Should a good system sound bad with bad recording?


A friend of mine came home with a few CDs burnt out of "official" bootleg recordings of Pearl Jam NorAm tour...the sound was so crappy that he looked at me a bit embarrassed, thinking "very loud" that my system was really not great despite the money I spent. I checked the site he downloaded from...full concerts are about 200 MB on average. I guess I am dealing with a case of ultra-compressed files. Should I be proud that the sound was really crappy on my set up?!!!!
beheme
I think it would help greatly if you had bass and treble control......i am finding out that high end means only playing a few recordings and not being able to play most........so what is the point of paying alot of $$$$$ to not be able to tolerate most recordings???

I have Krell gear and i hear from a relative,"you need a mixer", "not enough bass" and it pisses me off.

Spend the big bucks and then everything sounds like crap.
If it's a professionally done recording and you're playing it from at least a 16/44 source (or some loseless equivalent) then something is wrong with your system and/or your setup if you're finding a significant percentage of new recordings are "unlistenable". A good system will show the flaws of commercially oriented recordings, but it shouldn't make them sound like crap.

EQ and tone controls can correct for tonal imbalances, but nothing can undo excessive compression.
Bad CD's sound worse on good equipment. For example, I made the mistake of buying a few Laserlight releases on sale from Tower Records. They sounded bad in my car, but really attrocious in my music room. I ended up throwing them in the garbage.
Jay
A bad recording is a bad recording.
All a good system does is make a bad recording sound even worse.
Go by a boom box and the thing will sound silky smooth.
beheme-it isn't a so called 'audiophile recording'. like most modern recordings, it is however meant to be enjoyed on a quality playback system. the 'notion' that 'the better a system is-the worse most cd's and lp's sound' is about all any consumer has left to hang their hat on, when they find themselves with tens of thousands of dollars in equipment that they can't enjoy anything on. accurately reproducing the recording and enjoying the music are not different goals. no recording engineer sets out to make peoples ears bleed. unfortunately most high end speaker designs are not made to be listened to for hours on end. they are built specifically to impress a potential buyer using an audiophile quality recording. one that does not really 'test' the speakers at all. loudspeakers that do not favor one frequency over another, and maintain that balance with any ss or tube amp make just about any commercial recording listenable. ar, allison,hales,avalon,ohm,gradient,shahinian,castle,harmonic precision,harbeth,snell(the originals)chapman,enigma,totem,duntech,etc. are just a sample of speakers that are well engineered at all pricepoints. if you can't enjoy the history of recorded music from the dawn of high fidelity until today, you've got a problem that no amount of tweeking and component changing(other than speakers) can solve. those pearl jam recordings are not only historically significent-they rock. giving up the history of rock music alone based on a demo with a patricia barber or jennifer warnes cd(which don't sound bad even on a boombox)is nothing short of a bad purchase.