Looking for an argument

madtheory

Hello all, I'm looking for a good argument. I have narrowed it down to the following:

1. Digital is better than analogue.
2. Mac is better than PC.
3. Cheap mic pre amps are the same as expensive ones.
4. Your mother was a hamster.

Any more suggestions welcome. My budget is €2.

Dravokivich

Opposite day?

- Drav!

PaulBrewer

Plugins are better than hardware .

ZV Yoda

madtheory wrote: »

Hello all, I'm looking for a good argument. I have narrowed it down to the following:

1. Digital is better than analogue.
2. Mac is better than PC.
3. Cheap mic pre amps are the same as expensive ones.
4. Your mother was a hamster.

Any more suggestions welcome. My budget is €2.

I don't rate Hamsters at all. They're just glorified mice really. Granted, you might pick one up 2nd hand for €2, but why bother? I'd save for the next 10 years, then you'd have enough money to get something really worthwhile... maybe a 25ft Nile Crocodile... ya know, something to give your mixes that extra bite.

pistonsvox

behringer mixers are better made than midas's

kfoltman

madtheory wrote: »

Hello all, I'm looking for a good argument. I have narrowed it down to the following:

1. Digital is better than analogue.
2. Mac is better than PC.
3. Cheap mic pre amps are the same as expensive ones.
4. Your mother was a hamster.

5. Transistors are better than tubes
6. All Shure (or Neumann, Sennheiser, pick one) mikes are cheap sh*te
7. Fixed point sounds much better than single precision floating point because it uses more bits per sample.
8. 192kHz is a scam
9. 24-bit is a scam
10. Never ever {record anything DI | use EQ before compression | ...} because that's not pro
11. Vinyl has better fidelity than CD, you just need a really good gear
12. Analogue 4-track recorders give fatter sound when compared to DAWs
13. Old music vs new music
14. ITB vs OTB
15. All cables are the same vs all cables are very different
16. It's €0.02 not €2

PaulBrewer

kfoltman wrote: »

5. Transistors are better than tubes
6. All Shure (or Neumann, Sennheiser, pick one) mikes are cheap sh*te
7. Fixed point sounds much better than single precision floating point because it uses more bits per sample.
8. 192kHz is a scam
9. 24-bit is a scam
10. Never ever {record anything DI | use EQ before compression | ...} because that's not pro
11. Vinyl has better fidelity than CD, you just need a really good gear
12. Analogue 4-track recorders give fatter sound when compared to DAWs
13. Old music vs new music
14. ITB vs OTB
15. All cables are the same vs all cables are very different
16. It's €0.02 not €2

Jaysus - I'd hate to be a young lad getting into this business nowadays.
You'd have no idea of which way to go.

madtheory

ZV Yoda wrote: »

I don't rate Hamsters at all. They're just glorified mice really. Granted, you might pick one up 2nd hand for €2, but why bother? I'd save for the next 10 years, then you'd have enough money to get something really worthwhile... maybe a 25ft Nile Crocodile... ya know, something to give your mixes that extra bite.

That's not an argument.

kfoltman

madtheory wrote: »

That's not an argument.

Yes it is.

fitz

You're an argument.

tweeky

1. Analog and Digital are both good when you know what you are doing.
2. Expensive mic amps are generally better than cheap ones, the one exception is when a cheap one records a great song... then it just doesn't matter!
3. DI or mic, whatever works.
4. They don't sell guitar tuners west of the pale and if they do they don't sell the right batteries.
5. Bulmers tastes better from the bottle.
6. Guinness tastes better in front of an analogue fire.

PaulBrewer

tweeky wrote: »

2. Expensive mic amps are generally better than cheap ones,

If I might add a caveat - only if you're in a position to hear a difference.

dav nagle

PC's are better and more stable than mac

old gregg

The Stones were better than The Beatles

PaulBrewer

old gregg wrote: »

The Stones were better than The Beatles

We that's daft .... a copy cat bad blues band with a non-rhythymic drummer better than the inventors of Pop ? I think not ...

iamhunted

analogue computers are way better than digital ones

old gregg

PaulBrewer wrote: »

We that's daft .... a copy cat bad blues band with a non-rhythymic drummer better than the inventors of Pop ? I think not ...

now back the truck up there ... inventors of Pop? more like an Oasis cover band

tbh, it took me many years as an avid Stones fan to finally concede that I could dislike the Beatles and agree that as songwriters, they were the better of the two. These days I'd not cross the road to see the Stones and stopped buying their output many years ago.

