Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
R78Skijoo
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Lowest Common Denominator


About 20 years ago, there was a writer named Jim Eilworth who wrote a piece
called "The Lowest Common Denominator".* I first heard it read by the author as
an "editorial correspondent" piece on the easy listening station WRFM-AM.* (one
of the earliest automated AM-FM stations, then located in Clifton NJ.)* I only
heard it once more on that station about 6 years later, and both times I wish I
had a tape recorder.* I must not have been alone in my admiration for the piece
since it appeared on a business website, plagiarized by some management
consultant.
While I cannot recall the entire piece, the essence was while it could be
argued that lowering a standard to accommodate the masses makes things easier,
it ultimately hurts us since it encourages a downward vicious spiral in both
expectations and quality.* While short-term numbers will look better (read:
inflated), it is very difficult to recover from low standards.* It is like
grinding down a part to fit, realizing you went too far, and then realizing
further that it is going to be very difficult to replace what was lost to the
grinding wheel.

I'm also not buying the excuse that the average boom box is the reason why we
see waveforms that resemble toothpaste.* I remember the sound of the AM radio
in my father's 4 cylinder 1964 Chevy II with a 4x6 speaker in an all-metal
dashboard when tuned to WABC.* It sounded far worse than any boom box made
today, yet when I listen to a CD of the Beach Boys or the Beatles, I hear some
rather nice sounds.

Dumbing down the audio quality at the source is not the answer, nor is it good
for the long-term viability of the field.



*
*
Forget anything about sounding good on high end equipment since those 0.1
percent of the population having monitoring equipment is not the target at all.



Well, the record companies have successfully alienated me as a customer.* I
don't buy any new music.* I don't like the "artists" and I don't like the sound
quality.* I don't like the fact that the audio and music has become a secondary
consideration to the video.* I'm not alone; even in my culturally-dead area,
many in my age range grew up with some fairly nice 1970s-era stereo systems.*
We know what good sound is, even if we can't quantify it in technical terms.*
We grew up listening to "Dark Side of the Moon", "Aja", "Fly Like an Eagle",
"The Wall", "Hotel California", "Leftoverture", "A Night at the Opera", and our
auntie's copy of "Revolver".* Given that people in my demographic are at their
peak earning years, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the execs are
neglecting a pretty large source of income.

At some point, the technology for very high quality music reproduction will
become extremely cheap.* People may one day look back at the Walkman, and
wonder how we managed to scrape up $80 for something that sounded to them the
way a scratchy old 78 sounds to us today.* Record companies will regret that
they chose to let quality slip so much.* To see this takes long-term thinking,
and the average MBA's idea of long-term is a three month time frame.

Furthermore, those who allowed that quality to slip will one day regret they
stood by and allowed a project to be mixed at the Pro Tools "puree" setting.*
They will have a lot of explaining to do, and the "just following orders"
defense won't cut it.* If I were in the business and faced with receiving a
credit on a project like that, I would either insist that my name be
eliminated, or replaced with "Alan Smithee".
Has anyone ever wondered why the community remembers names like George Martin,
Geoff Emerick, Mr. & Mrs. Bob Fine, Doug Sax, Stan Ricker, George Massenberg,
etc.?

Does anyone ever wonder why the name of "Ampex" is synonymous with "high
quality" and "durability", and does anyone think this group would exist today
if it didn't??

Barring the unlikely event that sound quality standards are allowed to return
to that if a 1920s-era regenerative AM receiver, does anyone here REALLY think
that the mainstream product being released today will be praised for audio
quality some 20 years from now???

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
on topic: we need a rec.audio.pro.ot newsgroup! Peter Larsen Pro Audio 125 July 9th 08 06:16 PM
DNC Schedule of Events BLCKOUT420 Pro Audio 2 July 8th 04 04:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:07 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"