"tony sayer" wrote

What's prolly missing is some MP2-3-4 compression arty facts
somewhere;!!...

The interesting thing is that some people seem to like their music with,
rather than without, such artefacts. Even the AES test showed a preference
for mp3 over LPCM on a large proportion of occasions and in the conclusions
it was suggested that many younger listeners, brought up on mp3s, preferred
them.

This may be similar to the preference for "vinyl artefacts" in some
quarters, if you are used to the presence of such artefacts you may regard
their absence as a reduction, rather than an increase, in sound quality.

David.

"dc" wrote in message
...



I do feel that people colour their view of "decent sound" from their
musical preferences. That said confusion can result from the often
unwelcome decisions taken as to the "sound" delivered by the CD, DVD,
LP..et al. I have a number of CD's where the sound experience is close -
very close - to the live performance. Several Jacques Loussier Trio disks,
by Telarc spring to mind as examples. To me, these are spectacular
recordings that capture almost all of the live feel of sitting and
listening to these guys play. Someone with a preference for chamber music
is likely to feel uncomfortable when the bass "moves their shirt" ;-) This
is however the sound delivered by the trio live.

I also have a number of CD's where the sound delivered is much less
faithful, indeed it is tempting to believe some have been engineered for
playback in a car or other much compromised environment / equipment!

Yet another Dave


High Dave, nice to see a new poster here, even if you couldn't have come up
with a less common name ;-)


The great unmentionable topic on audio groups, ISTM, is the quality of
commercial recording. As you've mentioned some recordings are
extraordinarily good, but many are mediocre and some downright poor. I've
always wondered why "audiophiles" will spend so much time, effort, and money
on trying to choose the "best-sounding" cables or whatever, but hardly ever
get exercised by the poor quality of so many of the available recordings.

David.

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
The great unmentionable topic on audio groups, ISTM, is the quality of
commercial recording. As you've mentioned some recordings are
extraordinarily good, but many are mediocre and some downright poor.
I've always wondered why "audiophiles" will spend so much time, effort,
and money on trying to choose the "best-sounding" cables or whatever,
but hardly ever get exercised by the poor quality of so many of the
available recordings.

Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.

--
*If you think nobody cares about you, try missing a couple of payments *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , David Looser
scribeth thus
"tony sayer" wrote

What's prolly missing is some MP2-3-4 compression arty facts
somewhere;!!...

The interesting thing is that some people seem to like their music with,
rather than without, such artefacts. Even the AES test showed a preference
for mp3 over LPCM on a large proportion of occasions and in the conclusions
it was suggested that many younger listeners, brought up on mp3s, preferred
them.

This may be similar to the preference for "vinyl artefacts" in some
quarters, if you are used to the presence of such artefacts you may regard
their absence as a reduction, rather than an increase, in sound quality.

David.



Like LOUD processing on FM radio..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , David Looser
scribeth thus
"dc" wrote in message
...



I do feel that people colour their view of "decent sound" from their
musical preferences. That said confusion can result from the often
unwelcome decisions taken as to the "sound" delivered by the CD, DVD,
LP..et al. I have a number of CD's where the sound experience is close -
very close - to the live performance. Several Jacques Loussier Trio disks,
by Telarc spring to mind as examples. To me, these are spectacular
recordings that capture almost all of the live feel of sitting and
listening to these guys play. Someone with a preference for chamber music
is likely to feel uncomfortable when the bass "moves their shirt" ;-) This
is however the sound delivered by the trio live.

I also have a number of CD's where the sound delivered is much less
faithful, indeed it is tempting to believe some have been engineered for
playback in a car or other much compromised environment / equipment!

Yet another Dave


High Dave, nice to see a new poster here, even if you couldn't have come up
with a less common name ;-)


The great unmentionable topic on audio groups, ISTM, is the quality of
commercial recording. As you've mentioned some recordings are
extraordinarily good, but many are mediocre and some downright poor. I've
always wondered why "audiophiles" will spend so much time, effort, and money
on trying to choose the "best-sounding" cables or whatever, but hardly ever
get exercised by the poor quality of so many of the available recordings.

David.



I can only suppose its what they think the public wants rather than what
originally went on!.

I've got a few 15 IPS tape's here of live events and the best one is a
steam fair organ c/w steam engine driving it, now does that sound real
and very impressive!! but distorted but that might have been the
original sound..

--
Tony Sayer

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
David Looser wrote:
The great unmentionable topic on audio groups, ISTM, is the quality of
commercial recording. As you've mentioned some recordings are
extraordinarily good, but many are mediocre and some downright poor.
I've always wondered why "audiophiles" will spend so much time, effort,
and money on trying to choose the "best-sounding" cables or whatever,
but hardly ever get exercised by the poor quality of so many of the
available recordings.

Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.


Yeabut that implies a mile or more in any circuit don't it not;?.

What I expect you really mean are the mile or so of wire overall in a
studio ..
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.


Yeabut that implies a mile or more in any circuit don't it not;?.

No - hence the parenthesis. ;-)

What I expect you really mean are the mile or so of wire overall in a
studio ..

In pretty well any situation, the cabling between mics etc and the
recorder is many many times the length of any interconnects on a domestic
system. But of course usually balanced. However, if balanced were the norm
in domestic setups, plenty would find cables to 'improve' things. ;-)

--
*Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
The great unmentionable topic on audio groups, ISTM, is the quality of
commercial recording. As you've mentioned some recordings are
extraordinarily good, but many are mediocre and some downright poor.
I've always wondered why "audiophiles" will spend so much time, effort,
and money on trying to choose the "best-sounding" cables or whatever,
but hardly ever get exercised by the poor quality of so many of the
available recordings.

Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.

It would explain why some studios advertise the brands of wires they use
no matter if they believe it makes a difference or not.

Some audiophiles do get vigorously exercised about the sound quality of
recordings, hence lists of super discs or records to die for, etc as
well as endless discussions on various forums.

Stephen

In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:
Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.

It would explain why some studios advertise the brands of wires they use
no matter if they believe it makes a difference or not.

There will always be some who try to get business by appealing to the
naive.

Some audiophiles do get vigorously exercised about the sound quality of
recordings, hence lists of super discs or records to die for, etc as
well as endless discussions on various forums.

That's a different matter. The actual making of vinyl - after the studio
part - had a vast influence on the quality. Assuming a level playing field
on the master tapes.

--
*Where there's a will, I want to be in it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:
Some form of control fetish? As if a few feet of cable in your system
influences the sound in a way the 'miles' used in any recording between
mics and mixer don't.

It would explain why some studios advertise the brands of wires they use
no matter if they believe it makes a difference or not.

There will always be some who try to get business by appealing to the
naive.

Some audiophiles do get vigorously exercised about the sound quality of
recordings, hence lists of super discs or records to die for, etc as
well as endless discussions on various forums.

That's a different matter. The actual making of vinyl - after the studio
part - had a vast influence on the quality. Assuming a level playing field
on the master tapes.


I don't think there is a level playing field on master tapes, hence my
original comment. But I don't suggest the difference between superb and
mediocre recordings has much to do with the make of audio cable used in the
studio! Perhaps the skills of those involved makes rather more difference.

I'll take Stephen's word for it about audiophiles getting exercised about
recordings, what I've seen is far more them getting exercised about
hardware. In one forum I dipped into the subject of discussion was, and I
kid you not, the difference in sound quality between different makes of
GZ34s. If I had an amplifier whose sound quality was affected by the make of
HT rectifier I'd chuck it out and replace with something that had been
designed properly.

David.