Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Jackson Michaels

Regarding ICBYD vinyl vs. CD

Recommended Posts

ICBYD is one of his weakest releases? LOL

 

seriously, that one made me laugh.

 

how much could i fetch on ebay with my ICBYD vinyl i wonder

 

I saw it going for $40 on ebay once or twice, could probably get up to $80 for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Calx Sherbet

You're right about the frequencies. Partly. Most people can hear frequencies between 16-17 Hz. Some (particularly young people) can hear between 17-18 Hz. Above that it's just mumbo jumbo audiophile bullshit.

 

 

you're retarded

 

How?

 

Edit: The audiophile mumbo jumbo part is a joke.

 

audiophiles bother me to no end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right about the frequencies. Partly. Most people can hear frequencies between 16-17 Hz. Some (particularly young people) can hear between 17-18 Hz. Above that it's just mumbo jumbo audiophile bullshit.

 

 

you're retarded

 

How?

 

Edit: The audiophile mumbo jumbo part is a joke.

 

too late

classification has already been printed into next year's textbook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always assumed this album was recorded to DAT, not anything analog.

 

I do agree that the album sounds a little murky on CD. My personal random guess of an opinion is that the album as delivered to the mastering dude probably had a shitload of crazy high-end in it from the DAT distorting, MS-20 filter madness, etc. And so as part of the mastering they chopped everything nasty off the top.

 

A lot of mid-period Warp albums sound this way to me. Selection Sixteen, for example.

 

However, music from the same era that was mastered later (for example, the HAB CD reissue) sounds less restricted in the high-end, even though it was recorded (generally) around the same time. I think that fits with the more modern 2000s trend of it being more "okay" to allow really edgy-sounding stuff through the mastering stage onto the final CD.

 

In other words, ICBYD is mastered almost like a rock and roll album, whereas HAB is mastered like a modern electronica album (say, Clark, for example). Even though they probably sounded similar, frequencies-wise, when they were recorded.

HAB is a year or so later - and all native audio most likely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, I think there are parts on HAB where you can hear like mixer channel and DAT distortion. Who knows I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll sell you my ICBYD vinyl...

 

Name your price

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tv_party

ICBYD at 192 sounds perfect to me.....Then again, I can't hear a difference between a wav file and an mp3 at 192...Try it. HERE'S A BOLD STATEMENT: NO ONE CAN. Welcome new member. You'll have to get over the fact that no one here wants to talk about anything. They just wait for the perfect opportunity to say something smart-ass..

 

...

 

ya it becomes difficult for me at 192, but I think with close scrutiny I could pick it out. I still always go 320 for insurance.

 

I know that infrasonic frequencies can subconsciously affect the listening experience, but can ultrasonic frequencies also do so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll sell you my ICBYD vinyl...

 

Name your price

 

£2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a lot of it is sampled sounds (banging metal gates, percussive hits and sounds from analogue synths etc). Around the time I would say a typical sampler would operate at a 32Khz sample rate which would result in the highest replayable frequency being 16Khz.. so nothing missing just never there in the first place.

Edited by dampboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest no carrier

how much could i fetch on ebay with my ICBYD vinyl i wonder

 

I'll sell you my ICBYD vinyl...

 

Name your price

 

ITT: blasphemy.

 

btw i think i'm possibly some sort of a magnet for aphex twin records as i somehow ended up with an extra copy of the first 12". i gave it to a friend of mine as part of a birthday gift of vinyl doubles (check em).

 

holy shit! on discogs.com the vinyls range from $35.99 to $99.99 in american currency. i had no idea that this album would end up being even more valuable than the ventolin 2x12", which still stands as my most expensive vinyl purchase at $30 (it was there IRL staring me down and i think i damn near wet myself)

Edited by no carrier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a lot of it is sampled sounds (banging metal gates, percussive hits and sounds from analogue synths etc). Around the time I would say a typical sampler would operate at a 32Khz sample rate which would result in the highest replayable frequency being 16Khz.. so nothing missing just never there in the first place.

this seems to be the most logical conclusion. and also that pre-1995, none of aphex twin's output was particularly high fidelity

Edited by modey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a lot of it is sampled sounds (banging metal gates, percussive hits and sounds from analogue synths etc). Around the time I would say a typical sampler would operate at a 32Khz sample rate which would result in the highest replayable frequency being 16Khz.. so nothing missing just never there in the first place.

Akai S1000 could do 44.1KHz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

holy shit! on discogs.com the vinyls range from $35.99 to $99.99 in american currency. i had no idea that this album would end up being even more valuable than the ventolin 2x12", which still stands as my most expensive vinyl purchase at $30 (it was there IRL staring me down and i think i damn near wet myself)

 

 

 

I bought the 2x12" for £1.99 each when it came out

 

IN YOUR FACE FUCKPANTS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i found a stack of 10 ventolin 2x12" rubberbanded together in the dollar bin back in 98 and i grabbed them and was about to pay a dollar for them but instead i just stole them LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha! that's nothing, the other day, i was walking down the street, and some guy in a passing car threw a whole bunch of shrinkwrapped, mint condition copies of the SAWII brown 3xLP at me! i managed to catch most of them, and the ones that got damaged made a great meal!

Edited by modey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warp coloured vinyl sounds like shit :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fucking audiophiles. just enjoy the music

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol i wasn't trying to defend the integrity of the album. i don't really give a shit how it was mastered, it's one of his weaker releases imo. just thought you sounded like a pretentious dick so i wanted to call you out on it.

 

Do you still think I'm a pretentious dick?

 

Personally I think you sound like a teenager.

 

First you better stop waiving it like a feather-duster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jackson Michaels

lol i wasn't trying to defend the integrity of the album. i don't really give a shit how it was mastered, it's one of his weaker releases imo. just thought you sounded like a pretentious dick so i wanted to call you out on it.

 

Do you still think I'm a pretentious dick?

 

Personally I think you sound like a teenager.

 

First you better stop waiving it like a feather-duster.

 

IMG_01495.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how about the Bleep mastering? It's done from the CD or not?

 

 

 

 

 

ANd yeah 26 mixes from cash has some tracks mastered from fucking MP3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty sure it'd be from the CD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a lot of it is sampled sounds (banging metal gates, percussive hits and sounds from analogue synths etc). Around the time I would say a typical sampler would operate at a 32Khz sample rate which would result in the highest replayable frequency being 16Khz.. so nothing missing just never there in the first place.

 

most accurate observation in thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine a lot of it is sampled sounds (banging metal gates, percussive hits and sounds from analogue synths etc). Around the time I would say a typical sampler would operate at a 32Khz sample rate which would result in the highest replayable frequency being 16Khz.. so nothing missing just never there in the first place.

 

most accurate observation in thread

except that the Akai S1000 could do 16 bit 44.1KHz sampling, and that was released in 1988, and i would hazard a guess that the S1000 was quite popular amongst music makers

Edited by oscillik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

true, except i thought aphex had an affinity for using low bit rates to sample things. I know he used the Sequential Circuits Studio 440 which can sample almost up to 44.1 but has very small memory space. It had an adjustable sampling rate so it would make sense to me that he might have done it to save space or just for purely sonic purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...