Keith Richards Interview


Andrew Marr, the interviewer, might be unfamiliar to US A-goners. He is a former Member of Parliament who went into TV journalism full time. A few years ago he had a stroke but managed a full recovery and is seen on top form here interviewing the legendary Keith Richards.

Here's the crux of the matter : almost as soon as the camera gets rolling Keith expounds the virtues of analogue.
A man after my own heart... ;^)

You can watch the entire interview here. Please scroll to 27 minutes on the timebase as the show covers a lot of political issues.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06cjs02/the-andrew-marr-show-13092015

Enjoy!
moonglum
That sounds about right. I don't personally see any advantage of digtial except on paper.
Thanks Geoff :)
To some that review may have sounded as if I was baiting digital enthusiasts but it was intended as an illustration of why Keith's preference for analogue is easily understandable. (As our analogue friends here already know).

Note that I waited over 2 years before publishing any remarks so as not to torpedo sales of the BluRay ;^)
Unfortunately, the digiphiles had already done their own hatchet job on it shortly after release so I can't feel too guilty... :) :)
I could be wrong about this but it seems to me all of the Stones' albums since Steel Wheels which if memory serves is more than 20 years old have been entirely digital, i.e., DDD. in addition, most or all of the Stones' albums in the past 20 years maybe more have been victims of the Loudness Wars, having the dynamics compressed out of them. one assumes that Keith and the boys must exercise no control whatsoever over their artistic products, regardless of what Keith opines regarding the pros and cons of analog recordings.

Cheers
It could well be more than that, Geoff...(nearly 30 yrs?)

If memory serves, widespread use of Sony PCM1600 machines in the recording industry didn't seriously happen until mid-late 1980s?
All credit to them if they managed to dodge that particular bullet until the 90s.

Some original tapes (by other artists) from the 50s and 60s, and their resultant digital transcripts, have proved to be in far better shape than they have any right to be (many tapes were seriously suffering the ravages of time, while a few were lost or destroyed altogether) but if one wants to get as close to the original issue of the analogue master tape an early vinyl pressing is most often the answer.
BTW..I'm ashamed of you guys... :) :)
No one noticed the deliberate mistake. I cut and pasted a short comment about the track "Carol" from a second e-mail because it was assumed to be a BD comment (because that's what it stated). "BD" had been clearly a typo. It was obviously a sideband comparison spawned by the BD comparison and involved another digital source - possibly even a digital needledrop. My sincere apologies.
(Also it was 50 tracks not 60 ;^)