or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vinyl? - Page 3

post #31 of 54
I just acquired ten new LP sets at the local library sale - they were sitting in a box ignored by most. Time-Life sets of Casals and Segovia, Fidelio with Klemperer, Aida; La Boheme; Tristan and Isolde; some Heifetz.

50 cents each...

So while you're welcome to your iPods, I keep my turntable, thank you very much.
post #32 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawson808
And that would prove that you're not much of a DJ if you need beatmixing software. I haven't been to a club in ages, but there is just still something pure about vinyl.

A good number of DJ's today use Ableton Live to 'perform live' instead of 'mix live'. It is pretty powerful software, and once you warp a song or individual parts of a song, it will automatically be matched based on whatever your snap preference is, whether it be one beat, bar, 2 bars, etc. In interviews, DJ's like Richie Hawtin (who has poineered bringing additional technology to live performances in the early 90's) say its time for some DJ's to move away from traditional means and, instead of spending a lot of time beatmatching, spend time adding new elements and focusing on the experience.

When I was at this year's DEMF/Movement, I can say that 100% of the DJ's I went to see used some kind of software, either entireley Ableton (no beatmatching) or a mix of Ableton or Serato Scratch Live (some beatmatching).

That said, for amatuers and aspiring DJ's, the first skill they need to learn is beatmatching and song structure. Of course, without this, they wouldn't even be able to use the tools that do it for you. That's just like anything else. You must first master the fundamentals before you can become and expert.

Like I said upthread, I use software for playing MP3s on my computer through time coded vinyl, so I'm manipulating vinyl in order to beatmatch and using a hardware mixer, still. I haven't yet integrated Ableton in to my setup; however, I have recorded a CD with the application just to learn it and see what it's all about. It's quite powerful.
post #33 of 54
My dad has a handful of LPs, and I've started buying them myself, but mostly modern releases, usually if its a different master, or if its on 180g vinyl, in hopes of getting an improvement on SQ from CD (I have the new Flaming Lips' album in 180g on order from my local record shoppe, and am planning on picking up the Steve Hoffman mastered copy of Stadium Arcadium on 180g vinyl). Briancl: Interesting, I just bought a M-Audio Groovelab kit mainly for the M-audio Transit USB sound card, but I read it comes with a 'lite' version of Ableton Live, definitely interested in playing around with it when I get it. Are there any websites etc. that I can read up on the 'Fundamentals' you speak of?
post #34 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by briancl
A good number of DJ's today use Ableton Live to 'perform live' instead of 'mix live'. It is pretty powerful software, and once you warp a song or individual parts of a song, it will automatically be matched based on whatever your snap preference is, whether it be one beat, bar, 2 bars, etc. In interviews, DJ's like Richie Hawtin (who has poineered bringing additional technology to live performances in the early 90's) say its time for some DJ's to move away from traditional means and, instead of spending a lot of time beatmatching, spend time adding new elements and focusing on the experience.

When I was at this year's DEMF/Movement, I can say that 100% of the DJ's I went to see used some kind of software, either entireley Ableton (no beatmatching) or a mix of Ableton or Serato Scratch Live (some beatmatching).

That said, for amatuers and aspiring DJ's, the first skill they need to learn is beatmatching and song structure. Of course, without this, they wouldn't even be able to use the tools that do it for you. That's just like anything else. You must first master the fundamentals before you can become and expert.

Like I said upthread, I use software for playing MP3s on my computer through time coded vinyl, so I'm manipulating vinyl in order to beatmatch and using a hardware mixer, still. I haven't yet integrated Ableton in to my setup; however, I have recorded a CD with the application just to learn it and see what it's all about. It's quite powerful.

I use Ableton for recording and Logic Pro for producing my recorded nonsense, however I still say it's a cop-out to use it during a set. Ableton is way to powerful a tool.
post #35 of 54
Still have over 1000 albums and a fully operational turntable. I will never give up my vinyl.
post #36 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonglover
I still say it's a cop-out to use it during a set. Ableton is way to powerful a tool.

If you are using Ableton to just mix two tracks together, absolutely; however, some people are doing really amazing stuff in real time with Ableton... very cutting edge.

Matthew Dear (as Audion) puts together some incredibly impressive stuff live using a Laptop w/ Ableton, a hardware mixer, and 1 turntable. At DEMF, his hour long set was probably the most intense, exciting, and dynamic pieces of music performed live that I've been fortunate enough to experience.

