Some analysis of recordings:
The Mix Review
So it all comes down to the recording engineer getting the mixed sound he wants through his monitor speakers?
Will we see in the future 'speaker-specific mixes?' It's a great way to make more money for the recording industry.
The Mix Review
So it all comes down to the recording engineer getting the mixed sound he wants through his monitor speakers?
Will we see in the future 'speaker-specific mixes?' It's a great way to make more money for the recording industry.
Sorry, I meant to say one of the best engineers I know "of." I only met Cookie once during the last (and perhaps final) California Audio Show.
Basic, you are right there. 🙂 There is quite a bit of a disconnect, but I only know this from reading. One is constantly guessing what the other one wants to do. 🙂
Yes, 99% of all music you hear is manipulated in some way before it hits your speakers. From Classical recordings which are a mesh of multiple takes, to level and time matching to outright fraud of auto-tune like devices. It takes quite a bit of work to create two audio tracks (never mind what goes into a movie's sound track) palatable to anyone.
For a rather benign view of what has to happen, check out the article in Stereophile with Peter McGrath.
Then go look at some of the measurements of the Wilson speakers at SpeakerMeasurements.com which he claims to master on.
It's a real wonder any of the music we listen to is listenable at all. 🙂
Oh, and then after a stereo cut was made, a new cut was made to cut the actual metal disk masters, and engineers could sweeten or ruin the tracks there too, and it's still possible to do in the digital world, with different CD's having measurably different spectral content or channel separation based on when/who re-released them and what the prevailing trend in that semi-decade was. It's a royal mess I say! 🙂 Again, for a benign view click on "About this Album" on Miles Davis' Kind of Blue.
Best,
Erik
Basic, you are right there. 🙂 There is quite a bit of a disconnect, but I only know this from reading. One is constantly guessing what the other one wants to do. 🙂
Yes, 99% of all music you hear is manipulated in some way before it hits your speakers. From Classical recordings which are a mesh of multiple takes, to level and time matching to outright fraud of auto-tune like devices. It takes quite a bit of work to create two audio tracks (never mind what goes into a movie's sound track) palatable to anyone.
For a rather benign view of what has to happen, check out the article in Stereophile with Peter McGrath.
Then go look at some of the measurements of the Wilson speakers at SpeakerMeasurements.com which he claims to master on.
It's a real wonder any of the music we listen to is listenable at all. 🙂
Oh, and then after a stereo cut was made, a new cut was made to cut the actual metal disk masters, and engineers could sweeten or ruin the tracks there too, and it's still possible to do in the digital world, with different CD's having measurably different spectral content or channel separation based on when/who re-released them and what the prevailing trend in that semi-decade was. It's a royal mess I say! 🙂 Again, for a benign view click on "About this Album" on Miles Davis' Kind of Blue.
Best,
Erik
Last edited:
Erik
This video on You Tube, "RMAF15: Six Degrees of Degradation: Do Audiophile Standards ..." also explains problems with the Hi-Res phenomena as well. Checks out with what you say.
Another video : RMAF15: What The Specs Don't Tell You… And Why ... really helped me answer the question I asked : Why do speakers sound different ?
First of all, the specifications leave enough leeway for manufacturers to design and build speakers that sound different but with the same vague specifications.
Secondly, existing tests do not cover all types of audible distortion, so either speaker designers are not going to be concerned with something they do not test.
Different speaker manufacturers will, possibly through auditioning with music samples, be able to tune their speaker to reduce these untested but still audible aspects of speaker character, or to their own preferences, all the while staying within specifications.
All in all, a very revealing and useful video.
This video on You Tube, "RMAF15: Six Degrees of Degradation: Do Audiophile Standards ..." also explains problems with the Hi-Res phenomena as well. Checks out with what you say.
Another video : RMAF15: What The Specs Don't Tell You… And Why ... really helped me answer the question I asked : Why do speakers sound different ?
First of all, the specifications leave enough leeway for manufacturers to design and build speakers that sound different but with the same vague specifications.
Secondly, existing tests do not cover all types of audible distortion, so either speaker designers are not going to be concerned with something they do not test.
Different speaker manufacturers will, possibly through auditioning with music samples, be able to tune their speaker to reduce these untested but still audible aspects of speaker character, or to their own preferences, all the while staying within specifications.
All in all, a very revealing and useful video.
Basic, never mind all audible distortion tests. The only reviews I know of that cover either basic distortion or linearity is SoundStage Network. Everyone else is deliberately ignoring them. So a manufacturer like Wharferdale which puts in excellent tweeters in cheap boxes doesn't get credit for it at all.
Then there's speaker makers like Focal who deliberately make their crossovers hard to drive. See my blog here for one example.
It's nuts. 🙂
Erik
Then there's speaker makers like Focal who deliberately make their crossovers hard to drive. See my blog here for one example.
It's nuts. 🙂
Erik
- Status
- Not open for further replies.