Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
<g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
This guy sums it up nicely
This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
r
On Jan 3, 11:21=A0am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 10:33 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 10:17 am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 2, 10:15 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> > > > > Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.=
> > > > > This guy sums it up nicely
> > > > > This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> > > > >http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-c=
ra...
>
> > > > I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of th=
e
> > > > brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.=
>
> > > > I think this article explains the reason for this.
>
> > > As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers are=
> > > among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar mitzvahs
> > > to Carnegie Hall. I'm not writing of cRap non-music here. I almost
> > > never turn a radio or stereo on these days, and I avoid the movies,
> > > for the most part. When you've lost 50% of your hearing, and the music=
> > > (and much of the dialogue) in a theater combines pisspoor reproduction=
> > > with a level of amplification that makes the hair stand up on your
> > > arms, and blurs sounds so they are untranslateable by the brain. I
> > > wish movie makers would go back to making movies, letting the innate
> > > suspense do the hair raising. Comparing some of the CDs I've bought
> > > recently with the tapes of the same performance made a decade or more
> > > ago, I find the differences appalling. So tape/CD sales miss one
> > > customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something=
> > > as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
>
> > It would be far more problematic if you were to catch someone else in
> > your zipper, no?
>
> Depends on who, eh?
I was thinking Scarlett Johansson.
http://www.fmplus.net/common/d_images/src/8/Image/Images_Show/Scarlett_Johan=
son_300.jpg
"Charlie Self" wrote:
> As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers
are
> among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar
mitzvahs
> to Carnegie Hall.
After Sinatra, it's a long way down to the next level of those working
today with the exception of Bennett and the new kid Buble<s/p>.
We have lost so many of the good ones.
Lew
On Jan 2, 3:52=A0pm, "Skip Williams" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Really nice write up...thanks!
>
> I still have a bunch of vinyl and play it occasionally..
>
>
Pssssst... don't tell anybody. So do I. (Actually, I'm chasing a low
level 60Hz hum in my phono stage somewhere)
I recently demonstrated that I was getting wider bandwidth and more
dynamic range from a few vinyl recordings and their subsequent CD re-
issues.
And, NO, I do NOT want to go back to vinyl as a main source of music,
I just want the record company weasels to give me what CD's are
capable of.
On Jan 3, 2:22 pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Charlie Self" wrote:
> > As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers
> are
> > among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar
> mitzvahs
> > to Carnegie Hall.
>
> After Sinatra, it's a long way down to the next level of those working
> today with the exception of Bennett and the new kid Buble<s/p>.
>
> We have lost so many of the good ones.
>
Not just in music: I read the obit earlier today of George MacDonald
Fraser, the author of the Flashman series (and a slew of other books).
He was only 82.
Does anyone else recall the "Don't Trust Anyone Over 30" movement?
That started either the year I turned 30, or the year before.
Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of the
brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.
I think this article explains the reason for this.
"Robatoy" wrote
>Charlie Self wrote:
> > > customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
> > > as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
>
> > It would be far more problematic if you were to catch someone else in
> > your zipper, no?
>
> Depends on who, eh?
I was thinking Scarlett Johansson.
http://www.fmplus.net/common/d_images/src/8/Image/Images_Show/Scarlett_Johanson_300.jpg
Ahhh yes! ... that could make even old farts rise to the occasion,
occasionally.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)
"Robatoy" wrote in message
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
>
http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
Good one ... "Dynamic Range", or lack thereof in this case, is just part of
the story of "why CD's sound like crap".
Remember the promise of increased "Frequency Response", via an increase in
Sampling Rate in digitized music, that was going to be "the next BIG leap in
audio for the consumer", as soon, that is, as DVD technology advanced to
allow the necessary storage due to increased file size?
Those of us with "analog ears" were finally going to be "blown away" by
"digitized" music!
Yeah, right ... along came Jones, mp3's, and the iPod, simply allowing you
to pack more shit instead of quality into the container.
The music biz should thank gawd.allah.whomever for the physcoacoustic
properties of human hearing, without which we could not listen for long to
the shit foisted upon us by their corporate greed.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)
BTW, just found the following in my "archives ... written eight short years
ago, in January 1999, in response to the below quoted remark.
Looking back, like the smug bastard I was/am, I sure missed the mark on "how
DVD promised to raise the bar"! :)
Anyway, do note the last sentence, which also nicely covers/compensates for
the problems inherent in the "loudness wars" mentioned in your link above.
<start quoted text>
>Dianna D. wrote in message
> But there comes a point where our ears won't respond quickly
> enough to the digitalization effect (like our eyes with
> movies and *super* high res monitors and photographic
> quality prints) so it has no disadvantage compared to
> analog. The present CD's A to D rate was lowered to the
> lowest "acceptable" sampling rate and word size (think color
> depth) to keep the cost of the consumer hardware down. Now,
> DVD promises to raise the bar
Without getting too technical, or into the nitty gritty of digitizing audio,
what's being raised, as discussed previously, is basically the sampling rate
(SR), and therefore the *frequency range* of the recordings themselves ...
with a proviso noted at the very end hereof. :)
The frequency range subject to Analog to Digital conversion is limited to
roughly half the sampling rate according to Nyquist. (Although it works
both ways, that obviously, and immediately, limits what can be played back.)
:)
The human ear, at birth, can hear in the neighborhood of up to 22 KHz +/-
... and that rapidly drops with age and exposure to loud sounds,
particularly in our modern society.
A properly aligned, professional analog tape deck will record and reproduce,
relatively flatly, into the 45 KHz range and then drops off rather quickly.
Much of the music you have experienced in the last 40 years or so has been
thusly recorded and many LP's contain same, within certain limits of the
media.
Live music can contain harmonic content even higher than that.
The current CD, produced with an SR of 44.1 KHz, has a frequency response of
approximately 22.05 KHz (this is a brick wall ceiling, a la Nyquist) ...
but still well above most mature human's hearing ability.
The DVD process of which you speak, and which holds so much promise with a
SR of 98.6 KHz, has a theoretical frequency response of approximately 48 KHz
... approaching, as you can see, the range of the analog tape decks
mentioned above and more than double that of the average, mature human ear.
Why do we worry about reproducing a frequency response that exceeds, by more
than double, the frequency response of the human ear at birth?
Studies in psychoacoustics suggest strongly that the harmonic content of
music in those higher frequencies colors, to a great degree, the sounds that
can actually be heard.
IOW, if those higher frequencies are suddenly removed, as by the SR
limitations of Nyquist, the sound that you can/do hear is no longer the
same.
This is a "theory" and infinitely arguable in purist circles ... but one
that fits in with my experience ... and one, that I might add, can also
explain why some "old fart" engineers like Bruce Swedien (Michael Jackson,
et al) can, even at an advanced age of 60+ and surely missing much of their
high frequency hearing ability, still do a good job of engineering in the
modern day studio.
Even though they can no longer hear those higher frequencies, their ears are
trained enough to recognize that something may be missing, and where it is,
by what they *can* hear, even though that is reduced significantly.
There is a BIG problem with this DVD development of 98.6 KHz SR and the
resultant increase in frequency response available to the public however:
Not all amplifier circuits available for mass market reproduction at this
time are capable of handling these higher frequency transients without
"clicks and pops", so what is happening is that much of that content of this
wonderful new development is currently being "rolled off" in the mastering
process ... putting you right back where you started at 44.1. :(
So, even if you do get the much vaunted 98.6 KHz SR ability with DVD, you
are more than likely being ripped off in that you are not getting what you
paid for, or what is theoretically possible ... so much for progress and
market hype!
The nice thing about the whole issue is that your ears quickly compensate
for whatever you are listening to at the time and, unless you suddenly do an
AB comparison, you can usually forget the technology and hopefully just
enjoy the music.
<end quoted text>
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
> Charlie Self wrote:
> > There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
> > as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
>
>
> With ITunes and it's competition, you can buy only the songs you like
> and sample them before buying.
Yeah buddy! ... and for an excellent example of "try before you buy" in
music (strictly for illustration of the principle, of course!):
If you have iTunes on your computer:
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playListId=260097307
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playListId=260112611
If not:
http://musicishere.com/artists/Wild_River_Band/Requests_Vol_II/
http://musicishere.com/artists/Wild_River_Band/Old_Boots_-_New_Steps
For the whole enchilada:
http://cdbaby.com/found?artist=wild+river+band&soundlike=&style=&album=
Sorry, couldn't resist ... Hell, it's great shop music! DAMHIKT :)
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)
Really nice write up...thanks!
I still have a bunch of vinyl and play it occasionally..
Skip
www.ShopFileR.com
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
>
> r
On Jan 3, 10:33 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 10:17 am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 10:15 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> > > > Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> > > > This guy sums it up nicely
> > > > This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> > > >http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-cra...
>
> > > I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of the
> > > brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.
>
> > > I think this article explains the reason for this.
>
> > As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers are
> > among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar mitzvahs
> > to Carnegie Hall. I'm not writing of cRap non-music here. I almost
> > never turn a radio or stereo on these days, and I avoid the movies,
> > for the most part. When you've lost 50% of your hearing, and the music
> > (and much of the dialogue) in a theater combines pisspoor reproduction
> > with a level of amplification that makes the hair stand up on your
> > arms, and blurs sounds so they are untranslateable by the brain. I
> > wish movie makers would go back to making movies, letting the innate
> > suspense do the hair raising. Comparing some of the CDs I've bought
> > recently with the tapes of the same performance made a decade or more
> > ago, I find the differences appalling. So tape/CD sales miss one
> > customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
> > as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
>
> It would be far more problematic if you were to catch someone else in
> your zipper, no?
Depends on who, eh?
On Jan 2, 10:15 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> > Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> > This guy sums it up nicely
> > This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> >http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-cra...
>
> I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of the
> brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.
>
> I think this article explains the reason for this.
As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers are
among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar mitzvahs
to Carnegie Hall. I'm not writing of cRap non-music here. I almost
never turn a radio or stereo on these days, and I avoid the movies,
for the most part. When you've lost 50% of your hearing, and the music
(and much of the dialogue) in a theater combines pisspoor reproduction
with a level of amplification that makes the hair stand up on your
arms, and blurs sounds so they are untranslateable by the brain. I
wish movie makers would go back to making movies, letting the innate
suspense do the hair raising. Comparing some of the CDs I've bought
recently with the tapes of the same performance made a decade or more
ago, I find the differences appalling. So tape/CD sales miss one
customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
>
> r
Wow, pretty informative stuff. Thanks for posting.
jc
On Jan 3, 11:59 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 11:21 am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 10:33 am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 3, 10:17 am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 2, 10:15 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> > > > > > Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> > > > > > This guy sums it up nicely
> > > > > > This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> > > > > >http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-cra...
>
> > > > > I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of the
> > > > > brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.
>
> > > > > I think this article explains the reason for this.
>
> > > > As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers are
> > > > among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar mitzvahs
> > > > to Carnegie Hall. I'm not writing of cRap non-music here. I almost
> > > > never turn a radio or stereo on these days, and I avoid the movies,
> > > > for the most part. When you've lost 50% of your hearing, and the music
> > > > (and much of the dialogue) in a theater combines pisspoor reproduction
> > > > with a level of amplification that makes the hair stand up on your
> > > > arms, and blurs sounds so they are untranslateable by the brain. I
> > > > wish movie makers would go back to making movies, letting the innate
> > > > suspense do the hair raising. Comparing some of the CDs I've bought
> > > > recently with the tapes of the same performance made a decade or more
> > > > ago, I find the differences appalling. So tape/CD sales miss one
> > > > customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
> > > > as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
>
> > > It would be far more problematic if you were to catch someone else in
> > > your zipper, no?
>
> > Depends on who, eh?
>
> I was thinking Scarlett Johansson.
>
> http://www.fmplus.net/common/d_images/src/8/Image/Images_Show/Scarlet...
That'd work. Even though it now takes all night to do what I used to
do all night.
On Jan 3, 10:17=A0am, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 10:15 pm, Maxwell Lol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Robatoy <[email protected]> writes:
> > > Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> > > This guy sums it up nicely
> > > This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> > >http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-cra..=
.
>
> > I read somewhere that a scientist proved that a different part of the
> > brain was needed to listen to mp3's, and it was in fact more tiring.
>
> > I think this article explains the reason for this.
>
> As a nearly tone deaf listener, all I know is that today's singers are
> among the worst I've ever heard, from church soloists to bar mitzvahs
> to Carnegie Hall. I'm not writing of cRap non-music here. I almost
> never turn a radio or stereo on these days, and I avoid the movies,
> for the most part. When you've lost 50% of your hearing, and the music
> (and much of the dialogue) in a theater combines pisspoor reproduction
> with a level of amplification that makes the hair stand up on your
> arms, and blurs sounds so they are untranslateable by the brain. I
> wish movie makers would go back to making movies, letting the innate
> suspense do the hair raising. Comparing some of the CDs I've bought
> recently with the tapes of the same performance made a decade or more
> ago, I find the differences appalling. So tape/CD sales miss one
> customer. There's no way on earth I'm paying 17-18 bucks for something
> as enjoyable as catching myself in my zipper.
It would be far more problematic if you were to catch someone else in
your zipper, no?
Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
This really isn't as big of news as everyone seems to think. The
practice has been going on roughly forever--it's getting worse now,
perhaps, but dynamic range compression and hot recording levels have
been an 'airplay enhancement trick' for at least 30 years--since long
before CDs came along.
Recently I picked up a used record of Kim Carnes' "Mistaken Identity"
for a buck. The album had been played once, on decent (i.e. not damaging)
eqiupment. It sounds worse than garbage. I actually went over my turntable
system looking for problems, because it was that bad. Back in the days
of vinyl, limiting dynamic range (and also low frequency) would allow you
to pack the grooves closer together, getting 'more value' onto a record.
Nowadays, it's just ignorance and a different form of greed, but just as
effective.
There are still good albums being released. They're usually worth
searching out.
Colin
"Robatoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
>
> r
And all this time I thought it was because of what was recorded on them. c
RAP.
Robatoy wrote:
> Yo!, Swing!. Dude! ^5's 'Sup?
>
> <g> ( know, I know, I need to get back to work..)
>
> I'm sure there are a few folks who haven't seen music in this format.
>
> Here's a great explanation of what we were talking about recently.
> This guy sums it up nicely
> This hopefully explains it those who don't have the background.
>
> http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-todays-cds-sound-like-crap.html
>
> r
I am a retired drummer (still do a gig every so often, but I
am mostly retired). When we used to go into the studio to
record, the engineer was trying to explain this to me. After
reading that site, I finally REALLY understand what he was
talking about.
I understood him on the basis of "Your CD is going to sound
better than it would if it were recorded at a major studio for
commercial distribution." Now I understand why.
--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX