Quality of sound becoming less important?

[kerley]

[quote name='paulpirie8' timestamp='1357566609' post='1924540']
It's no doubt down to nostalgia more than anything else but it just seems to me that people had an appreciation and respect for sound quality that is becoming rare nowadays.

Paul
[/quote]

Or maybe they just don't know what they are missing having never heard a decent hi-fi system and are now sold iPod docks whch sound great to them as they have no reference point?

[zzaass]

I can play flac files through the line-out on my [url="http://www.rockbox.org/"]Rockboxed [/url]G5.5 Ipod. Sounds as good as CD and nearly as good as vinyl on my old separates.
I spend most of my time next to my desk computer in a different room though, where I listen through my [url="http://www.esi-audio.com/products/near05experience/"]NSI nEar05[/url] powered speakers.

I havnt paid a lot for any of my kit, but quality of sound IS important to me.

My TV sounds a bit crap though. Never got into surround sound systems and the like.
There doesnt seem to be a cheap way of having one system for both movies and music.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='paulpirie8' timestamp='1357566609' post='1924540']
It's no doubt down to nostalgia more than anything else but it just seems to me that people had an appreciation and respect for sound quality that is becoming rare nowadays.
[/quote]

Interesting point - I wonder if it's related to the apparent devaluing of music in general. When people can download or stream your choice of music for free, or listen to it mainly on their tinny smartphones, perhaps there's less incentive to invest thousands in a hi-fi system?

[bremen]

[quote name='zzaass' timestamp='1357567501' post='1924561']


My TV sounds a bit crap though. Never got into surround sound systems and the like.
There doesnt seem to be a cheap way of having one system for both movies and music.
[/quote]

I've got my dvd player plugged into my music system (200W power amplifier and vintage Tannoy Ardens) and it sounds great.

[Dr.Dave]

The point is that people are listening to music differently. Their listening habits have become more mobile so - Yes - sound quality is less important to most people.

Music is less important to most people.

[Cameronj279]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1357562475' post='1924439']


How do you feel about spark plugs?
[/quote]

Love 'em.

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='zzaass' timestamp='1357567501' post='1924561']
My TV sounds a bit crap though. Never got into surround sound systems and the like.
There doesnt seem to be a cheap way of having one system for both movies and music.
[/quote]

Take a phono lead out of the back and plug it into your stereo, I've been doing this for years.
Stereo, not surround, but good enough.

[jezzaboy]

From around 1985, I always owned decent hi fi separates, Marantz, Rega, Dual, Mission, Yamaha...But I no longer have the space to have a turntable, the vinyl has all but gone and the cassettes are in a shoe box out of harms way. All my music I now play is on a hard drive and played through a small JVC micro component system.

In the past the quality of the music was all important but as I stay in a flat and can`t crank up the volume to a decent level, my ears have become accustomed to the inferior sound of the JVC.

[zzaass]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1357569526' post='1924609']
Take a phono lead out of the back and plug it into your stereo, I've been doing this for years.
Stereo, not surround, but good enough.

[/quote]

Yes done that, Too lazy to turn the Hifi on most of the time though.

But have you seen those Surround sound Amps. Huge they are with millions of phono sockets on the back. Newer ones have HDMI though.

[4 Strings]

Is it to do with our ever higher speed of life? Gone are the days in my life when I stretched back in the apex of the speaker set up and enjoyed an hour or so of listening to music.

I probably listen to more music nowadays but its Spotify to accompany my work and MP3s in the car/ipod etc. More but less quality.

With so much compression on modern 'recordings' there's less benefit in a lovely sound system compared to recordings such as the Dave Brubeck album mentioned earlier.

[51m0n]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1357570753' post='1924636']
Is it to do with our ever higher speed of life? Gone are the days in my life when I stretched back in the apex of the speaker set up and enjoyed an hour or so of listening to music.

I probably listen to more music nowadays but its Spotify to accompany my work and MP3s in the car/ipod etc. More but less quality.

With so much [b]compression [/b]on modern 'recordings' there's less benefit in a lovely sound system compared to recordings such as the Dave Brubeck album mentioned earlier.
[/quote]

Which type of compression are you talking about here, data compression or audio?

I think a lot of music is mastered in a far too loud for louds sake (by which I mean technically a higher average level to peak level ratio, with the peak level at or fractionally below 0dBFs) achieved by various devices (compressors to a degree, but the real culpit is pushing into a brickwall limiter too hard).

This is a small part of the mastering process, and has nothing to do with compression as used during tracking/mixing. However if you harken back to the grand all analogue days of big consoles in big studios with big tape decks, then compression was on every single track in the form of tape compression, which sounds lovely on drums, vocals - well, everything

There isnt more compression generally these days, there si too much of the wrong compression in the wrong place IMO.

Its a terrible shame too, and it has ruined hifi for a generation, left us in a world where people dont experience decent qualtiy playback at all for the majority if not the entirety of their lives, and at least in part given the poor old CD a terrible terrible name for itself.

Edited January 7, 2013 by 51m0n

[4 Strings]

The lack of dynamic range, the music being loud and blaring as opposed to being natural and dynamic.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1357571274' post='1924644']
There isnt more compression generally these days, there si too much of the wrong compression in the wrong place IMO.

Its a terrible shame too, and it has ruined hifi for a generation, left us in a world where people dont experience decent qualtiy playback at all for the majority if not the entirety of their lives, and at least in part given the poor old CD a terrible terrible name for itself.
[/quote]

This is the really ironic thing. My understanding is that vinyl has a dynamic range of about 55-65dB (it varies because of the varying effective speed of the groove under the stylus as it moves across the record) whereas CDs have a dynamic range of well over 90db - a huge improvement.

Meanwhile, modern production is all about audio compression that wrings the dynamics out of recordings! (OK, there are exceptions of course, but the trend is fairly clear).

Funny old world.

[51m0n]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1357576665' post='1924754']
The lack of dynamic range, the music being loud and blaring as opposed to being natural and dynamic.
[/quote]

Yeah thats mainly mastering for volume, although in truth there are particular methodologies that can be used when mixing to maximise the mastering engineers chances of getting that last 1 or 2dB of RMS level.

In itself its nothing to do with mp3 data compression, [i]except[/i] that tracks mastered for absolute maximum volume tend to produce more artifacts as a result of a subsequent mp3 conversion. Appraently (I've never actually attempted to verify this myself)

[51m0n]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1357577372' post='1924761']
This is the really ironic thing. My understanding is that vinyl has a dynamic range of about 55-65dB (it varies because of the varying effective speed of the groove under the stylus as it moves across the record) whereas CDs have a dynamic range of well over 90db - a huge improvement.

Meanwhile, modern production is all about audio compression that wrings the dynamics out of recordings! (OK, there are exceptions of course, but the trend is fairly clear).

Funny old world.
[/quote]

I couldnt agree more!

Although I think that in fairness a lot of mixing isnt done for volume per se, its done for the best and most emotive production of the song for themselves that the mix engineer is capable of producing from the raw tracks. I mean a lot of heavy rock was all about trying to be louder than everyone else, and the Motown mastering engineers were very upset by the volume o fthe White album by some upstarts from the UK.

It tends to be not even the mastering engineer really, its the person paying them that states "Make this the loudest thing ever" or "It must be as loud as <[i]insert any rancid pop artists name you hate here[/i]>'s last single or we wont use you again"

So who's fault is it exactly?

And it isnt going away, far from it!

The Loudness War is still going, the accepted level of a CD has not dropped, the average level is still unbelievably high compared to the peak level in all contemporary pop, EDM, rock, you name it, if it isnt old school (jazz or classical) then its being pumped up during mastering.

