The Mike Moffat (#2 at Schiit) Blog

Please forgive some autobiographical matters in this missive which will hopefully explain why my least favorite question these days is: “Does the Gadget help you better communicate the intention of the original artist?” God.

Right after I got back from Vietnam, my roommate was trying to get away from this smoking hot gal with whom he worked. A bit of observation brought almost to mind a film noir. Almost, I say, because she wasn’t the type that you knew you would be dead not long after you fucked her, but one you knew was bat shit crazy. So eyes wide open I went for it.... Sandy moved like a snake and could suck start a 747. And she really was crazy, not just annoying as modern food tribe or safe space self styled victims are - she channeled everyone from Cleopatra to Elvis to God. Further, she was only capable of two activities - sex and talking. Oh, and she was determined to make me a channeling adept. God Damn, she was really beautiful and stunningly talented, but it didn’t take me long to realize that her craziness far exceeded her assets....and she failed miserably in her psychic ability teaching ability. Shaking her off was like trying to shake a booger off your finger.

Fast forward to now; I try to channel Beethoven, Mozart, Mahler, Emmet Miller, Robert Johnson, Janis, Hendrix, Duane Allman, and nothing happens. Even living musicians Are beyond my abilities. I am a failure at channeling, probably because I was more interested in channeling Sandy’s body than other historical figures.

Which leads me to my current dilemma: How can I communicate the intention of any musical artist given my total lack of ability to channel them? Damn! I guess I need to refer you to other manufacturers or cover bands and musicians for enlightenment. Sorry.

 

That was really... not what I expected to read in this thread update. But it cracked me right up just when I needed a break from a long day taking care of kids

 

IME, more often than not, when a remaster says something like "Approved by the Original Artist(s)" it is brick-walled or at least much lower in dynamics than the original release. Does anyone really believe these artists have been thinking, all of these years "The problem with the sound of my music releases is too much in the way of dynamics." or that something else is involved?

 

Sadly, i think hearing loss is a factor too, going on a tour or just playing an instrument every day might not be the best thing for your ears. You have to protect your investment.

 

Reminds me of the Sylvester School of Speech...https://view.yahoo.com/show/saturday-night-live/clip/40033175/sylvester-school
(I hope the link works; I can't view it from Canada)

 

Yes. I imagine that as one (a big one) of the possible reasons. And regardless, they will still get the sacred "the intention of the original artist" label.

 

@baldr

I had a hippie girlfriend for about a month once; vegan, no alcohol, yoga, massages, candles, indian music, spiritual healing. The whole nine yards. In hindsight I think I was probably her "project". She was supposed to rescue me from my shallow and materialistic western ways. She was also pretty hot in a natural down to earth way, and with the voice of an angel. It was fun for about a month until I realised that she's not going to compromise even one inch with what she believed. Logic, science and reasoning be damned. And since I had no plans of turning into an unemployed hippie it was about time to call it quits. I think anything which has to do with altenative lifestyles, or alternative beliefs, can be fun for a while. I'm more than willing to hear them out, but then I want back to "the real world".

 

Mike, did she have by chance the crazy eyes?


In doubt, you can always check out this academic paper on the hot/crazy tradeoffs:

 

Sometimes memories will play tricks on a person.

 

You just never know what you might read about in this thread on a quite weekend morning. But be prepared to do a spit take on your pad or keyboard! Some of the young ladies back then were interesting that's for sure. Hoping that was only Part 1 of the story @baldr. Oh, and you only have to talk about the Gadget if you want to. I lost all interest in whether or not it communicates with aliens after your Hurricane Sandy story.

 

Damn, Now I'm hearing everything in a Raymond Chandler accent

 

They're probably just played the tracks for comparison so they hear the original with more dynamics then a louder brickwalled version and like most people hear louder as better, they don't get a chance to hear a level matched comparison.

 

IMO...Roon + Yggdrasil = Nirvana....I did vinyl many years ago (3 armed TT, the whole shebang...)....with the digital quality where it is currently, vinyl is complete waste of time and money!

 

Yes, you've said this before. You were wrong then and you're still wrong now.

 

Why do I get the feeling of deja Vu.

Wait, I remember.
http://www.superbestaudiofriends.or...fat-2-at-schiit-blog.3507/page-29#post-163346

 

If Larry would have prefaced this quote with "For me, ", I don't think we could argue with his statement because, for him, his statement could be quite true. Obviously, vinyl is different things to different people. I am kinda of glad I got rid of my vinyl years ago because now I would be buying a bunch of vinyl gear and albums to listen and hear how much different it is than digital. It's a rabbit hole I don't really want to go down. But that doesn't mean I think it is waste of time and money. In fact, I am sure I would find it quite enjoyable.

 

If I had money and time, I'd go for vinyl. Vinyl entails mindfulness, which makes for better listening.

 

Dang, I just spent all my money on a Crosley

if only you'd posted this earlier.. (like on the 22nd of September maybe?)

 

Don't feed the trolls.