If you're curious.. check youtube or google video for "enferno" or just "ableton live" and you'll see some pretty cool stuff. Although Enferno isn't really my thing, he does showcase the application's flexibility quite well.
post #37 of 54
I read that somebody transfered wax cylinders from the 1870's to cd recently.
post #38 of 54
I have a cheap vacuum cleaner and a reasonably good belt-driven 'table with a top-notch moving-coil cartridge and some tweako things like an expensive mat. Have had it for some years. The fact that I cannot off the top of my head remember the brand names of any of those components is a good indicator of the last time I used it... All of my vinyl collection (my parents' vinyl collection and a few records I'd picked up since then, something around 1200 records broken down about 50% 60s and 70s pop/rock, 30% chamber music, and 18% orchestral music, and 2% "alternative"/"indie" or hip-hop) was "ripped" into Apple Lossless for home use by a Boston-area high end audio dealer within three months of Apple's incorporation of that format into iTunes. (I keep all of my music on a Firewire drive connected to an Intel Mac mini in my living room, and use AirTunes to listen to my collection around the house.) Their vinyl rig (the name Boulder sticks in my head for some reason) was well into the five figures if not even perhaps six figures, and I think I paid about $5 per record for cleaning and "ripping." I'm pretty sure it was a huge pain for them, which is why I'm not revealing their name. Records I've bought since then (this town has lots of opportunity to buy records) were "ripped" at home in a similar manner, using a 20-bit Sony portable analog-to-digital converter I bought cheap from a band that had broken up. (I resold the DAT drive that came with it, as I had no use for it.) True, sometimes an LP (especially a direct-to-disk recording or a painstakingly remastered audiophile nugget) will sound better than the CD version of same. However, the difference is only apparent in direct comparison with records that have been relentlessly babied. But in general the only way someone can think an LP "sounds better" than a CD of the same recording is if they have shitty speakers. Also in general vinyl's sins are better covered up in large orchestral works than in solo works. Ever hear a solo bassoon piece on vinyl? Nothing at all like the real thing. The massive dynamic compression and truncated frequency response of vinyl is glaringly obvious if one has speakers with some balls and an interest in listening to music at live-performance volume levels. With good speakers*, enough power, and good room treatment, however, a CD can sound startlingly close to the real thing. *To reproduce music, you need to be able to move air effortlessly. Examples of good speakers include the big Genelec and ATC studio monitors with 12"+ woofers for midbass and then subwoofers underneath, the Sound Lab A-1 electrostats, Acapella horns with separate subwoofers underneath, Quad ESL-63's with Gradient dipole subs, B&W N801D's, and big-bore like that. Not the typical "bookshelf" or "minitower" speaker consisting of a fist-sized "woofer" and a tweeter mounted flat on the baffle most so-called audiophiles end up with.
post #39 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGladwell
I have a cheap vacuum cleaner and a reasonably good belt-driven 'table with a top-notch moving-coil cartridge and some tweako things like an expensive mat. Have had it for some years. The fact that I cannot off the top of my head remember the brand names of any of those components is a good indicator of the last time I used it...

All of my vinyl collection (my parents' vinyl collection and a few records I'd picked up since then, something around 1200 records broken down about 50% 60s and 70s pop/rock, 30% chamber music, and 18% orchestral music, and 2% "alternative"/"indie" or hip-hop) was "ripped" into Apple Lossless for home use by a Boston-area high end audio dealer within three months of Apple's incorporation of that format into iTunes. (I keep all of my music on a Firewire drive connected to an Intel Mac mini in my living room, and use AirTunes to listen to my collection around the house.) Their vinyl rig (the name Boulder sticks in my head for some reason) was well into the five figures if not even perhaps six figures, and I think I paid about $5 per record for cleaning and "ripping." I'm pretty sure it was a huge pain for them, which is why I'm not revealing their name. Records I've bought since then (this town has lots of opportunity to buy records) were "ripped" at home in a similar manner, using a 20-bit Sony portable analog-to-digital converter I bought cheap from a band that had broken up. (I resold the DAT drive that came with it, as I had no use for it.)

