Mike Rivers wrote:
On 2/18/2012 6:50 AM, ChrisCoaster wrote:
Alright Ralph, chew on this:
http://lithe.files.wordpress.com/200...udness_war.jpg
Now you tell me which of those more accurately represents the original
waveform of that song. And if you think the waveform on the bottom
represents a better sounding product that is your PREFERENCE but it is
NOT ACCURATE.
You've been asked a couple of times and you've either
ignored the question or given a sarcastic answer. Are you
interested in how the music sounds to your ears, or do you
just assume that a waveform that looks a certain way won't
sound good and that's what you want to complain about?
That is why I suggested he check out Cookie Marenco's production of Tony
Furtado. One may perceive therein a discrepancy between what one hears
and what one's eyes might suggest one expect to hear.
How do you listen to music (assuming that you still actually
do) anyway? Do you have a very accurate room, a comfy chair,
and shut out all outside influences so you can pay 100%
attention to what's coming out of your $50,000 speakers?
I listen to the radio all the time. I listen to radio over
the Internet much of the time. But I listen to program
material that I enjoy hearing while I'm doing other things,
and now that I no longer have to listen to flutter, any
changes between the microphone and my speakers don't bother
me. What I'm listening to is better than silence. And if it
was any better quality, I'd risk getting distracted from
what I really need to do.
I do, occasionally, sit on the living room couch, put on a
CD or LP, and just listen. But I listen for the music, not
what's wrong with the production or engineering. I don't
have any CDs or LPs that I don't like.
Fancy that!
--
shut up and play your guitar *
http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri