says...


Sure, at least some people don't care about audio quality. No news there.
The point is it can't automatically be inferred that just because people
purchase hypercompressed audio that they actually PREFER it, as that's a non
sequitur.

I don't know whether they prefer it, I know I prefer it and I know the
consumers buying CDs aren't complaining about it or even acknowledging it much,
which means they don't dislike it at all.


Do they have an alternative? Do they know what the alternatives even are?
It's hard to show interest in what you don't know exists.

Sure, and maybe christians would be worshipping the Invisible Flying Pink
Unicorn instead of Jesus, if only they knew how much better the Invisible
Flying Pink Unicorn is than Jesus!


It's your opinion consumers want hypercompressed music. If they WANT it,
they have to buy it THE WAY ITS PRODUCED because.... _it doesn't come any
other way_. The only way to find out if they PREFER hypercompressed audio is
to give them a choice and note which one sells more.

Nice try, really that would be a good argument if it weren't for the fact that
there are thousands of CDs mastered in the 80s and early 90s that are still
available in stores, and most consumers probably have several in their CD
collection, and yet, I've never heard anything about consumers wishing the CDs
mastered in 2006 would be as quiet as the ones mastered in 1986, have you? The
only place I hear about it is this group and forums like it. Consumers have
access to both the less-compressed CDs of the past, and the more-compressed CDs
of today, and if they wanted to go back to the way things were, I'd have read
some letters to the editor in newspapers, music rags, etc. It'd be a big,
well-known controversy, rather than the obscure obsession of a miniscule few
whose access to the techniques and tools of audio production has apparently
clouded their judgement.

You are arguing with me as if I'm some sort of deity who could change the world
and make it the way you want it to be, if only you could convince me that it
should be that way. If you want to make recordings without much compression, I
certainly won't stand in your way. I'd prefer if you did, frankly, because it
would mean I wouldn't need to be concerned about you as competition. It seems
to be far more important to you that you make me submit to and adopt your point
of view than is probably healthy. So, rather than responding to each of your
posts where you present another fallacious or erroneous claim as a means to try
to convince me, and explaining to you exactly how each one of those claims are
fallacious or erroneous, I'll keep reading your posts in this thread, but I
won't respond again until I read a claim that isn't either subjective,
fallacious or erroneous, which would by default, if it is not subjective,
fallacious or erroneous, manage to convince me.

Chevdo wrote:

SNIP

because it
would mean I wouldn't need to be concerned about you as competition.


Competition for what? Making another Chevdo basement tape? The fact
is, you are not an audio professional, and never have been. Making 12
records for yourself, in your basement (or your mom's) or on the dining
room table, doesn't qualify.

Maybe you are very good at making records, unlikely as that would
seem to be from the tenor of your posts. Tell us who you are, and
provide examples of your work, as we have. Otherwise get the **** off
of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

(Chevdo) writes:

says...

Sure, at least some people don't care about audio quality. No news there.
The point is it can't automatically be inferred that just because people
purchase hypercompressed audio that they actually PREFER it, as that's a non
sequitur.

I don't know whether they prefer it, I know I prefer it and I know the

Remember Kev, the guy from a year or so ago who thought it was absurd to
spend more than $10 on a mic pre because they "all sounded the same"? He
was full of bluster and superiority even in the face of the most basic
challenges, but finally revealed that he "disliked" unamplified acoustic
music of any kind (and had never really heard any), thus telling us that
perhaps he had *no idea* what real music sounded like?

Of course no one need confine their listening to live, unamplified,
acoustic music, but for audio _professionals_ a regular dose of such music
in that environment can be a good reality check and contribute to the
honing of one's craft, no matter what kind of music one does on a regular
basis.

Ya know, Chevdo is sounding a LOT like Kev:

won't respond again until I read a claim that isn't either subjective,
fallacious or erroneous, which would by default, if it is not subjective,
fallacious or erroneous, manage to convince me.

Yup. Sounds like Kev. (It is the latter part of June, I wonder if there's
a school somewhere that graduates folks like this?)

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--

Otherwise get the **** off of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

And this is how true audio professionals communicate? Okey dokey, sure
thing.

Brian Running wrote:
Otherwise get the **** off of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

And this is how true audio professionals communicate? Okey dokey, sure
thing.

Sometimes. Hey, once I was told that I'd have my balls cut off and stuffed
down my throat if I made one change to the monitor mix. Profanity and
insults happen when people get stressed. The audio industry is ALL ABOUT
stress.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Brian Running wrote:
Otherwise get the **** off of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

And this is how true audio professionals communicate? Okey dokey, sure
thing.

Brian,

Just check the recent history of this particular nitwit on RAP.
You'll understand why this is the only rational response to Chevdo.

Regards,

-glenn

Chevdo wrote:

says...


