Dad was so right. I bought my first CD player near the beginning of optical drives in 1984 when almost nobody had one, and there were only a few dozen CDs to pick from. I picked out Floyd’s ‘Dark Side Of The Moon’ and Styx’s ‘Paradise Theater’, two albums I had listened to for years. I expected to be blown away by the new “digital” technology, but instead I was floored by how harsh and “tinny” they sounded. Warmth? Perhaps. Definitely the richness of the music was lost. How ironic. Progress in recording technology sent reproduced music backwards in quality.
I am a most disagreeable so and so. Most of my life I detested all Beatles songs, later I found two I sort of liked, that number is currently up to three. Maybe if I live for a few more millennia I might be able to say I like the Beatles after each song manages to worm it’s way into my head ;-)
Blame the compression. Good sound needs good equipment. My Creative soundblaster boxes give better sound than the new ones I tried hoping for a better experience. The new ones were quickly returned to sender. Even the earphones for about one Euro provided better sound.
The quality of digital music depends on the density of the data. Early CDs, like early digital cameras, lacked the density to compete with “analog” devices. The current technology allows for data rates high enough to capture everything on the old analog forms. Now it’s just a trade-off between quality and quantity.
I’m afraid I’m one of those who do NOT care for the Beatles.
Now don’t get me wrong, they deserve every bit of praise and fame they got for the groundwork they’ve laid for music.
It’s just, since then I feel the people who came after them took what the Beatles did and just made it SO much better. The Beatles music to me sounds like a rough draft to a story someone else made much better, and I’d rather listen to it.
Sugar Bombs 95 almost 6 years ago
From what I’ve seen, the people who never listened to the Beatles as kids don’t tend to like them much.
Good thing my mom was a Beatles fan, and played them constantly when we were kids.
Averagemoe almost 6 years ago
A vinyl can only capture so much nuance. A live performance is the only way to get the full effect.
Templo S.U.D. almost 6 years ago
I bet Marigold can even magically play a phonograph cylinder balanced upon her horn.
Enter.Name.Here almost 6 years ago
Dad was so right. I bought my first CD player near the beginning of optical drives in 1984 when almost nobody had one, and there were only a few dozen CDs to pick from. I picked out Floyd’s ‘Dark Side Of The Moon’ and Styx’s ‘Paradise Theater’, two albums I had listened to for years. I expected to be blown away by the new “digital” technology, but instead I was floored by how harsh and “tinny” they sounded. Warmth? Perhaps. Definitely the richness of the music was lost. How ironic. Progress in recording technology sent reproduced music backwards in quality.
codycab almost 6 years ago
The Beatles= no contest.
Troglodyte almost 6 years ago
The big question is: does Phoebe “agree” on The Beatles?
tirnaaisling almost 6 years ago
I am a most disagreeable so and so. Most of my life I detested all Beatles songs, later I found two I sort of liked, that number is currently up to three. Maybe if I live for a few more millennia I might be able to say I like the Beatles after each song manages to worm it’s way into my head ;-)
asrialfeeple almost 6 years ago
Blame the compression. Good sound needs good equipment. My Creative soundblaster boxes give better sound than the new ones I tried hoping for a better experience. The new ones were quickly returned to sender. Even the earphones for about one Euro provided better sound.
Wichita1.0 almost 6 years ago
“I don’t understand it. This records sounds all scratchy now??”
P51Strega almost 6 years ago
The quality of digital music depends on the density of the data. Early CDs, like early digital cameras, lacked the density to compete with “analog” devices. The current technology allows for data rates high enough to capture everything on the old analog forms. Now it’s just a trade-off between quality and quantity.
Neo Stryder almost 6 years ago
Well, everyone has a favorite song of the Beatles, right?
Miba almost 6 years ago
“for the record” :D
videomaster21XX almost 6 years ago
I’m afraid I’m one of those who do NOT care for the Beatles.
Now don’t get me wrong, they deserve every bit of praise and fame they got for the groundwork they’ve laid for music.
It’s just, since then I feel the people who came after them took what the Beatles did and just made it SO much better. The Beatles music to me sounds like a rough draft to a story someone else made much better, and I’d rather listen to it.
totalspaceman2010 almost 6 years ago
The Beatles, yuk.
Spider-UK almost 6 years ago
Personally I prefer the Monkees.
Kirk Barnes Premium Member almost 6 years ago
Meh, not a fan. I can listen to some of the early stuff, but I don’t particularly care for them. For the record, I’m not real fond of Elvis, either.
rgcviper almost 6 years ago
Goo, goo, b’joob!
AranIlyaris almost 5 years ago
“For the record”