From: Level42-request @ worldmachine.com (Level42 Digest) Subject: Level42 Digest V97 #59 _ ____ _ ____ _ _ ___ // //__ // / //__ // /__// __// //__ //__ \\_/ //__ //__ // /__ D I G E S T Level42 Digest Volume 97 : Issue 59 494 subscribers Today's topics: The Ring of Level 42 Morgan Roussel Human Hearing. . . Zaphod Beeblebrox Another song w/L42 title CenChem Hearing Range Marcus Bone Re: Level42 Digest V97 #58 Konstantin Braticevic Nothing much except... Jamie.SELL Human sonic perception Jeff Grous Pronunciation/Fav additions Taxi Come Talk To Me Zak ALAN MURPHY FUND Michael Payne ICEHOUSE Michael Payne Re : Christian Music Jason Bell MD: Interesting! dirk.vael Re: MD dribble Vince Mora Live set lists, please! John Venzon Live Disc - PP deleted tracks John Venzon Freq. Response Daniel James Sheepboy says "Remember the '80s?" ByrdLvl42 Re: Level42 Digest V97 #57 Boogievin ------------------------------ Subject: The Ring of Level 42 From: Morgan Roussel Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 12:55:37 +0100 Hi everybody!! I have created a ring of Level 42. If you want to join, go here: http://www.semaphore.fr/level42/webring.htm Thanxx, Morgan -- The Unofficial Level 42 Web Site ..... http://www.semaphore.fr/level42/ The Ultimate Bass Links .............. http://www.semaphore.fr/bass/ ------------------------------ Subject: Human Hearing. . . From: Zaphod Beeblebrox Organization: Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:36:52 -0600 rcol @ ix.netcom.com (Randall L Collins) writes. . . > Unless you're part dog, I don't think anyone should be able to hear > frequencies above 13,000 Hertz. Frequencies above this are inaudible. Actually, there are people who can hear into the 13k-20k range (as I can in one ear- I'm partially deaf in the other). Many women will be able to hear right to 20k well into their lives (probably 30's or so), while most men will have done something stupid to cause slight nerve damage, reducing their hearing into the mid 10-20k range by the time they're in their twenties. (Sorry if it sounds sexist, but this _does_ seem to be the case. > Some golden-eared audiophiles claim that this reduction causes a > degradation of sound. I don't think so, again, unless you're part dog > and can hear frequencies way above that threshold. However, it does (read on for an explination). > Other mediums (audio cassettes, > DAT, CD's) can record those higher frequencies but it doesn't matter. > You can't hear them! And besides, most music today doesn't get anywhere > NEAR these upper limits. The highest note on a pipe organ has a > frequency of 12.5kHz. This is the highest note that can be produced by > any instrument. Everything else falls below that, as far as acoustic > instruments go. Synthesized instruments might be able to go higher but > if it has no musical value (inaudible) why concern yourself with that? Because, music is more than the sum of the fundamental tones being played by the instruments. In every non-electronic instrument on the planet, the sound of the instrument is composed of the fundamental (the tone being played), as well as a complex series of harmonics, which will easily reach past the 20k limit of human hearing. Now, if it's beyond the range of human hearing, why bother recording it? Because it _does_ affect the sound. The timbre of a particular instrument is the sum of the fundamental, and the instrument's harmonics. If you cut off some of the harmonics, it alters the waveform slightly- thereby introducing distortion into the recording. This is the reason that many audiophiles are attempting to get a 96k sampling rate with a 24bit signal as the standard (or one standard) for DVD-audio. While this will only capture an additional octave (and a semitone or two), this will allow for greater fidelity in reproducing the nuances which make musical instruments unique. Zap ------------------------------ Subject: Another song w/L42 title From: CenChem @ aol.com Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 08:59:09 -0500 (EST) Hey gang, Any Daryl Hall ( from Hall & Oates ) fans out there? He just released a solo project in Japan that is labeled a collectors recording. The cd is called "Can't Stop Dreaming" and track 3 is a song called "Something About You" ( it doesn't touch Level ). Commentary time. I have to say that I enjoy Hall & Oates' older stuff, and whether you like them or not, this duo was HUGE worldwide back in the 80's, even bigger than Level. Daryl Hall has got to be one of the best vocalist I've ever heard, but he is really struggling with his solo career. He's recorded 3 solo projects and they have all been total disasters, as far as hits are concerned. And let's face it, without hits, you have no future as a recording artist. Here is another example of a very talented artist fighting fate. Daryl & John were supposed to be together, just like Mark and Mike were supposed to be together. WHY break up a duo that works so well together? Did you two have a wittle fight? Not getting along too well? Gimme a break and grow up. Maybe Daryl's solo career is something Mark should check out. Don't misunderstand me here. Mark King is my idol and I will buy whatever recordings he releases, and hopefully alot of stuff he doesn't release. But I still hope his music hits the charts or he won't continue to record. Anyone disagree here? Ever since Hall & Oates split back in 1992, Daryl can't buy a hit in the US, and I'm under the impression his solo stuff isn't doing well in countries that think the man is a god, like Japan. He even released a solo project called "Three Hearts In The Happy Ending Machine" back in 1985 while Hall & Oates were still together, and it still bombed! Boy, I can't see a clearer message hear, can you? Certain things were just meant to be, and certain musicians were supposed to be together. Even though Mark obviously carries the duo of Level 42, he needs Mike there with him to write, record, and play together. Mike plays a very big role in the group, and I'm sure splitting wasn't Mike's idea. I love Mark King, but I personally think this solo move is a mistake. Mike Lindup has got to be the easiest guy in the world to work with. If they need a change, just shift gears or change directions, don't split up. The odds are not in your favor. Besides Phil Collins, has anyone ever had a successful solo career after leaving a successful band? Just thought everyone might find this information interesting. Later, MIKE ------------------------------ Subject: Hearing Range From: Marcus Bone Organization: Kingston University (Science) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 12:56:32 GMT0BST I'm pretty sure the range of human hearing - is 20Hz to 20kHz - I will confirm this - but personally I reckon I've heard sounds of at least 16kHz. Later all Not you, Not me, Only memory ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Level42 Digest V97 #58 From: Konstantin Braticevic Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 15:32:46 +0000 Hi there! Randall wrote: > Unless you're part dog, I don't think anyone should be able to hear > frequencies above 13,000 Hertz. Frequencies above this are inaudible. > The frequency cutoff from ATRAC is about 18,000 to 19,000 Hertz (18kHz > to 19kHz). It could be lower depending on the music source. Some > golden-eared audiophiles claim that this reduction causes a degradation > of sound. I don't think so, again, unless you're part dog and can hear > frequencies way above that threshold. Other mediums (audio cassettes, > DAT, CD's) can record those higher frequencies but it doesn't matter. > You can't hear them! And besides, most music today doesn't get anywhere > NEAR these upper limits. The highest note on a pipe organ has a > frequency of 12.5kHz. This is the highest note that can be produced by > any instrument. Everything else falls below that, as far as acoustic > instruments go. Synthesized instruments might be able to go higher but > if it has no musical value (inaudible) why concern yourself with that? This is not entirely true. All sounds are made up of an (theoretically) unlimited number of overtones. A saxophone and a bass could play the exact same note, i.e. the same frequency, and still they sound different. Why? Because the instruments "timbre" (at any given moment) is made up of frequencies which co-exist together with the main frequency, the overtones. Some of these are, if isolated, inaudible, but they ARE a crucial part of the ones we can hear. Perhaps it takes a really well trained ear to hear the difference between a CD and a Minidisc, but I can't help but get suspicious when manufacturers (Sony) talk about "reduction in dataflows" that supposedly won't affect the listening experience. By the way: does anyone have the OVERTIME CD-single with live versions of GUARANTEED, OVERTIME and IF YOU WERE MINE? Koko. ------------------------------ Subject: Nothing much except... From: Jamie.SELL @ sb.com Date: 28 Feb 97 11:32:01 -0400 Hi all, just a quick note to say that I've got a rough list of items for sale that I've sent to Mark Hughes to put on the LevelADS page. No prices are added yet so give me your offers quickly before I double them and add on twenty. BTW who said there was no good music on the Brits the other night, the Manic Street Preachers won album of the year and best group, rightly deserved, and when they did "A Design for Life" I nearly dropped the Newky B it was so good. I seem to be in a circle of one, I have noticed that I only like L42 and nothing that everybody else is into. My musical tastes rest on the thrashing of alt. guitar bands (not alternative as it is seen in the US) and the Beatles, am I alone on this I wonder. TVMM, Jamie ------------------------------ Subject: Human sonic perception From: Jeff Grous Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 10:13:03 -0800 Hey, everybody! **DISCLAIMER: Non-l42 technobabble follows- read at your own peril!