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?
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.
Sometimes I like to listen in the car while driving. That's when lowering
the dynamic range a tad can actually help me enjoy the sounds a bit better.
Not having to continually reach for the volume knob is really nice. MP3s or
some compression may not be so bad for this application.
OTOH, I don't want it all squashed in my headphones or in the living room.
I guess what I'm saying is that, for me at least, different situations
require different dynamics.
--
---Jeff