Scott Dolan

Ah, OK. I actually do, too. But considering the topic at hand, I thought you were referring to LPs. But, I gotcha now. See, I don't look at it that way. I think the sonics are secondary when it comes to placing a recording in a given "era/age". For example, if I hear Rockabilly, I'm already thinking 1950's. If I hear Psychedelic Rock, I'm thinking 1960's. Now, of course there are contemporary bands playing this music, but I still never associate it with the sonic quality (or lack thereof) of the recording. Is that basically what you're saying? Sure, reverse engineer the sound and make The Soundtrack Of Our Lives sound like they recorded their albums in the 60's. But, you'll still know otherwise, right? Those genres and the artists were a product of their era, not the recording equipment they were able to use. At least in my opinion, anyway. There was a style, a popular modern culture those artist all worked within. I don't know that a modern artist replicate that simply through sonics. Perhaps they could, but I'm not sure if they could fool anyone that was listening intently. There would just be too many other factors, whether it be culture, politics, and/or the many other musical influences that have entered their universe since those styles were popular. I think that's one of the reasons why much of Wynton Marsalis' music seems so watered down to many. Try as he might to simulate '50's and '60's Bop/Post Bop/whatever, there are simply too many factors and influences he's absorbed to allow him to fully place himself in that era/pantheon/whatever...

If 24bit can rival analog in "sonic warmth" then someone is adding harmonics/distortion in the mastering phase.

I don't. Are you saying it sounds older on an LP than it does on a CD?

"The biggest distorter is the LP it­self." -RVG So no, he's not saying he can make records sound better. And Kevin, digital facilitated the loudness wars which have created some really awful sounding music, but the digital realm itself is GREATLY improved over where it once was. Compressed digital has caught up to CD in quality. Do you remember how awful those old 96k MP3's sounded?

No, Jim. He speaks directly to the question of the "sound" of digital: [[Q: A lot of people argue that digital is a cold­er, sterile sound. Where do you think that comes from? A: Where does it come from? The engineers. You've noticed they've attributed the sound to the medium. They say digital is cold, so they've given it an attribute, but linear digi­tal has no attributes.]] He then explains why it's nonsense: [[It's just a medium for storage.]]

You might want to re-read the second question and answer that Jim posted. That had nothing to do with data storage, but with the sound.

Please stop with the straw man arguments. You're better than that. I laid out several examples of things that many state as fact. And I prefer digital. That doesn'r mean that I'm saying digital is superior to analog. If you're going to continue to trot out terms like "opinion" and "fact", then please familiarize yourself with the difference between the two.

No, Paul. It is not an "opinion" when somebody says analog is superior to digital. It's not an "opinion" when someone says digital is cold and brittle and doesn't contain the richness of the analog sound. It is not an "opinion" when, as one poster once said here, that they could here the difference between an analog source and a digital source where the sound was broken up into 44,100 samples per second. It's not an "opinion" when they deny that the "warmth" they hear on their LPs is actually harmonic distortion not present in the digital domain. I've fought those battles and more here, and know the difference between a personal statement of fact and an opinion. Go back and read Kevin's post. He's not making that stuff up sans historical context.

There's nothing wrong with that, Guy. The problem stems from them claiming analog/LPs are superior to digital/CDs.

Agreed, Kevin. It's very Luddite in nature.

Nice to hear a master that worked in the analog realm his entire career completely destroy the analog vs digital myth. Oh, but I guess "he didn't really understand how digital worked".

Gotta agree with you there, Lon. Sometimes Jim spins out of control with all of the thoughts going through his head, but that post was about as spot on as any I've ever seen. From him, or anyone else for that matter. Examining the human condition can really strain the limits of critical thought, but that post was as interesting as it was insightful. The best thinkers are able to put into words things you always knew, but just couldn't fully grasp, or put into words yourself. They lay it out, and after you read it you have that "duh!" moment.

We could all become hardcore alcoholics, I suppose. Man, we'd all be social as a motherfucker then, now wouldn't we.

HA! That cuts right to the heart of the "problem", doesn't it? I'm pretty sure I get exactly what Joel is trying to state, the selfish and disconnected modern society, and all. But he's not finding the most graceful way of getting his point across. But, back to the quote. Isn't it odd how we've gone from a "people should really learn to mind their own business" society, to grouchy fuckers bemoaning the fact that everyone actually is now? I guess we should have been more carefully about what we wished for. Karma with a wink and a smirk.

I'll let the individual decide their reasoning for wearing earbuds.

Yeah, I love having the album cover on my tv screen. Though I still don't understand flipping it every 30 seconds, but no big deal. My wife and I recently bought a 3rd gen Apple TV for our master bedroom, almost strictly due to how cheap they're going for. I was surprised that the 4th gen doesn't have an optical input. But, I guess everything if going either USB or HDMI these days. BTW, Eric. Did you feel much of the earthquake Saturday morning? There were folks in certain parts of Jeff City that felt it, but my wife and I didn't.

The DAC can be different, but the way they convert digital to analog will be no different regardless of file type. I would assume that either Art was running his CDs through a different DAC than the one he uses for digital file playback, or simply convinced,himself that he hears a difference. But, the information in and out is exactly the same. One cannot sound better than the other using the same playback chain. Yep, it's a wonderful thing. I've been in this camp for several years now. No more going to the other end of the house to search for a CD. I have my entire catalog right there on my iPad screen.

Exactly the same. The bits are just cataloged differently making the file size smaller. Neither will sound better than the other. That's simply not possible. Unless there is a problem in the playback chain for one or the other, they will sound identical.

If your lossless files sound better than the CDs they were ripped from, there was a problem in your CD playback chain.

Cool. Crux does indeed sound interesting. While I like Jazz From Hell and Meets The Mothers Of Prevention well enough, I have to admit I've had my fill of synclavier.

Any good?

Oh my! The sounds serious...

I think you might want to double check the definition of elitist there, Art.

Elitist would be too strong a word for you, IMO. But, idealist certainly seems to fit. I fully sympathize with the frustration you've noted, but I think there may be a bit of Golden Age Fallacy in your thinking.

I agree. What's "important parts of life" is subjective, and only the individual can decide what those things are. They can't be dictated by others. That's just a wee bit presumptuous.