m_james

Members
  • Content count

    296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About m_james

  • Rank
    250+ Post Club

Uncategorized

  • Location
    Melbourne
  • Country
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,173 profile views

Display Name History

  1. Post 70s TD doesn't sit very well with me but this is one of their better ones.
  2. How do you distinguish between actual attempted hacks and false positives like ~Spyne~?
  3. Found these in the supermarket the other day, quite tasty.
  4. The issue is not adding more musicality in playback, but rather adding non-musical elements like exaggerated soundstage and detail. Removing these elements would therefore result in a more musical sound.
  5. Think rugby or AFL are tough? Not compared with Pok-ta-pok. Played in ancient mexico by the mayans, the losers often got their heads chopped off as a sacrifice. http://www.ancient.eu/article/604/
  6. Because if "faithfulness to the original performance, warts and all" is the benchmark of musicality, then even the worst sounding live performance IS by definition automatically musical.
  7. I thought that's what we've been arguing about, this definition:
  8. I don't know about that, but according to your definition only recordings can be musical. So saying "that was a very musical performance" after attending a symphony orchestra is meaningless, while saying it after listening to a CD of a band which you have never heard the band perform live in the studio somehow makes sense. Bizarre.
  9. You really think they got it right on In Through The Out Door? He sounds like he's singing in a pub toilet in that one.
  10. I can get behind most of this. I still think musicality is the wrong word, though. Audiophiles want accurate sound, which is what you're describing. I think musicality is something else, at least when reviewers use the word. For example, you wouldn't use 'musical' to describe the sound of an audio book.
  11. "The magazine for sound engineers and recording musicians" says it all really. The whole article boils down to "it sounds better MY way!" Even if the audience wants more bass at the expense of precision.
  12. Fair enough. But let's again take it further - a sixteen year old who loves the sound of bass chooses the system with louder bass over the neutral and faithful sounding system, no matter the recording. Are we prepared to argue with what he considers more musical?
  13. I still don't get the obsession with accuracy or faithfulness. Take this situation: A performer plays Greensleeves on a keyboard in front of a room of 100 people. The keyboard's equalizer is set to lower treble dB so it is barely audible. Now assume that the performance was recorded, and played back on two systems: the first does not change the EQ settings and is faithful to the performance. The second boosts the treble. Which system would most people (including the composer himself) say is more "musical" here? Surely it is the one that is most inaccurate, or unfaithful.
  14. Uh! Pen-pineapple-apple-pen Pen-pineapple-apple-pen Dance time!