[[email protected]]

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.

[Scott Dorsey]

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."

[[email protected]]

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

[None]

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****?

[None]

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****.

[[email protected]]

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?

[JackA]

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.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 11/24/2015 7:59 AM, wrote:
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.

Most of what I listen to in the car (and in an airplane) are recorded
radio programs. The music is pretty well leveled in the broadcast and
streaming processing but often I need to turn up the volume when the (do
they still call them DJs?) comes on and talks about the music. For the
shows that I listen to, they usually have something interesting to say.

Oh, and the promos, when they have to run them, are almost always too loud.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[[email protected]]

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.

[[email protected]]

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.

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

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.

Well, I'm trying to do my part... Per my suggestion, a bluegrass album I just
finished had this arc of text added to the CD art, along the outside edge, centered
on the main copy, where it would be impossible to miss:

"Wide dynamic range recording -- turn it up and enjoy!"

Now, there was some squish (I'm liking Slate's FG-X mastering processor when used
gently), but the stereo meters actually moved quite a bit. They didn't just hang at
O dBFS.

It'll be interesting to see what the response might be. (The producer, a bluegrass
picker and occasional bluegrass DJ loves the sound of the album in comparison to a
lot of other stuff in the genre, so that's encouraging as well.)

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[[email protected]]

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?

[Trevor]

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.

[Trevor]

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.

[Scott Dorsey]

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."