• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

"The Death of High Fidelity" article in Rolling Stone

super j

super j

Active Member
This is in the 2007 Yearbook issue of Rolling Stone. The article talks about how most albums are now listened to through small computer speakers and record labels have asked the engineers to turn up the sound levels on everything including the softer parts. I haven't had a chance to read the full article yet. I just wanted to give anyone interested a heads up. There is also a small write up by Joe Levy comparing a few albums on vinyl, cd, and mp3.
 
Register to hide this ad
That's an outstanding clip! It really does make it a simple issue to understand.

Thanks for posting it!
 
super j said:
This is in the 2007 Yearbook issue of Rolling Stone. The article talks about how most albums are now listened to through small computer speakers and record labels have asked the engineers to turn up the sound levels on everything including the softer parts. I haven't had a chance to read the full article yet. I just wanted to give anyone interested a heads up. There is also a small write up by Joe Levy comparing a few albums on vinyl, cd, and mp3.
Click to expand...
I think this is the article:

http://wilburland.blogspot.com/2007/12/death-of-high-fidelity.html
 
Great, thanks for the link.

Now, send it to all of your non-audiogeek friends and family.

My bet is-----They still won't get it.

"But I hear more in the compressed file.",
is what they'll say.

Dave
 
JohnG said:
I had noticed this on a downloaded Police song which I then tried on vinyl. I thought it was just dynamic range compression in the mp3 but this shows it may actually have been more than that. Very interesting, thanks for the link.
Click to expand...

This is often a point of confusion. Afaik, mp3 is "merely" file compression, not dynamic range compression. Two completely different things....
 
super j said:
This is in the 2007 Yearbook issue of Rolling Stone. The article talks about how most albums are now listened to through small computer speakers and record labels have asked the engineers to turn up the sound levels on everything including the softer parts. I haven't had a chance to read the full article yet. I just wanted to give anyone interested a heads up. There is also a small write up by Joe Levy comparing a few albums on vinyl, cd, and mp3.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the dynamic range compression of music has been a problem for quite a while now.

Somewhere I saw a timeline of how the use of DRC has steadily increased over the years...I'd post the link if I could remember where I saw it.

Considering that with today's equipment absolutely FABULOUS sound could result, much of it is butchered in this manner - quite pathetic, actually.
 
whoaru99 said:
This is often a point of confusion. Afaik, mp3 is "merely" file compression, not dynamic range compression. Two completely different things....
Click to expand...
I'm not confused between the two. The video shows something different which I never really thought of, sort of like clipping, and results in loss of impact.
 
You may not be, but quite a few people don't give it a second thought - thinking/assuming it's one in the same and the reason that some mp3 sound very bad.
 
Butchered sound that is what I call it. Thank goodness there are great FM stations in this area. WFUV Fordham University station. Seems to select its music carefully. Probably has some ancient equipment. The music sounds full, uncompressed and natural.
 
This is a huge reason why records often sound so much better than CD's...you can't get away with butchering the audio nearly as much on vinyl than you can on digital. Even classic albums often haven't escaped mutilation...CBS overcompressed the new remaster of Kansas "Point Of Know Return", making it sound less dynamic and muddier than the original CD reissue and the original record. The record sounds more lifelike.

Ever hear John Mayer's "Heavier Things" CD? It's so compressed the bass notes are actually distorted in places! There are some good songs on it, but they're ruined...it's hard to listen to. And Bob Ludwig mastered that CD! Hey record companies: wonder why I'm afraid to spend money on CD's? Here you are! You want me to pay my hard-earned dough for shoddy, wretched product? Fat chance.

At least ECM still knows how to make a high-fidelity recording...

Todd in Cheesecurdistan
 
that's the most disturbing thread i've read in a long while. Probably one of the most interesting and important one too.

Excuse me while I go to the corner now, and weep.:tears:
 
There's a radio station that is in the fringe reception zone for me, and it sounds like I'm not listening to radio at all. WLKK, from Wethersfield, Buffalo, NY, barely uses any compression because it always sounds quieter and has the dynamic range of, say, a CD or vinyl. All the other radio stations around here sound the same exact level all the time, but WLKK does a great job. One of their little jingles is "Just because we are a radio station doesn't mean we have to sound like one."
 
If you go to You Tube and search "loudness War" you get the original as posted above, and a few more good ones. There is one that compares what would happen to art and writing if the same approach were taken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom