The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Does analog gear really sound "better", or is it just a learned response?
Old 9 hours ago
  #5101
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
I went from Camels to Pall Malls because the 'full length' Pall Malls seem like a better deal. I had to give up the Pall Malls because something in the perfume (flavoring) caused an ulcer on my lip. It actually made me quit smoking for a while... damn. (I quit for good some years later.)
Speaking of Pall Malls, Van Halen's 1984 album cover with the angelic kid with the cigarette; the bottom pack were faux Pall Malls - the artist photographed a kid model with candy cigarettes, and the red pack was a fake PM pack.



Another cigarette centric album cover (ironically the tune is "Camel Hump"):
Old 9 hours ago
  #5102
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by donnylang View Post

The clearest analogy IMO is in the world of photography and cameras. A high-end camera from 50-60 years ago still takes photographs of the exact same high quality it always has. Even the best digital camera from 10-20 years ago is essentially obsolete. And a digital camera today will be obsolete 10-20 years from now. This is why I call it a marketing scheme. It's a trick to buy more features at a lower cost in "better quality" than the previous incarnation.

The easiest way I can get this concept across is: the goal seems to be to get an entire recording studio into your iPhone as a stand-alone.
That film camera from 50-60 years ago still needs film, which is getting harder to find and will disappear completely - rendering the camera useless. It also needs film processing, and people with the gear and the know how to do it.

We could go down the line - obsolescence, planned or accidental, is a fact of life.

You need better analogies, and a handbook on "its" vs "it's".
Old 9 hours ago
  #5103
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert82 View Post
Hey, when your Holy Trinity of Comedy...
Is the 3 Stooges.
What d'ya expect? (post eye poke)


Chris
Old 9 hours ago
  #5104
Lives for gear
 
donnylang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
You need better analogies, and a handbook on "its" vs "it's".
Is that so?
Old 8 hours ago
  #5105
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SongJohn View Post
yo Donny what do you think of this sound? It was recorded in 1976 on a 1/2" Teac 8 channel by a friend of mine in Indiana (in his livingroom):

http://www.700west.com/audio/Malachi...ongYouSing.mp3

(I think this is the most professional I've heard Teac gear used before. Kinda proves to me a lot of bad sounding Teac "narrow track" recordings are user error not entirely the machine).
Ironic, no? Using an mp3 file to accurately represent An analog recording - sort of supports the clean slate theory.
Old 8 hours ago
  #5106
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
When I was in my twenties, I wore a fedora, smoked unfiltered Camels, read Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, and Nathaniel West. I also had hair almost down to my waist. There was something complicated going on there, too. There's always something complicated going on with young people.


Unfortunately, I haven't been a member of the AES in years, so don't really have access to the findings of those studies, but nothing in the abstracts sounded particularly eyebrow-raising.
Sci hub, you can get pretty much any paper you want ther free.. Shhhhhhh.....
But yes I guess the conclusion, tentatively, would be that a preference for analogue over digital and vice versa is not just in people's heads but actually a statistically valid distinction under strict abx tests.. Ie people do seem to prefer analogue in some situations despite the ostensibly worse measurements of the technology. I think in the second paper data suggested people preferred digital recording for classical but analogue for rock music.
Old 8 hours ago
  #5107
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by donnylang View Post
I think it sounds great man. I also think your recordings are fantastic (I've heard them over the years on various forums). I firmly believe that great final results can be achieved using Teac gear, and the different between Ampex and Teac is minimal by the time it gets to consumer ears.

I will say that recording does still have Teac vibes to my ears. Not sure whether I could say that without you having told me ahead of time though ha. But in my experience recording my own stuff, it's very obvious in the studio. The differences are really extreme. Some of the best Teac recordings I've heard are these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnEK8bpqqDY

*vinyl/youtube rip, but the original vinyl sounds quite good. This is a 3340 mixed to a 3300 w/ a Model 2.
It’s an mp3 - that’s what you’re hearing (in the teac copy).
Old 8 hours ago
  #5108
Lives for gear
 

Gusss, the other people preferred the third paper, once they started Rolling.
Chris
Old 8 hours ago
  #5109
Lives for gear
 
donnylang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
It’s an mp3 - that’s what you’re hearing (in the teac copy).
Not playing.
Old 7 hours ago
  #5110
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
Ironic, no? Using an mp3 file to accurately represent An analog recording - sort of supports the clean slate theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
It’s an mp3 - that’s what you’re hearing (in the teac copy).
There's a similar thing in citing vinyl as examples of analog in analog/digital debates - when they were cut with a digital delay line.

Generally, in regards to representation, there are degrees to 'accuracy.' For example, there's no way a photo of Picasso's Guernica is going to convey the massive size of it (11′ 6″ x 25′ 6″), nor would Ansel Adams' photography give a hint of the splendor of Yosemite, though in Adams' case he imparts an other worldliness not otherwise there. But we get the picture...

With mp3s given a decent bitrate we get a good sense of how the audio is. It is what it is; bandwidth is not infinite at the moment...we get a very good idea about the relative quality of it. One thing for sure is, if it sounds good as an mp3, it sounds even better in a lossless format.

That Teac record even through YT sounds pretty good!
Old 5 hours ago
  #5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
LOL, seriously dude?

It wasn't some lonely mad scientist who came up with the notions of distortion, frequency response, or the ratio of signal to noise!

These measurements, how to take them, and their importance in transmitting and recording accurate copies of incoming signal were established by generations a physicists, perceptual scientists and others studying how to improve audio transmission and reproduction.

Perhaps a good book on the history of audio and recording might be productive reading for many in this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by donnylang View Post
Did most of this occur prior to the realization of digital audio? Wasn't digital audio the ultimate "solution" to the "problems" inherent to analog mediums?

You're thinly veiled insults are obvious too man. I'm not insulting you or anyone.
Sorry, I missed this earlier.

My irony was certainly thinly-veiled, but I never intended to be insulting.

That said, I did find myself at that point in the conversation a bit beside myself, trying to understand your reasoning; as noted, I've been intensively involved with audio since I was a kid in the really sixties. Like many here, I've been a professional studio engineer, spent a decade recording in mostly all analog studios in the 80s. I'm also a musician and songwriter. And I'm a music fan as well, as I noted, I've seen well over 70 (unamplified) symphonic concerts and around a score quartet and changer concerts (also untouched by audio equipment of any kind); I'm pretty serious about sound and many of my friends and associates have been as well... and, while I sincerely mean no offense, I have to say that I'm not at all sure you understand much of what I've been saying -- and I certainly don't understand the seemingly personal logic of what you are arguing.

But I do stand by your right to your opinions and beliefs, even if I don't understand them.

That said, I think in a forum such as this one, we all have to be careful about making factual claims that can't be supported by evidence and logic.
Old 5 hours ago
  #5112
Lives for gear
 
donnylang's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Sorry, I missed this earlier.

My irony was certainly thinly-veiled, but I never intended to be insulting.

That said, I did find myself at that point in the conversation a bit beside myself, trying to understand your reasoning; as noted, I've been intensively involved with audio since I was a kid in the really sixties. Like many here, I've been a professional studio engineer, spent a decade recording in mostly all analog studios in the 80s. I'm also a musician and songwriter. And I'm a music fan as well, as I noted, I've seen well over 70 (unamplified) symphonic concerts and around a score quartet and changer concerts (also untouched by audio equipment of any kind); I'm pretty serious about sound and many of my friends and associates have been as well... and, while I sincerely mean no offense, I have to say that I'm not at all sure you understand much of what I've been saying -- and I certainly don't understand the seemingly personal logic of what you are arguing.

But I do stand by your right to your opinions and beliefs, even if I don't understand them.

That said, I think in a forum such as this one, we all have to be careful about making factual claims that can't be supported by evidence and logic.
I’m done with the topic but appreciate your sentiment!
Old 58 minutes ago
  #5113
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
That film camera from 50-60 years ago still needs film, which is getting harder to find and will disappear completely - rendering the camera useless. It also needs film processing, and people with the gear and the know how to do it.

We could go down the line - obsolescence, planned or accidental, is a fact of life.

You need better analogies, and a handbook on "its" vs "it's".
You could get a digital back for the camera.

Will there be an equivalent for tape machine? A magnetic surface controlled by some electronics.
Old 52 minutes ago
  #5114
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnylang View Post
Yeh I agree it does involve a great deal of nuance and it's complex. I'm not unwilling to discuss it at that level, but I'm not compelled to do so in this forum. Tbh because once you do, others begin taking quotes out of context with "gotchas" etc.
Sadly so true!

Try to introduce nuance in any online discussion and many people can't handle it, defaulting to their whitewashing of all detail.
📝 Reply
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
🎙️ View mentioned gear