True, sometimes an LP (especially a direct-to-disk recording or a painstakingly remastered audiophile nugget) will sound better than the CD version of same. However, the difference is only apparent in direct comparison with records that have been relentlessly babied. But in general the only way someone can think an LP "sounds better" than a CD of the same recording is if they have shitty speakers. Also in general vinyl's sins are better covered up in large orchestral works than in solo works. Ever hear a solo bassoon piece on vinyl? Nothing at all like the real thing. The massive dynamic compression and truncated frequency response of vinyl is glaringly obvious if one has speakers with some balls and an interest in listening to music at live-performance volume levels.

With good speakers*, enough power, and good room treatment, however, a CD can sound startlingly close to the real thing.

*To reproduce music, you need to be able to move air effortlessly. Examples of good speakers include the big Genelec and ATC studio monitors with 12"+ woofers for midbass and then subwoofers underneath, the Sound Lab A-1 electrostats, Acapella horns with separate subwoofers underneath, Quad ESL-63's with Gradient dipole subs, B&W N801D's, and big-bore like that. Not the typical "bookshelf" or "minitower" speaker consisting of a fist-sized "woofer" and a tweeter mounted flat on the baffle most so-called audiophiles end up with.

You don't need statistics, and you don't need measuring equipment, you don't need $30,000 speakers, you just need your ears.

In 12 years in the hi-fi hobby, after A/B-ing my system to countless people, all have affirmed that vinyl is superior.

I've had mid-fi like Paradigm, good stuff like Vandersteen, and excellent stuff (Meadowlark Audio) and vinyl is better on all of those. I've listened extensively to high-end Vandersteens, Maggies of all sizes, Thiels, B&W high-end, and God-knows how many others and vinyl always sounds better.

Having said that, I'm glad you don't think so and I hope to receive some of the vinyl you have dumped over the years.

"The absence of noise does not equate to the presence of music."
post #40 of 54
Audiophiles: can you guys point me towards resources that have in-depth reviews of high-end components? I've been buying word of mouth for awhile now, and while I really haven't made any purchaes I regret, I'd like to look at some resources and there's such a wealth of info. out there I don't know who to trust.
post #41 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonglover
Audiophiles: can you guys point me towards resources that have in-depth reviews of high-end components? I've been buying word of mouth for awhile now, and while I really haven't made any purchaes I regret, I'd like to look at some resources and there's such a wealth of info. out there I don't know who to trust.

There are two camps (as there are in all things): Stereophile and The Absolute Sound. Most readers of each despise the other.

Stereophile will have more in the way of bench testing and graphs, if you're inclined that way.

I find TAS stuffy and self-important, but still read it from time to time. More of a $tereophile guy. Other than Hi Fi News (British) I wouldn't bother with any of the other mags.

P.S. is it Jon Glover or Jong Lover?
post #42 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
I've had mid-fi like Paradigm, good stuff like Vandersteen, and excellent stuff (Meadowlark Audio) and vinyl is better on all of those. I've listened extensively to high-end Vandersteens, Maggies of all sizes, Thiels, B&W high-end, and God-knows how many others and vinyl always sounds better.

Meadowlark is mid-fi, really, not really High End. You can't expect a piano to come out of a 7" woofer intact. Good stereos need to be able to move air.
post #43 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
There are two camps (as there are in all things): Stereophile and The Absolute Sound. Most readers of each despise the other.

Stereophile will have more in the way of bench testing and graphs, if you're inclined that way.

I find TAS stuffy and self-important, but still read it from time to time. More of a $tereophile guy. Other than Hi Fi News (British) I wouldn't bother with any of the other mags.

P.S. is it Jon Glover or Jong Lover?

Ah, thanks for the info.

And while I love me a good jong, my name is Jonathan Glover so...
post #44 of 54
Vinyl may sound nicer, but it is inaccurate to the master. But with current production practices, I don't blame anyone for not wanting to hear with any accuracy the crap that's being produced. But the best thing about vinyl is the turntable porn. Come on, someone has to have some to post! One of my background pictures is a Michell Orbe SE with an SME V arm, but I can't find a link to it online. The SME tables are works of art as well. --Andre
post #45 of 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGladwell
Meadowlark is mid-fi, really, not really High End. You can't expect a piano to come out of a 7" woofer intact. Good stereos need to be able to move air.

Non-sequiter: Did I say it was high-end? No, I did not.

I said it was "excellent," which it is.

It is far, far, better than "good."

FWIW, only stereos in the over-$100,000 range will "move air" like you describe and have an semblance of musicality. You pay dearly for the last octave. Mine go down to 32 just fine.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home