Disappointing CD's....

[SimontY]

Sounds like some rather extreme ignorance!

[audio-kraut]

there is an untranslatable word in german that describes the attitude of industrie and "artiste" rather well: "verarschung".

[Thunau]

Originally posted by audio-kraut


what an excuse - if someone doesn't care how their music is produced - why should I give a s...t about their music.
Sloppy production is an affront to the listener and imo inexcusable.

If that's their "production" philosophy - the trash can is always wide open.
Considerng the effort that was put into production with what they had in the sixties and seventies...this attitude stinks.

Making a recording is a creative process. Individual sounds are like techniques in a painter's arsenal. If a band thinks that certain lo-fi or downright weird approach to capturing and mixing of their music is appropriate- so be it. Recording studio is not a white coat lab where purity of the product is the goal. What counts is creativity and uniqness. If you don't care for the product don't buy it.

BTW. Do you disqualify all the paintings from the impressionist era because they have no detail and all seem out of focus? Are Leonardo Da Vinci and Michealangelo the ultimate artists because they painted to reflect reality?

What popular movie these days is made to look real? Would you want to watch a single stationary camera view of a set with no special lighting and no makeup on the actors? I think not.
This translates directly to recording. Makeup is like EQ, lighting is like compression, camera work is multitracking, editing is like mixing, special effects are like- you guessed it- special effects in music.
Synthesis of sounds is like digitally creating dinosaurs and aliens in movies.

Yes, some guys ( I should say most) in the studio get carried away with technology, but that's what separates the men from the boys. Men know how to use the tools to their advantage, while boys just use the tools.

[grimberg]

Originally posted by jmateus

This reminds me the FM band (even though is not comparable),
many years ago its quality was relatively acceptable and a tuner
was a justifiable piece of equipment to have in your system. Today,
well, forget... And the same applies to the TV sound! May be when
the HDTV becomes more affordable....

I am afraid things won't improve and here is why. In January I got a 90 days free trial to XM Radio. Even though there is interesting material being broadcast, the poor audio quality (128Kbits) gets fatiguing very fast. I stopped listening to it even before the trial period expired. XM Radio has over 4 million subscribers paying $12.99 a month that obviously do not mind the poor sound quality. In other words, people who care about the quality of recordings and broadcast are in minority and do not really impact the recording and broadcast companies bottom line.

[Thunau]

I listened to XM on quite a few ocasions. Personally, I doubt the quality is 128kbs. It sounds much closer to their web stream, which is 64kbs. 128kbs can be very good with some codecs. The XM codec is downright annoying. It's the only reason I didn't buy into it. I just use the web streaming from someone elses account. The programming is very good though. I find that the DJs for the stations that interest me know their stuff very well and play good selections. I bought quite a few good CDs based on their programming.

[qi]

Regarding compression, I use LAME MP3 ALT PRESET EXTREME which is 320K VBR, and averages about 228K (5 to 1). It is very close to a DVD movie soundtrack in quality, and not bad compared to CD.

Be sure to apply album-level gain with MP3GAIN, or the likes of Lenny Kravitz and Savage Garden will drive you out of the room (way too loud -- way too much bass)

I have become underwhelmed with anything lower in bitrate (i.e, everything on the WEB)

[audio-kraut]

What counts is creativity and uniqness. If you don't care for the product don't buy it.

And "creativeness" is an excuse for sloppiness?
There is simply no comparison berween the 'stile' that is used to create i.e. impressionism, and the lousy recording technique that is used as an apology - yes, certain methods could be considered part of the creative process, but from the statement related here its about laziness, sloppiness and to insult the music consumer - and for sure I will not buy something like that.
It still does not prevent me from speaking out.

[qi]

MY TWO CENTS...

What counts is creativity and uniqness. If you don't care for the product don't buy it.

EXACTLY -- I don't buy it.

I like good recordings done by MASTER SOUND ENGINEERS.

Examples -- PINK FLOYD, NORA JONES, The EAGLES' "Hell Freezes Over" live DVD in PCM...

[John Hope]

Hi Rick - I just saw your post today as we've been on holiday.

Adobe Audition uses a graphical device to alter dynamic range. Basically it's a dBin on one axis dBout on the other, so that for zero alteration of the signal, the graph will appear a straight line at 45 degrees. You can pick points on this line and stretch them to any point in two dimensions, either using straight line segments or the 'splines' function which generates smooth curves. So theoretically you can compress or expand as you wish. A large number of presets are provided, but most of these seem to be geared towards special effects and make matters worse.

I've sometimes succeeded in expanding a heavily compressed 'in your face at 0dBFS all the time ' CD (eg Shania Twain's Come On Over or Sheryl Crow's C'mon C'mon) using this tool. But I think the general problem with 'CD remastering' i.r.o. this tool is that you only have access to the final mix, not the 8 or 24 or however-many original tracks. So when you try and modify the dynamic range it modifies everything and the results often aren't what you want them to be.

The dynamics tool is quite finnicky and takes lots of practice to get it right. Sometimes the time this requires simply isn't worth it.

Regards

John H

[Vix]

Sometimes I wish that MP3 format was never invented.

Nowadays we are deluded into thinking that we are getting more (more songs) but in fact we are getting less (quality).

Since quantitative is easier to count, and quality is harder to prove....then I am afraid that we are loosing the battle.

Imagine a society 30 years later, with today's kids, then grown adults, used to listening MP3's only, not even knowing what high quality recording is....And we would become old, deaf granpa's who bu***it about good old times and good old high quality recordings....

Hope I'm wrong....