I'm fairly new to this site, and this may have been discussed here in the past, but what formats are preferred for noise/PE/industrial etc...? Personally, I think vinyl is the best all-around format. Yeah, yeah, I know: it's expensive. But seriously, are cassettes, cd's, and cdr's anywhere near as good??? I'm not a snob to formats other than vinyl: I have done a few cassette and cdr releases, and they seem to sell better than the vinyl I've done. Is it too pricey, too limiting as to where you can play it? What gives?
I must say, vinyl IS better sound-wise. Recently I bought a Bruce Gilbert 2LP rerelease on Mego, because my old CD version was a bit damaged. Anyway, the sounds from the record were way better. Thicker, and fuller. They reckon remastered CDs should be as good as vinyl originals, but I don't know about that. However, for durability into the future, CD is probably better.
Lots of factors to consider. Too many variables to declare just one. Not to skirt your questions, but they all have potential virtues and limits, so they all have their place.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on September 27, 2013, 09:35:26 PM
Lots of factors to consider. Too many variables to declare just one. Not to skirt your questions, but they all have potential virtues and limits, so they all have their place.
I agree. I'm just trying to figure out why vinyl doesn't seem to be as popular as other formats in the noise scene.
How many $20-30LPs can a person buy and still keep up with all the music they want to hear? Gets to be pretty easy to ween yourself off the fetish when it inhibits other music and other things. Choices. Options. Priorities. A younger audience with less income. Basic economics and budgets. For me, it's other things I've written too many times, but in a general sense, I don't find it difficult to understand at all.
Quote from: HOGRA on September 27, 2013, 09:52:48 PM
Quote from: Zeno Marx on September 27, 2013, 09:35:26 PM
Lots of factors to consider. Too many variables to declare just one. Not to skirt your questions, but they all have potential virtues and limits, so they all have their place.
I agree. I'm just trying to figure out why vinyl doesn't seem to be as popular as other formats in the noise scene.
Could be financial, but maybe portability? I don't know, can't remember what the general consensus was of the "listening habits" thread, but for me personally I listen to the most music when in the car or walking outside so sadly vinyl doesn't lend itself that well to my habits. Cassette offers a similar engagement factor to vinyl, and they fit in your pocket/bag/whatever; I also love the cassette sound.
Vinyl is best.
Vinyl is great unless you like music with high or low frequencies or stereo or the letter s
Tapes are best for noise
High bitrate or lossless downloads are reality
Simple answer to simple question: Indoors vinyl, outdoors cassette.
I guess the reason why some albums don't sell is simply because they haven't received the attention they may or may not deserve. When that's the case, people tend to approach the material very cautiously and don't put insane amounts on vinyl which will probably suck. It's easy to grab some tape for cheap and see if it's any good.
7" vinyl
I personally like all 3 physical formats (don't care much for downloads) but the downside of vinyl for me is the shipping cost. 7"s can be OK but postage for a 10" or LP is usually way too high compared to CDs or tapes. For the record, I live in Australia and order almost everything from overseas, so I guess this is not (so much of) an issue for Europeans ordering vinyl from Europe/their own country or Americans ordering from the US as shipping costs for them are much lower.
As for CDs, I've never understood the hostility towards it displayed by many. Even if vinyl sounds better (although that depends on several factors too: quality of hi-fi, pressing, condition of vinyl), it surely doesn't by so large a margin as to disregard CDs altogether. I also find that many times listening to CDs is more practical than to vinyl: sometimes I can't be bothered getting up every 20+ minutes to change sides (or more frequently in the case of a 7" or 10") and I rather listen to a CD uninterrupted for however long it is (which could be way longer than an LP).
I like tapes too, they can have great sound quality, but again, I don't quite get why someone would love tapes and dislike CDs. I assume it has to do with what aspects of the whole format issue are relevant for the individual listener, whether consciously or unconsciously (physical appeal of formats, memories linked to formats, sound quality, dominant format in one's favourite genres etc.).
personally:
Obscure/obsolete/anti-record formats (8track,floppy,microcassette,reel,VCD etc) > locked groove vinyl > 7" > 12"/other vinyl > pro duplicated cassette > mini-CDr > lathe cut record > DIY cassette > DIY normal CDr > web video > MP3/download > pro CD > pro CDr > 1-sided anything (unless it has a particularly good art/gimmick/concept for the blank side.)
While some types of music (rock, reggae and bass-heavy dance music) can sound better on vinyl I think CD is the best format for listening to noise and experimental music. I didn't get a really great CD player and speakers until a couple of years ago - just as the format seems to be dying I'm finally appreciating how good it can sound. Good mastering is very important on CDs, I have no time for homemade CD-Rs that have been burned using the horrible presets on a typical computer.
Vinyl is of course the most physically appealing format for artwork and fetishism, although the supposed vinyl audiophile lobby makes me laugh when they are seemingly unaware that 99.9% of modern vinyl has been mastered digitally.
Downloads are always burned to CD-R straight away here. I find listening to any kind of music through computer speakers impossible, and it may be my ears playing tricks on me but if I try to listen to mp3s even through good speakers it all sounds flat after a while. Flacs and wavs are better but hardly portable.
Cassettes have a lot of nostalgia value for me and some noise can sound amazing on them with all the added hiss and frequency range but they are an indisputably fiddly and difficult format - what's more tape decks need regular cleaning if you try to play oxidised 1980s cassettes on them too much like I do.
Vinyl > tape > cd.
All other formats are useless! Especially stupid floppy.
Due to lack of money, i'm mostly nowadays into CD/CDr Box sets and then single CDs and very few CDRs, depending on the artist.
I'm not a kind of snob for vinyls and tapes (my wallet does) but, in case of reissued CDs from various old tapes, if the digital transfer succeeds, then i surely have it on CD format.
If there was a battle of analogue formats, i'll stick with tapes.
Quote from: HongKongGoolagong on September 28, 2013, 09:50:10 PMit may be my ears playing tricks on me but if I try to listen to mp3s even through good speakers it all sounds flat after a while. Flacs and wavs are better but hardly portable.
It is your ears/brain/emotions. An MP3 burned to CDr played thru a hi-fi sounds the same as an MP3 played from a computer/ipod played thru a hi-fi unless either your sound card or your CD player are cheap enough to sound noticeably bad in some way, or there's something wrong with how you're connecting them.
Quote from: Cementimental on September 29, 2013, 01:17:37 AM
Quote from: HongKongGoolagong on September 28, 2013, 09:50:10 PMit may be my ears playing tricks on me but if I try to listen to mp3s even through good speakers it all sounds flat after a while. Flacs and wavs are better but hardly portable.
It is your ears/brain/emotions. An MP3 burned to CDr played thru a hi-fi sounds the same as an MP3 played from a computer/ipod played thru a hi-fi unless either your sound card or your CD player are cheap enough to sound noticeably bad in some way, or there's something wrong with how you're connecting them.
I must have 300+ CD-Rs of hideously rare bootlegs (not all noise by any means) from the golden age of free music blogs a few years ago - the sort of thing you would once get your hands on after five years of working in tape-trading circles of the 80s and 90s like Syd Barrett 1974 tapes etc. And even through great speakers and with some tweaking while mastering I think I can tell when the source was mp3. It's flat somehow, even the hi-rate stuff hurts your ears worse than a CD. I have a grey market compilation of punk licensed through Cherry Red to a shady German outfit where it's obvious that the CD is mastered quickly and lazily from mp3 too. The Grey Wolves mastered their poorly received but interesting/experimental Division CD from what seems obviously very lo-rate mp3s as a kind of deliberate statement on decay. And sadly most music of all genres is being mastered for the mp3/streaming format nowadays with the loudness wars. I guess this sort of discussion might be more suited to the mindbogglingly retentive stevehoffman.tv forums.
Are you involved in torrenting? If you really want that stuff in better quality, a good percentage of it is easily found on the various torrent sites. If you hadn't mentioned Syd Barrett, I wouldn't have bothered mentioning it. The classic rock audience --many of which are throwbacks from when stereos were a big deal and in every home, and from when nothing else was competing for their attention than music-- is diligent about upgrading their copies of demos, live, etc. The hobbyists are more reliable and interested in musical integrity than most in the professional field, and many of them have connexions to get near the masters. It's a private world gone public and with surprising enthusiasm for sharing and highest fidelity. They're getting good enough at it that groups like Tangerine Dream and King Crimson are now selling those same recordings on their websites as group-sanctioned product. Cannot help with the portability. Listening to music outside the home has never given me much satisfaction, and even in the car, I prefer talk radio.
Quote from: HongKongGoolagong on September 29, 2013, 01:46:35 AM
I must have 300+ CD-Rs of hideously rare bootlegs (not all noise by any means) from the golden age of free music blogs a few years ago
That's definitely a great benefit of listening to MP3s on CDr :) But backups of the original MP3s on a hard drive would be better if you need to share them again online without losing even more quality re-encoding.
QuoteIt's flat somehow, even the hi-rate stuff hurts your ears worse than a CD.
Certainly low bitrate or wrongly/re-encoded ones can sound really bad but I don't believe 320 kbit/s MP3s are really distinguishable from CDs by the human ear. Possibly some people with good hearing could detect a difference when listening very carefully and comparing the compressed and uncompressed recording but if the CD doesn't sound 'flat' or 'hurt your ears' (...aren't we on a forum dedicated largely to music intended to do so? ^_^) then neither does the 320 MP3.
all format are an interest
I prefer buying vinyl. I like tapes, cd's are ok.
My biggest problem with cd's is they're difficult to re-sell or sell when they're new. Vinyl & tapes are much easier to get rid of.
cassette
All format, except lossy low-rate mp3 downloads, and low quality CDr (unprinted disc, no artwork, etc.:.)... for physical ones, tapes and CDs are the best. Vinyl for me is too, eh, fastidious? Even if they are looking, and sounding good, I didn't started to collect them for this reason. Tapes are better for an analogue carrier, but it's just an opinion.. but I've think if someones want an exact content, or sound, the format doesn't really matter. I mean, if your selected artist would release a tape/CDr/digital download etc:. anything, what you would not purchase in normal case, would you reject it, even if everything looks good about it? I doubt it, you just want to hear/read/own that kind of content... but I must say, the best to have multiple formats for each releases, so everybody can pick it's liked one.
I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.
Quote from: burdizzo on September 30, 2013, 12:03:55 PM
I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.
Same. It's stupid to pay for files.
Preferred is the format that suits particular piece of sound.
I have absolutely no dislike for CD. I think most of ambient and more quiet experimental music works best for CD. Same goes for a lot of dynamic harsh noise.
Plenty of industrial & rough PE benefits from LP format. But can also be damaged by too poorly done LPs. And there are plenty of those these days.
I think there used to be some sort of poll about what people like/prefer and what they actually buy/use. I only hope to have format that compliments the piece of sound. Though sound quality as well as practical matters as possibilities of length etc. And also visual aspects of packaging and overall design.
Quote from: Dr Alex on September 30, 2013, 02:12:23 PM
Quote from: burdizzo on September 30, 2013, 12:03:55 PM
I must say, I don't buy things that are not on a physical format ie. CD/ CDr, LP, or tape.
Same. It's stupid to pay for files.
It's stupid as paying for files as downloading MP3s either for free.
Multiple times prefer to listen something from a regular format on a proper and decent stereophonic set rather something corrupted and alienated on my computer.
The CD replaced the LP and cassette mostly, IMHO, due to its imperviousness to generational losses. No matter how much care you give to an LP or a cassette, with each play it degrades. I've gotten around 200 plays on certain LP's before I've noticed anything but I've also had cassettes start squeaking after a few dozen. In general, the CD is more robust... assuming we look past the possibility of CD rot! If the data on a CD becomes corrupt, the music is gone. At least on a vinyl LP, it can always be played not matter its condition.
As for me, I usually prefer the sound of vinyl. It depends on the recording but vinyl usually trumps. The frequency range it works within, while not as wide as the CD, sounds more natural most of the time.
I find it very odd how a lot of people have this notion that a computer is good enough for recording, editing, mastering and CD-authoring music/noise, but somehow mysteriously not good enough for listening to it.
computer is good for listening but you need good speaker of course
Quote from: Cementimental on October 02, 2013, 01:26:19 PM
I find it very odd how a lot of people have this notion that a computer is good enough for recording, editing, mastering and CD-authoring music/noise, but somehow mysteriously not good enough for listening to it.
Speakers is not the only issue.
I have never used computer that has good pure & clean sound. Every computer I have used, has flaws of sound when you just use the mini-jack output. Be it my old PC's, lap-tops or various qualities and nowadays iMac. I know all you need is proper soundcard. But as it is, if I burn audio on CD and play it on stereos, sound is much better than play file.
I would think this is pretty much judged by reality - not by ideal case. You know, one could say the ideally they consume lossless files of best quality. They end up consuming atrocious quality music at youtube. It's like saying there's great XXX out there, but always eventually be browsing 2 minute clips of worst pixelated XXX. To listen proper releases on proper stereosystem is quite easy way of simply not allowing the possibility.
Just yesterday, I decided to give a try to latest Immolation album. Friend has said drum sound is so awful, you can't even listen the album. So instead of LP, which I have still sealed, I went to youtube to listen it. After realizing it has quite horrid drum sound, but that I had no problems listening to material, I was already at 2nd song. Then just decided to push stop. Not because it would be absolutely unlistenable, but close. Glitches, stream abruptly stopping, etc etc. If I had simply put the LP on stereos, atmosphere would have been very different. Excuse, possibility, easiness... lured, yet managed to get away before atmosphere of album would be ruined totally.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 02, 2013, 06:38:18 PM
Quote from: Cementimental on October 02, 2013, 01:26:19 PM
I find it very odd how a lot of people have this notion that a computer is good enough for recording, editing, mastering and CD-authoring music/noise, but somehow mysteriously not good enough for listening to it.
Speakers is not the only issue.
I have never used computer that has good pure & clean sound. Every computer I have used, has flaws of sound when you just use the mini-jack output. Be it my old PC's, lap-tops or various qualities and nowadays iMac. I know all you need is proper soundcard. But as it is, if I burn audio on CD and play it on stereos, sound is much better than play file.
This is a key factor when using a computer as a stereo component. From what I'm reading, there is a lot of background noise (crosstalk) on a computer, and stock soundcards aren't intended to give good sound. My previous computer was terrible with background noises. At a decent volume, you could hear all kinds of audible garbage that was reminiscent of phone modem squiggles. I've read more than once that if you want to use your computer as a true stereo component, you wouldn't have any other software on the computer but your player. It would be stripped of everything else but an OS and a media player. Most people aren't going to do this for various reasons, but since we're having the conversation, there it is. And a soundcard designed for high-fidelity and a DAC of some sorts. That's quite a leap considering a lot of people don't even have audio-grade speakers.
Yep. I'm fully aware of those "squiggles", and despite somewhat destroyed ears, this disturbs me as listener of recording.
I can adjust to it when editing noise/music on software, as I know it won't be there when final music is ready and stuff is burned on master CDR. But it disturbs me that it IS there until material is out from computer.
For this reason, better speakers won't help in computer listening - it may even damage severely. My current speakers has so detailed and crisp high frequencies, "regular quality" mp3 is pretty much impossible to listen to. While muddy low quality speakers may cloud the shittyness, high fidelity speakers exposes all the flaws.
While some people always conclude that it's just noise what sounds rough and crappy anyways, I tend to strongly disagree and expect highest possible audio quality from noise. If format is able to correct flaws of musical material, it's benefits of it, yet if it increases the flaws, it fails.
Good example is Genocide Organ's latest album. LP sounds about 10 times better than CD. Yes, it is very rough DMM cut. Yes, it adds this layer of distortion on top of just about everything. But just compare CD and LP. Songs like Tamil Eelam or such... What a drastic difference of LP and CD ! While one could complain that LP suffers from lack of fidelity due DMM cut, in this case it basically gives the touch for kind of overly digital multi-effect glitch sound, transforms it to something nasty and warm. Like loudly dubbed tape where format adds little dose of sonic magic in purely mechanical/magnetic/physical process. I would feel kind of sorry for those who'd settle for download, as they'll miss a lot. In same way, in some cases, those who stubbornly worship fidelity of LP in cases where CD is without doubt more suitable, appear as music haters. They worship format, they don't worship the sound/music. So I could merely repeat my previous conclusion: I prefer format what compliments each sound piece. On every level: Sound/presentation/general atmosphere.
I use this sound card for my PC which is hooked up directly to my stereo system and I don't get any of those sound artifacts anymore. I still generally just use my CD/record player/cassette deck which are hooked to the stereo too, but if I'm using my PC for audio playback it's pretty damn good.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829271004 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829271004)
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 02, 2013, 08:01:10 PM
While muddy low quality speakers may cloud the shittyness, high fidelity speakers exposes all the flaws.
Indeed. The more faithful the speakers, the more faithfully they'll expose whatever is upstream.
10" vinyls - legend!
Totally vinyl!
7" vinyl!!!
cd for me... can take it and listen where i want (at home, in my car,...) in a compact format and a great sound.
Quote from: nahàsh atrym on September 29, 2013, 05:33:58 PM
all format are an interest
second that , perhaps not so much for mp3 as there's just an overkill of stuff out there but as far as physical releases go i'm interested in all , especially the ones i can play (so no Minidisc (hope to change that soon btw.),8tracks or Wax-Cylinders etc...)
CD's
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 02, 2013, 07:41:27 PMI've read more than once that if you want to use your computer as a true stereo component, you wouldn't have any other software on the computer but your player. It would be stripped of everything else but an OS and a media player.
Sounds a bit like an audiophile-scene magical-thinking urban myth to me. A PC with a decent mid to high end audio interface is good enough for MAKING half the music around today but not for listening to it? Riiight. It's true you can't necessarily expect it to be perfect right out of the box with whatever default cheap sound card tho I agree.
Which format I prefer depends on the actual feel of the release as a whole; the sound, the artwork and sometimes even the background. I wouldn't want the Americanoise comp on vinyl for example, be it 120g or 300g vinyl. It's just fine on tape or the modest but nice 2CD reissue. At the same time I wouldn't have wanted the recently released Ákos Rózmann box set on vinyl instead of CD. It would have been way too annoying listening through it. I like vinyl, given the length and feel of the material fits its limitations; long tracks split between two or more sides is no fun.
I personally like all formats and don't go for that "only vinyl" or "only CD" kind of thing, I just buy whatever happens to catch my attention.
For brutal and in your face stuff I prefer 7''s and Tapes, for longer pieces a CD is better in my opinion. I like LP's too but, be it Noise, Metal or anything else, I just don't buy them that much.
With vinyl I think there is the effort to try and keep it alive some were afraid it would end and be gone forever I think but it also the most expensive format. I like the digital download I think it is amazing that with a computer you can get a piece music anywhere in the world. If you walk into a an internet cafe in any city you can walk out with whatever music you want. I think with a digital music player those kind of machines sometimes compress and reduce the quality of the sound but they are also a very easy way to consume allot of music and can store allot of music. People will often use a phone for music at the present but I am not really phone friendly.
Vinyl and tape, depending on genre. For some reason, I just feel like certain genre fits certain format better than any other format. For example, I prefer noise/power electronics on tapes over any other format while I like my sludge and punk most on 7" vinyl. The reason I prefer these dead formats is, first of all, they look way better than any other format out there. Secondly, I enjoy the 'ritual' of playing them, having to flip the side, rewind and all that plus in my opinion, cd or digital files just dont sound the same as vinyl and tape.
in terms of versatility, usage, and potential from artists' standpoint (as opposed to just listener), i think cd is the 'best' format. not restricted by side lengths, cheaper to ship than LPs, can play in the car or at your lame friend's house who doesn't have a turntable. sound-wise too, no loss of extreme highs + lows like with tape or vinyl (although this doesnt always matter with something like p.e. or harsh noise).
edit: "best" that is in terms of least limitation/most possibility. you could put shitty black metal or high-fidelity drone on a cd and it would work. i would not like to listen to klaus schulze, for instance, on tape. or keiji haino on 7". but harsh noise is fine on tape, hardcore is fine on 7". just a matter of possibilities.
I think I have to conclude that CD is superior to download even if downloading from a site like bandcamp can be cheap and a fast way to get music it does seem that a higher quality music file can be got from ripping a CD and certainly higher quality as well than some thing like a download code with an LP
Quote from: Bob on December 05, 2014, 08:44:54 PM
I think I have to conclude that CD is superior to download even if downloading from a site like bandcamp can be cheap and a fast way to get music it does seem that a higher quality music file can be got from ripping a CD and certainly higher quality as well than some thing like a download code with an LP
That's not the case most of the time. Bandcamp, for instance, offers a lossless option. It might even offer more than one. wav, aif, aiff, flac, shn, ape, ALAC, and m4a (lossless container) are all lossless and of the same quality as ripping a CD to wav. For the average user, downloading the Bandcamp lossless option is actually a better idea than ripping a CD with iTunes or a lesser software. EAC or XLD ripping, with the proper settings and following correct protocol, is comparable to downloading lossless from Bandcamp. Most people don't use, or don't know how to use, EAC or XLD optimally, so their rips are lesser than the Bandcamp lossless download.
*and some of the Bandcamp lossless downloads are shared at 24-bit and higher sampling rates, so they could be sharing directly from the studio masters rather than the dithered 16/44 that was sent to the CD plant. in those instances, Bandcamp is offering the best version available.
Well I am not sure about that going onto bandcamp now this is what is available to me
(This album https://lesbian.bandcamp.com/album/forestelevision)
Standard high-quality formats:
MP3 V0 - 85.2MB
MP3 320 - 101.6MB
Audiophiles and Nerds:
FLAC - 312.4MB
AAC - 77.1MB
Ogg Vorbis - 62.3MB
ALAC - 348.8MB
So yes there is a higher or bigger file option but I can rip a CD using windows media player as a lossless audio file and it can be up to 600 to 700 MB in size or more. For instance a bandcamp release at 54.39 length I can download it as FLAC 355MB or even ALAC 365MB but a CD I have ripped at 61.3 min length is 627 MB in size.
So I would say I think an audio file at 355MB is a perfectly good enough quality to listen to but I do think I can get better quality with a CD rip. Maybe for some albums a very big file will not suit it because it is not a very high quality recording in the first place so to have it a really large file might be useless for some things anyway. I still like all formats but I don't think I would listen to a 60 min album at 100 MB it is to low quality. I have never used itunes.
Quote from: Bob on December 05, 2014, 10:27:20 PM
Well I am not sure about that going onto bandcamp now this is what is available to me
(This album https://lesbian.bandcamp.com/album/forestelevision)
Standard high-quality formats:
MP3 V0 - 85.2MB
MP3 320 - 101.6MB
Audiophiles and Nerds:
FLAC - 312.4MB
AAC - 77.1MB
Ogg Vorbis - 62.3MB
ALAC - 348.8MB
So yes there is a higher or bigger file option but I can rip a CD using windows media player as a lossless audio file and it can be up to 600 to 700 MB in size or more. For instance a bandcamp release at 54.39 length I can download it as FLAC 355MB or even ALAC 365MB but a CD I have ripped at 61.3 min length is 627 MB in size.
So I would say I think an audio file at 355MB is a perfectly good enough quality to listen to but I do think I can get better quality with a CD rip. Maybe for some albums a very big file will not suit it because it is not a very high quality recording in the first place so to have it a really large file might be useless for some things anyway. I still like all formats but I don't think I would listen to a 60 min album at 100 MB it is to low quality. I have never used itunes.
It doesn't sound like you understand the technology involved here. The FLAC (355) and ALAC (365) is the same quality as your 627, but since you're using a poor quality ripper like Windows Media Player, the FLAC and ALAC are actually higher quality than your CD rip. You're going on size of files, and it is inconsequential. There is no loss in the FLAC or ALAC numbers. They are all
lossless.
In your Lesbian example, the FLAC and ALAC are the same as having the full wav. They've been compressed (but not altered) in their container. As I said, you don't appear to have a good grasp on what technology is in use here or what happens in the various processes.
The MP3s, AAC, and Ogg are all
lossy and not part of this discussion, but you're associating them all with lossy because you're confused into thinking 627 automatically means better than the FLAC and ALAC numbers. You could send me a wav file of a song of your choice, and we could look at its wav form. Then we could take a look at the FLAC or ALAC wav form of that same track and it would be identical to the wav image. It's all lossless. This would not be the case for MP3, AAC, or Ogg, because they are lossy.
Again, that FLAC (355) and ALAC (365) is higher quality than the 627 Windows Media Player rip, but only because Windows Media Player is a poor tool. Windows Media Player doesn't rip bit for bit, so it isn't identical to your CD. If you were using better software, they would all be of identical quality.
wav = AIFF/AIF = FLAC = ALAC. These are all identical files, though their sizes differ.
....god damn it Bob.
I see well that explains allot and I am glad if someone can tell me I freely admit it don't understand all this stuff about different file types and sizes. But can you recommend some better software then to rip CDs other than the Windows Media Player ? Or anyone ? I am a bit disappointed because with a really big file size I can only fit a small amount of stuff on my walkman.
Quote from: Bob on December 07, 2014, 04:18:05 AM
I see well that explains allot and I am glad if someone can tell me I freely admit it don't understand all this stuff about different file types and sizes. But can you recommend some better software then to rip CDs other than the Windows Media Player ? Or anyone ? I am a bit disappointed because with a really big file size I can only fit a small amount of stuff on my walkman.
Exact Audio Copy for PC, and XLD for Apple. dbpoweramp is an OK ripper, but even it is considered 2nd rate in comparison to EAC and XLD. It takes about fifteen minutes to set up the Exact Audio Copy correctly, and there is a short, step by step, process to ripping CDs with it. You quickly get used to it, and it takes only an extra minute to do it.
Exact Audio Copy setup tutorial & ripping tutorial:
http://filesharingtalk.com/threads/435208-Installing-configuring-and-ripping-with-Exact-Audio-Copy-%28EAC%29
XLD setup tutorial & ripping tutorial:
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=102584
Like some people said earlier, I like all format, and think they each work better depending of the situation/genre/artist message. I like CDs and mp3 because they are practical, tapes because they are cute and have a sound quality that fits some genres, LP because they look great etc.
I've always loved the future positive "cyberpunk" edge of the compact disc. Sony first intended it to be a luxury format for the japanese market, and that's exactly what it looks like. I have lot's of vinyl and tapes as well, but I've never looked upon them as aesthetically superior formats. I like things small and neat.
Right so I have installed both Exact Audio Copy and itunes and I have ripped three CDs twice with both programs I will try to decide which is best by listening. itunes seems to offer a bit more variation in the different types of rip available with regard quality and file size anyway thanks allot for the help Zeno Marx !
Quote from: 13 on December 07, 2014, 09:52:55 PM
I've always loved the future positive "cyberpunk" edge of the compact disc.
Yeah!
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QiOt4LDN0Ew/Ugvxtw8JCHI/AAAAAAAABiA/IKMU2XfygBI/s1600/271523-vlcsnap_418322.jpg)
End of thread.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on October 02, 2013, 07:41:27 PM
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 02, 2013, 06:38:18 PM
Quote from: Cementimental on October 02, 2013, 01:26:19 PM
I find it very odd how a lot of people have this notion that a computer is good enough for recording, editing, mastering and CD-authoring music/noise, but somehow mysteriously not good enough for listening to it.
Speakers is not the only issue.
I have never used computer that has good pure & clean sound. Every computer I have used, has flaws of sound when you just use the mini-jack output. Be it my old PC's, lap-tops or various qualities and nowadays iMac. I know all you need is proper soundcard. But as it is, if I burn audio on CD and play it on stereos, sound is much better than play file.
This is a key factor when using a computer as a stereo component. From what I'm reading, there is a lot of background noise (crosstalk) on a computer, and stock soundcards aren't intended to give good sound. My previous computer was terrible with background noises. At a decent volume, you could hear all kinds of audible garbage that was reminiscent of phone modem squiggles. I've read more than once that if you want to use your computer as a true stereo component, you wouldn't have any other software on the computer but your player. It would be stripped of everything else but an OS and a media player. Most people aren't going to do this for various reasons, but since we're having the conversation, there it is. And a soundcard designed for high-fidelity and a DAC of some sorts. That's quite a leap considering a lot of people don't even have audio-grade speakers.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on October 02, 2013, 08:01:10 PM
Yep. I'm fully aware of those "squiggles", and despite somewhat destroyed ears, this disturbs me as listener of recording.
I finally set up the WASAPI plug-in for Foobar. I should have done this a long time ago. These probably aren't the correct terms, but what it basically does is isolate your soundcard from all other activity. It's a hassle because you can't listen to music and then play anything else until you've closed Foobar. youtube won't even load if you're listening through Foobar. I've been listening through a digital out, thinking it was my best possibility. Wrong. WASAPI makes way for a superior sound. The difference between a normal soundcard setting+digital out vs. WASAPI+digital out is significant.
*I believe there are similar plug-ins and results with the ASIO plug-in for those with such soundcards.
Open question to those who collect &/or issue cassette-only releases:
Do none of you care one jot for the archival integrity of this format? It's poor.
Excessive tape-stretch over C90 resulting in slower music over time
Saturation issues/other limitations w/ fidelity
Tape decay
Colossal reduction in tape deck manufacturing
Occasional tape-chews
etc..
To my mind, those that release cassette-only are irresponsible towards their art; those that release the music of others this way? A shabby and Zeitgeist-y decision.
Imagine if history was different for a while: Forget Edison and his wax-coated tubes and consider where we would be if tape was invented before discs. What would this mean for our musical heritage and it's appreciation by those in the future?
Quote from: ONE on May 01, 2015, 10:11:11 AM
Open question to those who collect &/or issue cassette-only releases:
Do none of you care one jot for the archival integrity of this format? It's poor.
Excessive tape-stretch over C90 resulting in slower music over time
Saturation issues/other limitations w/ fidelity
Tape decay
Colossal reduction in tape deck manufacturing
Occasional tape-chews
etc..
To my mind, those that release cassette-only are irresponsible towards their art; those that release the music of others this way? A shabby and Zeitgeist-y decision.
Imagine if history was different for a while: Forget Edison and his wax-coated tubes and consider where we would be if tape was invented before discs. What would this mean for our musical heritage and it's appreciation by those in the future?
Who said that art/music must be long-lived? Who said that tape or other mediums must be perfect and excluded from self- or environment destruction? Where is here natural process of entropy? Is anything in nature which is still the same?
"We must secure the existence of our art and a future for musical heritage."
Quote from: Scat-O-Logy on May 01, 2015, 12:36:16 PM
"We must secure the existence of our art and a future for musical heritage."
Jeezzz, who said that?
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on May 01, 2015, 12:08:28 PMWho said that art/music must be long-lived?
Spare a thought for those speculators foolish enough to have purchased any of Willem De Kooning's paintings produced in the 1950's. He frequently stretched paints w/ olive oil and other unsuitable materiasl. Some of his works are now rotting in the frame.
I don't exist in the here and now, I came from distant people and places, and through my child - my stake in the future is secure. I'd like my child to know who I really was other than the over-worked drone I must appear to be as I fear there will not be enough time for me to reveal that fully whilst I'm still alive. History and cultural heritage are important to me. Having my art/music in a format that allows me to pass it down to my child is crucial; it could be argued that those works that do persist through the passing of generations says much about the quality and importance of piece - be it a fugue from Bach, or the Sistine Chapel.
I have no intention of palming my child off w/ a coffee table art book, I will take her to Venice.
Quote from: ONE on May 01, 2015, 02:02:26 PM
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on May 01, 2015, 12:08:28 PMWho said that art/music must be long-lived?
Spare a thought for those speculators foolish enough to have purchased any of Willem De Kooning's paintings produced in the 1950's. He frequently stretched paints w/ olive oil and other unsuitable materiasl. Some of his works are now rotting in the frame.
I don't exist in the here and now, I came from distant people and places, and through my child - my stake in the future is secure. I'd like my child to know who I really was other than the over-worked drone I must appear to be as I fear there will not be enough time for me to reveal that fully whilst I'm still alive. History and cultural heritage are important to me. Having my art/music in a format that allows me to pass it down to my child is crucial; it could be argued that those works that do persist through the passing of generations says much about the quality and importance of piece - be it a fugue from Bach, or the Sistine Chapel.
I have no intention of palming my child off w/ a coffee table art book, I will take her to Venice.
So, be free and issue your music in best format by yourself. Respect other artists / publishers who fuck "history and cultural heritage".
for me, it would be most ideal to release everything on vinyl but since that isn't possible tape is the next best thing. i have CDRs from years back that are starting to degrade and some of my oldest totally unplayable by now - a mere 15-20 years later. so that format has always been no good. the degradation from cassette seems miniscule to my ears. i have tapes from when i was a kid i still enjoy.
and theres the whole "theres just something about tape" fetishistic angle...that probably fits me best. and i just dont like change, i'm stuck in my ways.
I Mainly keep my album collection and downloads as flac which is then converted to mp3 using lame at VBR 160kbps. since i use a PSP as my other stuff either died or got lost and because i hear no difference sound quality wise when i compared them.
Cassettes are the best looking format. They are so small and friendly and conform to the golden mean
Here's (http://www.factmag.com/2015/05/07/pressed-to-the-edge-vinyl/) an interesting article about the harsh realities of vinyl pressing today. Too long to quote, so posting just a link...
Hm, i cant say i have a preferred format although i value physical releases more. For 2 reasons :
1. The fact that someone spend his time and his money to produce a physical product, someway is a guarantee for the quality of the music. At least more than the 10 minutes process of creating a Bandcamp account and uploading every worthless shit produced.
2. In this era, when we can have access almost to all the music we want, [By streaming, YouTube, even piracy ... not always in good quality but still it's access] , the process of ordering, waiting, having a physical release makes me pay more atention to the music itself, keeps me in balance to not get lost in the tons of shit around !
No matter the above, if there is digital available, i wont buy the physical. And no matter that, i dont like to be digital available ! As i dont like multiple formats of a release. I dont like to have options. A unique format for every release is ideal for me. Your call which format that would be. After some years a reissue on a different format is ok though.
Edit : As "digital", i mean digital download from Bandcamp etc. Not CD.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on April 07, 2015, 08:20:12 PM
I finally set up the WASAPI plug-in for Foobar. I should have done this a long time ago. These probably aren't the correct terms, but what it basically does is isolate your soundcard from all other activity. It's a hassle because you can't listen to music and then play anything else until you've closed Foobar. youtube won't even load if you're listening through Foobar. I've been listening through a digital out, thinking it was my best possibility. Wrong. WASAPI makes way for a superior sound. The difference between a normal soundcard setting+digital out vs. WASAPI+digital out is significant.
*I believe there are similar plug-ins and results with the ASIO plug-in for those with such soundcards.
Late reply on this but check Foobar preferences for a "Release ASIO on background / when not in use" option. That will let you play other PC sounds when Foobar doesnt playback without the need of closing the software. The best solution and what i have done is choose the onboard sound-chip as the default Windows soundcard and at each playback / editing software's options choose your good soundcard with ASIO or WASAPI.
And yes, ASIO / WASAPI sound is like night and day compared with the Windows drivers. Huge difference. Actually if you have boughten a soundcard and dont use ASIO / WASAPI drivers, then more likely you shouldnt buy it at all !
Edit : Ofcource, the solution with the onboard chip as default Windows soundcard requires an extra cable connection with your amp / active monitors and somehow to mix the 2 inputs there or to switch them fast & easy. Even if you cant have both inputs mixed, still you avoid sample rate conflicts and crashes.
Quote from: Theodore on May 14, 2015, 05:29:29 AM
Quote from: Zeno Marx on April 07, 2015, 08:20:12 PM
I finally set up the WASAPI plug-in for Foobar. I should have done this a long time ago. These probably aren't the correct terms, but what it basically does is isolate your soundcard from all other activity. It's a hassle because you can't listen to music and then play anything else until you've closed Foobar. youtube won't even load if you're listening through Foobar. I've been listening through a digital out, thinking it was my best possibility. Wrong. WASAPI makes way for a superior sound. The difference between a normal soundcard setting+digital out vs. WASAPI+digital out is significant.
*I believe there are similar plug-ins and results with the ASIO plug-in for those with such soundcards.
Late reply on this but check Foobar preferences for a "Release ASIO on background / when not in use" option. That will let you play other PC sounds when Foobar doesnt playback without the need of closing the software. The best solution and what i have done is choose the onboard sound-chip as the default Windows soundcard and at each playback / editing software's options choose your good soundcard with ASIO or WASAPI.
Thanks. I'm not finding that option in Foobar with WASAPI. I've looked everywhere in preferences. It must only be available with the ASIO plug-in.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on May 15, 2015, 05:16:17 PM
Thanks. I'm not finding that option in Foobar with WASAPI. I've looked everywhere in preferences. It must only be available with the ASIO plug-in.
No, you are right. It's me i was confused. Sorry about that. I was thinking that Foobar has this option, every other audio software i use has this. But now checking again and seems i confused that with the "Running with high process priority" option which i think has to do with the processor. No "Release ASIO" option in Foobar here either.
Still, using the on-board chip as default for PC / Browser sounds is the final solution.
good cassettes are like life. if there is deterioration from use. that to me is a good thing. (it shows love and a tape worth investing yourself in for hours/days) plus the degrading may have been started by the artist who never 'wanted' it to sound digital (more perfect lets say...) at all....
I like the sounds that are crumbling apart just like this world and life as you get older. So sometimes you buy 2 copies and don't open one? (just an option to preserve a tape for many years with no deterioration??)
