Absolutes in audio reproduction

[gregadd]

My absolutes

No matter how good a product they make Audio Research will have a Mark II within 12 mos.

Wilson will make a great speaker priced wildly disproportionately to the sum of it's parts. Vicious debate will follow.

That coveted peice of used audio gear on Audiogon will be sold a few days before you get the money to buy it.

CD players will get better. Vinyl will get more expensive.

As soon as they began to perfect a digital format they will abandon it and start all over with an inferior one.:ROFL:

 

[randysmith]

This image is a perfect picture of the good old days for me. Vivid.

I'd say for absolutes, start at the source at work downstream to the output. Although now that I think about it, the most expensive component has always been my speakers, and that's mainly what I've focused on!Besides tube gear. I really like tube gear so it's an absolute given to me (I know, narrow minded).

 

[JonFo]

Hi Amey,

I asked my friend, the recording studio owner and engineer (although he’s more of a musician than a geek), about this question.

Interesting answers:

In one way, you are absolutely right; a live session feed will have dynamic range and other properties that are usually not found on recordings. If you don’t limit DR, don’t filter frequency and just pass what the mic picks up, that’s what one tends to hear ‘live’ as being ‘better’ than a recording.

He explained the mastering process, and how the mastering engineer will apply overall or even bandwidth based compression to the final 2 track mix as he prepares it for creating the CD master.
Besides compression, they occasionally apply low frequency roll-off filters as well as selected EQ (to tame an over-bright high-end for example). But often, the decisions are based on taste just as much on general CD production guidelines.

This compression is designed to keep the music in a dynamic range that works well in cars, radio and other less-than HiFi situations.

So bottom line, a CD has less dynamic range and altered frequency response relative to the final mix-down tracks.

Furthermore, a mic feed is usually post-processed with EQ, gain riding and other ‘effects’ to achieve an artistic result that is unique. Which explains why live sounds so different from a studio rendition.

However, he did clarify that for him, since he hears both ‘live’ source and then his recorded tracks, a Protools HD deck at 24/96 or above are indistinguishable from each other, and that even at 24/48 it doesn’t make a difference in the end.

So my point about a mic going through a system, and 24/96 version of same being equal is sustained.

To help me see the effects of CD mastering, he gave me a CD of a small Italian group he engineered an album for, and a track from that album straight from the proToolsHD, with no post-processing, as a 24/48 stereo track on CD-ROM.
The source mix is a 60 track, highly engineered mix with lots of subtleties in it, so it will be interesting to see what gets lost with the compression and EQ of CD mastering.


BTW- he was not encouraging about Vinyl either (and he's a vinyl fan), which goes through even more mastering steps with stronger compression and more low-end filtering.

 

[JonFo]

...

As far as I'm concerned, I've heard too much of a fundamental difference (and I've heard this too many times) for me to believe it is the source component - it is the actual recording!

Yes, it is the recording. As noted above, compression is not our friend

Which is why we all go out of our way to find those CD's that are well mastered or pursue technologies like SACD and DVD-A for their wider dynamic range and higher resolution.

This also explains why a well mastered CD can sometimes 'sound' better than a poorly done 'high-rez' disc.

 

[Bernard]

Which is why we all go out of our way to find those CD's that are well mastered .....

I really just go for the music; if the CD is well-mastered that is a bonus. I would not buy a well-mastered CD if I don't like the music.

 

[amey01]

Hi Amey,

I asked my friend, the recording studio owner and engineer (although he’s more of a musician than a geek), about this question.

Interesting answers:

In one way, you are absolutely right; a live session feed will have dynamic range and other properties that are usually not found on recordings. If you don’t limit DR, don’t filter frequency and just pass what the mic picks up, that’s what one tends to hear ‘live’ as being ‘better’ than a recording.

He explained the mastering process, and how the mastering engineer will apply overall or even bandwidth based compression to the final 2 track mix as he prepares it for creating the CD master.
Besides compression, they occasionally apply low frequency roll-off filters as well as selected EQ (to tame an over-bright high-end for example). But often, the decisions are based on taste just as much on general CD production guidelines.

This compression is designed to keep the music in a dynamic range that works well in cars, radio and other less-than HiFi situations.

So bottom line, a CD has less dynamic range and altered frequency response relative to the final mix-down tracks.

Furthermore, a mic feed is usually post-processed with EQ, gain riding and other ‘effects’ to achieve an artistic result that is unique. Which explains why live sounds so different from a studio rendition.

However, he did clarify that for him, since he hears both ‘live’ source and then his recorded tracks, a Protools HD deck at 24/96 or above are indistinguishable from each other, and that even at 24/48 it doesn’t make a difference in the end.

So my point about a mic going through a system, and 24/96 version of same being equal is sustained.

To help me see the effects of CD mastering, he gave me a CD of a small Italian group he engineered an album for, and a track from that album straight from the proToolsHD, with no post-processing, as a 24/48 stereo track on CD-ROM.
The source mix is a 60 track, highly engineered mix with lots of subtleties in it, so it will be interesting to see what gets lost with the compression and EQ of CD mastering.


BTW- he was not encouraging about Vinyl either (and he's a vinyl fan), which goes through even more mastering steps with stronger compression and more low-end filtering.

Really interesting Jon. Thanks for raising this with your contact! I'd love to know even more if you would and care to ask at some point in the future!

I'd also love to be in a position to experiment and put some of these theories/observations to test.

Fact is though - I've heard far too many [what we would call] crappy sound systems (crappy speakers and crappy amplifiers) in [again, what we would call crappy] acoustic environments sound really good when fed a live feed.