PaulBrewer

old gregg wrote: »

now back the truck up there ... inventors of Pop? more like an Oasis cover band

tbh, it took me many years as an avid Stones fan to finally concede that I could dislike the Beatles and agree that as songwriters, they were the better of the two. These days I'd not cross the road to see the Stones and stopped buying their output many years ago.

Are the Stones playing across the road from you? - Cool ... Tell Mick I said 'Hi' .

old gregg

Then again Paul, today is Keith's birthday so I'll probably take out the old signed Exile vinyl and bang on Happy just for old times sake. As for Jagger, bah.

PaulBrewer

Keef is still alive ? Are you sure .....?

studiorat

thank you argument over. bye bye...

Bluebirdstudios

Nobody uses beat detective in PT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

judas101

madtheory wrote: »

Hello all, I'm looking for a good argument. I have narrowed it down to the following:

1. Digital is better than analogue.
2. Mac is better than PC.
3. Cheap mic pre amps are the same as expensive ones.
4. Your mother was a hamster.

yes
yes
no
no

jtsuited

feckin 23 posts and NOBODY mentions clocking???????

For Shame!

tweeky

Bluebirdstudios wrote: »

Nobody uses beat detective in PT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh yes they do,
Oh no they don't!

dav nagle

Everybody who posts on boards are legitmate owners of all their software.

Rockshamrover

Westlife are better than Take That.

PaulBrewer

Rockshamrover wrote: »

Westlife are better than Take That.

Da 'Zone are better than both ...

woodsdenis

Joe for no 1

PaulBrewer

woodsdenis wrote: »

Joe for no 1

I think the lil tyke might have just made it !

madtheory

Jeez, I was only joking...

Rockshamrover

madtheory wrote: »

Jeez, I was only joking...

That's what Adolph Hitler said.

kfoltman

Rockshamrover wrote: »

That's what Adolph Hitler said.

Godwined in 31th?

Anima

Looks like!

madtheory

Rockshamrover wrote: »

That's what Adolph Hitler said.

That's the end of the thread so. Strange.

BumbleB

Yngwie Malmsteen is better guitar player than Jimi hendrix,jimmy page and jeff beck were all sloppy players and didn't have a clue what they were at.

Polish girls are much fitter and sounder than Irish girls.


Mr Tayto is far nicer than walkers .

Nobody drinks guiness here.

madtheory

Right! Stop that! It's silly...

krd

Point of order and historical facts

BumbleB wrote: »

Yngwie Malmsteen is better guitar player than Jimi hendrix,jimmy page and jeff beck were all sloppy players and didn't have a clue what they were at.

Yngwie is the dictionary definition of Muso (Dictionary def of Muso- see dick)

BumbleB wrote: »

Polish girls are much fitter and sounder than Irish girls.

I wouldn't disagree with you. But it's a bit like saying Welsh birds are more attractive than Belgian girls - you're starting off on a low base - We're not even talking carling cup here.

BumbleB wrote: »

Mr Tayto is far nicer than walkers .

Mr. Tayto invented the flavoured crisp - historical fact - Without the Irish contribution there would be no cheese and onion - buffalo flavoured or salt and vingear crisps - There was a time when the only technology the Irish had was the potato, and we were the masters of that the tuber - it was all we had - The Brits only contribution was the prawn cocktail flavoured crisp - Because, let's face it - they're fags.

seanybiker

old gregg wrote: »

The Stones were better than The Beatles

to bloody right they where. Good man

congo_90

Pepsi v's coke

brown bread or white

ipod v's walkman

big speakers v's little speakers

mac sucks my b*lls
no my mother is not a hamster.

krd

As for the argument which is better: Analog or digital

I think the best sounding album of the decade was The White Stripes's Elephant - recorded at toe rag


All though my interest in music and music production is purely as a hobbyist (and not a very good one) - I have a theory - that the visual distract of computer production takes away from the production process - Analog recording being a pure Shaolin monk art - which must be learned by a grasshopper at the foot of a blind master (a blind master being the ultimate sound engineer, as they have virtually no visual distractions). The analog art had many, many, magical tricks.

I think digital makes it too easy - so cookie cutter jobs keep being repeated, instead of great recordings

kfoltman

krd wrote: »

that the visual distract of computer production takes away from the production process

It is a factor, but probably not THE factor.

Analog recording being a pure Shaolin monk art

Yes. Or maybe being good enough musician (and/or producer) to be fit for analog recording is a pure Shaolin monk art.

If the engineer can't proceed with turd as an input, there's less risk of ending up with polished turd. You can splice an analog tape in a few places to repair an "almost-there" kind of take, but you won't do it when practically every note needs to be spliced.

I mean - years of learning required to be good enough to play songs so that they're "fit for analog studio" have various byproducts that also improve the end result - flexibility with rhythm (vs quantization), good grasp of harmony (vs a song based on 3 chords with identical voicings), intuition about response of future audience, things like that. You can't get the same with freshman (or talentless) musician and engineering tricks. Or, you can, but then it's practically about making the engineer do the musicians' job.

madtheory

This thread was meant to be a pisstake, now it's being taken seriously...

krd

kfoltman wrote: »

It is a factor, but probably not THE factor.

Yes. Or maybe being good enough musician (and/or producer) to be fit for analog recording is a pure Shaolin monk art.

If the engineer can't proceed with turd as an input, there's less risk of ending up with polished turd. You can splice an analog tape in a few places to repair an "almost-there" kind of take, but you won't do it when practically every note needs to be spliced.

I mean - years of learning required to be good enough to play songs so that they're "fit for analog studio" have various byproducts that also improve the end result - flexibility with rhythm (vs quantization), good grasp of harmony (vs a song based on 3 chords with identical voicings), intuition about response of future audience, things like that. You can't get the same with freshman (or talentless) musician and engineering tricks. Or, you can, but then it's practically about making the engineer do the musicians' job.

No...

I disagree with you. And though this is very worthy of a much longer debate - I've been imibiding some magical fluids and am in no fit state to debate in a meaningful fashion.

Suffice

I will say - The studio engineer is an artisan... like a potter... a craftsman... an artist in their own right.

A potter has his wheel and his raw materials. And from that, with his craft, he shapes desirable objects.

So,

I will say - there isn't a meaningful and substantial difference between a lump of clay and a turd, apart from the smell. And I would expect any competent potter to spin a desirable bowl from either - 'sorry, man, this clay just doesn't cut it' just should not fly.

studiorat

I am obvioulsy the only one here with any talent or integrity, the rest of yiz are bozos

so now...

kfoltman

krd wrote: »

I will say - there isn't a meaningful and substantial difference between a lump of clay and a turd, apart from the smell. And I would expect any competent potter to spin a desirable bowl from either - 'sorry, man, this clay just doesn't cut it' just should not fly.

/me makes a mental note to double-check any food offered by krd!

PaulBrewer

studiorat wrote: »

I am obvioulsy the only one here with any talent or integrity, the rest of yiz are bozos

so now...

Feckin' Students ...

krd

studiorat wrote: »

I am obvioulsy the only one here with any talent or integrity, the rest of yiz are bozos

so now...

I'm not that sure there ever really was or is that much integrity to music.

What passes for integrity?

No overdubs?, No effects?, No session musos?, No click tracks?, No sequencer?

There was rumour years back - that Rod Stewart was having trouble with his vocal chords while he was recording another one of his lack lustre records - so much of the Rod Stewart your hearing on the record is not actually Rod Stewart, it's a sound a like. (I wouldn't say it was the first or last time something like that was done)

I have a recurrent moving image in my head for the last few days. It's really depressing me and zapping my will to live. It's of a guitarist who was in a friends band. One of these guitarist who could play absolutely everything note perfect every time. But absolutely everything he played, he played with an identical level of physical passion - The same kind of passion, a barrista in an O'Brien's sandwich bar gives their delivery - of your chicken and coleslaw roll. They're horrible to watch - and there's a crucial missing dynamic to their playing. Yeah, I'd say you could get the guy in studio and he'd deliver his guitar piece note perfect each time - but it would have the emotional content of a bap.

PaulBrewer

I know of one multi million selling Irish artist who had a backing vocalist who could imitate him well.

On one particular tune the 'star' just could not get the tune right, singing one note a semitone out all the time.

As this pre-daw they got the doppelganger to drop in all the wrong notes ..... and no-one ever knew ...... including the 'star' !

kfoltman

krd wrote: »

What passes for integrity?

Stereo pair through budget preamp and ADC straight to CD. Anything else is cheating and should be outlawed!

See also: real programmers only use "cat >prog.tar.gz".

studiorat

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Feckin' Students ...

I prefer the term Academic.
Feckin' Academics would be more appropriate!

Integrity means no ****e musics.