** I just couldn't stand by and let Randall get away with it... Randall writes: > ATRAC essentially adds a very complex digital signal processing > according to some human model for hearing soinaudible frequencies can be > omitted. This reduces the number of bits needed to store information. Yes. Sony did not want to compete with the CD format (why would people continue to buy regular CDs when they could buy a full-sized version that was recordable?), so the MD format was born. But MD requires a substantially reduced bit rate, and this is accomplished by throwing out information that the model says you can't hear. The basic premise behind this is something called "masking," which is a phonomenon that happens to humans- in a nutshell, a louder sound will tend to cover, or mask, another similar sound in the same frequency range. You generally will only hear the louder of two similar sounds. The trouble with this practice is that NO two individuals perceive sound in exactly the same way, and the model is therefore general in nature. My problem with the whole reduced bit-rate approach is that it throws information away- and once information is gone, it cannot be recovered, and that's trouble! My own evaluation of MD sound is that it's acceptable, but not as good as ordinary CD (which isn't nearly as good as the best analog mediums- I've heard many CDs played right alongside their 30IPS 2-track masters...and the difference is _night and day_!). I think MDs (and DCCs) when compared to CDs sound drier, more electronic, have less detail, a poorer soundstage and sound less open. I could never use it as my primary music delivery medium- it's not nearly good enough. > Now the question is: What is the true upper limit of hearing and does > these frequencies play a significant role in the overall sound? > Unless you're part dog, I don't think anyone should be able to hear > frequencies above 13,000 Hertz. Frequencies above this are inaudible. Well, that's not true for some individuals. The upper limits of my own hearing have been VERIFIED to top out at around 22 KHZ on pure tones. Also, there's a much larger issue involved than the fundamental highest tone developed by an instrument, and that's overtones. Overtones are what give things their sound, and overtones in musical performances can reach heights of 40-45KHZ. I am reminded of a study done where folks listened to identical source material with a verified bandwidth to 40KHZ. The way the study worked was that people listened to the full bandwidth performance and a band-limited version at 20KHZ. No one knew which performance was which, not even the testers. Guess what? The full 40KHZ version was rated by subjects as being more "musical, open, more natural sounding (their terms)." See, we may not be able to perceive pure tones at a given frequency, but we DO incorporate overtones into our overall perception of the entire sonic picture. The mechanism for this perception is not currently known. This is _one_ of the reasons the CD medium is not as accurate-sounding as the best analog mediums. In the CD world, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING going on above 20KHZ (except noise), plus there is a small amount of aliasing going on in the upper audible regions (foldover) because there is no magic way to completely kill energy beyond a selected point and keep everything below it unattenuated. You can approach a brick wall, but can never actually attain it. > The frequency cutoff from ATRAC is about 18,000 to 19,000 Hertz (18kHz > to 19kHz). It could be lower depending on the music source. Some > golden-eared audiophiles claim that this reduction causes a degradation > of sound. It does, but the sound is not degraded simply because of the limited high frequency bandwidth. An 18KHZ bandwidth is not all that bad, but there are other factors involved in the quality reduction, partially descibed above. > I don't think so, again, unless you're part dog and can hear > frequencies way above that threshold. Other mediums (audio cassettes, > DAT, CD's) can record those higher frequencies but it doesn't matter. > You can't hear them! See, the problem is that because _you_ as an individual are unable (or think you are unable) to perceive information above 13KHZ, you are ready to put us all into that category- and are ready to select a music- delivery medium for everyone that surely is "good enough." One size does not fit all! > And besides, most music today doesn't get anywhere > NEAR these upper limits. The highest note on a pipe organ has a > frequency of 12.5kHz. This is the highest note that can be produced by > any instrument. Everything else falls below that, as far as acoustic > instruments go. Synthesized instruments might be able to go higher but > if it has no musical value (inaudible) why concern yourself with that? Well, again, it's because the overtones ARE the sound. The spectral content of cymbals easily goes out to 17-18 KHZ and beyond. And if I've got energy at 15KHZ in whatever synth voice I'm using at a given point, it's there because I like the sound and want to incorporate it into the art. And if the energy is NOT there, the sound will be different, it's not the same voice at all. It _is_ part of the music. > Also with the editing features of MD, it's hard to beat... Couldn't agree with you more, there. But those things don't make up for the reduction in sonic quality. > The last thing I want to ask (sorry if I'm boring) is this: Does anyone > use their Hi-Fi VCR (assuming you have one) for audio-only recording? > I use it to record a mass amount of music and make cassettes and MD's > from it. It saves a lot of time having to pull out songs from all kinds > of CD's. The sound is phenomenal! CD quality sound, since the recording > head uses the entire width of the video tape. Something Hi-Fi VCR > owners might want to try. The hifi VCR is convenient, but it in no way offers CD quality. While the format does offer a good bandwidth (20-20KHZ), it suffers from switching noise artifacts (the audio signal is divided between two rotating heads, and they switch 60 times per second. Any sound that has a frequency component mathematically related to 60 HZ will suffer from distortion, and switching noise is also audible to a lesser extent on most all material), and dynamics (loud/soft/attack) errors caused by the companding noise reduction system used. It's good for casual stuff and making tapes for people who don't notice those things, but I wouldn't use it for anything serious. You'll never hear a record made from a hifi VCR master! My point with this whole diatribe is not to clobber Randall- what works for him works, and that's great. I wish I wasn't so particular about sonics, it'd be a much simpler world! But I think that the meduium that should be used for Digest mastering and projects is 44.1 KHZ DAT (NOT 48KHZ DAT. Sample-rate conversion sounds worse than the lower sampling rate does!) and nothing else. If folks want to use MD or DCC or hifi video tape as options for distribution, fine. But master to DAT, and then choose the distribution medium. My 6.02 x 10^23 cents worth... -Jeff "...Micro kid...speaks...digital..." ------------------------------ Subject: Pronunciation/Fav additions From: taxi @ europa.com (Taxi) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 10:24:21 -0800 (PST) Hi all. Could somebody please attempt a phoenetic spelling of "Jamiroquai." I'm sure that I'm pronouncing it wrong. Thankyouverymuchindeed. Some additions to the Favorites as indicated: Favorite Non-Slapped Bassline: Physical Presence Favorite Instrumental: Dune Tune Favorite B-Side: Can't Walk You Home (AYGB #7) Favorite Christian Band/Vocalist: Michael W. Smith As an aside to that, I met Wayne Kirkpatrick a few years ago after a MWS concert here in Oregon. We talked a bit about how I'm an aspiring bass player/produer/writer, and he was very encouraging. A real class act. Taxi ["jammear-o-kwy", quoted out of context from Mr. Jay Kay himself... -Eric] ------------------------------ Subject: Come Talk To Me From: Zak Date: Fri, 28 Feb 97 10:31:37 -0700 Apologies to Peter Gabriel there. Just wanted to mention that I set up a web site that's up now, you can go to it and type soemthing in the text field, and my Mac here at work will speak it out loud to me. You can get there from my home page, which is http://www.primenet.com/~xaqtly , and click on the "Speak to Zak" link near the top of the page. Now back to our regularly scheduled Digest. Zak Nilsson Xaqtly Music http://www.primenet.com/~xaqtly ------------------------------ Subject: ALAN MURPHY FUND From: Michael Payne Organization: Oklahoma State University Phys Plnt Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 12:53:53 -0600 Here is an address if you would like to make a contribution to the Alan Murphy Fund, Fight for the cure of HIV. I have received information on the Children Say Charities and will be posting that up next week. The Alan Murphy Fund c/o Richard Galbraith 1 Coleridge Gardens London NW6 3QH England, United Kingdom I hope all that can contribute CAN it is for a good cause to fight off such an evil and non-discriminating virus! Mike Payne ------------------------------ Subject: ICEHOUSE From: Michael Payne Organization: Oklahoma State University Phys Plnt Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 12:58:51 -0600 I noticed that someone, at the moment I can't remember who, posted that they liked ICEHOUSE. I have tried to get Iva Davies new album, but like L42 albums go, I CAN'T GET IT! I have Big Wheel and the Full Circle promo, with the 6 unreleased tracks (which is GRAND) but I would also like to hear a tape of them LIVE? Is this available anywhere? Mike ------------------------------ Subject: Re : Christian Music From: Jason Bell Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 19:13:50 -0800 For those of you who are bothered. My band, 'The Rumours Are True' is a Christian band from the UK. We recorded a CD called 'Longer Days'. The web page is at : http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/RumourRob/home.htm You can also link this page from my web page, the URL is below. Sorry for the shameless plug. Also thanks to all who mailed me about my Windows95 problems, the help was nice, thanks. -- Jason Bell EMAIL : xdr44 @ dial.pipex.com HTTP : http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/town/estate/xdr44 Chapman Stick Player + A Member Of The HTML Writers Guild. ------------------------------ Subject: MD: Interesting! From: "dirk.vael" Date: 28 Feb 97 18:06:56 Was quite an interesting article of Randall! >> Cooler still, my friend (who loaned me the DAT deck) recently bought a >> Sony MiniDisc 4-track recorder! You wanna talk power in a home studio? > A 4-track? It's funny I've never heard of that. Is it made for > professional use? That sounds like it would be totally cool. Yes it exists for some time now. If you're interested, I have some reviews on it from the MD Digest. It's very good, but has some little annoying tweaks though (esp. overwriting is implemented a bit clumsy) > Pre-recorded minidisc are a waste because you can get the same > stuff on CD's so it should solely be used as a recording medium. The quality of pre-recorded MDs is not as good as a CD copy of the same music on a re-recordable MD. > As long as I know who has a minidisc, perhaps we can get rare stuff > recorded on it. I know there's stuff out there I would like to get my > hands on. Randall, mail me! > Physically speaking, the minidisc, being smaller than the compact disc > cannot hold the same amount of information as a CD so a data reduction > system had to be created. ATRAC essentially adds a very complex digital > signal processing according to some human model for hearing so > inaudible frequencies can be omitted. This reduces the number of bits > needed to store information. MD stores 240 MB of compressed sound. > Now the question is: What is the true upper limit of hearing and does > these frequencies play a significant role in the overall sound? NO!!! > The frequency cutoff from ATRAC is about 18,000 to 19,000 Hertz (18kHz > to 19kHz). It could be lower depending on the music source. Some > golden-eared audiophiles claim that this reduction causes a degradation > of sound. I don't think so, again, unless you're part dog and can hear > frequencies way above that threshold. I really did a lot of testing, and no, I can spot any difference between the original CD and the MD copy. Funny to note, but MD copies of tapes of average quality sound better than the tape itself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really, try a normal position tape which sounds a bit worn out... Then record the tape as dynamic as possible (= as loud as possible without clipping). Really COOOOL, man! > Also with the editing features of MD, it's hard to beat! Not hard to beat, you just CAN'T beat it! > In fact, when I recorded LIW 87 > on to my MD, I recorded the whole thing first and then I broke it up > into its many tracks. Hear a glitch? You can take that out too without > affecting the continuity of the recording. Try these things with other > recording mediums! And you have instant access to any track(s) you > want. :) I dubbed myL @ W87 LD with digital optic cable... track marks were set automatically... Afterwards I added MicroKid also digitally into the gig... well... if I play this MD for somebody and I tell him there was a track added afterwards, he can't find which one, because you don't hear any abrupt changes... KEWL again! > I hear there's an upcoming system called CD-RW. I don't know much about > this but you're suppose to be able to write-many-times onto a special > CD. Perhaps someone might know more about this. CDRW can re-record CDs, but it's not compatible with usual CDs (you can't play a CD-RW on an ordinary CD player), plus the editing capabilities are much less powerful than MD. Usual CDs play ok on a CDRW drive. I wonder if this will be a success, since it costs more than a Jaz and is less powerful. For music it has no future I think, since it's incompatible with all current CD/CDROM players. So long guys, have a nice weekend, I'm going home Dirkies ------------------------------ Subject: Re: MD dribble From: "Vince Mora" Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 13:20:20 -0700 (MST) > I applaud Sony for taking a > risk and backing it up with advertisement, software, and money, money, > money! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Surely you jest! Sony has totally dropped the ball on marketing MiniDisc in the States. Fewer people here know about MiniDisc than watch Babylon 5. :) And this for a technology that's been out for how many years? 7? 10? > Pre-recorded minidisc are a waste because you can get the same > stuff on CD's so it should solely be used as a recording medium. Hear hear. I too use MD as a way of evolving up from tapes, not as a way of buying pre-recorded music. Plus I hear the record companies still use older ATRAC methods to make the discs so they sound like tscheiss. > As long as I know who has a minidisc, perhaps we can get rare stuff > recorded on it. I know there's stuff out there I would like to get my > hands on. Dirkies is your man. He made me my very first L42 MiniDisc -- whatta guy :) > The last thing I want to ask (sorry if I'm boring) is this: Does anyone > use their Hi-Fi VCR (assuming you have one) for audio-only recording? Sure do! I have slowly been archiving all my L42 12" singles to Hi-Fi VHS to save the vinyl. Now however I may just archive it all to MD ... ObL42: last chance to grab the MPEG2 of the Forever Now Porky Remix, I'll be taking it down soon. The address is www.swcp.com/synth/level42/audio/fn-porky.mp2 Maybe I'll put up the ADSC Remix of TBWYAgain next so Pat can have a good 80's trip. :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Vince Mora email: synth @ swcp.com http://www.swcp.com/synth/ voice: USA: 505 332 0139 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "We wish to suggest a structure for the salt of deoxyribose nucleic acid (D.N.A.). This structure has novel features which are of considerable biological interest." -- Watson and Crick, 1953 ------------------------------ Subject: Live set lists, please! From: John Venzon Date: Fri, 28 Feb 97 14:05:16 -0800 Everyone, Work is continuing on the live disc, and though it's slow going, it is moving forward. To help me decide the order of the tracks, it would be nice to get as many live set lists from Level 42, mostly from shows before RITF/World Machine era. Although Level 42 never performed the set list that will make up the live disc, it'd be nice to get an idea of where they usually fell in the set list. You can post them to the digest (Eric.. don't hit me!) or email them to me directly. Thanks! John V jvenzon @ deltanet.com jvenzon @ aol.com ------------------------------ Subject: Live Disc - PP deleted tracks From: John Venzon Date: Fri, 28 Feb 97 14:05:18 -0800 > Also, is there a CD version of Physical Presence with the three > instrumental tracks intact? Otherwise, I have all the original CD > catalogue ( I have a great import dealer, but he doesn't do much on > singles). I am including the three deleted tracks from Physical Presence on the new Live Disc (the followup to As Years Go By). They are dubbed from a clean vinyl copy to Digital Audio Tape, and sounds great. All praise is due to Lars! John V ------------------------------ Subject: Freq. Response From: Daniel James Organization: Mathsoft, Seattle Division Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 15:01:17 -0800 > Unless you're part dog, I don't think anyone should be able to hear > frequencies above 13,000 Hertz. Frequencies above this are inaudible. > The frequency cutoff from ATRAC is about 18,000 to 19,000 Hertz (18kHz > to 19kHz). It could be lower depending on the music source. Some > golden-eared audiophiles claim that this reduction causes a degradation > of sound. I don't think so, again, unless you're part dog and can hear > frequencies way above that threshold. Other mediums (audio cassettes, > DAT, CD's) can record those higher frequencies but it doesn't matter. > You can't hear them! And besides, most music today doesn't get anywhere > NEAR these upper limits. The highest note on a pipe organ has a > frequency of 12.5kHz. This is the highest note that can be produced by > any instrument. Everything else falls below that, as far as acoustic > instruments go. Synthesized instruments might be able to go higher but > if it has no musical value (inaudible) why concern yourself with that? Yes, but it becomes a bit more complicated than that. You might wonder why you'd bother recording frequencies higher than you can here. The fact is that the oscillations that occur at those frequencies interact and affect the ocisllations at lower frequencies, so elliminating them is going to have an affect on the overall timbre and harmonics. Just because you can't hear the actual pitches, doesn't mean they aren't important. To say otherwise is to deny the obvious warmth of analog recordings. I recently sunk a bit of money back into my turntable and discovered that there are a large number of people going back to the old, warm feeling that comes from an analog recording (of course that comes at a tradeoff with hiss and other imperfections). Perhaps we'll see this become less of a factor with the enhanced quality that DVD is supposed to provide. Synth, thanks for the mpeg file. I have this 12" at home, but I haven't had a chance to listen to it very much. Fun to hear it coming through my Pee Cee at work (they finally gave me a Pentium so that Windows can crash faster, oops--I said I wasn't going to do that anymore...). -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel James - Database Administrator djames @ statsci.com DAPD Div of MathSoft (formerly StatSci) (206) 283-8802 x284 ------------------------------ Subject: Sheepboy says "Remember the '80s?" From: ByrdLvl42 @ aol.com Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 23:20:07 -0500 (EST) Winston and Lolita: If you REALLY want to talk classic funk, '80s groove, no discussion is complete without mentioning Cameo (Attack me with your love, Single Life, Talking out the Side of Your Neck), the Gap Band (Burn rubber on me), Lakeside, and Loose Ends (Hanging on a String). But on the light side don't forget Duran Duran, Tears for Fears, Go West, Spandeau Ballet, and Billy Joel(?). So draw this picture...circa 1985. Ron runs the White House, but Cosby's the Father who knows best, a "Power PC" was an Apple IIe with a 5 1/4 floppy, and all GOOD bands played Yamaha DX-7s. I'm spraying Care Free Curl Curl Activator into my Jeri Curl, being careful not to drip any onto my green izod shirt. I'm drinking New Recipe Coke and prying the cubes off my Rubix Cube. As I'm buying my first L42 45 album (remember those, guys? Thats the only way I can find Level 42: The Remixes) I'm watching "16 Candles" and "Willow". "Star Wars" is now only about 8 years old now (A youngster). The Brat Pack, then looked a lot less like the Rat Pack. The biggest difference from then is the music. The music of the 80's was light and frivolous. Even goofy. The music of the '90s is SO DAMN HEAVY! Its like the difference between the light hearted teen rock n roll of the 50's and the protest jams of the 60's. Thats means disco has no choice but to make a comeback, if this trend is true. But the tremendously fun dance music of the 80's has decayed to the self absorbed drivel of the 90's. I remember the good ol' days when a Prince was a prince, and Madonna's name was not a literal description of the artist (and was still "Like a Virgin"), You have to be into S/M to dig the music out there today. Rap stars make two albums tops before they get mowed down in a blaze of machismo, and Heavy Metal did not describe the shotgun pellets some doctor pulled out of a dead musicians skull after his suicide. If a girl broke up she go out singing "I'm looking for a new love, Baby", instead of "You'd ought to know!" But then even good ol Level 42 followed suit with this horrid trend. I site the following examples: Comparison: 80's- "Something About You" 90's- "All Over You" 80's- "Hours By the Window" 90's- "Don't Bother Me" 80's- "Turn It On" 90's- "The Sunbed Song" 80's- "Seven Days" 90's- "She Can't Help Herself" 80's- "Leaving Me Now" 90's- "Talking in Yor Sleep" etc... Maybe its a bit of a stretch, but you'd be hard pressed to argue that "Forever Now" has moments where there's a deliberate trend to make the band look internationalist in whatever form is effective. I site the psuedo-techno sounding "Learn To Say No". Make no mistake, I love L42, and Forever Now. I guess I'm just getting old... "We're Only Human After All..." Byrdman (Please Use Before 4-23-97) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Level42 Digest V97 #57 From: Boogievin @ aol.com Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 01:21:51 -0500 (EST) Just checking in, as a new clubber, Really sad to hear about the breakup. But I know Mark and Mike will continue to put out quality stuff. Any other Californians out there digging Level 42? PS. my first exposure to the 42 was at the 87 Madunna tour at Anaheim Stadium in Orange County. As I was listening (I could hardly see the band) I said to my self "Who are these guys(sorry Annie!) they're f***king incredible! I was sold after that. Keep it alive Vince