Quote:
Originally Posted by primbs
Looks like some things stick around.
"Having just gone through the process of mastering our new album for digital and for vinyl, I can say it is completely amazing how different they really sound," said lead singer and guitarist Joshua Babcock in an e-mail interview. "The way the vinyl is so much better and warmer and more interesting to listen to is a wonder."
http://www.wired.com/entertainment/m...eningpost_1029 |
please don't start this argument here.. The reason for the renewed interest in vynil are terrible. Watch:
Quote:
|
Portability is no longer any reason to stick with CDs, and neither is audio quality. Although vinyl purists are ripe for parody, they're right about one thing: Records can sound better than CDs.
|
note the
can in can sound better.
If you screw up the CD mastering entirely, the vinyl medium will not allow you to master it as badly, and as such keeps the mastering engineer from doing so. The glaring omission is that the engineer could just as well have chosen to master the CD properly, thus removing the "need" for a remaster (on a different medium). Note that if you master (compress the digital range of) the original tape, rather than a copy, there is no way to get a "better" sounding vynil recording out of it. (mind you, this has already happened a number of times)
Quote:
|
Although CDs have a wider dynamic range, mastering houses are often encouraged to compress the audio on CDs to make it as loud as possible: It's the so-called loudness war. Since the audio on vinyl can't be compressed to such extremes, records generally offer a more nuanced sound.
|
If you combine the information given in this bit with your example of the "artists who are happy with their superior vynil mastering", it should make you wonder.
As stated CDs when mastered
properly are (far) superior. However, for some reason the band (or their mastering engineers) were either not allowed to do so (by their publishers), or just didn't want to do so, for fear of "losing" the loudness race; so they also release a
different mastering on vynil. If they had released the same mastering on CD the CD would sound better.
So: "vynil" is a total and utter hype, which has come into existence because of lousy mastering practices, which cannot be pursued on vynil (as it will saturate more quickly). The "more nuanced sound" is a choice record companies are explicitly not making, it's not a feature of vynil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmaul1114
Yeah, you still lose the ability to have multiple documents scattered around the desk to compare findings etc.
And I forgot to mention that it had to be affordable. I wouldn't pay more than $150-200 for something like that since I don't mind at all working with print outs. I generally don't do that kind of work outside the office so portability isn't an issue.
Otherwise I'm just stuck in my ways and for my academic documents and books I like just having a print out or paper book that I can easily write on, easily flip through, etc. etc.
|
Well, the thing my iLiad comes in handiest for is for putting papers on it.. If i see the 30-40cm stacks of printed papers that some people have lying around in their offices, having them all in PDF form would make that stack a lot more searchable.
That said, searching/switching/flipping between or through them will only
really become feasible once opening times reach 1-3 seconds, and page flips+loads take <.5s (we aren't quite there yet).
Currently I search the PDF versions of papers/books for words/phrases, and then start reading the actual text or whatever on my iLiad, which works OK but is still far from perfect (for my use).
Anyway, I'm sure technology will make a fan of you yet, in another 5 years or so.
