|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.227.248.174
In Reply to: Arcade Fire on vinyl posted by JustinPoss on March 2, 2005 at 11:03:21:
The vinyl is pretty heavy to begin with, which is nice. As far as sound goes, I am having a hard time distinguishing between what is a difference between formats and what is a difference between the equipment playing them. The vinyl has a fabulous midrange with very present vocals and very nice low level detail. But the CD has better low end presence and seems a little less sloppy in the presentation. I would dare to say my CD setup is superior to my TT though, so it could be a flaw of the TT. But I do know the entire album was done in analog, so if you happen to have a better TT, I say go for it.
Follow Ups:
I posted a querry about this on the Vinyl board, not knowing that this discussion was going on over here. I guess I should check it out here more often.First, I am very pleasantly surprised by the high quality of the pressing, this is as quiet a record as I've bought in a long long time. Not a pop or tick to be found, and as flat as the Canadian prairie. The sound is better than the CD, at least on my equipment, I don't hear the same bass issues as have been metioned in this thread, but I do hear a BIG improvement in the mids and highs, especially cymbals, much more natural sounding overall. I'm really glad that I bought the vinyl and I'd recommend it to any vinyl types who are on the fence.
P.S. I also discovered recently that "Rebellion (Lies)", has just had its video release...here's a link:
On second (or is it third) spin, my impressions are similar. I don't have the cd to compare, but the low end is kinda buried -- when you listen it's there and, like you said, it is detailed, but it's not nearly as prominent as the vocals and/or mids.
Usually, the vinyl will blow your socks off it was truely analog, most likely it was digital. Most indepedant bands these days shove off vinyl, no matter how crappy the recording just to be "retro". The new Interpol was torrid on plastic.
Actually, I wasn't guessing. It was done in analogue.From pitchforkmedia.com
Pitchfork: The actual production of the record is astounding. There's so much depth to it, but also an incredible amount of space considering all the instrumentation you've packed into it. It's balanced so nicely. But I guess as a proudly analog studio, are they sort of suffering now that Quantegy [the last remaining manufacturer of reel-to-reel analog audio tape] has shut down?
Win: Yeah, for sure. I think that everyone's hoping that there's going to be some alternative. They're just trying to buy up as much used tape as possible, but it's hard. It's a really scary time for analog.
Pitchfork: Yeah, I've heard that John Vanderslice's Tiny Telephone Studios just totally stocked up as much as they could when they heard the news, but that there were limited quantities, and obviously they don't have like a billion dollars to blow all at once on that kind of stuff.
Win: I'm sure someone will manufacture it, but it just might get really expensive. It already is really expensive. I'm sure the big record companies are stockpiling a ton [of it]. If you have the cash, you can do it. You'll be set for a couple years if you have the money up front. We recorded at least some of the record on used tape, which is at least an option, but you can't go on forever.
I just got this record and found the music to be great. However, the recording is not a steller analog recording. It either suffers from too many recorded tracks or someone put some compression on the mix. It is not that open and may in fact be a digital pressing.After putting on my $1.00 thrift store copy of Deja Vu from CSN, I always wonder why I spend more and get less. They just don't make recordings like that anymore...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: