Re: Anyone notice Vinyl making a comeback?

[THERMIONIC]

Apologies for starting new thread, board wouldn't let me post onto the original thread.

I've trotted this story out to a few folk recently:

Recently I had a meeting with the UK's "vinyl baron", who now owns 80%+ of the UK's pressing plants. He started out buying the EMI plant at Hayes Middx, with a view to converting it into exclusive apartments (it was in a really cool '20s art-deco building). So EMI sold it to him as a going concern, with a written agreement that he'd lay-off the staff (some of them had worked there 40yrs...) therefore obviating them any bad PR. So, he sent in his auditor to check the accounts before the dirty deed was performed...The auditor came back and stated that there was a 3-month waiting list for pressing, and he was ****ed if he could figure out why EMI would want to sell the facility in the first place...Eventually the plant was moved (inc original staff) to an industrial unit and the property developer has added the Orlake and Damont plants (no doubt he's bought others since) to his empire.

The strange thing is he had no plans to become the Uk's "vinyl baron", he develops properties for a living...The truth is stranger than fiction, got any sympathies for the majors when they declare they're losing cash??? Short-sighted business policies...The majors deserve to rot in hell.

Long live vinyl!!




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.net/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[dt king]

"THERMIONIC" > wrote in message
...

> The strange thing is he had no plans to become the Uk's "vinyl baron", he
develops properties for a living...The truth is stranger than fiction, got
any sympathies for the majors when they declare they're losing cash???
Short-sighted business policies...The majors deserve to rot in hell.
>
> Long live vinyl!!

You'd think the big labels would be embracing vinyl, now. It can't be
digitally copied and it's far less durable than CDs. Finally, copy
protection we can all live with.

dtk

[EggHd]

<< You'd think the big labels would be embracing vinyl, now. It can't be
digitally copied and it's far less durable than CDs. Finally, copy
protection we can all live with. >>

But all it would take is one person to make a digital file from an LP and it's
back on P2P. You can't take away the MP3 no mater what the "master"




---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

[Allen RENY]

"dt king" > wrote in message
hlink.net...


>
> Long live vinyl!!
>
> It can't be digitally copied and it's far less durable than CDs. Finally, copy
> protection we can all live with.
>
> dtk
=============================================
Off course it can be digitally copied and put onto a CD
and made into an MP3 or whatever else !

See how, here : http://www.a-reny.com/iexplorer/restauration.html
--
Allen Reny.
http://www.a-reny.com

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> But all it would take is one person to make a digital file from an LP and it's
> back on P2P. You can't take away the MP3 no mater what the "master"

They'd never do that because it's a real time process. Nobody has real
time any more.

There was a funny piece on NPR for April Fool this year about a new
archival process that, after the shaggy dog story, was about cutting
'78's.




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
news:znr1068673567k@trad
> In article >
> writes:
>
>> But all it would take is one person to make a digital file from an
>> LP and it's back on P2P. You can't take away the MP3 no mater what
>> the "master"
>
> They'd never do that because it's a real time process. Nobody has real
> time any more.

Don't bet on it. When faced with real time processes people multitask.

> There was a funny piece on NPR for April Fool this year about a new
> archival process that, after the shaggy dog story, was about cutting
> '78's.

I seem to recall playing 78's when I was a kid, using a pencil as a spindle
and my fingernail as stylus and diaphragm.

[Edi Zubovic]

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:25:20 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
>news:znr1068673567k@trad
>> In article >
>> writes:
--------



>> There was a funny piece on NPR for April Fool this year about a new
>> archival process that, after the shaggy dog story, was about cutting
>> '78's.

Cutting '78 anew? --Why not, perhaps it would work say if there's a
valuable recording and one scans the record at quite a high
resolution, does photorepairs and makes a new etching (now I'm just
theorizing :)

>I seem to recall playing 78's when I was a kid, using a pencil as a spindle
>and my fingernail as stylus and diaphragm.
>

I did it with a piece of wire because they wouldn't let me scream with
a Victrola at the second floor. I was some 5 years, guess I've got
that 78 rpm lifelong infection then.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> > They'd never do that because it's a real time process. Nobody has real
> > time any more.
>
> Don't bet on it. When faced with real time processes people multitask.

That's what I do - when dubbing a record to CD, I read rec.audio.pro,
read the newspaper, cook dinner. But most music pirates can't be
bothered, plus they have a very strong belief that a pass through a
D/A and A/D converter is the kiss of death and their digital copy will
have too much noise or distortion or it's not "hot enough." In
reality, I think it's because they don't know where the record level
control on their audio program is, or never learned how to properly
set the level.

It's amazing what most people won't do because it requires a little
work, a couple of cables, or some understanding of how a process
that's new to them (recording audio) works. Sure, some will do it, but
not many.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
news:znr1068731780k@trad

> In article >
> writes:

>>> They'd never do that because it's a real time process. Nobody has
>>> real time any more.

>> Don't bet on it. When faced with real time processes people
>> multitask.

> That's what I do - when dubbing a record to CD, I read rec.audio.pro,
> read the newspaper, cook dinner.

> But most music pirates can't be bothered,

Given the quick wide distribution of pirated music, it only takes one
exceptional pirate and the rest is as they say, history. Plus, if a popular
recording is copy-protected there are people who feel that it is their moral
imperative to crib and distribute it as quickly and widely as possible.
It's an old attention-getting ploy: Hey look at me, I broke the lock on the
candy box, here gobble it up!

> plus they have a very strong belief that a pass through a
> D/A and A/D converter is the kiss of death and their digital copy will
> have too much noise or distortion or it's not "hot enough."

I think this is true of a lot of audiophiles.

It's also an opinion that recording producers would like to encourage. But,
look how much mainstream interest there is in SACD an DVD-A. Could it be
weaker?

Despite SACD & DVD-A players and recordings with mainstream prices and
mainstream availability, the excitement with music players is some place
else. I strongly suspect there are a lot more people lusting after Apple's
and iRiver's latest high-end hard drive based personal music players than
DACD & DVD-A players. And that's despite the fact that they cost twice about
as much!

Found sitting next to a customer's new Dell computer that was sitting in a
third-floor playroom: A portable mini-video disc player. Sitting in the same
customer's driveway - 3 kids that were being driven home after school,
thoroughly entranced by something playing on a DVD player that came as
standard equipment on the minivan.

My casual non-scientific, opportunistic surveys of actual music being shared
by pirates (i.e., my customers who need new hard drives) says that a lot of
it has a less-than-sterling bit-perfect pedigree. I think I hear
on-motherboard audio recording interfaces, taps off the headphone jacks of
boom boxes, vinyl, FM, cassette tape, and some really well-made stuff, the
whole gamut.

> In reality, I think it's because they don't know where the record level
> control on their audio program is, or never learned how to properly
> set the level.

Agreed, but you didn't mention editing the starts and finishes of songs.
However, tools like MP3trim are readily-available and widely-used.

> It's amazing what most people won't do because it requires a little
> work, a couple of cables, or some understanding of how a process
> that's new to them (recording audio) works. Sure, some will do it, but
> not many.

The thing is, it only takes one smart pirate who does his *homework* and
then logs into Kazaa or its many equivalents, and his *work* is quickly
spread all over the world. Not literally the world, but actually the world.

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> Given the quick wide distribution of pirated music, it only takes one
> exceptional pirate and the rest is as they say, history. Plus, if a popular
> recording is copy-protected there are people who feel that it is their moral
> imperative to crib and distribute it as quickly and widely as possible.
> It's an old attention-getting ploy: Hey look at me, I broke the lock on the
> candy box, here gobble it up!

Maybe some day there will be the Bluebeardies - an award for the best
distributed pirated music.

> > they have a very strong belief that a pass through a
> > D/A and A/D converter is the kiss of death and their digital copy will
> > have too much noise or distortion or it's not "hot enough."
>
> I think this is true of a lot of audiophiles.

Audiophiles and music priates don't usually get together, or if
audiophiles use pirated music, they make allowances for what it is.
Considering that most pirated music that's distributed over the
Internet is still using lossy compression, that kind of destroys the
audiophile concept. I'd think that a good A/D and D/A converter (and
no data reduction) would be more "audiophile" than an MP3 file.

> I strongly suspect there are a lot more people lusting after Apple's
> and iRiver's latest high-end hard drive based personal music players than
> DACD & DVD-A players. And that's despite the fact that they cost twice about
> as much!

I suspect that it's because of the portability and the potential for
getting free or inexpensive music. SACD and DVD isn't yet "personal,"
something that portable players can offer. Everyone in the office can
listen to their own music. Everyone on the subway can listen to their
own music. And once you put in the time (What? And give up watching
television??!!) to make up an edited collection, it's truly personal.

> My casual non-scientific, opportunistic surveys of actual music being shared
> by pirates (i.e., my customers who need new hard drives) says that a lot of
> it has a less-than-sterling bit-perfect pedigree. I think I hear
> on-motherboard audio recording interfaces, taps off the headphone jacks of
> boom boxes, vinyl, FM, cassette tape, and some really well-made stuff, the
> whole gamut.

So obviously this isn't an audiophile phenomenon. Add to that the fact
that most of it is heard through cheap earphones and you have easily
ignored musical entertainment, not a listening experience.

> you didn't mention editing the starts and finishes of songs.
> However, tools like MP3trim are readily-available and widely-used.

Gee, that's a real devoted pirate.

> The thing is, it only takes one smart pirate who does his *homework* and
> then logs into Kazaa or its many equivalents, and his *work* is quickly
> spread all over the world. Not literally the world, but actually the world.

But for every one song that such a pirate puts up, others probably
put up hundreds. Then you have to sort through that pile of horse ****
in order to find the pony. But I guess that's part of the
entertainment too.




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
news:znr1068814710k@trad

> In article >
> writes:

>> Given the quick wide distribution of pirated music, it only takes one
>> exceptional pirate and the rest is as they say, history. Plus, if a
>> popular recording is copy-protected there are people who feel that
>> it is their moral imperative to crib and distribute it as quickly
>> and widely as possible. It's an old attention-getting ploy: Hey look
>> at me, I broke the lock on the candy box, here gobble it up!

> Maybe some day there will be the Bluebeardies - an award for the best
> distributed pirated music.

A little black humor, eh?

;-)

There is clearly interest in getting good quality MP3s among people who make
their own.

>>> they have a very strong belief that a pass through a
>>> D/A and A/D converter is the kiss of death and their digital copy
>>> will have too much noise or distortion or it's not "hot enough."

>> I think this is true of a lot of audiophiles.

> Audiophiles and music pirates don't usually get together, or if
> audiophiles use pirated music, they make allowances for what it is.
> Considering that most pirated music that's distributed over the
> Internet is still using lossy compression, that kind of destroys the
> audiophile concept. I'd think that a good A/D and D/A converter (and
> no data reduction) would be more "audiophile" than an MP3 file.

Measurements and listening tests provide a lot of support for the idea that
even modest modern converters are more sonically and technically accurate
than the best lossy compression. People frequently and reliably hear
differences due to lossy coding schemes, through the converters in the
better modern mass-market sub-$100 and even some sub-$50 sound cards.

This extends itself in a number of interesting ways. For example, a sound
card in the LynxTWO class (including your L22) is technically more accurate
than the converters in a lot of sub-$500 SACD and DVD-A players.

>> I strongly suspect there are a lot more people lusting after Apple's
>> and iRiver's latest high-end hard drive based personal music players
>> than DACD & DVD-A players. And that's despite the fact that they
>> cost twice about as much!

> I suspect that it's because of the portability and the potential for
> getting free or inexpensive music. SACD and DVD isn't yet "personal,"
> something that portable players can offer. Everyone in the office can
> listen to their own music. Everyone on the subway can listen to their
> own music. And once you put in the time (What? And give up watching
> television??!!) to make up an edited collection, it's truly personal.

Agreed. Loading a personal player is work, but once you get a few dozen
hours of your favorites loaded, a lot of music plays between repeats.
Portable listening and high-capacity players also facilitate marathon
listening sessions, such as the entire sequence of Beethoven symphonies, The
Ring, the entire discographies of a number of popular performers, etc a
large number of personal greatest hits, etc..

>> My casual non-scientific, opportunistic surveys of actual music
>> being shared by pirates (i.e., my customers who need new hard
>> drives) says that a lot of it has a less-than-sterling bit-perfect
>> pedigree. I think I hear on-motherboard audio recording interfaces,
>> taps off the headphone jacks of boom boxes, vinyl, FM, cassette
>> tape, and some really well-made stuff, the whole gamut.

> So obviously this isn't an audiophile phenomenon.

Agreed. These are middle class and UMC general listeners. I suspect that
audiophiles may do more of this sort of thing than they admit in public. It
might be one of those dirty little secret things that lotsa people do but
don't brag about online, like downloading porn.

>Add to that the fact
> that most of it is heard through cheap earphones and you have easily
> ignored musical entertainment, not a listening experience.

In the end, I think most people are most interested in listening music,
given that the sound quality meets minimal standards. Quality beyond a
certain point is negotiable. Despite its questionable uncontrolled genesis,
most pirated music sounds much better than hypercompressed FM even though a
little bit of it is in fact off-the-air.

>> you didn't mention editing the starts and finishes of songs.
>> However, tools like MP3trim are readily-available and widely-used.

> Gee, that's a real devoted pirate.

I forgot to add that iTunes allows you to establish your own edit points and
equalization for every song it indexes and plays. My daughter has ripped a
big chunk of her 100's of CDs into iTunes. She mentioned to me that she (no
audiophile!) has carefully edited the tags and cue points for each song in
her collection. She then burns CDs for use in her Liberty, which I might add
has a really pretty good stock sound system that was designed by a close
friend. She also uses them in her portable CD player which is an RCA
(mediocre). She listens to the portable CD via Sony MDR-EX70 ear buds that
cost more than the player...

Casual lurking in iPod forums has made me aware of considerable interest in
higher quality listening devices like the Shure E-series ear buds, the Sonys
I mentioned, the Etymotics, Sennheiser HD-580, 590 and 600 headphones, etc.
None of this stuff is exactly cheap. The highest-priced Shures cost more
than an iPod!

Like many young people her age and social position (post graduate student),
my daughter lusts after an iPod. I find that many non-audiophiles through at
least their early 40's have a good idea what an iPod is and either want one
or have one. Apple did a nice job on promoting it. In contrast, the
competitive offerings are relatively unknown among the general public. I
think they find out about the alternatives the first time when they go to
the store and are recovering from sticker shock.

>> The thing is, it only takes one smart pirate who does his *homework*
>> and then logs into Kazaa or its many equivalents, and his *work* is
>> quickly spread all over the world. Not literally the world, but
>> actually the world.

> But for every one song that such a pirate puts up, others probably
> put up hundreds. Then you have to sort through that pile of horse ****
> in order to find the pony. But I guess that's part of the
> entertainment too.

Again, based on my non-scientific reviews, I'd put the crap-to-good rips
ratio for music that is actually downloaded at well over 75%. The most
common sound quality hit is very-low-bitrate encoding. I don't know how
much pre-selection it takes to achieve what I see, but this is what I see on
actual consumer hard drives.