I will die and my son will most likely get my collection of music which is a gigantically variations of records, tapes and cds. I want to get the music and I do prefer tapes now a days, I will get whatever is available. Music is the only thing I have spent money on since grade school *25 or so years??...
And as a producer of tapes only and as I run a zine that only has cassette tape reviews currently, I am allowed access to such more music based on a low income. Also, I get to hear lo-fi music from around the world on very small runs. Somehow a cd or cdr never gives any great feelings like they do.
And running a cassette tape only label is fun. I can do it without massive debt. I can also have creative control over everything. And some recordings you would never want to hear 'digitally,' they massively loose their charm.
Sure it would be rad to only put out vinyl. But that is not economically feasible and would just make it hard to get a tiny labels music 'out there' both for label and artist. I used to be a huge vinyl guy. But has become so hard for someone on a 'musicians' budget, or someone who does not make enough to spent $200- $300 on records every paycheck....
But there is so much music I only want to hear from the artist by ordering their tape, rather than listening to on bandcamp. or any other digital option. (and I give away all the digital copies for this reason, I only charge for a tape because I spend a lot of time producing the whole release, music, art, what kind of packaging etc...
Just some thoughts. I admire your passion. that is great sometimes it just comes down to economics......again.
take care passing on your treasures to your children. It is really a beautiful process. I am sitting here blasting obscure BM while my 11 year old son sits next to me and loves it with me.,,,
for me that is amazing to feel. regardless of how produced physically. The more important matter is the love for this music!!!
love and passion for the music= beautiful no matter the format.
I like cds the most, then records, then cassettes, cdrs last. I don't like cdrs much due to the fact they usually look really cheaply made and can degrade even if you take good care of them, I rarely would ever buy a cdr release unless it was by one of my favorite artists and it didn't have any other physical release.Tapes are good for some genres like noise but I will only buy an album on cassette if it doesn't have a vinyl or cd release. Vinyl is fun to play and the large artwork and records look very nice, but they can be really disappointing in some cases when they have too much surface noise especially.
Cds are my favorite since they pretty much always sound great since you can play them thousands of times with no degradation in sound, look nice if not as large as a record sleeve and therefore don't take up too much space on the shelves.
Quote from: HongKongGoolagong on September 28, 2013, 09:50:10 PM
Vinyl is of course the most physically appealing format for artwork and fetishism, although the supposed vinyl audiophile lobby makes me laugh when they are seemingly unaware that 99.9% of modern vinyl has been mastered digitally.
Seconded, and furthermore - said people are also generally 'in the dark' to that fact that most of the modern releases they are buying have been captured/recorded to anything but a truly analogue chain..more often than not, straight to the project/bands home computers. In essence, this format which is seen by some as the
absolute(!) is in many cases nothing more than a flat and linear sounding 'Lp3', if you will. ;)
All formats serve their purpose!
artists and labels looking to press records...
https://thevinylfactory.com/news/apollo-transco-vinyl-lacquer-fire/
The scuttlebutt is possibly no more 7" lacquers, which would imply a 12" lacquer used instead, which would also raise all the costs even more for a 7". GZ uses DMM mastering, unless paying for a higher quality package, which doesn't use such lacquers but also sounds different. DMM has its resource problems too, like where to source the cutting heads, but that is an aside. Quite an ugly situation for the virtues of vinyl.
Quote from: Zeno Marx on February 18, 2020, 10:46:03 PM
artists and labels looking to press records...
https://thevinylfactory.com/news/apollo-transco-vinyl-lacquer-fire/
The scuttlebutt is possibly no more 7" lacquers, which would imply a 12" lacquer used instead, which would also raise all the costs even more for a 7". GZ uses DMM mastering, unless paying for a higher quality package, which doesn't use such lacquers but also sounds different. DMM has its resource problems too, like where to source the cutting heads, but that is an aside. Quite an ugly situation for the virtues of vinyl.
This is of course terrible news and will cause issues for lots of people in North America for sure, but I've started the process for getting several records cut since this fire happening and have been told that there will be basically no repercussion at least in the plants\mastering studios I use. I imagine that something new will pop up or Apollo will rebuild before this becomes too huge of an issue. Funny enough I remember talking to someone a few years ago who mentioned that this bottleneck with lacquers was a massive problem and if something was to happen it would be pretty serious
I've definitely heard of a few US labels having to shelve their 2020 release schedules. Where there's a will, there's a way, though. And there's enough money in the industry for someone to come along and fill the void.
Whatever happened to that magnetic tape shortage? Seems like everyone's been pressing tapes as often as usual.
Iirc the factory that produces the chemical needed for magnetic tape is back online
i would say... CD for albums, 7" for EPs, cassettes for demos/promos/smaller releases... although i like all three formats. i don't care for novelty formats like 8-track etc. at all
long releases or releases with crazy frequency responses: Compact Disc for sure.
shorter/niche releases: Cassette
Cassettes for listening and also for recording
tapes and vinyl, depends on the release which. mp3 is fine too. fuck cd's, i always just rip them and put them in the shelf never to be touched again
1. tape
2. CD
minidisc(but there are no scene who use it=
vinyl cd
but the main question is hearing the music
Don't want to start a new thread, so I take this one.
Just read on a news site, that the first time since 1986, in the US market there were more vinyls sold than CDs (232,1 to 129,9 Million $)
Somehow interesting, but not completely unexpected, I guess.
Still nothing compared to the streaming services - all in all 4,8 Billion $!