Standard CD:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001ED7C6W/?tag=imwan-20

Vinyl + Audiophile CD:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001HADDWY/?tag=imwan-20

See next post for the tracklisting ...

Hi Linda:

Here's what I know.

The street date is now 11-11-08. It will be released in two formats CD and LP.

The song sequence is as follows:

CD
The Wrong Thing To Do
Bootleg Flyer
Crystal River
High School Confidential

LP Sequence
Side One
The Wrong Thing To Do
Bootleg Flyer
High School Confidential

Side Two
Crystal River

List on the CD is 6.98. Bar Code is 093624982425
List on the LP is 11.98. Bar Code is 093624982401

The LP will come with an audiophile CD made from the
same uncompressed stereo masters as the LP.

Similar to what they did on the previous full length
LP.

All the tracks were recorded live in April of 2008.

No dates or locations on the recodings were given
yet.

Rebel007

Thanks, I'll pass...

The LP/Audiophile CD version will probably be available on the "Because Sound Matters" website.This is starting to piss me off.I sprung for the Mudcrutch Vinyl/CD combo the first time to get the uncompressed CD which I enjoy listening to more than the standard release,which I have as well.But I have not owned a Turntable since my old Dual manual unit crapped out over 20 years ago,nor do I intend on paying good money to go back to an inferior technology.I am tired of all the vinyl Luddites and their "warm sound" rubbish.I don't miss the static,pops.clicks,wow and flutter one bit.I have replaced almost all of my vinyl, most of which was worn out anyway,with CD's and Hi-Rez format disc's and I'm not going backward,DAMMIT! OK,I admit I do miss the old gatefold sleeves...nothing helps de-seed better than a copy of Led Zepelin IV!

P.S.-I have a couple of rotary telephones in the basement if anyone is interested...............

I'll probably get it, since I love Petty. But to tell you the truth, I listened to the Mudcrutch CD a couple of times, and got bored with it...

Jeff

Music aside, Mudcrutch has got to be the worst band name since Hoobastank.

Fantastic first record on vinyl and looking forward to this one. For those that don't "get" vinyl you probably bought those wonderful "hi-Def" cassettes just for the ease of car use and have blown your ears out anyway so you should stay with CD's so that compressed high pitch screech can penetrate. LOL

That post is one waveform short of being in the wrong forum.

"hi-Def" cassettes? WTF? Do you mean DAT? Just for the "record",the only pre-recorded cassette that I ever purchased was the Talking Heads "Speaking In Tongues" because it was the only release that featured the extended versions of most of the songs.Thankfully, the recent remaster included all these versions plus a DVD-A in "hi-Def" 5.1 of the album.Try that with vinyl!

Not Dat. It's called sarcasim. And I have the "cube" box on the THeads and I love it. As I said, if you have to argue the point you just don't get it and can't hear it.

I rarely play LP's anymore due to convenience, but I do feel that on the RIGHT PLAYBACK EQUIPMENT that LP continues to be slightly superior to cd, though cd has closed the gap other then the current trend in screechy mastering.

In my experience it takes AT LEAST a several hundred dollar table, + a quality cartridge & phono preamp to hear the difference. At one time I owned a Well Tempered, it's superiority to cd was really apparent.

Thanks for backing up my points exactly. Couldn't agree more.

Rich, I opted to buy those Talking Heads remasters as imports to avoid the dreaded and thankfully defunct DualDisc format.The imports came in CD/DVD-A double disc sets with NTSC video.Those damn DualDisc's are too fat to play in my car CD player.

I know I will never change the mindset of the vinyl lovers out there but here is an interesting article from Popular Science magazine:

Are Records Really Better? The FYI experts tackle the question that plagues every audiophile
By Corey Binns

Choices, Choices: Vinyl can’t compete with CDs, but compressed music files are even worse. Erik Isakson/Getty Images
Sorry, vinyl aficionados, but CDs most accurately capture the clarity of musical performances. If you look at the grooves of a standard long-play record, or LP, through a microscope, you’ll see that each is filled with what look like rolling hills. These are, in fact, an extremely close replication of the shape of the sound waves from the musician’s instrument. But because the needle that carves the groove is shaped slightly different than the needle that reads it, the LP will never sound exactly like the original performance. (Not to mention that changes in temperature and humidity warp vinyl over time.)

The mathematical data encoded on a CD, however, is a nearly exact representation of the original sound. Comparing an LP and a CD made from the same microphone signal, the LP’s groove must perfectly match the signal to sound close to CD-quality, which is almost impossible, says Stanley Lipshitz, who studies electro-acoustics and digital-signal processing in the Audio Research Group at the University of Waterloo in Canada.

Even so, some audiophiles claim to hear a natural sound, vaguely described as “musical warmth,” when listening to vinyl. What they’re hearing, Lipshitz says, is most likely the deficiencies of the record player. Sound waves from the speakers and the needle’s rise-and-fall passage over the grooves cause the LP to vibrate. The needle picks up these extra vibrations and adds them to the music, creating the “fullness” that’s associated with LPs. “Some people mistake this defect for a virtue,” Lipshitz says.

But when it comes to portable music, people stuff their iPods with tunes of far worse quality than either CDs or LPs. MP3s are compressed files that cut as much as 90 percent of the sound from the original recording, by using computer models of human hearing and removing subtle sounds that most of us don’t realize we’re missing. A compressed recording of a French horn, for example, might lack the slight reverberations from the concert hall.

Instead of filling his digital music player with thousands of songs of crummy sound quality, Grammy Award–winning producer Jim Anderson keeps his iPod stocked with just 55 songs in an uncompressed format, including jazz pianist Keith Jarrett’s epic live solo concerts in Germany. (Anderson prefers the lossless AIFF format, in which one minute of stereo audio occupies 10 megabytes.) “If I were to cut the CD down to an MP3, I’d be throwing out all the stuff in the room that makes the piano sound as full as it does,” says Anderson, who is also chair of the department of recorded music at New York University. “I hear the piano exactly as it was at the concert.”

Burning question? Send it forth to the experts at fyi@popsci.com

No offense meant to you Mr Fuse, but my memory is that Mr Lipshitz was id'd years ago by Stereophile magazine as being against all subjective listening tests. If memory serves, he's had a long running battle with the audiophile community. There are also scientists on the side of subjective listening backed up by lab reports that show differences.

The article above is kind of like quoting Fox news without quoting anyone who disagrees!

Too bad Barry Diament seems to have stopped posting here. I'd be very interested in his opinion (which may very well be different then mine, but it would certainly be informed!).

Like I mentioned in my last post, I'm almost completely cd myself these days; but my ears have heard vinyl's superiority on many occasions. Personally, I'm ok with all of us having our preferences, as long as lossy (Mp3, tetc) formats never become the standard.

On the topic, I sure wish there was a way to get the uncompressed cd without buying the vinyl!

We all hear differently.I don't care how people prefer to listen to their music.I believe in freedom of choice.I am only trying to make the point that music lovers should not be subjected to buying something they don't want in order to get something they do because some customers claim an old outdated format is superior in audio quality than another and the record companies pander to them.

Now I'm waitng for all the Lipshitz jokes.............

They are not pandering. There is a small but growing community of young (under 30 crowd) of kids buying vinyl for all the ovious reasons. And when I ask them why they say the same reasons I and Geoff have stated but they also do what I do and buy the CD as well for the car. The new WB inpring "Because Sound Matters" was created not to create a market but to respond to the demand. That is not pandering it is sound business. The 5.1 Hi Res crowd that you belong to is 10x smaller than the vinyl crowd. I'm glad you enjoy it and I would in no way try and persuade you away from it.

Hi Geff R,



I apologize for my (long?) absence. Sometimes things get busy and I don't get to all the sites I like to visit.

Is the question LP vs. CD?
If so, I can only speak for myself of course. In my experience, folks who say LP can't equal CD (meaning they believe CD more faithful to the source) have most likely not heard good vinyl playback.

As to "The mathematical data encoded on a CD, however, is a nearly exact representation of the original sound.", my experience says if you are listening to music, this just isn't true. Ultimately, it isn't even close. 16-bit/44k audio, as represented by the CD format is very good at capturing sine waves but music does not look or behave like sine waves.

Some will say what vinyl lovers are preferring is a "good" distortion. I don't agree. The best vinyl playback is to my ears, more faithful to a microphone input (or any source) than the best CD on the best player.

That said, once we move toward high resolution digital, things start to change. 24-bit/96k digital can rival the best vinyl. Recently, I've started recording at 24/192 instead of the 24/96 I've used for the past several years. (While a number of converters claim 24/192 ability, few in my experience, can do this very well. Similarly, some converters are "happier" with 16/44 than they are with 24/96.) With good 24/192, I believe we have the best sounding (i.e. most faithful to its input) recording/playback format I've ever experienced. Any remaining areas where I've felt in the past that analog still does better have now fallen to 24/192.

So when I hear folks talk about the theoretical perfection of CD, I find it kind of funny.

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com

Actually, though almost no one remembers, there was a "hi-def" cassette format, DCC, introduced in 1992. It never caught on and didn't last very long at all. From Wikipedia:

"Digital Compact Cassette (DCC) is an obsolete magnetic tape sound recording format introduced by Philips and Matsushita in late 1992. Pitched as a successor to the standard analog cassette, and competitor to MiniDisc (MD) and Digital Audio Tape (DAT), it never became popular with the general public. It shared the same form factor as analog cassettes, and DCC recorders could play back either type of cassette. This backward compatibility allowed users to adopt digital recording without rendering their existing tape collections obsolete. The DCC was discontinued after October 1996."

DCC was LOSSY( like MP3). For that reason the audiophile community opposed it as we also opposed Sony's mini disc atarac codec. There was a concern at the time that the record labels were going to push for dcc to be the archival standard (shudder).

The closest thing we ever had to "high def" cassette was DAT, & with burnable cdr's at under 25 cents.......

Barry, thanks for your post!

The problem with DATs was a very short shelf life.
Record a DAT today, place it in a climate controlled vault for 6 months and you will be guaranteed to have at least some sections that are no longer playable, sounding like bursts from a fax machine.

All the digital tape formats I know of were error prone and short in duration, all the way up to the 1630, 3/4" U-matic cassettes that were used for CD masters in the old days.

DCC was anything BUT high definition. As Geff pointed out, they were lossy and quite low fidelity actually. (Then again, some folks find eMPty3s to be of "CD quality". ;-})

Best regards,
Barry
http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com