Yesterday afternoon I left work and of course it's TGIF. So I stop off at that Irish vendor of fermented grape juice and other water/ethanol solutions. Upon arriving home I pop a cork (well twist a cap but that doesn't have the same ring) because, you know TGIF, and put on some suitable relaxation music. Towards the end of side one I thought to myself that it could be louder but the gain control suggested otherwise, so I put a meter on it. It measured in the 117-122dB range.
Am I a rev-head??
Disclaimers/excuses:
I let rip for about 1 album every week or two and it's in the afternoon. I'm neither as loud or as consistent as the kids over the road (or me decades ago).
It was Emerson Lake and Palmer 'Pictures at an Exhibition' after all. My uncle was in London in the early 70's and he saw Pink Floyd and Deep Purple but said ELP was _loud_, so I was just being authentic . Also these early 70's recordings just don't have the bottom end of today's recordings and no amount of computer enhancement really fixes that. So the tenancy is to turn it up to compensate. [I have some modern jazz recordings where the double bass is very full and clean, so it's not the sound system that is lacking.]
So come on, tell me the worst; I'm deaf to your insults .
Base Freak maybe given your perceived lack of base
Head Banger more likely - medically verifiable - check for aneurisms and hematomas
What about plain Deaf or Deaf Head - obviously you cant hear too well
Hope I have complied with the intent of the thread !!
Confessing your sins is a good start.
But a good rule is..if you find you enjoy something that is a good indicator that such should be avoided.
I must say what I miss most ,apart from the peace and dark sky, of living in the bush, was the opportunity to turn my 60 watt guitar amp up to near max and play the 3 string guitar.
Lucky that now being in the city I have been able to realise that was far too indulgent.
i think modern recordings on the whole are utter crap!!
i am a vinyl maniac and i think for rock the best recordings came from the mid 80's, and indeed a lot of the best recordings were aussie pub bands!
i find modern rock bands are recorded too loudly in the first instance and that they lose stereo "imagery"........... it is like a wall of noise emanating from two boxes in the corner of the room
i have an original lightning hopkins vinyl from 1957 that is an astounding recording, you know where every body is situated on the stage AND their depth of position................ i cannot tell where the music is coming from as i cannot "hear" the speakers in a sense if you know what i mean?
pt
Several suggestions come to mind, but it seems we are kindred spirits. Thankfully my relatively remote location is not only dark, but has the advantage of no close neighbours..................Roger Waters rips!
Alex you need a fuzz box, phaser and a wah wah pedal for your guitar, then you will be in heaven.
David, I like to freak the gran-kids out with some 1960's acid rock, i.e. Pink Floyd, King Crimson, E,L,P, Moody Blues, Jethro Tull, Genesis on the British side and Jimi Hendrix, Frank Zappa, Doors, Grateful Dead on the American side.
Plus 100's more LP's that I have and are all scratch free.
Hmm, I have a Denon Amp poking into a surround sound system, 2 x 70 litre Polk Studio spkrs up front, a 40 litre centre , 2 x 50 litre back spkrs and a 12" Subbie. I can push them at 100% without clipping or any distortion at all.
Last time I did that I had noise control round in about 10 minutes. It is extremely loud but perfect. I haven't played it at anywhere near that volume for years but the reproduction is absolutely beautiful.
Nonetheless we are about to buy a deck and go vinyl because unless you are playing FLAC digital there is still something missing that only vinyl can reproduce. There is a concrete slab which used to be part of an unused front door step where I'll build a plinth pier (?) just behind the system. I am just hoping my already damaged hearing can still discern the subtle ambience of it.
No more rev head but Pink Floyd, Stones, Jethro Tull, Led Zepp, and some of the more modern releases by Robert Plant and others all coming out on vinyl to enjoy. And it doesn't have to be loud to enjoy.
It was Emerson Lake and Palmer 'Pictures at an Exhibition' after all. My uncle was in London in the early 70's and he saw Pink Floyd and Deep Purple but said ELP was _loud_, so I was just being authentic .
So the closing words in Pictures is "Deaf is life"
To think I've misheard them for all these years ...
Confessing your sins is a good start.
But a good rule is..if you find you enjoy something that is a good indicator that such should be avoided.
I must say what I miss most ,apart from the peace and dark sky, of living in the bush, was the opportunity to turn my 60 watt guitar amp up to near max and play the 3 string guitar.
Lucky that now being in the city I have been able to realise that was far too indulgent.
Alex
That's not indulgent
Check music shops for AKG K44 h/phones, they're cheapish and I always have a couple of pair in the studio.
And damn, some people have good taste in music, some of my favourite bands being mentioned. Actually saw Ian Anderson a couple of years ago at the Opera House and will be there in March sitting side of stage for Robert Plant.
I really like going for long periods without an amp.
Even back playing acoustic guitar or practice on the electric and little sound it seemed you had to play some how better so when you got going with an amp it was just explosive.
More so with the little ciger box guitar. I play it mostly unamplified and even the little amp is not much up on none...but after a time like that and you plug in and adjust and play ..well I wish I could perform in public like that as I recon its great...anyways I enjoy it exclusively for me... only improvised blues but heck its uplifting.
Yesterday afternoon I left work and of course it's TGIF. So I stop off at that Irish vendor of fermented grape juice and other water/ethanol solutions. Upon arriving home I pop a cork (well twist a cap but that doesn't have the same ring) because, you know TGIF, and put on some suitable relaxation music. Towards the end of side one I thought to myself that it could be louder but the gain control suggested otherwise, so I put a meter on it. It measured in the 117-122dB range.
Am I a rev-head??
Disclaimers/excuses:
I let rip for about 1 album every week or two and it's in the afternoon. I'm neither as loud or as consistent as the kids over the road (or me decades ago).
It was Emerson Lake and Palmer 'Pictures at an Exhibition' after all. My uncle was in London in the early 70's and he saw Pink Floyd and Deep Purple but said ELP was _loud_, so I was just being authentic . Also these early 70's recordings just don't have the bottom end of today's recordings and no amount of computer enhancement really fixes that. So the tenancy is to turn it up to compensate. [I have some modern jazz recordings where the double bass is very full and clean, so it's not the sound system that is lacking.]
So come on, tell me the worst; I'm deaf to your insults .
Sounds good to me David . No insults here. There is something about rock concert / discotheque sound pressure levels that at times are just what you need. That percussive effect on the body is often what we crave and missing in headphones or when listened to at much lower levels. That coupled with the ear's non linear response with SPL, refer Fletcher-Munson Loudness contours is another reason we like it loud or louder - The frequency response/sensitivity of the ear becomes more linear as SPL increases. I used to use it (I'd just say "Fletcher-Munson") as an excuse to the folks to play the music loud, much to their "amazement".
Of course with longer exposure at higher SPL not so good, so we need to exercise care to avoid hearing damage or at the very least, reduce listener fatigue.
Best
JA
PS: In my other life I was/ am a music lover/audiophile or maybe the other way around.
I can understand wanting/needing volume, it's a valid point.
Aside from that, there've been on and off discussions for a long time regarding analogue (eg:vinyl, tape, etc.) vs digital audio recording(s) with both sides having frequently polarised opinions. I run 16trks of dedicated h/disk and 16 trks of 1" tape and have come to appreciate the pros and cons of each and to be honest and kinda quoting Jethro Tull, "they're two different animals living jungles apart". Digital is convenient, analogue can be comprehensively, more "accurate".
Two past "studies" that are potentially interesting are...........:
One studying the recorded frequency response of the same segment of music when recorded to both digital and analogue. Spectrograph pics attached.
Following on from this is the other, the results of a detailed study into brain activity when exposed to both analogue and digitally recorded music. The general conclusion was that above the audible hearing range which is ~ 20kHz and below, other bodily "systems" sense the higher frequencies and we have a "positive" reaction to these higher frequencies.
Nah,you sound fairly normal to me, possibly because I do the same thing with no concern for the neighbours, one of whom has being doing a reno for two years, banging away from daylight till dusk, and the other who had a yappy dog that barked from dusk till daylight.
I worked for a record company back in the early 70's so I have a fair collection of vinyl, and still use the speakers that the sound engineer designed for me.
They are Danish 'Peerless' speakers, 12", 6" and 2" with built in crossover in a very heavy box, and they still sound as good as new.
Am I a rev head? Quite possibly, having owned a 1275cc Cooper 'S', two GT Falcons including an XA with the full house RPO83 kit, and still have a 1200 Suzuki Bandit in the garage.
I can understand wanting/needing volume, it's a valid point.
Aside from that, there've been on and off discussions for a long time regarding analogue (eg:vinyl, tape, etc.) vs digital audio recording(s) with both sides having frequently polarised opinions. I run 16trks of dedicated h/disk and 16 trks of 1" tape and have come to appreciate the pros and cons of each and to be honest and kinda quoting Jethro Tull, "they're two different animals living jungles apart". Digital is convenient, analogue can be comprehensively, more "accurate".
Two past "studies" that are potentially interesting are...........:
One studying the recorded frequency response of the same segment of music when recorded to both digital and analogue. Spectrograph pics attached.
Following on from this is the other, the results of a detailed study into brain activity when exposed to both analogue and digitally recorded music. The general conclusion was that above the audible hearing range which is ~ 20kHz and below, other bodily "systems" sense the higher frequencies and we have a "positive" reaction to these higher frequencies.
Thanks for the spectros', quite informative. never seen the difference before to understand why it is. Fascinating ,....
I think collectively we are a bunch of rev-heads, welcome to the club ..
Am I a rev-head
. Also these early 70's recordings just don't have the bottom end of today's recordings and no amount of computer enhancement really fixes that. So the tenancy is to turn it up to compensate. [I have some modern jazz recordings where the double bass is very full and clean, so it's not the sound system that is lacking.]
.
