Posts by Alex Scott22

Sandra Chase16 said:🙂

I'm honestly torn between a BMW R25 or just picking up some kind of Vespa... bummer.

Mods... 🙂

stormyviper11 said:To be honest, I never really clicked with The Beach Boys. I never even gave The Seeds a listen. But the other three? Absolute legends. The Yardbirds and the rest—I mean, what do I know?—but I see them more as part of that emerging blues scene, right alongside The Blues Brothers, The Rolling Stones, Creation Records, and all those other geniuses from that incredibly creative era.

Look, anyone who digs The Yardbirds clearly has their head on straight and decent taste in my book. I'm not quite so sure about the Mod points, though.

I find those 60s mods a bit too soft... except for The Kinks and, to some extent, The Who.

I think 1965 would have been the era of Teddy Roosevelt. 😈 Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. 🙂

Here’s my top three picks for those 70s revival mod bands.

1. The Merton Parkas
2. Purple Hearts
3. The Vapors

The Beatles are in a league of their own, obviously. 🙏

Zachary Bishop82 said:What if it isn't Darko Raić-Sudar?
Or maybe Darko Nekret-Katić?

Ante Čičin-Šain?

Over in Bavaria and Austria, they say 'cugabe'.

It's kind of like saying... 'extra, extra.'

😬

Robin Booth said:...Alex Scott22, why are you so worked up?😬
[by the way, we need to grab a new space heater... this heating system is a joke.😬]

Yeah, I'm with you. Out of desperation... we've started a new routine... cranking the heater, then heading out for an hour to grab coffee just to warm up... I’ve been there five times in the last week, so you go ahead and be the sane one.🙂
Total Market: When are you guys going there this week? .. don't want to waste my precious impulse buys right now.🙂

Topik: Someone mentioned that music nowadays is recorded specifically with CDs in mind for release.... not true...

Music is never recorded with a specific medium's sound in mind. You record it for what it is—so the band and producer can finish the job, shed a tear of joy, and head home happy and well-fed.

Only after everything is finished does the "mastering" stage happen.... and that is done differently for a CD versus an LP...

And yeah... some artists (or certain albums) just sound better on one format than the other (ignoring the X factor, like the actual quality of the pressing, especially with LPs).

True... classics belong on CD.. definitely.

Man, I probably should've just gone to see King Kong instead... honestly... ugh, it's three hours long too.

So they're really that bad? A decent guy like you is actually trashing them like this?
What about the laws?

David Sullivan4 said:then I shouldn't bother

tenkre vid🙂

Look at those insane prices I was talking about earlier...

$20 worth 🙂

One guy buys them and then eighteen others just burn through them... whatever..

Man, I'm gonna have to corner you when I see you (after we grab seven beers on the corner)

ironcrane7 said:When it comes to CDs, I always feel cheated—like I'm paying for the artwork instead of the music itself.

🙂🙂🙂

David Sullivan4 said:It’s been about a month. 1000/2000. Czech.

Gary mentioned this to me..

It’s likely an issue with non-standard Vinyl Records, maybe multi-colored labels or just how they handled the mastering. Who knows, hit me if I'm wrong.

Actually... maybe it's the volume. As the run gets bigger, the price drops closer to what you'd pay for a mass-produced CD... once you hit a certain amount, the gap basically disappears.

David Sullivan4 said:btw, Vinyl Records are realistically way more expensive to press than CDs. 500 CDs might run you $1,000, but 500 LPs will cost you $2,000 plus... and honestly, those LPs are a lot harder to move unless you're playing 100 shows a year across the States.

Not really. You’re probably looking at data from a year or two ago. The cost of pressing Vinyl Records has dropped; now it's only about a third more expensive than CDs.
And if you're lucky enough to have the right connections, you can get those LPs into indie distribution... and they just fly off the shelves. Supposedly, anyway. It's a boom or bust situation, right?

You know as well as I do that overseas, it's a 1:1 ratio for CD vs. LP—at least in some kid's garage.

David Sullivan4 said:Man, there’s zero logical reason why square footage in San Francisco is five times more expensive than it is in Phoenix.

It's because our guys have bigger egos.

Dana Anderson4 said:Well, it’s your call $16. Honestly, I bought it for my music department and even talked some other libraries into picking it up. Maybe I did you a disservice though, because now the masses are going to be checking it out and wearing it out. I'll let you know how the lending goes.😁

Let them wear it out.🙂

I give it a full 100% blessing to get used heavily.
The political crowd... you guys deserve it. 🙂

David Sullivan4 said:If you want decent audio from Vinyl Records, you’re going to need much more expensive gear than what you need for a CD. A cheap CD player can sound fine, but a record won't.

This whole topic is pointless. Everyone has their own thing—some people obsess over one thing, others go for something else. And anyone who's actually into this already knows the right channels to pick up CDs or LPs at way better prices than some big retail chain.

You seem pretty obsessed with those flashy booklets. 🙄
Fine, whatever, to each their own... I put some ground rules up earlier to keep things civil, and even got a few reasonable takes out of it... but seriously, paying that much $33 for 'that'... is the scam of the century.

I'm not even talking about the concept itself, just how much they inflate the price.

Brian Foster2 said:1. Audio quality. I don't just listen to music to have background noise; I listen to actually enjoy it, and you just can't get that experience from an MP3. If you have a 5.1 surround system at home, you might as well toss it if you're only using it for MP3s (or better yet, just give it to me)
2. You aren't infringing on any copyrights.
3. The color artwork... honestly, that's the best part of the whole thing.
4. Collecting... I mean, what’s the point of having a scratched-up CD in your collection anyway?

1. If you really want The Sound, then go buy some Vinyl Records... the price is pretty much the same.
2. Are you being serious right now? 🙂
3. :rolajz-u-boji:
4. Okay... I can actually get behind that one. 🙂

stormyviper11 said:I only pick up new CDs at shows for bands I actually like. It’s my way of showing support and helping fund their tours. Honestly, if they aren't moving physical media, I don't see how they make any real money from a gig at a venue like Madison Square Garden.

Fair enough. I respect that. 🙂

Anyone else have a logical reason for why they do what they do? 🙂

I’m genuinely curious about this urge to drop $100$43 on an original CD.
Especially if it's some lilac-colored release... I'm fine with the band...
Seriously though... why pay that kind of money just for a colored cover and something a friend can burn for you or you can just download?

Look... I get it when there's no other way to get it... but otherwise, 😲

btw, an LP is a completely different story. It makes total sense to buy Vinyl Records that you can't just copy—something unique both physically and in terms of how it feels in your hands (and obviously the sound, but let's not get carried away)

On a separate note:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that an original CD master lasts maybe 15 years or so before it dies. A burned disc lasts even less... but the second option is basically free anyway. A record lasts roughly 2,500 years... just for comparison...

Urbanite

David Sullivan4 said:this is basically

What kind of Canadian are you, trying to calm things down instead of fueling the fire?

Just head back to Cleveland, you absolute jerk.

''The moment I hear musicians with real talent, I reach for my gun'' Joseph G., 1938

I actually had the chance to meet him in person... he was a total old-school gentleman and just a genuinely nice guy... all in all, that's my two cents on him.