I read a breif blurb yesterday, that 60 years ago, 1948. Columbia Records introduced the 33 1/3 RPM LP. This started the end of 78's. Even when I was a child, I was still listening to vinyl.

Bought some vinyl 33's yesterday from the place I talked to you about. POP's in Lexington...one of the largest stocks of old vinyl in the South...more than 60,000 titles. Love my old vinyl.


Be well,

Russ

That's cool Russ. Although, the records I have predate vinyl. I do have a few LP's, but not too many.

Paul

I think the best sounding music I've ever heard is 33 1/3 LPs played on a high quality hifi system with studio monitors. I think they out perform CDs in terms of sound quality and dynamics. They are just more fragile and inclined to wear over time. CDs really aren't better, just more convenient that's all.

Timing...just cleared out some of my friends equipment today (George-died last September) and found what looks like a prestine set of Charlie Parker original disks...78's. Set is called Charlie Parker with strings. Sideman include Ray Brown and Buddy Ritch.

Nigel is right...nothing like old vinyl!

R.

Well, I can't favor either one over the other, becuse I was born, when LP's were still the norm, but at the same time I remeber, when CD's were introduced. I wound up buying a lot of music on CD's, then I did on LP. Only becuse by the time I could buy music. CD's had dominated the market. I do remeber, as a child, spending a lot of time listening to my parents LP's, as well as my own.

I absolutely agree with this.
In fact I bought a lot of remastered vinyl for cd's which I also have on vinyl just out of convenience, but I recently did a side by side comparison with the same old analoge recordings and remastered recordings, and in fact there is no comparison. the vinyl sounds a lot better, if you think away the noise/rumble and crackling though

The question is of course, is this caused by technical reasons or is it caused by the remastering process or a different musical view by the person re-mastering!

Personally I think it is caused by the person doing the re-mastering, since there are cd's sounding terrific.

A good example is f.i. 'The Soul Cages" of Sting, which is a good example of a superb cd recording with analogue dynamics.
So it can be done, but you need a good master engineer not infected by compressors and limiters...

What is everyones feelings on other formats? Such as Magnetic Tape ie. (Reel to Reel, Casstte 8 Track and, ADAT/DAT) and MP3's?

[This message has been edited by analogcontrolfreak (edited 05-24-2008).]

During the transition to DAT, we used to record project on DAT and conventional analog. In many cases, the client preferred the warmer sound of the conventional process. Some still do, believe it or not. Occasionally, we'll be on the look-out for 2" tape.

Russ

You don't still use reel to reel do you?

Not as a rule, but occasionally, someone really demands it. A few national recording acts are still using reel to reel for major projects. Of course, you now have to have major bucks to do it. Last year, Esquire magazine (I think) carried a story about the national acts who still use reeel to reel and the nationwide search for 2 inch tape.


Russ

I remeber, reading somewhere, where KORG had introduced a new portable recording studio, that was useing cassette tape. Which, I thought was interesting. Considering cassette tapes, have pretty much disapered.

[This message has been edited by analogcontrolfreak (edited 05-27-2008).]

Some recording engineers still prefer to record drum takes on reel-to-reel for that tape saturation that provides analog warmth and punch. Reel-to-reel can sound awesome though the cost and availability of tapes is problem the biggest problem.

Cassette tapes don't sound anywhere near as good as reel-to-reel because the tape being recorded on is so narrow. Russ was talking 2 inch reel-to-reel tape that provides plenty of tape real estate. Though even 4 track on 1/4 inch tape could sound pretty good too. I remember getting some impressive results on Teac 4 tracks.


[This message has been edited by Nigel (edited 05-28-2008).]

I remember a modest hit from England called "Sgt Pepper" something or other ....

4 track 1/4 inch tape!

"It was twenty year's ago today, Sgt. Peppert taught the band to play...."

When I had visited the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and Museum, two years ago. In the gift shop, they were selling Early Rock albums that had been re-released onto Vyinl. There's a company, I think in England that is doing this. I also read of a band a few years back. Releaseing an album of their's onto vyinl, as well.

Yes I think you are right Freddy some CDs do sound awesome but others sound tinny and lack substance. I do think mastering is critical to getting good sounding music in a 44 Khz 16 bit format. But mastering was always a very important stage for vinyl records as well. I guess it's more critical for digital formats because of the limited range of high frequencies in the digital world.


[This message has been edited by Nigel (edited 05-29-2008).]

I think you made a clerical error
Sgt Pepper was released june 1967, which is now 41 years ago...

Oh ha ha, that's funny

I still have a tascam 234 tape machine in one of the racks. It uses 1/4' tape and you could bounce a lot of tracks with it.
I grew up with the 1/2" thick 78 rpm and a windup victorla that my grandma had. she had all those old country records from the 1920 and 30/s. I currently have many of those on MP3 and I am sending them out to one of my email lists at the rate of 3 a day.
I have about 270 I am sending out.
Good old time Country Music,
Bebop

That's cool Beebop. I have a small wind Victrola myslef. I even have a nice collection of eraly 78's from the teens through the early 20's.