Do they have an alternative? Do they know what the alternatives even are?
It's hard to show interest in what you don't know exists.

It's your opinion consumers want hypercompressed music. If they WANT it,
they have to buy it THE WAY ITS PRODUCED because.... _it doesn't come any
other way_. The only way to find out if they PREFER hypercompressed audio is
to give them a choice and note which one sells more.

Nice try, really that would be a good argument if it weren't for the fact that
there are thousands of CDs mastered in the 80s and early 90s that are still
available in stores, and most consumers probably have several in their CD
collection, and yet, I've never heard anything about consumers wishing the CDs
mastered in 2006 would be as quiet as the ones mastered in 1986, have you? The
only place I hear about it is this group and forums like it.

i remember there was a CD album by Dynamic Syncopation, called
"Dynamism" (release year: 1999) on the well-known Ninja Tune label -
http://www.discogs.com/release/40992 . this album is really quiet
compared to CDs released today. it has, however, been very popular at
that time. i even asked myself why they didn't master it to sound
louder and i wondered if their other releases of that same time had
similar average loudness levels, so i checked another album by
Herbaliser called "Very Mercenary", which sounded louder than the
"Dynamism" by Dynamic Syncopation. what's the point? in my personal
opinion, it doesn't matter much for the consumer -- they can pump the
volume up a little if it's too quiet.

frankly, i think our life has become too loud lately. i have even read
an article about that somewhere on internet. (wish i remembered a
link) radio, television, cars, stress in our lives etc. demand that
the music be as loud.. it's rather sad to me, isn't it? but, perhaps,
it's our ears that are getting used to louder sounds with each new
generation as we are living in the very loud world these days...

-andrew

loco wrote:
Chevdo wrote:

says...


i remember there was a

Blue Cheer concert

or was it the MC5

now that was .... **** there was _no compression_ live.

ain't no cure for the ....Jams, Mother****ers

Brian,

Just check the recent history of this particular nitwit on RAP.
You'll understand why this is the only rational response to Chevdo.

Regards,

-glenn

I suppose I shouldn't have commented -- I only pop in here every now and
then, and don't know everyone's history. And, I'm sure that I've said
similar things in similar circumstances in the newsgroups I frequent
that would make an outsider think I was a nut. I withdraw my comment,
and apologize.

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Brian Running wrote:
Otherwise get the **** off of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

And this is how true audio professionals communicate? Okey dokey, sure
thing.

Sometimes. Hey, once I was told that I'd have my balls cut off and stuffed
down my throat if I made one change to the monitor mix. Profanity and
insults happen when people get stressed. The audio industry is ALL ABOUT
stress.
--scott

Yeah, especially for the guy freelancing in my studio lately g! The
last time he was out here, it was like I was a Dongle for my DAW...
every time I'd leave, something would go wrong. Once literally as I
closed the door. This is a DAW that locks up or otherwise malfunctions
maybe once a year with me at the helm. (Turned out that he'd,
unbeknownst to me, hooked up his own hard drive that was for whatever
reason having problems... then he'd copied the session to one of my
drives but the root media was still on his drive, etc etc).

Oh... and you should have seen the poor young whippersnapper sweating
it on his first important destructive punches on the analog machine!
Amazing how addictive the UNDO is on a DAW and how taken for granted it
is by folks who have never done it "ye olde way".

More to the point, yes, stress management is a huge part of whether a
person turns out to be able to do this job or not. If you can't absorb
some stress from your clients, forget it. In fact being a stress
sponge is part of the job. It's too bad that stress, caffiene, and the
anti-stress agents like alchohol and weed mess with your hearing
perception so much... but then again stress will mess with your free
throw, your test scores, your pecker on prom night, your skiing, your
parenting, on and on and on... so a person just needs to learn to deal
I suppose. But having someone livid at you because they can't play
their solo to save their ass can be a bit over the top.

-jeff

In article om,
"Jeff Olsen" wrote:

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Brian Running wrote:
Otherwise get the **** off of rec.audio.PRO

You're a clueless, cowardly pussy.

And this is how true audio professionals communicate? Okey dokey, sure
thing.

Sometimes. Hey, once I was told that I'd have my balls cut off and stuffed
down my throat if I made one change to the monitor mix. Profanity and
insults happen when people get stressed. The audio industry is ALL ABOUT
stress.
--scott

Yeah, especially for the guy freelancing in my studio lately g! The
last time he was out here, it was like I was a Dongle for my DAW...
every time I'd leave, something would go wrong. Once literally as I
closed the door. This is a DAW that locks up or otherwise malfunctions
maybe once a year with me at the helm. (Turned out that he'd,
unbeknownst to me, hooked up his own hard drive that was for whatever
reason having problems... then he'd copied the session to one of my
drives but the root media was still on his drive, etc etc).

