[John Williamson]

On 06/08/2018 16:44, wrote:
I'm working with clients who have no familiarity with our jargon. I said "dynamics" once and they asked me what I was talking about. So yeah, we're trying to communicate regarding the quality of the audio WITHOUT using terms like "dynamics", "frequency range", "noise floor", etc. Figured somebody on here would have been in the same situation before. Maybe there is no great word for it specific to audio.

In video, "vivid" to me says "colour gain set high for saturated colours
with contrast and edge enhancement (HF gain on analogue video) turned
way up". Frequent cuts from scene to scene help especially with bright
clashing colours.

The closest I'd come up with for audio would be to compress the dynamics
and put a boost in the "air" range until it was getting painful. A bit
like wotzisname and his 3kHz boost that was all that was needed to
"improve" a perfectly mastered track. That gives what the uninitiated
would call a "bright" track, which is as fatiguing to listen to as a
"vivid" video track is to watch.

In both cases, returning to a linear response greatly improves things.
"Vivid" or, in audio terms "bright" is not necessarily a Good Thing,
unless there is an artistic need for it.

In my opinion, others are no doubt available, possibly for a fee.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.