the mastering engineers give the clients what they want.

nothing more, nothing less.

and no, Pro Tools does not "saturate easy".... it is software..it doesn't "saturate" at all actually.

thats why I dont listen to commercial music. if your music isnt commercial anyway, who gives a damn about the loudness.

The new mavis staples album is stunning, as is the ray lamontagne "god willin and the creek dont rise" as well as "till the sun turns black"

those are what modern records SHOULD sound like.

Also...the new Daniel Lanois/Neil Young..

http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/Level_paper_AES109.pdf

All good albums TR, but I'd still call them all "commercial". Neil Young's been doing great music for 30 years now, but it's still commercial- they play his stuff I bet at least once a day on every classic rock station in the country!

My point really is, it's not whether it's "commercial" or uber-indie, so much as a band being educated, aware and directed enough to insist the recording/mastering process does their music justice. It's like how in the movie industry the best directors and cinematographers all use real film- even for if it's later going to have a lot of big effects on top. Film just captures more, a LOT more, than even the best HD.

Quote:
My point really is, it's not whether it's "commercial" or uber-indie, so much as a band being educated, aware and directed enough to insist the recording/mastering process does their music justice. It's like how in the movie industry the best directors and cinematographers all use real film- even for if it's later going to have a lot of big effects on top. Film just captures more, a LOT more, than even the best HD.

Cinematographers can't work with defective eyesight. Many of today's musicians are working with defective hearing, an occupational hazard these days, and consequently expect mastering engineers to compensate. I doubt these musicians know that's what they're asking for. That and catering for in car sound environments gives us the joys of compression etc. What I can't understand is why recordings can't be made with a full natural dynamic range and compressed AS NECESSARY by digital technology at the point of replay.

Think of it this way-

Let's say you record and mix your album and don't use any compression (though this is rarely done.) Your loud, electric tracks consistently max out at 0db while your acoustic track maxes out at -12db. The artists, label or mastering engineer decide that the album needs to be louder, so they break the compressors out. Essentially the mastering engineer will compress the album so they can raise the overall level of 12db. This mean that the loud tracks (the electric ones) suffer from a lot of compression, while the acoustic tracks have very little. The ear hears both the "loud" and "quiet" tracks as the same loudness because of the compression used (the ear hears loudness as an average), yet the track that was originally louder has been compressed much more than the orginally quiet track.

Ergo, the orginally loud track will sound crappy while the acoustic track will be alright.

Until the industry adopts a standard of mastering to say -20db average for an album, we will continute to deal with bad sound in an era where great recording has never been more possible. .

I will go out on a limb and make a prediction for a coming audiophile utopia:

Soon, consumers will be given control over how much compression they want to add when they buy digital recordings and download them online.

Same with file size, sampling rate they prefer, etc...

It's gonna be great.

From your mouth to God's ears, Buddah.

I also agree - it is SO easy to apply compression on the user end. My iPod can do it, my CD Changer in my car can do it. Sometimes, say when you are listening to classical music in the car, you need a little compression to compensate for road noise etc. I would much rather apply compression when I need it and it is not critical instead of buying a product that is flawed from the get-go.

I truly believe that the over compression of music made in the last 10 years is a major factor in NOT upgrading ones stereo. Why bother getting 24 bit resolution when that bit depth is rendered useless because of over compression?

Thank goodness I listen to a lot of classical discs where compression is rarely used and, if it is, it is done sparingly and with taste. Upgrading my stereo and trying to achieve the best possible sound is rewarded when using classical music as my software. I'm not sure that if I only listened to Pop and Rock releases that I would even bother having better than a nice mid-fi system. Of course there are the rare exceptions, but you catch my drift.

Quote:

Thank goodness I listen to a lot of classical discs where compression is rarely used and, if it is, it is done sparingly and with taste. Upgrading my stereo and trying to achieve the best possible sound is rewarded when using classical music as my software. I'm not sure that if I only listened to Pop and Rock releases that I would even bother having better than a nice mid-fi system. Of course there are the rare exceptions, but you catch my drift.

Totally agree Lick-T but you've thrown a brick into the wasp's nest. For starters consider the number of audio reviewers who think it's OK to review gear by only playing Rock. Just try and tell em they've no objective standard to judge reproduction with and they usually go hysterical.

I'm not really saying that you can't use rock recordings in reviews. Heck I try to throw something Rock/Pop/Electronic/whatever-we-are-calling-it-these-days in all my reviews. However, I have to laugh when I hear reviewers talk about the huge dynamics of some rock albums when I damn well know there AREN'T any dynamics on the record.

I have to say that if I only listened to one genre of music it would be MUCH easier to build a system. I would buy stuff that makes those records sound best. If I listened to Rock only, I'd buy horns. If I only listened to Jazz, perhaps a planar speaker would be all I need. If I listened only to classical, I'd get me some omnis. Say what we will, some kinds of speakers do sound better on certain kinds of music and vice versa. I, (un)fortunately, love lots of different music and want it all to move me. Its way hard to make one system excel at everything.

That said, my current system is the best is has ever sounded, by a wide margin. And no, I'm not telling what's in it right now. You have to buy the magazine in a few months to find out!

Quote:
I'm not really saying that you can't use rock recordings in reviews. Heck I try to throw something Rock/Pop/Electronic/whatever-we-are-calling-it-these-days in all my reviews. However, I have to laugh when I hear reviewers talk about the huge dynamics of some rock albums when I damn well know there AREN'T any dynamics on the record.

I have to say that if I only listened to one genre of music it would be MUCH easier to build a system. I would buy stuff that makes those records sound best. If I listened to Rock only, I'd buy horns. If I only listened to Jazz, perhaps a planar speaker would be all I need. If I listened only to classical, I'd get me some omnis. Say what we will, some kinds of speakers do sound better on certain kinds of music and vice versa. I, (un)fortunately, love lots of different music and want it all to move me. Its way hard to make one system excel at everything.

That said, my current system is the best is has ever sounded, by a wide margin. And no, I'm not telling what's in it right now. You have to buy the magazine in a few months to find out!

You're right on the money whey you say " - - - - - reviewers talk about the huge dynamics of some rock albums when I damn well know there AREN'T any dynamics on the record. - - -" I suspect they think being hit in the stomach by low bass transients for an entire track constitutes dynamics.
Well, having also finally put together a collection of junk that, to my ears in my room, does justice to all kinds of music I'm self-satisfied & arrogant(?) enough to think I don't need to read that review.
I do however begin to understand your list:-
Horns for Rock.
Planar for Jazz
and Omnis for classical -
- - - except I'd suggest Soundlabs ULP X stats with their stat sub-woofer ( or a couple of Velodyne DD15's?) will do Jazz and Classical and that not all classical gets on with Omnis. The big works yes but many of the Omins I've run across smear small scale chamber music all over the room in a very un-natural manner.
What also needs to be considered, and in my opinion THE MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF ALL ( excuse me for yelling but I get evangelical about this one) is the listening room itself.

Quote:
consider the number of audio reviewers who think it's OK to review gear by only playing Rock. Just try and tell em they've no objective standard to judge reproduction with and they usually go hysterical.

Rock music is very useful in revealing some problems that go unnoticed with, say, chamber music. See the discussion at http://www.stereophile.com/features/109/index3.html for more on this.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

My list of "for instances" relating speakers to genres of music was intended to be a gross over simplification. But I do think certain products can shine best on certain kinds of music. There are, thank goodness, genre-crossing products. I always feel that, in order to truly get my ears around a system or product, I have to listen to all types of music, even overly compressed Rock and Pop recordings. I learn much about how products handle albums I know to be sonically flawed. I personally love the music on many bad sounding recordings and I'm sure most readers feel the same way. I hope that a product can truly shine on well-recorded albums while not making me run from the room when listening to the badly recorded stuff I still love.

The problem really comes when reviewers use only audiophile approved recordings (many recorded with a single point microphone which leads to a thin tonal balance and no real bass), or overcooked Pop and Rock albums (with thier vast amounts of compression). I, however, try to not have any delusions that the bad recordings I use in a review actually sound bad.

I have a number of friends who almost exclusively listen to rock and electronica and many of these albums are not well recorded. I've watched a few of these folks embark an quixotic quest to make one record that they love (one that isn't a great recording to begin with) sound great, spending thousands of dollars in the process. Once they put together a system that dials that song in, they realize there are other recordings that now don't sound as good as they used to. They have introduced counteracting colorations to the system to compensate for the originally bad recording.

I think it is important to not fetishize certain recordings but listen "on the average" to your whole musical library when evaluating a product. In my opinion, the consistent colorations of a product will shine through if you consistently hear them on a bunch of different recording. This is why I always listen to some mix CD's as part my reviewing process. It allows me to hear a bunch of musical styles and recording techniques while I can relax and focus, instead of getting up and down from the listening seat. If I hear an increased lower treble emphasis on all of the tracks on the mix CD, then there is probably a low treble emphasis. Then I'll pull out other recordings to confirm or deny my impression.

Quote:
That said, my current system is the best is has ever sounded, by a wide margin. And no, I'm not telling what's in it right now. You have to buy the magazine in a few months to find out!

I will say the same for mine...for the first time ever, nothing in my system screams for replacement..I would like better speakers and the CD player I use as a transport has developed a quirk, but all in all, it works and is not offending me...would that I could say the same about my computers (this one has become selective about which microsoft updates it will accept and my old XP machine is slower than ever)

Funny, I would love better speakers too, and my CD-player has also developed a quirk. Perhaps they're family?

I had a Vista machine that went crazy with updates, and the only solution (with the aid of Microsoft Support) was a clean reinstall. On your XP machine try using Ccleaner and Auslogics Defrag. They should help.

Quote:
I live on a heavy diet of Blues and sample lots well known modern luminaries as well as lesser known bands.

The consistent thing I find is that many/most tracks on an album suffer from the