Finally, someone cares about quality [Archive]

pos

07-16-2015, 07:36 AM

He blamed the poor sound quality of the medium.

"I don't need my music to be devalued by the worst quality in the history of broadcasting or any other form of distribution," Young wrote in the post. "I don't feel right allowing this to be sold to my fans."
Then why did he accept to see his recording edited on those pesky cassette tapes back when?... :dont-know:

Fact is a properly encoded mp3 (at the very least 128kbps for stereo, and more importantly a decent codec such as the original fraunhofer) *is* better than FM broadcasting on almost every aspect, and *much* *much* better than cassette tapes.

In practice a well encoded mp3 is indistinguishable from the original, and that is exactly what it was meant to be.

Although his decision is "not because of the money," he notes that bad deals made without his consent had cut into his income.
That is more like it...

Lee in Montreal

07-16-2015, 08:02 AM

Just for the curiosity, here's how much music is missing when converting to MP3. And that's only one aspect of the conversion ;-)

http://www.factmag.com/2015/02/19/listen-song-made-entirely-data-lost-compressing-suzanne-vegas-toms-diner-mp3/

pos

07-16-2015, 08:51 AM

Actually that is the only one.
I did similar experiments around 1999 by simply subtracting a mp3 and its original wav.

The trick is that these artifact should not be audible thanks to the masking effect, and it works pretty well indeed.
Of course the lower the bitrate the more audible the artifacts. Different codecs will also have different artifacts.

Wagner

07-17-2015, 07:29 AM

From the pitch man for "PONO" no less

I love all this talk about "sound quality"; targeted primarily at the portable players/smart phone crowd, to be used with ear buds or cheap head phones (most of the time in a public/semi-public space)

Gotta love progress! :)

While the music business looks on, standing in the ruins and asking "how did all of this happen!?"

I refuse to participate; it's all crap for one reason or another, convenience and portability notwithstanding

Too late Neil, the cat is already out of the bag!
(this "Bud"'s for you!)

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

Mr. Widget

07-17-2015, 08:43 AM

I love all this talk about "sound quality"; targeted primarily at the portable players/smart phone crowd, to be used with ear buds or cheap head phones (most of the time in a public/semi-public space)Thats got me scratching my head too... on a very high resolving system there are definite losses with all sources compared to the master tapes or master digital files, but will you hear them through a portable player with headphones as you wander the planet? It just doesn't make sense to me. I think the result is market driven... the logic being most young people today do most of their listening through a portable device so give them an option for an excellent portable. Yeah, maybe...

But the Pono doesn't accept the files directly, you have to interface with a computer and store the music on flash memory cards... seems a bit retro to me and not in a good way.

Widget

Ducatista47

07-17-2015, 03:05 PM

If memory serves (shades of Iron Chef), the concensus here was that 320 mp3 was difficult to distinguish from 44.1. As a practical matter, of course.

As to listening to portable, my contention from day one has been that the issue is how much attention is being paid to the music. If the listener is multi tasking music listening, which after all is also done whenever listening while driving a car or socialzing at a party - even in the presence of a fine stereo, then high fidelity may be of lower importance. When I take my Rhapsody, IPod and Etymotic in ears or Sony MDR-1Rs out and get a chance to listen, it is another story, isn't it?

Not everyone using portable is multitasking. Think a long flight. Not everyone playing that great stereo is is giving it their full attention either. Still, I am saddened (for our society) that most new listeners will probably not ever buy a stereo system. At least if their portable systems are of high quality, they have a fighting chance of discovering the joys of music for real.

I feel Neil's Achilles Heel is his complete nostalga for analog. Neil loves retro. I am reminded of an audio reviewer who wouldn't review tube gear. His expanation? Car magazines don't review buggy whips. No need to agree with him or me to get the point. To be fair, Neil may sometimes seem to have strange ideas, but if Daryl Hannah were my girlfriend I might be distracted too. He is one of our great creative artists, no doubt, so I will always hear him out.

Mr. Widget

07-17-2015, 05:14 PM

I feel Neil's Achilles Heel is his complete nostalga for analog. Neil loves retro.Not to derail into analog vs. digital as that isn't the topic here and they both have their strengths... even Bob Stuart, founder of 100% digital Meridian and an excellent digital codec MLP, says that all music is analog when we hear it and digital attempts to capture most of what we hear.

I do agree that someone could use their Pono player with excellent headphones in a quiet room and get a lot from them... and you can plug the "portable" player into a home system, but I find it odd that their flagship product is a portable. I would likely be on board if they had an equally compelling home player/streaming device.

Widget

Ducatista47

07-18-2015, 02:25 PM

Sorry to mislead/go off topic/open old wounds. My point in the last paragraph was that Neil Young seems to prefer retro in nearly everything. He drives cars as old as I am and goes on about it. A classic good old days rant. He also goes on about much prefering the way records used to sound. The Pono project was bound to be going forward to reach back, so the way it ended up, warts and all, does not surprise me. He wants the World back to pre digital and knew he had to use digital to realize his vision. It was almost sure to be neither fish nor foul.

Face it, it's a digital Walkman.

Wagner

07-18-2015, 05:04 PM

I feel Neil's Achilles Heel is his complete nostalga for analog. Neil loves retro. I am reminded of an audio reviewer who wouldn't review tube gear. His expanation? Car magazines don't review buggy whips. No need to agree with him or me to get the point. To be fair, Neil may sometimes seem to have strange ideas, but if Daryl Hannah were my girlfriend I might be distracted too. He is one of our great creative artists, no doubt, so I will always hear him out.
Neil's "Achilles Heel" as you put it is how to reconcile his past words and actions (cool then) with his current deeds (and nowadays, so far as the record business is concerned, his irrelevance) and make it all fit together with his love (and NEED) for money

Daryl Hannah, another irrelevant soul as far as the "pop culture" (read: money/revenue generating ability) world is concerned

ART is another matter

No one (as in very very few) under the age of 35 would even give a shit whether Neil Young allowed his catalog to be "streamed" if it were not for his self-serving association with the current trendy (and no talent) Jack White (who currently enjoys "cash cow" status as I am sure you are aware) They wouldn't/don't even know who Neil Young is

I am NOT knocking on Neil's music past or his contributions.................40 years ago

Neil is for all intents and purposes 70 years old now; the only thing he knows about what "sounds" good is what somebody tells him (when we are getting down to discussing low level resolution and the like)

It is depressing to see someone like Young go from eccentric "rock" persona to an endorsement clown and shill (but I am not surprised; seems to be the norm in today's world)

SEAWOLF97

07-18-2015, 06:30 PM

It is depressing to see someone like Young go from eccentric "rock" persona to an endorsement clown and shill (but I am not surprised; seems to be the norm in today's world)

Don't want no cash
Don't need no money
Ain't got no stash
This note's for you.

