the death of high fidelity

[alocispepraluger102]

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/177...f_high_fidelity

[Harold_Z]

Good article. I'm in total agreement. The over compression of much of todays music makes it unlistenable for me.

[Christiern]

Interesting piece. Sad how the deterioration of audio reproduction is going hand in hand with the dilution of the music. After years of giving loudness priority over artistry (remember the anything-you-can-sing-I-can-sing-higher "Star Search" contests?) the boom box generation's ear drums seem to have been seriously damaged. Oh, what the hell, the whole music industry has decayed at the hands of corporate lawyers and tin-eared CPAs.

[porcy62]

Good article. I'm in total agreement. The over compression of much of todays music makes it unlistenable for me.

Me too.

[Teasing the Korean]

We can all give a big round of applause to commercial radio, which - in the US at least - compressed the hell out their signals for decades. It was not uncommon for a rock or pop group to finish a recording and wonder why it didn't sound right - until they heard it on the radio with all that compression.

When the Raspberries recorded "Go All the Way," they thought it lacked punch and wanted to scrap the whole thing. The producer went in and squashed the bejesus out of the levels, resulting in the hit that we all know and love today.

The Who's first album, "My Generation," rivals any of the more recent albums discussed in that article as far as compression and limiting. I remember as a teenager making a cassette of that record. I set the levels at the opening guitar chords of "Out in the Street" so they were just on the cusp the red. The needles stayed in that exact position through the whole album, barely moving.

A close second to that Who album would be the US stereo version of "The Beatles' Second Album," which is either their best sounding or worst sounding early record, depending on your aesthetics. Frankly, I go back and forth on this one.

Leaving rock music for a while, spin any of the early Enoch Light Command albums. Most of these are not very good musically - and I love much so-called "easy listening" from that era - though they will sometimes have a great track or two. The liner notes brag about the amount of compression used, and the evidence is right there in the grooves. Talk about ear fatigue.

While the "loudness war" may be a recent phenomenon in terms of sheer number of artists who feel compelled to over-compress their records, it is really nothing new.

Edited January 20, 2008 by Teasing the Korean

[porcy62]

We can all give a big round of applause to commercial radio, which - in the US at least - compressed the hell out their signals for decades. It was not uncommon for a rock or pop group to finish a recording and wonder why it didn't sound right - until they heard it on the radio with all that compression.

When the Raspberries recorded "Go All the Way," they thought it lacked punch and wanted to scrap the whole thing. The producer went in and squashed the bejesus out of the levels, resulting in the hit that we all know and love today.

The Who's first album, "My Generation," rivals any of the more recent albums discussed in that article as far as compression and limiting. I remember as a teenager making a cassette of that record. I set the levels at the opening guitar chords of "Out in the Street" so they were just on the cusp the red. The needles stayed in that exact position through the whole album, barely moving.

A close second to that Who album would be the US stereo version of "The Beatles' Second Album," which is either their best sounding or worst sounding early record, depending on your aesthetics. Frankly, I go back and forth on this one.

Leaving rock music for a while, spin any of the early Enoch Light Command albums. Most of these are not very good musically - and I love much so-called "easy listening" from that era - though they will sometimes have a great track or two. The liner notes brag about the amount of compression used, and the evidence is right there in the grooves. Talk about ear fatigue.

While the "loudness war" may be a recent phenomenon in terms of sheer number of artists who feel compelled to over-compress their records, it is really nothing new.

You might be right, but nevertheless from "My Generation" to "Californication" we had a huge number of good sounding records of rock/pop.

The paradox is that the supposed biggest dinamic range of digital (vs analog) recording is basically useless in today's way of producing disc.

[Teasing the Korean]

You might be right, but nevertheless from "My Generation" to "Californication" we had a huge number of good sounding records of rock/pop.

Agree 100%. I was simply saying that there was a long, long road leading to this "recent" phenomenon.

[porcy62]

You might be right, but nevertheless from "My Generation" to "Californication" we had a huge number of good sounding records of rock/pop.

Agree 100%. I was simply saying that there was a long, long road leading to this "recent" phenomenon.

Perhaps the point is that "My Generation" was still a sort of "collection" of singles, like the early Beatles', so loudness may have some sense in singles.

When the guys entered in the realm of "album" everything changed. Today with the downloading we are back in the single's era.

[Teasing the Korean]

The Beatles' Second Album was a US concoction by Dave Dexter, Jr. He was responsible for all that compression. The UK versions sound completely different (and not necessarily better).

I think the Who album was conceived as an album, at least to the degree that existed at the time for rock/pop groups.

[porcy62]

The Beatles' Second Album was a US concoction by Dave Dexter, Jr. He was responsible for all that compression. The UK versions sound completely different (and not necessarily better).

I think the Who album was conceived as an album, at least to the degree that existed at the time for rock/pop groups.

I was just guessing about the two records you named.

I still think that the concern about sound quality was deeply rooted in the album's era because a particular "sound" was part of the "artistic project" in general. Dylan went to Nashville for it. They looked for particular producers, sound engineers, studios, (or the producers looked for it) in order to achieve a "sound". The very same "sound" that is lost in today's compressed mastering, or remastering.

[jim anderson]

Hasn't died in my house...

[porcy62]

Hasn't died in my house...

Nor in mine...though I am a bit worried about my Hi-Fi's health when my wife is gazing at room occupied by the system.

[Chalupa]

somewhat related topic here....

http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=33846

[RDK]

It's ironic, then, that one of the few places you can hear pop music without overproduction, excessive loudness, compression, and auto-tuned singing is on American Idol.

[captainwrong]

Slightly OT: This is something that's been on my mind a lot lately as I've got a bit of money to play with and am weighing my options. I wanted to put together a really excellent stereo finally (retiring my decent but tired 70s gear) but I'm just not so sure it makes sense for me anymore. Ninetimes out of ten, I'm listening to music on my iPod (with a pair of top of the line Shure earbuds and a Bitheads amp.) I just don't have the time to sit down and really listen to my stereo rig anymore. I'm starting to realize I just can't justify spending all that money for something I'll rarely get to use.

That said, I'll take a well encoded mp3 of a properly mastered CD over the over compressed mess most labels are shoving out there today. I'm not ashamed to admit, I can rarely tell the difference between a high bit rate mp3 and the original source, but I can't listen to the Amy Winehouse CD because IT'S SO DAMN LOUD!!!!!

[porcy62]

Slightly OT: This is something that's been on my mind a lot lately as I've got a bit of money to play with and am weighing my options. I wanted to put together a really excellent stereo finally (retiring my decent but tired 70s gear) but I'm just not so sure it makes sense for me anymore. Ninetimes out of ten, I'm listening to music on my iPod (with a pair of top of the line Shure earbuds and a Bitheads amp.) I just don't have the time to sit down and really listen to my stereo rig anymore. I'm starting to realize I just can't justify spending all that money for something I'll rarely get to use.

That said, I'll take a well encoded mp3 of a properly mastered CD over the over compressed mess most labels are shoving out there today. I'm not ashamed to admit, I can rarely tell the difference between a high bit rate mp3 and the original source, but I can't listen to the Amy Winehouse CD because IT'S SO DAMN LOUD!!!!!

I am just the opposite.

The only time I can listen to music is when I am at home seated in front of my stereo rig. I used to have a walkman (tape) when I was a commuter and use public transport or when I was jogging. Now I drive a motorbike and practice Aikido. No way to listen music at work. No headphones in my life. So I am not really interested in iPod or mp3 players.

[Teasing the Korean]

[No headphones in my life. So I am not really interested in iPod or mp3 players.

[tonym]

I read a bunch of letters recently in Gramophone discussing the manipulation of pieces of music by BBC Radio 3 engineers. The narrowing of the dynamic range making it 'easier' to listen to music in cars and such, but just about rendering the whole recording worthless and unlistenable.

I'm with the latter. I don't want my Zep recordings louder; there was never intended to be a wall of sound anyway --- light and shade --- wasn't that one Jimmy Page dictum in the first place.

Pianissimo passages in a classical piece should be pretty far away from the tutti with a lot of ground in between!

[AllenLowe]

that's why I master all my own stuff myself - also that's why I own as many stereo version of Beatles albums as I can find - some remarkably clear, uncompressed sound -

[Teasing the Korean]

that's why I master all my own stuff myself - also that's why I own as many stereo version of Beatles albums as I can find - some remarkably clear, uncompressed sound -

Have you heard the UK mono versions? They're even better.

[AllenLowe]

I have some of those but find them variable - some are very good -

[CJ Shearn]

I was talking about this subject with my friend who admittedly is NOT a music fan a few weeks ago. He thinks that it's good that the eventual discontinuing of CD's is a good think because everyone downloads. I basically said no way because most MP3 files suffer from horrible compression artifacts and music lovers aren't into that. He basically said "maybe for you but MP3's are fine" he likes some classical pieces, I said that MP3's of classical is bad b/c it crushes dynamic range, he then said "I only listen to the melody". So people who aren't into good sound thibk we're crazy, it's sad. I have a modest system (upgraded to an Onkyo amp) but something like Pat Metheny's "The Way Up" sounded far better on my ok Technics speakers than the Bose system at Circuit City they were demoing the album on recently. It was "Part 3" and there was so much mid range and bass that the guitars, cymbals and keyboards could not be heard and so much distortion as well. Circuit City is full of clowns that suck in unsuspecting buyers, I started talking about how bad the album sounded on their system and they had no idea what I was talking about, no surprise there.

[porcy62]

I was talking about this subject with my friend who admittedly is NOT a music fan a few weeks ago. He thinks that it's good that the eventual discontinuing of CD's is a good think because everyone downloads. I basically said no way because most MP3 files suffer from horrible compression artifacts and music lovers aren't into that. He basically said "maybe for you but MP3's are fine" he likes some classical pieces, I said that MP3's of classical is bad b/c it crushes dynamic range, he then said "I only listen to the melody". So people who aren't into good sound thibk we're crazy, it's sad. I have a modest system (upgraded to an Onkyo amp) but something like Pat Metheny's "The Way Up" sounded far better on my ok Technics speakers than the Bose system at Circuit City they were demoing the album on recently. It was "Part 3" and there was so much mid range and bass that the guitars, cymbals and keyboards could not be heard and so much distortion as well. Circuit City is full of clowns that suck in unsuspecting buyers, I started talking about how bad the album sounded on their system and they had no idea what I was talking about, no surprise there.

You're right.

You know what? My stereo system is more expensive then my car, and when my "friends" know it, they think I am crazy. The very same "friends" that would find "normal" buying a brand new Mercedes Benz, just for wasting hours in traffic jams or looking for a parking, instead of using cheaper and faster public transports.

Edited January 21, 2008 by porcy62

[John L]

Pianissimo passages in a classical piece should be pretty far away from the tutti with a lot of ground in between!

It is a bit ironic that the digital revolution was initially about expanding dynamic range. Some of the earlier attemtps to do this went too far, just like they went overboard in channel separation when stereo first appeared. I have some symphonic classical CDs that are virtually unlistenable for the opposite reason that is being discussed here: either the soft parts are inaudible or the load parts rattle the walls.

Clearly, it is not compression that is an evil in and of itself. It just needs to be used properly.

[tonym]

Pianissimo passages in a classical piece should be pretty far away from the tutti with a lot of ground in between!

I have some symphonic classical CDs that are virtually unlistenable for the opposite reason that is being discussed here: either the soft parts are inaudible or the load parts rattle the walls.

Clearly, it is not compression that is an evil in and of itself. It just needs to be used properly.

Good point!