It’s not enough to merely like something. You must prove it is objectively the best and stifle all other opinions. Only then can you listen to meh music with impunity.

Yoko Kanno!

Also, I always loved Shirley Walker on Batman The Animated Series.

Punchy, appropriate, custom composed to the beats of each scene, surprisingly varied. Very talented.

Is it a fault if they are actively seeking your help to correct it?

>You couldn't go jogging with them

Loolllll man, takes me back. They were really fine in cars though in the 80s (unless you hit a bumpy patch, it would for sure skip lol). Honestly and truly, the few people who I knew back then who were obsessed with audio were still clutching vinyls and eyeing CDs with suspicion. I honestly do remember there being multiple camps on this topic back then though, so the discrepancy in our recollection is frankly unsurprising.

This is the best response I could imagine. Fuckin' slicing through it like a knife.

I mean the late 80s I guess is what I'm talking about. *Shrug*

Let's be reasonable though--CD players were always small (compact disk) and portability was very much the point as much as anything. They really were alternatives to tapes more in my mind I think in that regard. There were also those weird tapes with aux cables.

>Analog media does have it's own "data points" as well. The size of the magnetic particles on tape or the size of vinyl that is required to still be strong enough to not break when in contact with the stylus. It's harder to measure but it's there.

Do you know if it tends to be more or less information than a digital transfer of the same material on CD?

Half-baked thought: I wonder if there is any audible characteristic to regularity/irregularity of information density on a media. Like I assume CDs would be very regular, where as tape may actually be inconsistent in this respect.

I... am... someone who remembers. And CDs in cars were rad.

lol Fine. Everyone but me. Happy? Honestly, I don't care how good you think I am, or if I'm better than someone else. The only reason I posted anything is to show that I know how to write music.

All you guys do is appeal to popularity, demand support, demand proof of competency, demand agreement, and you provide nothing in return. You aren't even capable of having a technical discussion about Dylan's music seemingly.

Honestly, I'd rather you tell me one specific thing you love about a piece of music Dylan has written, in musical terms. I will go and listen to that thing and try my very hardest to hear it as you do.

Sorry, intended to agree with you about CDs/DVDs using compression/not using compression. Edited my previous post to fix the typo.

In terms of capture, missing a frequency range sounds like it compromises 'fidelity' in some audible sense if those ranges are indeed audible--all of this as compared with analog media.

Simply asked: Is it possible that someone could hear and prefer/dislike the sound of audio recorded at above the threshold described by the nyquist theorem?

Literally never claimed that, only that Dylan is trash and most people are better than Dylan in my opinion.

>It’s besides the point, though.

Lol convenient. Every track you've ever recorded is so tightly correlated to your identity. I'm sure you are Quincy Fuckin' Jones.

It's offensive to him that you like what you like, and not the very specific list of rock greats that have been signed off on by magazines and critics and halls of fame.

It's all an appeal to popularity and authority, but can they admit that "Hit me baby one more time" by Britany Spears a banger? Certainly not! Pop trash! Never mind that it has more interesting elements than the average Dylan song :P.

You are an elitist for disliking Dylan! Also, what you like is actually bad, so you are also dumb. A dumb elitist!

That's really interesting, but is that the same as saying audio "quality" won't benefit from a higher sample rate? I actually can't tell from reading it. It seems like it establishes a minimum sample rate sufficient for reproduction of the wave form, but there is still interpolation occurring in the process, which seems to imply higher rates may impact the result to me.

My point was that analog media are not constructed of data points at all, which remains true, but I'm interested to understand more, as you are correct that CDs are *not* directly comparable to DVDs in terms of using lossy compression.

Post your own music :P

Something tells me I could never post anything that you would equate with the absolute gorgeousness that is Dylan.

And yeah, my track is a cheesy wank fest. I learned from the best (Hendrix).

Lol they are not boilerplate chord progressions. The first one is like, one chord, but it's all improvisational. The second one is like... I don't know... modulating constantly? Also like... I'm not sure if you noticed... there's an orchestra there...

Bob Dylan is not known for his chord progressions... They are like 4 chord songs largely, and they are not deep.

Besides, I never compared myself to Bob Dylan. I'm just a hobbyist musician. The previous poster asked for examples of what I've written, those are some examples. I'm clearly literate and competent, am I not? What are you churning out?

To be honest, your characterization of my music shows me you can't hear the depth that is there. It's not like the music is written arbitrarily, it's written mechanically using all sorts of specific techniques, and literally each section of the orchestral piece is modulating to a different key. It's very easy to say a melody is "meh", but saying chord progressions are boilerplate is absurd. If anything, they are much too scattered.

Also like, I showed you some metal shredding and some orchestral+piano music. It's kind of varied, isn't it? I honestly think I could replicate an approximation to Dylan's music than the other way around. I'm a craftsman like that, where as he is not. Granted, there's nothing innovative in it, but there's not much innovative in Dylan either IMO.

Lol I mean the world does not begin and end with pop music so yeah, I think there are many many numerous musicians throughout the world that are more talented than any of the people you cited as authorities. How is that egotistical?

Here’s me playing guitar at age 16, 100,000 years ago:

https://on.soundcloud.com/SRwTL

Here’s something I’ve been working on lately:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j3782DhstGGR2rMPmrHQYU2afw4F0C1B/view?usp=drivesdk

You have better? Is it not diverse enough?

Maybe you hate my music, maybe you like it, but I know what I’m talking about. My tastes are varied as hell. If you ask me who’s a better song writer, Bob Dylan or Willie Nelson, or even Dolly Parton, or even Taylor Swift—yes. I think Dylan is at the bottom of the list in terms of craftsmanship and artistry. Deal with it.

Also, like, I’m a programmer. I stake zero ego on music. I just like it. So what’s my agenda anyway?

I’ve listened to it. I’ve thought about it. It doesn’t hold up to scrutiny for me.

Look, musicologists are weird. I knew a guy who got a degree in musicology in part by discussing the history of air guitar (seriously). People who are basically non-doing critics have opinions that are different than the people who do the thing. As for Beatles and Hendrix—mediocrity likes mediocrity, no surprise there, but I do like both Beatles and Hendrix. Also, Hendrix died by puking and the Beatles have done everything from stealing songs to weird culty eastern religious shit. My opinion doesn’t have to be their opinion. They aren’t infallible, just humans.

The world is bigger and more full of talent than you think.

What are you going on about? CDs were an order of magnitude more convenient, and using them in your car is a prime reason to make the switch.

lol you are so impassioned about this, but tell me, what is the bitrate of tape or vinyl?

Analog media is not directly comparable to digital formats, and in a sense all digital formats are lossy by comparison. Just as film (read: tape; analog) can be used to produce 4k versions of film (state of the art digital format) where as DVD (old digital; highly compressed; lossy) cannot, tape can be used to produce the highest possible quality transfer to CDs (old digital; lossy but usually acceptable/inaudible) and even higher bitrate formats; or vinyl. Vinyl does have distortion, and particularly it can degrade over time, but any digital transfer was lossy (in a different way; it is subtractive) to begin with.

And yes, any additive modification of the source audio by the media itself is basically a form of distortion, but people have long preferred tube amps due to their distortion properties, which are frequently very pleasing even on settings that sound very "clean". It simply adds character--but if you want to be more of an engineer about it, it adds characteristics to the wave forms it produces or records.

So anyway, I'm not really persuaded by your "audio quality is objective" argument. Resolution is objective, but not always comparable between media... so not a very good way of comparing things, obviously.

In conclusion, there were some very good machines which we now consider old. They are still very good, especially in certain aesthetic ways.

Do I own a record player? No. It's expensive and wasteful and silly in my opinion. But there are differences and I wouldn't begrudge anyone that hobby if they have the time and money for it.

Well, cool, but I have a music degree and at one point I had a music history professor who took us from medieval music to relatively modern pop music over four semesters. During the course of this, the professor went on an absolute Bob Dylan tirade. Like a whole day spent glowing about Dylan, dissecting his lyrics, straight up telling us “this is good. This is deep.”

I think it’s a farce. Literally every person in that room was a better musician than Dylan. It made more sense when I saw the music history professor’s pathetic faculty recital consisting of “folk music”.

Some people like to write music. Some people like to perform music. Some people like to study music. And lastly, some people just like to talk about music. I’m weary of their strongly held opinions.

People can enjoy what music they choose, and it’s not that I “hate” Bob Dylan. But his fans are the people who WOULD WANT to be in charge of handing out accolades and awards (for an art firm they barely understand). Just stop it already.

Also, there isn’t strong enough weed in the world to fix the bag-of-cats that is a Bob Dylan song.