+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 52

Thread: Best music-Worst recording?

  1. #21
    Join Date: Apr 2015

    Location: Central Virginia

    Posts: 1,736
    I'm Russell.

    Default

    I subscribe to the old adage, "Garbage in, garbage out"


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  2. #22
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,779
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    I subscribe to the old adage that if you are obsessing over recording quality you went wrong with your system somewhere. A good system will make the differences in recordings obvious. But if it is spoiling your appreciation of the music then it needs a rethink.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  3. #23
    Join Date: Jan 2012

    Location: leicestershire

    Posts: 694
    I'm John.

    Default


    Original Bowie mix sounds like mud, but still one of the greatest guitar albums ever.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Technics 1210/Mike New Bearing/Jelco SA750d/Goldring 2500/Paul Hynes SR5 21/27.
    Cambridge Audio 840c CD. Squeezebox Touch. Synology NAS.
    Teac A-3440.
    Beresford Bushmaster.
    Quad II monoblocks....Quad 44/405.....Croft Micro.....Cambridge Audio 840.
    Celestion Ditton 66.....KEF Reference One

  4. #24
    Join Date: Nov 2011

    Location: Newcastle UK

    Posts: 3,745
    I'm Rich.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    Half Man Half Biscuit 'Back in the DHSS'

    Velvet Underground: 'Live at Max's Kansas City'

    Iggy and the Stooges: 'Raw Power'

    Aye, anyone listening to HMHB for the production quality has clearly missed the point.

    Saw them again live last year. Still brilliant.
    One of these days... I'm going to cut you into little pieces.

  5. #25
    Join Date: Apr 2015

    Location: Central Virginia

    Posts: 1,736
    I'm Russell.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    I subscribe to the old adage that if you are obsessing over recording quality you went wrong with your system somewhere. A good system will make the differences in recordings obvious. But if it is spoiling your appreciation of the music then it needs a rethink.
    Even the most forgiving system has its limits. While we toss about old adages, you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  6. #26
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,779
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    My view is that there are a lot less sows ears out there (recording-wise) than people think.

    Incidentally how do those claiming that choosing hi-fi is very simple, 'you just play some music on it and if it sounds good then the kit is good', square that with the idea that there is a huge divergence in the quality of recordings?

    Specifically what 'music' do you play to ascertain if the kit is good? The worst recordings? The best recordings? Recordings that are somewhere in the middle?

    Will never forget listening to a very pricey system with several other people. A variety of stuff was played, Sound quality was not unacceptable but after the first couple of tunes I decided that there was an issue although no-one else seemed to notice/care. Then a particular recording was played and that really showed up the issue. Someone said 'That's a really bad recording' and everyone (except me) agreed.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  7. #27
    Ziggy Guest

    Default

    Original Bowie mix sounds like mud, but still one of the greatest guitar albums ever.
    I go along with "Raw Power".

  8. #28
    Join Date: May 2010

    Location: Vancouver, Canada

    Posts: 2,166
    I'm Alex.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    My view is that there are a lot less sows ears out there (recording-wise) than people think.

    Incidentally how do those claiming that choosing hi-fi is very simple, 'you just play some music on it and if it sounds good then the kit is good', square that with the idea that there is a huge divergence in the quality of recordings?

    Specifically what 'music' do you play to ascertain if the kit is good? The worst recordings? The best recordings? Recordings that are somewhere in the middle?

    Will never forget listening to a very pricey system with several other people. A variety of stuff was played, Sound quality was not unacceptable but after the first couple of tunes I decided that there was an issue although no-one else seemed to notice/care. Then a particular recording was played and that really showed up the issue. Someone said 'That's a really bad recording' and everyone (except me) agreed.
    Interesting line of reasoning. You said that there are a lot less bad recordings than people think. From that I surmise that you do think there are some bad recordings. The question is, how do you know? How do you distinguish a bad recording from a less than stellar system?
    Don't you just hate it when you cannot detect where the post ends and a signature line begins?

    Alex.

  9. #29
    Join Date: Jun 2010

    Location: Essex, United Kingdom

    Posts: 899
    I'm givingyouaprettygoodclue.

    Default

    If by recording the question includes mastering then there are enough examples to make the forum crash. Rush had two stabs at "Vapor Trails", which I felt was a return to form musically after a bland patch, but the original Paul Northfield production is very dense (apparently down to compression) and the Paul Bottrill remix goes the opposite way in making each band member's contribution sound too separate from the others.

    In terms of production the earlier post about Rainbow is well made. "Rising" uses a strange effect on Cozy Powell's cymbals which make it bright and irritating to my ears, the overall sound being cold and hard. The rough mix which was a bootleg for many years and included on the Deluxe Edition is warmer and more listenable as a result.

    I tend to think less is more when it come to cymbals. I'd really like the White Stripes but for the splash-on-every-beat technique.

    Pete

  10. #30
    Join Date: Apr 2015

    Location: Central Virginia

    Posts: 1,736
    I'm Russell.

    Default

    Most audio reviewers would say that the objective of a stereo is to recreate the original event. But the stereo is only half of the equation, to bring one to the original sound, to sound as much like the original event, will start at the recording process. To start with microphone choice and placement, etc. then how much engineering is applied, how the final product is produced. All of that takes place before we ever come into the picture with our hi fi stereos trying to take that recording and complete the second half of the equation, to bring that recording back to life!

    And if that recording is trashed, if the damage was done during the process of capturing the original sounds, no stereo on earth is going to make it better. You can not undo poor microphone placement, you can not undo poor compression or incorrect master cutting techniques. Distortions introduced into the recording can not be removed by a later device in your stereo.

    Of course this is basic and theoretical, reality is far more complicated. Modern music is much more than a close mic'd grand piano. But a good recording of a close mic'd piano may be a good ruler to measure your stereo. But my contention is, when a recording as bad as Live Rust is made, it makes no difference if you play it on a $35 child's record player, or a $100k reference system, it still sucks! The original recording was destroyed during the recording process, and no amount of audio trickery, or lack their of, can save it.

    I will agree, most recordings are fairly decent, and many are outstanding achievements! But the rare case is made that some great performances are lost to the ages because the engineers blew it! And ruined the recording before it ever got to us.

    Blaming recordings for the shortcomings of a system, is another matter. If that same recording sounds good on another system but not yours, then it's not the recording.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •