The quality of Digital only labels?

cixxxj · Post by **cixxxj** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:59 am

ive signed up for the beatport newsletter, there are 100000 new tunes every month and its _impossible_ even half or a quarter of them are good... there is tooo much crap (every style, not only dubstep) around, waaay too much. This trend goes much on the "electro house", mnml and these styles which are popular to the kids which today buy a computer, get an internet connection, a P2P tool. (I dont really have anything against these styles, Im still much in them, where it comes to simply fairly awesome music). Then those kids download some music making soft, make "tunes", or better make crap and then they open a label on beatport. If there's not a minimum quality control, you must assume beatport scrap too much money off the releases, because if they stock so much of them without control, it means they can easily afford the bandwidth and the strictly internet related costs (see the MySpace ad campaign), so I frankly hate beatport and its disrespectful attitude to the music. Im saying these things because they say they are saving the music, when they're tearing it down even more

cody · Post by **cody** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:20 pm

forensix (mcr) wrote:
UFO over easy wrote: I love vinyl too but you're confused on this cody
agreed

The theory that vinyl records can audibly represent lower frequencies that compact discs cannot (making the recording sound "warmer") is largely a myth - according to Red Book specifications, the compact disc has a frequency response of 20 Hz to 22.05 kHz, while the human auditory system is sensitive to frequencies from 20 Hz to a maximum of around 20,000 Hz. This means that any frequencies that a vinyl record can represent that a compact disc cannot would be inaudible and thus completely subliminal.

true, there may not be audible difference, but is it not the case that you can feel subsonic bass which can only be achived through playing a vinyl version of the track?

thats what i have been led to believe.

its also my opinion that vinyl just sounds better. this could be unfounded factually, but thats how i feel.

dont get it twisted, im not a serato hater, in fact i think its a wicked program and not once have i said anything like 'eff digital maaaan, im strictly analogue.'

pimp, your environment argument, is a good one. but the plastic for usb or your hard drive still had to come from a refinery. also i think its easier to recycle a record sleeve than a computer, but again i could be wrong.

alien pimp wrote:i've looked my watch and it said: time to get real!

LOL!

claw · Post by **claw** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:56 pm

if i could, i would only release my music on hd-dvd....and people would be required to have a professionally tuned room and monitors that are flat from 20-20k to listen to my stuff on

guerillaeye · Post by **guerillaeye** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:13 pm

abZ wrote:Hey the guerilla how did you like it that I brought a crate AND a comp with me to Willkes Barre. Fatman got you beat son.

BTW, what where those wimpy little shiny things that you were playin with during your set?

Youse the man!!!! you got my respect even if you were spinning Jem and Barbie 45's.

what shiny things? i have no idea what you're talking about. I only brought thousands upon thousands of big, heavy, obscure special first edition vinyl

on topic... i did hear from a reliable source that Serato tends to loose Sub as a Mid-Range frequencey... thus loosing a lot the Sonic Force of a Subwoofer.

.rudetone. · Post by **.rudetone.** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:29 pm

I personally prefer vinyl to CDs or mp3/FLAC/wav digital stuff just because its something that you can hold, that spins round on a deck, that hurts your shoulder on the way to a club because a bag full of em is really heavy...It goes hand in hand with the physicality of the music...you can feel a vinyl, same way you can feel a bassline in a dance.

I'm not saying its wrong to use digital formats...each to their own...you do it your way, I'll do it my way...I reckon there's just about enough people who feel the same way to keep vinyl going...I really hope so anyway.

whut · Post by **whut** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:01 pm

To automatically question the quality of music because of the format it is released on is ridiculous.

I am yet to understand why all labels don't automatically release mp3/flac/wav simultaneously with vinyl. Surely giving more people access to the music is better for sales and exposure.

It would be interesting to see how Tempa did recently with Skreamizm 4 releasing both formats at the same time.

bob crunkhouse · Post by **bob crunkhouse** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:04 pm

Whut wrote:I am yet to understand why all labels don't automatically release mp3/flac/wav simultaneously with vinyl. Surely giving more people access to the music is better for sales and exposure.

YES YES YES YES YES!

wouldnt even care if it was a week later or something,, DMZ, Deep Medi, a lot of tempa stuff dont get any kind of mp3 release. I wanna support the labels but what choise do non-vinyl buyers have?

alien pimp · Post by **alien pimp** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:39 pm

first of all, all this thread is started from a typical human logic crossconnection:

there is no logical or factual connection between quality control and format as format is not involved in any way in generating or selecting musical quality, but OUR MIND is!

so, at a wider level, the music industry would show as much intelligence as the ppl do, you have the music industry you deserve!

the format you use doesn't make you any better at understanding the music nor the biz. just the wax doesn't allow you to take as much risks trying new things and it's not helping progress for that reason.

so this thread sounds to me a bit of trolling, not sure for what purpose.
all answers have been given, if you keep on going with this debate, you feed the trolls!

cb_db · Post by **cb_db** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:42 pm

£5.00 vs. £1.50 for two tracks. And the two digital tracks I know I really, really like vs. only really liking one side of the vinyl most of the time.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars on vinyl over the years. I supported the format and was die hard for a while. Now it's time to get real.

Spending $100 and getting 8 records (16 tracks) or spend $100 and get like 50 tracks. I can't look past that.

Also, yes there is plenty of crap out on digital, but for fucks sake, have a listen the vinyl releases, sooooo much garbage, not as much obviously, but that's $10+ garbage vs 2 dollar garbage. haha.

Also, for a producer to be able to finish a track and send it across the fucking world for a dj to play within minutes, what's not to love about that?

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:45 pm

cB_dB wrote:£5.00 vs. £1.50 for two tracks. And the two digital tracks I know I really, really like vs. only really liking one side of the vinyl most of the time.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

I've spent thousands and thousands of dollars on vinyl over the years. I supported the format and was die hard for a while. Now it's time to get real.

Spending $100 and getting 8 records (16 tracks) or spend $100 and get like 50 tracks. I can't look past that.

Also, yes there is plenty of crap out on digital, but for fucks sake, have a listen the vinyl releases, sooooo much garbage, not as much obviously, but that's $10+ garbage vs 2 dollar garbage. haha.

Also, for a producer to be able to finish a track and send it across the fucking world for a dj to play within minutes, what's not to love about that?

Still a vinyl luddite myself, but that is totally spot on

ramadanman · Post by **ramadanman** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:05 pm

cB_dB wrote:
Also, for a producer to be able to finish a track and send it across the fucking world for a dj to play within minutes, what's not to love about that?

to a point...but the financial commitment to both pressing a tune to dubplate, and pressing a tune for a vinyl release generally helps to act as a quality control. it's like a counter culture to the way that much music is seen as a disposable commodity these days

alien pimp · Post by **alien pimp** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:10 pm

the pressure is financial, artistic quality and financial success are not related

alien pimp wrote: ....
i've heard gems released digitally that would never pay off if released on wax
i've heard wax labels saying: this is pure dopeness, but considering the market, won't sell good enough!
....

cb_db · Post by **cb_db** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:34 pm

ramadanman wrote:
cB_dB wrote:
Also, for a producer to be able to finish a track and send it across the fucking world for a dj to play within minutes, what's not to love about that?
to a point...but the financial commitment to both pressing a tune to dubplate, and pressing a tune for a vinyl release generally helps to act as a quality control. it's like a counter culture to the way that much music is seen as a disposable commodity these days

I see your point.

I do my own quality control. I know where to look for quality (at least in my opinion.) What I consider quality someone else may consider garbage. I'm into more of the darker, ruff, heavy stuff, a lot of which is being produced by U.S./ North American producers, Claw, Ultrablack, SelfSimilar, Excision, Trill bass. ( Although, I have bought quite a few ramadanman releases haha

)Most labels are out of the UK, the labels with the biggest distribution are UK. (Argon is doing pretty damn well for themselves tho) It seems to me UK Labels aren't taking a risk on these u.s., darker sounding producers. So for me without digital my choices are very, very limited. If things were exactly the way they were but, price wasn't an issue, I'd still be buying digital releases if 75% because the stuff I consider quality isn't coming out on vinyl.

What I would consider 'quality control' might be completely different than the next guy.

Do I want vinyl to become extinct? Fuck no? Would I prefer to have a release of mine on vinyl? Fuck yeah! But for me, realistically, digital is the right choice. In a perfect world every track I wanted would come out on vinyl and it would cost 50 cents a record and producers would be getting rich off of this. But as we all know, it's far from a perfect world. I love vinyl, i love the feel, i love being able to see the groves and knowing what the record is going to do just by looking at it, but I can't spend $10+ on each piece of vinyl. I just can't do it anymore. It wouldn't be financially responsible.

cb_db · Post by **cb_db** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 6:48 pm

This argument has been beat to shit eh?

Meet my friend, Digital vs. vinyl argument

(thanks Lukki hahah)

abZ · Post by **abZ** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:42 pm

guerillaeye wrote:
abZ wrote:Hey the guerilla how did you like it that I brought a crate AND a comp with me to Willkes Barre. Fatman got you beat son.

BTW, what where those wimpy little shiny things that you were playin with during your set?

Youse the man!!!! you got my respect even if you were spinning Jem and Barbie 45's.

what shiny things? i have no idea what you're talking about. I only brought thousands upon thousands of big, heavy, obscure special first edition vinyl

on topic... i did hear from a reliable source that Serato tends to loose Sub as a Mid-Range frequencey... thus loosing a lot the Sonic Force of a Subwoofer.

You and your boys seemed to be digging that Barbie 45

On the Serato thing. What your saying there doesn't even make sense. Serato dj's can push speakers as well.

fractal · Post by **fractal** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:46 pm

i know if i went to see mala play and he was strictly digital id be sad

alien pimp · Post by **alien pimp** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:50 pm

how's that connected with the topic?

btw, don't they use lots of those dubplates cut directly from the unmastered wavs provided by the artists?

music always comes last in a debate about music i see...

etidorhpa · Post by **etidorhpa** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:05 pm

I think there's perhaps a reason why a lot (but not all) of 'digital only labels' are 'digital only'.

They couldn't secure a pressing and distribution deal? Didn't have the funds to press their own records?

Maybe 'digital only labels' startup with a view to progressing (yes i said progressing....) to vinyl at a later stage, its a good place to start.

alien pimp · Post by **alien pimp** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:14 pm

financial risks and distributor's role in deciding what's good for wax or not won't ever help the development of ART!

the more you connect ART and CASH the more you downgrade it!

cb_db · Post by **cb_db** » Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:45 pm

The quality of Digital only labels?

Who is online