[Robert Morein]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of modern recordings is
"atrocious," and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the
studio than on disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both sat down and
auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of recordings
origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s is atrocious because of the
dynamic range compression that also seems to be endemic in modern releases
these days.

[MINe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...News&storyID=2
006-08-22T183959Z_01_N22395766_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-DYLAN.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsA
rt-L3-Technology+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both sat down and
auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of recordings
origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s is atrocious because of the
dynamic range compression that also seems to be endemic in modern releases
these days.

The Dylan SACD hybrid box is still available at yourmusic, sixteen discs
for under $100 plus tax.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...News&storyID=2
006-08-22T183959Z_01_N22395766_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-DYLAN.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsA
rt-L3-Technology+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
sat down and auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s
is atrocious because of the dynamic range compression
that also seems to be endemic in modern releases these
days.

The Dylan SACD hybrid box is still available at
yourmusic, sixteen discs for under $100 plus tax.

No doubt listed under "dead formats".

So, do these recordings have their dynamics compressed or not?

[MINe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...gyNews&storyID
=2
006-08-22T183959Z_01_N22395766_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-DYLAN.xml&WTmodLoc=New
sA
rt-L3-Technology+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
sat down and auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s
is atrocious because of the dynamic range compression
that also seems to be endemic in modern releases these
days.

The Dylan SACD hybrid box is still available at
yourmusic, sixteen discs for under $100 plus tax.

No doubt listed under "dead formats".

No, "box sets." :-) As players are available and these SACDs exist,
there's no reason someone interested in the collection shouldn't take
advantage.

So, do these recordings have their dynamics compressed or not?

Probably no more so than the masters. Certainly not the modern crunchy
loudness compression some of us dislike.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs
on his new album sounded much better in the studio
than on disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...gyNews&storyID
=2
006-08-22T183959Z_01_N22395766_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-DYLAN.xml&WTmodLoc=New
sA
rt-L3-Technology+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
sat down and auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid
80s is atrocious because of the dynamic range
compression that also seems to be endemic in modern
releases these days.

The Dylan SACD hybrid box is still available at
yourmusic, sixteen discs for under $100 plus tax.

No doubt listed under "dead formats".

No, "box sets." :-) As players are available and these
SACDs exist, there's no reason someone interested in the
collection shouldn't take advantage.

So, do these recordings have their dynamics compressed
or not?

Probably no more so than the masters.

So you have no actual practical knowlege?

Certainly not the
modern crunchy loudness compression some of us dislike.

There is no guarantee of that.

[soundhaspriority]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both sat down and
auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of recordings
origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s is atrocious because of the
dynamic range compression that also seems to be endemic in modern releases
these days.
But with his stature and fortune, doesn't Dylan control the mix? This is
strong evidence that vinyl is superior to digital.

[Arny Krueger]

"soundhaspriority" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on
his new album sounded much better in the studio than on
disc.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2

Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
sat down and auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid 80s
is atrocious because of the dynamic range compression
that also seems to be endemic in modern releases these
days.

But with his stature and fortune, doesn't Dylan control
the mix?

We're not talking mixing, we're talking mastering.

This is strong evidence that vinyl is superior to digital.

Total nonsense, because we're comparing CDs mastered in the 80s with CD
mastered in Y2K+.

[TT]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
: "soundhaspriority" wrote in message
:
: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message
: news : "Robert Morein" wrote in message
:
:
: LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
: modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs
on
: his new album sounded much better in the studio than
on
: disc.
:
:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2
:
: Arny, you got a problem wid dat?
:
: No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
: sat down and auditioned the same recordings.
:
: I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
: recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid
80s
: is atrocious because of the dynamic range compression
: that also seems to be endemic in modern releases these
: days.
:
: But with his stature and fortune, doesn't Dylan control
: the mix?
:
: We're not talking mixing, we're talking mastering.
:
: This is strong evidence that vinyl is superior to
digital.
:
: Total nonsense, because we're comparing CDs mastered in
the 80s with CD
: mastered in Y2K+.
:
Arney you should be an Olympic Gymnast. That was an
excellent backflip with double twist ;-) Correct me *IF* I
am wrong here but don't we have 1 master tape that is then
mixed for CD and the same master tape that is then mixed
(RIAA EQed) for vinyl?

Regards TT

[Arny Krueger]

"TT" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"soundhaspriority" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news "Robert Morein" wrote in message


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of
modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs
on his new album sounded much better in the studio
than on disc.


http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...ogy+NewsNews-2
Arny, you got a problem wid dat?

No problem, I probably would agree with him, if we both
sat down and auditioned the same recordings.

I think that the quality of many modern CD reissues of
recordings origionally issued on CD in the early-mid
80s is atrocious because of the dynamic range
compression that also seems to be endemic in modern
releases these days.

But with his stature and fortune, doesn't Dylan control
the mix?

We're not talking mixing, we're talking mastering.

This is strong evidence that vinyl is superior to
digital.

Total nonsense, because we're comparing CDs mastered in
the 80s with CD mastered in Y2K+.

Arney you should be an Olympic Gymnast. That was an
excellent backflip with double twist ;-)

Far less so than the claim that Dylan's comments were "strong evidence that
vinyl is superior to
digital." Now that's a reach if not a blatant troll.


Correct me *IF*
I am wrong here but don't we have 1 master tape that is
then mixed for CD and the same master tape that is then
mixed (RIAA EQed) for vinyl?

As a rule, remixes are tremendously rare. I suspect that the word you are
looking for is "mastered".

As a rule there is one master tape that resulted from mixing-down of a
collection of individual tracks. There is at least one track for each
subgroup, vocalist and/or instrument. A few instruments such as drums that
have various distinct components may be individually tracked (parallel
tracks). Some subgroups, instruments or voices may be added in the form of
segments that are shorter than the entire piece (serial tracks).

Once a master tape is reviewed and finalized, it may be remastered any
number of times for various purposes and formats. There are good reasons to
remaster music for FM and TV, for example. Back in the days when people
still took the LP and cassette tape formats seriously, unique masters were
made for them. The recipie or making a LP master is pretty well known -
throw away the deep bass, make the remaining bass mono, and squish the
dynamics and power response at the very highest frequencies, if the master
tape was wideband and/or highly dynamic.

There may also be addtional layers of masters - IOW a LP grand master was
made to exploit the general properties of the LP format, and then individual
cutting masters may have been made from the LP grand master, that exploited
the properties of individual cutting lathes. It depended on how many LPs
were expected to be produced, and at how many different plants. It is well
known that a LP lacquer should be plated within 24 hours of cutting, and one
way to do that would be to cut it at the pressing plant. Various pressing
plants may have had cutting lathes that differed.

While its full of self-congratulatory hype and golden ear dogma, some might
find this article educational:
http://www.stereophile.com/musicreco...72/index1.html