Oh... and you should have seen the poor young whippersnapper sweating
it on his first important destructive punches on the analog machine!
Amazing how addictive the UNDO is on a DAW and how taken for granted it
is by folks who have never done it "ye olde way".

More to the point, yes, stress management is a huge part of whether a
person turns out to be able to do this job or not. If you can't absorb
some stress from your clients, forget it. In fact being a stress
sponge is part of the job. It's too bad that stress, caffiene, and the
anti-stress agents like alchohol and weed mess with your hearing
perception so much... but then again stress will mess with your free
throw, your test scores, your pecker on prom night, your skiing, your
parenting, on and on and on... so a person just needs to learn to deal
I suppose. But having someone livid at you because they can't play
their solo to save their ass can be a bit over the top.

-jeff

Jeff,

Thanks for posting this.

It's one of the best written blurbs of net advice I've come across on
ANY newsgroup in quite a while.

Nice job!

wrote:
loco wrote:
Chevdo wrote:

says...


i remember there was a

Blue Cheer concert

or was it the MC5

now that was .... **** there was _no compression_ live.

ain't no cure for the ....Jams, Mother****ers

Must have been the brown acid they told you to stear clear of...
Compression is a fact of life in this modern era. Deal with it, or go
back to spinning your old jams on your 33.33333333333........
flashback..flashback...flashback.......hey summer of love, penicillin
shots, tie dye, and your best friend boning your old lady...those were
the days my friend, we thought they'd never end....

wrote:
wrote:
loco wrote:
Chevdo wrote:

says...


i remember there was a

Blue Cheer concert

or was it the MC5

now that was .... **** there was _no compression_ live.

ain't no cure for the ....Jams, Mother****ers


I seriously believe that listening to over-compressed material for long
periods of time can cause listener fatigue at the least and
psychological behavioral problems at the worst. The dynamic range
compression mimics the physiological stress response of your ears to
high volumes. Yeah, it's exciting for a while, but it gets old real
fast.

(To be clear here, I am talking about dynamic range loudness
compression, I am not talking about MP3 type data rate compression)

Mark

Mark wrote:
I seriously believe that listening to over-compressed material for long
periods of time can cause listener fatigue at the least and
psychological behavioral problems at the worst. The dynamic range
compression mimics the physiological stress response of your ears to
high volumes. Yeah, it's exciting for a while, but it gets old real
fast.

Broadcast guys don't care about long-term fatigue, though. Since folks
only stick on a station for a little over two minutes at a time anyway,
they don't have to.

(To be clear here, I am talking about dynamic range loudness
compression, I am not talking about MP3 type data rate compression)

I think everyone but chevdo has realized that dynamic compression is
getting out of hand. Even so, if you're thinking about music in terms
of singles rather than albums, long-term fatigue may not seem like a real
consideration, and making your single as loud as everyone else's on the
jukebox might seem like one.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Jeff Olsen wrote:

But having someone livid at you because they can't play
their solo to save their ass can be a bit over the top.

I used to see a t-shirt at fiddle contests with a skull and crossbones
on the front with "Tune It Or Die!", and on the back, "Go Home And
Practice!"

--
ha

In article , says...


Mark wrote:
I seriously believe that listening to over-compressed material for long
periods of time can cause listener fatigue at the least and
psychological behavioral problems at the worst. The dynamic range
compression mimics the physiological stress response of your ears to
high volumes. Yeah, it's exciting for a while, but it gets old real
fast.

Broadcast guys don't care about long-term fatigue, though. Since folks
only stick on a station for a little over two minutes at a time anyway,
they don't have to.

Depends on the format. If a station is doing a "smooth jazz," "light
rock," or other background format, Time Spent Listening (to use the
Arbitron terminology) is of vital importance and stations process
appropriately.

Bob Orban

Robert Orban wrote:
In article , says...


Mark wrote:
I seriously believe that listening to over-compressed material for long
periods of time can cause listener fatigue at the least and
psychological behavioral problems at the worst. The dynamic range
compression mimics the physiological stress response of your ears to
high volumes. Yeah, it's exciting for a while, but it gets old real
fast.

Broadcast guys don't care about long-term fatigue, though. Since folks
only stick on a station for a little over two minutes at a time anyway,
they don't have to.

Depends on the format. If a station is doing a "smooth jazz," "light
rock," or other background format, Time Spent Listening (to use the
Arbitron terminology) is of vital importance and stations process
appropriately.

Bob Orban

Hi Bob,

to get decent sound off of the CDs produced these days, you should
design an EXPANDER for the radio stations... :-)

I actully do use an old dbx expander on my stereo, it's my favorite
piece of gear...I've modified it to speed up the attack and decay times
so that it actually follows the envelope. It is amazing how a few dB
of fast expansion improves the sound...

Mark



Mark