(Topic ID: 177555)

Aerosmith pics are UP!!


By Collin

2 years ago



Topic Stats

  • 499 posts
  • 215 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 2 years ago by Russell
  • Topic is favorited by 7 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

There have been 31 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

DSCN5235 (resized).JPG
IMG_4311 (resized).JPG
A8B9D37F-F021-4F71-A7E2-B5ADB19D9816-3635-00000900661A3EC3_tmp (resized).png
AS (resized).png
8bdd3af7103555e98e1ea0c3947d4bca55f58bda (resized).png
skittles (resized).jpg
Speakers (resized).jpg
Goldfish-floating-in-bowl-on-a-white-background (resized).jpg
as_grilles (resized).png
microwave_bottom (resized).png
guitar-hero-aerosmith-20080629112827104 (resized).jpg
guitarheroaerosmith_5a (resized).jpg
143368_screenshot_07_l (resized).jpg
61AiaJqIfDL__AC_SX215_ (resized).jpg
IMG_0343 (resized).PNG
IMG_0342 (resized).PNG

There are 499 posts in this topic. You are on page 10 of 10.
#451 2 years ago
Quoted from PW79:

He's prolly comparing fully featured Stern games of the past such as TSPP found NIB for I'd guess $3500 or so vs todays fully featured Stern premiums at just under $7000

That's not what he said. At all.

He said "you used to be able to get a NIB pin for almost half the price, though..."

Not a single word about comparing today's premium version to prior pro models. Just that you used to be able to get a NIB pin for half the price. At $5200.00 for a pro, that would be $2600.00 at "half the price."

#452 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

3 thumbs up for this complete nonsense?
Where does this come from?
Are you going back to the 80's?

Going back to when Aerosmith was actually popular.

#453 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

Going back to when Aerosmith was actually popular.

Actually they were more "popular" in terms of album sales in the 90's, which is ironic because their earlier stuff was much better.

#454 2 years ago

I love old Aerosmith but rarely hear any unless it is coming from my turntable. Top 40 radio only seems to play songs from Permanent Vacation and newer - and those all suck. Somewhere along the line Tyler's voice turned from ripping rocker to wimpy whiner. I cannot reach for my car stereo fast enough when one of those cheese grating songs comes on and I am glad that most of them were left off. Still trying to figure out where all the "toys" are at in this game. It has a trunk that collects balls and pukes them out for mb. Oh boy. Calling that a toy is a bit of a stretch imo. For the pro that is about all I see. So what I am missing? I want to like this game and while I dig the playfield art I find the playfield itself a little bland. Where are the toys? Where is Panzerfreak?
You're slacking tankboy.

#455 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

That's not what he said. At all.
He said "you used to be able to get a NIB pin for almost half the price, though..."
Not a single word about comparing today's premium version to prior pro models. Just that you used to be able to get a NIB pin for half the price. At $5200.00 for a pro, that would be $2600.00 at "half the price."

I hear ya man

For me tho I make the connection every time someone says "Stern doubled their pricing". I think others make the connection too but pretend not to Especially when Pro's didnt even exist back in the day.

Its a lot of typing to always reference the $3500 days of (usually) a single offering of a game vs todays $5200, $6,800, $15,000 & so on offerings of a game.

#456 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Actually they were more "popular" in terms of album sales in the 90's, which is ironic because their earlier stuff was much better.

Well, in the 90s games did sell for around $2500 I believe. And you're not getting a whole lot more with today's offerings that's for sure. But prices on a lot of things have gone up since then, others prices have gone down.

#457 2 years ago
Quoted from Khabbi:

Wow, did Game Room guys shoot that video from a Treo 650? 240p only? WTF.

Here's the 1080p version of that same video.

#458 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

Well, in the 90s games did sell for around $2500 I believe. And you're not getting a whole lot more with today's offerings that's for sure. But prices on a lot of things have gone up since then, others prices have gone down.

When I moved into my house in 94 homes in my neighborhood were 200/250 not they sell 825/875

#459 2 years ago

I'm in for Aerosmith pending the rules layout. Does it have good breadth with lots of scoring opportunities and big jackpots? Or is it just shoot the ball around the table chasing colorful arrows?

Multiplier shots are great in a pin, spelling aerosmith appears to light multipliers , but does anyone know how to spell aerosmith? If completing song modes is how you light aerosmith and shot multipliers become as difficult and rare as Star Trek shot multipliers then not good for me personally. But if there's an element of risk/reward where I can earn 2,3, or 4 shot multipliers from one song and it's only active for the current ball then that's good.

I think I read lighting multipliers is done with the upper pf, so how is it achieved on the pro?

Do song modes have an end that cuts out the song (ala mustang), or can you continue to progress and build jackpot levels staying on one song (ala acdc).

Bottom line, everything I see on aerosmith so far looks stellar; design, art, theme, sounds. It's going to boil down to rules for me; breadth with risk/reward or depth with linear mode progression. If the former, I'm in - if the latter, I'm out. Unfortunately, only 2 programmers at Stern choose breadth over depth and neither of them worked on AS. But I'm intrigued, very intrigued - game looks amazing..... so far.

#460 2 years ago
Quoted from JY64:

When I moved into my house in 94 homes in my neighborhood were 200/250 not they sell 825/875

In '95 Aerosmith CDs sold for around $10? Now I think you can find them in the bargain bin at Walmart for much cheaper than that.

#461 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

In '95 Aerosmith CDs sold for around $10? Now I think you can find them in the bargain bin at Walmart for much cheaper than that.

You can't give away cd's there are the music vhs

#462 2 years ago
Quoted from JY64:

You can't give away cd's there are the music vhs

LOL. I still like them. I like physical media.

#463 2 years ago

Plus they sound better than any other media.

Quoted from Pimp77:

LOL. I still like them. I like physical media.

#464 2 years ago
Quoted from Eskaybee:

I'm in for Aerosmith..

..blah, something about rules, blah.

Me too!

I love how we think the same, SKB.

#465 2 years ago
Quoted from luvthatapex2:

Plus they sound better than any other media.

Actually vinyl has never been topped as far as sound quality.

#466 2 years ago

#467 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

Actually vinyl has never been topped as far as sound quality.

It's and interesting subject.

http://gizmodo.com/dont-buy-what-neil-young-is-selling-1678446860

Summary - CD quality is indistinguishable from analog or any higher def audio to the human ear.

...Maybe a dog can tell the difference?

edit - My pet peave is the poor audio quality of satellite radio. Their music channels sound like 96 or 128khz and their talk channels are even more compressed.

#468 2 years ago
Quoted from Neal_W:

CD quality is indistinguishable from analog or any higher def audio to the human ear.

That's not true. CD is digital sampling, thus leaving out parts of the original analog recording.

#469 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

That's not true. CD is digital sampling, thus leaving out parts of the original analog recording.

Right, indistinguishable parts.

#470 2 years ago

Lonnie D. Ropp on the software . . . Oh boy ........

#471 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

Actually vinyl has never been topped as far as sound quality.

Even if CDs don't sound better than vinyl, it's just not worth the extra effort that is required to get the quality out of the vinyl.

In practical application, vinyl will often sound worse than CD, with the various pops/crackles that come from static. I used the anti-static gun (Zerostat) and everything and it was still a challenge. I gave up on vinyl years ago. I have some SA-CD and DVD-A discs that sound incredible, but for the most part, I am still pretty happy with CD.

#472 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Even if CDs don't sound better than vinyl, it's just not worth the extra effort that is required to get the quality out of the vinyl.
In practical application, vinyl will often sound worse than CD, with the various pops/crackles that come from static. I used the anti-static gun (Zerostat) and everything and it was still a challenge. I gave up on vinyl years ago. I have some SA-CD and DVD-A discs that sound incredible, but for the most part, I am still pretty happy with CD.

I found that I simply stopped caring. I found the quality of music to be deteriorating faster than the quality of the audio.

#473 2 years ago

The less cases, disks, hardware, etc...I have to deal with, the better. Digital cloud music FTW!

#474 2 years ago
Quoted from Neal_W:

Right, indistinguishable parts.

For you maybe, but not me. I noticed it right off the bat. CDs were more convenient, but so were cassettes.

#475 2 years ago
Quoted from Eskaybee:

The less cases, disks, hardware, etc...I have to deal with, the better. Digital cloud music FTW!

Great convenience. Too bad the sound quality is pretty bad.

#476 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Great convenience. Too bad the sound quality is pretty bad.

If you listen to old classic rock that was recorded on 2" analog, yea - sound quality will be worse. But, when I was in a band, we recorded on 2" analog converted to CD. And I went to school for recording engineering. Since I don't do it for a living, I'm in the same boat as Time Bandit, I simply do not care anymore

Give me convenience or give me death - dam I'm a yuppy

#477 2 years ago

Its good to see Stern putting come color back into the playfield with the inserts instead of the cheap look of all the white lighting. And I love the playfield artwork. The purple premium colors really look awesome with it. That being said many people here have certainly noted the weaknesses in this game. Besides...I am still voting with my wallet over the QC and code issues that are still ongoing. I am definitely out.

#478 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Even if CDs don't sound better than vinyl, it's just not worth the extra effort that is required to get the quality out of the vinyl.
In practical application, vinyl will often sound worse than CD, with the various pops/crackles that come from static. I used the anti-static gun (Zerostat) and everything and it was still a challenge. I gave up on vinyl years ago. I have some SA-CD and DVD-A discs that sound incredible, but for the most part, I am still pretty happy with CD.

The thing I don't get about the modern vinyl craze is this little fact.... It is likely that the music is recorded in studio digitally. Or worked digitally at some point in the process. Unless the studio is using all analogue mixers and tape from the 1970s. Then the vinyl pressings are made from those digital masters. So you are listening to an analogue copy of a digital recreation.

So to me, the whole vinyl thing lately is a hipster sham.

#479 2 years ago
Quoted from frolic:

The thing I don't get about the modern vinyl craze is this little fact.... It is likely that the music is recorded in studio digitally. Or worked digitally at some point in the process. Unless the studio is using all analogue mixers and tape from the 1970s. Then the vinyl pressings are made from those digital masters. So you are listening to an analogue copy of a digital recreation.
So to me, the whole vinyl thing lately is a hipster sham.

Exactly.

That said, there *are* situations where vinyl is better, but it's always with the older recordings (that were analog).

This article explains it well:

http://www.philpalombi.com/2013/02/vinyl-vs-cd-its-a-battle-to-the-death/

#480 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

That said, there *are* situations where vinyl is better, but it's always with the older recordings (that were analog).

And we are in a thread discussing Aerosmith. A band that recorded their best albums in the 70s on analog, of which sound best on vinyl.

#481 2 years ago

The 80s was a homogenized, digitalized decade. And that's exactly what they did when they converted all the great analog recordings of the past to fit on a compact disc.

#482 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

The 80s was a homogenized, digitalized decade. And that's exactly what they did when they converted all the great analog recordings of the past to fit on a compact disc.

It's all in your imagination.

http://www.laweekly.com/music/why-cds-may-actually-sound-better-than-vinyl-5352162

#483 2 years ago
Quoted from jwilson:

It's all in your imagination.

Just like your bullshit post, you can't believe everything you read. I was there when it happened, I noticed the difference, I still notice the difference, and I trust my senses more than what some wanna be experts on a pinball forum tell me I should believe.

But you are free to believe whatever they have convinced you you must believe.

#484 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

And we are in a thread discussing Aerosmith. A band that recorded their best albums in the 70s on analog, of which sound best on vinyl.

Sorry buddy, I didn't realize that we were limiting our discussion of vinyl vs. CD to Aerosmith recordings.

#485 2 years ago

Not to get back on topic or anything, but anyone know if stern plans on getting dead flip in to do a stream?

#486 2 years ago
Quoted from Eskaybee:

Not to get back on topic or anything, but anyone know if stern plans on getting dead flip in to do a stream?

WTH is wrong with you?

Can't you see we are having an important discussion here about vinyl albums vs CD?!

Sheesh!

#487 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Sorry buddy, I didn't realize that we were limiting our discussion of vinyl vs. CD to Aerosmith recordings.

I wasn't and you weren't. I don't listen to much of either anymore. But If you ever feel the need to compare which obsolete music format is more pleasing to the ears, feel free to stop on by.

DSCN5235 (resized).JPG

#488 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

I wasn't and you weren't. I don't listen to much of either anymore. But If you ever feel the need to compare which obsolete music format is more pleasing to the ears, feel free to stop on by.

Between those particular two, I would expect the vinyl to win, for all the reasons stated in the article that I linked to.

Great album too!

#489 2 years ago

Pisses me off my vinyl Rocks and Get Your Wings are missing. I purged the collection a few years back, but was sure those were still there. Maybe I'll look again... in a few years

#490 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Between those particular two, I would expect the vinyl to win, for all the reasons stated in the article that I linked to.
Great album too!

...but the remastered CD sounds better.
(assuming there is one). The re-mastered Beatles collection sounds better.

#491 2 years ago
Quoted from frolic:

The thing I don't get about the modern vinyl craze is this little fact.... It is likely that the music is recorded in studio digitally. Or worked digitally at some point in the process. Unless the studio is using all analogue mixers and tape from the 1970s. Then the vinyl pressings are made from those digital masters. So you are listening to an analogue copy of a digital recreation.
So to me, the whole vinyl thing lately is a hipster sham.

I think it's something along the lines of "it's fun", whatever that means.

#492 2 years ago
Quoted from Pimp77:

...but the remastered CD sounds better.
(assuming there is one). The re-mastered Beatles collection sounds better.

Exactly!

It's almost like you read the article that I linked to.

#493 2 years ago

Guys, trying to bring this back on topic here. Which dimples more, vinyl or cd's? I'm going with vinyl, but I like the authentic feel of dimples.

#494 2 years ago

To be fair to o-din, a lot of early CDs really did sound like shit. The DAC stuff wasn't ironed out right or whatever. They did fix it.

And there's nothing wrong with working with both analog and digital. Eskaybee can probably tell you that you can't beat the bottom end you can get from overdriving 2" tape, but that doesn't mean you can't then bounce that to digital later to work with it.

They're all just tools. I've got crates of records I never listen to, because it's just a pain in the ass, and I don't have room in my office now for my turntables. I've pressed my own music onto vinyl, it's like nothing else just because you can hold it and the big art on the sleeves etc, but at the end of the day I'm too lazy to get up and flip a double album every 3 songs.

#495 2 years ago
Quoted from o-din:

Just like your bullshit post, you can't believe everything you read.

Yeah, all that science is "bullshit" and your "feelings" trump it. Got it.

The article even talks about all the reasons that sometimes vinyl is better because of the experience or the mastering is designed with the limitations of the medium, but vinyl is objectively and scientifically worse for accurate sound reproduction. You can like it more all you want but that's your subjective opinion, not the absolute truth.

If you like it for the experience, we actually agree - sitting down with an album, putting it on the turntable, cueing it up and sitting back to enjoy the liner notes - you don't get that with CD and certainly not with MP3. But that has nothing to do with accuracy.

#496 2 years ago
Quoted from jwilson:

If you like it for the experience, we actually agree - sitting down with an album, putting it on the turntable, cueing it up and sitting back to enjoy the liner notes -

God Vinyl people are the worst

#497 2 years ago
Quoted from jwilson:

Yeah, all that science is "bullshit" and your "feelings" trump it. Got it.
The article even talks about all the reasons that sometimes vinyl is better because of the experience or the mastering is designed with the limitations of the medium, but vinyl is objectively and scientifically worse for accurate sound reproduction. You can like it more all you want but that's your subjective opinion, not the absolute truth.
If you like it for the experience, we actually agree - sitting down with an album, putting it on the turntable, cueing it up and sitting back to enjoy the liner notes - you don't get that with CD and certainly not with MP3. But that has nothing to do with accuracy.

It does have to do with working under certain limitations. By it's very nature the sounds on vinyl have to be compressed and this can mean a "warmer" sound for the listener. It's not always about accuracy for the listener apparently.

On a CD you have a larger range from low to high so you don't need heavy compression so it's a wider range but can sound a little "cold" to people if it's not done right.

Sadly the trend is to compress everything to have the LOUDEST POSSIBLE CD so these "volume wars" have spoiled the last 5 years of CD's anyways.

#498 2 years ago
Quoted from jwilson:

Yeah, all that science is "bullshit" and your "feelings" trump it. Got it.

What's bullshit is telling me it is all my imagination.

Was what they did to the early ZZ Top albums when they first put them on CD all in my imagination as well?

#499 2 years ago
Quoted from RobT:

Great convenience. Too bad the sound quality is pretty bad.

Not if you use Apple lossless. Editor of Stereophile magazine says it's the best overall format.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
$ 94.95
Cabinet - Shooter Rods
Super Skill Shot Shop
$ 19.95
$ 69.99
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Lighted Pinball Mods
5,000
Machine - For Sale
Colgate, WI
From: $ 40.00
Cabinet - Other
Rock Custom Pinball
$ 48.00
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ModFather Pinball Mods
From: $ 11.95
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
ULEKstore
There are 499 posts in this topic. You are on page 10 of 10.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside