HD tracks, Loudness Wars, Pono

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
V

Vladimir

New member
Dec 26, 2013
220
7
0
I watched these two videos just now:

Raining on Neil Young's Pono Music Parade with Audio Truths

HDtracks & Pono vs. CD & MP3 - Is High Definition Music Worth It? Quality Test

The vanity and hypocrisy of people in the music business is sickening. Who are they kidding telling us (themselves) they are artists. They produce cra**y mass goods for on the go consumption. It really doesn't matter what sound quality their product has since it was poo to begin with. Bread and circuses.

How true musical artist lives and creates today IMO, check out Estas Tonne. You can download his whole discography in CD quality for free. (If you're thinking it must be terrible probably, since it's free, you are well indoctrinated).
 
Interesting.

So, if I'm correct. A good recording has 'air' in it, so the music can breath and become more music than the compressed cdquality we can buy today.

Out of curiosity: is it audible for me?
 
Vladimir said:
loneranger said:
Also everybody back to LP?
Click to expand...

That would be even worse. Ideal is to have digital media with well produced and mastered music.
Click to expand...

Very true. There's something seriously wrong with the system when to get access to the best-sounding master you have to buy it on a technically-inferior medium.

I've sometimes wondered how musicassettes would have panned-out in the loudness wars. They don't have the physical limitations of vinyl and could have taken the over-compressed masters without becoming unplayable, even though they may have sounded distorted and over-driven had the record-level not been wound-back a few dBs. Actually I think I've just answered my own question.
 
LP is better because on this medium the loudness war isn't possible. Otherwise maybe something like the Lyngdorf tdai 2170 with the icc chip can help.
 
loneranger said:
LP is better because on this medium the loudness war isn't possible. Otherwise maybe something like the Lyngdorf tdai 2170 with the icc chip can help.
Click to expand...

Yes, but vinyl playback introduces other issues like pops, clicks, noise, wow, flutter and LPs require maintanance and are lower resolution than CD.
 
I don't want a better mastering of Neil Young's music, or of Adele. I don't want to listen to any of it. Time to show the greedy music mafia and their stables full of zero integrity riff stealing musicians the middle finger. So much music to listen to, why bother with those fastfood generics at all.
 
Yes, but what if it is your favorite music?. Nightwish is a favorite band of me. But al their cd's sounded very bad because of those loudness war. Lp better. Classical music is much better recorded.but i don't like that. So, what can you do?
 
I understand for many this is a problem, in some cases whole genres of music become unlistenable due to deliberately crap production.

I do not demand pristeen production, I listen to a lot of live recordings and in many cases the sound quality is less than perfect, but that does not bother me if it is simply the limitations of the recording or venue. Would I not listen to Miles live at the Filmore because of the obvious tape hiss, no of course not.

Life is too short to listen to crap, move on.
 
Reijer said:
To investigate what crap I listen to, which program for Mac will show how it is recorded?
Click to expand...

Your ears. If it sounds bad to you, don't listen to it. *unknw*

Otherwise you can check the DR Loudness database. Clicky
 
CD is more than good enough. They just have to bother their arse to make a good recording and then not squash the crap out of it so they can make it louder than the Joneses.
 
Jota180 said:
CD is more than good enough. They just have to bother their arse to make a good recording and then not squash the crap out of it so they can make it louder than the Joneses.
Click to expand...

Strangely the artist often thinks that heavily compressed music sounds 'better'. Not sure why, loudness probably, but have been known to complain if their latest offering is less loud than the 'opposition'.

As has been discussed many times, most music, virtually all in statistical terms, is consumed on resolutely low fi equipment, that is the market and it is not going to change anytime soon.

No point complaining, no one in the record business is listening and even if they were thet wouldn't care.

Unless there is a marketing opportunity to sell you the music you already own all over again in 'super duper hi-rez' format. It's just money to them.
 
Vladimir said:
Otherwise you can check the DR Loudness database. Clicky
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link but ...

... one of my favourites 'Concert By The Sea' by Erroll Garner was notoriously badly recorded (it's only sort of by accident it was ever released) and yet it scores a 12 (max 13) on that DR scale. An amateur recording where ...

"... the acoustics were poor and the piano somewhat out of tune. The balance of instruments on the recording was also poor; the bass and drums were receded ..."

Something wrong there. That recording (probably on domestic grade 1/4" tape at slow speed on primitive - circa 1955 - portable equipment) can't be anywhere on that DR scale let alone borderline 'good'.
 
chebby said:
Vladimir said:
Otherwise you can check the DR Loudness database. Clicky
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link but ...

... one of my favourites 'Concert By The Sea' by Erroll Garner was notoriously badly recorded (it's only sort of by accident it was ever released) and yet it scores a 12 (max 13) on that DR scale. An amateur recording where ...

"... the acoustics were poor and the piano somewhat out of tune. The balance of instruments on the recording was also poor; the bass and drums were receded ..."

Something wrong there. That recording (probably on domestic grade 1/4" tape at slow speed on primitive - circa 1955 - portable equipment) can't be anywhere on that DR scale let alone borderline 'good'.
Click to expand...

DR isn't a measure of recording quality; it's only a measure of dynamic range in the mastering. A recording can be distorted to hell and still score well for dynamic range.
 
matt49 said:
DR isn't a measure of recording quality; it's only a measure of dynamic range in the mastering. A recording can be distorted to hell and still score well for dynamic range.
Click to expand...

I know that but it was a sub-optimal recording on 1955 portable equipment where "the bass and drums were receded". Just how much DR could have been captured under those circumstances and by such primitive equipment? (It was only a few years after the first satisfactory recorded transmissions and I'm sure what was found behind the stage at 'Concert By The Sea' wasn't a megabucks Ampex set-up!)

Frustatingly that database isn't very comprehensive either! I wanted to use it as a guide to which more recently mastered CDs to ditch in favour of better, older versions that haven't been screwed with.
 
chebby said:
matt49 said:
DR isn't a measure of recording quality; it's only a measure of dynamic range in the mastering. A recording can be distorted to hell and still score well for dynamic range.
Click to expand...

I know that but it was a sub-optimal recording on 1955 portable equipment where "the bass and drums were receded". Just how much DR could have been captured under those circumstances and by such primitive equipment? (It was only a few years after the first satisfactory recorded transmissions and I'm sure what was found behind the stage at 'Concert By The Sea' wasn't a megabucks Ampex set-up!)

Frustatingly that database isn't very comprehensive either! I wanted to use it as a guide to which more recently mastered CDs to ditch in favour of better, older versions that haven't been screwed with.
Click to expand...

Well, whatever DR was captured on the original tape (capable of maybe 45-50dB) may well have been considerably better than the DR of many modern digital masterings.

I agree that the database isn't comprehensive. It contains virtually no classical recordings. But shouldn't we be grateful that it exists at all?
 
loneranger said:
LP sounds better. I can understand the revival.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Frustrating thing is that a properly recorded CD has the capacity to blow the socks off an LP. It is better in every respect - except it would seem the mixing of the master.

I had hoped that given the cost of storing and maintaining a catalogue of high dynamic range versions alongside compressed mass-market versions for a streaming service would be low, that record companies would start releasing high DR versions as well. I had also hoped that while hi-res doesn't bring much to the party, at least the mixes would be of good quality.

I have been disappointed on both fronts. I guess the 'hi fi, high DR' market is so small, that it really isn't worth going after.
 
chebby said:
Frustatingly that database isn't very comprehensive either! I wanted to use it as a guide to which more recently mastered CDs to ditch in favour of better, older versions that haven't been screwed with.
Click to expand...

The info on the DR database is supplied and updated by members of the public, hence why some titles may be missing.

You can always add your own *smile*
 
DougK said:
chebby said:
Frustatingly that database isn't very comprehensive either! I wanted to use it as a guide to which more recently mastered CDs to ditch in favour of better, older versions that haven't been screwed with.
Click to expand...

The info on the DR database is supplied and updated by members of the public, hence why some titles may be missing.

You can always add your own *smile*
Click to expand...

I don't have the necessary equipment to measure DR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom