Therefore if I have a product that suits my needs and I am asked to replace that product with another that does the job no better; why should I be expected to make that change?"
(a) Who is asking you to replace anything?
(b) You should be expected to do only as you please!
I hope I don't come across as to be telling everyone they should toss their stereo gear and adopt MC. My point is that I like both and have a preference for quality MC hi-rez. I just see no reason for this format to be continuously subject to such negativity. Criticizing particular recordings is one thing and I have no problem with that. It's true that not all recordings are excellent, let alone even good, but when MC recordings have been mixed/engineered correctly they can be truly wonderful amd IMHO, much better than 2c.
If hi-rez MC does nothing for you then so be it. I am yet to hear "guitars slit in two and splashed around the room" unless the recording is aimed at effects rather than the music. For the most part, I think MC separates the instruments and gives one the impression of being among the band, or in the audience with the band in front and ambient sounds from the sides and rear.
But all that is irrelevent to me as long as I like what I hear. Such as: the excellent CD recording of "Riding with the King." I recently acquired the DVD-A version. It's not big on effect sounds but I'll listen to the latter over the CD anytime. To me, it's seems more real: depth, clarity and imagery is just excellent.
Here's to the music!
|
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 782
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 06:38 pm: |
|
Ghia
I do understand that the tweaks mentioned in my jab at the Mac owners are related to the bookshelf speakers. It's just that you're all Mac owners.
BTW - I have tried taking my floostanders off the stands, different positions and so on, but the sound seems best where they are now. Room acoustics and furniture placement are the reasons for this I think.
Enjoy your new toys! |
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2224
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 07:31 pm: |
|
Classical 1,
Many thanks. I look to recorded music for the same sorts of reasons, and my appetite is whetted by a severe case of "don't get around much any more". At least musically. And this may change. No sane person will read all those archives at the top of the page, but some of the posts in the earliest one may help provide the context to this thread, started by J. Vigne and by me with the intention of examining, what, if anything, multichannel has to offer, and why people listen to recordings in the first place.
Thanks, too, Jan.
As before, I am struck by the parallel with the debate concerning mono versus stereo. It is long ago, and I was probably not paying much attention; stereo had been adopted long before I got my own, first little system.
But the "mono rules" people made similar points, such as
1. Stereo is for gee-whiz special effects, not music.
2. It is expensive; you need twice as many speakers, amplifier channels, etc - why not spend your money on a better-sounding single channel?
3. Pretty well all recordings are in mono (this was true until well into the 60s).
4. The few stereo recordings promise what they cannot deliver "like being there" (in some cases "better than being there"!)
5. Engineers often do not know where to put microphones.
6. Stereo is a distraction from the music itself.
7. The need to provide arresting stereo effects gets in the way of performers' judgement about disposition in performance.
...and so on.
In my view we are roughly at the stage with multichannel that we were at with stereo when much of the mono catalogue was being electronically reprocessed "to give stereo effect on stereo equipment". And that was dire, from a musical point of view, no question. Matrixed surround-sound effects (Prologic etc) can be done by our equipement, not just by the engineers, and that is a small difference.
I do think multi-channel sound, properly recorded and played back, has a lot of potential. It will never displace stereo completely, just has stereo has not entirely displaced mono, but it is possible to imagine a time, not too distant, where almost everything is presented with multi-channel as, at least, an option.
If movies have introduced the demand for "special effects" and the take-up of multi-channel systems, it does not follow that these cannot be put to good use for music alone. Again, this is a difference - the demand for stereo came initially from "Audiophile"-type people, and the "entertainment" demand caught up, later.
What we need, I think, is some sensible and critical awareness of what multichannel can do. Maybe we have achieved something on this thread, in a small way. I still hear the guys on "CD review" speaking disparagingly of "ping-pong stereo"; it is still there in some new recordings.
The other new feature is the obtacle the recording industry has placed, deliberately, in the way of people adopting surround sound formats. Right now I have loaned my Mahler 5 DVD-A to my audio to dealer, to check it out on players, and see if they can carry out the required "firmware upgrade" themselves on an NAD T533; the one on display in the shop had exactly the same problem as mine. I give them marks for that, and NAD, who have responded to me, and I think have been caught on the hop with new and stronger copy protection. I have heard nothing from EMI, not even "sorry". The recording industry is shooting itself in the foot with these new possibilities, in my view. Nothing comparable took place with the introduction of stereo. Did it? HDCD is a rearguard action, and irrelevant. It is sold as "Giving better sound". I believe the Emperor has no clothes. "Better sound" is often touted, and I suppose people such as Old Dogs, listen, decide for themselves, and are inclined to damn the whole lot of 'em when they do not deliver on their promises.
I very much think it would be in the industry's interests for me to be able to burn a few copies of "Spem in alium" and send them to friends; it is minority stuff, a narrow market niche: only the really dedicated Early Music specialist is likely to buy it on spec., and most of those are probably busy singing or playing the sackbutt or something. But what you can really do with multichannel (in that case 4.0) is on that single DVD-A, for anyone with ears. However, the industry doesn't see copying in that way. It has no confidence itself in the superiority of the new product. How it can then lament the slow take-up of mutichannel recordings, I have no idea. I suppose it has grown accustomed to market control, and wants to be able to go on telling people what to buy. I doubt if this happened with the introduction of stereo, either.
Was it then a simpler world, with more of the spirit of Adam Smith than Bill Gates, or I am I just suffering from the "former-golden-age" nostalgia that afflicts people, I have noticed, as they get older? |
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2225
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 07:40 pm: |
|
Just to say "hear, hear" to My Rantz, whose last two posts I had not read before posting as above.
No-one is urging anyone to replace anything. Keep your CDs. And your LPs. Just consider that we have more options, now.
We should always decide for ourselves. And always listen to the music, not the medium that delivers it. The medium itself should be transparent. That is what some of the great stereo recording engineers were aiming for, and they did great things. They helped get music out into the world. |
J. Vigne Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 08:09 pm: |
|
I'm going to guess the Republicans are hoping Friday come pretty quick. As the day has gone on more and more of Mr. Cheney's statements are being shown to be less than truthful. Matter of fact some are just outright lies. No matter, George will save the day.
Hi-Oh, Silver. Away!!!
|
|
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 08:27 pm: |
|
Guys,
Am pretty much looking at some older Klipsch's - Quartets or KG 5.5's or something else I can pick up for $4-500. Or possibly some old JBL monitors - 4312 or something - to see what those are about. Won't be spending much as these would be a 2nd pair of speakers to go along with whatever small monitor I pick up.
Would run a vintage Luxman, Marantz, or something of the like through them - on the warm side and can be had pretty cheap - until I could pick up something more substantial. All these speakers being pretty efficient, it wouldn't take much from either to drive them. (Mind you if I see some guy selling his Hafler DH-220 and DH-110 for $100 - I'm going to jump on it.) All this stuff is more than respectable for a basic music lover like myself.
Jan,
How loud is loud? Well, don't know about measurements. I had some Cerwin Vega VS 120's in my 10x12 bedroom for a while, which was fun. Completely rocked and shook my room - things falling off my shelves etc. - and apartment for that matter. (Roomate commented on how she could hear me cackling in the background after each song.) My receivers in so far haven't been great, so somehow I think one with some punch and quality will give some great effect without having to be as loud. But certain things I like conveyed - the slam of Keith Moon, the thunder of John Entwistle, the rumble of Tommy Shannon (bass for Double Trouble/Stevie Ray), the throaty tone of Leslie West - that kind of stuff. Am a bit weary of Klipsch in that I've heard their horns are a bit bright. Bright at mid and low volume is ok. Bright and loud - bad.
Rick B,
That line about blowing up Budweiser plants and having 4 million bass boats of rednecks with coolers and shotguns heading across the Atlantic is just classic.
Debates: I'm surprised at how all these "skilled" debaters, especially Edwards, miss constant opportunities to absolutely cut off the other at the knees. (Dick opened some holes I could have driven a semi-truck through.) Nobody is getting creamed, but they're not doing close to what they could either. Decent stuff - but at some point got hit with a feeling in the pit of my stomach last night that we can really be in deep sh*t with either ticket. With regards to this nation as a whole, this presidential race, and who we are currently choosing from in terms of tickets - to use Kerry's words - we can do better. Looking at the big picture - I think every single one of these guys, in one way or another, stinks... Taking a step back and looking, the whole situation is an outrage.
|
Classical 1 Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 10:08 pm: |
|
Ah, yes - the debates. End of comment.
Anyway, John A. - you don't need to "get around much anymore" - from what I gather, you have heard many and varying performances over the years. Call up the memories and try to find discs of those that meant the most to you, even years afterward. It will bring a smile to your face.
I am promised, by UPS, my probably-insane venture into CD tweakdom, in the form of Walker's "Vivid" CD "enhancer - to be delivered to my home by Friday. If it doesn't snow heavily, that is! I shall use it on some discs, and report to this august assemblage the results.
Will wiping this liquid onto the discs and polishing them make an audible difference? Will I have wasted $45 in my quest for less strident sound from "regular" CDs? Stay tuned. . .
Oh, yes - my Marantz-playing friend is quite enamored of the brass cones! But when he came over for a drink that became several I made the mistake of telling about the maple speaker stands as reported on this forum. Now he's going to the Mapleshade web site, and will probably add even more "tweaks" to his arsenal. But he seems happy, so I don't want to pour cold water on his enthusiasm - or any other part of his body!
My Paradigms, by the way, sit happily on 19-inch stands - plates on top and bottom, metal tube filled with sand in between. I'm told that these stands "sound" wonderful. That, I just don't understand at all!
More later. . . |
|
|
Classical 1 Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 10:27 pm: |
|
J. Vigne - in re-reading one of your earlier comments - I'm with you "half the way." I listen in 2-channel here in Colorado, and in both 2-channel and surround in Florida. But, to be perfectly honest, most of my surround experiences there are with DVD movies, not CD music.
More later. . . |
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 537
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 07:00 am: |
|
Cheers to all the "OD's"!
Well Mrs. Barnes finally got around to asking why the Spendors are on the living room floor. I gave her a brief explanantion, and she gave me the cow watching a passing train expression. I had her listen for 30 seconds back on the stands, then put them back on the floor. She said without hesitation, that the bass was much better with the floor position. What a woman! I then asked if she would like to help me rub my cones, and she said why not. WHAT A WOMAN! So how was your afternoon? That explains the no progress on the stands yesterday..................
MarcC,
Thank you!
Classical 1,
Pass along to your friend that IMHO, the Mapleshade Golden Helix speaker cable is the best I have heard at any price.
Jan,
A politician lying to us? Who could imagine such a thing? Are we not in search of truth, justice, and the American way, Kemosabe? |
Silver Member Username: Sem
New York
USA
Post Number: 269
Registered: Mar-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 08:31 am: |
|
Hey, just want to take a second to apologise for my cantankerous remarks yesterday in http://forum.ecoustics.com/cgi-bin/bbs/show.pl?tpc=1&post=153915#POST153915
I had just finished 24 straight hours at work, taking care of some "fires" and would have been better served going straight off to bed rather than trying to make a point.  Its funny, what makes sense to a clouded mind sounds quite absurd when the mind is clearer. So, anyway, sorry.
I do enjoy the banter, though neither side is likely to persuade the other. I guess I'm still in the gee-whiz stage of MC, because given the choice, I'll take that hands down over stereo every time, usually with a smile on my face. And I don't see it as being there at a live performance, just as another option. Options are good. |
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2226
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 09:11 am: |
|
Not cantenkerous at all, Sem. It was a good point, I thought. Options are good, yes. And not everyone wants the perfectionist's reproduction of some performance somewhere. One reason for the strength of feeling by some of us is that the ads and the hype promise more than they deliver, or ever could, in that department, I think. But if it is not what someone wants, anyway, I can see "so what?" makes complete sense. It is easy to get obsessive about hifi. |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 785
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 10:44 am: |
|
Rick,
"That explains the no progress on the stands yesterday.................. "
Heh heh heh - typical old dog!
Sem,
"Deal with it."
Too late - I dealt with it. The shrink said it wasn't the multi-channel, it's the voices in my head. That's what makes it so real. I can't thank you enough for the advice.
John A
"It is easy to get obsessive about hifi."
Isn't it though! Image what it would be without the womenfolk to us in check! Look at how Rick was saved :-)
|
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1596
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:19 am: |
|
and look how kegger won't be. |
J.Vigne Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:32 am: |
|
Ghia is rubbing gimbals and Rick is getting his driver massaged. How old I feel!
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 538
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:55 am: |
|
Woof............Stretch............Yawn...........
.........Nap!
It's good to be an old dog....................... |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1597
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:11 pm: |
|
yo rick!
I'm sure you took it that way.
but when I said to bad the spendors sens was to low
for a smaller tube amp.
that wasn't a knock on them, just an observation as to what it would
take to drive them very nicely. |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 786
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:34 pm: |
|
Strewth, I can't believe I wrote that last sentence in my previous post. Having a rough night!
I just got up ... put a shirt on and a button fell off. I picked up my briefcase to do some work and the handle came off. Now I'm afraid to go to the bathroom. |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1598
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:47 pm: |
|
ha ha lol rantz |
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 539
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Kegger,
No problem my friend, I knew exactly what you meant.
Rantz,
Don't touch ANYTHING! |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 787
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 12:58 pm: |
|
I can't take credit Kegger. I was just reading about Rodney Dangerfield's death. These are some of his famous one liners as was the bathroom joke.
1. I was so poor growing up ... if I wasn't a boy I'd have had nothing to play with.
2. A girl phoned me the other day and said, "Come on over, nobody's home." I went over. Nobody was home.
3. My girlfriend always wants to talk to me during sex. Just the other night she called me from a hotel.
4. One day I came home early from work ... I saw a guy jogging with no clothes on. I said to the guy: "Hey buddy, why are you doing that?" He said: "Because you came home early."
5. I was such an ugly kid ... when I played in the sandbox, the cat kept covering me up.
6. I could tell my parents hated me. My bath toys were a toaster and radio.
7. I was an ugly baby ... my mother never breast fed me. She told me she only liked me as a friend.
8. I'm so ugly ... my father carried around a picture of the kid who came with his wallet.
9. When I was born the doctor came into the waiting room and said to my father: "I'm sorry. We did everything we could but he pulled through."
10. I'm so ugly ... my mother had morning sickness ... AFTER I was born.
11. I remember the time that I was kidnapped and they sent a piece of my finger to my father. He said he wanted more proof.
12. Once when I was lost, I saw a policeman, and asked him to help me find my parents. I said: "Do you think we'll ever find them?" He said: "I don't know kid. There's so many places they can hide."
13. My wife made me join a bridge club. I jump off next Tuesday.
14. I'm so ugly ... I worked in a pet shop and people kept asking how big I'd get.
15. I went to see my doctor. "Doctor, every morning when I get up and I look in the mirror ... I feel like throwing up. What's wrong with me?" He said: "I don't know but your eyesight is perfect."
16. I went to the doctor because I'd swallowed a bottle of sleeping pills. My doctor told me to have a few drinks and get some rest.
17. With my old man I got no respect. I asked him: "How can I get my kite in the air?" He told me to run off a cliff.
18. Some dog I got. We call him Egypt because in every room he leaves a pyramid. His favorite bone is in my arm. Last night he went on the paper four times - three of those times I was reading it.
19. One year they wanted to make me poster boy for birth control.
20. My uncle's dying wish was to have me sitting in his lap - he was in the electric chair.
21. I'm so ugly, when I was born the doctor slapped my mother!
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 540
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 01:19 pm: |
|
22. My wife's cooking is so bad I fed it to my dog. He ran over to his corner and started licking his a-s-s to get the taste out of his mouth.