Ain't singin' for Pepsi
Ain't singin' for Coke
I don't sing for nobody
Makes me look like a joke
This note's for you.

Ain't singin' for Miller
Don't sing for Bud
I won't sing for politicians
Ain't singin' for Spuds
This note's for you.

Don't need no cash
Don't want no money
Ain't got no stash
This note's for you.

I've got the real thing
I got the real thing, baby
I got the real thing
Yeah, alright.

-NY

Wagner

07-18-2015, 06:59 PM

Don't want no cash
Don't need no money
Ain't got no stash
This note's for you.

Ain't singin' for Pepsi
Ain't singin' for Coke
I don't sing for nobody
Makes me look like a joke
This note's for you.

Ain't singin' for Miller
Don't sing for Bud
I won't sing for politicians
Ain't singin' for Spuds
This note's for you.

Don't need no cash
Don't want no money
Ain't got no stash
This note's for you.

I've got the real thing
I got the real thing, baby
I got the real thing
Yeah, alright.

-NY

At least Taylor Swift, Bless her heart, is honest about it :)

It's ALL about the money (and in my opinion, rightfully so)

According to Neil "The Legend" Young:
" Neil Young has left the door open to return to streaming: ‘When the quality is back, I’ll give it another look,’ he said."

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/jul/16/neil-young-bans-his-music-from-streaming-due-to-worst-sound-quality

Right Neil, will it all sound better when they work out how you guys'll get paid properly?

Neil is a clown, he quit the best bands he was ever in for stupid doper reasons

Not a career to ashamed of, but other than one #1 pretty typical for quite a few bands of the era of his greatest "prowess" (late '69 to late '72 or thereabouts)

In my OPINION his almost cult like status is built on 3 strong solo albums from the best of times, post CSN&Y, but that's about it

Some people say all they have to say in only two or three and then fade away; Neil's done about 35 or 40 studio albums I believe

You know it's over when everything you do subsequently is compared to two or three records from decades ago

And now, today thanks to marketing :bs: and hype he's a legend?

Maybe some folks think he is but I am not among them

I own at least 1/2 a dozen Neil Young records and I like them, just to let it be known

It's too bad all this press isn't about his latest studio album (and CHART success) instead of some crappy throw away music player, what late night talk show he's going to be on or who he's hanging out with

Mr. Widget

07-18-2015, 07:13 PM

Wagner

07-18-2015, 07:25 PM

True about Neil's love if retro, but he also loves cutting edge technology. One of his vintage cars was modified into a massive electric car.

As for the under 35 set knowing about or even caring about Mr. Young? I can't say that I've read any studies on the topic, but anecdotally I did have a 20 something over to hear my big ass stereo and he singled out a number of Neil Young albums and particularly wanted to hear them on vinyl. I don't think the vinyl craze in general has much to do with quality and is more about retro-cool... but at least some of the younger set know about that old man of rock. :bouncy:

Widget

I touched on that above....................I am aware he's hot with the "millennials" now, and the hipsters.............it's all because of his Jack White connection/association

I did not say they did not care:

No one (as in very very few) under the age of 35 would even give a shit whether Neil Young allowed his catalog to be "streamed" if it were not for his self-serving association with the current trendy (and no talent) Jack White (who currently enjoys "cash cow" status as I am sure you are aware) They wouldn't/don't even know who Neil Young is

hsosdrum

07-20-2015, 11:40 AM

Neil's "Achilles Heel" as you put it is how to reconcile his past words and actions (cool then) with his current deeds (and nowadays, so far as the record business is concerned, his irrelevance) and make it all fit together with his love (and NEED) for money

Record business? What record business? Wake up and smell 2015: the entire record business is now irrelevant. Today, musical artists make their living touring. (I would say "playing live,", but so many touring musicians merely mime to backing tracks that the term "playing live" is largely inaccurate.) The way to survive in the music biz today is to get your ass out in front of people and perform; being a jazz fan, this does my heart good, since nothing can substitute for the direct communication between an artist and a live audience, and on that basis, ol' Neil can still compete with the best of 'em.

Wagner

07-21-2015, 08:00 AM

Record business? What record business? Wake up and smell 2015: the entire record business is now irrelevant. Today, musical artists make their living touring. (I would say "playing live,", but so many touring musicians merely mime to backing tracks that the term "playing live" is largely inaccurate.) The way to survive in the music biz today is to get your ass out in front of people and perform; being a jazz fan, this does my heart good, since nothing can substitute for the direct communication between an artist and a live audience, and on that basis, ol' Neil can still compete with the best of 'em.

I disagree with your assessment of the "way to survive" only being "to get your ass out in front of people and perform" (but that's another discussion entirely)
It certainly helps, I would agree, but is far from being a requisite

Maybe it is for competing TRENDY "acts" but for ARTISTS and MUSICIANS? Don't think so...............few make money "touring"...........UNLESS you are one of the current, in style flavor of the month "performers", or a War Horse (Bruno Mars and Paul McCartney) doing millions in concessions, licensing and add ons (getting paid)

The primary reason (for MOST) for doing live shows is still, even in 2015, is to promote "RECORDINGS or MUSIC" sales and hopefully garner name recognition (we'll drop the use of the nowadays somewhat ambiguous term "records") regardless of delivery format...............that and publishing revenues (watch TV lately?

I also do not think that true "artists" are doing a lot of the miming you are referring to...............maybe folks like Britney Spears perhaps?

There are also a hell of a lot of the music loving public that either do not, or cannot, attend concerts for any number of reasons; one's geographic location being the biggest deciding factor as for that option, after cost, even today

The way for them "to survive" (artists and acts) is for them to be PAID for their work and obviously Neil agrees; maybe not entirely with his words but certainly by his deeds

Maybe I should have included "quote unquote" when referring to the "record business", that or referred to it more accurately as the "recording industry"

It, and music publishing is still alive and well friend, as long as there are lawyers and money involved

THAT is the basis for PONO and everything else Neil Young has done in the past 35-40 years or so and I have absolutely NO problems with that.................just be honest about it

Keep in mind as well that the highest percentage of revenue streams and actual dollar amounts (totals, not per album or event) for the record industry today are being generated by artists, acts and catalogs posthumously

And you cite JAZZ as your example?! JAZZ is better at losing money than Classical music in today's market (I love JAZZ, Hard Bop and back as well as Classical but this conversation is about music players, delivery formats, the "business" and motives)

BMWCCA

07-21-2015, 11:02 AM

hsosdrum

07-21-2015, 01:30 PM

I disagree with your assessment of the "way to survive" only being "to get your ass out in front of people and perform" (but that's another discussion entirely)
It certainly helps, I would agree, but is far from being a requisite.
Except in rare cases, these days touring is absolutely a requisite to making money at music. I'm afraid you're woefully out of touch with the way the music world now works.

Maybe it is for competing TRENDY "acts" but for ARTISTS and MUSICIANS? Don't think so...............few make money "touring"...........UNLESS you are one of the current, in style flavor of the month "performers", or a War Horse (Bruno Mars and Paul McCartney) doing millions in concessions, licensing and add ons (getting paid)
Being an "artist" does not immunize a musician from the economic realities of today's music business: if you want to show a profit you have to play live. (And just who bestows this immunity of "artist" that you speak of, anyway? Certainly a subject for another thread.)

The primary reason (for MOST) for doing live shows is still, even in 2015, is to promote "RECORDINGS or MUSIC" sales and hopefully garner name recognition (we'll drop the use of the nowadays somewhat ambiguous term "records") regardless of delivery format...............that and publishing revenues (watch TV lately?
Again, you're applying pre-2000s economic thinking to a situation that has completely changed. Most listeners today get their music free, or from streaming services that pay nothing (or practically nothing) to the artists. The era of music being bought-and-paid-for by the listener is more than ten years dead. You and I may pay for CDs and downloads, but the overwhelming majority of the music-consuming public does not. It's morally wrong, but it's a fact of life here in 2015, and nobody's yet come up with a way to prevent if from continuing.

The way for them "to survive" (artists and acts) is for them to be PAID for their work and obviously Neil agrees; maybe not entirely with his words but certainly by his deeds
You'll get no argument from me on this point.

Maybe I should have included "quote unquote" when referring to the "record business", that or referred to it more accurately as the "recording industry" It, and music publishing is still alive and well friend, as long as there are lawyers and money involved
Alive? Yes, but well? Not so much.

And you cite JAZZ as your example?! JAZZ is better at losing money than Classical music in today's market (I love JAZZ, Hard Bop and back as well as Classical but this conversation is about music players, delivery formats, the "business" and motives)
I cited jazz only as an example of music that can be experienced to the fullest only when listening to artists play it live, since its essence is improvisation. Experiencing talented and skilled musicians create art out of thin air in-the-moment is the most rewarding, thrilling and complete experience I can have as a receiver of art. For me, no other art form even comes close. As soon as you add a dollar sign to the equation art begins to become commerce, and good art rarely equals good commerce, just as good commerce rarely spawns good art. THAT'S what was wrong with the music business from the mid-70s until its collapse about 15 years ago. Whatever rises from its ashes is bound to be better for art.

Wagner

07-21-2015, 02:34 PM

FWIW:
Kind of Blue (180g Vinyl) (https://www.amazon.com/Kind-Blue-Vinyl-Miles-Davis/dp/B0041TM5OU/ref=zg_bs_music_51)~ Miles Davis
is number 51 on the Amazon current sales list of vinyl and CD (not downloads). That's the first jazz album I ran across and that doesn't include CD sales for that album, either! Oddly, it's listed as #3 on the just Jazz chart where the CD version is #8. Weird.

Even weirder (to me) is that Barry Manilow is listed on the Jazz charts! So is B.B. King, and Amy Winehouse. Never mind.

Yep, that one's been a cash cow for more than a few.....................for a long time now; BLEW UP (or is that "Blue Up!") in the late '90s all over again

I think Classic Records alone pressed it about 6 different ways inside of 5 years.............correct speed, original speed, blue vinyl, black vinyl, 180 gram, 200 gram, 45rpm etc etc etc

I know, I own 4 of them not counting my "daily driver" plain vanilla CeeDee copy

Besides being a fabulous ground breaking Jazz album read by a dream line-up there are other forces at work with that one; it's really "in", can you dig it?! Wow man, that is so KEWEL! ;)

My Son recently finished his masters in music at UNC-G; they have the horn Miles used to make "Kind of Blue" on display in the lobby of the music building; when you see it it is difficult to imagine that that instrument was the one you hear on that recording ("looks" like a 10 pound student horn)

As for classifications of music? My fave is what "they" consider "R&B" now, as in "you've got to be pulling my leg!" Sad, isn't it?

Wagner

07-21-2015, 02:50 PM

Except in rare cases, these days touring is absolutely a requisite to making money at music. I'm afraid you're woefully out of touch with the way the music world now works.

You're dreaming; "art" has always (ultimately) been about money since time began...........wasn't inviting a debate, just stating my opinions based on the facts as I see them

The driving force behind Bach to Mozart to Wagner to the Beatles and everything in between (that and nookie)

They are not mutually exclusive except in the minds of the naive

CRAP is about money too, but as I have said, THAT IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION (but the right people with money can and do elevate CRAP to "art" status) They do it all the time and that is where and why the lines start to blur

You should try actually reading my post(s)

rusty jefferson

07-21-2015, 02:55 PM

Interesting TED talk on the general subject. Not Neil Young, but the changed landscape for artists and performers.

http://www.ted.com/talks/amanda_palmer_the_art_of_asking?language=en#t-106235

Wagner

07-21-2015, 03:45 PM

Interesting TED talk on the general subject. Not Neil Young, but the changed landscape for artists and performers.

http://www.ted.com/talks/amanda_palmer_the_art_of_asking?language=en#t-106235

Too funny! Thanks to all of this digital progress we're reverting to the barter system?

