2. music
  3. 1109028516

The problem with the music

There are lots of people who frequent this site that have spent significant amounts of money to buy the gear that they use to reproduce their music. I would never suggest that you should not have done that, but I wonder if the music industry is not working against you, or at least, not with you.

For the most part studios are using expensive gear to record with, but is it really all that good? Do the people doing the recording have good systems that can reproduce soundstage, detail and all the other things that audiophiles desire, or do they even care about playback?

I know there are labels that are sympathetic to our obsessions, but does Sony/Columbia, Mercury, or RCA etc. give a rats #$%&@ about what we want?

Recordings (digital) have gotten a lot better since the garbage released in the mid 80's. Some of them are even listenable! BUT lots of people are spending lots of money to get great music when the studios don't seem that interested in doing good recordings. Mike Large, director of operations for Real Worl Studios said "The aim of the music is to connect with you on an emotional level; and I'd be prepared to bet that the system you have at home does that better than any of the systems we make records on."

Do recording engineers even care about relating the emotion of the music, or are they just concerned about the mechanics?

What do you think, and can/ should anything be done about it?
128x128nrchy
cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
Metralla,

Picture at an Exhibition and Scheherazade, are the two discs.

Scheherazade isn't great but dire?...that's being overly critical. On the 5 systems I have heard it on this is not the case.

The Moussorgsky is very good. Neither are unlistenable or trash.

I certainly didn't get the feeling that no one cared about the recordings and that they were limited to appeal to low resolution systems. Ones better than the other.

Focusing on Scheherazade;

The Scheherazade is definitely one of those borderline recordings that take very little to make sound "dire" but when systems are operating properly it is satisfactory. I have heard a dramatic difference in the way systems handle this recording and sometimes dire would be a good word.

Systems that make Scheherazade sound "dire" just needed to be fixed. So now you have a better reference where I'm at.
array1138's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
array1138
80 posts
 
I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the recording industry's lack of interest in the ultimate quality of the recording, they are simply in it for the money. I submit as evidence the lack of variety in artistic output (this is a VERY diplomatic way of saying that I think most new music SUCKS!.
There will be defenders of the industry as a whole, but all they can really do is mention the exceptions to the rule. Sure there are many engineers, and some company owners who care about the product, but the majors are driven by the mighty dollar, and the vagaries of bottom line minded stockholders.
Thankfully, we have each other. For feedback regarding new music, recordings of merit, and fine performances, I would be lost without the wealth of information I garner from the friends I have made in the field, meaning you all. I take this opportunity to thank you all for your priceless opinions about gear and recordings. It is the only information I rely on for purchasing new music - I read all I can, talk to people, pick their brains, and finally make up my own mind about purchases. My stongest influence is the opinion of people whose taste and integrity I respect. I am certain thal I am not alone in this.
In the final analysis, the best we have is each other.
Thank You,
Ray
ben_campbell
1,169 posts
 
An interesting debate(great points by Slappy and Viridian) but I can't totally relate to Nrchy's opening point.

At the end of the day it is an individual perspective on how we view and listen to music-some have freely admitted on here they have enough music to last them the rest of their lives,others fanatically explore and others are more interested in the quality of recording than the actual music.This hobby clearly attracts people to whom the music is secondary to the equipment.
It's hard to fit everyone in one jar.

So why should we expect engineers to exhibit any less variety?-they are bound to be made up out of charlartans,greedy individuals and people with the soundest integrity and skill hellbent on getting to the core of the musical statement.

Audiophiles tend to make the kind of rash generalisations about music (no new good stuff,all badly recorded blah blah)that they wouldn't like pointed back at themselves.

As for the wider question why should the big record labels worry about a very small niche market?

In my book the responsibility of good sound reproduction lies mostly with one person or group of people-the artists themselves.
I say that with the knowledge that smaller artists struggle with this due to budget.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
As a generalization, has the recording industry ever been interested in, or rather, concerned about, making audiophile quality recordings? Is there a past era that excelled the current era of recording?

I for one would like to have Cinematic_Systems post his suggestions on improving Nrchy's system, why do so privately?
imin2u
392 posts
 
Believe me, No recording engineer is part of the problem. It's the mass production end of things that screw things up. Any master is better than what you get to purchase. Even the worse of the masters.
More to discover