KVR Audio

Chuck E. Jesus · Post by **Chuck E. Jesus** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:55 pm

bduffy wrote:That's the best you can do?

i'll get a twelve pack in me and try again later....

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:57 pm

isn't it because of noise, distortion and added harmonics?
when your brain needs to process noise it improves it's processing and so I gues you..errm..hear more

could be voodoo as well though

or magic..

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:58 pm

The Chase wrote:It's like when you're with some dude and like holding his muscles 'cause his arms just are like wrapped around you and you feel like so safe 'cause you're like...you know...not that you're gay or nothin but God you just want to bury yourself in his chest and just live there forever.

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:59 pm

So, do all you analog fans still have a record player or tape deck?
Otherwise all you're talking about is where best to put the digital conversion.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:04 pm

nuffink wrote:So, do all you analog fans still have a record player or tape deck?
Otherwise all you're talking about is where best to put the digital conversion.

I still have a teac and akai 4 track collecting dust
I never ever recorded analogue>analogue with it though

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:10 pm

I've got a Linn Sondek/Rega RB300/Denon DL304 stored away. I broke it out for a listen the other day.

Analog sucks.

seamoss · Post by **seamoss** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:12 pm

Stupid American Pig wrote:is there really moss in the sea?

who would have known?

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:56 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryozoa

Chuck E. Jesus · Post by **Chuck E. Jesus** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:03 pm

Jafo wrote:Actually, even analog is digital -- it's just that the minimal changes lie so far beyond our threshholds of difference, that they only seem continuous.

Maybe what we should really be arguing about, is what sampling rate and bit-depth we need to use to eliminate obvious digital artifacts. Personally, I find that a decent set of converters at 16/44.1 usually works fine -- although I keep experimenting with 24/88.2!

although i understand your first statement in spirit, it is argueable if pushing electrons could be considered "digital", as the on/off, yes/no quality of digital seems to be the thing missing...

but you are right on the money with statement two....had a long talk with my old sweetwater salesperson the other day, he brought up these points: the converters(especially quality of the electronic other than the converter chips themselves), the stability of the clock used, and the math that goes on behind the scences (are the numbers rounded off?)

back in the day, everyone loved digital because there was no hiss, but after awhile the missing stuff that we all took for granted in analog became obvious...it's way better today, will only get better...but analog is still cool (go listen to a good tape echo vs. a plugin if you don't believe me)...

if i had the money, i'd get a couple Studer 16 track machines, a Neoteck board (hell, i'd just buy everything in Albini's studio http://www.electrical.com/equipment.php), a tricked out Protools HD system, and a massive mixed modular....and i'd probably just look at it...guess i'll stick with my PC and T2....

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:19 pm

james0tucson wrote:
Hink wrote: not sure I agree with all that...I reckon my pod 2.0 live run through my 400 watt power amp might fill that 500 seat room as well as my boogie....perhaps that's why they call it "live". I'm also not sure just because something is all tubes does not mean it is "high quality pro-audio" when compared to some of the high-end line six stuff or other similar products...

The ease of lugging the thing out of the station wagon, on to the stage, and back, has a certain appeal. I'm damn sure not hauling any computer equipment into that environment, believe me. Maybe you guys get gigs in nice clean places where the floors aren't soaked with beer

reread my post, I didn't say lugging computer equipment...I said my POD xt live, the reason I group it in with pc based stuff is because a few months ago I started a poll and the majority of members here felt there was no difference between PODs and software based sims...

ludwig · Post by **ludwig** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:38 pm

farlukar wrote:
kritikon wrote:Who's Steve Albini?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_albini

He's a great recording engineer, plays in one of the bestest bands evar, and (although he's not as uptight as this thread might suggest) is a bit of an arrogant c**t.

Wow, that's the guy who recorded Surfer Rosa from the Pixies

About the analog vs digital: i really couldn't care less, most of the music i have is on my iPod, so that all digital (even worse, mp3's)...

Stupid American Pig · Post by **Stupid American Pig** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:40 pm

seamoss wrote:
Stupid American Pig wrote:is there really moss in the sea?

who would have known?

do you ever smoke that?

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:46 pm

Analog recordings sound better because the REAL professionals invariably use my own coveted Vintage Analog Silence Samples as the basis for every track.

The smartest (and luckiest) of them run the most critical tracks through Transparency Preserver 2.0 as well.

seamoss · Post by **seamoss** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:48 pm

kritikon wrote:Who's Steve Albini?

He is best known for his production work with Veruca Salt

Stupid American Pig · Post by **Stupid American Pig** » Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:14 pm

seamoss wrote:
kritikon wrote:Who's Steve Albini?
He is best known for his production work with Veruca Salt

He couldnt fight the seether either...

why do analog recordings sound better than digital?