IB Slammin Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Many valid points made for both LP & CD. I have never played background music. I always "listen". The volume is either up or off. I remember running into another room to change an LP. The tone arm (and I tryed them all) just couldnt stay in the groove at volume. I tend to listen to the great recording, rather than the great music. Great music does not necessarily complement the quility of our systems. Great recordings exist in both mediums, but not high volume. I primarily listen to 60's-90's rock, R&B, Hot Jazz, what ever is recorded best. I have very rarely heard "live music" or "live recordings" that sound as good as the studio. Many groups sound great when properly mixed, and sound bad live. IMHO the mix makes or breaks a recording. Years ago recordings were mixed while listening to 6X9 monitors. They were mixed to accommodate the 6X9's of car radios and not intended to compliment "Hi-Fi" systems. I can still remember opening 4 or 5 LP's at a store in an effort to find one that was flat. tc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IB Slammin Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 PS: mdeneen, To my thinking, CD's are not just a matter of "convenience". If you can't keep the stylus in the groove, can't play a cut at volume, you can't listen to it. Good recording or bad. Regards, tc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IB Slammin Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 ---------------- On 11/29/2003 8:37:06 PM mdeneen wrote: "....If you can't keep the stylus in the groove, can't play a cut at volume, you can't listen to it...." You may want to look into turntable isolation. Even mid-fi arm/cartridges (when rightly aligned) will track any groove I am aware of - this is independent of speaker volume. mdeneen ---------------- Years ago, my last TT was used was with 2 Klipschhorns and 4 LaS.(7-T pre & 2 DC-300's ) Yeh, Yeh, I know the Crowns. Old days for sure! ".........turntable isolation ?......." How about drilling a 5' diameter reinforced concrete pier 30' deep. Imbedding a 10" wide steel "I" beam in the concrete and allow it to penetrate the floor. Weld a steel pan atop the beam and fill the pan with mercury. Float the turntable in the mercury..and ISOLATE. Mid-fi. I'm shure you are right. But it always seemed that the better arms, SLT's included, were the worst. tc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audio Flynn Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Fred, An audiophile label would be Duetsch Gramofon in my mind. Mobile Fidelity in their day. Mark, Modern recordings are nothing but a huge coalescence of sanitized noises, assembled "by time" to pretend to represent some musical event which occurred (and never did). This assemblage technique (multi-micing, if you will) fails so miserably to convey the sense of music, that it is at many times enough to cause one to give up the hobby. I agree! I need to get off my butt and support Mapleshades records. This guy knows how to record. And has a nice diversity of musical genre to put on CD. Most artists and record companies could care less. I would like to hear the newly remastered Neil Young CDs that just came out from the 70s. His Greendale new CD is mastered very well. THe box set of the "LAst Waltz" from the BAND is quite good. But you lower your standards when listeneing to CD. I have 4 older Dave Mason LPs I have acquired in the past year. The are all amazingly musical; so far above CD on my sysytem! Also ALL of the NAXOS newer classical music is mastered excellent on CD. TAS Harry Pearson recommended in some cases. BMG ceased their classicall music club. Not good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klipsch RF7 Posted November 29, 2003 Author Share Posted November 29, 2003 I own Beethovens symphonies by Deutsche Grammophon on cd conducted by Herbert Von Karajan in 1963 and other DG labels:) I also own alot of Naxos cd's as well and I like Philips digitally remastered and DDD sets as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clipped and Shorn Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 Karlheinz Stockhausen.....he's Classical ......right? Its.......Deutshe Grammophon and everything..... C&S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted November 29, 2003 Share Posted November 29, 2003 ---------------- On 11/29/2003 7:42:33 PM IB Slammin wrote: Years ago recordings were mixed while listening to 6X9 monitors. They were mixed to accommodate the 6X9's of car radios and not intended to compliment "Hi-Fi" systems. ---------------- When was this? I agree that the mix can make or break a recording... but i just can't picture a mixing studio with 6x9s? Vinyl was the staple of the music industry up until the mid 80's when the switch to CDs began and the 4track tapes peaked during this switch. just curious... Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 oh bum, i spent a good hour last nite bringing up some good points and it got lost...oh well, i'll try to say it all again without any support. that means you can take what i say for what it is...the opinion of some1 who's been mixing for the last 11 years throughout the midwest and currently runs a full scale recording studio. mixing is my life btw, im also only 19 (yes, i did my first lone mix at the age of 8) so let's begin: the sound coming from an electric bass guitar amp does not resemble a sonic event that ever occured...it is a creation of sound that would otherwise never exist. yet nobody questions the use of an amp, or even discredits the amp because it's as much a part of the instrument as the bass guitar itself. the studio, like the amp, is an instrument and with it we create music. I like to think of true music as an art, which rules out what we call "pop" music and all that crap. that's not art, but rather product. anyways, back to the topic... because the studio is an instrument for music, who then is to criticize the artist for his methods and the actual final product? in the world of mixing, it really doesn't matter how you arrive to the sound you're trying achieve as long as it's what you're trying to achieve. now all that to say, not everyone enjoys hearing the room and people in which a recording was taken. i personally find it very annoying, cumbersome, tiring, and just plain crap. that's just my opinion, but im not going to refrain from calling it "music". I will just assume the artists involved wanted those sounds and believe it is part of the music. however, new recording techniques allow us to not hear those other sounds, and they allow us to hear new sounds...both of which, were rarely an option in the past. to say that multi-mic'ing is a sin is a bunch of crap, because some musicians want those sounds (or absences of other sounds). according to some of the proposed techniques, it would be better to construct a room designed around a single song so that just two mics could be used to capture a true audio event that actually happened. that's just not feasible and would force the musicians to not perform as well. the thing about "stereo mic'ing" as if the two mics were the human ears is that it is a totally bunk theory and doesn't work. i don't want to get into it right now, but that method of recording makes it physically impossible to playback the sonic event that occured. (if you ask nicely though, i might try to dig out some literature if you want me to) so no matter what, any and every mic'ing method does not capture the true audio event. but more importantly, why even bother trying to capture a true event? it's entirely impossible, and i personally don't think it sounds better when using the number of mics that i want. i have tried many times to stereo mic and record, but i always find more life and passion and art in multi-mic'ing techniques...i do agree though, that many new recording "engineers" like to use too many mics...it always sounds better when there's less, but you shouldn't use so few that you can't get the sound you want. im gonna leave it at this, even though i could go on for hours about the philosophy behind mixing. it is my life, it is my art, and it gets taken personally when people start bashing something they don't understand. (btw, understand is present tense...past audio experience would qualify as understood, the past tense form of the word...things change daily in the audio world). so ya, to sum it up...there are many who like music recorded with "life", but not everyone digs that sound, and to require all music to have this is out of line. im sorry if i seem a bit blunt about this stuff, but you'll find that most all sound guys tend to be this way...im in no way agitated or anything like that, i just wanted to share an active sound guy's perspective. im not sure if mdeenen was the only one bashing mixing, but he did bring up some important points and i just wanted to mention that before a war breaks out and to answer the original question of this thread, i have no idea why people prefer LP over a CD, unless it's to add to the noise that they already like to hear in their music. It's also got tweaking abilities which a few others have already mentioned...it's kinda hard to tweak a CD player. as far as quality though, CDs are definetly better...if they weren't, modern music would still be recorded to LP. i like to say LPs have been tweaked to their near potential already, but CD technology has just begun and has a very long way to go (CD is not just the redbook standard we adhere to...so my using the term CD includes DVD, and other similar items yet to come). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 yikes, i forgot to add those all the big studios have multiple sets of monitoring systems...bad and good systems, to get a reference as to what it will sound like in different situations. 6x9's are very common to find in the studio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 DrWho, You are correct that almost all music that is recorded is a total fabrication. I sure don't have a problem with that. Given most of my own music is recorded one track at a time, my music would also fall into that category. There is more than one way to record most music, so let's not put limits on it. Use what is best for the music and idea you are trying to capture. Mixing is an art, and most of all requires ears that can hear. All the technology in the world won't get you far past that if you can't hear correctly/accurately and mix well. For whoever posted about the 6x9 speakers. They weren't all that was used -- ever. VOTTs and Altecs with the coaxial 604E were the mainstay. Ad ub JBLs. Many of those studios DID use the speaers in a boom box, of some 6x9 auto speakers as well. Many used the little Auratones. Get a grip guys and lighten up. Some of us here have been hanging around studios since the late '60s, some maybe even earlier. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 Dr. Who likes to be blunt. So will I. I too have had experience in the studio. Look closely at Dr. Who's post. Look at the comments about live recording, his theories about it, mics, and finally, LP vs CD. It is the same with most of the recording engineers today. I personally disagree with a lot of that post. IT goes to show there are many viewpoints here. And in my view, points to the reason for some of the problems coming from the studio side, this added to the generally mediocre monitoring gear. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leok Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 I have found that well recorded CDs can out-perform well recorded records .. including having stronger high frequency content that remains smooth. But often CDs are mastered poorly and their record counterparts are much better. I do find that powerful high frequency content in some CDs can bring out problems with my system that most records just don't challenge. Until I address the system problem, it that case, records tend to sound better .. less harsh. With the last change to my RF-7s I'm finding many CDs I thought were harsh sounding, are not. But, also with that last RF-7 change I found I can hear that I have one Andrew Manze disk, a compilation "Andrew Manze Portrait" has highs that are close to the real thing while disks, from the same company, with the same material, but mastered differently all sound gritty. That's harmonia mundi .. very frustrating. Most of the CDs that I have from small mastering outfits are very good. From the big companies quality is spotty. Leo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Delaflor Posted November 30, 2003 Share Posted November 30, 2003 " i have tried many times to stereo mic and record, but i always find more life and passion and art in multi-mic'ing techniques...i do agree though, that many new recording "engineers" like to use too many mics...it always sounds better when there's less, but you shouldn't use so few that you can't get the sound you want." I have some questions for you. Why do we need to hear "what the engineer wanted"? Is it not enough to hear what the instruments are playing in a determinated place? If I go to a classical music concert Im not concerned about if Im listening every note every intrument is playing, I want to listen to the whole thing, live. Maybe recording an entire orchestra is different than recording a few musicians in a studio. But I have listened to several recordings in big studios with multiple mics (one or more for every kind of instrument in the orchestra) that later are mixed and mixed and mixed. The result? Horrible. Recording techniques that uses only two or three mics which capure the "ambience" of the hall and surely not "every note every intrument make" and that then are not mixed "to capture the spirit" or whatever about anything" seem to me much more natural and lifelike. Im surely don't want to discuss nor insult you in ANY way, but I would like to know why do some engineers think they need to "correct" anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 im not saying you have to use multiple mics for every single recording session...for example, in the studio i like to use 3 mics for a drum set (1 kick, two overheads). but live, i like to mic every single drum and cymbal. anyways, if it sounds better using another method, then by all means use that method! that's the main point of what i was trying to get across. I don't have any experience mic'ing a symphony orchestra, but i have done projects with rock instruments combined with orchestral type stuff...this christmas season, i do get to mix live for the first time a pseudo opera orchestral production thing and i will be recording the whole thing and just for kicks, i might as well try mic'ing with a stereo pair, as well as a seperate mix with lots of channels...perhaps i can provide some audio clips for y'all to compare? it's interesting that you mentioned "hearing what the engineer wanted"...i would say it is not enough to hear the instruments in a determined space if the artist was looking for something else. often times, it's not what the engineer wanted, but how the engineer satisfied the tastes of the artists, producers, and mastering facility. even this upcomming friday, I'm finishing up several weeks of recording and the band is very involved in the mix and we're having a final mixdown party...i know it's not going to be what i want, but rather what they want and as an engineer i gotta suck it up and go with the flow. the only reason i bring this up is that it'd be cool to be able to purchase the raw audio files of recordings and then remix them yourself, add your own effects and all that. i remember one time in school, a class of 30 kids all produced totally different songs from the same 10 audio files. my approach to mixing is simple. i decide what im looking to achieve, and then i decide on the best approach to arriving there. all the various ways of mic'ing and adding effects and mediums to record to are all different approaches to arriving at the final destination... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 ---------------- On 11/30/2003 6:30:40 PM Marvel wrote: For whoever posted about the 6x9 speakers. They weren't all that was used -- ever. VOTTs and Altecs with the coaxial 604E were the mainstay. Ad ub JBLs. Many of those studios DID use the speaers in a boom box, of some 6x9 auto speakers as well. Many used the little Auratones. ---------------- That's more of what I've heard and imagined... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Mobley Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 clipped and shorn, Thanks for your well-thought-out, informative and well written post above. Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 "Why do they say that LP's are superior to CD???" Well first off - not everyone does. Some people are convinced that CD is superior, or SACD, DVDa. For me, however, LP in simple terms provides the best quality of sound I can get for my money. Its re-introduction into my system has resulted in the following: 1. An increase in music listening by, say 1000%. 2. A change in the way I listen. Music used to be background to another activity - now I just sit, relax and listen. 3. A huge swing in my music from Rock to classical. Previously classical was less than 10% of my listening, now it it 90%. I am not a tehnical person when it comes to audio. I know next to nothing about recording techniques, and finally, only now am I starting to appreciate the sonic signature of the various companies that produced music. In the late hours, with a bare minimum of lighting and an ocasional scotch with ice I recline in front of my chosen orchestra and simply marvel at their virtuosity. People talk of the speakers disappearing. For me the system disappears. There is just me and the music of the performers. My love affair with the violin is relatively new and sometimes threatens to swamp out the other instruments on offer, but it never quite does. Mendelssonn, Brahms et al are leading me astray I fear and yet... What miracle is the Piano? From the gentlest of Mozart's caresses to the grandeur and majesty of Beethoven or Rachmaninoff. The french horn, emerging from the blackness, at once mournful yet alive, to be joined by the kettle drum, trumpets and those haunting woodwinds - all part of Dvorak's grand plan. In my head, as I write, is another refrain altogether. I am in Egypt now, priestesses sing a so distant chant it is hard to belive we are in the same country let alone room. Just as I am lost to distance in the realm of the stars Verdi introduces a solo soprano, close enough to touch yet soaring to the skies. A baritone answers her call to my right and a tenor joins the ensemble as the priests, nearer than their female equivalents, fill the seemingly infinite space that surrounds. Each evening I choose my journey. Shall I ride with the Valkirie, float in the waters of Pier Gynt, abandon my march with the French to Russian guns in 1812, amble across hill and dale to the Pastorale or surrender to the hair dressing skills in Seville? I am a bullfighter, in love with a butterfly. I am both who fight over Tosca and he who Callas addresses in Boheme. I waltz with Strauss and make love to Bolero. Time to bring this reverie to a halt. In simple terms - music is my other life and I travel by vinyl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksdad Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 well said maxg! since this thread began i have word after word about micing or?????? and it has been ????? and it has said very little about the actual experience or pleasure derived from a well assembled 2 channel rig, the ambience, the warmth, in my collection of formats i have the 2900 which can play almost everything, sacd fantastic! dvd-a fantastic, cd good, all the rest very good, but once i cue up my sumikp, turn the lights down i am taken away, to a different time, almost able to touch or talk to the people i shared this music with originally. the music had a more fluid character, i have read less dyna,mics? bunk! not as defined? i guess that depends on your downstream. as i sit and listen i realize that after all of the money i have invested, and after all the machines i have either auditioned or had in house, i have come to a point that brings me to a musical peace, after the first play on my tt a calm came over my body, a calm that told me my search was over, now my search for the most realistic natural musical presentation was over, lp after lp, is so refined, so dynamic, so welcoming... sit and relax, let me carry you away. i will admit as well that watching the tt as it quietly spins is part of the ambience, nostalgia, in a futuristic package, last night i wondered - how is it that all this is coming from that spinning disc? brought a smile to my face. so in the face of all the audiophile dialog, i will simply say, to my ears, with my rig analog is just a more enjoyable format, plus 1 more huge advantage, after 1 year of buying lp's over sacd, dvd-a, cd, i will have saved enough money to pay for the tt and the phono pre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 Markdad, Now that was a excellent post ! I love the last sentence Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted December 1, 2003 Share Posted December 1, 2003 I get a monthly magazine called AUDIO MEDIA. On one cover is a photo of a drum set in a studio. I counted TEN (10) mics. SO wheres the stereo image? Wheres the sound stage? Some times you,v got to set up A MIC set the level & shoot the engineer. I have a RCA classicle recording that used 38 mics. And they had the GALL to call it STEREO. The LP was mixed differently than the CD no compairison could be made. I dont know witch engineer to shoot first LP or CD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.