Hint: Use 'j' and 'k' keys
to move up and down

TEEN ARCHER

bikes, bands, basses, baseball • film, vegan food, and nonsense
emailtwitterinstagramabout.mestore

Puig Destroyer LP Tracking @ Antisleep, Oakland, CA

(Source: youtube.com)

poordietarychoices:

GOTTA SHOW OFF THAT TASTY SPINASSCH

poordietarychoices:

GOTTA SHOW OFF THAT TASTY SPINASSCH

1,500 notes on this post, which is probably at least 1,000 more than all my other posts combined. Glad folks are enjoying the photos. 

teenarcher:

Throwback Thursday: Blink (pre-182) at Berkeley Square, 1995. 

A band I was in shared management with Blink when they were first starting out. They were still unsigned and they hadn’t yet added the “182” to their name. We played a bunch of shows with them, including this one at the Berkeley Square in August of 1995. 

They were nice guys, but I didn’t think they were anything special. The fact that labels were falling over each other to throw money at them really confused me. This proves that I would have been a terrible A&R man. 

Not sure who took the photos, sorry. 

productiveouts:

Super excited for this one, which is basically just Riley and Ian talking for almost 2 hours about how great Eric Gagne was. 

Nah, just kidding, he was a giant tool! But we do have other great stuff for you, including:

- The open (0:00-5:23)

- The emails (5:51-29:31)

- The musical guest: FUCKED UP.  (30:10-33:45)

- The human guest: Justin Halpern (33:45-1:04:13)

- The baseball stuff: (1:04:47-1:38:52)

  • Manny Machado is a dumbass

  • Josh Lueke got DFA (finally) and the Rays will be sellers… but when? 

  • The Giants are running away with the NL West

  • Are the Blue Jays for real?

  • The Twines signed one or more Kendrys Moraleses

  • Tony Sipp played right field

  • Trevor Cahill was D’d for A

  • Gregory Polanco is finally up and the Super 2 thing sucks

  • Lonald Chisenhall had a big night

  • MLB DARFT

  • CWS stuff. Go ‘Eaters!

- The li’l KWC tour report (1:39:30-1:47:36)

See you next week! 

Utah, you’re all right.

On point. 
mackro:

How Not To Sound Like A Fool When Talking About Mastering, Vinyl, CDs, etc.
Today, I posted a mini-rant on Facebook around the old, current and perpetual audio medium war. It was inspired by a posting by Oliver Wang on his great blog Soul Sides. Here is that entry. I agree with the entry, but the resulting comments from it on various Facebook threads exhibited that there are certain technical issues that are still misunderstood by many. I posted most of the following off the top of my head earlier today, and I was kinda blown away by the positive response. So here it is, with some slight changes and amendments to make it a little less sloppy
Mastering vinyl from digital sources doesn’t universally suck, nor does it suck at all. It’s the majority of people who have no clue and/or no care for what they’re doing while mastering modern vinyl that suck. The issues that make these vinyl issues suck may easily be a different issue than any digital source or the vinyl part altogether. It could be the player. It’s often cheap headphones or speakers.
CDs and MP3s are not the same thing — especially 128kbps encoded MP3s. If you equate the two in an argument about “digital” media sucking, you’re a goddamn fool.
Actually, any debate about the “sound quality” of a certain medium is doomed from the start. “Sound quality” is far too vague a term, yet it’s a phrase that’s all too easy to blurt out. If it’s ever brought up in an argument, either clarify the phrase, or end the argument.
High-end open reel-to-reel tape has a better frequency range than both vinyl and CD. If you want to brag about Massive Frequency Superiority, show off your 2-inch tape machine instead of your turntable or high-end CD/DVD player.
Vinyl does not have a wider frequency range than CD audio, for practical purposes. Vinyl can handle higher frequencies than 20kHz, but these are frequencies humans can’t hear. Vinyl does more poorly with low frequencies — circa 20Hz — than CD because of rumble. That’s not vinyl’s fault. That’s your turntable cartridge’s fault. More to the point, it’s the turntable owner who needs to get a more boomin’ cartridge. Either way, CD audio frequency ranges are pretty much the same as vinyl, but without any contact-media complications
Vinyl’s technical advantage over CDs is its resolution. (Think of frequency range as the range of the color palette, and resolution as how detailed and life-like the painting looks.) Vinyl does not quantize its sound reproduction, which CDs and digital sources do, by definition. However, vinyl is only superior in resolution if the mastering source has equal or higher resolution, such as high-end reel-to-reel tape. That said, that same sound source as uncompressed 16-bit or preferably 24-bit digital audio is barely audibly inferior to reel-to-reel to most people. If the digital source is a low-bit-rate MP3, that MP3 will almost certainly sound better than the vinyl mastered from it.
A vinyl release with minor flaws can easily sound inferior to a well-done CD.
A CD release with minor flaws can easily sound inferior to a well-done vinyl release.
In the case of the latter two, you may blame the artist, the mixer, the studio, the mastering engineer, the record label, whatever. But don’t blame the medium.
Replace “vinyl”, “turntable”, “cartridge”, and “rumble” above with "cassette", "cassette deck", "playback head", and "tape hiss" respectively, and you have all you need to know about cassettes vs. CD as well — more or less.
Most people like the packaging and feel of holding a vinyl release than a CD release or MP3 release, for reasons of rumination, visual art aesthetics, and ergonomics. This is a perfectly valid opinion to uphold. It is no more than an opinion. Yet, that opinion is holding major economic sway these days, whether you like it or not. And "sound quality" has zero to do with vinyl’s high media profile today — except for when you buy and complain about horribly mastered vinyl, in which case go to the first bulletpoint.

