New DS Live Box Set, 3rd November 2023!

[Jules]

To get vinyl sound quality that matches good digital sound quality, you need to invest an insane amount in the gear (turntable, pickup, arm, RIAA, etc.) plus the records themselves must be top notch (audiophile pressings). I've heard some systems like that, where only the pickup costs almost £10k. Amazing. But the cost ... And the maintenance. No, thank you. Entry- and mid-level vinyl gear and ordinary pressings are a waste of time, unless sound quality is less important and you simply enjoy the "vinyl experience".

True but also a discussion as old as the CD is. Technically there is no doubt about the difference and that CD is "better". I would however not judge it with "better" or "worse" but  with "different". Since I started to listen to vinyl again I listen to much more and different music and definitely enjoy it much more than during the last CD decades. You could describe it with "the vinyl experience" as you did but it is definitely more than just the way and act of listening.  I got the  BIA double vinyl  from 2013 for Christmas and listen to it on a daily base since and I just LOVE the sound of it. It's just dufferent. I couldn't bother to listen to the BIA CD for years and it's almost like a rediscovery. The words vinyl people use to describe the difference are true. CD is a wall, vinyl is a landscape.

LE

Totally agree, even with a cheap equipment you can feel that landscape sensation.

I remember playing some long ago the Making Movies lp and I was like, WOW, did they put new things on it? and they didn't, but it's like the music is wide, like spread around you, and when I listen a cd is more like something going straight to you.

These are just sensations, but they are true ones at least for me, glad LE described it the same way I feel it!

[Chris W]

^^ Ha, Ha ^^ Funny cartoon.

The debate between vinyl and CD could go on for pages.
I grew up with vinyl, transitioned to CD in the late 80's like most people.
I had always kept some of my old vinyl, and bought some reissues a couple of years ago.
I A/B'ed the CD with the vinyl (same album, cued up to start together as much as possible) and I switched the 'CD' and 'Phono' button on my amplifier continually. The differences were minimal.
In the end I found the cost and inconvenience of vinyl didn't make up for the margins of sound (vibe or whatever) it delivered.
The cost of modern vinyl is horrendous. I would rather pay £10 to £12 for a CD than £25 to £30 for the vinyl.
But each to their own.

[Chris W]

I recommend this listening to everyone.

Thank you, much appreciated.
The McCartney tour was much more Rock n Roll.....maybe like the BIA tour. McCartney really went for it*, both in his singing and his playing. I was actually quite shocked at rehearsals as we got closer to the first show. Another major factor was that we were pretty much five instruments. Linda added a lot of vocals, but her keyboards were sparse. So there was a lot of improv, interaction and therefore fun between us.
On the OES tour it was just a wall of sound, with nine people playing all the time.In a way it had to be more organised or it would have become a cacophony of nine different people doing their own thing.
*Mark never really went for it in my opinion. His vocals were very low key, his guitar solos were very similar from show to show.

[JF]

Guy said they used it to separate tracks of "where do you think you are going" from the MFN compilation, as the archivist couldn't find the multitracks of it. Guy had to mix it in Atmos so he used a software, probably AI, to do it. He said it did the job but the results are not what he really needs.

Is it the demo version or the album version ?

The demo.

Guy also said that nobody knew from where that version came from, so there was no way to find the multitracks of that version and had to use an AI to extract the tracks and do the atmos mix.

Seems they have an issue with the archive, as Guy also said that the reason why Portobello live is from Hammersmith, and not from Paris, as originally was sourced, is becaude that was what the record company provided him, so I guess the persons in charge of the archive lost some items, like the demos from "Where do you think" came, and the Paris 83 tapes...

as said in the Oldfield book, the whole Communiqué album was recorded as demo in London in november 78, except the title track which was composed in Nassau in december.
They brought these demos in Nassau, because Jerry Wexler listened to it, before recording the album.

So I guess that Mark or Ed or David or John or Mercury/Phonogram/Warner... should have the tape somewhere.... but of course after all this time, maybe they don't remember where they shelved it 

and of course a very little chance that they kept the multitrack...

[hunter v2.0]

Today you can buy top of the line (in terms of sound quality) streamers with integrated DAC that cost less than a decent pickup (e.g. Eversolo DMP-A6). If you want to color the sound a little, there are a number of DACs (even tube based) that sound remarkably analog. I use mid-fi gear from Rega (amp and DAC), which may not be the latest word in resolution, but it sounds very musical and pleasant. Very analog. I have ripped my CD collection (about 500) to FLAC, which fits on a 256 GB SD card. I understand the appeal of the physicality of LPs, but the hassle and cost not so much.

[Robson]

"The cost of modern vinyl is horrendous. I would rather pay £10 to £12 for a CD than £25 to £30 for the vinyl.
But each to their own"

Exactly!
I know one thing. I'll stick with CD

[hunter v2.0]

*Mark never really went for it in my opinion. His vocals were very low key, his guitar solos were very similar from show to show.

I've been wondering what happened with his vocals from 83 (Alchemy) to 92. He was never a "belter", but he totally went for it during the Alchemy show. Obviously 40? 60? cigarettes a day doesn't help LOL But that's an aspect that I've missed a lot during Mark's solo career. Very low-key vocals. It's like he's sitting in a recliner reading bedtime stories he-he

[Chris W]

I'm not sure it was a conscious thing, to save his voice or anything. It seemed to just become his style.
If I was sat at my drums when Ade (the monitor guy) tested Mark's mic it absolutely took my head off. But during the show I need that extreme level to hear Mark's singing.

[dmg]

*Mark never really went for it in my opinion. His vocals were very low key, his guitar solos were very similar from show to show.

I've been wondering what happened with his vocals from 83 (Alchemy) to 92. He was never a "belter", but he totally went for it during the Alchemy show. Obviously 40? 60? cigarettes a day doesn't help LOL But that's an aspect that I've missed a lot during Mark's solo career. Very low-key vocals. It's like he's sitting in a recliner reading bedtime stories he-he

Often wondered this myself.  The enthusiasm went after the BIA tour.  He used to bounce up and down at the mic quite often and walk about on stage, then on the OES tour he stopped that bounce, barely moved from his spot and the vocals were world weary. 

[hunter v2.0]

*Mark never really went for it in my opinion. His vocals were very low key, his guitar solos were very similar from show to show.

I've been wondering what happened with his vocals from 83 (Alchemy) to 92. He was never a "belter", but he totally went for it during the Alchemy show. Obviously 40? 60? cigarettes a day doesn't help LOL But that's an aspect that I've missed a lot during Mark's solo career. Very low-key vocals. It's like he's sitting in a recliner reading bedtime stories he-he

Often wondered this myself.  The enthusiasm went after the BIA tour.  He used to bounce up and down at the mic quite often and walk about on stage, then on the OES tour he stopped that bounce, barely moved from his spot and the vocals were world weary.

Given the whole "negativity" clouding the OES tour, the lack of enthusiasm is understandable. But during the solo years, though? And what's more, on the records the voice is often buried deep in the mix. It's not like Mark and the engineers don't have ears or the technical competence to improve it.

[herlock]

Yes, I agree that the interest of vinyl is in physicality, not technicality, and to me it's not worth the hassle.

Technically, the CD can be made to sound perfect. The fact that early CDs sounded "metallic" was because the mastering process was in its infancy, but today, a CD produced at British Grove studio can sound perfect. No matter what "Hi-rez" aficionados claim, 44.1khz sampling rate is more than enough to hear the whole human ear range (up to 20khz), we are not dogs, we can't hear ultrasounds... And 16-bit dynamic range is a bit small, but with proper dithering it can be made to accomodate 96 to 120db. On the contrary, the vinyl only has a 60db dynamic range. That is quite compressed, but as always, limitations are opportunities for clever mastering to shine, some vinyls are produced to make best use of this small range... Also, vinyls can render frequencies up to 50Khz, which is actually too much for the human earing, so no gain here.

[tomtom51]

I recommend this listening to everyone.

Thank you, much appreciated.
The McCartney tour was much more Rock n Roll.....maybe like the BIA tour. McCartney really went for it*, both in his singing and his playing. I was actually quite shocked at rehearsals as we got closer to the first show. Another major factor was that we were pretty much five instruments. Linda added a lot of vocals, but her keyboards were sparse. So there was a lot of improv, interaction and therefore fun between us.
On the OES tour it was just a wall of sound, with nine people playing all the time.In a way it had to be more organised or it would have become a cacophony of nine different people doing their own thing.
*Mark never really went for it in my opinion. His vocals were very low key, his guitar solos were very similar from show to show.

If I might add, on the same era Knebworth live cd, Paul McCartney can be heard praising "young Mr Christopher" for the intro to Coming Up. Again, what a class act ! Thanks again for these great drum parts on that and TTLF.

[Chris W]

Again....thanks.

[Matchstickman]

As for Mark's soloing, surely some parts were always more or less improvised (or changed around) - the intro to Heavy Fuel, and the intros and outros of The Bug come to mind. They are all different in the performances with which I'm familiar.

Those songs are simple musically, but more complicated songs like Sultans and Tunnel seem to have sections that start in familiar territory, include improvisation, use familiar phrases as cues to both the band the audience, and finally end on the famous twiddly bits (or what have you).

[Chris W]

Yeah, I would say the solos were always in part improvised, but more similar than not.
Of course there were certain themes and riffs that had to be played to signal the next part of the song.
I never knew what Robbie Macintosh or Macca were going to play in their solos, whereas Mark's solos were more of a variation on a theme from show to show.