The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Any Truth to Neil Young's Claim re: High Res Music?
Old 1st February 2012
  #91
Lives for gear
 

Chuck Norris can hear 3 octaves above Hi Res.
Old 1st February 2012
  #92
Gear Maniac
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 

As others have stated here, Neil Young has been anti-digital for a long time. When cd's became the norm, he was against them.

That said, Neil Young has made a ton of money in his day. He has not "sold out", because he does not need to "sell out" to pay his bills. Do artists today have the same luxury? I do not think so.

After all this is digested, we are forced to deal with a more basic issue, where is the money being made for recording artists? Bobby Owsinski's Music 3.0 underlines the new argument.

The money is not made with the recorded music, it is made with the selling of rights, sponserships, touring and personal appearances. Music is not the marketing to get those revenues, not the other way around.

Recording music is an expense, it always was, but now it is an expense for the part of the music business that does not generate the money. It became necessary to reduce the cost of this expense to maximize profit, because that is why everyone works, to make money. So, how do you reduced expenses... technology is a great tool.

Technology has made a lot of short cuts to make the recording process cheaper. It also made the distribution cheaper. Technology did not always improve these processes, but not enough people, including the artists, care. It is the side of the bread which is buttered.

All this really sucks for guys who make their living recording other people's music. You have to find a workflow that satisfies the customer and is still profitable to you.
Old 1st February 2012
  #93
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg View Post
Neil Young has been complaining quite loudly about digital audio since about 1988
he should learn to sing and play in tune before complaining about anything
Old 1st February 2012
  #94
Lives for gear
 
Granny Gremlin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
I'm pretty sure you've either got a typo or a really loose grip on your audio history.


PS... And, of course, vinyl was never used for master recordings. It's a distribution format only. Prior to the widespread adoption of magnetic tape in studios in the 50's, the recording was cut to a lacquer disk. The mother and stamping master disks were plated metal. Although, going back before WWII, you had other master materials. Go back far enough and you had wax master disks and cylinders.
You don't think you're splitting hairs differentiating between vinyl and a 'laquer" master?

A Laquer is just a manually cut (w a lathe) vs stamped in a press (vinyl or whatever material, this makes little difference) record. Essantially the same format but manufactured differently - all the same limitations (plus a few more sometimes - often these are no better than dub plates which have a limited number of plays before audio quality degrades, but a good mastering engineer will use better quality stuff than that). Basically like the diff between CDR and glass mastered CD; longevity and robustness is the only difference, with distro vinyl being the winner on that score. Though I guess it's arguable that the plating and mothering process introduces some noise, that's a fault of mass-producing records not the format itself (some indie bands release limited run lathe cut records, sometimes cut into interesting material choices).

Wax cylinders were apparently the most accurate medium ever devised (someone told me once, and for some reason I believed them). Just very delicate and not practical.
Old 1st February 2012
  #95
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimS View Post
On a side note, am I the only one who is both amused and annoyed by the claim that "Young is working" on a device of some sort? Unless he has some engineering skills that I wasn't aware of, I'm pretty sure he's not "working" on ****.
Him personally? Maybe, maybe not, but this is a guy that designed model trains and cows with a better "moo". He tinkers with everything. Anyway there's nothing about the idea that's technically challenging. It needs a player for hi res audio and enough memory/SSD or integration with a computer to store the files. Standard "Made in China" stuff. Getting it done needs people to sign up for supplying content and consumers to use it. What's interesting is that you'd actually NEED a special device, and not just an existing box like an AppleTV that streams music from your computer to your listening setup just like it streams video. If there's enough bandwidth for good quality video is that enough for hi res audio?
Old 1st February 2012
  #96
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimS View Post
On a side note, am I the only one who is both amused and annoyed by the claim that "Young is working" on a device of some sort? Unless he has some engineering skills that I wasn't aware of, I'm pretty sure he's not "working" on ****.
You think Steve Jobs had 'engineering skills' that could develop the iPod????
Ideas and the thoughts behind those ideas is 'working' on something.

It's not usually engineers who developed things - build them for sure - but it's usually guys like Young who only visualize the gear they want that engineers build.

