I have read several of these discussions, not just here but on other boards as well. They usually fall along the same lines as this one has. How mp3s are terrible because of the way they compress the sound. How nobody listens to 'high quality' audio anymore. How this new technology is just terrible for the 'true' audio purist. Let me take you back a few years.

Lets talk about the time when the 'great records' were being recorded. I listen to country, have been since I was old enough to talk. Ever hear the song 'Tennessee Stud' by acclaimed recording artist Eddy Arnold? All vocals are in the left speaker, all instruments in the right. It made it to number 5 on the charts!

How about good old LP records. Ever listen to one in school? How many of you here are old enough to remember the big brown box the 'record player' came in, and how 'great' it sounded. Big mono speaker in the front (it was a gold color). The needle, when was the last time it was changed (if ever).

But mp3s are for portable use today? Anyone remember how we use to listen to music back in the 60s? Does the '7-transistor AM radio' bring back memories? How about the great AM radio you had in the car. If you got past the ever present static, well let's just hope you didn't go under a bridge or through a tunnel.

I am old enough to remember when FM radio came into existence. I remember my dad (a great connoisseur of music) when asked if he wanted that new 'AM/FM' radio in the new car, he stated no, that one speaker in the center of the dash with the reliable AM radio was just fine. He didn't need to spend all that money to hear the same music as he could hear on AM.

You know, somehow I wonder what the talk was like in the monastery when the printing press first came out...
"Have you heard about Gutenberg and that new contraption of his? He can print out whole pages of the Bible! Why they say he can make an entire Bible in less than a week!"
"Yeah, but the quality is not as good as the ones we scribe by hand. Look at the detail that we put into our work. Ours is in color, while he only uses BLACK INK! Yeah it takes longer, but it is worth the year it takes us to make a single Bible. After all, its not the content that is important, but how well it looks. Can you imagine the Pope walking around with a Gutenberg Bible!?! That would NEVER happen! Old Gutty can't hold a candle to us and never will. That printing press thing will never last! Those who know quality will make sure of that"

Anyone know a master scribe?

To me the real problem is the shift in the quality of music. The technology will always evolve but to me the problem is that the "music business" is no longer run by music people. This is a problem in the entertainment business in general. If we look how much radio has changed, the fact the MTV doesn't play music anymore and that young people are more interested in learning technology than an instrument. It seems to me that music has become dispensable in our instant gratification society. Record companies used to have A&R; people that really developed and nurtured up and coming artists. It seems recording artists have to have so many things in place before a label will look at them these days. It's nice that we all have these tools available to us that enable us to record with limited budgets but there will always be something to be said for going to a full blown studio with an experienced engineer and producer.

Sorry, I fell off my soapbox. As for the digital side of things it is certainly much easier to cut corners with software versus hardware. I'm sure many manufacturers capitalize on this. As on old analog guy I think there is much to be said about 2" 16 track analog recording but for doing things in a home studio environment by myself I'll take digital.