Re: _TSW_ pressings

["Ken." <krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>]

In response to something I said along the lines of:
>>     I sincerily hope that Kate figures out that digital is better for her
>>listeners even though it's more expensive.  I always thought that _The
>>Dreaming_ was a great recording.

>Yes, but Kate has said why she preferred analog mixing to digital...
>the article (interview?) was posted here sometime in the last, oh, 5 months
>or so.  I have it on file somewhere.

     Wasn't it because 1) she's more comfortable with analog, 2) digital only
had a "crystalline quality" over the analog and 3) digital was more difficult
to do in certain cases, while easier than others?
     Well, I can accept 1).  I mean, I'd prefer good KaTe AAD to mediocre
KaTe DDD.  2) and 3) are interesting points, but don't really discourage the
use of digital (at least in her description.)
     Frankly, I think if KaTe engineered her AAD recordings correctly they'd
be a good match for DDD.  She'd be happy because she'd be using analog, and
we'd be happy because we could sacrifice our stereo speakers in KaTe's name.
     Unfortunately, it's too early in the morning for me to be optimistic.

>That said, anybody have any idea why _The Dreaming_ CD is AAD?  Shouldn't
>it be ADD?

     I always thought it was recorded digitally.  Oh well.  ADD it is.  I
think _HoL_ and _TD_ had their AADs and ADDs mixed up.  BFD, but interesting.

>Confused (and hoping he don't gotta wait 'til '94 for the next KT album),

     "    ( " ),

>Jeff
>|Jeffrey C. Burka                | "On the outskirts of nowhere           |
>|jburka@silver.ucs.indiana.edu   |  on the ringroad to somewhere,         |
>|jburka@amber.ucs.indiana.edu    |  on the verge of indecision..." --Fish |

							Ken.
						   ken-b@uiuc.edu