From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V5 #17 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Tuesday, January 18 2005 Volume 05 : Number 017 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [loud-fans] another country heard ["Keegstra, Russell " ] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard [LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard ["Tim Walters" ] [loud-fans] Outrageous Cherry link ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard ["Bradley Skaught" ] Re: [loud-fans] 2005 off to a good start [LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard [LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com] [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks ["Keegstra, Russell " ] Re: [loud-fans] another country heard [Gil Ray ] Re: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks [Jeff ] Re: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks [Jenny Grover ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:50:38 -0600 From: "Keegstra, Russell " Subject: RE: [loud-fans] another country heard Mr. Walters: >Digital photography, on the other hand, is an approximation, and one >which currently is inferior to film in resolution and tonal range, >although that may change sooner rather than later. What he said, although in resolution the high end is already pretty dang close. The biggest difference is dynamic range, negative film has at least two more stops of range. Slide film not so much. My wife and I used to do B&W darkroom stuff (RC proofs, FB finals, Ilford paper in Kodak chemistry, do we have a consensus?), but we've been doing digital for two years now and have never looked back. We're shooting far from the high end (Nikon D100) but we routinely produce 12x18 prints which look quite good. It's just a different set of tools and they take some getting used to, but you can use them in the light and in a room bigger than a closet. And you don't stink when you're done. Russ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:24:57 EST From: LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard In a message dated 1/17/05 8:57:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, RK9@tmw.com writes: > It's just a different set of tools and they take > some getting used to, but you can use them in the light and in a room > bigger than a closet. And you don't stink when you're done. > > I suppose you could make some backup pictures in place of negatives, but with an Orwellian fear of data loss (including CD-R disc rot or damage), I think a lot more people than just me are fearful of digital photography. In a few more years, it will get to the point where people will have to send their negatives (and what film is left) off to Kodak for processing, like it was the era of the Brownie all over again. 3..6..9 seconds of dread, - --Mark np Guided by Voices (best of) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:06:00 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Tim Walters wrote: > Virtually the same thing happened with analog tape. Manufacturers and > recording engineers used to pride themselves on accurate recordings, > but when digital recording came along and offered far greater accuracy > with little effort, the rhetoric changed. Distortion and noise are now > sold as "warmth" and "depth", and recording engineers go out of their > way to court tape saturation, instead of avoiding it. Tim makes an excellent point here, but i think there's another element that's helpful in understanding people's attitudes, and that is that the generation of engineers who are most vociferous about the analog/digital divide got their ideas of what records are SUPPOSED to sound like from the Beatles and Sun and Motown et cetera ... those (analog) records were the templates, and when the application of the leading edge of technology made the sound of records move away from that ideal is when this debate really started -- at least as far back as 86, although what was arguably poor mastering of early CDs exacerbated the issue. > The specific color offered by analog tape is still appropriate and > flattering for some types of signal (e.g. rock drums), but personally I i think it can be very flattering for rock voices and rock guitar too, and I think that is another line that's useful to look at. There probably are analog fetishists in the hip hop community -- certainly you can hear an affection for the noise artifacts of vinyl -- but the notion sounds a little silly to me. Often the liner notes of classical recordings will rather proudly list the microphones, A/D converters and recording hardware used. I think the jazz community is also much more "digital-friendly" overall. > All that said, I could probably list twenty factors that are more > important to the sound of a record than whether analog or digital > recording was used. Both are capable of excellent results (as Bradley's > CD proves on the analog side, and, say, VESPERTINE proves on the > digital side). The analog/digital divide is just a lot easier to > fetishize and argue about than things that are actually important, like > room treatment, microphone placement, and high-quality monitoring. of course, i do spend ample time arguing (well, discussing, i hope) room treatmeant and mic placement and monitoring and all sorts of things. Tim, I'm curious as to whether you've had an opportunity to form an opinion about the dangerous 2-bus and similar products. snake oil? something to it? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:30:53 -0800 (PST) From: "Tim Walters" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard dmw wrote: > Tim, I'm curious as to whether you've had an opportunity to form > an opinion about the dangerous 2-bus and similar products. snake > oil? something to it? Somebody once played me two mixes that were supposedly identical except that one was mixed digitally and the other through an analog console. I had little trouble telling them apart. I liked the digital mix better--the analog mix sounded slightly distorted to me. To him it sounded "warmer." I haven't heard the D2B, but I would expect similar results, possibly with the distortion being more euphonic (at that price, it had better be). Assuming that's correct, it's not snake oil, since it has an audible effect, the desirability of which is a matter of taste. They market the unit as "preserving the nuance and clarity of your mix," though, which I find very hard to believe (especially because they also claim "more punch"). Still, I can't really say until I've heard it. - -- THE DOUBTFUL PALACE Free exquisite music http://www.doubtfulpalace.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:59:27 -0800 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard > The analog/digital divide is just a lot easier to > fetishize and argue about than things that are actually > important, like > room treatment, microphone placement, and high- > quality monitoring. That's very true, and I think that it took folks awhile to start thinking about how some of their room treatment, mic placement, etc. tecniques needed to be readjusted for a different medium. And certainly, type of music can be a factor as well. I don't feel like you can record the same way to digital as you can to tape, and there's also a "vocabulary" of sounds that are particular to tape (until the technology catches up) that people miss. I can only think of a handful of albums that were actually ruined by the choice of the digital recording, and a handful more that would have been more artistically successful had they been done on tape, but the past five years or so have seen an enormous leap in the quality and personality of recording digital. One interesting example that comes to mind is Bruce Springsteen's _The River_. One of the earliest digital recordings, i'm sure, and not a particularily great sounding record. The _Tracks_ box that came out awhile ago featured a number of unreleased songs from the River sessions that were remixed, and the sound of those tracks is really stunning. It really makes one wish they'd go back and remix the whole album, and it really demonstrates how much the digital recording world has grown. That said i'd still love to do everything on two inch tape if I could afford it! B - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.12 - Release Date: 1/14/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:06:11 -0500 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard Keegstra, Russell wrote: >My wife and I used to do B&W darkroom stuff (RC proofs, FB finals, >Ilford paper in Kodak chemistry, do we have a consensus?), but we've been >doing digital for two years now and have never looked back. We're shooting >far from the high end (Nikon D100) but we routinely produce 12x18 prints >which look quite good. It's just a different set of tools and they take >some getting used to, but you can use them in the light and in a room >bigger than a closet. And you don't stink when you're done. > > I shoot mostly digital now myself for various reasons (I can take gazillions of photos without ringing up processing costs in my head, I don't have to store them as negatives and prints which can start to take up incredible amounts of space, I can see if the shot works or not on the spot and make adjustments, it works well in really crappy light like dark clubs with primarily red lights, and I just haven't had the time or inclination to do much home processing in the past couple of years, one reason being I don't have a darkroom and have to temporarily convert the main bathroom for that purpose). Sometime I take both a digital and a film camera with me on a shoot. The main thing I like about "analog" photography and processing is the kinds and range of manipulations you can do if you're not just after a "straight" shot. For example, I like to use Tri-X in high contrast sunlight and develop it in warm (78 degrees) Microdol X. It produces tremendous grain, which some people don't like, but I like for portraits and certain kinds of nature shots. I can't produce that kind of result digitally or with computer manipulations. Granted, I can do some cool things to photos on the computer, and computers put me out of my former job as a hand retoucher almost overnight. But they are different approaches for me, and serve different purposes. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:10:38 -0500 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com wrote: >I suppose you could make some backup pictures in place of negatives, but with >an Orwellian fear of data loss (including CD-R disc rot or damage), I think a >lot more people than just me are fearful of digital photography. > > Most photo processors will make prints on photo paper from digital for you now. And you can make back-ups on multiple types of media, and/or replace your back-ups periodically if you're worried about media stability. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:26:21 -0800 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] 2005 off to a good start The new Outrageous Cherry album, Our Love Will Save The World, is really = fantastic. It's a step back from the gigantic psychedelic monsters = they've been putting out recently--it's more a of a straightforward pop = album. I love these guys more and more. They're unapologetically retro = with their 60's garage/Nuggets sound, but Matt Smith is a brilliant = songwriter and he strikes a perfect balance between raw, garage-y sounds = and attention to songwriting/production detail. This new album harkens = back to my favorite of theirs, _Out There In The Dark_. The Pernice Brothers live album/DVD is a lot of fun. Probably not = necessary for non-fans, but a good document of a great line-up in = concert. The DVD is a lot like the Loud Family DVD--a funny, homemade, = insider's view of the band on tour (my favorite scene involves a vending = machine that only takes credit cards!) There's supposed to be a new = Pernice Brothers album in the spring. I've noticed that Statuesque isn't on absolutely everybody's year-end = list, and it breaks my heart! I can't imagine anyone here hasn't given = them a chance, but if you haven't than do check them out at = www.125records.com/esq.html --I don't think there's anyone operating at = the level of craft and imagination that Stephen Manning is operating at = in pop music. The new one isn't even my favorite Statuesque album and = it's still a masterpiece! luv, B P.S. This looks pretty good to me... 1. Ray Durham, 2B; 2. Omar Vizquel, SS; 3. J.T. Snow, 1B; 4. Barry = Bonds, LF; 5. Moises Alou, RF; 6. Edgardo Alfonzo, 3B; 7. Marquis = Grissom, CF; 8. Mike Matheny, C. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.12 - Release Date: 1/14/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:40:07 -0800 (PST) From: zoom@muppetlabs.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard > Digital photography, on the other hand, is an approximation, and one > which currently is inferior to film in resolution and tonal range, > although that may change sooner rather than later. On a somewhat oblique note, I'll note that digital photography, the moving kind, does at least make creative projects (i.e. films) possible which otherwise might not have been possible due to financial constraints. Some of my favorite films of recent years, including UNIFORM, on my list from last year, use digital video. Debate about the merits of the look(s) is, of course, always possible. And the dawning of new rules sets in accordance with new technology can be baffling and/or offensive to those more familiar with the older standards. I'm reminded of the lady who made a big splash with digital erotic photography, and confessed to one interviewer that she didn't know how to work a light meter, something like that. Something an "old-school" photographer would have to know, at least. I'd look up the details, but I'm at work. While I'm thinking laterally, about film, let me remind listers that I've always been fond of Dan Sallitt's "Diary Of A Low-Budget Filmmaker": http://www.panix.com/~sallitt/intro.html ...and now I'm pleased to direct your attention to another fine film-in-progress, West Anthony's chronicle of his first project as producer. You'll find it at www.toneandgroove.com All the digital pleasures of the world could not, alas, produce a single usable photo of me in drag last Halloween, Andy "Barry Manilow! Lawrence Welk!" - --a couple of stewbums sitting up front in the audience yesterday afternoon at Sureshot, when the singer from Sleepy Workers announced that he'd heard "If Loving You Is Wrong (I Don't Want To Be Right)" at the record store where he works, but couldn't recall who performed it. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:43:26 -0800 From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard Well, now that this thread has morphed to film processing, I wonder if anyone here can confirm this, since Google couldn't: I have heard that when filmmakers make a B&W film, these days they actually shoot color film, then turn the color into B&W. The reason being that film makers have continued to improve their color films over the years, but haven't improved B&W film in decades. Anyone? mm, who thinks high end digital pictures look good, but to these eyes can't quite match Fuji Velvia. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:53:31 -0500 From: glenn mcdonald Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 2005 off to a good start The only 2005 release I've heard so far is the new Kreator album, which isn't likely to appeal to many people on this list, but I'm unexpectedly pleased with two late 2004 releases that I'm only now spending time with. One is the new Manic Street Preachers album, _Lifeblood_, which might be confident and self-contained enough to get them back on track, in my book, towards being one of the world's great Rock Bands again. The other is _Exodus_, the first US domestic release and first album in English by Japanese prefab diva Utada Hikaru, whose Japanese stuff I always thought sounded like low-grade Christina Aguilera. This one, though, is strange and thrilling, like _Ray of Light_ run through a twitchy "Independent Women Part 1" filter. glenn ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:00:33 -0600 From: "Keegstra, Russell " Subject: RE: [loud-fans] another country heard Mr. Mitton: >mm, who thinks high end digital pictures look good, but to these eyes >can't quite match Fuji Velvia. I love Velveeta (er, Velvia), but I mostly shoot landscapy stuff. It can turn people red though. I'm still waiting for a Velvia Photoshop plugin - saturate the colors a bit, then saturate the greens a little more... ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:32:56 -0800 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: [loud-fans] Outrageous Cherry link http://www.rainbowquartz.com/artists.asp?BC=3DOC There are plenty of downloads here to check out. "Why Don't We Talk = About Something Else" is from a 2004 ep, but also appears on the new = album and is representative of the new stuff. Check it out! luv, B No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.12 - Release Date: 1/14/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:16:59 -0600 From: Chris Prew Subject: [loud-fans] My 2004 best In no particular order, as that would require some thought: Secret Machines, Now Here is Nowhere Franz Ferdinand s/t : Damned if I didn't really want to hate this buzz band... No such luck. Interpol, Antics Didn't like this as much as the 1st, but liked it well enough. I don't think its sunk in yet. Mission of Burma, OnOffOn See Interpol Brain Wilson - Smile Continuing a newfound middle-aged appreciation for the man & his music Collections of Colonies of Bees, Customer Cut & Paste, slice & dice guitar work that doesn't forget about melody. Cool. Arcade Fire - Funeral Probably the most immediate record I heard this year Aberfeldy, Forever Young Never fails to bring a smile to my face. I like this in the same way I like Fairground Attraction. Stuff I haven't heard enough of yet to include Jimmy Eat World Camper Van Beethoven American Music Club Saturday Looks Good to Me Sonic Youth Electrelane Tarentel Chris ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:42:22 -0800 From: "Bradley Skaught" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard > On a somewhat oblique note, I'll note that digital >photography, the moving > kind, does at least make creative projects (i.e. films) >possible which > otherwise might not have been possible due to >financial constraints. This applies to music, too, which is one the great contributions of digital recording--it really can put the power of creation in people's hands who wouldn't be able to afford studio time or expensive analog gear/maintenence. It also makes it a lot easier for an artist to combine work in a studio with work at home. xoxo, B - -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.12 - Release Date: 1/14/2005 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:37:41 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: [loud-fans] best of 2005 Okay... my top 5 of 2005 so far: 1. LCD Soundsystem - s/t (to be released on 2/14) 2. Roots Manuva - Awfully Deep (1/31) 3. The Decemberists - Picaresque (3/22) 4. Aesop Rock - Fast Cars, Danger, Fire & Knives (2/?) 5. Bright Eyes - Digital Ash In A Digital Urn (1/25) That LCD Soundsystem album is everything the Rapture record was supposed to be (except I don't think it'll be selling for $7 retail, especially since it's apparently coming with a bonus disc containing all of their non-album singles; I believe said disc will be longer than the "real" album itself). a ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:52:04 EST From: LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 2005 off to a good start In a message dated 1/17/05 3:45:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, treesprite@earthlink.net writes: > The new Outrageous Cherry album, Our Love Will Save The World, is really = > fantastic The label they're on is fantastic as well. They have Myracle Brah's first album, and their issue of it has a few tracks more than the original on Not Lame. There's a write-up about Rainbow Quartz head Jim McGarry in the new Magnet if anyone's interested and hasn't seen it, (the current issue is one of their better ones) along with a little bit about Cotton Mather, Outrageous Cherry, Denise James, Lackloves, and the Waxwings (whose latest album was disappointing to me, but I still have faith they'll bounce back with another one as good as their debut). - --Mark ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:13:20 EST From: LkDylaninthmvies@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard In a message dated 1/17/05 3:45:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlmitton@gmail.com writes: > I have heard > that when filmmakers make a B&W film, these days they actually shoot > color film, then turn the color into B&W. The reason being that film > makers have continued to improve their color films over the years, but > haven't improved B&W film in decades. Anyone? > My friend at the photo shop told me a few years ago that B&W film for photographs has remained unchanged in its chemistry for decades...as to what decade that was, I don't know. I had taken some 620 roll film I shot as a kid that I found in my mom's attic in 1999 or 2000 (can't remember now) and took it down to the shop and the color rolls were not developable, since the color process was outdated (at least that's what I was told, but I have my doubts...but still, even if someone could develop it it's very doubtful anything would come out. Color film, especially older color film from that era, is really fussy and breaks down), but the black and white ones came out, and the images were in remarkably good shape even though they were undeveloped for a quarter century (a little fungus in the borders gave the pictures a dreamlike effect, so it was kind of cool actually)...though kind of eerie to see pics I took at age 8 at age 33. Black and white film is pretty rugged. One of these photos was digitally enhanced last year when I blew it up to make another 8X10, and Kodak sharpened it up considerably, so I'm all for digital enhancement. Just please don't take 35mm away at least. - --Mark ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:10:44 -0600 From: "Keegstra, Russell " Subject: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks Please allow me to direct your attention to "Your Genre Sucks", the current installment of Something Awful's Your Band Sucks column. http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2618 "Perhaps [post-punk] was a pity-based humanitarian effort to create a style of music so ridiculous that not even poor Mark E. Smith would be laughed out of it." ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:10:56 -0800 (PST) From: Gil Ray Subject: Re: [loud-fans] another country heard - --- Bradley Skaught wrote: > That said i'd still love to do everything on two > inch tape if I could afford > it! Me...well, I'll stick to 8-track cassette. I'm doomed. Gil __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:44:26 -0600 From: Jeff Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:10:44 -0600, Keegstra, Russell wrote: > Please allow me to direct your attention to "Your Genre Sucks", the current installment of Something Awful's Your Band Sucks column. > > http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2618 Pretty amusing, but...do music nerds really stay up late inventing subgenres? I thought they stayed up late asking annoying meta-questions like that one. Really - since we have a captive population of music nerds here, does anyone enjoy genre-categorizing music? (It's a given that the bands themselves resolutely refuse to be identified with a genre.) Also: I've never figured out what's genre-like about "Brit Pop" except that it's British. Oh well. Also also: no, please do not discuss "emo" anymore. - -- ...Jeff The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:21:59 -0500 From: Jenny Grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks Jeff wrote: >Pretty amusing, but...do music nerds really stay up late inventing >subgenres? I thought they stayed up late asking annoying >meta-questions like that one. > > I thought they stayed up late updating their music databases. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:59:37 -0600 From: Jeff Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Your Genre Sucks On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:21:59 -0500, Jenny Grover wrote: > Jeff wrote: > > >Pretty amusing, but...do music nerds really stay up late inventing > >subgenres? I thought they stayed up late asking annoying > >meta-questions like that one. > > > > I thought they stayed up late updating their music databases. Crippled Christ on a crutch, Jen - do you have a secret camera in my house? Those of us also sub'd to fegmaniax will note that two minutes ago, I sent a post obviously derived from my poring over my database...which indeed was updated in the process... - -- ...Jeff The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V5 #17 ******************************