Is music quality moving away from the "audiophile"


I recently read an interesting post on the production of the new Metallica album and how its sound has been catered to the Ipod generation. Formatting the sound of the album toward the ipod itself. With computer downloads, mp3's etc, etc. it seems that "compression" over quality is becoming the norm.

In the Metallica example, I have been a fan since 84. Now, i know they are not a good example for the so called "audiophile", but that being said the production on this album is terrible. Actually, worse than their previous album St. Anger. Who makes the call on this? The band, engineer, record company? A combination of all?
zigonht
Phasecorrect,

It is an improvement over St. Anger but as a fan since 84 it is honestly is not that great. Sad to say...
It's more than a small % of Springsteen fans that are very unhappy with the compression (and distortion) on Springsteen's "Magic". For an example of a recent excellent sounding rock/pop release, try Jackson Browne's Time the Conqueror. He even uses tubes; and is selling LPs at his concerts.
I bought the new Metallica album Death magnetic on Warners US 2LP set.

Expecting to hear this terrible compressed, overloading sound I was pleasantly surprised. It sounds pretty good. Not that dynamic in the bass, but it is reasonably uncompressed and has no overload or distortion whatsoever.

Sounds like this issue is about the CD mastering. No suprprise to us LP lovers.

BTW, St Anger is a very good recording - huge drum so0und and hiuge dynamic range - it must be heard on a full range system thou to be appreciated.
I do not think any magor record company ever intended or will ever intend to make an audiophile recording. Its always been LUCK.