I mean, Amanda should be rolling in it, she does live shows all the time? (have a daughter who is or was a big fan)

hsosdrum

07-22-2015, 12:49 PM

You're dreaming; "art" has always (ultimately) been about money since time began...........wasn't inviting a debate, just stating my opinions based on the facts as I see them

The driving force behind Bach to Mozart to Wagner to the Beatles and everything in between (that and nookie)

They are not mutually exclusive except in the minds of the naive

CRAP is about money too, but as I have said, THAT IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION (but the right people with money can and do elevate CRAP to "art" status) They do it all the time and that is where and why the lines start to blur

You should try actually reading my post(s)

Have you ever tried to create art, or have you ever been close to anyone who has tried to create art? Art is about the artist's need to tell truth—nothing more and nothing less. Money is strictly a sideshow. Rarely, an artist's genius is recognized during their lifetime and they become wealthy as a result (Picasso and Stravinsky, to name two). Much more often, the artist spends their life struggling to make ends meet. (A struggle which informs their art, forming the strongest direct connection between money and art.)

Again, you confuse art with commerce. I'll provide a quick lesson: Kenny G = commerce; John Coltrane = art. Kenny G = rich; John Coltrane = not so much (his death notwithstanding). Beatles = art & rich (one of the few happy confluences between the two).

P.S. I read and enjoy your posts; you're one of the few people around here who's even crankier than I am. ;)

Wagner

07-22-2015, 01:44 PM

Have you ever tried to create art, or have you ever been close to anyone who has tried to create art? Art is about the artist's need to tell truth—nothing more and nothing less. Money is strictly a sideshow. Rarely, an artist's genius is recognized during their lifetime and they become wealthy as a result (Picasso and Stravinsky, to name two). Much more often, the artist spends their life struggling to make ends meet. (A struggle which informs their art, forming the strongest direct connection between money and art.)

Again, you confuse art with commerce. I'll provide a quick lesson: Kenny G = commerce; John Coltrane = art. Kenny G = rich; John Coltrane = not so much (his death notwithstanding). Beatles = art & rich (one of the few happy confluences between the two).

P.S. I read and enjoy your posts; you're one of the few people around here who's even crankier than I am. ;)

So, your definition of what is, and isn't "art" is the de facto standard now? As well as who is, and isn't, an artist?!

Save your quick lessons (and pigeonholing)

For what it's worth, as for creating or being close to what I would consider "art", yes I have, but a true artist doesn't "have to try", only sharpen/develop his skills of delivery

As for Pablo and Igor? That's a good one!

Enough of this foolishness

Ducatista47

07-22-2015, 02:15 PM

hsosdrum

07-22-2015, 05:23 PM

SEAWOLF97

07-23-2015, 10:00 AM

Fact is a properly encoded mp3 (at the very least 128kbps for stereo, and more importantly a decent codec such as the original fraunhofer) *is* better than FM broadcasting on almost every aspect, and *much* *much* better than cassette tapes.
In practice a well encoded mp3 is indistinguishable from the original, and that is exactly what it was meant to be.

For Xmas my son gave me the 180g , remastered Immersion LP of "Wish you Were Here" ... it's great. :)

Inside the package was a chit for free downloading the album direct from the manufacturer. I took a look at the site just after opening the LP and saw the download was MP3's and didn't bother.

So last week I finally got around to it. To their credit, at least they were coded 320kbs.

Today I burned them to CD and put in the Arcam to see what I had. Holy Crap :) , they sound awesome.

It's maybe the best that I've heard that album sound.

MP3 ain't necessarily crap.

Wagner

07-23-2015, 12:21 PM

As one who has done creating and living hand to mouth, I offer an insight. The urge to create is potentially pure; it is a matter of the spiritual. The urge to have your work appreciated is purely a matter of the ego and of arrogance. The urge to make money is divided; survival is a necessity to continue to create but the drive to gain wealth is once again ego and most of all arrogance.

More than a few have ignored survival in the throes of creativity and perished. The brilliant reedman and flutist Eric Dolphy could not bring himself to stop playing - practicing - to take insulin and he died holding his horn.

The tendency of many artists, driven creative individuals, to voraciously seek out each others output and feedback, is not a need to be appreciated. It is a means to expand and further their well of experience from artists they know are on to something worth knowing.

You are correct when you say the urge to create is potentially pure but that doesn't guaranty a creation that anyone is interested in, for any reason

How's THAT for "ego and arrogance" (and gives a whole lot of folks excuses to do very little day to day, even pretty much nothing with their lives) The poor misunderstood starving artist routine; "if only they could see what I see" (or hear what I hear or whatever, you fill in the blank)

Good example? Yoko Ono, her visual, written and musical "art" Many admire her and consider her the real deal, many people can't stand her, same as with anything and everything
A year or two before, OR after, whatever the trend is has past, she's a nobody, but marry the right guy, hang out with the "right" people and put some MONEY behind it and she's still doing shows at the MoMa as well as executing on publishing and record deals if she wants them (right guy, right people, money, it's all one and the same)
One can rationalize anything (creative work) into, or out of, being "art" by simply defining it by it's creator's "state of mind" (the altruists reveling in their muse) Many times crap being romanticized long after the fact of it's creation; yesterday's rejects become tomorrows inspirations............
What :bs: (on more levels than I care to type "rebuttals")

"ART" and what is and isn't (genuine) is an impossible debate to resolve; a real losing game because in order to acknowledge one you must dismiss the other (both the creation and the medium) Example of what I am trying to say? Woodworking Who decides when it goes from "craft" or "trade" and becomes "art"?

BUT, I do apply one criteria in defining my provincial view: will this piece still be sought after, enjoyed and appreciated by ANYONE 100 years from today...........if the answer is yes, then I consider it legitimate

100, 200 years from now, for whatever the reason and whatever the level of sophistication the audience may or may not possess, you think Neil Young's going to be on that list? And that's all I was saying when this thread became derailed

As for Dolphy? He didn't even know he had diabetes; in fact Mingus has been quoted as saying he thought someone had killed him

Krunchy

11-01-2015, 09:16 AM

Neil is for all intents and purposes 70 years old now; the only thing he knows about what "sounds" good is what somebody tells him

That's gotta be one of the stupidest remarks I've eve read. If you don't like his sound/music, voice that's fine and I hope your remark is about the PONO(I dont have one) not his overall studio or live sound.
I highly doubt Neil needs anyone to tell him what sounds good, an ignorant remark, youre way out of your element there Bub.
I also don't see what his age has anything t do with anything.

