Page 3 of 9
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 7:42 pm
by arsenic
dermike wrote:If most digital releases use the vinyl master audio, then you're losing the quality that vinyl brings to it.. which imo sounds so much better when you compare.
sorry, but that's complete and utter horseshit.
the only thing you may be hearing - if from a vinyl master - is the fact that they've had to roll off the highs and choke back/mono a lot of the sub frequencies due to vinyl's shortcomings.
now, if for say you're recording a band to 2" R2R and a DAW *never* touches your workflow...you will get a better representation with vinyl, this is true.
but the second you use a digital format to compose, and think that somehow...magically...that vinyl is gonna make shit sound better, you clearly have no idea wtf you're talking about.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 7:44 pm
by arsenic
jaybird wrote:Vinyl lasts forever..
really? I have grips of vinyl that, after being heavily caned in the clubs, no longer play without skipping or sounding like a muffled piece of shit
my digital files still sound the exact same
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 7:57 pm
by surface_tension
If I'm a Star Trek OG Trekie, like from the original books and original series... odds are, I'm not going to give a shit what some Babylon 5 fan wants or thinks about.
Vinyl only labels are trying to save vinyl, not make a ton of money. Sure they could, but they don't want to. It's their art, their product and they should determine how to deliver it to the fans. What you think is immaterial to them when it comes to vinyl vs digital.
And sounding "better" is subjective.
Better to me is crackle, hiss, hearing the needle hit the record in my headphones, and then having a wider spectrum of sound than I'd have on a wav/flac... even if I can't hear it, even if I just have FAITH that the quality is better, for that piece of mind, it's better.
You can't steal vinyl quite as easily. Which is why I suspect there are so many Serato/CDJ DJ's. Sure, not all of them steal... but uh, ya know, a lot do.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 7:58 pm
by beatlejuice
i thought everyone knew vinyl is the ulitmate in quality control. If your shit doesnt make it to wax it's just not worthy
i learnt that in dubstep 101 years ago from professor blackdown
LONG LIVE DUBPLATE CULTURE!!!
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:05 pm
by arsenic
beatlejuice wrote:LONG LIVE DUBPLATE CULTURE!!!
dubplate != vinyl
and tbpf, the sheer amount of unreleased/unfinished/off the wall/not on vinyl stuff I play is the main reason I went with serato...fuck paying $50 a pop to a cutting house, that doesn't benefit the labels OR the artists...only the people doing the cut.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:13 pm
by Shift Recordings
ThinKing wrote:
no good reason not to sell digital these days imo, otherwise you're just marginalising part of your customer base.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:14 pm
by capo ultra
jaybird wrote:k.. your right.. stolen records suck, but at least they are still real..
and the thing that suck about stolen stuff.. you dunno when someone nicks your wav's, once they broken into your system..
Dun think this isn't a problem?.. my firewall sees all kindas of peeps trying to grab my unreleased productions..
Fair do's. I'm a vinyl-head myself. Just playing Devil's Advocate s'all
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:14 pm
by arsenic
_Shift_ wrote:ThinKing wrote:
no good reason not to sell digital these days imo, otherwise you're just marginalising part of your customer base.
fuck that mayne, gotta keep it REAL
same shit with dnb...and the fans suffer, as do the artists when they don't get paid
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:23 pm
by tacospheros
well im not a dj , i dont have decks, so i have absolutely no reason to buy vinyl
and guess what? same goes for 90% of your audience !
so if you dont make your music available in different formats, firstly you're missing out on spreading your music to a wider audience and gaining profit , and secondly you're encouraging piracy by not even giving people who would buy a cd or mp3 a chance to do so
the exclusive elitist dubplate mentality is all well and good , IF YOU'RE A DJ. but to the rest of us , it kinda never enters my thought process
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:36 pm
by surface_tension
tacospheros wrote:well im not a dj , i dont have decks, so i have absolutely no reason to buy vinyl
and guess what? same goes for 90% of your audience !
10 years ago you had 2 options... see it in a club, see it on a turntable at your house. That's DJ's, fans, producers, label owners alike... There are those of us who buy vinyl because we want to have some sort of nostalgia when we hear a tune 2.. 3... 20 years later. Nothing better than throwing an old record on and hearing it play and thinking back. You can do the same thing with a tune you downloaded, but it's not the same feeling I assure you of that. Sliding that record out of a sleeve is like a butcher pulling a knife from the block. I makes that sound that can't be duplicated by a CD case or a mouse clicking.
It's obviously a personal choice. You can't hate on a painter because they only do water color, or only do oil paintings... that's the way they want to deliver their art. Buy a ticket to the museum or don't, simple as that. There are other reasons to put out records than making money. A record is a commitment by a producer and a label and a distributor to put their financial ass on the line for the product they are delivering.
And to further the point, if you are angry at the label for not doing a digital release, maybe you should move on to labels that do them. I mean, they obviously are more than willing to sell you what they have. If there's an Iphone app I want, I guess I better buy an Iphone right?
Same scenario with vinyl only releases. It's meant to be exclusive to that number of people. It's a limited edition.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 8:57 pm
by arsenic
cling on to your vinyl for all I care, you're like the guy in PCU that was majoring in Sanskrit
and music, nor art, should ever be 'exclusive'...if you think otherwise, you're quite an elitist and have entirely missed the point IMO.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:08 pm
by surface_tension
arsenic wrote:cling on to your vinyl for all I care, you're like the guy in PCU that was majoring in Sanskrit
and music, nor art, should ever be 'exclusive'...if you think otherwise, you're quite an elitist and have entirely missed the point IMO.
We release digital. I collect vinyl. Motherfuckers collect cars, coins, CDs, mp3s and shit... why can I not collect records?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stone
Why would anyone want to better understand something like language?
If you don't know where you've been, you won't get where you're going.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:10 pm
by _boring
seckle wrote:consume consume consume.
i want all these tunes now, and if i can't have them, i'm going to throw a tantrum.
music isn't always about how you consume it.
ez man. no need to jump on that ship so soon.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:19 pm
by beatlejuice
Surface_Tension wrote:
If you don't know where you've been, you won't get where you're going.
what a crock of shit !!!
i've been so paralytic sometimes and have no idea where i've been but still manage to find my way home and wake up in my own bed
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:48 pm
by mrgerbik
arsenic wrote:dermike wrote:If most digital releases use the vinyl master audio, then you're losing the quality that vinyl brings to it.. which imo sounds so much better when you compare.
sorry, but that's complete and utter horseshit.
the only thing you may be hearing - if from a vinyl master - is the fact that they've had to roll off the highs and choke back/mono a lot of the sub frequencies due to vinyl's shortcomings.
now, if for say you're recording a band to 2" R2R and a DAW *never* touches your workflow...you will get a better representation with vinyl, this is true.
but the second you use a digital format to compose, and think that somehow...magically...that vinyl is gonna make shit sound better, you clearly have no idea wtf you're talking about.
this. truth.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:52 pm
by arsenic
Surface_Tension wrote:arsenic wrote:cling on to your vinyl for all I care, you're like the guy in PCU that was majoring in Sanskrit
and music, nor art, should ever be 'exclusive'...if you think otherwise, you're quite an elitist and have entirely missed the point IMO.
We release digital. I collect vinyl. Motherfuckers collect cars, coins, CDs, mp3s and shit... why can I not collect records?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stone
Why would anyone want to better understand something like language?
If you don't know where you've been, you won't get where you're going.
collecting rare items (due to age, people throwing items away, etc) is one thing, engineering it to be exclusive is horseshit.
thing is, most of what people collect never were really 'rare' when they were new, they were in fact everyday items that anybody had an equal chance of obtaining...this is a new thing of these last few decades (even so far as sneakers...ffs)
the hype machine of being exclusive and preferential to a format can suck my dong for all I care
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:53 pm
by dermike
arsenic wrote:dermike wrote:If most digital releases use the vinyl master audio, then you're losing the quality that vinyl brings to it.. which imo sounds so much better when you compare.
sorry, but that's complete and utter horseshit.
the only thing you may be hearing - if from a vinyl master - is the fact that they've had to roll off the highs and choke back/mono a lot of the sub frequencies due to vinyl's shortcomings.
now, if for say you're recording a band to 2" R2R and a DAW *never* touches your workflow...you will get a better representation with vinyl, this is true.
but the second you use a digital format to compose, and think that somehow...magically...that vinyl is gonna make shit sound better, you clearly have no idea wtf you're talking about.
My experience is at least that the digital vinyl master sounds completely different and better on vinyl.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 9:59 pm
by arsenic
dermike wrote:My experience is at least that the digital vinyl master sounds completely different and better on vinyl.
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Arsenic
i've dealt with my fair share of em, and I can't say I agree intrinsically...but you have to remember, that mastering for digital and mastering for vinyl are two very, very different things due to the constraints of both mediums
sadly, you'll be hard pressed to find an indie label that is willing to pay for proper masters of both...and will either use the vinyl master for their digital releases, or rely on the DAW version (which in many cases, may be better)
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 10:03 pm
by dermike
arsenic wrote:dermike wrote:My experience is at least that the digital vinyl master sounds completely different and better on vinyl.
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Arsenic
i've dealt with my fair share of em, and I can't say I agree intrinsically...but you have to remember, that mastering for digital and mastering for vinyl are two very, very different things due to the constraints of both mediums
sadly, you'll be hard pressed to find an indie label that is willing to pay for proper masters of both...and will either use the vinyl master for their digital releases, or rely on the DAW version (which in many cases, may be better)
Yeah, that was what I was trying to say with my first post.
Vinyl master digital vs. the actual vinyl.
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 10:08 pm
by arsenic
dermike wrote:Yeah, that was what I was trying to say with my first post.
Vinyl master digital vs. the actual vinyl.
fair enough then, but it only has to do with the fact that it was mastered specifically for that format...nothing 'better' (personal opinion aside) about vinyl in the slightest
