i need to start streaming as well, have the gear and all but the motivation isnt really there yet, and i'm working on 2 remixes atm

 

you need to check my soundcloud... wait nvm

this track was made with just one machinedrum and a russian distortion, it was a small club hit in goth clubs over here

 

https://audiosex.pro/threads/why-modern-digital-synthesis-is-more-analog-than-analog.74425/

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2024

I am advocating wax-cylinders for analogidiots since 2000 ...

 

The music that you listen to is neither analog nor digital. It is pressure differences. So the real question is if music that is recorded analog translates to the movement of molecules in the air differently than music that was recorded digitally. Plus most music even if it was recorded using analog equipment will be played back on digital equipment. A much more interesting question would be if different gasses would translate it differently and if it would be an advantage to use a different gas to translate the music from the speaker to the ear.

 

People have gone to great lengths to switch from analog to digital audio, hoping to substantially improve recording quality. When they realized it was the other way around, they started desperately looking for a way back while still retaining their basic digital position. Consequently, they ended up in a digital processing squared.

 

I will tell you why. Revenues. Re-mastering often has nothing to do with improving the sound of the recording. It is a way for labels to continue to monetize on old stock WITHOUT spending big money. For example, Dark Side of the Moon. It has been re-mastered at least 7 times! Was it really needed? In my opinion, with the exception of the Dolby Atmos it was not. However, those re=mastered versions amount to millions in sales. A good marketing strategy, and one of easiest way for labels to continue to milk the cow.