---- Mary E Tyler <dejahvu@...> wrote:
> >> and across the
> >> board, people used cassettes.
> >
> > Maybe in your neck of the woods they did. But maybe not everywhere.
> >
> > I know that as late as 1980 or so, Brian Orser was still using
> > vinyl. I know because I saw the record case, once, many years ago. I
> > know "anecdote does not equal data," but if a skater at that level
> > was still using it, it suggests he probably wasn't the only one.
>
> Maybe not and perhaps at the high end, but to file under "anecdote
> does not equal data," Orser is ONE skater. And I'm talking about
> hundreds of participants over multiple events over the course of four
> years of competition. I never saw a single vinyl record, only
> cassettes. Hundreds of data points is not an anecdote. One man is.

I agree, but something also tells me, where there is one, there is likely to be
more. Then again, I am not and was never trying to prove that HUGE numbers of
skaters were still using vinyl--just that not all of them were.
>
> >> Now granted, at 12 I was better at
> >> cutting music than most of what makes it onto the skating scene these
> >> days. But I hardly had a Mac.
> >
> > 'Course not. But to do nice music edits with a cassette player took
> > patience and skill. Nowadays you really don't need the patience and
> > skill, all you need is the right software and the ability to punch
> > keys.
>
> I beg to differ. Cutting music on a tape deck took one good ear, two
> fingers and three keys: play, rewind and record. It took time as well.

That's what I meant by "patience." Oh, and even with those, get the wrong
equipment and you had an ugly "CHUNK" sound in every edit regardless.

> It took me about 3 hours to cut a 2.5 minute program in 1982. That was
> two, perhaps three cuts. The most recent piece I cut was quite a while
> back, from 6 minutes down to 2.5 took 6 hours for six cuts. It was no
> easier and no quicker. The result was better, yes, but it took
> significantly more skill and a lot more equipment. It's not cut and
> paste and there is a significant time investment no matter what tool
> you use.

It's going to take time no matter what. How did it take more skill? I'm curious
to know.

> > Of course, all the equipment in the world isn't going to tell you
> > why it's a jarringly bad idea to cut Music A at this point and
> > insert Music B at that point, which is a whole different kettle of
> > fish. You had probably also developed a really good sense of what
> > sounded aesthetically acceptable as a segue and what would stuck out
> > like the proverbial sore thumb no matter how smooth the technology
> > made the transition sound.
>
> This is the truth. Most of the music cuts I hear, flatly, suck. I did
> better when I was 12. Never have been able to figure out how to get
> into the business of cutting skating music though. It seems like a lot
> of it is pre-made and sold by the album.
>
> >> It wasn't that it was impossible, simply that they didn't bother to
> >> do
> >> it.
> >
> > True--but it's easier now to at least deal with the mechanics.
>
> Not "easier," significantly more complex but possible to yield vastly
> better results.

Actually, that would be my own definition of "easier." Better technology and
better results. I'm probably simplifying to say that, but that's what I mean.

> And tech can't buy you an ear.

I think we're both agreed on that.

Trudi