2. music
  3. 1109028516

The problem with the music

There are lots of people who frequent this site that have spent significant amounts of money to buy the gear that they use to reproduce their music. I would never suggest that you should not have done that, but I wonder if the music industry is not working against you, or at least, not with you.

For the most part studios are using expensive gear to record with, but is it really all that good? Do the people doing the recording have good systems that can reproduce soundstage, detail and all the other things that audiophiles desire, or do they even care about playback?

I know there are labels that are sympathetic to our obsessions, but does Sony/Columbia, Mercury, or RCA etc. give a rats #$%&@ about what we want?

Recordings (digital) have gotten a lot better since the garbage released in the mid 80's. Some of them are even listenable! BUT lots of people are spending lots of money to get great music when the studios don't seem that interested in doing good recordings. Mike Large, director of operations for Real Worl Studios said "The aim of the music is to connect with you on an emotional level; and I'd be prepared to bet that the system you have at home does that better than any of the systems we make records on."

Do recording engineers even care about relating the emotion of the music, or are they just concerned about the mechanics?

What do you think, and can/ should anything be done about it?
128x128nrchy
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,111 posts
 
The point remains that one does not have to have a great system to hear that something is amiss in many of the recordings being sold today. I say this not to make the point, but to reinforce it; why are there so many people remastering, or selling 'audiophile' recordings if this is not true.

Maybe it's not worth arguing this point as cinematic and others seem to think that everything is fine.

If no one is holding the manufacturers, and engineers, responsible there is really no reason for them to offer anything more than what they are offering today.
ben_campbell
1,164 posts
 
Nrchy I don't like the tone in a few of the posts directed at you and interesting as they are they are heading a bit off topic.

I buy a lot of new music and whilst never claimining Audiophile ears I do find the vast majority to sound at least fine and a lot of them good.
Of course there are exceptions-if you take the new U2 album which I will review on Lugs soon-it sounds decent on headphones and on my iPod speakers-put it on my main system and it's pretty horrific.
However I believe that is their intention to make sure the "sound" hits the mass market-I say it in my review U2 didn't get to be one of the biggest bands in the world by worrying about niche markets.

It's a shame because I believe there is no need for this approach but I don't find it that common.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
Hi Ben, you mention that you believe that there is intention to make sure the sound hits the mass market. My question would be, if the mass market doesn't know good from bad, why not make it good? (I am not agreeing with or disagreeing with one side of this or the other, simply asking a question.)
pabelson
344 posts
 
Nrchy: It seems to me you've just stated the obvious. So what's your point? Audiophiles cannot "hold the manufacturers and engineers responsible" because they're too small in number to matter in the marketplace.

On the other hand, as you note, there are a number of small companies willing to cater to audiophiles by taking better care in recording and production. If you value that enough to pay the price premium, then what's the problem?
cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
Nrchy,

What more do you want? This is important, be specific.

Pin it down, what are they doing wrong?

What is missing in todays recordings for you, not global but local, your turn to answer my question.

They are trying to give us surround sound which is a huge deal, they have upped the bits, equipment in the studio is improving at huge rate even though exploited talent seems to be in abit of decline but that will change.

The only recordings that seem hard to take are the primed for top 40 group. This has always been the case.

If there a is a consistent problem one recording to another the only constant is your system. I have been through this process/ phase of bad mouthing recording engineers and proaudio "never enough highs dude" etc. I was wrong and so was my system.

Not every recording will be perfect, no matter who its made for. Its the way life is. The new Dido CD is great filled with layers of sound natural sounding instruments...what more could i ask for other than to have had them master it in my room to my tastes? Evanescense, owweee!, very hot recording.

Sorry I wasn't more succinct but this is where I was trying to go. So let's forget how we got here, and discuss what needs to be changed, what are recordings lacking specifically on a consistent basis in your opinion.
More to discover