How Science Got Sound Wrong

Neil Young would probably have had a much different outcome had he known any audiophiles who were into tweaks. As I’ve oft observed not much good can come of playing untreated CDs on stock un-tweaked systems, especially in-tweaked CD players. 

I doubt he has any hearing left anyway--especially after all those sessions with Crazy Horse--i suppose i could cut him some slack and interpret his rants as being solely about compression of dynamic range in digital?  Nah, even though i like his early work he's still full of it...

"...not much good can come of playing untreated CDs on stock un-tweaked systems..."

Would Neil Young's CDs become good if treated, or it is a little too much to wish for?

wyoboy
I doubt he has any hearing left anyway--especially after all those sessions with Crazy Horse--i suppose i could cut him some slack and interpret his rants as being solely about compression of dynamic range in digital? Nah, even though i like his early work he’s still full of it...

>>>>Sadly Neil Young was onto the whole CD scam before dynamic range compression set in. But that probably didn’t help. Apparently there are people in this world who find CDs completely objectionable, you know, what with the thinness, shrillness, two dimensionality, and missing information.

Apparently there are people in this world who find CDs completely objectionable, you know, what with the thinness, shrillness, two dimensionality, and missing information.

Its people like that wot cause social unrest. Everybody knows it was, and while the buffalo roam, perfect as it was conceived and will remain so until the end of time. And there are absolutely irreducible math thingees and literally billions and billions of articles to prove that beyond any shadow of a doubt. To think otherwise is just plain luddite quackery. I mean who are you going to believe, the hard theoretic evidence or your lying ears.