As system improves, do bad recordings sound worse?


My early efforts to improve my system usually resulted in making bad recordings sound worse. But at some point in my upgrade history, bad recordings started to sound better - in fact, better than I ever thought possible.

Anybody have a similar experience? Anybody have a theory as to why?
bryoncunningham
"If it gets better at resolving details, should it not be more pleasing?" Yes, IF the recording is a good one, and I don't mean 'audiophile' good. I don't know how old you are, but when I was younger AM radio used to be a main source of music. Much of the music that I absolutely loved (and love), when played through a decent rig, sounds like absolute ka-ka. Much of the music wasn't recorded with true audio fidelity in mind and a good system reflects this, do you know what I mean? While I totally understand what yr saying, if the unsaid part of yr post is that perhaps my equipment or set-up is the culprit, I can assure you it isn't. I've been at this for close to 3 decades and have gone from an all transistor to an all tube set-up. I believe the popular audiophile consensus is, that if anything, a tube based system can add a euphonic coloring to the music. Which would actually make the system a tad more forgiving of poorly recorded recordings. As far as my analog rig, I've owned an LP12/Lingo/Ittok/Ortofon/ARPH3 that has regularly been tuned up by pros for yrs. It ain't my gear bro'!!;)
I hear you. I guess it's what we have to live with. They're starting to re-master some of that old stuff. You do have to really like some of those tunes to overlook the problems.
The last 2 paragraphs of this review by a very well respected UK hi-fi reviewer, is the opinion I also hold now. It should not just be applicable to the speakers being reviewed, but all speakers worth their salt.

http://www.acoustica.org.uk/impulse/images/H1_4.gif
As system improves, do bad recordings sound worse?

No, they sound exactly the same. The only difference is you can hear more of the "details" than you could with your boombox.
Interesting thread, Bryon, and I think that you are probably correct in general. As Mrtennis says, this is ultimately all subjective. I also agree with Audioquest4life's early response where he said that a really bad recording is never going to sound good. I believe that many audiophiles are too quick to blame their systems when in actual fact what they are hearing is a problem with the original recording. No two engineers record the same way, especially in today's digital age where they can pretty much manipulate the recording however they wish, and they have the same choices in values you mention (between musicality, accuracy, transparency, etc.) and many other choices besides. The recording process itself is extremely subjective. I also think that Cbw is correct that some recordings interact with some systems better than others and that this variable changes whenever a change to the system is made. I think that any change made to a system is going to make some things sound worse and some things sound better, regardless of the effect on the system overall - there are far too many variables for it to be otherwise.