-
This 'reproduction of a live event' criteria kinda bugs me. So much of recorded music is not live and a fair amount could never be performed live. It'd probably be cool to see Beck live, e.g., but for listening at home I'd rather have a studio CD that in no way pretends to be a live performance.
On good recordings, I often find myself distracted by the crowd noise. Sure, if you listen to symphonies, there's a sense of grandeur you just can't reproduce. Maybe it's just because my classical tastes tend toward smaller groups that I want a reproduction of intimacy more than a reproduction of space? I'm not sure what my point is. I think I'm being Melvinized.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
This 'reproduction of a live event' criteria kinda bugs me. So much of recorded music is not live and a fair amount could never be performed live. It'd probably be cool to see Beck, e.g. live, but for listening at home I'd rather have a studio CD that in no way pretends to be a live performance.
On good recordings, I often find myself distracted by the crowd noise. Sure, if you listen to symphonies, there's a sense of grandeur you just can't reproduce. Maybe it's just because my classical tastes tend toward smaller groups that I want a reproduction of intimacy more than a reproduction of space? I'm not sure what my point is. I think I'm being Melvinized.
The live event citeria bugs me as well, since I'm not a huge fan of live music.... simply because a lot of the music I buy sounds better out of the studio, than with screaming fans in the background....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlsstl
Perhaps you are unaware that such comparisons (live vs recorded) date back to Thomas Edison's time.
From the Wikipedia entry on Edison: "Prior to the war Edison Records started a marketing campaign, hiring prominent singers and Vaudeville performers to perform along side and alternating with Edison records of their performances played on top-of-the-line "Laboratory Model" Edison Diamond Disc Phonographs. At various stages during the performances, all lights in the theater would be darkened and the audience challenged to guess if what they were hearing was live or recorded; accounts often said that much of the audience was astonished when the lights went back up to reveal only the Edison Phonograph on stage. According to a book published by the Edison company titled Composers and Artists whose Art is Re-Created by Edison's New Art, ca. 1920, the first such "comparison test" took place at Carnegie Hall on April 28, 1916 with Marie Rappold, of the Metropolitan opera providing the live vocal performance."
That is a fairly typical audience response for such comparisons, whether 92 years ago, or in 1962, 1970 or today. I hope you would not argue that meant Edison's un-amplified acoustic record represented the ultimate in playback quality just because the audience was thoroughly fooled.
With your logic, there would have been no need for any further advancement in audio engineering after 1920 or so.
For someone who spends as much time as you lecturing the young about their ignorance of audio history, you seem to be a bit shy on the subject yourself.
I have accomplished one purpose if you have began reading audio history.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
The real story is that $18k in 1968 dollars would be about $105k today. The Corvette ZR-1 will considerably outperform the old Ferrari in every way and will be available for around $100k. No difference with inflation adjusted dollars.
I hope you update your point.
rw
You are correct , the difference is that the Ferrari will run at over 150 miles per hour all day , the Corvette will not. The AR-I like most American iron is designed to sprint.
How many Corvettes has won a World Manufactures Championship ? How many Corvettes has finished first at Le Mans ?
The are no 12 cylinder Ferrari that can be bought new for $105,000 !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
Yeah,
There's this thing called inflation.
Agreed. That is why we compromise. A Rolex Datejust cost $390.00 in 1970 today around
$6500 , a Porsche 911 S cost $7000 in 1970 today's equivalent $70,000.
A Hickey Freeman men's suit in 1970 cost $200.00 today $1500 +.
There have been many improvements in most items sold today. The difference is most people can't afford those improvements. A hotel room in Paris on the right bank was $50.00 a day in 1970, , today that same hotel room is more like $200.00 per day.
So what does the average American do , except less. Most young people today will not wear Rolex watches , drive Porsche cars , wear Hickey Freeman suits.
Most did not in the 1970's but al least the average working man could buy an excellent suit Hickey Freeman are afford a hotel room in New York at one of the 4 are 5 star hotels such as the Park Lane. The Park Lane was affordable.
Again so we compromise. Clothing . cars , watches , travel , wines , and audio !
We tell ourselves that because it is new it must be better. The 1970 Ferrari is no match for a 2008 Ferrari , but the difference in price is ten times greater.
There is no difference in a high end speakers made in 1970 , the price of today's
equivalent is ten times greater , don't fool yourselves.
-
You're saying the same thing only from a different angle. Unless we have tens of thousands of dollars to spend on audio gear, we're not going to get the quality that was had in the 50's and 60's right old man?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mel
So what does the average American do , except less. Most young people today will not wear Rolex watches , drive Porsche cars , wear Hickey Freeman suits
You make so many rediculous assumptions about the youger generation it is laughable. You're a pompous...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Agreed. That is why we compromise. A Rolex Datejust cost $390.00 in 1970 today around
$6500 , a Porsche 911 S cost $7000 in 1970 today's equivalent $70,000.
A Hickey Freeman men's suit in 1970 cost $200.00 today $1500 +.
There have been many improvements in most items sold today. The difference is most people can't afford those improvements. A hotel room in Paris on the right bank was $50.00 a day in 1970, , today that same hotel room is more like $200.00 per day.
So what does the average American do , except less. Most young people today will not wear Rolex watches , drive Porsche cars , wear Hickey Freeman suits.
Most did not in the 1970's but al least the average working man could buy an excellent suit Hickey Freeman are afford a hotel room in New York at one of the 4 are 5 star hotels such as the Park Lane. The Park Lane was affordable.
Again so we compromise. Clothing . cars , watches , travel , wines , and audio !
We tell ourselves that because it is new it must be better. The 1970 Ferrari is no match for a 2008 Ferrari , but the difference in price is ten times greater.
There is no difference in a high end speakers made in 1970 , the price of today's
equivalent is ten times greater , don't fool yourselves.
Did the 'Average American' wear Rolex watches & drive Porsche cars back in your day?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Agreed. That is why we compromise. A Rolex Datejust cost $390.00 in 1970 today around
$6500 , a Porsche 911 S cost $7000 in 1970 today's equivalent $70,000.
A Hickey Freeman men's suit in 1970 cost $200.00 today $1500 +.
There have been many improvements in most items sold today. The difference is most people can't afford those improvements. A hotel room in Paris on the right bank was $50.00 a day in 1970, , today that same hotel room is more like $200.00 per day.
So what does the average American do , except less. Most young people today will not wear Rolex watches , drive Porsche cars , wear Hickey Freeman suits.
Most did not in the 1970's but al least the average working man could buy an excellent suit Hickey Freeman are afford a hotel room in New York at one of the 4 are 5 star hotels such as the Park Lane. The Park Lane was affordable.
Again so we compromise. Clothing . cars , watches , travel , wines , and audio !
We tell ourselves that because it is new it must be better. The 1970 Ferrari is no match for a 2008 Ferrari , but the difference in price is ten times greater.
There is no difference in a high end speakers made in 1970 , the price of today's
equivalent is ten times greater , don't fool yourselves.
The receiver I bought in 1978 cost me 3 week's salary. That money could have bought me a 6 month supply of gas.
The receiver I bought in 2005 cost me less than 2 week's salary. That money would only buy me about 3 months worth of gas.
The new one sounds 10 times better.
Don't fool yourself. You can't match dollars. You have to match what those dollars were worth and how much they cost you from that time till now. You seem to be great with the details, but you keep missing the bigger pictures. (not seeing the forest through the trees and all)
-
Quote:
I have accomplished one purpose if you have began reading audio history.
You're taking credit for that? The fellow who seems to have no knowledge of anything outside of a 20 or 30 year period?
Now that is rich!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Did the 'Average American' wear Rolex watches & drive Porsche cars back in your day?
I was a member of the Porsche Club of North America starting in 1972. There were several Porsche members that had average jobs. Several worked at McDonnell Douglas on the assembly line , there were a few that worked at The General Motors Plant in St.Louis .
There were a few Drug salesmen. After all the Porsche 911S in 1972 only cost $10,000 !
When I dropped out of the club in 1990 , the car was no longer affordable for those types of workers. Today I have several friends that are members of the Porsche Club.
Their incomes are in the triple numbers. Starting at about $70,000 the people who buy Porsche's today are very different in education and income from those who bought Porsches in the 70"s.
As for as Rolex's the same rules apply, one could buy a new Rolex in 1970 for less than
$400,00 , not a stretch for those who wanted one. Today it's more than a stretch.
I bought a Rolex DateJust for $384,00 in 1969. My son -in-law paid $6000.00 for the same watch. I bought a Cartier Tank for my wife in 1972 out of a catalog for $250,00 !
Saks was selling that watch for $500.00. Today that same watch list for over $4,000.
Audio is no different , A company called Classic Audio Reproductions in Michigan was
selling Hartsfield speaker systems for $17,000 each. The speaker system sold did not employ the driver that made the Hartsfield , instead the crossover point was 800
hertz rather than 500 hertz. the results would be a less defined bass.
The last year of the Hartsfield production when it added the 075 and an additional crossover was $1245 each.
$34,000 is out of the reach of most audiophiles, $1445 was not in the 1960's.
-
I dunno but ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
...
There is no difference in a high end speakers made in 1970 , the price of today's
equivalent is ten times greater , don't fool yourselves.
What do you consider a "high-end" speaker? An AR3a? A KLH 9?
The AR3a in 1970 was (?) $500/pr.. There are plenty of better speakers today for $5000/pr., e.g, to name just a few better known ones:
- Paradigm Studio 100
- PSB Synchrony 1
- Monitor Audio GS60
- Dynaudio Audience 82
- B&W 703
What did the KLH 9's run? $1500? Various much better planars are available today for less than $15,000:
- Magneplanar 20.1
- Sound Lab Millennium-3 PX
- Quad ESL-2905
- Martin Logan Summit (hybrid)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlumpBuster
Ever hear the phrase "enough rope to hang himself?" Well, brother, you're running a frickin' rope factory. Here is everything you ever wanted to know about Carnegie Hall's amplified sound system. The most interesting part is why it was installed: to correct acoustical problems. It may be a great hall, but far from a perfect hall.
http://www.meyersound.com/applicatio...type=25&id=985
Oh, and a quick google search reveals that Fisher Hall and Powell Hall have amplified sound systems. Of course they do, ya knownothing.
The only time these great halls would use amplified sound is if there was a rock concert.
Young people want it "LOUD " These halls were designed for classical , Opera , jazz and spop singers such as Como and Sinatra.
Powell Hall in St. Louis does not book Rock concerts . " THANK GOD"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlsstl
Perhaps you are unaware that such comparisons (live vs recorded) date back to Thomas Edison's time.
From the Wikipedia entry on Edison: "Prior to the war Edison Records started a marketing campaign, hiring prominent singers and Vaudeville performers to perform along side and alternating with Edison records of their performances played on top-of-the-line "Laboratory Model" Edison Diamond Disc Phonographs. At various stages during the performances, all lights in the theater would be darkened and the audience challenged to guess if what they were hearing was live or recorded; accounts often said that much of the audience was astonished when the lights went back up to reveal only the Edison Phonograph on stage. According to a book published by the Edison company titled Composers and Artists whose Art is Re-Created by Edison's New Art, ca. 1920, the first such "comparison test" took place at Carnegie Hall on April 28, 1916 with Marie Rappold, of the Metropolitan opera providing the live vocal performance."
That is a fairly typical audience response for such comparisons, whether 92 years ago, or in 1962, 1970 or today. I hope you would not argue that meant Edison's un-amplified acoustic record represented the ultimate in playback quality just because the audience was thoroughly fooled.
With your logic, there would have been no need for any further advancement in audio engineering after 1920 or so.
For someone who spends as much time as you lecturing the young about their ignorance of audio history, you seem to be a bit shy on the subject yourself.
The facts are that live vs recorded sound exhibits were held in the 1960's and 70's.
They were financed by several of the audio equipment companies of that era.
Why is it always personal ? can't you discuss audio without a personal comment ?
-
Melvin maybe it is because you bring out the best in us.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
After all the Porsche 911S in 1972 only cost $10,000 !
When I dropped out of the club in 1990 , the car was no longer affordable for those types of workers. Today I have several friends that are members of the Porsche Club.
Their incomes are in the triple numbers. Starting at about $70,000 the people who buy Porsche's today are very different in education and income from those who bought Porsches in the 70"s.
In inflation adjusted dollars, $10,000 in 1972 is equal in buying power to approximately $50,000 today. Which is sufficient to buy many of Porche's current offerings.
Ergo, the same people can afford them now and then.
-
Melvin, if your elders told you that everything created prior to your birth in 1947 was better than everything created afterwards, would you not question it?
There are also worlds available outside of Branson, MO
The Grass is greener on the other side of Business HWY 65 brother.....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
What do you consider a "high-end" speaker? An AR3a? A KLH 9?
The AR3a in 1970 was (?) $500/pr.. There are plenty of better speakers today for $5000/pr., e.g, to name just a few better known ones:
- Paradigm Studio 100
- PSB Synchrony 1
- Monitor Audio GS60
- Dynaudio Audience 82
- B&W 703
What did the KLH 9's run? $1500? Various much better planars are available today for less than $15,000:
- Magneplanar 20.1
- Sound Lab Millennium-3 PX
- Quad ESL-2905
- Martin Logan Summit (hybrid)
The AR3a speaker in 1970 sold for $250.00 in oiled walnut. AR's were not considered high end speakers in 1970. A Paragon was and so was a KLH model 9 Electronic speaker costing $1140.00 in 1963.
AR;s was later reproduced and sold for around $1100 each. High end speakers pre 1970's were speakers selling for $900.00 are above for each. Concert Grands , Patricians , Churchills , Imperials , Hartsfields , etc were generally considered the finest speakers built at the time. If You wish to research high end speakers pre-1970's. Stereo Review Directory is a good place to look.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny p
Melvin, if your elders told you that everything created prior to your birth in 1947 was better than everything created afterwards, would you not question it?
There are also worlds available outside of Branson, MO
The Grass is greener on the other side of Business HWY 65 brother.....
My elders would never make such a statement. I never made such a statement. If I did
find the quote.
Never been to Branson, Mo. I have vacation on several continents and as a national sales manager for a fortune 100 company traveled through out America.
I am not your brother !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Why is it always personal ? can't you discuss audio without a personal comment ?
You talk down to people and still need to ask this?
It's like that guy who likes to push people's buttons to see them get upset. Then he questions why they are mad at him.
duh..
-
If You wish to research high end speakers pre-1970's. Stereo Review Directory is a good place to look.
Many of us do not and I think that is the point several are trying to make. We are interested in what is current and available to us.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny p
Melvin, if your elders told you that everything created prior to your birth in 1947 was better than everything created afterwards, would you not question it?
There are also worlds available outside of Branson, MO
The Grass is greener on the other side of Business HWY 65 brother.....
Brings up an interesting question: What came first? Melvin are the dinosaurs?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlsstl
You're taking credit for that? The fellow who seems to have no knowledge of anything outside of a 20 or 30 year period?
Now that is rich!
I enjoy history. Taught history for a few years. I would say that today , most young people show little interest in history. As a matter of fact the New York times in a survey found that most young Americans could not find Iraq on a map !
In another survey again done by the New York Times , many young people thought that Japan was an ally of America in World War Two " wow"
There have been great improvements in audio over the past years. We all agree to that.
Let's just not forget where it all began. The men and women who devoted their lives so that we Americans and other peoples to can enjoy what we now have.
Basketball didn't began with Michael Jordan and Audio didn't began with transistors.
-
Man, I need to send some young people over to kick your old a$$
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
You talk down to people and still need to ask this?
It's like that guy who likes to push people's buttons to see them get upset. Then he questions why they are mad at him.
duh..
I don't know who you are nor do I care. My only interest is a discussion on audio. If you feel someone is talking down to you that is your problem. I don't think this forum is about you are me.
If you disagree with my points than offer a counterpoint. To personalize this forum is to waste valuable Internet time.
We can agree to disagree , I have said that many times. Keep it at that. I will respond to your post when I feel it is in good taste and only if it concerns audio.
Again the issues here is not you and I but audio. if you can , let's keep it that way.
Now back to audio.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
I enjoy history. Taught history for a few years. I would say that today , most young people show little interest in history. As a matter of fact the New York times in a survey found that most young Americans could not find Iraq on a map !
In another survey again done by the New York Times , many young people thought that Japan was an ally of America in World War Two " wow"
There have been great improvements in audio over the past years. We all agree to that.
Let's just not forget where it all began. The men and women who devoted their lives so that we Americans and other peoples to can enjoy what we now have.
Basketball didn't began with Michael Jordan and Audio didn't began with transistors.
Locating Iraq on a map would be an exercise in Geography, not History. Basketball didn't began... that would be a problem in grammar.
|