Now That's What I Call Music (1 Viewer)

[ann post]

i been thinking about some shitty early ninties dance compilations i used to have when i was a young un, mostly they had early prodigy and trance stuff, total mainline commercial stuff but i remember at the time i thought the trance was mad stuff. any have any of these or know what they might be called?

 

[rettucs]

i been thinking about some shitty early ninties dance compilations i used to have when i was a young un, mostly they had early prodigy and trance stuff, total mainline commercial stuff but i remember at the time i thought the trance was mad stuff. any have any of these or know what they might be called?

Euphoria? There were loads of them. I went through a phase (a short one thankfully) of buying and listening to them.

So, who here has all the Shine compilations? I don't have any but I did have all of them taped at one stage. Some good stuff on them.

 

[kavanelli]

Got me first grope to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hits_7.

Went to her 30th the other night.

Please say it was to LL Cool J - I need love

 

[ann post]

it might have been a year or two before that golden 'euphoria' period, i think when i get a bit more spare time then the scant 23hours a day that i'm currently scraping by on i'll take a look for these, i'd say there's one good compilation/playlist in it if i look through em. i had one shine, but i think it ended up skipping and i lost the head with it.

 

[georgestapleton]

I have this on vinyl and I have Now 1 on vinyl.

 

[Jerry Twig]

Now that's what I call retarded

 

[nlgbbbblth]

Now: The Millennium Series (1982) is the only place you can hear U2's A Celebration on CD. Value has shot up accordingly.

 

[magnetize]

can these people not burn cds?

 

[nlgbbbblth]

can these people not burn cds?

They could

Early NOW CDs go for serious money. Despite the fact that you could obtain all the individual tracks via CD or legal download for much, much less than that.

but it's the collectors fetish for the real deal. In this case, it beggars belief.

 

[magnetize]

can never really understand collecting cds... horrible format.

 

[rettucs]

can never really understand collecting cds... horrible format.

no way. CDs rock. They're like a badge of honour, displaying them in your front room or wherever. Ya can't do that with feckin mp3s.

I got my first CD in 1991. It was 'On Every Street' by Dire Straits around the time they played the point. The whole thing was a bit disappointing. To this day its CDs all the way for me. Its second only to vinyl, but vinyl has gone a bit ridiculous since its revival.

 

[magnetize]

no way. CDs rock. They're like a badge of honour, displaying them in your front room or wherever. Ya can't do that with feckin mp3s.

vinyl is a much bigger & better sounding badge of honour, that doesnt look like shit & crap out after a few yrs

 

[nlgbbbblth]

can never really understand collecting cds... horrible format.

Not as horrible as cassettes and mp3s.
CDs and vinyl are both deadly and happily co-exist in my collection.

CDs are essential for the 'multi-disc retrospective box set' concept - something which often is more than just a few discs in a cardboard box. The format is rapidly falling victim to the loudness wars though - as major crimes are committed in the name of remastering. I never thought I would hark back to the days of flat sounding 1980s CDs but give me them than the over-compressed ear-bleeders that are being pushed out nowadays. At least the old discs sound good with the volume up.

Vinyl artwork is naturally nicer but the format did itself no favours with the multitude of crappy LP pressings which were rife in the early 1980s and continued for over a decade. As the music industry geared up for the kill in the early 1990s (which was unsuccesful) single LPs were used to cram more and more music onto each side (Single LPs exceeding 60 mins duration were not uncommon) which meant for a lot of shit sounding albums with no dynamic bass.

The penchant for artists releasing longer albums in recent years means that most vinyl versions are double or triple LPs.
Soundwise - great. Not so convenient if you have to get up four times in one sitting.
35 - 40 minute albums should be the norm but aren't.

 

[Unknown Convict]

 

[magnetize]

Not as horrible as cassettes and mp3s.
CDs and vinyl are both deadly and happily co-exist in my collection.

CDs are essential for the 'multi-disc retrospective box set' concept - something which often is more than just a few discs in a cardboard box. The format is rapidly falling victim to the loudness wars though - as major crimes are committed in the name of remastering. I never thought I would hark back to the days of flat sounding 1980s CDs but give me them than the over-compressed ear-bleeders that are being pushed out nowadays. At least the old discs sound good with the volume up.

Vinyl artwork is naturally nicer but the format did itself no favours with the multitude of crappy LP pressings which were rife in the early 1980s and continued for over a decade. As the music industry geared up for the kill in the early 1990s (which was unsuccesful) single LPs were used to cram more and more music onto each side (Single LPs exceeding 60 mins duration were not uncommon) which meant for a lot of shit sounding albums with no dynamic bass.

The penchant for artists releasing longer albums in recent years means that most vinyl versions are double or triple LPs.
Soundwise - great. Not so convenient if you have to get up four times in one sitting.
35 - 40 minute albums should be the norm but aren't.

have to disagree on tapes. a good tape player, like a nak, & chrome cassette lp, sounds way better than a standard cd copy of the same - even allowing for the inherent limitations of tape & the rolloff in high frequencies.

of course youve still got the same problem with cds of shitty packaging.

the only thing cds have, as you say, is convenience. but by that reasoning mp3s would be the format of choice.

 

[Lolo]

The Nows went a bit pear shaped when stock-aitken and waterman started ruling the world. My guess is that was around Now 6.

Well, yeah, cause that's when pop music went crap (I won't say "pear-shaped" cause, frankly, as a pear-shaped woman, using my own shape in a derogatory manner is just wrong ). But people 5-10 years older than me think it all went wrong much earlier than that, I guess it's all to do with the age you are when you first hear music.

Good thing it did go crap though or I'd never have switched off mainstream radio in disgust and gone looking for something more interesting!

 

[nlgbbbblth]

h
of course youve still got the same problem with cds of shitty packaging.

the only thing cds have, as you say, is convenience. but by that reasoning mp3s would be the format of choice.

CDs sound better than mp3s - to my ears.

CD packaging is better than no packaging at all.
Plus they are a physical format. mp3s are not. Having all your music stored on an iPOD or PC horrifies me.

 

[magnetize]

aye, of course, mp3s are lowest of the low.
was just making the point that convenience is not something that i place to high in my choice of music medium & mp3s are the ultimate in conveniece..