Quality system, make poor recordings sound better?

Please reread my response regarding radio shack equipment. I was making a point (clearly I thought) regarding quality of sound recording equipment so that you could see an extreme example of how it would be virtually impossible for anyone with a decent system to not hear the poor recording quality of cheap recoding equipment, vs the same performance recorded with top of the line equipment. Also, many recording artists didn't and still don't have much of a say as to what was recorded, how it is recorded and distributed. So, to say they wouldn't let the poor recording be distributed is missing the point of "they were not in charge and didn't decide". Also, another point is that the playback equipment and speakers in some recording/playback booths were not close to the stuff audiophiles have in their homes, and many times they simply didn't hear the poor recording quality. Also, please remember that I was referring to really poor recording equipment of the early 80s. If you go back an re-read some articles regarding the types of digital recording media used in those times, you would see clearly that they were described as terrible. That is what I am talking about regarding poor recording equipment. Also, go read some audio/music magazines that describe recording equipment in use today and from the 60's and you will see much mention of the quality of the various mikes, from absolutely terrible to masterful. It depends on the experience and knowledge of the master recording engineer. All are not the same. So, yes, you will hear poor recording in your playback equipment's sound. Some equipment mask and some really show it. For example (sorry for the long post), My previous pre-amp was the excellent Audio Research SP 11, which before I upgraded, I compared directly with an Audio Research REF 3 pre-amp. Didn't change anything but the pre-amps. Some recordings using the SP 11 sounded pretty good, but when listening through the REF 3 the same recording sounded really bad. You could really hear the poor recording quality through the REF 3 that was slightly masked with the SP11. but the excellent recordings sounded great on both. I was surprised. And as it turned out, it was typically with older cd's that I heard this. sorry for the long post, but I really thought I was clear in my extreme example regarding radio shack quality equipment vs top of the line. I never said recording engineers actually did this, I was making an example that would be easy to understand.

enjoy

No, to the basic question. In fact, poor recordings can become unlistenable in a really definitive system. However, I have heard some older tube based systems that seemed to be kind to just about anything that came their way. All the more reason to have multiple systems if one can afford the luxury of space and expense.

I composed the following before seeing Minorl's post just above, with which I agree entirely:

Gentlemen, keep in mind that a key goal in the engineering of most recordings is presumably to make them sound as appealing as possible to as many potential purchasers as possible, when played on the equipment that is used by as many of those potential purchasers as possible. That can be expected to include people listening in cars, on radios, on portable equipment providing mp3 playback through cheap headphones, and on low fi home equipment.

Toward that end, recordings, especially those involving orchestras, are generally captured with an excessive number of microphones, and are then excessively processed in elaborate electronic consoles, the processing involving mixing, equalization, dynamic compression, dynamic range limiting, etc. With the people doing all of this often being possessed of musical sensitivity and basic competence that is questionable at best. A'gon member Learsfool, who is a professional classical musician and has had more direct exposure than most of us put together to the ins and outs of orchestral recording as it is commonly practiced, has attested to and justifiably ranted about all of this in a number of past threads here.

It's not about quality control. It's about intent, approach, philosophy, and in some cases competence.

Regards,
-- Al

Minorl ,so the equipment change made the difference . Albeit in a negative way . Do not equate spending more money on a new ar pre as being more truthful to sound quality . Your pre is adding it's own sound signature

This makes sense. The better resolution your system has the more detail you will hear - good or bad. If your system has certain character such as overall warmness it may help a marginal recording but there's only so much it can do. Garbage in, garbage out. This is why audio forum people are so sensitive to recording technique, mastering, pressings, etc.