News

Just so long as he is the purveyor and not the producer, I am good with a new way of listening.

;-D

Between his ear and Dylan's voice, we really have something to anticipate.

I am a card-carrying audiophile and love it, BUT, the comments I found here (https://www.stereogum.com/2184752/bob-dylan-t-bone-burnett-new-audio-for...) when looking into this further are hilarious and accurate.

To quote a couple of highlights
"I'm not sure if I envy or pity the people who can hear the difference between good sound and perfect sound."

"Does anyone else feel like this is a hilarious mismatch of audio technology and artist? "It's the pinnacle of recorded sound! You can hear every mumble!""

And others..

..to many others it is not. Digital is inadequate. Obviously you don't love the sound of analog as much as every other audiophile.

a new type of TT which also won’t play regular vinyl, it will be a hard pass for me, unless the sonic results actually match the hyperbole. Current audiophile vinyl pressings are fantastic, so why would I or anyone with an extensive vinyl collection buy into this? It represents everything I hate about digital, namely the regular need to upgrade your hardware (read dac) and ever-changing formats. The fact that T-Bone is now seemingly trying to introduce obsolescence to vinyl actually pisses me off, to be honest. Will be interesting to see the results of this new technology. Any bets that the sonic improvements will require about a 5 figure investment in a new table?

It seems to me that Burnett may have developed a way to produce an aluminum disc coated with lacquer that can be played using a regular turntable and (perhaps) cartridge. Very few people will invest in a totally new analog playback system when digital rules the roost and the vast majority of people are happy with that.
That's just a guess, there are so many unanswered questions...

Dylan gives us new songs!!

Ahh...T-Bone..we have the long playing vinyl LP. I'm interested to see how your team can improve on that, might be just another music icon flushing $ with no real breakthrough or possible mass adoption. Record on tape if possible and release on vinyl or reel to reel and enjoy the vast variety of recorded music.

I think T-Bone simply saw the market for ultra-fiddled reel to reel players and "master" reel to reels that sell at 450 bucks each and thought, "I need to translate that into something I can cash in on."

So, he will be selling "one of one" lacquers.

1) Get the tape.

2) Cut it to a lacquer.

3) Sell lacquer.

4) Repeat.

I hope he makes some money, but these are just gussied up lacquers. Maybe he can emulate Wu Tang Clan and sell some to Pharma Bro.

This is unhinged stuff. He's got a gimmick. This isn't going anywhere.

What's this bruhaha all about?

Until we see/hear the self proclaimed breakthrough then there is no point in speculating.

Let curious minds create!

Inventions that propel thought are not always successful, but the additional designs that grow from it may indeed lead to something meaningful to the market.

The lacquer tech out of this design may mean better vinyl down the road, if not a completely new technology.

One won't ever know until one tries.

Keep an open mind... Oh sorry. Keep on hating!

I might not have seen without Analog Planet. Even if it is a format I do not buy or is not long lasting it will still be intriguing to follow and fun to talk with friends about while listening to vinyl. Kind of like following the Pono saga. In any event, not sure why such consternation over different formats. When listening by myself or a friend or two vinyl is the way to go. If I am outdoors streaming music is what I do. With a party what is wrong with a Spotify playlist. I even know an audiophile store owner who has owned it since 1977 and practices piano a couple hours a day to try to avoid dementia like his father had, listens to mostly CD's. My son recorded his own music and as he is a graphic artist designed his own cassette case and had some produced. Much cheaper than finding someone who will press a few pieces of vinyl. So maybe just listening to music is a good thing and use whatever format you feel like in that situation. And if you have the chance listen to Jellico Coal Man by T-Bone on Johnny Cash The Music Forever Words.

Seems like a waste using this with Bob Dylan.He has a horrible nasal voice 70 years ago and it's gotten worse.He sucks and so does his music.

...to get my Elcaset deck hooked up to my Pono player and now you tell me something better has come along? Color me skeptical.
---
Also, could some of you turd droppers please find a different punch bowl? Honestly.

Analogue is rare? Not at all; there are many analogue recorders---both multi-track and 2-track---in regular use today. I've been in many studios---large and small---in the past quarter-century (as recently as last year), all with multi-track machines recording onto 2 inch tape, the multi-track tapes mixed to 2-tracks on either a 1/4" or 1/2" tape machine, pure analogue. Where is all this repeating of inaccurate information coming from?!

Yes, indi artists with home studios rarely have a 24-trk 2" machine (though I know a couple who), but Rock stars like Dylan, Tom Petty, and Mike Campbell (as well as numerous others) do. And ALL pro studios do. When I recorded with the late Emitt Rhodes, he had both a 24-track Otari 2-inch analogue recorder and four digital recorders. Get out of your basement and book some time in a pro studio!

Analogue is impractical (and therefore presumably uncommon now)? Not at all; there are many analogue recorders---both multi-track and 2-track---in regular use today. I've been in many studios---large and small---in the past quarter-century (as recently as last year), all with multi-track machines recording onto 2 inch tape, the multi-track tapes mixed to 2-tracks on either a 1/4" or 1/2" tape machine, pure analogue. Where is all this repeating of inaccurate information coming from?!

Yes, indi artists with home studios rarely have a 24-trk 2" machine (though I know a couple who), but Rock stars like Dylan, Tom Petty, and Mike Campbell (as well as numerous others) do. And ALL pro studios do. When I recorded with the late Emitt Rhodes, he had both a 24-track Otari 2-inch analogue recorder and four digital recorders. Get out of your basement and book some time in a pro studio!

Obviously not an expensive high quality machine but my 20+ year old with not a lot of money did buy a Concord reel tape machine to do some recording with. But a place to start and to recognize that analog is very alive and relevant. By the way, I listened to Michael's advise about Le Noise by Neal Young in 2011, bought the album and what a great example of excellent analog production. Not a bad investment either.

The late 70s was less than 50 years ago.

how any semblance of real world practicality is completely lost on many in this comments section. analog recording is great for sound quality, no doubt about it, but it's not practical. the workflow of digital is much better in supporting creativity and allowing artists to experiment without having to worry about permanently ruining their recordings. and when it comes to mixing, i've been told that it can take DAYS to set up a mix in the analog domain... not to mention all the detail that is lost when you play a tape too much. oh, and did i mention that it's expensive? EVERYONE can have pro tools on their computer and with a few good plugins, make a recording and mix that sounds cohesive. take that digital production into a pro studio with analog outboard gear and it's leagues better. it won't have the sparkle and airiness of tape but it'll still sound very good if done right, and it's so much more flexible and less expensive. not to mention, the sound of tape isn't even suitable for many styles of music.

Hello all,

first post here - intended as enlightenment rather than hostility. I'm a working recording engineer, and I've been making records for the past 30 years. From my side of the fence, the audiophile community revolves around a lot of great stuff, but is also very ill-informed about what goes on in the studio; tracking, mixing and mastering.

In this particular case, I'd like to add some real-world, every day facts to the "analog recording" comments:

1. Aside from the hip-hop and electronic based worlds, the majority of recording studios are still centered around large format analog consoles. Most of the Neves, SSLs, APIs, etc, that were making your favorite records in the 70s and 80s are still maintained, functioning, and used every day to make records. It may be true that most of these records are recorded digitally - this often has more to do with editing capability, unlimited takes and comping, etc, than anything else. I am not just talking about multi-million dollar facilities, but right down the one-person operations billing $50/hr with engineer...

2. Analog tape machines - multitrack and mixdown - are not as absolutely ubiquitous now as they were before the computer-based digital platforms - ie, Pro Tools. (Bear in mind, digital recording dates back to the early 70s - on magnetic tape decades before on computers.) BUT, analog machines are still widely maintained, very inexpensive to purchase used - albeit needing repair and maintenance. They exist and are maintained in perhaps 50% + of recording studios (across the USA at least), including very affordable rooms.

3. Tape itself has increased significantly in price - more than double what it was when I started. $350/15 min vs $125 in 1990. This is entirely because it went from large companies like 3M to boutique manufacture as all uses for magnetic tape dwindled. But, almost all studios will rent you multitrack reels, and back them up to digital for archiving.

In regards to all this technology being available only to millionaires... completely incorrect.

I work in Chicago, and there are several dozen studios with analog tape machines. These studios work every day of the week with indie artists and small labels in jazz, rock, folk, etc.

Any artist can make an all-analog record in any of these studios in the same price range as recording digitally.

The biggest obstacles to recording analog - "AAA" as the audiophile community likes to call it - are the need to arrive at the studio better prepared and rehearsed (as editing is FAR more limited), and the inability to keep unlimited takes (of full songs, of vocal overdubs, etc)... in other words, what everyone managed to do and afford *before* digital recording.

To clarify; any of my clients could make an "AAA" recording next week if they chose. None of them are millionaires, even the ones with Grammys, gold records and major label contracts. All of the studios I've worked in recent years have tape machines. Cost may have fluctuated - usually up but in some cases down - between tape cost, mixing expense and overall workflow.

Okay, one non-millionaire who has a 16-track 2" analogue recorder (a 3M, similar to the ubiquitous Ampex) in his little studio in Los Angeles is the bassist in Los Straitjackets. In addition to the Straitjackets, he has recorded Nick Lowe, I've done a few tracks there myself, as have lesser-known Roots artists (Rockabilly, Surf), who wouldn't dream of recording digitally.

Well known Jazz/Instrumental guitarist Bill Frisell has recorded a number of his albums at Flora Recording And Playback in Portland, Oregon, a studio I too have recorded at, in pure analogue. Owner/engineer Tucker Martine is not a millionaire, but the sound quality he gets out of his equipment (which includes a Studer 2" 24-track and ATR 1/2" 2-track, both of course analogue. His microphone collection includes a Telefunken U47!) is world-class.

The little studio in Atlanta I recorded at with Evan Johns (three albums on Rykodisc) has a 2" Ampex 24-track, and a 1/2" 2-track.

I could name a dozen more, but if you want to insist analogue is impractical, it's not up to me to dissuade you. Look on the list of contemporary artists who have recorded at Flora; that is, if you want to learn something. Artists often record home demos on cheap digital equipment, but when they go in to do the recording which will be used to make LP's and CD's, you can bet they record onto analogue. Go ahead, investigate. Then stop spreading bs.

… to NOT read the comments? LOL

If Mr. Burnett thinks I’m going to once again, re-purchase my music collection in yet another format, in addition to whatever hardware is required, well he better guess again. Vinyl, reel to reel, cassette, CD, iPod and back to vinyl. I’m done. This thing has Pono and mini disc written all over it.

One could always do a little informed searching and thereby find U.S. Patent US10629227, but as is usual with the internet it's a lot easier to show how smart you are when ignorant.

Basically it's an LP lacquer disc that has the recording inscribed onto it, and then a specialized coating is applied to the lacquer to harden and protect it from wear. Playable on any turntable. So, theoretically a one-off, direct-from-the-cutting-head LP that never degrades. Dog knows what one will cost!

BTW, I never knew Burnett's given name is Joseph Henry.

Hoped for this.No analog to digital to analog.Better than tape?With no digital problems? The future is now!

for adding something worth reading to these comments.

Malachi, you get plenty of advice but if you are open to one additional piece, it is that you are wasting your time arguing in an online forum with this crowd. You are a talented kid. Do some learning from a recording engineer or acoustic engineer if you have the interest. Maybe they would let you hang around their studio as an intern or something. I bet the experience would be eye-opening, and it will help sort through much of the BS that pervades this hobby. Kind regards

...after reading through Ionic's issued patent is that this new format, like so many other inventions, is an innovation in materials only. (To be honest, I'm amazed that this patent was issued. It would be interesting to look at the prosecution history to identify which features the Patent Office found novel enough to justify issuance.) I just read through quickly, so I may have missed something, but it looks to me as though the patent discloses a normal LP that is made of coated aluminum, rather than vinyl. Will it last longer than a vinyl LP? Well, I'm not sure that that's the issue for analog audiophiles. (And the answer will probably be "no" when a disk is not played.) Since vinyl aficionados generally align their cartridges and keep their records clean (ahem!), record wear is not a huge concern for many of us. But two other issues certainly are of interest: sonics & stylus wear. The physical interactions between diamond and vinyl will certainly differ from those between diamond and lacquer-coated Al. So I'll reserve judgement until somebody like Mikey or J.R. Boisclair has one of these beasties inhouse & files a first-hand report. Of course, it'll be impossible to draw early conclusions without assurance that control & variable differ only in the delivery medium -- that is, that Ionic and vinyl test disks are made from identical sources. We'll see. In the interim, check out how T-Bone's earlier "Code" invention made out.