I read it too, and you make some good points.
Thanks!
I'm not sure I agree with all of them, but I don't mean that in a pissing match kind of way.
Not taken that way. If I'm wrong, I like to know so for that is the way we improve ourselves. :thmbsp:
It's just been my experience that most of the new music I buy sounds better than the opinions that get bounced around on audio forums.
Yes, this is subjective. There are many who seemingly despise anything recorded post 1960 something while others find high SQ releases up to the present day. I think that much new music is recorded well, but I also think that more music is recorded poorly than ever before, and this is not just in rock/pop genres.
An album can be put out in various formats, bitrates, etc, but who knows what group of buyers artist(s) are shooting for? Just because an album will have a lossy release it doesn't mean that the performer/production team is shooting for the MP3 crowd.
True, but I have read several times that many new releases are being purposely compressed or formatted to sound the best in lossy formats. And this pertains, again, to not just rock/pop genres.
Lossy compression isn't an issue if you continue to buy CDs and rip them to a lossless format, or purchase non compressed hi res files.
It is if the music was produced to sound best on lossy formats, just as it is still a problem when music produced to be as loud as possible is put on a cd: the compression/clipping/distortion is still there regardless of the lossless format.
Even if you do buy music from iTunes etc, the lossy compression doesn't, or at least isn't intended to have any effect on dynamic range or frequency response.
Well, whatever the lack of headroom is measured as, it is all too apparent on lossy formats. I've been blind tested, multiple times, on multiple setups, between lossy and lossless and 9/10 times I've answered correctly. So has most everyone else who was also tested. Usually the difference is blatant.
My late father was an audiophile, I remember him bemoaning the high levels of compression applied to "modern" music, that was in the 80s and 90s, quite some time before the iPod generation.
Yes, and that's exactly why I referred to those who think that most music produced post 60's (or maybe 70's) is lacking in SQ. And they do have some reason to think this way. Also, the SQ of music can be further declining too and that can be a direct result of the lossy format. So it can be the case that from the 80's on, before lossy formats even existed, SQ of music has been declining and also that now the lossy format has further contributed to this decline.
I would hazard a guess that the potentially exaggerated "loudness wars" was an attempt to make music sound louder, better, on portable radios, car radios, and TV speakers.
That's what I've always taken it to be, at least the louder consideration. But even a high quality system tuned into radio will still impart to a listener the psychological effect of thinking the louder songs on the radio are "better" (or they attract more attention) just as louder cds or FLAC files played back on a high quality system can trick some into thinking they sound "better" from the quieter material, especially when they are all shuffled together.
