• 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

High Fidelity: Decades of Decline

JoeESP9 said:
OTOH, with storage space so cheap I can't find any compelling reason to use MP files.
Click to expand...
What if that’s the only format available for an album? I have a couple where that’s the case.

I buy the highest resolution I can, but music trumps quality.
 
Last edited:
DaveVoorhis said:
It is a strange and unpleasant prejudice that derides one musical instrument, or one form of musical expression, over another. It is downright musically bigoted to suggest that some forms of musical expression represent a decline in sound. There are true artists who will argue -- and demonstrate -- that a synthesiser is every bit as subtle, expressive, and capable of conveying virtuosity as a guitar or violin; and rap is every bit as valid a form of musical expression as jazz, classical or rock.

Unfortunately, what tends to happen is that people unfairly pick the worst of an unliked instrument or genre to characterise that instrument or genre, rather than fairly picking the best.
Click to expand...
I should have noted that I don't subscribe to the ridiculous notion that the quality of music has declined nor that the synthesizer has in any way added to any such decline. Face it, there was shitty music back then too and there is plenty of great music using synthesizers as well. There were also plenty of so called musicians back then that couldn't play their instruments worth a damn just as there is today. :)
 
There is nothing inherently analog about dynamic compression, and digital has made it far easier to implement.

And besides compression there is peak-limiting, which could as easily be called 'digital clipping'. Those waveforms look even worse. Google 'loudness wars' and click on Images to see waveform comparisons.
 
darkblue94 said:
I should have noted that I don't subscribe to the ridiculous notion that the quality of music has declined nor that the synthesizer has in any way added to any such decline. Face it, there was shitty music back then too and there is plenty of great music using synthesizers as well. There were also plenty of so called musicians back then that couldn't play their instruments worth a damn just as there is today. :)
Click to expand...

I agree. Everytime someone says music got lousy back in 19xx I just shake my head.
Yeah we get it, you're old and want to believe that when you were in your prime so was everything else. Silly notion.
 
Lossless said:
My local Salvation Army never has audio anything. I think the workers get it first. They have plenty of overpriced 1950s vinyl.
Click to expand...
That or corporate takes it haha , or sells it on eBay . They have to be getting audio , video donations , heartville goodwill had an employee who just crushed all electronics .... I wasn’t hired in there because I disagreed with there practices .
Today my legs hurt to bad time to look for a desk job . Going on year 5 nojob ! :eek:
 
Seems to me a lot of r & d dollars are spent on video and very little is spent on audio.

This has been the norm for years.
 
ultumax said:
Probably need big pocketbook to afford speaker horns that large and a massiv eroom size to use them .:eek::eek2:
Click to expand...

Large horns can work quite well in small rooms because of their controlled dispersion. And because of the ability of the savvy DIY horny to choose a horn with dispersion characteristics that match the room.
 
This line of thought has been going on for years. Its my opinion that you can get the best audio reproduction today than ever before. Modern speakers in the budget realm are far more detailed and uncolored than their predecessors. Subwoofers are also extremely capable for not crazy money. Amplification is extremely affordable, especially well thought out Class D components. A repurposed laptop and Couple hundred dollar DAC can be a great source for the money.

The high performance stuff costs a lot of money, but so did the same level of stuff in the 60/70/80's. Adjust for inflation and the price tags get closer. Cutting edge gear really doesnt have an equivilent in price as knowledge, materials, technique, machining, and knowledge base are at different levels.

Cheers
Mister Pig
 
Last edited:
I didn't watch the entire video but my take from what I saw was the main point they were making was that the artist were disappointed that so much of their work to produce their art was being lost by people who chose to use less than accurate formats, and listening gear to reproduce what they had created. Was it the Kiss member who said why go to great lengths to produce a work only for someone to use something that loses much of what they had labored to create.
 
Kiss member?
You may be referring to Slash? He was with Guns n Roses.

But to the point, certainly today's headphones fed from a phone that I see people walking around with are an improvement above a 3" paper speaker in a 70s portable radio. Paul Simon probably spent lots of studio time working on the sound of Mother and Child Reunion too. :dunno:
 
oblomov said:
But to the point, certainly today's headphones fed from a phone that I see people walking around with are an improvement above a 3" paper speaker in a 70s portable radio.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. And today's headphones fed from a phone are vastly superior to the earphones that plugged into transistor radios. Remember these?

phonenplug.JPG

Even the cheapest mobile phone earbuds are vastly superior.

I find it interesting how many of my university students have really nice headphones -- far better, as a percentage of income, than I had when I was their age. Most of them don't want the big speakers and silver-faced gear of our youth, but they're every bit as much interested in quality audio as we were at their age, if not more so.
 
Or, I'm sure he cringed when hearing his beloved creation played through even a high end system of the day -- a Yorx pushing Panasonic Thrusters.*


*Thrusters is a registered trademark of the Panasonic corporation. All rights reserved.
 
DaveVoorhis said:
Absolutely. And today's headphones fed from a phone are vastly superior to the earphones that plugged into transistor radios. Remember these?

Even the cheapest mobile phone earbuds are vastly superior.

I find it interesting how many of my university students have really nice headphones -- far better, as a percentage of income, than I had when I was their age. Most of them don't want the big speakers and silver-faced gear of our youth, but they're every bit as much interested in quality audio as we were at their age, if not more so.
Click to expand...

True that .. cans are the new home for young audiophiles. You even have a choice of good sounding $100 headphone amps. JDS Labs Atom, Schiit Modi 3 and Monolith Liquid Spark (Alex Cavalli).

Cheese, tea and rice $100, you have got to be flipping kidding me. :yikes:
 
oblomov said:
Or, I'm sure he cringed when hearing his beloved creation played through even a high end system of the day -- a Yorx pushing Panasonic Thrusters.*


*Thrusters is a registered trademark of the Panasonic corporation. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...
My first "system" of my own was a SOUNDESIGN and a BSR turntable. I could only dream of having Panasonic Thrusters back then. :bigok:
 
oblomov said:
Kiss member?
You may be referring to Slash? He was with Guns n Roses.

But to the point, certainly today's headphones fed from a phone that I see people walking around with are an improvement above a 3" paper speaker in a 70s portable radio. Paul Simon probably spent lots of studio time working on the sound of Mother and Child Reunion too. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Well I didn't know who he was, but thanks for the correction.

I also thought it kind of funny that they had Yamaha NS50's in the studio, not what I would call a great studio speaker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom