From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V5 #120 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 Thursday, May 12 2005 Volume 05 : Number 120 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [loud-fans] The state of live recording ["Larry Tucker" ] [loud-fans] The Forgotten Aimee [A52boy@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Emusic [DOUDIE@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Emusic [Aaron Mandel ] [loud-fans] King Tut/Marc Almond [A52boy@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 10:03:06 -0400 From: "Larry Tucker" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] The state of live recording > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-loud-fans@smoe.org [mailto:owner-loud-fans@smoe.org] On Behalf > Of Dan Sallitt > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 11:41 PM > To: loud-fans > Subject: [loud-fans] The state of live recording > > Hi, loud-fans. Sorry I'm posting for the first time in a while with a > query rather than a contribution. > > I'm in the market for a recorder for live shows, and I'm trying to > figure out whether the hard-disk-type recorders are well-regarded. I've > used minidisc recorders and was very happy with the sound, though making > a CD from them seemed to involve a digital-to-analog-back-to-digital > journey. A friend recently bought an attachment to turn her iPod into a > recorder, but her results were not good - I don't know whether she just > needed a better mike, or whether that technology has limitations. > Anyone explored this realm already? Dan, you're right on my turf here. I do a lot of live recording and migrated from a minidisc to a hard drive recorder in the past year. After doing a lot of research I found that the Neuros II was the one for me and I've been VERY happy with the results. It's great to be able to record in a 44.1kHz WAV format and transfer an entire show to my PC for editing via USB in just a few seconds. I won't go into too much detail here there's a lot of information on the products website www.neurosaudio.com , but I will add a few comments. I love that its firmware is open source and that it can be upgraded. Their messageboard should be quite helpful in helping you make a decision, it was for me. There are a couple of groups of people out here that have customized the firmware just for us recordists too. http://neuros-firmware.sourceforge.net/ The Neuros uses a laptop type hard drive which attaches to the back of the recorder which makes it a little bulky as an alternative to and iPod. On the plus side it has a FM transmitter so you can wirelessly play the device through any FM radio. There's a good comparison to an iPod here www.americantechpushers.com And price? You can get a 20GB model for under $300. Keep in mind though that the Neuros III is due to come out sometime around the end of the year and it's rumored to be totally redesigned and much smaller. Digital Innovations, the manufacturer, in the past has offered a "buy back" policy for existing owners to enable them to upgrade more economically. DI offers owners about what they expect to recoup selling them on eBay and other places. They made this offer when the Neuros I was replaced with the Neuros II model. What appears to be the next big thing though are flash memory recorders. There are two units out now that I know of, but they tend to be a bit pricier and really are for recording and not so much as an iPod-like media storage device. Two models that have peaked my interest are the Marrantz PMD660 http://www.proaudiosuperstore.com/marantz-pmd660.html and the Edirol R-1 http://www.edirol.com/products/info/r1.html . The Edirol looks the most promising to me, but again without the all-around versatility of a Neuros. > Thanks to whoever (Larry?) recommended the recent Bill Lloyd record - > it's very good, especially in its second half. It'll probably be my > favorite Lloyd record after the dust settles. - Dan That may well have been me. BACK TO EVEN is easily my favorite Bill Lloyd album. Larry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:21:31 -0500 From: Chris Prew Subject: [loud-fans] Emusic Wow -- Merge records is now available on Emusic. I smell another couple of booster packs coming my way. So which of the 3 discs of 69 Love Songs should I download 1st to test my Merritt-ability? I've never gotten into the Fields but I'm willing to give it a try. Chris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:23:42 EDT From: A52boy@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] The Forgotten Aimee Hey guys, give the new Aimee Mann record a chance to germinate. I put it on after not listening to it for a few days, and then it clicked for me. It may be one you need to let sit for a while and come back to. - --Mark, who ordered the new Lucksmiths album, wasn't told it was an import, and it arrived for a hefty $31.99 (I'd like to see something in a Lucksmiths album please? ) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:07:27 EDT From: DOUDIE@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Emusic In a message dated 5/11/05 12:25:27 PM, prew@icsusa.com writes: > Wow -- Merge records is now available on Emusic. I smell another couple > of booster packs coming my way. > > So which of the 3 discs of 69 Love Songs should I download 1st to test > my Merritt-ability? I've never gotten into the Fields but I'm willing > to give it a try. > > > > Chris > Disc 2! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:15:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Emusic On Wed, 11 May 2005, Chris Prew wrote: > So which of the 3 discs of 69 Love Songs should I download 1st to test > my Merritt-ability? I've never gotten into the Fields but I'm willing to > give it a try. By now, there's a pretty clear distinction between new Magnetic Fields (69 Love Songs and "i") and the older stuff. I still think Holiday is his masterpiece. All three discs of 69 Love Songs are fine; discs 1 and 3 have more filler toward the end, while disc 2 has it toward the beginning. a ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 02:04:00 EDT From: A52boy@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] King Tut/Marc Almond AOL is running an AP article about King Tut and facial reconstruction using modern technology...three different teams, one Egyptian, one French and one American, have given their version of what they think his face looked like. The funny thing is, the French team's version looks just like Marc Almond. - --Mark np Ivy LATELY e.p. ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V5 #120 *******************************