Vote

It's extremely difficult to find good recordings nowadays on the artists one follows. Compression is a plague that is slowly killing the audio world.

That's like saying the air in LA sucks or sharks sh*t in the sea...no need to state the obvious

It depends on what you are listening to and the label. I have purchased some CDs from smaller labels that sound very, very good. And some from the big boys labels that do not sound good at all. Depending on what kind of music you like there is a lot more available than static. If it is today's AM/FM top 40 oriented towards the pre-teen and teen crowd what difference does quality make? Video killed the radio star...a prediction that turned out to be very, very true.

When it comes to pop music (and yes, that includes the umbrella-term-genre of "rock"), he's right. The hey-day of American rock/pop music had come and gone, and so has quality recording jobs for such music.

Anyone notice Bob is actually sounding....better?

I don't think I even have to read what he said...it's true. Much of the new music is just "mush." There are a few exceptions but the majority is icky stuff.

Of course, not all recordings sound like this, but Bob has been the noble bard of popular music for over 40 years now, so he certainly has the right to speak out about the quality of contemporary recordings. Neil Young is another artist who has been challenging the current state of recording for years now (at least since CD "quality" sound became good enough for all listeners). Music has been reduced to a commodity—a compressed, limited-dynamic, commodity of ephemeral value.

I think Bob is right on target if he is referring to Rock. Many recordings are engineered to be loud! Because there is very little distinction of what used to be a dynamic range, I think the music does not have a long term emotional impact. It's great for about two weeks, probably because it does have some merit, but in a short time the thrill is gone. I think it is amazing when you have a band that thrives on power cords change it's format on unplugged versions. The unplugged versions of songs are more powerful 9 out of 10 times. There aren't many songs that are going to impact the world today as the ones that Bob and a lot of others recorded in the 60's & 70's. Bob isn't saying that the songs or bands aren't good. He is singling out the engineers, mixers, and producers and I think he raises some valid points.

Compression ruins it all since 1990 in popular music. Where's the dynamic range gone?

Ever wondered why rap music is such a winner? It's the only thing that sounds tolerable on CD!

I may not be listening to the same recordings as Dylan; it

Actually the recording quality has improved since the analog days but the studio is now full of all sorts of sound processing devices that should not belong there

Making maximum money is the only focus. The recording industry has no interest in music per se. Its all making a glamor music video and marketing. automation of music creation (sampling etc) also is a reason.

I think the modern recordings do suck. But I am not sure I listen to old music or old recordings. However, modern studios do use too many audio channels and this does degrade fidelity. Of course, I like the sound of old analogue studio recordings, so I cant really say.

Most of what I hear on the radio is motivated by money, not by the music being played. Fewer executives and more musicianship.

And I'm stupid enough to spend thousands of dollars on equipment to make the recordings sound better!

Recording technology has gotten so much better. There is so much more definition in today's recordings. Listen to the new Rx Bandits album ...And The Battle Begun. There are so many subtle sounds going on that you would not have been able to capture and reproduce in the old recordings.

In general, a large amount of modern recordings are overmixed and overprocessed. There is little, if any, "real" accoustic sound—especially with rap, hip-hop, and pop music.

He is right! They usually sound so loud without dynamics. Really not worth of a higher resolution media.

We could justly argue details, and notable minority exceptions, but, IMHO, Dylan is on the mark here.

Nothing happens in recording today!

And Bob selling out to do an iPod Nano commercial takes the credibility away from his whining.

...no definition of nothing... ? Let's talk about Bob's grammar first!

Dylan can still hear!

Dynamic range has been killed. The CD promised increased dynamic range and modern engineers, at the behest of bands and producers, have squandered this advantage. We still get the A/D D/A artifacts, yet less pops, but on the whole I think we are behind where we were just prior to the launch of CDs. To be fair, vinyl was pretty cheap then too. As the playback equipment reaches ever higher levels, the media reaches ever lower lows.

There are few exceptions but Dylan is pretty much right on.

He's right and wrong. There's still good music coming out—except for his latest stuff. On that he's right: It's atrocious and boring.

Dylan is a little bit right and a little bit wrong. I do find great recordings from independent labels, but seldom from the majors. Perhaps he should think of moving from Sony, but that would be a severe pay cut and no number one CD.. Also, as an audio pro, I can

... and I don't even like Bob Dylan!! Recordings rarely 'swing' anymore, and there's no sense of any space in the soundstage.

Well far too many recordings sound atrocious.....but it is not just modern ones. Modern ones are far superior to older ones, but by no means good. The good ones are few and far between, but they do exist.