mlukfc.com Forums - Meat's song writers Diana Warren & Desmond Child

mlukfc.com Forums (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/index.php)

- General Messages (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - Meat's song writers Diana Warren & Desmond Child (https://www.mlukfc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19650)

greg	09 Sep 2014 16:29

Meat's song writers Diana Warren & Desmond Child

which one me theses writer. you would rather have write meat songs for . meat i can't choose. who would you have ???

CarylB

09 Sep 2014 17:07

I think we can guess at what Meat's answer would be ;) He's worked with Diane more recently, and has no wish to work with Desmond again

AndrewG

09 Sep 2014 17:27

Desmond Child gave Meat some of his best songs over the last decade in my opinion. It's a shame he is remembered with so much negativity and many fans seem to follow that course as well in my opinion. When I think Meat I like to think of songs such as Blind as a Bat / Alive not songs in which he swears or were written for a bunch of other unspecific people originally. :-(

CarylB

09 Sep 2014 20:47

I loved both those songs too .. and don't know Child and have no negative feelings towards him whatsoever .. but I still stand by my reply to Greg :-)

greg	10 Sep 2014 10:28

Childs has worked with so many rock bands . I Fo me. Desmonds . Feel a lot more rock than warren

Evil Ernie

10 Sep 2014 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB (Post 605839)

I think we can guess at what Meat's answer would be ;) He's worked with Diane more recently, and has no wish to work with Desmond again

When was the last Diane Warren song? The last one I recall was 'What About Love'. DC co-wrote 'Elvis in Vegas' from HCTB, so ML has worked with him more recently.

Or are we talking a track from the new album?

renegadeangel

11 Sep 2014 03:58

Not trying to really start anything but the only big time success Meat has ever had has been with one songwriter
Steinman
Everything else and with all due respect to the other writers pales in comparison. Theirs is the perfect partnership
Steinman writes what only Meat can give true life to through his interpretation and performance,

Evil Ernie

11 Sep 2014 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605892)

This is so true it hurts.

IMO Jim should have written ML 6+ full length albums and been consistently relevant for years, but alas that is not the way things turned out (and who's to say conclusively that they would have been a success, who knows?).

This is with all due respect to every song writer and contributor that he has ever had. It's just that Jim is the King, and you can't top the king without becoming the King yourself.

CarylB

11 Sep 2014 05:20

Doesn't for me .. I simply love some of the songs from other composers that Meat has recorded .. in particular Did I Say That, which to me is one of the best he's done. Horses for courses I guess

Mr. Happy

11 Sep 2014 07:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605891)

When was the last Diane Warren song? The last one I recall was 'What About Love'. DC co-wrote 'Elvis in Vegas' from HCTB, so ML has worked with him more recently.

He didn't really work with Child on Elvis on Vegas, though. Child wrote that with Bon Jovi in the early 2000s and it was literally given to Meat after the fact. Saying they worked together on that isn't entirely accurate.

Technicalities, but yeah :lol:

The last time Meat would have worked with either Warren or Child would have been Warren on Hang Cool Teddy Bear. If I'm remembering correctly, wasn't she meant to have a song on the album that never showed up? There was a YouTube video with her and everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB (Post 605894)

Doesn't for me .. I simply love some of the songs from other composers that Meat has recorded .. in particular Did I Say That, which to me is one of the best he's done. Horses for courses I guess

James Michael is one of the best songwriters Meat has ever worked with. I would take a full album by him as readily as I would a full album by Jim :up:

JennaG

11 Sep 2014 09:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB (Post 605894)

Doesn't for me .. I simply love some of the songs from other composers that Meat has recorded.

Me too. Hell In A Handbasket remains to be my favourite album and there are several songs by other songwriters that I prefer to to some of Steinman's songs. Of course, there are some Steinman songs that I enjoy but I personally wouldn't be any more excited with an album of Steinman songs than I would be with an album of songs by other writers.

I guess it's a case of each to their own. ;)

tonyloaf

11 Sep 2014 09:53

i dont really think you can compare a Meat/Steinman album to any other Meat has done, they are all good but different in alot of ways to Meat/Steinman songs.

CarylB

11 Sep 2014 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Happy (Post 605895)

The last time Meat would have worked with either Warren or Child would have been Warren on Hang Cool Teddy Bear. If I'm remembering correctly, wasn't she meant to have a song on the album that never showed up? There was a YouTube video with her and everything.

That's what I was referring to, yes :) Seen together, seemed to be working, and clearly on good terms

Quote:

James Michael is one of the best songwriters Meat has ever worked with. I would take a full album by him as readily as I would a full album by Jim :up:

Me too ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyloaf (Post 605898)

i dont really think you can compare a Meat/Steinman album to any other Meat has done

Nor do I .. it seems a pointless and to be honest rather tiring exercise, so I didn't ;)

I simply don't agree that only when singing Steinman compositions is Meat a great performer. It seems as diminishing to say this as it would be to say that Steinman's songs can only be great songs if Meat sings them. Of course in combination we expect them to be great, but that should not take anything from each as individuals, great in their own right.

I am really looking forward to the new album with all the tracks Meat will deliver, more than I would be to one with 6 songs only .. but then I am a Meat fan, and for me he has a proven ability to select songs that I love to listen to, and listen to again and again.

renegadeangel

11 Sep 2014 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB (Post 605901)

That's what I was referring to, yes :) Seen together, seemed to be working, and clearly on good terms

Me too ;)

Nor do I .. it seems a pointless and to be honest rather tiring exercise, so I didn't ;)

I simply don't agree that only when singing Steinman compositions is Meat a great performer. It seems as diminishing to say this as it would be to say that Steinman's songs can only be great songs if Meat sings them. Of course in combination we expect them to be great, but that should not take anything from each as individuals, great in their own right.

Interesting. From DEADRINGER to BAT 2 people generally considered Meat to be a footnote in rock history. I personally enjoyed every album he put out but if you look at his success rate, it has always been with Steinman.
Fair or not the record companies never gave him his due with the proper backing unless Steinman was involved. The proof again will be there when the new album comes out.
My guess is that it will have so much more publicity than any album Meat has released since BAT 3

I am really looking forward to the new album with all the tracks Meat will deliver, more than I would be to one with 6 songs only .. but then I am a Meat fan, and for me he has a proven ability to select songs that I love to listen to, and listen to again and again.

I feel the same way about that and the same way with other artists. But that is the reserved place for the truly diehard fan. The casual fan doesn't own HCTB or HIAHB or even CHSIB but they do have BAT 1 2 and 3
And the casual fans outnumber the diehards so the record companies are looking at attracting the casual fans moreso than the diehards as they already have them

Evil One

11 Sep 2014 13:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605905)

The casual fan doesn't own HCTB or HIAHB or even CHSIB but they do have BAT 1 2 and 3

I suspect more casual fans own Dead Ringer and Welcome To The Neighbourhood than Bat 3.

CarylB

11 Sep 2014 17:23

Quote:

Interesting. From DEADRINGER to BAT 2 people generally considered Meat to be a footnote in rock history. I personally enjoyed every album he put out but if you look at his success rate, it has always been with Steinman.

Guess it depends where you live. Meat was never a "footnote" here .. and Dead Ringer in particular was very successful in commercial terms, and I agree with Evil on DR and Welcome, although he too is from the UK, so perhaps it's truer here.

Even if you judge success purely by sales, all Meat's albums have sold well here, although he has carried almost a millstone in terms of BOOH which shouldn't be the yardstick as it was something so exceptional set against most rock albums, let alone Meat's. He has always had a record company prepared to back an album (whoever wrote the songs) .. his first yardstick, and one he has always achieved over many years and despite huge changes in the music industry. That equates with success in my book ;)

Anyway .. I have responded that I am looking forward to the new album, am pleased there will be many songs on it, do not consider anything Meat records penned by other great writers than Steinman are somehow lesser, and am getting off the merry-go-round ;)

AndrewG

11 Sep 2014 17:32

Several (non-Steinman) tracks on CHSIB and Bat 3 sounded more Steinmany to me than the Steinman ones we did get on Bat 3. :?
CHSIB
DIST
Alive
Blind as a Bat
What about love?
I think these are my 5 favourite Meat songs since VBO 1998. + Prize Fight Lover.
Even Monster is Loose was pretty cool I thought. No one ever seems to mention it anymore.

Evil Ernie

11 Sep 2014 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605916)

I hear what you're saying, and I agree with the Jim songs not sounding as 'jim' as they could, but IMO the ONLY song to ape Jim and do a good job was 'I'd Lie For You.'

I like the other stuff that ML does, but I will never mistake almost any of it as being written by Jim. The song mentioned above was the only instance I can think of me thinking it was him.

JennaG

11 Sep 2014 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605924)

I like the other stuff that ML does, but I will never mistake almost any of it as being written by Jim.

I don't think I've ever really mistaken any non-Steinman song to have been written by Steinman but then again I don't tend to put much thought into who writes songs on a whole.

renegadeangel

12 Sep 2014 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605916)

Again proves the point. If you can't have Steinman try to get someone to write like Steinman.
Meat has always been big in Europe and Caryl is correct with DEADRINGER being very well received. Interesting that Steinman wrote it and did most of the production on it.
Meat has tried very hard and I give him alot of credit for his efforts with CHSIB, HCTB and HIAHB as I too like those albums. And if the record companies ever gave it the right push they all could have been better sellers than they were.
But the record companies look at the track record of Meat's albums without Steinman's input or very little of and the sales aren't there
Sure sales aren't everything. But sales mean hits and that is what every artist surely wants is the recognition of their efforts.
Meat definitely deserves this.
If anyone really thinks that Meat is going to do better without Steinman, checkout how emotional he was on his last european tour speaking about Jim.
Meat really wants to have Steinman's songs again.

JennaG

12 Sep 2014 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605935)

If anyone really thinks that Meat is going to do better without Steinman, checkout how emotional he was on his last european tour speaking about Jim. Meat really wants to have Steinman's songs again.

I don't think anyone in this thread has suggested that Meat Loaf will do BETTER without Steinman just that they enjoy the work of other songwriters too.

renegadeangel

12 Sep 2014 02:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by JennaG (Post 605937)

I don't think anyone in this thread has suggested that Meat Loaf will do BETTER without Steinman just that they enjoy the work of other songwriters too.

Never said they did. My point was more to do with the lack of support by the record companies and the fact that the general public identify more with Meat and his Steinman catalogue then his other works

Julie in the rv mirror

12 Sep 2014 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605938)

Honestly, I think most of the general public have no clue who Steinman is, even though they do know his songs.

In Meat's case, I think it's more of an association with BOOH than with Steinman specifically.

Evil Ernie

12 Sep 2014 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605939)

The general public doesn't care about filler songs either. We as ML/Steinman fans do. I personally really identify with Jim's style, so I can generally tell.

It matters to me dammit!!

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BvTNyKIGXiI/0.jpg

JennaG

12 Sep 2014 12:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605938)

Never said they did.

Sorry, that was my mistake. I guess I misinterpreted you when you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605935)

If anyone really thinks that Meat is going to do better without Steinman, checkout how emotional he was on his last european tour speaking about Jim.

Your use of the term 'anyone' and the rest of the sentence that follows, implied to me that you were referring to people here as much as other people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605939)

Honestly, I think most of the general public have no clue who Steinman is, even though they do know his songs.

To be honest, I don't actually believe that most of them really care either. As far as they're concerned, they buy an album to hear Meat Loaf singing some really great songs. They don't put a second thought into who wrote it.

AndrewG

12 Sep 2014 12:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605939)

Meh not sure about that. I think he is better known than most song writers where the artist is not writing the songs themselves.

Especially in Europe I get the impression he seems well known and remembered by casual music lovers because of "Total Eclipse of the heart". UK perhaps more Bat, AFL and Dead Ringer for Love

renegadeangel

12 Sep 2014 12:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by JennaG (Post 605946)

Sorry, that was my mistake. I guess I misinterpreted you when you said:

Your use of the term 'anyone' and the rest of the sentence that follows, implied to me that you were referring to people here as much as other people.

To be honest, I don't actually believe that most of them really care either. As far as they're concerned, they buy an album to hear Meat Loaf singing some really great songs. They don't put a second thought into who wrote it.

The people here are the diehard fans and love Meat and will always support him. I'm thinking more in terms of the average person when I say anyone.
And I do agree with you to a point that it is the song that Meat sings that makes people take note.
But it seems that no real publicity effort by Meat's label exists unless Steinman is involved. Proven track record in the eyes of the record companies when they team up.
MATLAF
BA
BBIS
are barely on the radar anymore expect to the diehard fans. Even in concert it is extremely rare to hear Meat perform one of the songs from these albums as people want to hear BAT and BAT 2 and whatever he has recently released.
CHSIB
HCTB
HIAHB
will unfortunately end up going the same way.
This is too bad cause out of the six albums there are some really good songs.

TheDoode

12 Sep 2014 13:04

Jim has had 18 number one songs, which is no small thing.

The 'who knows Jim Steinman' debate is futile because it entirely depends on your social circle. As a writer and a producer, he's definitely well known. In the eyes of the general British public? More so than most. But again, it's demographic based. Does anyone under 21 really know who he is? Probably not, unless they're rock/metal fans (and now we're into the realms of subcultures). So - futile!

Meat Loaf sings great songs. Jim Steinman writes great songs. The most notable and successful (in terms of sales, chart position, and general public recognition) are always a collaboration of the two. Jim has had successes outside of his collaborations with Meat, and Meat has had successes outside of his collaborations with Jim (though maybe not to the same degree).

Bottom line: let's not forget how this whole thing started.

AndrewG

12 Sep 2014 13:09

I really can't see the last album being called Meat Loaf & Jim Steinman if the album has 7 songs by other writers. But I hope I'm proven wrong.

JennaG

12 Sep 2014 13:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel (Post 605948)

Even in concert it is extremely rare to hear Meat perform one of the songs from these albums as people want to hear BAT and BAT 2 and whatever he has recently released.

Well they're the ones losing out on the opportunity to enjoy new music. On the last tour only ONE song from HIAH was performed which I thought was such a shame because there was probably a fair few people in that audience who will never hear anything else from what I believe was a good album. Do they care? I very much doubt it because after all they're not going to miss what they don't know.

I think that ALL of Meat Loaf's albums should have a fair shot at getting the support from record companies regardless of who wrote the songs. After all, shouldn't it be based on merit? If they're only interested in Jim Steinman then why bother with the others at all? After all that's what 'everyone' wants isn't it?

AndrewG

12 Sep 2014 13:28

Face it this type of music as far as the record industry goes is pretty much dead. Chrissie Hynde said it exactly that in an interview I saw this week. Why would any record company invest a lot? It's quite obvious when artists such as U2 give away complete albums that there is no more money to be made here. Use it for a catalyst to tour or for the hard core fans. Reaching new ones I think is almost impossible now. Unless you are a female singer with a big ass and that's constantly on display and sing about sex and cocaine you stand no chance anymore. Regardless of Steinman being involved surely.

TheDoode

12 Sep 2014 15:05

Ask Bono how much Apple gave him for that album, then tell me there's no money to be made from music anymore! (I do get your point though Andrew).

Evil One

12 Sep 2014 15:24

Money that Bono will no doubt squirrel away in offshore accounts, while begging those with nothing to give generously to charity. :roll:

tonyloaf

12 Sep 2014 16:51

if people like Guy would stop buying mutiple copies of justin bieber then recored sales would make sense :)

Vickip

12 Sep 2014 17:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonyloaf (Post 605955)

if people like Guy would stop buying mutiple copies of justin bieber then recored sales would make sense :)

:lol:

Julie in the rv mirror

12 Sep 2014 17:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoode (Post 605953)

Ask Bono how much Apple gave him for that album, then tell me there's no money to be made from music anymore! (I do get your point though Andrew).

The amount wasn't disclosed, but it's rumored to be 25-30 million dollars. Reaching new people is exactly what they are hoping to do by "giving away" the album to everyone.

AndrewG

12 Sep 2014 20:02

I just read that apparently it was 100 million. :shock:

To automatically install that I find completely insane and I say this as an Apple enthusiast. Quite funny reading the Tweets "How do I uninstall this virus called U2?" :-P

stretch37

12 Sep 2014 20:18

I think it's great that the album was free for consumers, but it is still making the band money. That is amazing and it is the future - Money does not just have to come from existing conventional sources.

As far as being in people's libraries by default, well, perhaps they took it a little too far, and now Apple they will learn something. It's hard to tell. There's a media spin on the whole thing right now. I'd like to hear from all the young people who discovered U2 for the fist time from having it appear in their library, and it helped them through something in their life. perhaps saved a life.

Food for thought..

JennaG

12 Sep 2014 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605958)

I don't think it should have been automatically installed like it was and I think that there are going to be a lot of people who have been annoyed by the principle of it rather than consider it to be a way of introducing them to music that they might not have considered beforehand.

AndrewG

12 Sep 2014 20:38

This talk reminds me of the free copy of HCTB at the 2010 Meat shows. Most know it's not my favourite album of his. But it was a rather superb and generous move by Meat I have to say. At least it was apt!!

Evil One

12 Sep 2014 21:05

Didn't a large portion of them end up left on the floor? :shock:

JennaG

12 Sep 2014 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605961)

I thought that was a nice way for Meat to have introduced that album to people who may have previously been a bit unsure about whether to buy.

I think people would find it harder to object to a free physical copy of an album given to them at that artist's show than they would if he'd have forced it upon all users of a particular piece of software without warning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil One (Post 605962)

Didn't a large portion of them end up left on the floor? :shock:

Actually I vaguely remember reading something like that. :(

It puzzles me a bit considering the fact that it's something that could have been sold on or given away if you didn't want it.

Julie in the rv mirror

12 Sep 2014 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605958)

It sounded that way at first, but if you read the press carefully, the 100 million figure also includes endorsements that could potentially amount to 100 million. I saw the first commercial yesterday. They were paid a blanket fee for the album.

Lol at the U2 virus! :lawl:

Quote:

Originally Posted by stretch37 (Post 605959)

Perhaps, but there are also people who will play it because it was there, but wouldn't have downloaded it otherwise. Word is their back catalog sales have been brisk since they did this, as well. The music business is changing, and artists have to change with it. A few people might also download iTunes in order to get the album, so there are potential new customers there for Apple as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG (Post 605961)

Just my guess, but I'd bet the cost was built into the ticket price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JennaG

It puzzles me a bit considering the fact that it's something that could have been sold on or given away if you didn't want it.

People don't tend to value things as much when they don't pay for them, unfortunately.

CarylB

13 Sep 2014 00:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil One (Post 605962)

Didn't a large portion of them end up left on the floor? :shock:

I was at every show bar one, was in the front row, and always gather my stuff together, have a bit of a sit, and wait for the crush to leave. I don't leave until they chase me away by which time the auditorium is pretty empty. I saw NO CDs on the floor .. trust me, I'd have scarfed them up to sell for TPT if I'd seen any. So whatever the papers choose to spin, I don't believe this at all. At those arenas where there were people waiting outside when I emerged, plenty I saw were clutching their CDs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605965)

Just my guess, but I'd bet the cost was built into the ticket price.

The ticket prices were pretty much in line with the previous tour, and as always at the low end of the spectrum for artists of Meat's calibre .. but the basic unit cost at source for a CD won't be that high anyway surely.

Julie in the rv mirror

13 Sep 2014 00:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB (Post 605966)

Right, it wouldn't be retail price- probably not more than a few dollars each.

Evil Ernie

13 Sep 2014 03:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by JennaG (Post 605963)

It puzzles me a bit considering the fact that it's something that could have been sold on or given away if you didn't want it.

It's because people don't want CD's any more. He would have been better off to offer a free digital copy, which would have cost NOTHING and wouldn't have looked so bad when they were just LEFT there. Giving away the CD was just a couple of shades away from giving away cassettes.

People who do buy CD's, stop it. Unless you wanna be like those lonely people who like to hold onto their 8-Track and Tape collection.

Monstro

13 Sep 2014 04:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605968)

People who do buy CD's, stop it. Unless you wanna be like those lonely people who like to hold onto their 8-Track and Tape collection.

I buy CD's (also have vinyl and cassettes).

Come the day I can't buy a hard version of an album I want I'll be pissed off as there are times when it's nice to listen to something as it was meant to be heard, not compressed to hell.

And I ain't lonely

Evil Ernie

13 Sep 2014 05:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monstro (Post 605969)

I find that Apple Lossless is quite good.

Vinyl is different because it gives you a sound quality that you can't get anywhere else.

Digital Music has come a long way. This is coming from a guy who owned around 3000 CD's before I sold them all (with a few exceptions, ML being one of them).

Julie in the rv mirror

13 Sep 2014 07:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monstro (Post 605969)

CD's and even vinyl can still sound crap depending on the masters they're made from. The sad fact is, most albums these days are mastered to sound best on computers and iPods, since that's how most people listen to music these days.

Having said that, I still do buy CD's (and a limited amount of vinyl), though not as many as I used to. I like having a physical product which is a guaranteed backup to a digital file.

TheDoode

13 Sep 2014 08:33

Usually there's a different mastering process for vinyl over CD/digital :)

Julie in the rv mirror

13 Sep 2014 10:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoode (Post 605973)

Usually there's a different mastering process for vinyl over CD/digital :)

Yeah, if they do a separate one.

JennaG

13 Sep 2014 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605968)

People who do buy CD's, stop it. Unless you wanna be like those lonely people who like to hold onto their 8-Track and Tape collection.

Then I'll be lonely with my CDs. ;)

I don't mind buying music digitally if it's a one-off track that I like but if it's likely to be an album that will have several tracks that I'll like such as one by Meat or Imelda May, then I'll buy the CD.

I don't know if it's just me but if it's an album that I've really been looking forward to then it seems more exciting actually going into a shop on release day and buying the CD than it does just clicking the 'Buy' button on iTunes.

chairboys

13 Sep 2014 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605968)

People who do buy CD's, stop it. Unless you wanna be like those lonely people who like to hold onto their 8-Track and Tape collection.

EE, stop it? I won't do that!
Like others, I will continue to buy my music how I like!
I'm a hard-copy, physical format album man, proud of it, and nobody will change me.
Old-fashioned but happy!

Evil One

13 Sep 2014 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605968)

People who do buy CD's, stop it.

I can make mp3's from my CD's. I can't make CD quality CD's from my mp3's.

It's funny. Most people go gaga over HD TV and Bluray, yet quite happily listen to poor quality audio. In fact audio quality is going backwards, and will only get worse when streaming becomes the norm.

Julie in the rv mirror

13 Sep 2014 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil One (Post 605982)

I can make mp3's from my CD's. I can't make CD quality CD's from my mp3's.

No, but you can make very good quality CD's from FLAC or ALAC (Apple Lossless)

Quote:

It's funny. Most people go gaga over HD TV and Bluray, yet quite happily listen to poor quality audio. In fact audio quality is going backwards, and will only get worse when streaming becomes the norm.

I think there is actually some movement in the other direction; HD audio has even higher resolution than CD's: http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-th...-anybody-care/

Neil Young has been trying to get his Pono player started; it's supposed to be incredible sound quality: http://www.ponomusic.com/#home

Evil Ernie

14 Sep 2014 05:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil One (Post 605982)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605988)

No, but you can make very good quality CD's from FLAC or ALAC (Apple Lossless)

I think there is actually some movement in the other direction; HD audio has even higher resolution than CD's: http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-th...-anybody-care/

Neil Young has been trying to get his Pono player started; it's supposed to be incredible sound quality: http://www.ponomusic.com/#home

I think that Digital Audio is going in the right direction (and has been for awhile), while the quality preference of Video has gone down. I know far more people who own Netflix/Huluplus over those who still buy BlueRays. Still really good quality though.

You guys can fight it all you want, but digital is the present AND the future. To me it's like still buying DVD's. Ya they're still around, but I don't know anyone who actually buys them.

Julie in the rv mirror

14 Sep 2014 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605989)

You guys can fight it all you want, but digital is the present AND the future. To me it's like still buying DVD's. Ya they're still around, but I don't know anyone who actually buys them.

I still buy concert DVD's, but pretty much everything else I do Netflix or Amazon streaming video.

JennaG

14 Sep 2014 10:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605989)

You guys can fight it all you want, but digital is the present AND the future. To me it's like still buying DVD's. Ya they're still around, but I don't know anyone who actually buys them.

I still see a fair number of people buying DVDs in shops and I've worked in retail for the last ten years.

I guess that not everyone believes in replacing things like DVD players when there's nothing wrong with them. I know people who still have VHS players too.

Vickip

14 Sep 2014 14:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie in the rv mirror (Post 605991)

I still buy concert DVD's, but pretty much everything else I do Netflix or Amazon streaming video.

I've stopped buying DVD's because of the boxes and boxes of DVD's in my closet that I've never watched. In fact most of them are still in their original wrapper, and I'm trying to figure out the best way to sell them :-)

I still buy Meat's movies, Concerts DVDs (occasionally) and Disney Movies on Blu-ray. Otherwise like you, I'll watch a movie that I want to see on Amazon or Netflix.

Evil One

14 Sep 2014 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vickip (Post 605996)

I'll watch a movie that I want to see on Amazon or Netflix.

Call me old-fashioned, but if I want to watch something I'll wait for it to be broadcast on TV. I already pay my licence fee and Virgin Media. I don't see why I should then pay again to another company rather than wait a couple of months and watch the programme by conventional means.

Yevonda

14 Sep 2014 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil Ernie (Post 605989)

I very rarely buy dvd's anymore. I rarely watch regular television either. I like others who posted on here still will buy concert dvd's (I do that regularly) and I will buy movies of my favorite actors or my favorite series. Like if Meat comes out in a movie I will buy it any time, or if Star Trek releases a new movie I will buy it.

Other than that, I streamline most of my television and movies through Netflix or some other program. I do not have cable television. I can't see the reasoning behind paying anywhere from $60-$100+ a month for all of these channels I will never watch when I can pay $8 a month for Netflix. There are more programs that stream than I have days left in my lifetime to watch. As far as the cable programs go, I stream the ones I want to watch for free through online TV so I am still watching the programs I like on there, I just will watch it a day or two after it airs. Which is fine by me.

Julie in the rv mirror

15 Sep 2014 00:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vickip (Post 605996)

I'm in the same boat, Vicki; my husband used to buy lots of DVD's that nobody watches anymore. In fact, just last night, I was staring at a stack and thinking it might be time for a yard sale. ;) Either that, or used stores usually buy DVD's- they might give you more since they're sealed. Barring all of that, you could always donate them- I remember giving literally bagfuls of VHS tapes to the preschool after my son outgrew them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evil One (Post 605997)

I'd be waiting close to forever (if even then) for most things to come on regular broadcast TV- I refuse to pay for cable. Plus, the beauty of streaming is that I get to watch what I want when I want to watch it. :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yevonda (Post 605999)

I very rarely buy dvd's anymore. I rarely watch regular television either.

Other than that, I streamline most of my television and movies through Netflix or some other program. I do not have cable television. I can't see the reasoning behind paying anywhere from $60-$100+ a month for all of these channels I will never watch when I can pay $8 a month for Netflix.

I agree totally- I don't watch much regular TV anymore either. Between Netflix and the occasional rental from Amazon, I have more than enough to watch.

Julie in the rv mirror

21 Sep 2014 23:51

Rolling Stone article on hi-fidelity streaming:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...music-20140919

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 17:08.

Page generated in 0.06626 seconds with 11 queries.