[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] "All hail the analogue revolution..."
It depends.Let me start with the disclaimer,that classical,rock,and older R&B,are the bulk of my listening diet.I find most commercial classical recordings made after 1978,or so to be completely unlistenable,both in terms of sound,and performance.As for rock,there are select people,who know how to make good-sounding records in a digital age.Topping this list,would be Blur,and some of R.E.M's stuff."Reveal",and "Up",being outstanding examples,yet others like "New Adventures In HiFi" sound terrible.In spite of the fact,it has two of thier greatest songs.Jeff Lynne's productions,are very good,"Cloud Nine",and the first Wilburys are a joy to listen to.As is "Think Visual',the first Kinks record to emply digital recording.Digital vinyl,in short,is a mixed bag,as any serious listener will tell you.
Roger
Konrad Strauss <konrad.strauss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: on 9/22/06 12:25 PM, Roger and Allison Kulp at thorenstd124@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> As someone who has never owned a CD,or a CD player,this just
> confirms what I have known,about this abysmal format for over 20 years.It's
> physically ugly to look at,unlike vinyl,and sounds like crap.No amount of
> tweaking;gold CDs, SACD,24 bit mastering (ROFL),ad nauseum,has been able to
> improve on an innately flawed format.
I'm curious, in what way is CD, and by extension digital recording, innately
flawed?
--
Konrad Strauss
Director of Recording Arts
Associate Professor of Music
Jacobs School of Music
Indiana University
http://php.indiana.edu/~kstrauss
http://www.music.indiana.edu/department/audio/
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com