Sounds Good!

[Davey]

Davey pointed that out to me on something that I thought was well recorded and it turned out not to be so great. Been a bit gun shy about making pronouncements since then.

Don't you hate self-important bores like that? Geez, next time just tell him to go dance about architecture somewhere else!



Hehehe, wonder what record it was? The National? Hopefully not that awful sounding Interpol CD!

[Jim Clark]

Don't you hate self-important bores like that? Geez, next time just tell him to go dance about architecture somewhere else!



Hehehe, wonder what record it was? The National? Hopefully not that awful sounding Interpol CD!

Not really sure it which one it was, but it was something that I thought sounded pretty dang good and then you posted a screen shot of the wav form. Far from being bored, it was a real eye opener. First of all it made me realize that I am way more interested in the music then the production values. I am reminded of J saying something like he'd rather listen to the Ramones on a boombox then most of the other crap on a high dollar system. I got more than a touch of that in me since I've not heard any CD I can't listen to based only on the recording quality.

More than that though, it made me realize perhaps my head isn't entirely on straight and my "golden ears" are perhaps more lead then gold.

Think we've made enough posts on his thread to calm Slosh down?

jc

still waiting on the international consortium to come through...

[Troy]

I'd puke a couple of lumps of coal/diamonds for you guys, but they are 192k mp3s. Are you golden-eared snobs ok with that?

[Troy]

So, why won't this .flac file play in iTunes? I double click it from the desktop and nothing happens.

[Slosh]

So, why won't this .flac file play in iTunes? I double click it from the desktop and nothing happens.

Because iTunes sucks! Okay, it's actually pretty good software but the only lossless format it supports is (surprise!) Apple Lossless. I don't speak Mac but I believe there is free conversion software that will turn FLAC into Apple Lossless called Max and/or MacFLAC.

Jeez, the tactics I have to use to get people to respond

[Slosh]

You people aren't seriously gonna let me pick out which tracks to use, are ya?

Pick a preference or two and I'll work with it.

My plan is to only offer a downloadable version but if anyone wants to do the ol' CDR-in-the-mail routine have at it. I'll make a separate post when it's done (assuming we get enough participation).

NP:

[Davey]

You people aren't seriously gonna let me pick out which tracks to use, are ya?

Pick a preference or two and I'll work with it.

Back already? I thought you packed up your Barbie dolls and left for good a couple days ago? Heehee, I was just listening to that Morphine song in the car on the way home from work late last night, really really loud, twice in a row, man they make a lot of good sounding racket on that one! So that's my pick. Although they were pretty popular back in the day so most people might've already heard it a bunch.

If so, maybe the Electrelane song. That is from one of the best recorded and best sounding CDs of the last few years imo, Axes. Not my favorite from Electrelane cause they seem to lose focus a few times throughout the record, meandering down some paths that don't do much for me, but they still often bring it all together in metronomic bliss. And it is live in the studio, with Steve Albini in charge. Sounds very natural, as in "a rock band in the studio" kind of way.

But yea, I know, not that many people actually like Electrelane, no matter how well it's recorded, so maybe the best bet is the Magnolia Electric Co song which opens the "Sun Sessions" EP which was recorded down in Memphis at the legendary Sun Studios one day in 2006. Really nice and warm sound on that one.

[3-LockBox]

I believe there is free conversion software that will turn FLAC into Apple Lossless called Max and/or MacFLAC.

The latest version of Goldwave converts in all kinds of formats; some of which I've never heard of before. It'll play them back as well. I can even do wave file manipulation and save in any format.

[3-LockBox]

This a song from 2006's All The Road Running album by Mark Knopfler and Emmylou Harris. It has decent sonics, and may be more in line with some of you guys' tastes, considering what's been posted thus far. http://www.mediafire.com/?z03qqjzhn55

[Swish]

Because iTunes sucks! Okay, it's actually pretty good software but the only lossless format it supports is (surprise!) Apple Lossless. I don't speak Mac but I believe there is free conversion software that will turn FLAC into Apple Lossless called Max and/or MacFLAC.

Jeez, the tactics I have to use to get people to respond

Swish

[Slosh]

Swish

You spelled your own moniker wrong?

NP:

[Slosh]

Swish

Last edited by Swish : Today at 5:59PM. Reason: Typo

NP:

[Slosh]

I'd puke a couple of lumps of coal/diamonds for you guys, but they are 192k mp3s. Are you golden-eared snobs ok with that?

No. Kinda defeats the point, don't 'cha think?

[Jim Clark]

No. Kinda defeats the point, don't 'cha think?

Troy's just being his usual antidisestablishmentarian self.

jc

[Troy]

No. Kinda defeats the point, don't 'cha think?

Not really. I bet if we did a blind A/B test with the original CD and a 192k mp3 of 10 random songs from your collection you wouldn't be able to tell the difference on most of them.

"Sounds Good" is more about production values than actual sound. At least it is for me.

[3-LockBox]

Not really. I bet if we did a blind A/B test with the original CD and a 192k mp3 of 10 random songs from your collection you wouldn't be able to tell the difference on most of them.

Depends where you listen. On most ear buds or some computer speakers and car speakers, prolly not. But I've ripped songs to MP3 for playback on my main rig w/ DVD player and wound up not doing that twice cuz where bass was plentiful on the CD, the MP3 disc sounded anemic.

I went to some people's house and recognized a song and how differently 'not good' it sounded from memory and when I checked, it was an 128kbps track. My strep-son played some rap stuff on my basement setup and it was so obvious that it was bass shy; one of his buddies had the actual CD and the difference was glaring.

I will say for a lot of pop/rock music, you'll have to go as low as 128kbps or lower to hear a difference, because I believe as you do, its about production value. An overly compressed wave file isn't going to sound any better than a 128kbps file. Some of the music that I was able to download at 320kbps sounds close enough to its CD counterpart as to cause difficulty telling them apart.

[Troy]

Depends where you listen. On most ear buds or some computer speakers and car speakers, prolly not. But I've ripped songs to MP3 for playback on my main rig w/ DVD player and wound up not doing that twice cuz where bass was plentiful on the CD, the MP3 disc sounded anemic.

I went to some people's house and recognized a song and how differently 'not good' it sounded from memory and when I checked, it was an 128kbps track. My strep-son played some rap stuff on my basement setup and it was so obvious that it was bass shy; one of his buddies had the actual CD and the difference was glaring.

I will say for a lot of pop/rock music, you'll have to go as low as 128kbps or lower to hear a difference, because I believe as you do, its about production value. An overly compressed wave file isn't going to sound any better than a 128kbps file. Some of the music that I was able to download at 320kbps sounds close enough to its CD counterpart as to cause difficulty telling them apart.

Yes, you absolutely would NOT be able to tell the difference with earbud, computer or 99% or car systems. I think in most situations, on most people's main systems with a 192k mp3 (NOT 128, which do sound tinny and usually experience sibilant clipping) you wouldn't notice a difference. I really do.

Does your strep-son have a sore throat?

[Slosh]

Not really. I bet if we did a blind A/B test with the original CD and a 192k mp3 of 10 random songs from your collection you wouldn't be able to tell the difference on most of them.

I have 1,180GB of hard drive space so I don't bother with mp3 other than for my mp3 player which is only 30GB. You're right that on my portable I can't often enough tell the difference (but I use Lame V0, not 192CBR) to justify using lossless, especially when I can fit 5,000 V0 mp3s vs. 1,200 lossless songs. On my home stereo systems I absolutely can, however. Yeah, maybe not always and maybe even only rarely, but these days with 500GB HDDs going for less than $100 and 160GB iPods why fuck with mp3 at all?

[Slosh]

Okay, so we know have over 95 minutes worth of stuff, and that's not even including that long ass Mingus Big Band track. I'll wait about another week for others to contribute. We have good variety already but only five contributers. Maybe that's about as good as I can expect from this board nowadays but it seems to me that a group comp should be pooled from a larger group. This isn't basketball