Avg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 1921
Length: 7:56
Plays (last 30 days): 0
Canto, meu amor
Tu és fixe
És muito bom
You mean, like "Trump?" As in 'to trump'....... from the 15th Century, which is to fart. Onomatopoeia - no lie.
That explains everything
I agree! You also forgot to mention, wow & flutter, acoustic feedback and dynamic range! Also, music that is mastered for vinyl, has to have all of the low end below 250hz in mono, so the stylus doesn't jump out of the groove. The first track of a 331/3 record has higher fidelity than the last track (closest to center) because of the faster surface speed. And tangiental tracking error, to name a few!
Well -- all of that stuff can certainly be true. A great many factors affect the listening experience. My personal view is that I'd rather hear great music on any signal path, and even shite gear, than shite music in a mastering suite.
I have diffculty pronouncing this bands name without losing my dental prosthesis
LOL!! Too funny!! GREAT band!!
where is this from? i'm mesmerized.
Freaks and Geeks.
where is this from? i'm mesmerized.
Martin Starr as Bill Haverchuck in Freaks and Geeks
where is this from? i'm mesmerized.
Tubes can be easily pushed to their (physics) limits, leading to distortion. That's precisely what many guitar and bass players want in their sound, but no one wants that in a recording or broadcast.
Thanks for all the techno-chat. That's another reason I enjoy this place!
YEP!!
I like the sound of the various iterations of the Fender Twin Reverb & Dual Showman for guitar amps, but detest the sound of Marshall amps. The Fenders are cleaner sounding, but Marshalls are too raspy sounding. For tube bass amps, the old Fender Bassman head is very distorted (fuzzy) sounding, While the Ampeg SVT head is VERY powerful (loud) & clean, the Ampeg Portaflex iterations w/ 15" speaker are less powerful (loud) & very clean! Everybody has their preference! And, don't get me wrong, Marshalls have their place, where intentional loud distortion is desired & appropriate! For a cleaner sound, I will go with Fenders! Now, speakers are a whole other discussion!
..... Some people love the sound of tube audio, but I don't, except for guitar amplifiers. To each their own!
Tubes can be easily pushed to their (physics) limits, leading to distortion. That's precisely what many guitar and bass players want in their sound, but no one wants that in a recording or broadcast.
Thanks for all the techno-chat. That's another reason I enjoy this place!
man, it's always so cool to hear Shpongle on radioparadise!
I Agree!! RP introduced me to them. Now, I like a LOT of their music! Thanx RP!
Definitely hits a groove. Think I have been officially Shpongled?...Shponglefied?
love it! Aldous would be proud.
The term is Shpongled. To be properly Spongled involves pychedelic substances.
He originally recorded under the name Hallucinogen. Also as Celtic Cross in addition to Younger Brother and Shpongle (with long time fixture of the Goa scene, Raja Ram, who provides vocals & flute).
not complaining though....
see what im saying?
A bit mansplain-y, and I'm sure tm means vinyl, but I personally agree as well (I'm an Audio Producer).
The complaints some people have about digital being "brittle" or "lifeless" have to do with the recording techniques and mixing/mastering practices, not the medium.
This of course assumes robust digitization. Very early on, admittedly A/D converter technology wasn't great, so results sounded pretty thin. Pro-level A/Ds for at least the last 20 years have been great.
I think 24 bit is a MUST -- 16 bit just doesn't cut it. I can hear the difference between 44.1k sample rate and 48k, but to me the improvement with 96k, though welcome, is so subtle as to not usually be worth double the file size. So 24/48 or 24/96 is ideal. This means I much prefer the "hi-res" streaming offerings over standard CD spec.
Also, the process of transfer to vinyl adds distortion. Many people find this distortion pleasing, which is cool, but it's not necessarily what everyone approved in the studio, so probably not exactly what the artist intended.
I do miss the wonderful album jackets though...
Anyhoo, as has been said, to each his own!
I agree! You also forgot to mention, wow & flutter, acoustic feedback and dynamic range! Also, music that is mastered for vinyl, has to have all of the low end below 250hz in mono, so the stylus doesn't jump out of the groove. The first track of a 331/3 record has higher fidelity than the last track (closest to center) because of the faster surface speed. And tangiental tracking error, to name a few!
Just a little education for those “audiophiles” - albums honestly pale in quality to straight digital. You think you like the scratchs and skips - bah bullocks. My movie producer neighbor and I laugh about his love for the look over sound quality. He being in the movie/sound industry for 35 years and me being a musician for near 45. Albums feel good and look good. They do not sound better and it is not subjective.
A bit mansplain-y, and I'm sure tm means vinyl, but I personally agree as well (I'm an Audio Producer).
The complaints some people have about digital being "brittle" or "lifeless" have to do with the recording techniques and mixing/mastering practices, not the medium.
This of course assumes robust digitization. Very early on, admittedly A/D converter technology wasn't great, so results sounded pretty thin. Pro-level A/Ds for at least the last 20 years have been great.
I think 24 bit is a MUST -- 16 bit just doesn't cut it. I can hear the difference between 44.1k sample rate and 48k, but to me the improvement with 96k, though welcome, is so subtle as to not usually be worth double the file size. So 24/48 or 24/96 is ideal. This means I much prefer the "hi-res" streaming offerings over standard CD spec.
Also, the process of transfer to vinyl adds distortion. Many people find this distortion pleasing, which is cool, but it's not necessarily what everyone approved in the studio, so probably not exactly what the artist intended.
I do miss the wonderful album jackets though...
Anyhoo, as has been said, to each his own!
Still would love to see them live one day
This syncs up pretty nicely, I have to say.
Just a little education for those “audiophiles” - albums honestly pale in quality to straight digital. You think you like the scratchs and skips - bah bullocks. My movie producer neighbor and I laugh about his love for the look over sound quality. He being in the movie/sound industry for 35 years and me being a musician for near 45. Albums feel good and look good. They do not sound better and it is not subjective.
By "album" you mean "record" or "vinyl", right?
An "album" is a collection of songs or music tracks, put together as one named collection. The medium used to distribute said album can be on a physical record made with vinyl, on a physical tape (in the past), on in a digital file which contains a collection of multiple songs.
Just a little education for those “audiophiles” - albums honestly pale in quality to straight digital. You think you like the scratchs and skips - bah bullocks. My movie producer neighbor and I laugh about his love for the look over sound quality. He being in the movie/sound industry for 35 years and me being a musician for near 45. Albums feel good and look good. They do not sound better and it is not subjective.
I agree completely! Early digital was not as good as the current iterations, but it blew away cassette tapes. Current digital technology has evolved to greatness. Aside from skips & scratches, records have wow & flutter, tangiental tracking error & Feedback. The 1st track on a side has better frequency response than the last track. Records need to be mastered differently than digital. All low end below 300hz needs to be mono (equal on left & right channels), to prevent the stylus from jumping out of the groove. Also, digital has greater dynamic range (the difference between loud & soft passages). Some people prefer the sound of records, but I DON'T! Some people love the sound of tube audio, but I don't, except for guitar amplifiers. To each their own!
I don’t know about the rest of the world, but in Scotland, Shpongle is a seriously derogatory word...
Seems to me we need to be further educated in this...
love it! Aldous would be proud.
Posted 1 month ago by Kajukenbo If you were only going to buy one Shpongle CD (yes, CD) which one? c. Posted 1 month ago by cc_rider from Bastrop Yes, quite the bummer. Sphongle does not release vinyl, I can only imagine the eargasm I would have via my quality turntable if I could spin this on vinyl!
Posford does release vinyl with some of his endeavours, so worth having a look from time to time. https://shponglemusic.bandcamp...
I think I'd need to be out on the Playa with a head full of drugs for this to be pleasing to my ear.
My head digs this sober. : )
c.
I am Cornholio!
Yes, a veritable soundtrack to Beavis' internal dialogue!
Always nice to be wrong. Wrong like a Gong. The more you know the more you know you don't know what you know.
You mean, like "Trump?" As in 'to trump'....... from the 15th Century, which is to fart. Onomatopoeia - no lie.
I'm at the bar now... What can I get you?
I am Cornholio!
I just love this piece,You have to Shpongle once in awhile to get recharged ! :o) Connecticut.