With improving audio technologies, Fair to blame Bad Sound on "Bad Recordings" or have Bad Systems?

[caesar]

As high end gear has improved, with great analog digging so much information from the grooves and reference DACs pulling musical bits off digital sources in kinder and gentler ways, is it fair to blame bad sounding systems on "bad recordings"? Or do so many systems suck, with bad tone, poor dynamics, lack of recreation of spacial elements, inability to project sound energy from the point in space toward listener (blowing horn), etc.?

Obviously, I am not talking about a recording made by a guy holding up a microphone in a crowd or something severely compressed, but an average classical, jazz, blues, or rock record from 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s, or CDs created off those, with music one enjoys.

Shouldn't the best systems pull the best elements out of those recordings instead of having the whole thing sound like crap?

 

[Al M.]

As high end gear has improved, with great analog digging so much information from the grooves and reference DACs pulling musical bits off digital sources in kinder and gentler ways, is it fair to blame bad sounding systems on "bad recordings"? Or do so many systems suck, with bad tone, poor dynamics, lack of recreation of spacial elements, inability to project sound energy from the point in space toward listener (blowing horn), etc.?

Obviously, I am not talking about a recording made by a guy holding up a microphone in a crowd or something severely compressed, but an average classical, jazz, blues, or rock record from 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s, or CDs created off those, with music one enjoys.

Shouldn't the best systems pull the best elements out of those recordings instead of having the whole thing sound like crap?

I agree. If most recordings sound bad on a system, it's not the recordings. The system is to blame. Or, as you say so aptly, disregarding political correctness, "the system sucks".

 

[ack]

I agree. If most recordings sound bad on a system, it's not the recordings. The system is to blame. Or, as you say so aptly, disregarding political correctness, "the system sucks".

big +1 - blame thyself before blaming thy recording

 

[Speedskater]

A more resolving system allows you to hear the badness along with the goodness in a recording.
A less resolving system like the original Bose made everything sound OK. (sort of)

 

[Mike Lavigne]

A more resolving system allows you to hear the badness along with the goodness in a recording.
A less resolving system like the original Bose made everything sound OK. (sort of)

these days with my system it's rare to find a 'bad recording' even with redbook. sure; there is what I call 'angry music' which covers all sorts of dreck disguised as music (I know....one man's dreck....is another man's.....)....where it's debatable how it might be intended to sound (yes; I'm sure I'm offending some....sorry). but mostly that is not part of my musical day. with Tidal these days I do encounter some of this.

but with musical genre's which are familiar to me there are decent, good, very good and excellent recordings, but few bad ones. maybe I don't always prefer the mix, or how an instrument or voice is highlighted, or I'd prefer more of a mid hall view and not close miced, but these are just viewpoints of the artist and engineer.....they are not good or bad.

I do have Lp pressings which are 'hard' sounding; certain eras and labels come to mind, where the vinyl masterings are more 'uneven' than bad. then I hear a modern reissue of that recording and it fine. so what is a bad recording? and what is a bad mastering? I know some have a second cartridge that glosses over and warms up some of this type sound (or phono stages with variable playback curves).

I will say that as my digital playback has gone from good , to very good, to astonishing now.....that any reservations I had previously about redbook have completely evaporated.

and that as my system has evolved the last few years certain jazz and classical more avant-garde type recordings have come alive for me whereas previously they were mostly noise. and maybe much of this question is the viewpoint and 'ear' of the listener.

 

[Rodney Gold]

Life is short .. why waste time putting up with irritating to listen to sub par recordings when there is a cornucopia of really good ones out there.

 

[microstrip]

Most of the time it is not question of being "good" or "poor" recording or "good" or "poor" system. It is simply a question of being compatible - there is a very a large variation in stereo recording and playback techniques.

Some of my best recordings sound better in the DCS Vivaldi than in the Metronome and vice-versa.

 

[NorthStar]

As high end gear has improved, with great analog digging so much information from the grooves and reference DACs pulling musical bits off digital sources in kinder and gentler ways, is it fair to blame bad sounding systems on "bad recordings"? Or do so many systems suck, with bad tone, poor dynamics, lack of recreation of spacial elements, inability to project sound energy from the point in space toward listener (blowing horn), etc.?

Obviously, I am not talking about a recording made by a guy holding up a microphone in a crowd or something severely compressed, but an average classical, jazz, blues, or rock record from 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s, or CDs created off those, with music one enjoys.

Shouldn't the best systems pull the best elements out of those recordings instead of having the whole thing sound like crap?

The technology keep advancing and improving on all fronts, including audio.
The search is in the music itself, the one that enhances our lives, what matters, what's important.

A friend just bought a new pair of speakers; he said that he never heard before how his records sound today, magnificent.
The music recordings we have today will sound better tomorrow on more advanced loudspeakers.

 

[JackD201]

If nothing complex sounds good and only simple stuff sometimes does, it is probably the system.

 

[Al M.]

If nothing complex sounds good and only simple stuff sometimes does, it is probably the system.

Agree. Perhaps that is why exhibitors often just play the simple stuff at shows, because they know their sound would fall apart if they'd play something more challenging.

 

[DaveC]

If nothing complex sounds good and only simple stuff sometimes does, it is probably the system.

Yup, that's why I use complex tracks that few systems get right as part of testing... this is a very important aspect of system performance.

The track "A Moment So Close" by Bela Fleck and the Flecktones on the album Live at the Quick (NOT the studio version!) is a good one. I've only heard a few systems do a great job, most good systems do an ok job at it and many more than you'd think make a huge mess of it. The more complex parts usually end up making the system fall apart and the soundstage collapses into a mass of sound. I've only heard two systems where this didn't happen at all. Many would think this track is a "bad recording" but it really isn't.

 

[prerich]

Agree. Perhaps that is why exhibitors often just play the simple stuff at shows, because they know their sound would fall apart if they'd play something more challenging.

Ohhhhh...what you said

 

[microstrip]

Yup, that's why I use complex tracks that few systems get right as part of testing... this is a very important aspect of system performance. (...)

You should get this recording - http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23072-My-curent-reference-Les-routes-de-l%B4esclavage-(Jordi-Savall)&p=449224&viewfull=1#post449224

More than 20 musicians playing very diverse instruments - ancient instruments, percussion, african and south american instruments and different type of singers create an extremely complex, but very stable and powerful performance. Most systems will not be able to play it at realistic levels.

 

[microstrip]

Agree. Perhaps that is why exhibitors often just play the simple stuff at shows, because they know their sound would fall apart if they'd play something more challenging.

Surely. These people come in an hotel room, sometimes with a system assembled due to marketing and distributor arrangements, and need to create a sound that should be decent for a wide zone in one day. After an hasty set-up a professional demonstrator will pick just the recordings that show the good aspects of his system! I am sure I would not be well received with a Shostakovitch symphony at shows - the prefer some selected Tchaikovsky or Rimsky-Korsakov ...

 

[bonzo75]

Surely. These people come in an hotel room, sometimes with a system assembled due to marketing and distributor arrangements, and need to create a sound that should be decent for a wide zone in one day. After an hasty set-up a professional demonstrator will pick just the recordings that show the good aspects of his system! I am sure I would not be well received with a Shostakovitch symphony at shows - the prefer some selected Tchaikovsky or Rimsky-Korsakov ...

There are a lot who let you play whatever you want.

 

[Rodney Gold]

I just finished listening to that bela flek song... proud to say my system didnt make a mess of it (at concert levels)
Guests at my house play their choice of music..however dodgy it may be..

 

[NorthStar]

You should get this recording - http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?23072-My-curent-reference-Les-routes-de-l%B4esclavage-(Jordi-Savall)&p=449224&viewfull=1#post449224

More than 20 musicians playing very diverse instruments - ancient instruments, percussion, african and south american instruments and different type of singers create an extremely complex, but very stable and powerful performance. Most systems will not be able to play it at realistic levels.

Very nice Francisco, and I agree that the various instruments plus vocals is an excellent overall test for system performance, including the loudspeakers, and the cables, of course.
The more homogeneous and less constrained the rendition, the better the sound reproduction. A live acoustic music performance, say like a classical orchestra with organ, choir and opera singers, well recorded by a professional(s) using the best mic techniques, is the ultimum audio test to verify where the technology is today, and tomorrow, and was yesterday.
I don't think two enormous/gigantic speaker's columns with two separate monstrous/huge subwoofer's columns can encapsulate this live experience of 110 musicians live on stage.

Tomorrow's ultra high end systems will have more than just four huge columns of sound; it'll be multiple speakers (smaller but almost full range) well positioned all around the listener(s). ...And with multiple subwoofers also very well positioned. The rooms will be well acoustically treated and help from the best acoustic DSP processors are part of the final tuning...IMO. Very ew members here and over there are close to such setups. Me, not even 1% of that vision. But some of you IMO are much closer, like 10% or perhaps 15%.
That's my vision, similar to Auro-3D Music with a dTS Trinnov audio center control.

Anyway, we have a lot of ground to walk before getting close to the real deal in classical orchestral live music experience, and that, is a beautiful challenge for the top caliber and best highest ultra hi-fi audiophiles.

Thx again for that video Micro; that's a good one. ...A good test for a stereo hi-fi system (two speakers). In multichannel I bet it would be magnificent if well recorded.
The music is the search, the techniques used in the music recordings, and the music we love listening to, from solo piano and small jazz ensemble and classical chamber trio and quartet to full unleashed classical orchestral...all acoustic. ...No electronics, no amplified music like heavy metal/rock, just pure acoustics to test today's best sound reproduction from reference. Because after all, what is the reference in amplified music? Ha!

 

[RogerD]

Let's face it there are bad recordings,but not all by any means. On my system they stand out in different ways,usually the sound is almost like mono. The vast majority are extremely pleasurable and that's what makes a great system.

 

[NorthStar]

There are a lot who let you play whatever you want.

Even the grandiose classical organ music recordings (64-foot pipes)?

* Even a solo grand piano recording is a good comparative audio test between various system setups and rooms.

IMO we are approximately @ around 10% of the full accurate live music experience, so the future is super exciting in the challenge/pursuit of the best.
Powerful amps will keep evolving, and driver's materials too. Preamps will get less and less noisy, and same with cables when trying to reproduce the live experience.
I can only imagine where we'll be hundred years from now in sound system music reproduction. It's just too bad that we are not immortal to see/experience the entire audio evolution, nobody is, not the ones before us and not the ones after us. We live our times, and those are the best times of our lives.

 

[DSkip]

There are a lot who let you play whatever you want.

This is my approach at shows. I can say that since getting the Rosso Fiorentino reference line in, I have experienced enjoyment in a very diverse selection of genres. No recording sounds 'bad', but most recordings sound better than they should have any right sounding. It has been great (at the hobbyist level) to expand BACK into genres that I had previously given up on due to poor sound.