Sound Quality Vs. Measurements

[tsiros]

Originally Posted by dvv

You're kidding, right?

without listening to it.

here are some pictures, can you tell me which are the flac and which the mp3?

[dvv]

Originally Posted by Wavebourn

Optimal means satisfies set of criteria. Example: what is optimal for stationary speaker is suboptimal for portable speaker. So for portable speaker light material would be preferable, for stationary speakers heavy material would be preferable. Here is a picture of my subwoofer attached. It is of course suboptimal for a boombox, but why would I prefer portable boxes in my living room when concrete horn under the floor works better?

Agreed.

Whether the set of criteria is itself optimal for a given purpose is another matter.

And why exactly is your subwoofer suboptimal for a boombox?

[dvv]

Originally Posted by tsiros

without listening to it.

here are some pictures, can you tell me which are the flac and which the mp3?

A misunedrstaning - I meant hearing the difference between standard Red Book CD and MP3.

[Wavebourn]

Originally Posted by dvv

Whether the set of criteria is itself optimal for a given purpose is another matter.

A-priory. "The future belongs to those who know right questions"

And why exactly is your subwoofer suboptimal for a boombox?

Right question.
The hole in the floor is not portable.

[popilin]

Originally Posted by Wavebourn

The hole in the floor is not portable.

I would not be so sure.

ACME Instantaneous hole - YouTube

[tsiros]

Originally Posted by dvv

A misunedrstaning - I meant hearing the difference between standard Red Book CD and MP3.

you can? 320kbps? without joint stereo?

[fas42]

Originally Posted by Wavebourn

Here is the link that I received today in e-mail:

Recording: In The Studio: The Top 10 Reasons Why Music Is Compressed - Pro Sound Web

The guy advocates compression.

Just be careful not to confuse Audio data compression, which is what MP3 is, with Dynamic range compression, a very different thing; orthogonal in fact.

Frank

[abraxalito]

Originally Posted by dvv

I agree or disagree with you depending on what you understand as optimal. To me, optimal means that the product satisfies the primary goal that has been set for it.

That is not my meaning for optimal. I agree with Wave, there are a set of criteria and optimal best fulfills that chosen set in totality.

It seems to me you are looking at it far too much from the engineering side, whereas I am looking at it from its ultimate goal as a product, which is to sell and produce profits.

It seems to me that your business understanding ie somewhat lacking. The purpose of business is not 'to produce profits' but rather, as Drucker says 'to create a customer'. To me, engineering encompasses 'building the right product' just as much as 'building the product right', but you might consider the former as 'marketing'.

Looking at it from the economic side, it is a success, because it sells, and in my opinion, it is economically optimal because it satisfies not only that on e basic goal, but does so without endangering its sister model,

As I said before, in my meaning 'optimal' is not a matter of opinion so it does seem we've been talking at crossed purposes. I propose to halt the discussion here

[tsiros]

I'll add my 0.10


10: Compression is part of the sound of contemporary music. Completely uncompressed music would sound lifeless and boring to most listeners. They crave more energy than unprocessed sound offers.


Too general a claim... The self titled Animals as Leaders ("contemporary" music) album is horrible to listen to... why? Because it is brickwalled compressed.


9: Louder music, even if it’s just slightly louder, almost always sounds better than quieter music.


that is why we have these things called amplifiers that take a weak signal and make it stronger which in the end is heard louder.


8: Most music is listened to in the background to accompany some other activity like working, reading exercising, driving, or cooking. When you’re doing something else, uncompressed music’s constantly shifting volume level would be an annoyance.

That's not music, that's barely one step above muzak. Have you ever held a deep, thoughtful, meaningful conversation with a friend while doing the dishes? I thought not. How can you be involved in a meaningful way to the music you hear while you are involved in something else? Frankly i don't give a **** if you want to cater to these people, but don't you dare lump us with them.

7: When listening in shuffle mode, there’s a good chance you’ll skip over the quieter songs to get to the next tune. Record producers live in fear of a mix that’s too quiet.


excuse me... what ? This is so absurd i don't think it even merits discussion.


6: In the days before CD mastering, engineers needed to boost the quietest sounds to keep them above the LP’s noise floor, and reduce the loudest sounds volume level to keep the “needle” in the groove. Digital didn’t have those problems, but we still wound up with CDs that have less soft-to-loud dynamic range than LPs.


a) he doesn't say what dynamic range he is referring to. The dynamic range that the CD is capable of (16bits is ~98 dB. vinyl is what? 70 dB?) or the dynamic range that we end up with after the mastering?


b) if someone is mastering a recording targeted at CD while having vinyl in mind i think (i'm no recording engineer) there is something wrong.


5: Engineers like using different types of compression to create new sounds to catch the ear. There’s nothing wrong with that.


Nothing wrong? The engineer is not the performer. His work better be in agreement with what the performer wants, or he fails at his purpose.


4: People so rarely listen to music in quiet surroundings, they need compression to keep music loud enough to be heard over the noise.


So because the majority of people do not know how to appreciate music, you cater to them. Catering to the lowest common denominator, gotcha.


3: If people really didn’t like compression, they would stop buying/listening to compressed music (see No. 1).


... were we given a choice? When? Where is the "uncompressed" version of the music i like? Since we are not given a choice, you can't blame us for our actions.


2: People mistake compression for dynamics; when all the sounds are loud and “punchy,” it’s called “dynamic.” Naturally dynamic music lacks the kick of a compressed mix.


Compressed means that the upper levels of "loud" are all brought to the same level of "loud". By definition compression means loss of dynamic range.



If that claim were true, a live orchestra would have less kick than his compressed master. Absurd. Is he thinking of an expander, perhaps? I know colloquially compressing and expanding are both called compression, but from a guy who claims to be a master at his art, i'd expect him to use the correct terminology.



1: Audiophiles like to complain about compressed music, but they actually prefer it.


No we ******* don't. That is why you see people even trying to uncompress recordings that are compressed to hell. I can not link directly because it is against the rules, but try searching for "animals as leaders unbrickwalled". Understand what this means? Try searching for "not remastered" on torrent sites. Understand what this means?

[Wavebourn]

Originally Posted by fas42

Just be careful not to confuse Audio data compression, which is what MP3 is, with Dynamic range compression, a very different thing; orthogonal in fact.

Frank

Nice to meet you Frank. My name is Anatoliy.

I am not advocating neither dynamic range compression, nor lossy file compression. I just posted a link on a blog of a guy that advocates dynamic range compression. He is a typical audio engineer of the modern era.