SEAWOLF97

11-01-2015, 10:36 AM

I love all this talk about "sound quality"; targeted primarily at the portable players/smart phone crowd, to be used with ear buds or cheap head phones (most of the time in a public/semi-public space)

I listen on portable DAP's ..an iTouch & a sony MD player, but ONLY in bed. While these sources (and pandora too) can sound like crap on OEM buds, they CAN sound very fine on a nice pair of cans. Also while riding bike, but the gain is so low that I can just barely make out what is playing..

As to listening to portable, my contention from day one has been that the issue is how much attention is being paid to the music.

I think you hit on a good point Clark. Sometimes I think that the music is only played just to fill the silence.

if it were not for his self-serving association with the current trendy (and no talent) Jack White (who currently enjoys "cash cow" status as I am sure you are aware) They wouldn't/don't even know who Neil Young is

cannot agree abt jack or Neil. JW will develop as much talent as Jimmy Page. Neil ? he's great in small doses, but after an entire album ..he tends to come across as whiny.

FWIW:
Kind of Blue (180g Vinyl) (https://www.amazon.com/Kind-Blue-Vinyl-Miles-Davis/dp/B0041TM5OU/ref=zg_bs_music_51)~ Miles Davis
is number 51 on the Amazon current sales list of vinyl and CD

I have NEVER heard that album and have no desire to do so. Not a big fan of BRASS at all.

Being an "artist" does not immunize a musician from the economic realities of today's music business:

I was watching the extras on the BD of "Hard Days Night" . Interestingly they noted that the movie was made to support the album ..not vice versa.

You're dreaming; "art" has always (ultimately) been about money since time began..........

there is a lot of truth there. but as a hobby photog, for me it was about art. Money only came in after the fact.

P.S. I read and enjoy your posts; you're one of the few people around here who's even crankier than I am. ;)

re:TW .... I enjoy them too.

.
I highly doubt Neil needs anyone to tell him what sound good,
I also don't see what his age has anything t do with anything.

+1
I'm on the verge of 67 and my hearing still outperforms many that are younger. The sweep tests show a top of 14.5 (despite my best efforts to kill my range ....months on the deck of a CVA , 30 feet from f-4's in full launch burner, months mere feet below Bell UH-1 turbines, years of small arms firing with no hearing protection ...etc.)

LVB composed great things while deaf ?

Wagner

11-01-2015, 11:24 AM

That's gotta be one of the stupidest remarks I've eve read. If you don't like his sound/music and that's fine and I hope your remark is about the PONO(I dont have one) not his overall studio or live sound.
I highly doubt Neil needs anyone to tell him what sound good, youre way out of your element there Bub.
I also don't see what his age has anything t do with anything.
Please, feel free to elaborate, "Bub". You have my undivided attention.

Thomas

Ducatista47

11-01-2015, 11:32 AM

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by BMWCCA http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=378042#post378042)
FWIW:
Kind of Blue (180g Vinyl) (https://www.amazon.com/Kind-Blue-Vinyl-Miles-Davis/dp/B0041TM5OU/ref=zg_bs_music_51)~ Miles Davis...

Originally posted by Seawolf: I have NEVER heard that album and have no desire to do so. Not a big fan of BRASS at all.

Perhaps you are confusing Kind Of Blue with the Gil Evans collaborations like Sketches Of Spain? I believe the only constant brass on Kind Of Blue is Miles' trumpet, with or without Hamilton mute. Saxes are, of course, woodwinds. I would encourage you to give the album a try. The work by Bill Evans is worth the ticket by itself, and Coltrane and Cannonball Adderley are brilliant. Everyone is, really. The album is laid back by my taste in Jazz, but it is one of the popular, huge selling recordings that IS great music.

Like most of Miles' work at that time, it was unrehearsed to preserve spontaneity. That works if everyone is pretty much a genius, and they all were that day. It is, at its core, the collaboration between Bill Evans and Miles Davis when Miles wanted to work with someone who could enable his desire to explore modal playing.

PS I know this could be mightily confusing to anyone not into Jazz music. BILL Evans was a Mount Rushmore class musician who also composed. GIL Evans was an arranger/composer/producer. It is diabolically confusing that Miles worked with both; Bill once, Gil more often.

6803668037
Upper Photo, Bill Evans.
Lower, Gil Evans, the mute, Miles Davis.

Krunchy

11-01-2015, 11:46 AM

Please, feel free to elaborate, "Bub". You have my undivided attention.

Thomas

Say something once why say it again....... But you go right ahead with your thread, very entertaining.

Wagner

11-01-2015, 12:46 PM

I believe the only constant brass on Kind Of Blue is Miles' trumpet, with or without Hamilton
Early on, Davis used a cup mute most frequently when he used a mute, really early in is career a lot of open horn playing (and these records I especially cherish) later on (around the time of "Kind of Blue" and forward) he most frequently used a Harmon aluminum "Wow-Wow" without the stem. At the time I think Harmon was the only one making that style of what many call a "wah wah" today.
Today there's a least a dozen clones of the original Harmon and some of them play much better as far as intonation (did for me anyway), BUT the copies do not sound the same; I don't care what anyone says.
The sound most famously associated with Miles Davis is that of when he used the Harmon (although the sounds he got from it is ALL Miles as the Harmon slots for shit).
Never heard of a Hamilton?

Ducatista47

11-01-2015, 12:57 PM

Never heard of a Hamilton?

I have read and been told that the Hamilton, also reputedly used by Miles, was manufactured by Hamilton Standard, the same company that famously produces aircraft props. I cannot verify any of it.

Wagner

11-01-2015, 01:14 PM

BILL Evans was a Mount Rushmore class musician who also composed. GIL Evans was an arranger/composer/producer. It is diabolical that Miles worked with both; Bill once, Gil more often.

I don't know what any of this means ("diabolical"?. If it were not for his association and work with Miles Davis (and most notably, "Kind of Blue") I doubt anyone outside of New York would have ever even known who Bill Evans was short of a liner note or credit or two (except hardcore Jazz fans familiar with folks like George Russell).

For me, that is the greatest gift Davis ever gave to the form called Jazz; all the great musicians he gave a springboard of relevancy, in a BIG, "record deal with YOUR name on it" sort of way.

And as for Gil Evans? I don't know of many other people who did more to further Mile's career than he did.

Ducatista47

11-01-2015, 01:24 PM

Diabolical for its possibilities to confuse someone just starting to get into the scene. Gil - Bill - ?

I am not a fan of Gil's work but that has nothing to do with his talent, just his style. Irrelevant in any case, no one should care about my taste in music. My best friend's brother's favorite recording is Sketches.

I admit I am crazy for Bill Evans, and I'm not alone. A recent ranking of the fifty greatest Jazz piano artists listed him third, after Tatum and Monk. I think it was a plausible list. Not like a list of Saxophone greats from last year that had Lester Young around 30th.

Wagner

11-01-2015, 01:35 PM

I have read and been told that the Hamilton, also reputedly used by Miles, was manufactured by Hamilton Standard, the same company that famously produces aircraft props. I cannot verify any of it.
Davis played a Harmon for the brunt of his career
I'm sure plenty of people tried to get him to use their shit along the way, especially after he achieved stardom

The mute you hear on the recording "Kind of Blue" is a Harmon model "Wow-Wow" with the stem removed, which can be easily verified
(you can also see it in hundreds of photographs surrounding those sessions as well as many others)
The particular horn he used on the recording is in a glass case in the lobby of the music building on the campus of the University of North Carolina - Greensboro where my son completed his masters in trumpet performance

Ducatista47

11-01-2015, 01:38 PM

Apologies for the complete misinformation. I should believe less of what I encounter.

SEAWOLF97

11-01-2015, 02:14 PM

Perhaps you are confusing Kind Of Blue with the Gil Evans collaborations like Sketches Of Spain? I believe the only constant brass on Kind Of Blue is Miles' trumpet

Perhaps I'm NOT confusing anything and just don't like brass (trumpet, horn , euphonium, and tuba, as well as the cornet, flügelhorn, tenor horn , baritone horn, sousaphone, mellophone, and the saxhorn...etc..etc) or sax ,,,, even Kenny G's photo bothers me. (as does that Michael B. moron)

see ... Wagner isn't the only grumpy guy here. :(

Wagner

11-01-2015, 02:47 PM

Perhaps I'm NOT confusing anything and just don't like brass (trumpet, horn , euphonium, and tuba, as well as the cornet, flügelhorn, tenor horn , baritone horn, sousaphone, mellophone, and the saxhorn...etc..etc) or sax ,,,, even Kenny G's photo bothers me. (as does that Michael B. moron)

see ... Wagner isn't the only grumpy guy here. :(
I don't how in the "f" that's being "grumpy"?

I'm NOT grumpy you $%$##&^%^! ;)

Krunchy

11-01-2015, 05:12 PM

Perhaps I'm NOT confusing anything and just don't like brass (saxhorn...etc..etc) or sax ,,,,
even Kenny G's photo bothers me. (as does that Michael B. moron)

:rotfl::rotfl: :D

DavidF

11-01-2015, 05:14 PM

Perhaps I'm NOT confusing anything and just don't like brass (trumpet, horn , euphonium, and tuba, as well as the cornet, flügelhorn, tenor horn , baritone horn, sousaphone, mellophone, and the saxhorn...etc..etc) or sax ,,,, even Kenny G's photo bothers me. (as does that Michael B. moron)

see ... Wagner isn't the only grumpy guy here. :(

Reminds me of a great film by Laurel and Hardy. The boys worked at a horn factory until Hardy went bonkers and tore up the place. Horns, horns... HORNS!!!

rusty jefferson

11-01-2015, 07:41 PM

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/15/neil-young-says-hes-done-with-streaming-music.html

I assume Pono is excellent. But expensive. :)

Not sure how excellent it is. Saw this video interview with Mark Waldrep of AIX Records. In the interview he mentions Pono's claim about 2 million "Hi Rez" songs. In fact, according to him, they only have 4000 transfers (remasters) from original studio master tapes to 24 bit (what Neil Young did to his catalog). The rest are simply upsampled cds. Even the 24 bit remasters won't have the dynamic range of a true 24 bit recording, but it is necessary to drag all the information possible out of that tape. Upsampling for profit is a scam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzX_MBoz5wc

Wagner

11-03-2015, 01:32 PM

Say something once why say it again....... But you go right ahead with your thread, very entertaining.
Well, I'm still waiting for you to say something substantive in support of your opinions/name calling. Try reading what I said/wrote in post#13.

I made it clear why I said what I said and I stand by it, regardless the fact that you find it "one of the stupidest remarks I've eve read".

Neil Young is irrelevant musically and has been for years (and years). When what's left of us boomers have passed it'll be "Neil who?"

Wagner

11-03-2015, 02:04 PM

cannot agree abt jack or Neil. JW will develop as much talent as Jimmy Page. Neil ? he's great in small doses, but after an entire album ..he tends to come across as whiny.

I own at least one copy of every record they ever made and bought them all when they first came out. I, like you, lived through Zeppelin's career path (well, listened to it anyway). I even bought "No Quarter" for that version of "That's the Way". I think "Houses of the Holy" is one of the baddest ass (and underrated) records ever made for partying, hardcore '70s style..........................that said

Jimmy Page was incredibly lucky, right place at the right time with the "right" sound.
Turning White kids in the suburbs on to Black peoples's music and living the bad ass rock 'n' roller/Blues man life style.

Most of Page's music has the same effect on me as you say brass has on you..............it sounds like shit to my ears. Then his tripping off on his Middle-Eastern/Moroccan crap, very tiresome...................

For some reason, the current crop of kids have all adopted him as their savior; guess that's a commentary on the current state of Rock and Roll.

That "UnLedded" ego trip (and all about the money maker) from back in '94 is 90 minutes of my life I'd like to have back.

Jimmy Page; King, Master and Guru in Chief of re-issuing and remastering the same tired shit.

Page definitely has disciples, I understand that, I congratulate him on his great success and more power to him.......................but I ain't one of 'em.

Jack White either; he's just a little douche. More about the coolness hip factor than anything worth listening to (and I've given him a serious try from all of his incarnations/"bands" starting with the "White Stripes")...........BUT, to each his own.

That's the beauty of it I guess.

SEAWOLF97

11-03-2015, 02:53 PM

Most of Page's music has the same effect on me as you say brass has on you..............it sounds like shit to my ears.

Can't stand "Stairway.." anymore , but "Levvy & Gallows Pole" are faves ... LZ is real hit & miss with me .... not a blind follower here.

yes, MOST brass drives me _____ , BUT there is 1 album that I can stand and listen to more than once. Herb Alpert "Rise" , yeah it's pop , but it's compatible with my ears.

BUT I like a lot of Classical , especially LVB (symphony's) , Vivaldi and many can't stand the genre.

I'm a DOORS fan , but most anything they did LIVE was putrid. Go figure ??

Back to thread topic ... IMHO the for the vast majority of LIVE music is the opposite of QUALITY. (with a few exceptions), might as well reserve compressed MP3's for live concerts or bootlegs. :(

Krunchy

11-04-2015, 09:41 AM

Well, I'm still waiting for you to say something substantive in support of your opinions/name calling. Try reading what I said/wrote in post#13.

I made it clear why I said what I said and I stand by it, regardless the fact that you find it "one of the stupidest remarks I've eve read".

Neil Young is irrelevant musically and has been for years (and years). When what's left of us boomers have passed it'll be "Neil who?"

Sorry to keep you waiting.

Listen, first off I sincerely would like to apologize for the "name calling" stupid, on my behalf. Rather "what sounds good is what someone tells him" I'll call it "one of the most outrageous remarks I've ever read" and I stand by that.

He is old he probably has tinnitus but I think he is more than capable of knowing what truly good sound/tone is to him,even if other people dont like it. I simply happen to like his sound and tone, I cant listen to him all the time though. I've heard the name Jack white and some of his stuff but I dont see anything special, original or amazing about him, he can play guitar and is the flavor of the month, good for him, hope he saves his money.
I get a feeling you really dont like him too much and thats fine, you've summed up/reduced his career to three albums, I disagree. Again this is really all very objective as you well know. If you dont like the rest of his work after those three albums thats cool, you're entitled to your opinion but you are generalizing quite a bit on a variety of different topics, I wont elaborate on this, read your own posts.
Will he be remembered 100-200 years from now, I would think yes, will everyone be seeking out his work, probably not, who the hell knows. We may not be around 100-200 years from now (you and I certainly wont!).
NY is not my guru but I do like his work, simple as that, not all of it.

Is he cashing in, absolutely, but who the hell isnt?.....The stones, who, led zep, aerosmith, heck if I could cash in I would and so would you, unfortunately I dont have anything to cash in on. You want them to at "least be honest', who really is these days, thats not how you cash in. we're all hypocrites, how many "last tour" has the who done and I love Pete but I wont go to his shows, been there done that.

There was some talk about Bill Evans, I gave my friend a copy on one of his albums and he disregarded it as Lounge music :D so go figure. I lean more towards Clark's ranking....at the top, but thats just my personal taste.
I dont know that I address everything you have been talking about in this thread you're kinda all over the place, & I did read all your posts.
Yes they are all cashing in, all re-issuing, re-masters but we know that so F___! them

The reason why I started to read this thread was cause I wanted to see what you guys thought of the PONO, (which he is plugging the crap our of, its all over his book Waging heavy peace). Seemed like an interesting subject, I personally hate the Ipod, it sucks.

Back on topic. Has anyone here had experience with this device, it seems like it still has a lot of things that need to be improved. From what I've read elsewhere I get the feeling its not going to be The Gadget to get too many quirks, expensive and I think besides neils stuff not a lot of other artists jumping on the bandwagon, I hope I am wrong.
Or at least I hope someone invents a new (preferably non apple) that is not only capable of producing great sound but quite possibly some new unforeseen capabilities.

Wagner

11-04-2015, 10:08 AM

Again this is really all very objective as you well know.
Yes, yes it is. I tried my best to be as objective with my remarks regarding Neil Young and his "PONO scheme" as I could.
That was some post; well received but not expected.
Thanks for sharing!
Thomas

Krunchy

11-04-2015, 10:42 AM

Yes, yes it is. I tried my best to be as objective with my remarks regarding Neil Young and his "PONO scheme" as I could.That was some post; well received but not expected.Thanks for sharing!Thomas
I admire the man but he can be a bit of (as they say in France) a Dauche in person depending on his mood.....I cant blame him for that, who can be in a good mood all the time? :D
Peace ! ;)

SEAWOLF97

11-04-2015, 10:48 AM

I admire the man but he can be a bit of a (as they say in France) Dauche in person depending on his mood.....I can totally relate :D I have donned the Dauche outfit from time to time.

Peace ! ;)

A while back PBS ran old eps of the 1969 Johnny Cash variety TV show.

When NY came on, he was a shy guy who just looked at his feet and did not really make any
eye contact with the studio audience. Did his song and just packed up and left. Socially a dud.

If all I knew about him came from this appearance, my opinion would be that he's a fine studio performer, but LIVE is a no-go for him.

All this talk about only 3 good albums ? "On the Beach" is great ..IMHO

Krunchy

11-04-2015, 11:05 AM

A while back PBS ran old eps of the 1969 Johnny Cash variety TV show.

When NY came on, he was a shy guy who just looked at his feet and did not really make any
eye contact with the studio audience. Did his song and just packed up and left. Socially a dud.

If all I knew about him came from this appearance, my opinion would be that he's a fine studio performer, but LIVE is a no-go for him.

All this talk about only 3 good albums ? "On the Beach" is great ..IMHO

From what I've read I know he is very demanding of himself and his band, with him music comes FIRST, aside from family. He can be a bastard and moody, its impossible for me to say anything beyond his musical persona since I dont know him personally. There's a clip on utube from Massey hall (very intimate setting) where he tells a girl not to take pictures while he's singing/performing cause it ruins his concentration and instead take them between songs. He doenst suffer fools and is outspoken nowadays. I know many people who hate the Beatles, NY and on and on, some guy told me he hated Mark Knopfler but that he was an "alright guit player" :D
Until some new magical mythical digital device manifests itself I'm actually getting ready to get my turntable set up and go back to basics.

Wagner

11-04-2015, 11:43 AM

All this talk about only 3 good albums ? "On the Beach" is great ..IMHO
I didn't say that; I said there were three by which all subsequent have been compared/related to............and the benchmark for which Neil has constantly labored to revisit.

I own a lot of his records and I can hear.

Good example? "Harvest Moon" He's either hearkening back or trying some sort of reinvention, like with "Are You Passionate"; I ain't buyin' :D

And his message is stuck in 1972 as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvest_Moon_(album)

From whoever wrote his Wikipedia entry; I couldn't agree more:
"Young's work since Harvest (1972) had alternated between being rejected by mass audiences and being seen as backward-looking by critics, sometimes both at once, and now he was suddenly viewed as relevant by a new generation, who began to discover his earlier work."

"PONO" and his bromance with Jack White ain't going to change the fact that what Neil's got to say is played, unless you're a boomer or some millennial who's down with his "coolness" factor.

His music for the past 3 decades plus has been mediocre at best. There is ALMOST ALWAYS one VERY good song on all of his records; maybe he should really go retro and get back into the "singles" game. ALMOST an album a year for decades and for the most part, ALL filler and LITTLE killer. The same can be said for a lot of artists and bands, just doesn't qualify them as some sort of icon (that's all I'm saying).

Curt Cobain's comments and the Clinton years are largely responsible for a new generation "rediscovering" his tired old hippie shit. Keep on Rockin' in the Free World, dood................

I think it's really ironic and amusing too that he's about a day late and a dollar short on his shitty portable music player as well. Even the Generation Yers and the "linksters" don't want it.

Maybe he and Jack should promote a revival of the little RCA 45 players and just release their occasional "good" songs?

Neil Young is a half assed musician an activist and a professional uber liberal hypocrite. Thanks in large part to associations, both present and past (his pals) and his message, someone, somewhere, will always think "he's da man"

I'm just not one of them.

SEAWOLF97

11-05-2015, 08:39 AM

Wagner

11-05-2015, 10:23 AM

OK, I'll give you .... NY may be past his pull date , but I can still enjoy
selections (best of) comps like many other artists.
Most everybody who once was "in the limelight" is trying to cash in on former
"good times". It's the way of fame/fortune. Maintain the lifestyle.

Ny as a tech guru ? I don't see any background for it. If he wants to risk his own
capitol on another device in an already crowded field, and it makes him happy, who cares ?

I won't be buying a PONO, my portable listening is done in non-critical situations and mainly to
make miles go by faster or to induce sleep. :)

All this NY & his device BS does not affect my life in any possible way. Let it die.
You're right.............
My (sincere) apologies man for the Neil Young rant..........it's more about all the new found and wannabe techie writers/hipster/grunge scene/tree hugger/how altruistic he is worship than anything said here in this thread, by you or anyone else..................just got me wound up. The selfless music icon gone "global citizen" hero http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/bs.gif

I mean, there's a LOT of good people doing good work, inside and outside of the music biz (and a hell of a lot more important/productive) than Neil Young and you never hear about them.

Like our VETERANS to cite just one example

Didn't mean to be an "A" hole about it. Just tired of the trend.

Wagner

11-05-2015, 12:33 PM

don't open that can o' ....

"Thank You for your service..." (so I didn't have to .... :( )
"Have a nice day" etc.
OR, Keep On Rockin' In The Free World! (U.S.A. anyway) ;)

dr_gallup

11-06-2015, 12:59 PM

Not sure how excellent it is. Saw this video interview with Mark Waldrep of AIX Records. In the interview he mentions Pono's claim about 2 million "Hi Rez" songs. In fact, according to him, they only have 4000 transfers (remasters) from original studio master tapes to 24 bit (what Neil Young did to his catalog). The rest are simply upsampled cds. Even the 24 bit remasters won't have the dynamic range of a true 24 bit recording, but it is necessary to drag all the information possible out of that tape. Upsampling for profit is a scam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzX_MBoz5wc

I get Mark Waldreps daily blog. His complaint is not with the Pono player which seems to deliver pretty good quality (overpriced and weird shape not withstanding) but with Pono Music website where most downloads are just upsampled CD tracks. As you said, upsampling is a complete scam. Mark is crusading for providing provenance with every recording. The sound quality is only as good as the weakest link in the delivery chain. A million bits and megahertz sampling will not improve a source file that has limited frequency response and dynamic range to begin with. There can be no "Hi Rez" versions of recordings from the 70's, 80's, etc.

Personally, I'm not so sure that anything beyond CD spec is necessary, at least at this stage in life. Perhaps teenage girls can tell the difference but given the music they listen to and the reproduction chain they use, "Hi Rez" would be wasted on them too.

Neil Young is being very hypocritical when he demonizes CD quality then promotes these downloads.

I am a NY fan and think he has quite a few more than 3 good albums, Zuma is one. Anyone with his staying power and who has reinvented himself as many times as NY has is a national treasure. I remember reading a Stereo Review record review in the 70's and the reviewer called him a musical idiot savant. I think he got it right. Good musician, just don't bother listening to anything else he has to say.

Wagner

11-06-2015, 01:52 PM

I am a NY fan and think he has quite a few more than 3 good albums, Zuma is one. Anyone with his staying power and who has reinvented himself as many times as NY has is a national treasure. I remember reading a Stereo Review record review in the 70's and the reviewer called him a musical idiot savant. I think he got it right. Good musician, just don't bother listening to anything else he has to say.
Man, I wish you guys would please stop misconstruing what I said about those three albums, glomming onto just that small part of what I said and using it out of context (the 3 albums part).
There are plenty of recording stars who have basically recycled the same musical ideas into dozens of albums and done quite well with it.
My point is it doesn't mean they are musical giants or icons, just successful record makers...........and enjoy whatever degree of popularity it is that they have.
The "PONO" deal must not be working out as planned though, Neil's asking Donald Trump for money to pour into it, Trump gives it a pass so out of the blue Neil doesn't want Trump playing his song, so yeah, I'd agree with the hypocrite part as well (although I think I already did on several other "issues" with Mr. Young)
CNN is about as liberal as it gets, so unless they're out to harm Neil's rep, I believe this story (Trump's "tweet"):
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/donald-trump-steven-tyler-dream-on/

Maybe more than enough people still do (already) care about "quality", just not "PONO"?
Maybe?