2. tech-talk
  3. 149210-131431

What is the least compressed signal?

Hello everyone.I was wondering what everyone's thoughts might be about what is the least compressed front end signal? A friend of mine recently told me that radio signal is compressed. So I thought maybe a direct connection to a CD player? Or, since CDs are pretty compressed, maybe a record player? Thoughts?
the reason I ask is, my friend recently gave me a fantastic pair of speakers. And I've been listening to the radio through them. He had a disgusted look on his face and told me I was not using these speakers how they were meant to be used, because the radio signal is kind of crappy and compressed. I would love to use the speakers as they were intended. Meadowlark kestrel hot rods hooked up to an Integra receiver w/ kimbers
ddjr
Post removed 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Koost
It appears we’re now venturing into the wilderness of "Numbers don’t mean anything", the final refuge of those who’s numbers don’t reflect the magical understandings they’ve embraced. Like it or not, numbers always mean something.

>>>>Actually, we’re entering into the wilderness of ignoring what numbers mean. Know what I mean, jelly bean? You are completely ignoring the fact that numbers in the dynamic range database correlate 100% with what we already know about the Loudness Wars - that sagging sales numbers forced the industry to substitute loudness for dynamic range. It’s as obvious as the noise on your face. 🤥 Which wouldn’t be so bad except it hits audiophiles right where they live. Stones, Beatles, Zeppelin, Dylan, Radiohead. Compressed! Compressed! Compressed! Compressed! It’s not uncommon to see recent recordings flatlined - ALL RED 🌹on the database. Who wants to listen to CDs or LPs that have been suffocated by mastering engineers who are squeezing the life right out of the music? Wake up and smell the coffee? ☕️
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,967 posts
 
geoffkait
... if the range of values that represent dynamic range in the database are 1-20, whereas real dynamic range values are from 1 to 130 dB or higher, then the database contains approximate values ... The database shows trends.
That sums it up rather nicely. For anyone who has compared some of the database numbers with their own listening, it’s pretty clear that it’s a useful resource. Data needn’t be perfect to be useful, particularly in this kind of example. We’re not using the numbers to calculate a moonshot - the data are just a guide to DR.

Objections to the quality of the data are silly, imo. Of course, kosst is free to discount or ignore the information. But to criticize its value by attacking the methodology is sort of like measuring something with a micrometer, marking it with a grease pencil and then cutting it with a chainsaw. Extreme precision isn't always necessary, or even desired.
ddjr OP
31 posts
 
Okay then... How about this? a few years ago, my cousin recorded everything The Beatles had ever put out onto CD for me. He recorded it onto CD from a record player. What's says you?
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
You can not (rpt not) get better dynamic range than the source. If the source is Beatles LPs it’s whatever the LPs are, which varies. Here’s the The Beatles recordings, LPs and CDs, from the dynamic range database. Starts off with p. 1 of 3.

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=The+Beatles&album=
More to discover