Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 4:13 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:45 am
Posts: 9674
Location: EINDHOVEN
Oh Frank. Has Isaac returned?

I wonder why they wouldn't stick to the MOFO mix for Freak Out. It sounds a lot better and new Frank fans are not all that likely to buy MOFO anyway. Same goes for Greasy Love Songs and Ruben. Hey, why not package both mixes on one CD?

_________________
Image
Join the PackardGoose forum! Send me a PM!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 12:58 pm
Posts: 2142
Location: Birmingham, AL
BBP wrote:
Oh Frank. Has Isaac returned?

I wonder why they wouldn't stick to the MOFO mix for Freak Out. It sounds a lot better and new Frank fans are not all that likely to buy MOFO anyway. Same goes for Greasy Love Songs and Ruben. Hey, why not package both mixes on one CD?

My only guess is that they don't want to make MOFO and GLS obsolete, especially since they're only a few years old.

What I'm curious about is the Ryko albums that aren't part of the official 60, stuff like Lather and The Lost Episodes. Are they going to be part of this reissue campaign, or are they going to slip out of print?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:54 am
Posts: 153
Location: Ireland
I did it.... I pre-ordered the new Hot Rats for €8.99 (it was 9.99 but they sent me a €1 voucher). (http://www.ie.wowhd.com/)

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
A REMASTERED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL MIX

THE VINYL WAS A 2008 REMASTER

REMASTERED VERSIONS ARE BEING USED FOR THE CDS

THEREFORE THE CDS WILL MOSTLY RESEMBLE THE ORIGINAL MIXES, BUT NOT BE THE SAME AS THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD BE THE SAME AS THE ORIGINAL MIXES IS IF THEY WERE UNMASTERED.


Hey doofus - please explain to me how remastering something changes the way it's mixed. No remaster is ever going to resemble an old mastering exactly. It's fucking impossible. There is no such thing as "unmastered". The original vinyl was "mastered". The new CD is going to be "mastered". They both use the same master tape, therefore they are going to have the same audio charachteristics. Nobody is saying that they're gonna sound exactly identical. Jeez. Get a clue.


They will have similar audio characteristics, but not identical. I've already outlined my position on it, others agree with me and others seem to agree with you.

The very fact that it's a 2008 remaster of the original mix means nothing less than they've somewhat altered the sound. I'm not saying they didn't use the original mix, just that it won't sound exactly like the original and it won't, no matter how hard you try to make me believe you, it won't.

I'm now withdrawing from this debate with you as I've made myself clear and it's obvious you either have a mental block or limited understanding of the mastering process and you still didn't answer any of my points.

You've actually made my point for me, I have been saying from the beginning that it will sound different, you now agree with me and say;

"No remaster is ever going to resemble an old mastering exactly. It's fucking impossible"

That's all I've been saying from the beginning.

you then say

"There is no such thing as "unmastered".

Yes there is lol, that's a track straight out of the mix that's not been mastered.

And of course the original was mastered, this is a remaster so will sound different from the original master regardless of whether they're from the same tapes or not.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Last edited by TheCentralScrutinizer on Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Thinman wrote:
duchamp wrote:
Not trying to throw fuel on this fire but I have an honest question asking out of truthful ignorance. If a remaster does not mean any significant changes happened, then why advertise that a particular album is the 2008 remaster? Why even bring it up? I don't mean only in this specific case, but in any case. People often refer to the "such and such" remaster. Why do people make this distinction if there is no real difference?

The industry uses the term "remastered" to sell their repertoire multiple times to clueless consumers. They try to make people believe that a remaster is always an improvement to previous versions because otherwise people won't buy it. Well sometimes it is an improvement but in many cases - not. Sometimes it seems to be an improvement on first listen, but it is just made louder in many cases.

A remaster can be an opportunity to improve something and correct mistakes from previous issues (like with the Zappa catalogue) and/or correct problems with the source format when it has suffered from aging processes. And it can be an opportunity to get over the disadvantages of older formats (the restrictions of vinyl for instance). But sometimes it is just a marketing trick. In my sense a remaster should try to preserve a historic recording as original as possible without changing the original content. A remaster should not try to convert something historic into a "modern listening habits" product. IMHO. I won't buy that.

Th.


Answer my points please, if you have the will to try and belittle me in public, please do the decent thing and respond to my post.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:35 pm
Posts: 1261
Location: Ohio
Thinman wrote:
Isn't this a stupid discussion?


Amen :mrgreen:

_________________
Good writing is clear writing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Thinman wrote:
duchamp wrote:
Not trying to throw fuel on this fire but I have an honest question asking out of truthful ignorance. If a remaster does not mean any significant changes happened, then why advertise that a particular album is the 2008 remaster? Why even bring it up? I don't mean only in this specific case, but in any case. People often refer to the "such and such" remaster. Why do people make this distinction if there is no real difference?

The industry uses the term "remastered" to sell their repertoire multiple times to clueless consumers. They try to make people believe that a remaster is always an improvement to previous versions because otherwise people won't buy it. Well sometimes it is an improvement but in many cases - not. Sometimes it seems to be an improvement on first listen, but it is just made louder in many cases.

A remaster can be an opportunity to improve something and correct mistakes from previous issues (like with the Zappa catalogue) and/or correct problems with the source format when it has suffered from aging processes. And it can be an opportunity to get over the disadvantages of older formats (the restrictions of vinyl for instance). But sometimes it is just a marketing trick. In my sense a remaster should try to preserve a historic recording as original as possible without changing the original content. A remaster should not try to convert something historic into a "modern listening habits" product. IMHO. I won't buy that.

Th.


I see, so when they say is it's a 2008 re-master, they're actually lying to us so we're all stupid enough to buy it??? This is your big theory??? Nice attempt to try and wriggle out of it :mrgreen:

You need to make your mind up. Yesterday you were telling the world that mastering was simply transferring the audio from analog to digital and encoding it at 24bit/96khz and 16bit/44khz, now it's all this other stuff as well......make your mind up, or shut the fuck up :mrgreen:

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
A REMASTERED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL MIX

THE VINYL WAS A 2008 REMASTER

REMASTERED VERSIONS ARE BEING USED FOR THE CDS

THEREFORE THE CDS WILL MOSTLY RESEMBLE THE ORIGINAL MIXES, BUT NOT BE THE SAME AS THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD BE THE SAME AS THE ORIGINAL MIXES IS IF THEY WERE UNMASTERED.


Hey doofus - please explain to me how remastering something changes the way it's mixed. No remaster is ever going to resemble an old mastering exactly. It's fucking impossible. There is no such thing as "unmastered". The original vinyl was "mastered". The new CD is going to be "mastered". They both use the same master tape, therefore they are going to have the same audio charachteristics. Nobody is saying that they're gonna sound exactly identical. Jeez. Get a clue.


You said it was the same numbnut!!!!! My whole point from the beginning was that it would not sound exactly the same as the original....that was my fucking point you monstrous moron.

You obviously now realise you're a total fucking douchebag and like Thinman, are backtracking on what you originally said.

Jesus fuck man :shock:

I can't talk to you anymore, it's like talking to my 15 year old dog and she's deaf.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
Thinman wrote:
If you don't want "flavours" (what "flavours") at all you would have to construct a time machine and travel back to 1969 to listen to the master of Hot Rats right when it was done - and on the original machine of course. How can you know how an old recording on old tape would have sounded when it was knew?

Isn't this a stupid discussion?


Exactly. Try explaining to these dolts how to wipe their own ass, and see how far you get. I feel like I'm at the Special Olympics.


You are hahahahaha, the pair of you :mrgreen:

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:11 am
Posts: 1023
Location: North German Wasteland
@TCS: Your point was, as I understood (and probably misunderstood) you, that remastering inevitably alters the sound of the source. I said no. It can, but it doesn't have to if you don't want to (the process you call encoding). I don't talk about nuances and "flavours" of converters. I always consider several possibilities. For you there seems to be only one way all the time in everything.

We don't know about the kind of sources the ZFT has at hand for the releases. Are they 2-track mix-downs or are they 2-track masters? That is a huge difference. Normally it is talked about 2-track masters that are already mastered. In the best case those 2-track masters would simply have to be transferred and encoded for the target medium without altering the sound ("double tweezed").

Th.

P.S.: Only for a short moment, after having exchanged private messages with you a short while ago, I considered the possibiltiy that you are not an asshole. Reading all your recent posts here proves different. Your behaviour is hopeless.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from public forum activity in 2013


Last edited by Thinman on Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 6:48 am
Posts: 6285
Location: Your Mom's Box
re: Hot Rats. my thoughts about 2008 remaster...

What it really all comes down to is that the new CD will be so close to the original LP mix that NO ONE will be able to really tell the fucking difference anyway.

_________________
Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:11 am
Posts: 1023
Location: North German Wasteland
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
Thinman wrote:
duchamp wrote:
Not trying to throw fuel on this fire but I have an honest question asking out of truthful ignorance. If a remaster does not mean any significant changes happened, then why advertise that a particular album is the 2008 remaster? Why even bring it up? I don't mean only in this specific case, but in any case. People often refer to the "such and such" remaster. Why do people make this distinction if there is no real difference?

The industry uses the term "remastered" to sell their repertoire multiple times to clueless consumers. They try to make people believe that a remaster is always an improvement to previous versions because otherwise people won't buy it. Well sometimes it is an improvement but in many cases - not. Sometimes it seems to be an improvement on first listen, but it is just made louder in many cases.

A remaster can be an opportunity to improve something and correct mistakes from previous issues (like with the Zappa catalogue) and/or correct problems with the source format when it has suffered from aging processes. And it can be an opportunity to get over the disadvantages of older formats (the restrictions of vinyl for instance). But sometimes it is just a marketing trick. In my sense a remaster should try to preserve a historic recording as original as possible without changing the original content. A remaster should not try to convert something historic into a "modern listening habits" product. IMHO. I won't buy that.

Th.


I see, so when they say is it's a 2008 re-master, they're actually lying to us so we're all stupid enough to buy it??? This is your big theory??? Nice attempt to try and wriggle out of it :mrgreen:

You need to make your mind up. Yesterday you were telling the world that mastering was simply transferring the audio from analog to digital and encoding it at 24bit/96khz and 16bit/44khz, now it's all this other stuff as well......make your mind up, or shut the fuck up :mrgreen:

1. I never said that the ZFT is lying. I was talking about the record industry in general and the remaster-marketing-hype. I thought the questions of duchamp pointed in that general direction and not the ZFT and/or the HR remaster in specific.
2. I never said that remastering is always just a transfer. There is a mixup of the terms sometimes: pre-mastering, mastering, re-mastering. Pre-mastering is the tweezage after the mixdown. Mastering is the technical process (at the plant) to make it manufacturable. Sometimes even those two terms are exchanged and confused. Re-Mastering can be understood as a new "re-pre-mastering" from the mixdown or simply the technical process (at the plant) to make an existing master compatible to a new medium, or to just take advantage of new technologioes to get rid of the limitations of earlier versions. Or "double tweezing" of something that is already tweezed. Lots of possibilities. Unfortunately it is, in most cases today, the latter. I'm sorry if there is only one for you.

This all is nothing I have invented myself. So I don't have to "make my mind up".

TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
Answer my points please, if you have the will to try and belittle me in public, please do the decent thing and respond to my post.


I simply asked you to explain your understanding of remastering, etc. to the public on this forum, to avoid confusion and misunderstanding. You did that. Why should I respond?

Please read and think before posting in the future.

Th.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from public forum activity in 2013


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:51 pm
Posts: 241
Location: Austin, TX (wherever I am)
jaypfunk wrote:
re: Hot Rats. my thoughts about 2008 remaster...

What it really all comes down to is that the new CD will be so close to the original LP mix that NO ONE will be able to really tell the fucking difference anyway.


For the most part, this is correct. I wouldn't go so far as to say NO ONE will be able to tell the difference, but it will be very few.

The bottom line is that there are only two mixes of Hot Rats: the original LP mix and the Ryko CD mix. Only the Ryko CDs and subsequent cassettes have the Ryko CD mix. Every other release contains the original LP mix, albeit with different masterings (the reverb-laden Old Masters LP being the worst version of this).

The upcoming CD will contain the original LP mix (via the 2008 remaster). It will be the first CD release to do so, AFAIK.

The original was mixed in 1969. Frank remixed the album for CD in 1986 or 1987. It has not been remixed any other time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:39 am
Posts: 152
Thinman wrote:

1. I never said that the ZFT is lying. I was talking about the record industry in general and the remaster-marketing-hype. I thought the questions of duchamp pointed in that general direction and not the ZFT and/or the HR remaster in specific.
2. I never said that remastering is always just a transfer. There is a mixup of the terms sometimes: pre-mastering, mastering, re-mastering. Pre-mastering is the tweezage after the mixdown. Mastering is the technical process (at the plant) to make it manufacturable. Sometimes even those two terms are exchanged and confused. Re-Mastering can be understood as a new "re-pre-mastering" from the mixdown or simply the technical process (at the plant) to make an existing master compatible to a new medium, or to just take advantage of new technologioes to get rid of the limitations of earlier versions. Or "double tweezing" of something that is already tweezed. Lots of possibilities. Unfortunately it is, in most cases today, the latter. I'm sorry if there is only one for you.


Why are you explaining yourself to this idiot? It's obvious that he's clueless. Let him blather on and on about stuff he doesn't understand. He'll be graduating from high school pretty soon, and he will finally be able to take some audio courses at a community college of his choosing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
@thinman

Don't give me your facetious bullshit man. You know exactly what you said and what you were attempting to do. You should have responded because I had the decency to reply to your insulting post and you did say that a remaster was an industry trick to get people to buy the releases after yesterday claiming that mastering was simply encoding tracks at 24bit/96khz and 16bit/44khz....you fucking said it, go back and read what you said.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Thinman wrote:
@TCS: Your point was, as I understood (and probably misunderstood) you, that remastering inevitably alters the sound of the source. I said no. It can, but it doesn't have to if you don't want to (the process you call encoding). I don't talk about nuances and "flavours" of converters. I always consider several possibilities. For you there seems to be only one way all the time in everything.

We don't know about the kind of sources the ZFT has at hand for the releases. Are they 2-track mix-downs or are they 2-track masters? That is a huge difference. Normally it is talked about 2-track masters that are already mastered. In the best case those 2-track masters would simply have to be transferred and encoded for the target medium without altering the sound ("double tweezed").

Th.

P.S.: Only for a short moment, after having exchanged private messages with you a short while ago, I considered the possibiltiy that you are not an asshole. Reading all your recent posts here proves different. Your behaviour is hopeless.


That was very fucking decent of you, thanks for your kindness.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 6:48 am
Posts: 6285
Location: Your Mom's Box
Gail said that the CDs will be clearly marked as to what the sources are. Great if you are actually holding one in a store. But what about the online listings? THAT FUCKING INFO SHOULD ALREADY BE AVAILABLE BY NOW!!

_________________
Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
Thinman wrote:

1. I never said that the ZFT is lying. I was talking about the record industry in general and the remaster-marketing-hype. I thought the questions of duchamp pointed in that general direction and not the ZFT and/or the HR remaster in specific.
2. I never said that remastering is always just a transfer. There is a mixup of the terms sometimes: pre-mastering, mastering, re-mastering. Pre-mastering is the tweezage after the mixdown. Mastering is the technical process (at the plant) to make it manufacturable. Sometimes even those two terms are exchanged and confused. Re-Mastering can be understood as a new "re-pre-mastering" from the mixdown or simply the technical process (at the plant) to make an existing master compatible to a new medium, or to just take advantage of new technologioes to get rid of the limitations of earlier versions. Or "double tweezing" of something that is already tweezed. Lots of possibilities. Unfortunately it is, in most cases today, the latter. I'm sorry if there is only one for you.


Why are you explaining yourself to this idiot? It's obvious that he's clueless. Let him blather on and on about stuff he doesn't understand. He'll be graduating from high school pretty soon, and he will finally be able to take some audio courses at a community college of his choosing.


I'm 38 (in 12 days), married with 4 kids, run a record label with global distribution and I'm also currently doing my honours year of a politics degree. What do you do numbnut? It's obvious I don't have a clue and you and Thinman know everything you're talking about, so lay the goods on the table.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:11 am
Posts: 1023
Location: North German Wasteland
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
… It's obvious that he's clueless. Let him blather on and on about stuff he doesn't understand. He'll be graduating from high school pretty soon, and he will finally be able to take some audio courses at a community college of his choosing.

I know that he is not clueless. If he really is the person behind the links in his signature, I even have to say that I appreciate much of his stuff.

I think he may be just a hot-tempered, irascible person, who feels insulted early on in every discussion. I don't know the reason for this (drug abuse, alcohol, desease, heartbreak, too much or not enough work …?). He may have proven for me that he might be an asshole on this forum, but I don't know if he is one in real life. Strangely when having contact via PM, sometimes people are surprisingly polite and very different from their forum personality.

@TCS: Stop yelling, calm down! You are taking this forum and the discussions way too serious and too personal. You are even worse than what I have sometimes been accused for. Not every discussion you are involved in must result in arguments, yelling and insultments.

Th.

P.S.: And most of the time I do not take your outbreaks on this forum too serious, too. It even amuses me most of the time, just like Jaypfunk's never ending collection of favourite insults.

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from public forum activity in 2013


Last edited by Thinman on Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:39 am
Posts: 152
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
I'm 38 (in 12 days), married with 4 kids, run a record label with global distribution and I'm also currently doing my honours year of a politics degree. What do you do numbnut? It's obvious I don't have a clue and you and Thinman know everything you're talking about, so lay the goods on the table.


All that with Downs Syndrome? Well good for you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Thinman wrote:
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
… It's obvious that he's clueless. Let him blather on and on about stuff he doesn't understand. He'll be graduating from high school pretty soon, and he will finally be able to take some audio courses at a community college of his choosing.

I know that he is not clueless. If he really is the person behind the links in his signature, I even have to say that I appreciate much of his stuff.

I think he may be just a hot-tempered, irascible person, who feels insulted early on in every discussion. I don't know the reason for this (drug abuse, alcohol, desease, heartbreak, too much or not enough work …?). He may have proven for me that he might be an asshole on this forum, but I don't know if he is one in real life. Strangely when having contact via PM, sometimes people are surprisingly polite and very different from their forum personality.

@TCS: Stop yelling, calm down! You are taking this forum and the discussions way too serious and too personal. You are even worse than what I have sometimes been accused for. Not every discussion you are involved in must result in arguments, yelling and insultments.

Th.


Thinman, I don't really have a problem with you, but I generally don't insult people unless I am insulted. If someone insults me, then I will insult them back....I see that as being quite fair.

My main issue with you was not so much what you said, but what you insinuated with your invitation. I explained myself in a very nice manner without insult and you didn't even have the decency to reply. I found that in itself insulting and impolite.

Incidentally, my hot-headedness is not the result of drink/drugs/heartbreak etc etc. It's just been my nature since childhood and if I believe that someone is being confrontational with me, then they will get it back. I'm generally quite a calm person until that point.

I still maintain that a 2008 Re-master cannot and will not sound exactly the same as the original mix. However, I'm not going to talk about it anymore.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
Wen D. Carlos wrote:
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
I'm 38 (in 12 days), married with 4 kids, run a record label with global distribution and I'm also currently doing my honours year of a politics degree. What do you do numbnut? It's obvious I don't have a clue and you and Thinman know everything you're talking about, so lay the goods on the table.


All that with Downs Syndrome? Well good for you!


Thanks, that's very kind of you. In that one sentence, you've managed to crytallise exactly what you are, an ignorant bully with no substance.

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Last edited by TheCentralScrutinizer on Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 6:48 am
Posts: 6285
Location: Your Mom's Box
Image

_________________
Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 10:50 am
Posts: 5813
Location: A holographic construct outside of linear time
jaypfunk wrote:
Image


Now that was quite funny :mrgreen: I do have the ability to laugh at myself too :mrgreen:

_________________
Solipsism
Solar Culture
Solipsism Tumblr
Shitface
Shitface Music Page


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:11 am
Posts: 1023
Location: North German Wasteland
Double-LOL! :lol: :lol:

_________________
Active forum member since 2005 - R E T I R E D from public forum activity in 2013


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group