Stoner/Doom/Psychadelic Recommendations

npearce said:
I think you, Dreamlord, and Markgugs (others as well) would really like them, but I just thought I'd let everybody know about the US version coming soon.

If somdbody wants a copy, just email me:

npearce@ultimatemetal.com
After reading that article in Terrorizer, I will be the first to step up and admit that I really, really want to hear Grand Magus. Plus, The Music Cartel is a good "buy blind" label for me.

I'd love a copy, is basically what I'm trying to say. :)
 
If any of you really wanna get hectic, check out the stoner sludge of Iron Monkey. Monster riffs backed by the insane vocals of the late Johnny Morrow (RIP).
 
Dreamlord said:
If any of you really wanna get hectic, check out the stoner sludge of Iron Monkey. Monster riffs backed by the insane vocals of the late Johnny Morrow (RIP).
Very interesting of you to mention these boys...I drunkenly ordered one of their CDs from half.com last night for about $4.50 + s/h, I think because I read a description that was nearly word-for-word what you just wrote above. Heh. Teh eewwrrriiDD!
 
Well, I was listening to them on the way to work this morning, so I thought I'd bring them up. Just expect some maniacal vocals.
 
markgugs said:
Yep, OGG is superior, though still technically a "lossy" format. And I would never recommend someone store FLAC, SHN or APE lossless files on their PC UNLESS they did in fact collect live recordings. There's simply no point in encoding studio material to a lossless format.

As for bitrate, while they will in fact SOUND better to your ears (which for many, I realize, is all that matters), they are just as lossy as low bitrate mp3s.

Finally, the only reason this whole conversation took place is because I said it was foolish to encode something to mp3 if you were going to burn it to CD and then mail it. Erik, you mentioned that you "...would never burn a CD from MP3's if I didn't absolutely have to." That's my point. Why would anyone actually HAVE to? I said earlier I can see when you want someone to check out a song or 2 via Soulseek or something like that, it makes no sense to try to "share" or download the .WAV file. So sure, compress it. But if you HAVE the original CDs and are going to go through the trouble of ripping them, burning them onto CDR for someone, and mailing them...why not just preserve the quality of the audio?
It's like 10 years ago you'd make a tape instead of a CD-R. Quality doesn't matter at all because if Jay likes what he hears he will say "oh well fuck this CD-R, off to half.com we go." I understand that you mean that regardless of that it's little extra work to get another CD-R or two and just burn the audio but it's still more of a hassle, especially when you're offering to do something for free.

Also, saying that high bitrate MP3's are "just as lossy" is just not right. Obviously you preserve more of the original audio information the higher the bitrate is. I do understand if you mean that bitrate aside, once it's been compressed it's been compressed, but I'd take a CD burned from 320 kbps ABR MP3's encoded with LAME over 128 kbps VBR BladeEnc ones any day, you know.
 
actually i'm sending 9 albums his way on one CD-R, i don't know JayKeely well enough to make 9 individual CD-R copies :) Also i do not have 9 lying around to do that. Perhaps if i had a fresh spindle i would but i don't so maybe next time. I will however b sending NAD a direct CD copy of the Less than Zero sndtk since that's all he wanted, so the original audio quality shall be preserved.
 
Hey thanks. That way I can remain true to the audiophile gods even! ;)

And it goes without saying if you want a copy of something, just let me know.
 
Erik said:
It's like 10 years ago you'd make a tape instead of a CD-R. Quality doesn't matter at all because if Jay likes what he hears he will say "oh well fuck this CD-R, off to half.com we go." I understand that you mean that regardless of that it's little extra work to get another CD-R or two and just burn the audio but it's still more of a hassle, especially when you're offering to do something for free.
All good points.

Also, saying that high bitrate MP3's are "just as lossy" is just not right. Obviously you preserve more of the original audio information the higher the bitrate is. I do understand if you mean that bitrate aside, once it's been compressed it's been compressed, but I'd take a CD burned from 320 kbps ABR MP3's encoded with LAME over 128 kbps VBR BladeEnc ones any day, you know.
You're right, I should have better clarified myself. To me (and my trading world), lossy = lossy. Regardless of how much is lost. But I will grant you that a "CD burned from 320 kbps ABR MP3's encoded with LAME" is going to be superior in sound to "128 kbps VBR BladeEnc ones." It's all moot to me, but you are correct.
 
Quick question concerning stoner stuff:

Maybe it's just the desert loving Californian in me, but does stoner rock sound infinitely better in extremely hot weather to anyone else?

Think about the opening moments of Black Sabbath - Vol. 4. Doesn't that just sound like sweat?