[Luxey]

BTW, I really think damage from piracy is exaggeraated by several orders of magnitude. 99.9999% of pirate downloaded music and crap nobody would buy anyway. It's more of a benefit to those artists and their publishers, serving as (free) advertizing.

Oh, yes, one more thing, that would be the following two:

1. **** the industry!
2. Support unsigned independent artists!
3. Stay free!

[Scott Dorsey]

Luxey wrote:
BTW, I really think damage from piracy is exaggeraated by several orders of magnitude. 99.9999% of pirate downloaded music and crap nobody would buy anyway. It's more of a benefit to those artists and their publishers, serving as (free) advertizing.

It's possible.

But... not all that long ago there were record companies selling records,
and they were funding high end studios and paying musicians. And now this
thing is not happening.

I'm not saying that piracy is the only reason this has taken place, but the
difference in the industry has been absolutely staggering.

I think the Record Plant auction was the first time I realized something was
going wrong.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Luxey wrote:
BTW, I really think damage from piracy is exaggeraated by several orders
of magnitude. 99.9999% of pirate downloaded music and crap nobody would
buy anyway. It's more of a benefit to those artists and their publishers,
serving as (free) advertizing.


It's possible.

But... not all that long ago there were record companies selling records,
and they were funding high end studios and paying musicians. And now this
thing is not happening.

I'm not saying that piracy is the only reason this has taken place, but the
difference in the industry has been absolutely staggering.

I think the Record Plant auction was the first time I realized something was
going wrong.
--scott

The industry's failure to recognize the implications of technological
progress led to major bullet wounds in both feet, thinking that legal
bullying would do anything to affect the way the Internet works.

When Napster filled that access vacuum the game was over on many levels.
Now instead of spending a considerable sum on several different artists
from several different genres, and working to develop an artist's career
and recording stature, the remaining corporate megafaunae spend an
outright fortune, in the millions of dollars, to break a single artist
presenting something called "pop" music.

This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new. Who remembers
that part in the film Festival Express where a bunch of white
middleclass college students think admission to the festival should be
free, and the mayor of their intellectually impoverished town agrees?
That goes back to people my own advanced age, and how they did or did
not raise their kids.

Blaming the current generation, or any single generation, for the demise
of the music business as it once existed is evidence of not having paid
attention along the way.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Luxey]

уторак, 20. јануар 2015. 21.43.06 UTC+1, hank alrich је напи�ао/ла:
This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new. Who remembers
that part in the film Festival Express where a bunch of white
middleclass college students think admission to the festival should be
free, and the mayor of their intellectually impoverished town agrees?
That goes back to people my own advanced age, and how they did or did
not raise their kids.


Recently I had an argument over copyright and intelectal property, applied
to royalties and authors' loss due piracy. As a final word, my oponent,
technical college student in his mid to late 20s, advocating "music for free"
said:

"You do not buy a fork each time you're to eat a steak."

Go figure.

(His idea was that author would sell piece of music once, for fixed
price, fairly high, and be done with it.)

[hank alrich]

Luxey wrote:

??????, 20. ?????? 2015. 21.43.06 UTC+1, hank alrich ?? ???????/??:
This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new. Who remembers
that part in the film Festival Express where a bunch of white
middleclass college students think admission to the festival should be
free, and the mayor of their intellectually impoverished town agrees?
That goes back to people my own advanced age, and how they did or did
not raise their kids.


Recently I had an argument over copyright and intelectal property, applied
to royalties and authors' loss due piracy. As a final word, my oponent,
technical college student in his mid to late 20s, advocating "music for free"
said:

"You do not buy a fork each time you're to eat a steak."

Go figure.

(His idea was that author would sell piece of music once, for fixed
price, fairly high, and be done with it.)

I will make a CD for him for $25,000.00. One copy only. Have him get in
touch.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Luxey wrote:
BTW, I really think damage from piracy is exaggeraated by several orders of magnitude. 99.9999% of pirate downloaded music and crap nobody would buy anyway. It's more of a benefit to those artists and their publishers, serving as (free) advertizing.

It's possible.

But... not all that long ago there were record companies selling records,
and they were funding high end studios and paying musicians. And now this
thing is not happening.

I'm not saying that piracy is the only reason this has taken place, but the
difference in the industry has been absolutely staggering.



So ClearChannel ate radio and loaded it up with debt, and now it
doesn't work any more. Plus we all got older.

I dunno what kids do. I'm reasonably certain they pirate *movies*, but
I'm less sure about music.

I think the Record Plant auction was the first time I realized something was
going wrong.
--scott


--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

(hank alrich) wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

Luxey wrote:
BTW, I really think damage from piracy is exaggeraated by several orders
of magnitude. 99.9999% of pirate downloaded music and crap nobody would
buy anyway. It's more of a benefit to those artists and their publishers,
serving as (free) advertizing.


It's possible.

But... not all that long ago there were record companies selling records,
and they were funding high end studios and paying musicians. And now this
thing is not happening.

I'm not saying that piracy is the only reason this has taken place, but the
difference in the industry has been absolutely staggering.

I think the Record Plant auction was the first time I realized something was
going wrong.
--scott

The industry's failure to recognize the implications of technological
progress led to major bullet wounds in both feet, thinking that legal
bullying would do anything to affect the way the Internet works.

When Napster filled that access vacuum the game was over on many levels.
Now instead of spending a considerable sum on several different artists
from several different genres, and working to develop an artist's career
and recording stature, the remaining corporate megafaunae spend an
outright fortune, in the millions of dollars, to break a single artist
presenting something called "pop" music.


But there's nothing new there. Funny how the suits* end up controlling
the budget. And that budget doesn't go to those smelly people
who make the stuff; it goes to other suits because that fits
the norms better.

*not picking teh suits; it's just a nice punchy word.

This is literally true everywhere. It's not limited to music. There
were cases at a former employer where just contract process navigation
cost more than the contract.

I see links from you about the Spotify story. That makes rainbows
and unicorn farts look like physics.

This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new. Who remembers
that part in the film Festival Express where a bunch of white
middleclass college students think admission to the festival should be
free, and the mayor of their intellectually impoverished town agrees?

I remember the film "Woodstock". "This is now a free concert..."

That goes back to people my own advanced age, and how they did or did
not raise their kids.


People don't actually know what anything is worth. It just doesn't
factor into decisions at all.

Blaming the current generation, or any single generation, for the demise
of the music business as it once existed is evidence of not having paid
attention along the way.


--
Les Cargill

[geoff]

On 21/01/2015 9:43 a.m., hank alrich wrote:


This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new.


But increasingly as it is obtained for free, it equally is regarded as
having no real value. Which seems to become a self-fulfilling prophecy -
for those generations at least.

Which is very sad for the future of music.....

geoff

[Trevor]

On 21/01/2015 5:03 PM, geoff wrote:
On 21/01/2015 9:43 a.m., hank alrich wrote:

This "music should be free" idea, however, is nothing new.

But increasingly as it is obtained for free, it equally is regarded as
having no real value. Which seems to become a self-fulfilling prophecy -
for those generations at least.

While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta rap has no value
whatsoever, many of the artists seem to be doing VERY well indeed with
multi-million dollar mansions and garages full of luxury cars. Frankly I
don't see any change at all over the years, with a few artists making a
fortune, and the majority of artists scratching to get by, just as it
has been for centuries. And the amounts paid to artists for concerts
(and the tickets themselves) have exceeded the inflation rate for
decades. So when Celine Dion or Brittney Spears can make far more per
concert (in real terms) at Las Vegas than Elvis Presley ever did, maybe
there isn't too much to whinge about for some at least.
And even bands like the Rolling Stones are making far more now per
concert than they ever did in their heyday, and many of their concert
goers wouldn't even bother to download their latest CD's for free :-)

Trevor.

[[email protected]]

Trevor wrote: "While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta rap has no value whatsoever"


I TRIPLE-dare you to make that statement on a street corner in Harlem or Bronx and see what happens. Who the F__ are you to decide what genres have "no value whatsoever" - Pastey?!

[John Williamson]

On 21/01/2015 12:20, wrote:
Trevor wrote: "While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta rap has no value whatsoever"


I TRIPLE-dare you to make that statement on a street corner in Harlem or Bronx and see what happens. Who the F__ are you to decide what genres have "no value whatsoever" - Pastey?!

Listen to the lyrics of a few tracks and then try and claim that they
are great or even good music or poetry, or that they would be good
advice for living your life. :-)

Trevor also said he "might personally think that", not that it is
unconditionally true. The fact that some people would commit violence if
he were to express his opinion in their hearing need not alter his
honestly held opinion, as violence tends only to prove the lack of
reasoning behind the attitude of the person committing the violence.

Some people don't see any value in Mozart or Beethoven's work. And as
for Strauss, that's just auditory popcorn in some peoples' view.

Is English your first language, by the way? Your lack of comprehension
and quality of arguments in this group suggests that you are either
lacking comprehension and composition skills or are struggling with a
second language.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[[email protected]]

John Williamson:

Yeah yeah blah blah, one cracker
trying to sugar-coat and defend
another's racist comment. Even
if it is "just their personal" opinion.

For every one critique of classical
or country as 'meaningless' there are
at least 100 such comments about rap.

Rap, and country, and jazz, pop, metal,
or whatever genres have value or
meaning to SOMEONE, or else they
wouldn't exist.

[John Williamson]

On 21/01/2015 12:51, wrote:
John Williamson:

Yeah yeah blah blah, one cracker
trying to sugar-coat and defend
another's racist comment. Even
if it is "just their personal" opinion.

So, in your opinion, anyone who doesn't like the music made by a person
of a different race is "racist", even if it's the music they dislike,
not the performer? Okay. In that case, I have met a *lot* of West Indian
racists over the years. You would call them Afro Caribbeans, if you
weren't being too politically correct. They loved all forms of Reggae,
but hated everything else, especially any music performed by white guys.
They weren't all that keen on white guys performing Reggae, either.

For every one critique of classical
or country as 'meaningless' there are
at least 100 such comments about rap.

Which may tell you something about the perceived value of each type of
music by the majority of listeners, and the literacy of the respective
listeners.

Rap, and country, and jazz, pop, metal,
or whatever genres have value or
meaning to SOMEONE, or else they
wouldn't exist.

He didn't and nor do I deny that. I don't like Gangsta Rap, or indeed
any kind of Rap or hip hop. I also don't voluntarily listen to music
where the lyrics are mostly swearing. Some people do. I'd be surprised
if anyone who did likes Rap likes the kind of music I listen to from choice.

That's not racist, that's just the way we grew up and what we were
exposed to in the process. What *is* racist is saying that anyone that
doesn't see the value in your preferred form of music is a racist just
because their name doesn't conform to the sort of name you'd prefer tp
see them use. If Trevor had used the alias Bronxman, you'd have said
nothing, I'll bet.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 1/21/2015 1:56 AM, Trevor wrote:
While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta rap has no value
whatsoever, many of the artists seem to be doing VERY well indeed with
multi-million dollar mansions and garages full of luxury cars. Frankly I
don't see any change at all over the years, with a few artists making a
fortune, and the majority of artists scratching to get by

Right. The availability of music recording and distribution at low cost
isn't making any more artists wealthy. However, the pool is both much
bigger and more crowded because of the lower price of admission. The
likelihood that a modestly talented artist will find a way to great
wealth is much less than it ever was. And if they do have a hit, they
don't usually have many more.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[hank alrich]

John Williamson wrote:

On 21/01/2015 12:20, wrote:
Trevor wrote: "While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta
rap has no value whatsoever"


I TRIPLE-dare you to make that statement on a street corner in Harlem or
Bronx and see what happens. Who the F__ are you to decide what genres
have "no value whatsoever" - Pastey?!

Listen to the lyrics of a few tracks and then try and claim that they
are great or even good music or poetry, or that they would be good
advice for living your life. :-)

Trevor also said he "might personally think that", not that it is
unconditionally true. The fact that some people would commit violence if
he were to express his opinion in their hearing need not alter his
honestly held opinion, as violence tends only to prove the lack of
reasoning behind the attitude of the person committing the violence.

Some people don't see any value in Mozart or Beethoven's work. And as
for Strauss, that's just auditory popcorn in some peoples' view.

Is English your first language, by the way? Your lack of comprehension
and quality of arguments in this group suggests that you are either
lacking comprehension and composition skills or are struggling with a
second language.

Hear, hear!

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

John Williamson wrote:

On 21/01/2015 12:51, wrote:
John Williamson:

Yeah yeah blah blah, one cracker
trying to sugar-coat and defend
another's racist comment. Even
if it is "just their personal" opinion.

So, in your opinion, anyone who doesn't like the music made by a person
of a different race is "racist", even if it's the music they dislike,
not the performer? Okay. In that case, I have met a *lot* of West Indian
racists over the years. You would call them Afro Caribbeans, if you
weren't being too politically correct. They loved all forms of Reggae,
but hated everything else, especially any music performed by white guys.
They weren't all that keen on white guys performing Reggae, either.

For every one critique of classical
or country as 'meaningless' there are
at least 100 such comments about rap.

Which may tell you something about the perceived value of each type of
music by the majority of listeners, and the literacy of the respective
listeners.

Rap, and country, and jazz, pop, metal,
or whatever genres have value or
meaning to SOMEONE, or else they
wouldn't exist.

He didn't and nor do I deny that. I don't like Gangsta Rap, or indeed
any kind of Rap or hip hop. I also don't voluntarily listen to music
where the lyrics are mostly swearing. Some people do. I'd be surprised
if anyone who did likes Rap likes the kind of music I listen to from choice.

That's not racist, that's just the way we grew up and what we were
exposed to in the process. What *is* racist is saying that anyone that
doesn't see the value in your preferred form of music is a racist just
because their name doesn't conform to the sort of name you'd prefer tp
see them use. If Trevor had used the alias Bronxman, you'd have said
nothing, I'll bet.

Strawman mounts a red herring saddle atop a dead horse.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[[email protected]]

hank alrich wrote: "- show quoted text -
Strawman mounts a red herring saddle atop a dead
horse.
- show quoted text -


Another denialist statement. Anyone knows that
processing decisions made in post are far more
audible than the differences between digital formats.

That's where the real loss of fidelity lies.

[Frank Stearns]

(hank alrich) writes:

John Williamson wrote:

snips

Rap, and country, and jazz, pop, metal,
or whatever genres have value or
meaning to SOMEONE, or else they
wouldn't exist.

He didn't and nor do I deny that. I don't like Gangsta Rap, or indeed
any kind of Rap or hip hop. I also don't voluntarily listen to music
where the lyrics are mostly swearing. Some people do. I'd be surprised
if anyone who did likes Rap likes the kind of music I listen to from choice.

That's not racist, that's just the way we grew up and what we were
exposed to in the process. What *is* racist is saying that anyone that
doesn't see the value in your preferred form of music is a racist just
because their name doesn't conform to the sort of name you'd prefer tp
see them use. If Trevor had used the alias Bronxman, you'd have said
nothing, I'll bet.

Strawman mounts a red herring saddle atop a dead horse.

Guffaw. Good one, Hank.

As far as the thread, it indeed should not be racist to call **** "****" -- no
matter who does it or how much money it made, at that moment.

The true test will be one of time. Will anyone remember this stuff 20 years from
now? Will anyone be inspired enough to go out of their way to perform it again?
Most likely not.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[[email protected]]

Frank Stearns:

"****" is all a point of view. And from mine, it's brown,
stinks, and is often found in the bottom of a toilet bowl.

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns wrote:

The true test will be one of time. Will anyone remember this stuff 20 years from
now? Will anyone be inspired enough to go out of their way to perform it again?
Most likely not.

I predict that there _will_ be rap music that will stand the test of time,
but that most of it will disappear and never be heard again. Just like
happened to the pop music of the sixties and to most Baroque music.

I'm not willing to predict what rap songs will last, but I bet a few do.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul[_13_]]

On 1/20/2015 6:30 PM, Les Cargill wrote:


I dunno what kids do. I'm reasonably certain they pirate *movies*, but
I'm less sure about music.


They don't need to pirate or download anything these days.

Anyone with an internet connection can Youtube, Spotify, Bandcamp,
or Reverbnation practically anything.

Astounding, really.....

[Nil[_2_]]

On 21 Jan 2015, Frank Stearns
wrote in rec.audio.pro:

The true test will be one of time. Will anyone remember this stuff
20 years from now?

Well, yes, they will. Rap and Hip Hop has been around since the '70s
and Gangsta Rap since the '80s, and some of that stuff is still
"remembered" today.

Will anyone be inspired enough to go out of
their way to perform it again? Most likely not.

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

Frank Stearns:

"****" is all a point of view. And from mine, it's brown,
stinks, and is often found in the bottom of a toilet bowl.

An apt description of some so-called art, regardless of the medium.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 1/21/2015 2:05 PM, Nil wrote:
Well, yes, they will. Rap and Hip Hop has been around since the '70s
and Gangsta Rap since the '80s, and some of that stuff is still
"remembered" today.

The genre, yes, but are the words remembered? Surely not 100% have been
lost, but so much rap is about current events that don't seem to find a
place in history. And hip hop is just rhythm. You have to really care
about it to know one tune from another.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 1/21/2015 2:05 PM, Nil wrote:
Well, yes, they will. Rap and Hip Hop has been around since the '70s
and Gangsta Rap since the '80s, and some of that stuff is still
"remembered" today.

The genre, yes, but are the words remembered? Surely not 100% have been
lost, but so much rap is about current events that don't seem to find a
place in history. And hip hop is just rhythm. You have to really care
about it to know one tune from another.

That's the case with all popular music, and for the most part it means
that music passes away very quickly.

On the other hand, "Charlie on the MTA" and CSNY's "Ohio" live on, years
after most have forgotten the events they commemorated. Go figure.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Nil[_2_]]

On 21 Jan 2015, Mike Rivers wrote in
rec.audio.pro:

On 1/21/2015 2:05 PM, Nil wrote:
Well, yes, they will. Rap and Hip Hop has been around since the
'70s and Gangsta Rap since the '80s, and some of that stuff is
still "remembered" today.

The genre, yes, but are the words remembered? Surely not 100% have
been lost, but so much rap is about current events that don't seem
to find a place in history. And hip hop is just rhythm. You have
to really care about it to know one tune from another.

I'm not the right one to ask, but even I can recite a few lines from
Sugar Hill Gang's "Rapper's Delight", and that's from more than 35
years ago. I don't doubt at all that words from other rap and hip hop
songs are remembered by those who are into the style.

[Ralph Barone[_2_]]

wrote:
Trevor wrote: "While I might personally think that hip hop and gangsta
rap has no value whatsoever"


I TRIPLE-dare you to make that statement on a street corner in Harlem or
Bronx and see what happens. Who the F__ are you to decide what genres
have "no value whatsoever" - Pastey?!

So are you saying that people aren't allowed to express their personal
opinions in a public space? I take it that you are not Charlie.

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Paul wrote:
On 1/20/2015 6:30 PM, Les Cargill wrote:


I dunno what kids do. I'm reasonably certain they pirate *movies*, but
I'm less sure about music.


They don't need to pirate or download anything these days.

Anyone with an internet connection can Youtube, Spotify, Bandcamp,
or Reverbnation practically anything.

Astounding, really.....


Pretty much.

--
Les Cargill

[None]

krissie dumb****i @ gurglemoron-dot-com wrote in message
...
hank alrich wrote: "- show quoted text -
Strawman mounts a red herring saddle atop a dead
horse.
- show quoted text -


Another denialist statement.

Yet again, you prove that you have no comprehension of the loudness
wars; the technical points, the business implications, the sound, the
history, and the facts that have been spoon-fed to you here, often
with patience and politeness that you don't deserve because of the
contemptuous ignorance of your responses. Calling you a dumb**** is
not "denialist", and the fact that you could make such a moronic claim
further proves that you are a clueless moron.

A dumb****.

[None]

wrote in message
...
Frank Stearns:

"****" is all a point of view. And from mine, it's brown,
stinks, and is often found in the bottom of a toilet bowl.

It's what you find filling your skull. No wonder you recognize it,
it's what you have for brains! If I ever said that you don't know
****, I recant. But you're still a short-bus dumb**** who has no
intention of learning anything. All you want to do is wallow in the
stink of your dead hobbyhorse.

[None]

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
Is English your first language, by the way? Your lack of
comprehension and quality of arguments in this group suggests that
you are either lacking comprehension and composition skills or are
struggling with a second language.

Broken English is Krissie's first language. Yes, he has an utter lack
of reading comprehension and composition skills. He's a dumb ****.

[[email protected]]

Nil wrote: "
I'm not the right one to ask, but even I can recite a few lines from
Sugar Hill Gang's "Rapper's Delight", and that's from more than 35
years ago. I don't doubt at all that words from other rap and hip hop
songs are remembered by those who are into the style. "

'Friends, how many of us have them?
Friends, ones we can depend on.
Friends, how many of us have them? Friends,
Before we go any further, let's be

Friends - A word we use every day,
But some of us use it in the wrong way,
Now you could look the word up, again and again
But the dictionary doesn't know the meaning of friends!

And if you ask me you know I couldn't be much help
Because a friend is someone you judge for yourself....'

"Friends" - Whodini 1984


For all the negating mouth-breathers looking for
womanizing gang-banging gold chains and pants
around your ankles lyrics - SORRY -

Not in this song!

[Scott Dorsey]

Les Cargill wrote:
But there's nothing new there. Funny how the suits* end up controlling
the budget. And that budget doesn't go to those smelly people
who make the stuff; it goes to other suits because that fits
the norms better.

*not picking teh suits; it's just a nice punchy word.

This is literally true everywhere. It's not limited to music. There
were cases at a former employer where just contract process navigation
cost more than the contract.

This is not new and it's not a bad thing either. The problem is when the
suits who are making those decisions have no vision beyond the next week,
and I think that is comparatively new.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul[_13_]]

On 1/21/2015 9:47 PM, Les Cargill wrote:


They don't need to pirate or download anything these days.

Anyone with an internet connection can Youtube, Spotify, Bandcamp,
or Reverbnation practically anything.

Astounding, really.....


Pretty much.


And now that most people have internet on their phones, you can
access even the most obscure bootleg music from practically anywhere.
No need to save it on the phone, it's all in the "cloud"!

The only place I still play CDs on occasion, is in my car, but
since CD players are being replaced with USB connections, this will soon
be an ancient practice.

Another nail on the coffin, will be when Bluetooth connectivity
is standard on all car stereos and smart phones, as some people already
have:


http://www.quora.com/How-can-I-play-...-an-audio-cord

Technology moves so quick, our heads are spinnin'!

:O

[[email protected]]

Paul: play CDs in the car and at home.
No substitute for good sound!

[John Williamson]

On 22/01/2015 16:00, wrote:
Paul: play CDs in the car and at home.
No substitute for good sound!

In the car is about the only place it's not worth playing CDs for better
sound quality due to the background noise and poor acoustics. What's
wanted in a car is lots of compression and bass. ;-)

Even back in the days of cassette players in cars, I used to EQ the
tracks to try and beat the LF noise.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Les Cargill wrote:
But there's nothing new there. Funny how the suits* end up controlling
the budget. And that budget doesn't go to those smelly people
who make the stuff; it goes to other suits because that fits
the norms better.

*not picking teh suits; it's just a nice punchy word.

This is literally true everywhere. It's not limited to music. There
were cases at a former employer where just contract process navigation
cost more than the contract.

This is not new and it's not a bad thing either. The problem is when the
suits who are making those decisions have no vision beyond the next week,
and I think that is comparatively new.
--scott

The suits entered when the founders retired and the labels were taken
over by Wall Street. I'm thinking that began in earnest in the 1980's.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[[email protected]]

John Williamson wrote: "wanted in a car
is lots of compression and bass. ;-)"

Good, there's a bass control in the
car stereo, and we can add a comp to
that too. Just keep that sh- out of the
recording!

[[email protected]]

But there's nothing new there. Funny how the suits* end up controlling
the budget. And that budget doesn't go to those smelly people
who make the stuff; it goes to other suits because that fits
the norms better.

*not picking teh suits; it's just a nice punchy word.

This is literally true everywhere. It's not limited to music. There
were cases at a former employer where just contract process navigation
cost more than the contract.

This is not new and it's not a bad thing either. The problem is when the
suits who are making those decisions have no vision beyond the next week,
and I think that is comparatively new.
--scott



no it is not limitd to any one industry
no it is not new.

but I think it IS a bad thing when the "smelly people" have most of the knowledge and do most of the work while the "suits" enjoy most of the rewards.

Mark

[david gourley[_2_]]

Jeff Henig said...news:124747281443591551.986948yomama-
:

wrote:
John Williamson:

Yeah yeah blah blah, one cracker
trying to sugar-coat and defend
another's racist comment. Even
if it is "just their personal" opinion.

For every one critique of classical
or country as 'meaningless' there are
at least 100 such comments about rap.

Rap, and country, and jazz, pop, metal,
or whatever genres have value or
meaning to SOMEONE, or else they
wouldn't exist.

"Cracker"?

Who is the racist, here?

Lemme ask you this: if I dislike Native American tribal music, does that
make me a racist? What if I dislike musicals by Rogers and Hammerstein?
What if I dislike elevator music?

You keep using that word, and I'm pretty sure you've no freaking clue
what
it means.


It sure wouldn't be the first time !
david