Song Recommendations

[Rectifier]

Here's some more grunge:Would? by Alice in Chains

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Meh, the studio version sounds alright. Not digging the unplugged versions.

Here are a few more things I'm listening to on my playlist.

"Switchback" - Celldweller

"Chu Chu Lovely Muni Muni Mura Mura Purin Purin Boron Nurururerorero" - Maximum the Hormone

"Simply Being Loved (Somnambolist)" - BT

"Vitriol" - Bluejuice

"Still in Your Marble Hill Zone OC Remix (Sonic the Hedgehog)" - Diggi Dis

"Ice Capped OC Remix (Sonic the Hedgehog 3)" - McVaffe

"Amaranth" - Nightwish

"Hitori no Yoru (GTO 2nd OP)" - Porno Graffiti

[Rectifier]

Meh, the studio version sounds alright. Not digging the unplugged versions.

I don't know you anymore.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Meh, the studio version sounds alright. Not digging the unplugged versions.

I don't know you anymore.

I'm an electric beat kinda guy, as you can see from... well hell about everything I have ever put on this forum. I hate country, and enjoy only a select few acoustic songs.

[Rectifier]

Acoustic = the ORIGIN of music

Its impossible to like the digital or electronic version unless you also like the acoustic version.

You actually LOSE sound when changing from acoustic sound to digital sound, therefore acoustic sound will always be better.

(If you can't tell I like music a lot. )

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Its impossible to like the digital or electronic version unless you also like the acoustic version.

You actually LOSE sound when changing from acoustic sound to digital sound, therefore acoustic sound will always be better.

With todays technology you can take the acoustic sound, amplify the parts you want, and cut out the rest of the noise. It sounds much cleaner and you are able to edit in many more things digitally. Hell, I prefer it just for that. And as a bonus you can make music digitally with beats and sounds that acoustic is unable to do. I'd probably like the acoustic music if it were by a band I like, with a song that would sound good in acoustic, and only if I was there in person.

[ainsoph9]

TGM, I think that Rectifier is referring to the quality of the sound. In terms of processing the sound digitally, Rectifier is correct. When you process sound digitally, the tendency is to lose the quality of the sound, especially if it is during the recording/mastering process or within the instrument itself. I will admit that in some respects the technology is getting better, but you generally have to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for it. Also, when you filter out noise in a signal, you are actually cutting out some of the actual sound that you want to hear. While you may be able to get rid of a 60Hz hum in the signal, you will take any harmonic of that signal out as well (i.e., 120Hz, 180Hz, 240Hz, etc.). The price you pay for a "cleaner" sound is a drastic reduction in actual sound quality such as sound staging, imaging, depth, frequency range and depth, tone, etc. The list goes on forever. While you may be able to achieve cool sounds from that, that kind of stuff is best left to synthesizers and other electronic instruments that are designed to create those sounds. Anything else done during the recording and mastering process is generally harmful such as compression and pitch shifting. Just to be sure though, I am in no way trying to slam your musical tastes. Nonetheless, I think that sound quality is important because of my love for music as well.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Yeah I understand what both of you mean. I've taken a few audio recording classes so I know about the loss of analog to digital. And I dislike acoustic because of that fact. As I said I would only enjoy it if I was there in person. Not to mention acoustic guitars are extremely limited in what they can do compared to electric guitars like sound modification and amplification. Acoustic just sounds so... bland.

[ainsoph9]

Acoustic guitars do not sound bland unless the recording is poor, or your equipment is horrible. Also, you can get around much of the digital problem with a good old turntable and LPs. You can even get entirely tubed systems (my personal preference). Furthermore, there is a lot you can do on acoustic that you cannot do on electric and vice versa. Concerning the concert venue thing, let me just say that it really depends on the venue, the artist's amps and guitar, etc.

[b0mb3r]

damn where the hell do u learn all this stuff on music...or tech stuff?

[TheGiftedMonkey]

damn where the hell do u learn all this stuff on music...or tech stuff?

School.

[ainsoph9]

Umm...I am an electrical engineer for one. Also, I have a friend who is big into audio and makes a living off of it. Another thing you can do is go to forums, read magazines like Stereophile, and visit your local hi-fi audio store.

[Rectifier]

I like to think of myself as a music person, I mean the only reason I was able to travel to China was because of my interest to keep playing my trumpet in marching band and stuff.

Oh and yeah, what happens to digital output? Its converted to acoustic soundwaves because it vibrates the air.


So technically digital sound is never actually heard , its turned into pressure waves in the air (which is then converted again when it hits your ear, but I'm not sure if thats all electrical impulses after that part).

Therefore by using my inherently flawed logic, acoustic sound is always better.

[TheGiftedMonkey]

Therefore by using my inherently flawed logic, acoustic sound is always better.

This isn't logic, it's personal preference. I think acoustic blows.

[Rectifier]

Therefore by using my inherently flawed logic, acoustic sound is always better.

This isn't logic, it's personal preference. I think acoustic blows.

I don't know you anymore.