PG Music Home Forums General Discussion Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production Which is better Vinyl or Digital?? An interesting look.

An interesting video on YouTube discussing whether digital or analog is the better medium. This seems a real “chicken or the egg” type argument. I know it gets raised a lot. This video has an interesting slant on it.

https://youtu.be/lzRvSWPZQYk

Fight on!

Tony

It comes down to what you prefer. Disks not cared for properly are painful to listen to with all the clicks pops, static, scratches, and noise.

I have quite a nice collection of analog disks..... But I also enjoy the digital media just as much and it's so much easier to transport with me.

I've argued for years that digital is better(*), but that the loudness wars and over-compression squeezes the life out of the music.

(*) The presenter in the OP video concludes they're "functionally the same". Well, more or less. Actually vinyl normally does introduce a tiny(!) amount of distortion that digital does not, but it tends towards 2nd harmonic which is "nice, warm" distortion that we perceive as a slight additional richness.

Here's a "loudness war" explanation from 15 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

...and another from 2011 that followed when I viewed the above: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcKDMBuGodU

I make recordings of a jazz group of which I'm part. I sometimes use a little of compression on them, as the microphone pair is rarely in the ideal place. When I do, the band notice that the sound "isn't quite right".

I own a lot of vinyl and prefer the sound. Man do I love to sit on the couch and listen to Aja on the turntable. It is much "warmer" to me.

A few years ago I went to a high end audiophile store to get a new needle and a guy with white hair and a long pony tail came to help me. I told him I preferred vinyl and he proceeded to give me a 45 minute lecture that went something like this:

Of course you do! CDs are crap! Digital is crap!! Vinyl has 100 times more sonic information than a CD!!!! Why do you think they call it compact!! Because they compact it! In a musical garbage compactor!!

And so on.

45 minutes later I said thanks and walked out with my needle.

Not sure how much of that was actually scientific but that's what he said.

I still enjoy cassettes from the mid 70s, 7", 10" & 12" flat black plastic, CDs, FLAC & .WAV.
I don't really enjoy MP3 very much though some sound okay.

I mostly enjoy the message encoded in these formats and some of those messages ring out nicely regardless of the format.

The dynamic range of a "record" is fairly limited due to the noise floor but is helped a little by the RIAA in & out. MOST releases, with a decent M.E. and cutting engineer can be pretty good if the record remains clean & damage free. The end result dynamic range will depend on the content, the mixing and mastering.
The sound is often lovely and is what my ears expect...I'm trained to like it. Source material is important though. I have a couple of LPs that are well pressed, almost noise free and are simply un-listenable - disregarding the musical content.

CDs, we didn't have much choice for 20 odd years. The machine stopped sending anything but CDs to the shops. The 1st batch, when they hadn't twigged they needed to change from the RIAA masters to format specific masters, weren't too flash. They weren't/aren't as indestructible as they were promised to be. The dynamic range is deliberate limited BUT with a much lower noise floor they can sound really fabulous. I was reading, today, an article that says the same "master" can be pressed to vinyl or CD. Yeah, it can but it'll sound off without the RIAA EQ reversed on the CD, (a bit like playing a standard cassette tape back on a player with the Dolby B encoder on but more so). CDs have the potential for greater dynamic range but we've all heard "loudness wars" releases that demonstrate that potential isn't always desired let alone achieved. Fortunately the unintended consequence of a variety of "streaming services" having different, yet similar, level requirements and have punitive compression/processing for any variance from it has meant home recorders and meathead mixers have been lead by the nose to leave some headroom and dynamics in their "mastered" works. Mind you I've heard some LUFS compliant stuff that's still brick walled - it's just that the top of the wall is lower.

All of that said: if I have the LP I'm more inclined to play it than the CD IF I have the time to sit & listen. My little D.A.P. gets a lot of use and my "Walkman" gets occasional use. The "Discman" is rarely pulled out and I don't have a truly portable turntable.

The Dead Kennedys were right when it comes to casual listening.

I'm all for digital myself, given the preference. Mainly it's because I just don't have enough physical space to house a large record collection, nor do I have the money when new vinyl is $30-40 vs a download is $10-15.

One of the main factors is whether the album was properly mastered for vinyl - a lot of music done today is recorded and mastered digitally before the vinyl is even thought about, so the vinyl is cut from the digital version, sometimes pre-limiter but not always.

What I miss most about records are record covers.

What I don't miss at all is having to treat them like fussy little babies or they'll "cry" (crackle) all night.

The resurgence of flat black plastic has brought a LOT of shonky traders with it. I've had about four badly buckled LPs delivered...all packaged REALLY well and no evidence of postal damage...they were warped from the factory of distribution points...a further couple have had BAD pops n crackles. For the most part I've had good pressings and QC over the last five years. Once it settles into some sort of regular, non trend, production system things should improve. At present it's a very few machines producing around the clock to capitalize on the trend/fad.
Packing LPs and CDs took me ages for my move earlier this year. The LPs are unpacked, in their safe places and being played. The CDs are half done...the storage is problematic in this new place - 1000 or so to go once I reassemble the shelving.

Folks, I have a problem that I hope you can help me with.

I have been collecting vinyl from deceased relatives for ages.

My step mother was a 3 cigarettes at a time smoker. (Not kidding. She died at the age of 59 from ages of smoking.) Her vinyl seems to have a nicotine coating that doesn't come off with the D4 cleaner I use for everything else. Records from non-smokers play fine.

Any ideas?

...Deb

I think you could probably gently clean your vinyl with just plain soap and warm water and a lint free cloth, I don't think it would damage it. And then use your D4 cleaner to remove any soap residue. Try it on one first I suppose to make sure.

I still have all of my vinyl going back to the 60's. Moved the collection more times than I can count! I don't play them much anymore to be honest, I keep them mainly because of the nostalgia. Although I do have a few that never were released as CD's, might be valuable I suppose.

After buying CD's on a regular basis as recently as last month I've finally got into the streaming thing with Spotify. Very convenient to have a track playing in the house, then get in my car and the track starts playing again though the car's sound system right from where it left off. And man, what a selection of material! Sound is good enough for me, I don't notice a huge difference.

Maybe one of these sites will help:

https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/839160

https://davis-signs.com/removing-nicotine-from-vinyl-signs/

I’m curious as to the outcome of hard research (double blind studies) on the differences audiophiles can hear when it comes to all of the above. The same research applied to the perceived difference in amps and receivers would also be of interest. To date I’ve never seen such.

Us? We walk in the living room and tell Siri what play - same in both vehicles. Been that way for years. And in the spirit of disclosure our primary system is a Yamaha receiver, Yamaha sub and Polk Audio towers. KRK’s for the “studio” and Janice has AirPods. Oh, and there is a turntable for the primary system but is hasn’t been fired up for years.

Finally we have hundreds of vinyl albums in the basement. They include the first album I bought in 1959, all the original Beatles albums (including the butcher shop cover), psychedelia and blues from the 60’s, rock/blues rock from the 70’s and mostly ending around the advent of CDs. Also residing there is a large collection of blues 78’s from the 20’s - 40’s. Hmmm … maybe I oughta crank up the Victrola!

Bud

I used to clean mine fairly regularly like that, using washing-up liquid, rinse well several time. I think one can't damage the vinyl by doing this, though if they're not rinsed well, I think detergent residues may well clog the stylus, which may then go on to do damage.

There's long been a difficulty with this, in that many audiophiles, if they don't get the outcome they expect, will proclaim that there must be something wrong with the experiments/tests.

I've had people claim that they can tell the difference between .wav and .flac, but if you decompress a .flac file to a .wav, you can then do a bit-for-bit comparison between the original and the wav->flac->wav copy and they are identical.

Not so with mp3, ogg-vorbis, et al. They definitely do degrade the sound, though at the highest quality compressions, most of us would struggle to hear the difference. At high-compression/low-data rates, most of us can tell the difference.

This is compounded by the fact that it can be demonstrated that some surprisingly subtle changes are detectable ... the effects of certain types of capacitors, for example.

The amount of care needed to set up a different-media comparison would be huge and it may well prove impossible to completely eliminate something like the RIAA equalisation effects from the comparison, which would invalidate the rest of the test.

One or two drops of liquid hand soap, plenty of rinse water, a toothbrush with very soft bristles and then air dry use to work for me.

Thanks all! I appreciate very much. I will give it a try.

You can see the build up on them.

Her car was the same way.

...Deb

They say vinyl is so much richer and full but I haven't heard a real record play since probably the mid-90s, so I can't say. I can say that streaming songs I like on Youtube is very easy and I like the sound good enough. Once in a while I'll watch a record play in Youtube. There really was nothing like watching the disc spin round and round.

I have done numerous double blind studies involving the album Led Zeppelin II.

I am able to say without reservation that using a robust confidence level in a Chi Square test of significance I need to drop the needle and hear a substantial amount of noise, crackle and popping when the needle hits to render a respectable air punch when the opening riff of Whole Lotta Love Kicks in.

Also, I need to have the volume knob on the Pioneer amp turned all the way to the right because if I do not blow up the speakers, it just does not have the same effect.

I conducted these experiments numerous times at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

wish i hadnt skimmed my old 45's across a lake years ago when i had one too many tequila sunrises at a mates cottage...lmao
JOKING !
om

Here is another take that makes a whole lot of sense to me. Looking at many aspects there may be some differences in the way vinyl performs as compared to digital but why is the big thing. This guy talks a lot about compression and vinyl compared to digital. Goes on about loudness and the effects on the different media.

Another good look https://youtu.be/mfVVTJejmpw

Tony

Hahahahaha!!!

You obviously aced the research design courses

Bud

I remember this same argument from almost 40 years ago. My only comment would be.......





Regards,

Bob

He mentions hi-end audio and I'm someone who's had such a system for a long time now.

Around 2003 I'd taken a voluntary redundancy and was working on designs for high-end audio systems, aiming at the time to compete with the likes of Naim, Linn, Mark Levington.

Things for me took a turn and I put the designs on hold for a while. When I was ready to carry on, it was 2005 and I was already getting quite unhappy about the directions of music production. Too much compression on CDs, and the move to things like iPods and mobile 'phones, where portability and convenience were trumping recording and production quality (IMHO). So often people were listening to **** and didn't really seem to care. By then, audiophiles were complaining that CDs were tiring to listen to and not involving enough, though few then seemed to understand why.

I put the project on hold again and there it remained.

There was no point to high-end audio systems if the content itself was no longer to be high-end. Personally I think that's all too often still true.

... Poor old 'orse. :-) (shanty)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vkFF0qXlPo

It is, as always, relative.
I grew up listening to a"radiogram" until I was 15...a good old stack 'em and go machine and mono too.
Around 73 my folks bought a "stereo"...a big piece of furniture but it had a cassette player recorder, turntable plus AM/FM radio.
That was an eye opener...stereo...the room was filled with sounds - headphones were acquired.

The MP3 world was a retrograde step in terms of quality, compared to decently made records and many, though not all cassettes, but since then storage is much cheaper and either 16 & 24 bit hi res files are easily acquired and played. Some streaming services offer hi res and a decent program on the receiver can make them sound as grand as they should but there is a generation for whom "in the room" decent resolution stereo sound is a foreign thing. They know headphones/earbuds playlists and streaming, they know sonically hyped Beats headphones, they know wham pow surround sound as well as sound bar simulations. They rarely know good stereo. That's pretty sad really. Even glorious Quad rarely packed the punch of a good stereo mix on half decent gear in a living room.

This is not a cohort's fault as it is, as things were in my youth, the prevailing technology combined with marketing and acquisition desire that drives consumption. The market backed off from one set of consumables and pushed the latest, and more profit intensive, versions. People bought/acquired what was available and in their price range, (except for iPhone people who happily buy outside their economic range becasue it's Apple). I like my records, I play them when I can. I like my CDs, I play them when I can. I haven't bought many digital music files but I like them and play them when I can. I make digital music and play that on whatever will play it. I'm a consumer who hasn't thrown away the goods in that same way that I still enjoy Slade, Bowie, T Rex, John Mayall, Dinosaur Jr and stuff I've bought recently.

Regardless of format I'm always battling to create a wider sweet spot so I don't have to tie myself to a single chair to listen.

+1
Well said.
Reading the liner notes and enjoying the artwork was a big part of the experience.

I miss that more than the changes is sound.

That and the smell of opening a new vinyl album ..
And things like In through the Out Door with different covers and the (hidden) water paint aspect <grin>
If you got the sleeve damp it gained color ..
Wikipedia -
"The original album featured an unusual gimmick: the album had an outer sleeve which was made to look like a plain brown paper bag (reminiscent of similarly packaged bootleg album sleeves with the title rubber-stamped on it), and the inner sleeve featured black and white line artwork which, if washed with water, would become permanently fully colored. There were also six different sleeves featuring a different pair of photos ..."

A lot of work went into some of the packaging alone.
I was also a fan of some bands that used real artists for covers, like some of the Yes albums.

I had a guinea pig in 1974, her name was "Bush" because she was shrublike. She was pure white and had jello-red eyes.

Some time well into the 21st century, I pulled out an old record I hadn't played in a very long time, and could still pick short white guinea pig hairs off the surface. That pig had been dead for decades. I may still have the album.

Try doing that with a stream.

I love both vinyl and digital! My personal preference more comes down to mood. If I'm on the go and walking somewhere, it's much easier to grab a pair of headphones and my phone and listen to some tunes, but when I'm at home I will definitely always prefer listening to vinyl whenever I can.

Well, I love my vinyl records (I've got about 1500 in my collection), but that's in addition to the 2000 CD's and the 800 or so cassettes. I've been busy digitizing them (recording them, cleaning up the sound, splitting out to tracks, and converting to MP3 - and that's for both albums and cassettes). I took pictures of all my album covers and use my pictures for the album art, scuffs and everything. I've also ripped my CD's to MP3 as well. Because, well, I just can't listen to my vinyl in the car or walking the dogs or while camping, which these days seems to be where I do most of my listening. Alphabetically, I am almost through the S's and plan to have everything ripped to MP3 by sometime next year (and then I start tackling my dad's fairly extensive collection). I rip to both 320 and 128. The 128 goes on my phone, which has a 512GB micro SD card in it and I've currently got about 40,000 songs I take with me everywhere. And it's all a fun project. Both have their place.

But like RHarv, there's something about pulling out the album from the sleeve and keeping the sleeve at hand while you listen and read or just admire. Liner notes are readable (unlike on CD's) and the sound of the needle dropping down just, well, brings it all back.

I suspect once everything is ripped, I'll probably be getting rid of them as we downsize. They do take up a lot of space, whereas my MP3 collection fits on either a USB drive the size of a pack of playing cards, or an SD card the size of a dime.

I don't miss Casette, LP or CD's - I simply love the convenience of digital streaming, and the audio quality on my car stereo is significantly better than any previous car stereo with cassette or CD.

When it comes to HiFi and proper stereo - let me quote Alan Parsons "Audiophiles don't use their equipment to listen to your music. Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment."

Well I miss the album covers for LP with lyrics, art work and info about session musicians, engineers, producers et all. Not the crackle, pops and scratches....and especially not mounting the turntable somewhere steady, so you could walk past or otherwise risk the damage of the record and your expensive Ortofon sapphire moving coil pickup. Not everything was better in the old days
.
.
.
.
.
well perhaps the music :-)

There is a difference. However, if you take out the pops and clicks which are from damage to the product...then the difference is like that of a pink lady apple and a fuji apple.

I had no problem getting rid of my jazz albums in the early nineties to go with CD for space/convenience.

The bigger difference for me is production and quality of music. There's not much great music today. It's getting dumbed down more and more every decade. More and more over-produced. Gone is something that actually sounds fresh and real.

Re: mp3's and streaming. That's another huge problem. No product. Nothing to hold in your hand. No touch or smell. No liner notes. Very easy for an mp3 song to get lost in some giant digital musical dump collection on your hard drive.

Because it's no longer a physical product it has also devalued the music too.

But that's not gonna stop me from releasing mp3's and streaming. If you can't beat um join um.

It's sad though because this is yet another example of how technology doesn't always improve our lives.

It's exactly the same thing with non-fiction books too.

All of this has made me realize that I am very much a snob. And I am going to have to own it, I suppose, because nothing can be done.

You see, I detest modern culture, I suppose, and so for me, vinyl is a form of rebellion. A way of life. I have a television subscription I NEVER use, I waste money on a Netflix account because the only I think I ever watch is "Crackling Roaring Fire" while I have a real fire going in the hearth.

I read old Life magazines, live in a dreamland where I pretend it is 1953, have a library of the Great Classics, only watch classic movies, and play classical guitar, violin, cello, piano, jazz guitar and bass.

I do not know what type of equipment people are using but my vinyl sounds warm and wonderful and better than any CD or MP3 I have ever listened to. The difference is astounding and I am shocked people can't hear it--I suppose it is because their ears have been irreparably damaged from listening to crap.

Back in the day, the people who made all the music that goes on vinyl had what I would like to call "Beautiful Souls." The other day I dropped the needle on Rickie Lee Jones' "Pirates." Now there is greatness. I hear what people are doing today and I want to run away to the moon, but it isn't far enough away.

Comparatively, when I hear the majority of "entertainers" today it sounds like they have the soul of a garbage dump.

So, I play my cello and my vinyl and watch my classic movies and remain in my delusional fantasy world, eyes closed in bliss when I play my Bach on my classical guitars.

But also, I know I am also a hypocrite, since I own BIAB, every Xtra Styles Pak made, more orchestral libraries than I can count, and 897 VST plugins.

So, as I sat by the fire just now, with a cup of espresso, listening to vinyl in my cashmere sweater, I had to realize:

David you are a pompous over-educated snob and a hypocrite.

Why yes, I suppose I am.

But it is has gone far too long for me to change, so I suppose I will have to love myself in spite of it.

Have fun in the modern world, my friends.

I for one want no part of it.

Merry Christmas!!!



https://soundcloud.com/david-snyder-gigs3/another-white-christmas

Hi David,

Let's say all that stuff you said about yourself is true...perhaps.

It does not change anything. I like you just the way you are.

I don't play my Bach on my classical guitars only because I don't know how. People are going to be playing Bach long after you and I are long gone from this world.

No one needs to apologize for liking vinal or crap MP3 on a bloody cell phone for that matter.

I have vinal, cassette tapes, reel-to-reel tape, CDs, and even some crap MP3s on my cell phone. The tape may sound the best, for a while at least. It does deteriorate. The vinal sounds warm and friendly and will last for a very long time. It is my favorite for several reasons, it is analog, moves, you can see it, you can touch it. It lives in the same room and not somewhere in cyberspace.

I use to be stuck in the past lamenting the fact that all my old blues friends died and left me here alone.

Well, lately I decided to move on. Went out and found me a twenty-two-year-old girlfriend. So stop right there...not that kind of girlfriend...lol

What she has made me aware of is that there is a lot of "modern" music and musicians that are as good as anything we have been accustomed to from the past. I have missed a lot because I was so turned off too much of the modern music and just stop listening to new stuff.

Three this afternoon at my house for the first recording/writing/collaboration session. Perhaps Punk Rock Bach...lol Who knows what will develop.

So...David, why don't you post some of that Cello music you play for us? We like that stuff also you know.

Happy Holidays to everyone.

Billy

True that, and I do lament the loss of that physicality.

However, a Story From the Modern World:

The other day, for various reasons, I found myself thinking of an old pop version of "Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead".

If I had the old record, I could have played it. It would have had a nostalgic old paper smell. The cover may have had some information, or at least photos to look at. (Laura Nyro once put out an album that was SCENTED WITH PERFUME. Try streaming that!)

Anyway, I did not have the old record, so I streamed it, and read up on that version online.

I learned that the cool instrumental I remembered from childhood was by the renaissance composer Michael Praetorius. I then found numerous versions of that particular piece online, and listened to them. I then found a MIDI transcription and created my own version with crazy synthetic voices and posted it on the Internet, where anyone anywhere in the world can listen to it.

I liked being able to do all that modern stuff.

In the end, I satisfied my need for physicality by playing the old song on my iPhone while walking in the woods. I had the phone playing in my pocket, so I wasn't disconnected from the forest, and I marched and bounced on the crunchy yellow leaves and it was good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1VYf4wZq9w

Back in time I had a reel-to-reel tape deck and a reel-to-reel tape recorder. I quit buying commercial releases on tape because the content playback speed was 3 3/4, the tapes didn't receive any high fidelity processing and the storage boxes usually didn't include liner notes.

I have to say that I don't think any of what David said was either snobbish or hypocritical.

Nor is it of any significance whether one prefers vinyl or CD or streaming or open reel or cassette. It only becomes snobbish when one criticises other for their lack of appreciation of ones own preferences, which , almost be definition are ones own "reference standard".

Nor is it hypocritical to prefer vinyl and playing real instruments whilst using a tool like BiaB. It's a tool, nothing more nor less. And if your own preference is orchestral, then of course you'll have orchestral libraries and they, too, are a tool.

"Back in the day, the people who made all the music that goes on vinyl had what I would like to call 'Beautiful Souls' [...] Comparatively, when I hear the majority of 'entertainers' today it sounds like they have the soul of a garbage dump" is not exactly "to each his own". =8^)

I think that you are an audiophile. Just because someone is a great musician, does not necessarily equate to them being an audiophile. In fact many audiophiles are NOT musicians.

For myself, I was in my early twenties when CDs came out. My ears were fine. I will say that I've never had a great stereo or speakers. Never had the money, being a broke-[*****] jazz musician.

I will say that even though I was classically trained, having been principle clarinet in the college orchestra....my preference has always been [*****]-shaking music (as my sax teacher put it) And certainly there are many more subtleties in classical recordings, than jazz, rock, and pop.

There is clearly a difference between vinyl and CD, HOWEVER...I don't think it's an issue of good vs. bad, but rather a preference, just the same way that some prefer jazz and others prefer country....and yet others prefer everything or different combinations.

Perhaps it would have better to say MOST. There was plenty of bad music back then too. And there is some great music today too. Because it is so very easy to put music out today, it's harder to find the gems among the crap. Same thing with books. It's become way too easy for anyone regardless of talent or skills to make something. That's the bad. The good is that it's easy for talented people to get there work out today, without being taken advantage of by the record labels, agents, and managers.

Perhaps it would have better to say MOST. There was plenty of bad music back then too. And there is some great music today too. Because it is so very easy to put music out today, it's harder to find the gems among the crap. Same thing with books. It's become way too easy for anyone regardless of talent or skills to make something. That's the bad. The good is that it's easy for talented people to get there work out today, without being taken advantage of by the record labels, agents, and managers.

The thing is, all the garbage from decades past is forgiven and forgotten. When we speak of, say, the 1930s, we are talking about what has stood the test of time and come down to us today. When I say "I like 1930s music", my sample is totally skewed: unless I'm a serious musicologist, I'm talking about the very best 1930s music, and it's very easy to ignore the rest.

When we speak of "today's music", though, we're talking about all of it, because there it all is, whatever is going on right now, unfiltered by the judgement of history, all the crap still roiling in the pot.

No wonder people always talk about the good old days. But on behalf of the present, I say not fair. The past has had so much more time to prepare.

Good Lord.

It is not even what I said. I said:

"Comparatively, when I hear the majority of 'entertainers' today it sounds like they have the soul of a garbage dump."

And I was using the English language. Two different thoughts! Now I am flummoxed.

Perhaps I should have added basic reading skills to my list of desired traits from the Golden Days!

Ummmmpfff. I am going back to my audiophile corner and listen to more Gershwin. The lack of basics around here is insufferable.

I say!

You are correct, sir. I "Adam Shiffed" your Perfect Post. I will go correct my earlier post immediately.

I did say most. Actually I said "the majority of entertainers."



I am being somewhat tongue-in-cheek and putting on airs on purpose for the sake of frivolity, but my main point remains the same.

With books, there are 8,000 new books added to Amazon each day.

With free samples you can read the first three chapters of anything you want.

I would say that 99.99999999% of stuff released is absolutely unreadable. At least to me, it is. Ok, ok, maybe that also is hyperbolic. Maybe I should say "much" or "a lot of it" to be fair. I do run across good stuff from time to time.

But the biggest problem is that 99.999999% of the effort put forth by people (and taught by others) is solely on marketing, not writing.

That is a problem. If you are going to put out a book you should be able to write, I think.

But apparently, most people missed that memo, and heard "You should know how to promote yourself and ask your friends for 5-star reviews."

By any standard, in any genre, what passes for writing these days is MOST of the time just horrific--to me.

Thoughout this I've had one particular record in the back of my mind.

I've long been a King Crimson fan, but they had good periods and bad periods.

One of the bad periods was the album "Red" which, and goodness only know why, they chose to master on a cassette recorder. It was a very good cassette recorder, but was still total cr*p in comparison with open reel. Not surprisingly the vinyl was even worse as there's always a reduction in quality when one converts from one media to another.

I think this is your own belief. There's some truth in it, particularly about that's what's being taught in book marketing....HOWEVER there is a much simpler explanation which I think is more accurate.

Most people are bad writers.

Most people don't have or won't spend the money on a good editor.

Many people are more interested in a promotional book to sell something else. (again because that's what they were taught)

And finally, we are living in an age of fluffy-ness. And that lack of depth is reflected in the arts of this time period as well. The average attention span is down from what had been 25 seconds 20 years ago to just a few seconds.

Most people don't have any real connection with real humans any longer. (This happened way before physical social distancing.

Are brains are being programmed from the addictive dopamine hits we get from interacting on social media.

Our culture is/has become one of entertainment not education. Thus more video focused and much less reading focused. And more superficial than ever before. More narcissistic than ever before.

So yeah, the music reflects the overall decline of that our society is going through. The good news is when things get bad enough, great music will come out of it. And the whole process will start all over again.

This thread touches on strong topic for many people. It's no surprise that it strikes a strong nerve sometimes.

My own belief is live your truth. And don't get too hung up on whether or not it's actually true. Because for the most part it's only really gonna be true for you.

If that's correct, and I hae no reason to doubt it, then I'm actually quite shocked if it was only 25 seconds 20 years ago.

I see people scrolling aimlessly through social media, often not stopping to look at anything or to read anything. Vacant. Mesmerised.

I watch documentaries.
All of the sentences are short.
They have very few commas.
Everything is in tiny sized bites.


I bought some bread rolls a while back. "Two bags with eight in each" I said to the cashier. She gave a slightly crestfallen look and asked "You don't happen to know how many in total do you?"

What I find most shocking is that I imagine most people can do more than those suggest, but so often they're spoon fed to the point that they simply stop thinking.

Conversely, we get crime dramas with so many threads that an intelligent thinking person can become overloaded with information, and I wonder how many people follow the plot and how many just sit mesmerised until the hero magics up a solution from nowhere.

I went back and listened to the entire youtube video that was in the original post.

This is a classic advertising method in use today. Provide information you think people will have an interest in and also tell them about your product or service that you have for sale.

The information in the video is a pretty simplified version of what electronic engineers have done to answer the basic question about the scientifically demonstratable " technical" difference between digital and analog recordings.

The real issue is in the original question. How do you define "better"? It is essentially a meaningless question because there is no agreed-on definition of the word "better" as it is used to analyze or compare digital and analog recording mediums.

The only answer is perception and preference. "My "perception" is that one sounds "better" with no viable way to scientifically validate or demonstrate that.

Due to the fact that "preference" varies widely and we have become more polarized, less excepting, more fearful, and less tolerant of other people's "preferences," the discussions often become increasingly more continuous.

There are way too many attempts nowadays to define things in simplistic terms of "good and bad", "right or wrong". That is a very monochromatic view of the world with little or no attention to the various shades of grey or real cause and effect.

We often have little interest in the truth and in fact, often profane it when we are subjected to it.

Cheers,

Billy

I totally agree.

Well said Billy.

But you just said there is no truth, just meaningless words and personal preferences. So what are you saying people should care more about?

Hello Sax,

Of course it is my belief. No one else is saying it.

But it is more than a belief. It is an observation backed up by evidence. For various reasons, I am inundated with sales pitches from people who promise to teach you how to write the great new bestseller. All experts. But guess how many have written one?

The Internet is flooded with these "experts" and pitches. Like the music world, the waters are infested. Price tags often start at $3,000 and go up from there.

The common denominator is that everything (or almost everything) focuses on MARKETING. Every way you look. Not content. Hype.

I cannot tell you how many people ask me to read their new book and give them a 5-star. I can't do it, because I know I should be giving a 1 or a 2 and I can't.

There is something in our culture that borders on a global narcissistic insanity and I can't even process it anymore. So, I just keep my head down and go about my business. I have no idea where it will all take us. I have participated in large studies that show the dumbing down of culture is very real and very frightening. Critical thinking skills are becoming non-existent. Most people have surrendered their brains to technology. Almost every sentence uttered is a regurgitated opinion from someone else, supported by no facts. The media supports and applauds the idiocy as long as it is the right type of idiocy.

I can't see how it will turn out well.

Oh, well. It was a good planet while it lasted.

"Most people have surrendered their brains to technology. Almost every sentence uttered is a regurgitated opinion from someone else, supported by no facts."

The philosophic well is deep here. Much of this resonates with me in that songwriting and musicianship is a gem you now must dig for as technology, Band-in-a-Box included, has allowed nearly everyone to claim credentials in these two spaces. The ability to navigate software menus and showcase expertise in a mouse click to generate 'music' translates mostly into a polished proverbial turd that surprisingly wins approval from a fair amount of people. It is a tough pill to swallow that most who do just this do not want to hear the sobering news so I will put things in context that is both illuminating and hopeful: my son is a drummer and a fine one. While he doesn't use this particular software, he "writes" songs cutting and pasting beats along with synth pads and I dare say, for a moment in my head, they sound good. I endorse this behavior because it permits him to flesh out musical ideas he could not otherwise do because he only plays one instrument. He is young yet not naive - he views that 'compositional' activity and the software itself as tools.

BIAB is just that in my eyes. A tool. And a very effective one in the hands of a musician. (Consider its original intent: a ready backup band for jazz musicians to woodshed over.) At the risk of rustling feathers, it fails painfully if that tool becomes the crutch disguised as art for at the end of the day PG Music feeds the content and no cutting and pasting will elevate the craft hopefully most of us are engaged in.

If the above is noise to your ears, I guess at the end of the day I miss Gershwin too.

I like making pieces with drum parts, but I am not a drummer and I know nothing about drumming, and writing drum parts from scratch is particularly hard because there are SO many notes.

Enter (1) BIAB and (2) Logic's robot Drummer. With these fantastic tools I am able to whip up massive percussion tracks that sound great, and life is good.

But the other day I dug up a decades old MIDI project, where I created the drum part by clicking in all the hits, and while it sounded simplistic and completely unprofessional, it was interesting and melodic in a way I don't try to do anymore.

Sure, if I want to write good drum parts I have to learn how to do that, both in terms of drumming technique and software editors. But if I have a couple of tools here and now that will work perfectly? It is just soooo tempting to skip the hard work and let the bot keep the beat.

I love the technology, but it does create this personal challenge, for me at least.

Again, the activities you describe are useful for fleshing out an idea and/or to tap performances on instruments one cannot play. I was speaking more to the theme of the post addressing how technology in the wrong hands can pass for art. The production level is such that much passes for quality songwriting and music when closer inspection reveals anything but.

I am a fan of it and it is a competent tool for making demos.

Ah, but you can't give people super-awesome tools for creating music and then tell them, "Of course, this is just for demos, if you want to be a real musician you have to do all this yourself." People will make the music they make with the tools they have and that will be how they make their music, and they will think of it as the real thing, not some approximation or substitute.

Interestingly, a look around the net into discussions on non-PG forums will find people saying exactly this about Band-in-a-Box! I have seen it called "cheating". And of course I get it, but of course I object.

My real reply would take almost a book, but I will try and hit some highlights.

When I was younger, I use to hang out with some of the world's top medical experts in neuroscience and other fields. Across the board they were horrified by advances in technology and felt that people would become so reliant on computers for basic thinking that the human capacity for discernment or critical thinking would totally disappear. Some even said they had empirical evidence that the human brain was de-evolving. In other words, technology is making us stupid. To quote an example given by a forum member, how many people can calculate a tip in a restaurant now without the calculator on their iPhone? You would be surprised. I think these doctors were not only right, they were prophetic.

I always grew up feeling and believing that music is the purest expression of the human soul.

If you use a flute, a piano, any other instrument(s) or even Band-in-a-Box to capture and present deep feelings that represent an "expression" of your soul, then I am eagerly waiting to hear. Yes, a tool is just a tool. It is the "soul" part that is most important.

When I read most books today, or listen to most new music today, would I so often find missing is the "soul." It all seems rather lifeless. In books, I see attempts at clever plots, but I am left wondering: have you ever met a human being? A real woman? A real man? Do you have the slightest idea what makes people tick? What makes people do what they do? The foggiest clue? Almost everything today (to me) reads like a cartoon.

When I listen to most new music: same thing. I hear robots. I am not moved. There is nothing "human" to recognize. I don't hear the human soul. I hear a computer.

BUT, I am a huge fan of BIAB and products like it when they allow me to add FLAVOR to the stuff I am working on. A huge fan. There is a line that you cross when you bring nothing to the table yourself, though, and I think most people know were that line is. You have to be careful with the robots, unless you want to become one. (Yet, I cannot begin to express how much I have LEARNED from Band-in-a-Box by studying great players play, in notation, and trying to do what they do. That is a gift to humanity.)

All that I have said is the reason why I turn on the classical station at 8 a.m. and usually do not turn it off until 11 p.m. It stays on all day. My soul recognizes what it hears, in this case.

Final note: although we do not always agree on this forum, it is still the only forum I really visit. There are some smart people on here for sure.

I used to visit the big name social media platforms (albeit briefly) and I just couldn't take it. The level of self-promotional absorption and constant "branding" and hype is just too much. I can't handle it.

That is my short version. The longer one is 500 pages.

Deep stuff David, I love it.... You could make a song using the write-up as your lyrics...

You miss my point. Of course people will do what they want. Again, I was chiming in on the original post and its legitimate concern that those who made music prior to 15 years ago did so because they had some musical skill in which to do so. There was very little to hide behind and the crap was quickly identified as such and promptly placed in the budget rack at your local record store.

BIAB and tools like it lend polish to the ill equipped save their mouse clicks and processing power, and to the point of the original post, the market is flush with dismissible works. The question to ask is, if you strip BIAB out of the equation will the song and the musicianship hold under its own weight? I boldly say no.

Yikes. I guess it depends on what you mean by "the song", but that's harsh.

I really have no idea what this means. I can't take it literally and I don't relate to the metaphor. All I know is that you think pre-1954 musicians FOR THE MOST PART had Beautiful Souls and present day musicians FOR THE MOST PART have souls like garbage dumps.

Here's a challenge.

Go back in time, if you can, to 1953. Literally, in a time machine.

Spend a year listening to everything that was coming out back then.

Condition: Your memories from 2021 are wiped when you go back, so you won't have a cheat sheet of what to listen to, where to find the good stuff. You won't remember any of it. You're just a 1953 guy listening to 1953 music, including all the crap that has by 2021 been relegated to the dustbin of musical history.

Then come back to 2021 and tell me 1953 was really so much better a year for music than 2020. Bet you won't!

Harsh? Is it any harsher than releases ending up in budget bin at Tower Records? The difference is the bin is much larger now because technology made 'music creation' more accessible to those who can't make it otherwise.

This started as a discussion and should by no means be an indictment. The bar should always be high.

Can't say I know how to solve that equation.

The thing is, if technology expands the set of people making music, say, 100 times, you would certainly wind up with a lot more crap but you should also presumably wind up with a lot more good stuff. Maybe it's an ugly ratio, maybe you have 100x more crap and only 3x more goodness, but that's still more than you had before. Hypothetically speaking.

In any case, I was reacting to your comments about BIAB, which did seem pretty dismissive of it as a possible tool for serious music production.

Mark,

Again, this is not what I said. You are toying with my quote which you totally [*****] [this word is getting purged and it is not a curse word, oh well] the first time. You need to read a little more carefully.

I never said that ALL musicians from a certain day had beautiful souls, etc. etc.

I also never tied 1953 to that. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment in another point.

And I never said all musicians today have the soul of a garbage dump.

What I AM saying is that there was a time when I heard a lot of music that I felt on the level of my soul. It moved me.

And I am saying that MOST new stuff I hear coming out today sounds soul-less and robotic. TO ME. It just does.

I am not the only person who feels this way. But for the purpose of the discussion, that is not important. It is what I feel. Most new music today to me sounds canned, artificial, robotic and soul-less.

If you cannot understand that I am saying that, I can't help you. If you feel differently, then get out your credit card and buy it dude.

Over and out.

Side note: message received. Articulated, clearly so.

Oh well, the time travel idea was a good one! Unfortunately, you seem to have undershot 1953 and spent the year in a 1995 AOL chat room.

It is important to be clear because nothing I said on this exchange suggested I was dismissive of BIAB - I am the one who identified it as a "tool" much like your garden variety DAW is. Where your perception is spot on is there is no way it serves in the category of 'serious music production'. For the record, I thought it might be, but as a guitarist there is no way you can rely on BIAB to play in the same manner you would do for obvious reasons (timing, strumming technique, dynamics, even proficiency). However, you can approximate, which again is fine for fleshing out a concept but it will never be you. Unless, of course, it is.

All of my comments have been presented on the backdrop that BAIB is indeed useful for framing out musical ideas. So much has been talked about on the subject of projecting the soul of one's music yet it stands to reason that the more an 'artist' relies on BIAB the less it reflects the signature of who you are.

The good news is the software is useful to all of us.

Thanks for the word of caution. I look in the mirror often and judge myself harshly on the musical front. My comment about stripping "BIAB out of the equation" doesn't target those who are excellent songwriters and musicians - only those who think they are because BIAB enabled them to think so.

I grant you, a guitarist who bought BIAB in the hopes of using it to make records while recovering from a broken wrist would probably be very frustrated.

The last word is yours. I am looking forward to hearing your records...

***


This is for Mark and "God": I am so glad that God decided to join the forum by the way. I was wondering what was taking so long. Also God, it is great to meet you, and I was wondering what kind of trip you prefer. Is it shrooms? Are you a shrooms guy or a Ayahuasca guy? Or lady, sorry!

Anyway, by "serious" music production do we mean using some loops in Ableton and writing songs about our wet....hmmmmm....wet noses??? With Justin Bieber?? Would that be serious???

On the other aspects of Band-in-a-Box, has anyone here ever played a studio session??? I mean, actually??

Is it not apparent that aside from whatever guitar you are going to play yourself, and vocals you are going sing, piano you are going to play, violin, pan flute, whatever, that NO ONE (or few) is going to be able to tell that the bass, synth, or mandolin came from BIAB???

A backing track is a backing track.

It is what you DO with it.

Remember????? Writing songs and stuff.

Hello...hello...anyone out there???

Anybody tuning up????

Oh, and Mark, I remember you from that AOL chat room. That was some crazy a.... s.....you used to say, but I will never bring it up.

Promise.

What happens in The Flirt's Nook stays in The Flirt's Nook.

You got it.