On point. 

mackro:

How Not To Sound Like A Fool When Talking About Mastering, Vinyl, CDs, etc.

Today, I posted a mini-rant on Facebook around the old, current and perpetual audio medium war. It was inspired by a posting by Oliver Wang on his great blog Soul Sides. Here is that entry. I agree with the entry, but the resulting comments from it on various Facebook threads exhibited that there are certain technical issues that are still misunderstood by many. I posted most of the following off the top of my head earlier today, and I was kinda blown away by the positive response. So here it is, with some slight changes and amendments to make it a little less sloppy

  • Mastering vinyl from digital sources doesn’t universally suck, nor does it suck at all. It’s the majority of people who have no clue and/or no care for what they’re doing while mastering modern vinyl that suck. The issues that make these vinyl issues suck may easily be a different issue than any digital source or the vinyl part altogether. It could be the player. It’s often cheap headphones or speakers.
  • CDs and MP3s are not the same thing — especially 128kbps encoded MP3s. If you equate the two in an argument about “digital” media sucking, you’re a goddamn fool.
  • Actually, any debate about the “sound quality” of a certain medium is doomed from the start. “Sound quality” is far too vague a term, yet it’s a phrase that’s all too easy to blurt out. If it’s ever brought up in an argument, either clarify the phrase, or end the argument.
  • High-end open reel-to-reel tape has a better frequency range than both vinyl and CD. If you want to brag about Massive Frequency Superiority, show off your 2-inch tape machine instead of your turntable or high-end CD/DVD player.
  • Vinyl does not have a wider frequency range than CD audio, for practical purposes. Vinyl can handle higher frequencies than 20kHz, but these are frequencies humans can’t hear. Vinyl does more poorly with low frequencies — circa 20Hz — than CD because of rumble. That’s not vinyl’s fault. That’s your turntable cartridge’s fault. More to the point, it’s the turntable owner who needs to get a more boomin’ cartridge. Either way, CD audio frequency ranges are pretty much the same as vinyl, but without any contact-media complications
  • Vinyl’s technical advantage over CDs is its resolution. (Think of frequency range as the range of the color palette, and resolution as how detailed and life-like the painting looks.) Vinyl does not quantize its sound reproduction, which CDs and digital sources do, by definition. However, vinyl is only superior in resolution if the mastering source has equal or higher resolution, such as high-end reel-to-reel tape. That said, that same sound source as uncompressed 16-bit or preferably 24-bit digital audio is barely audibly inferior to reel-to-reel to most people. If the digital source is a low-bit-rate MP3, that MP3 will almost certainly sound better than the vinyl mastered from it.
  • A vinyl release with minor flaws can easily sound inferior to a well-done CD.
  • A CD release with minor flaws can easily sound inferior to a well-done vinyl release.
  • In the case of the latter two, you may blame the artist, the mixer, the studio, the mastering engineer, the record label, whatever. But don’t blame the medium.
  • Replace “vinyl”, “turntable”, “cartridge”, and “rumble” above with "cassette", "cassette deck", "playback head", and "tape hiss" respectively, and you have all you need to know about cassettes vs. CD as well — more or less.
  • Most people like the packaging and feel of holding a vinyl release than a CD release or MP3 release, for reasons of rumination, visual art aesthetics, and ergonomics. This is a perfectly valid opinion to uphold. It is no more than an opinion. Yet, that opinion is holding major economic sway these days, whether you like it or not. And "sound quality" has zero to do with vinyl’s high media profile today — except for when you buy and complain about horribly mastered vinyl, in which case go to the first bulletpoint.
If you don’t already have this, or if you think you don’t like Bob Seger, burn some bandwidth and cop this. It’s truly fantastic. 
doomandgloomfromthetomb:

Never Mind The Bullets: Bob Seger, 1966 - 1974
Summer is a-coming in, so it’s time to re-up this compilation of early, criminally out-of-print Seger! It’s raw, it’s garagey, it’s so good. And I still think this is the best photograph of all time. 

If you don’t already have this, or if you think you don’t like Bob Seger, burn some bandwidth and cop this. It’s truly fantastic. 

doomandgloomfromthetomb:

Never Mind The Bullets: Bob Seger, 1966 - 1974

Summer is a-coming in, so it’s time to re-up this compilation of early, criminally out-of-print Seger! It’s raw, it’s garagey, it’s so good. And I still think this is the best photograph of all time. 

First day out with a borrowed 40D. Just learning my way around this thing. 

Thrilled to have seen Thou twice in 24 hours. One of the most earnest, honest, talented, and inspiring bands around. These pictures are from their 4/20 at Toys in Babeland in Oakland. Taken with an iPhone 4s and an olloclip.

productiveouts:

Yeah, this podcast is dedicated to all the teachers that told us we’d never get past episode fitty. It’s all good, baby.

- It was all a dream: Not Jose Mota welcomes back the baseball season (0:00-7:12)

- We read your crazy-ass emails (7:45-28:45)

- Salt and Pepa and Animals as Leaders up in the limousine (29:2-34:15)

- Every Wednesday night, Evan Funk Davies, not Marley Marl (34:15-53:55)

- Baseball talk til my tape popped (54:42-1:20:11)

  • BASEDBALL IS BACK
  • Mike Trout is rich (and very good at baseball)
  • Miguel Cabrera is also rich (and good at baseball) and the Tigers are dumb
  • DICKSTAND
  • Our respective divisional picks, wild card teams, NL & AL champs & WS champ

- Peace to Puig DCult Leader, KWC (1:21:05-1:27:55)

And if you don’t know, now you know…