2. misc-audio
  3. 1131284574

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
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
your example would apply to some cases but there are many instances where dynamic range is not an issue, especially classical, non orchestra music.
Mrtennis (Threads | Answers)

Most live music has abundant dynamic range ...much more than an average from 75 to 80 db. An unamplified grand piano goes up to around 110 db on peaks or crescendos. Drums, tympany, brass all can go from extremely loud to soft. So while you may listen quietly to stereo or from a distance at a concert ....it is the lack of dynamics that often distinguish stereo system playback from live real music....real instruments.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
i value my ears too much to listen beyond 85 db.

besides some small ensemble chamber music is not very loud.

a harpsichord does not play loud and baroque and renaissance music sounds better at lower sound pressure levels.

one of the best speakers of all time, the quad esl was not known for its dynamic range. i will take that speaker any day over any speaker made today.

what i am trying to say is it depends upon preference and your choice of music.
zar
185 posts
 
I agree with the majority of responses, a bad recording is bad no matter what it is played throuh. This is why I have not minded spending extra $$ for remastered cd's of my favorite albums.
gawdbless's avatar
gawdbless
1,235 posts
 
A bad recording can sound good through a well balanced hi-fi system. If one has to resort to buying 'remastered' or.. ageing groups/recording companies wanting to make a bit more cash, by fooling punters that this latest 'souped up' (more eq on the mid) version is better than the old version so one can accomplish a better/acceptable sound from ones system, does that not tell one that something is fundamentally amiss? It does to me.
Rock on.....
Post removed 
More to discover