Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
geoff wrote: "- show quoted text -
You car, and the roads it drives on, must be quieter than mine. And presumably no 'intolerant' passengers ? geoff " Geoff: I'm not advocating ZERO dynamics-processing here. As for the car, I'm talking about listening to first-issues, on CD, of material released on vinyl up til and including the late 1980s. This would include stuff from the Beatles, Marvin Gaye, Boston, Journey, Billy Joel, Michael Jackson, Bruce Springsteen, Madonna, and Survivor, and MP3 rips made from material by those artists played from a digital device. I have no problem hearing what I need to from those sources to be able to enjoy them on the go, or on a CD player or portable player at home. Remasters of most of the names I listed, however, leave me feeling flat and my ears fatigued, be it in my house, or in the car or a train, because one form of dynamics processing or another, or combination thereof, has been used on most of those so-called remasters - ABOVE AND BEYOND what was used during original mixing/mastering back in the '60s, '70s, or '80s. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 24/11/2015 1:22 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: In article , wrote: Geoff: Example of the dishonesty I alluded to: http://www.audiostream.com/content/h...lM2vOA9VYzP.97 Yes, but this has nothing to do with processing different versions on the same disc differently. In fact, processing different versions on the same disc in different ways _prevents_ this problem. It means that you can put on a clean high resolution version with wide dynamics, and also put on an mp3 that is crushed for subway listening. So everybody gets what they want. You do realise the CD layer is not MP3 right? If so why do you insist on introducing red herrings to every argument? Because you CAN put an MP3 file on the disc, and you should, because that way you have control over the MP3 encoding which you do not if the end user "rips" it from the CD layer. In any case you could just as easily provide 2 CD versions, one for the highly compressed fans and another for those who enjoy proper dynamics. Yes, this is absolutely true, and I recommend doing this. NO need for SACD at all, which is the point of the argument. No need to buy another expensive player and more expensive disks just to get different mastering. I didn't realize that was the point of the argument. It's true that the only real advantages of SACD disappeared when inexpensive sigma-delta converter filters finally got good. I thought this was an argument about putting multiple formats on one disc. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
Remasters of
most of the names I listed, however, leave me feeling flat and my ears fatigued, You need one of these http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/1bx.shtml Mark |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
thikskullrock @gmail.com wrote in message
... Mike Rivers wrote: "Bash your artists on Facebook or however you do it. And that certainly is the challenge Mike. Unfortunately, engineers present a more public face, No, engineers don't present more of a public face than performers. often making them the unjust targets of this criticism. Then why do you keep criticizing them for it, dumb****? |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
thickskullrockforbrains @gmail.com wrote in message
... So stop comparing me to JackA all of you, Stop trolling and maybe the comparison might be less obvious. As it is, you're trolling this morning, so comparing you to Agnew is appropriate. except for someone here who does it for their livelihood and gets mad when it it mentioned. There you go again, you trolling dumb****. Put on that hockey helmet and get back on the short bus. Your hobbyhorse is dead, dumb****. |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
8:34 wrote:
" Remasters of most of the names I listed, however, leave me feeling flat and my ears fatigued, You need one of these http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/1bx.shtml Mark " Dynamic range enhancer. And your point, Mark? |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 2:43:16 AM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
On 24/11/2015 7:51 AM, geoff wrote: "Yeah, I really LOVE your mix, but could you make it all louder ?" Sigh. Yep, get that unfortunately. Then they send it to be mastered because they think it's not finished until someone else stuffs with it, and it invariably gets squashed even more. :-( Many 45 vinyl singles (that became US Top 40 Hits) were "squashed", but I heard no one complaining about them. Jack Trevor. |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 10:18:33 AM UTC-5, wrote:
8:34 wrote: " Remasters of most of the names I listed, however, leave me feeling flat and my ears fatigued, You need one of these http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/1bx.shtml Mark " Dynamic range enhancer. And your point, Mark? then you can adjust the dynamic range to your taste and not have feel victimized by the "evil" engineers I have one and i love it. |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
1:20 wrote:
"- show quoted text - then you can adjust the dynamic range to your taste and not have feel victimized by the "evil" engineers I have one and i love it. " If you haven't noticed, I stopped blaming engineers sometime ago. It's just that I don't read from too many big label artists on usenet, so we can tell them to stop demanding the destruction of their own music. |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
|
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
N:
Why don't you just kill-file me if my mentioning over-processing audio upsets/offends you so much? I mean, we're not talking about your mother here, seriously. Chill! Let the rest of the correspondents here communicate in peace. BTW what year did you graduate college? |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
On 25/11/2015 12:29 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote: On 24/11/2015 1:22 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: In article , wrote: Geoff: Example of the dishonesty I alluded to: http://www.audiostream.com/content/h...lM2vOA9VYzP.97 Yes, but this has nothing to do with processing different versions on the same disc differently. In fact, processing different versions on the same disc in different ways _prevents_ this problem. It means that you can put on a clean high resolution version with wide dynamics, and also put on an mp3 that is crushed for subway listening. So everybody gets what they want. You do realise the CD layer is not MP3 right? If so why do you insist on introducing red herrings to every argument? Because you CAN put an MP3 file on the disc, and you should, because that way you have control over the MP3 encoding which you do not if the end user "rips" it from the CD layer. But how many do? ANY? And why would you need SACD to do that anyway? In any case you could just as easily provide 2 CD versions, one for the highly compressed fans and another for those who enjoy proper dynamics. Yes, this is absolutely true, and I recommend doing this. NO need for SACD at all, which is the point of the argument. No need to buy another expensive player and more expensive disks just to get different mastering. I didn't realize that was the point of the argument. It's true that the only real advantages of SACD disappeared when inexpensive sigma-delta converter filters finally got good. I thought this was an argument about putting multiple formats on one disc. Not from my reading of the original post. That seems to be where you took it. Trevor. |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
On 25/11/2015 12:34 AM, wrote:
Remasters of most of the names I listed, however, leave me feeling flat and my ears fatigued, You need one of these http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/dbx/1bx.shtml 3BX was better. But you can do the same in software much better now and simply remaster CD's to suit your taste if you think that sort of processing helps. I must admit to having done it a few times myself, including declipping and EQ etc. Trevor. |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Sony Quality or Sony Scams?
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 25/11/2015 12:29 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: You do realise the CD layer is not MP3 right? If so why do you insist on introducing red herrings to every argument? Because you CAN put an MP3 file on the disc, and you should, because that way you have control over the MP3 encoding which you do not if the end user "rips" it from the CD layer. But how many do? ANY? And why would you need SACD to do that anyway? You don't, but you need some sort of multi-volume disc. You can't do it with a CD without violating the red book. You can do it with SACD or DVD-A or some of the other DVD formats. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA: Sony Minidisc MDX-C6500R and Connects2 Sony/Renault Display Stalk Adapter | Car Audio | |||
FA: Sony Minidisc MDX-C6500R and Connects2 Sony/Renault Display Stalk Adapter | Marketplace | |||
FA: CHEEP>SONY CMA-8 POWER SUPPLY & Sony VO-6800 CAMERA CABLE ASSY | Marketplace | |||
Are Sony speakers of good quality? | Audio Opinions | |||
Quality audio and video products at superlow discount prices!! Sony, Pyle, Jensen... | Marketplace |