It may seem like semantics...but it's not. For Example Gene Roddenberry visualized flip phones, cell phones, and mass communications like we have now. He wasn't an engineer by any means....but we have communicators we hold in our hands and can talk to just about anyone in the world don't we?
It's the ideas that breath life into gear...not the electronics.
Old 12th February 2012
  #97
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Papanate View Post
You think Steve Jobs had 'engineering skills' that could develop the iPod????
Ideas and the thoughts behind those ideas is 'working' on something.

It's not usually engineers who developed things - build them for sure - but it's usually guys like Young who only visualize the gear they want that engineers build.

It may seem like semantics...but it's not. For Example Gene Roddenberry visualized flip phones, cell phones, and mass communications like we have now. He wasn't an engineer by any means....but we have communicators we hold in our hands and can talk to just about anyone in the world don't we?
It's the ideas that breath life into gear...not the electronics.
I respectfully disagree. There are ideas, and then there are IDEAS. Any idiot can think of something that would be nice to have exist, but that by itself is nothing more than meaningless fantasy. What truly matters is the thought that goes into turning those dreams into reality.

Let's use your example: First of all, Roddenberry certainly wasn't the first to think of the idea of a communicator, but that's beside the point. More importantly, to my knowledge he put no thought or effort into the technical issues of how such a communicator might actually be made. The real credit belongs to the engineering team at Motorola who developed the first mobile phone, as well as the generations of engineers before them who developed the technology that made their accomplishment possible. And if you told any of those people that Roddenberry was "working on" the mobile phone simply because he put the concept of one existing into a science fiction story, they'd laugh you out of the room.

That's not to say that thought isn't important - the history of science is filled with people whose ideas were later confirmed by others (Einstein's General Theory of Relativity being an obvious example). But there's a world of difference between a scientist who develops a theory through painstaking research, measurements, and calculations, and somebody who merely says "hey, this would be cool!"
Old 11th March 2012
  #98
Lives for gear
 
ScumBum's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertshaw View Post
he should learn to sing and play in tune before complaining about anything
haha ,

I love it
Old 11th March 2012
  #99
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimS View Post

That's not to say that thought isn't important - the history of science is filled with people whose ideas were later confirmed by others (Einstein's General Theory of Relativity being an obvious example). But there's a world of difference between a scientist who develops a theory through painstaking research, measurements, and calculations, and somebody who merely says "hey, this would be cool!"
What difference is there between and concept and a reality except the physical?

Classic examples - Steve Jobs, Walk Disney, Alexander Bell and Thomas Edison. If they didn't exist, then I bet dollars to donuts none of there engineer's ideas get made.

The thing is without superior leadership and vision nothing gets done - no matter how talented an engineer or scientist is.
Old 11th March 2012
  #100
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Papanate View Post
What difference is there between and concept and a reality except the physical?

Classic examples - Steve Jobs, Walk Disney, Alexander Bell and Thomas Edison. If they didn't exist, then I bet dollars to donuts none of there engineer's ideas get made.

The thing is without superior leadership and vision nothing gets done - no matter how talented an engineer or scientist is.
You're proving my point for me. Alexander Bell and Thomas Edison were both scientists who made their ideas into realities, which is why they're remembered today (it's true that Edison was notorious for stealing from other inventors, but he did enough on his own to still be worthy of merit.)

Jobs and Disney are both better known as businessmen than inventors. While they deserve credit for having the business acumen to recognize a good thing when they saw it, to my knowledge neither of them actually invented anything of note, and while I'm not an expert in either's life I don't know that either of them even originated any groundbreaking concepts. They simply took what other people were already doing and marketed it on a large scale - certainly an accomplishment in its own right, but neither the idea nor the implementation were their own.
Old 11th March 2012
  #101
Lives for gear
 

And I'll add that Disney, and to a much lesser extent Jobs, at least had some technical skills in their particular fields. Neil Young to my knowledge has no electrical/computer engineering knowledge whatsoever. So quite frankly, to get back to my original point, he's not "working" on anything.
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Time / Gear free zone - shoot the breeze
1
dtobocman / So Much Gear, So Little Time
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump