From: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org (shindell-list-digest) To: shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Subject: shindell-list-digest V11 #60 Reply-To: shindell-list@smoe.org Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk shindell-list-digest Thursday, September 9 2010 Volume 11 : Number 060 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V11 #59 [John Walkey ] Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner [Howie ] Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V11 #59 [Howie ] Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner ["ja clary" ] Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner [Carol Love Subject: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V11 #59 On audio fidelity: > Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:21:47 -0600 > From: John Clary > Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner > > The big difference for my ears is sound quality of CDs over mp3s. > Even the iTunes store's best quality doesn't match CD. > > john clary > 303.589.8099 | johnclary.net > Although I spend a lot of time on computers, I've never gotten into converting my music collection and habits to all digital -- i.e., downloads and only electronic files of one sort or another. CDs is as far as I go and I've started actually buying stuff again on LPs for those artists who make it available. It usually is a heavier grade of LP, comes with additional doo-dads and artwork and is usually more pricey than I want to spend. But if Richard put out an LP I'd pick it up. No beating that warmer, fuller sound and I don't have to worry about compression issues, lossy formats, constantly changing formats, planned obsolescence, etc.... Maybe Richard should put out some Edison cylinders! Stuck in the last century, ~John ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 09:14:30 -0400 From: Howie Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner While people can argue endlessly (and continue to do so), comparing analog and digitally recorded music, there's no doubt that mp3-compressed music is a much poorer representation of the original than uncompressed versions. I've never listened to "lossless compression", though. Can anyone chime in on that? - -Howie At 02:21 AM 9/8/2010, you wrote: > The big difference for my ears is sound quality of CDs over mp3s. >Even the iTunes store's best quality doesn't match CD. > >john clary >303.589.8099 | johnclary.net > > >On 9/7/2010 10:05 PM, rongrittz@cox.net wrote: >>>>Hey, what's the difference between digital releases and complete >>>>records, anyway? If you look at our discussion of late, we all >>>>winnow records down to the 3 or 4 (if you're lucky) songs that >>>>you want to listen to on a semi-regular basis.<< >>Conversely, there are 3 or 4 songs on any given CD that I don't >>particularly care for. Plus, I enjoy the overall theme and feel of >>the CDs, and many of the songs may not sound as great tossed out >>individually. Me, I'd prefer to wait. >> >>RG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 09:23:54 -0400 From: Howie Subject: Re: [RS] RE: shindell-list-digest V11 #59 At 08:30 AM 9/8/2010, you wrote: >On audio fidelity: > > > Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:21:47 -0600 > > From: John Clary > > Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner > > > > The big difference for my ears is sound quality of CDs over mp3s. > > Even the iTunes store's best quality doesn't match CD. > > > > john clary > > 303.589.8099 | johnclary.net > > > > >Although I spend a lot of time on computers, I've never gotten into converting >my music collection and habits to all digital -- i.e., downloads and only >electronic files of one sort or another. CDs is as far as I go and I've >started actually buying stuff again on LPs for those artists who make it >available. It usually is a heavier grade of LP, comes with additional >doo-dads and artwork and is usually more pricey than I want to spend. But if >Richard put out an LP I'd pick it up. No beating that warmer, fuller sound >and I don't have to worry about compression issues, lossy formats, constantly >changing formats, planned obsolescence, etc.... Maybe Richard should put out >some Edison cylinders! > >Stuck in the last century, >~John Perhaps the century prior? See http://www.cyberbee.com/edison/cylinder.html for lots of interesting info on Edison and his recordings, including the Edison Talking Doll, a marketing failure. - -Howie ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 13:29:18 +0000 From: "ja clary" Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner I haven't heard lossless digital yet. But I must confess that while I can still hear a difference in my headphones, CDs sound equally as bad as anything else I've tried in my car. So I convert to lo-fi mp3 and load up a thumb drive for that venue. - ------Original Message------ From: Howie Sender: owner-shindell-list-digest@smoe.org To: shindell-list@smoe.org ReplyTo: shindell-list@smoe.org Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner Sent: Sep 8, 2010 7:14 AM While people can argue endlessly (and continue to do so), comparing analog and digitally recorded music, there's no doubt that mp3-compressed music is a much poorer representation of the original than uncompressed versions. I've never listened to "lossless compression", though. Can anyone chime in on that? - -Howie At 02:21 AM 9/8/2010, you wrote: > The big difference for my ears is sound quality of CDs over mp3s. >Even the iTunes store's best quality doesn't match CD. > >john clary >303.589.8099 | johnclary.net > > >On 9/7/2010 10:05 PM, rongrittz@cox.net wrote: >>>>Hey, what's the difference between digital releases and complete >>>>records, anyway? If you look at our discussion of late, we all >>>>winnow records down to the 3 or 4 (if you're lucky) songs that >>>>you want to listen to on a semi-regular basis.<< >>Conversely, there are 3 or 4 songs on any given CD that I don't >>particularly care for. Plus, I enjoy the overall theme and feel of >>the CDs, and many of the songs may not sound as great tossed out >>individually. Me, I'd prefer to wait. >> >>RG - -- ja clary johncleirigh.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 18:06:09 -0400 From: Carol Love Subject: Re: [RS] Digital means new music sooner ...........I don't think I understood a word John just said. :-) On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:29 AM, ja clary wrote: > I haven't heard lossless digital yet. But I must confess that while I can > still hear a difference in my headphones, CDs sound equally as bad as > anything else I've tried in my car. So I convert to lo-fi mp3 and load up a > thumb drive for that venue. > ------Original Message------ ------------------------------ End of shindell-list-digest V11 #60 ***********************************