... POORLY RECORDED SONGS THAT ...


Hello to all...

Was thinking about the songs I luv, that are so poorly recorded that it hurts my ears to listen to them - but because they are so great I just can't help myself 'cause they really moves me:

MEATLOAF: BAT OUTTA HELL

SPRINGSTEIN: ROSELITTA

NICKELBACK: BURN IT DOWN

Can you give me a couple or more, that you think are really great songs and such a disappointment in how they come across recorded (on vinyl, CD, Cassette or whatever...)



justvintagestuff
Yes, michaelgreenaudio, I too would like to know how any system can compensate for elements in a bad recording. I hear this fairly often but it doesn't make sense to me. I don't doubt that there are things that can be done to help some. But especially in the case of compressed DR I don't see how any system can make a big difference there.

As I mentioned in another thread I can see how an equalizer might be able to take advantage of the fact that different frequencies will have different perceived volumes at the same system volume setting. (I'd like to try my hand at this sometime.) But even that can't make a huge difference when dynamic range is compressed as much as in many new recordings.


Hi Guys

The average playback system (pre-tuning) plays about 1/10 of the recorded content of the source. Note that this number did not come from me only, but from others including me, who have researched and tested this same topic "real space". Real space is the actual space of a recording. Every recording has "real space/real size". Every recording has it’s own "real space" content that differs per recording. I have given the term "recorded code" to this content to make it easier to comprehend, but this understanding goes back to the beginning of the playback soundstage, mono, stereo and multi-channel.

In the 1990’s I toured with several audio reviewers to other reviewer’s systems uncovering the real space of given recordings. We tuned these systems, per recording, using a variable method called "Tuning". Tuning has 3 main ingredients Acoustical, Mechanical and Electrical, all of which host the playback signal at sometime during the audio pathway. Everywhere along the audio pathway is the physical part called the "Audio Chain". Anytime we make a change to the audio chain we affect the audio pathway.

To break it down we have the "recorded code" that becomes the "audio code" once the signal becomes physical (analog) as it makes contact with physical mechanical conduits (parts that host the signal). As the signal travels through the audio pathway it makes contact with the each part of the chain. The audio code is affected by the four fundamental interactions of nature (look up fundamental forces) as it travels making the signal itself variable. Tuning is how we adjust the signal.

michael

http://tuneland.forumotion.com/t268-the-audio-code

"I too would like to know how any system can compensate for elements in a bad recording"

The teaching of the "recorded code" has been limited at best when it comes to quality of recordings. I would say we need to fault the teachers of the hobby, whom ever they are. It also seems that when it comes to compression, dynamic range and efficiencies the explanations are not in line with the actual "doing" of the audio chain. Dynamic range is not necessarily a function of recording compression (limiting) and efficiency but somehow has turned into an excuse for poor performance in playback systems. The term "revealing system" has been used as the justification of a system not being able to play a recordings content, when not being able to play any recording is a function of content being or not being in tune. If your system is not "in-tune" with recording content the music will sound "out of tune". It doesn’t matter what is considered good or bad engineering.

Take your "great" sounding recordings to another system and it will sound different (many times majorly different). Why does it sound so different is a function of system tuning. HEA got off track when they went to discrete system component matching. Here’s why, all recordings have a different recorded code and sound different from each other when played on a system with only one setting.

Let's take any recording and play it at any studio or home setting in the world. Now let's take that same recording and play it in any other studio or home setting, guess what, it sounds different. Does that make the recording or system bad? Of course not, it makes every setup different sounding.

michael

michael, I still don't understand. Sorry, I might be being dense here.

But if you take a recording with a compressed dynamic range how can you expand the range beyond what exists on the recording? If it isn't there then it isn't there. To take an extreme example: there have been newer recordings in which the compressed DR has lead to clipping. How can you get back what has been clipped, i.e. not there?