"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:43:18 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:

I think everyone here would agree that the concept behind
"Straight-line"
is
to deliver the music as the artist intended, unsullied and
uncoloured -
an
accurate reflection of the artist's work.

Just reading an interview with Neil Young (HiFi Choice, January 2005),
in
which he states,

"The analogue records always sounded better than anything else to me.
But
I
compared the new vinyl versions, which are taken from a first
generation
analogue master copy, and the best just got better. It's a really good
feeling."

To be fair and put this in context, he also speaks well of DVD-Audio,
but
it's clear that NY is one artist who sees vinyl as the source which is
closest to a "true replica".

Yup, and he is *one* recording artist out of thousands. Furthermore,
his stuff is heavily EQ'd and overproduced pop crap, so who knows what
it's supposed to sound like? Finally, if he also likes DVD-A, which
sounds *nothing* like vinyl, what does that tell you? Now, try to find
*one* jazz or classical artist who wants his pure and natural master
tape sound mangled by vinyl.

Sure he's *one* recording artist. That does not invalidate his opinion in
any way.

However, the lack of any other reputable recording artist with the
same opinion, certainly does. Further, since DVD-A sounds *nothing*
like vinyl, to claim to like both is the most cynical bull****ting
I've seen in quite a while.

You do youself a disservice with this reply, coming across like an old
fart
who simply dislikes "pop" music

Well, given the vast amopunt of crap that's on the market today, that
might be a fair assessment.

Maybe you could better express this so that it doesn't sound like you're
responses (e.g. quote below) on other issues are prejudiced by your dislike
for certain music?

and who dismisses the entire - and often
highly creative - production process when it doesn't suit his own agenda.

I have no 'agenda' other than preferring that what goes into my
speakers is as close as possible to what came off the mixdown master.

"His stuff is heavily EQ'd and overproduced pop crap, so who knows what it's
supposed to sound like?"

Is any work carried out beyond that which is captured from a live microphone
irrelevant to what the artist would consider is a "completed" piece?

You come across as a young fart who doesn't understand what happens
*before* the master is made.

If artists' desire their finished product includes post-production work,
then what's the problem?

Maybe I don't understand your POV here.

What music do you listen to? Only it sounds like you dislike any form of
recording and production, beyond the capturing of live sound via microphone.

If that's an incorrect conclusion, then please can you clarify your
preference - or lack of it?