Thank you Rodney, the "OD's" will miss you........ |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 788
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 01:32 pm: |
|
Rick
Re post before last: Don't worry, I can't find my glasses anyway. :-)
Cheers guys - I'm going to try for some sleep! |
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 541
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 01:47 pm: |
|
Nite nite Rantz.................LOL! |
J. Vigne Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 02:15 pm: |
|
Use the jammies with the footsies.
|
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2227
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 03:50 pm: |
|
The best line for weeks is Rick's "Well Mrs. Barnes finally got around to asking why the Spendors are on the living room floor. I gave her a brief explanantion, and she gave me the cow watching a passing train expression".
Been there, done that. But Mrs B's behaviour is prefereble to that of Flanders and Swann's hifi widow, who evetually took to low fidelity at high frequency. |
Silver Member Username: Rick_b
New York
USA
Post Number: 542
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 04:09 pm: |
|
Thank you John. I have gotten that look many times over the years................LOL!
I think what I like best about The "Old Dogs" is our ability to laugh at ourselves, and with each other.
Cheers! |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 791
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:36 pm: |
|
Okay, everyone out of the pool and back to the serious stuff!
"this was great news for those among us who have noticed how much richer DVD-Audio discs based on high-resolution transfers from analogue masters sound when compared to discs based on digital source recordings."
This is an exerpt from the review of Steely Dan's 'Going Out Of Business' DVD-a in Highfidelityreview.com. I have wondered about this descrepency on the occassional recording and now I have the answer. Anyone else notice this - besides Jan :-)
BTW - Two Against Nature and the above DVD-A are excellent hi-rez recordings. Both in 2 and Multi channel. Of course, the latter just pipping it!
http://www.highfidelityreview.com/reviews/review.asp?reviewnumber=13143569 |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 792
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Rick,
Meant to say I concur re your view of what you like best about the Old Dogs. No a bad bunch of old flea bags (and bagette) if I do say so myself. |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1599
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 11:58 pm: |
|
yo rantz gaucho and too shabby either!
|
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 793
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 12:07 am: |
|
Kegger
I've been looking out for it. Have you got the DVD-A or SACD version? |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1600
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 12:19 am: |
|
sacd |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 794
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 12:28 am: |
|
Okay thanks! |
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2229
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 01:40 am: |
|
Great stuff, Old Dogs. Brief notice that my e-mail ISP home.se seems to have pulled the plug without notice or warning. Very serious for Mrs A who uses nothing else.
I have successfully burned a hi-res DVD-V, the obscure one. The DTS format is good enough to illustrate my point about musical value of multichannel sound, done properly. Will try the DVD-A side later today. Will report back. If it works I will gladly send a copy to friends, with details of original. I am sure this will increase, not decrease, their sales. Well it will if it could be bought in shops at all; I have seen it in only one. How not to do business.
My isp has another 24 hours before I change my contact e-mail on this forum (yet again, and for same reason) and will notify any who might have sent me e-mail recently; apologies if I have not replied, it is because I have received no e-mails for 36 hours approx. In civil societies it is illegal to obstruct delivery of mail.
My NAd dealer has that e-mail address to report back on the EMI DVD-A and the NAD "firmware upgrade".
In my irritation I have come round to the view that copy protection is immoral and it should be defeated wherever possible. We need a Bill of RIghts for all digital information, making it an offence to claim ownership of public propery. Music is a "commons". I am happy with ownership of the medium; it cost someone something to produce. But not with ownership of content, unless the performers themselves, surely the only "owners" of the music, wish to restrict access to their performance. The industry wants it the other way: to own the content, not the medium. This has no basis in common sense or morality, in my view. You might as well encrypt fresh air in charge people by the breath. |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1601
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 02:11 am: |
|
well john i am sorry about your isp and email.
that truly sucks.
but you know my stance on copy protection.
i just happen to disagree with you on almost every point.
but as we have said many times. everyone is entitled to their oppinion.
yours just happens to be wrong! ooohhh! ouch! sting! (just kidding) |
Silver Member Username: Myrantz
Post Number: 795
Registered: Aug-04
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 02:33 am: |
|
Well John,
I am of the belief that if the musician's works are not protected then soon the only way we'll be able to have our music is by paying for a poor quality MP3 copy until choices run dry. Authors works are copyrighted, inventions are patented, and so on. All for good reason.
You keep on about this and everyone reports back with their same views and round and round it goes. In the near future a copy of all music will be playable on a standard player. If not, then you'll soon be able to complain to the player's manufacturer. Commercial pirating is rife, especiallly in SE Asia (I don't know about your part of the world) and something has to be done about it. Come up with an alternate answer, the dogs can put in some dough, we can become partners and all of us make a mill or two:-)
What is immoral is pirating. We don't buy the music, we buy the right to play it on the the purchased medium. Yeah, yeah, the record companies are the ones making all the money. The workers chant the same thing - the business owners make all the money. Well, who are the one taking all the risks? Who are the ones putting profits back into business to expand and employ more workers - take on more artists and so on. I know, they aren't all such altruists, but perfection will never be.
We either have free enterprise or not. If so, we must protect it. At all costs. Until we find Utopia.
|
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 05:50 am: |
|
"This food's so bad, it still has marks from where the jockey was hittin' it!"
R.I.P. Rodney - thanks for making movies (especially Caddyshack!) we can watch over and over. 82 - not bad at all...
Finally - some respect. |
Silver Member Username: Ghiacabriolet
NC
Post Number: 411
Registered: Apr-04
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 07:50 am: |
|
MR wrote:
Yeah, yeah, the record companies are the ones making all the money. The workers chant the same thing - the business owners make all the money. Well, who are the one taking all the risks?
While this may be true in most business models, the music industry is not an example. Exactly what risks do the record companies take? They don't assume the risk of creating music. Musicians do. They don't assume the risk of recording the music. Musicians do. They don't assume the risk of performing the music. Musicians do. The only risk the record companies assume is the manufacturing and marketing processes. The ultimate risk the musician takes is having the fruits of their labor owned by the record companies.
Having said that, I believe in copyright protections. I just think the wrong people are being protected by them. |
Gold Member Username: John_a
Post Number: 2230
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 11:08 am: |
|
Sorry to open this old copyright debate again; views well expressed, as before. I am with Ghia on this.
As I speak I have successfully made a DVD-A disc image, and my office computer seems to be burning a disc OK. My computer will not play DVD-A discs, of course, so I'll have to take the burned disc home to check at the weekend. Will report back.
I am feeling a bit better after visiting my dealer to enquire about their investigations with the NAD T533 and EMI Mahler 5 DVD-A. I got a good and knowlegable guy who reports that the disc will not play on any of the T533s in their stock, and that their own firmware fix does not solve the problem. He wants to get to the bottom of this, and has e-mailed NAD himself. He asked to hold on to the disc for another week to try other players, pending a reply from NAD, and also to be able to see if anything can fix it. I said "great, go ahead". He also said that after that they will either get it to play, and/or give me full credit on return of the player for another make, if that's what I want. That's not bad, these days. He asked what I thought of Denon, for example....
So who knows, I might be able to join the "universal" gang before too long; you will all be spared all my paranoid ramblings about DSD; and I'll be buying an SACD or two. I still like the T533. Totally amazing sound quality, considering its price. One gets attached to things. |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1602
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 11:19 am: |
|
souds good john come on over to the dark side. |
Gold Member Username: Kegger
MICHIGAN
Post Number: 1603
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 11:27 am: |
|
and i'm sorry i feel the opposite of ghia also and side mr. rantz.
the artist's take no risk!
they make the album, get paid by the record company then
the record company makes the masters, produces all the music then
makes the media and tries to sell it.
if it doesn't sell or they get ripped off from copying, the music
company is out for backing the band.
so in my oppinion the record company takes all the risks!
if they put up the money to get the music out there and it
doesn't sell the record companies are out.
so they take the chance on the artist being successful.
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest |
| Posted on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 12:33 pm: |
| | |