[ZenBasses]

Yup I agree that the marketing machine is more centric to ipod this and connectivity that etc etc.. Very rarely are products on the shelves these day geared towards sound quality...This is based upon the plethora of electrical retailers and not the small but important hifi retailers such as richer sounds

I am a complete geek when it comes to technology but to this I add that my setup includes late 80s and early 90 pioneer and Kenwood equipment running through some home brew speakers made of birch with kef drivers from the early 00s

For me on my budget they take pride of place.. And love the warm sound that they produce.

I don't really get the argument for cds being cold..?.. It's more to do with the advancements of microphones.

Old style mics picked up much more 'background noise' made up of reflections off walls, people, instruments etc etc.. This gives a better sense of actually being 'in the room'?

And then all this old style recording and new techniques are ruined by 192kb/s...

Digital recordings done in lossless / flac are very detailed but then maybe some would argue cold?

Listen through the right equipment.. With decent speakers made of let say wood? Rather than mdf.. Does a whole lot to warm things up.

You'll never get that from a ipod dock all in one or a sound bar

They are just watts for watts

Shame cause there are some genuinely outstanding hifi separate products and they do get reviewed in detail..

Where?

Hidden What Hifi, or the like..

Like boutique basses.....

It's a personal thing and long may it be a personal choice...

What sounds right to you.. Is right

But most consumers don't know any better..but that is not their fault just the culture we live in.. A disposable culture

Edited January 7, 2013 by ZenBasses

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1357562162' post='1924431']
I can't help but feel that people who obsess over HiFi have lost sight of the most important things when it comes to music: Do you like the song and does the performance move you?
[/quote]

Theres a sweet spot to be found I think. I'm not by any means an audiophile but just having decent ish speakers makes a huge difference. I run my TV through a pair of floor standers and my PC sound system is a proper amp and bookshelf speakers.

And I have to say that in some circumstances sound quality can trump playing ability - for example I've sometimes enjoyed the playing of a mediocre player (or even a whole band) with a great sound more than a brilliant one with a crap sound. After-all music is sound not just a series of notes.

Edited January 7, 2013 by bassman7755

[flyfisher]

[quote name='ZenBasses' timestamp='1357582553' post='1924861']
Yup I agree that the marketing machine is more centric to ipod this and connectivity that etc etc.. Very rarely are products on the shelves these day geared towards sound quality...This is based upon the plethora of electrical retailers and not the small but important hifi retailers such as richer sounds
[/quote]

I'm getting a mental picture of a mastering suite comprising of the usual massive desk but with an ipod dock in the centre as the reference monitors.

[ZenBasses]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1357589569' post='1925048']


I'm getting a mental picture of a mastering suite comprising of the usual massive desk but with an ipod dock in the centre as the reference monitors.
[/quote]


Your right... Because Mr Beats said so.....

But yeah that is exactly where I am coming from.. In the mixing and mastering world the rule of thumb is 'The sound produce is only ever as good as the weakest link'

I means you wouldn't play a Fbass through a peavey practice amp hehe

[51m0n]

[quote name='ZenBasses' timestamp='1357582553' post='1924861']
....
I don't really get the argument for cds being cold..?.. It's more to do with the advancements of microphones.

Old style mics picked up much more 'background noise' made up of reflections off walls, people, instruments etc etc.. This gives a better sense of actually being 'in the room'?
....
[/quote]

Errr, not sure about that. Most serious studios are more than proud to have several Neumann U47s (FET and tube), U67s and U87s, not to mention Telefunken and Coles, RCA and all manner of other interesting vintage oddities alongside the likes of many far more modern but equally superb mics such as those made by Nordic Audio Labs at the highest end and AKG, Audio Technica, Sennheiser and Shure and whoever else you care to name lower down that list.

Mics then didn't "capture more of the room" than they do now, that is entirely dependent on mic pickup pattern, and they are all available now as they were then.

Ribbon mics may be the technology you are referring to as they are typically figure of 8 pattern and will therefore pickup a lot of room. Ribbons were in use before anything else I think, but dynamics and condensors go back a very very long way indeed, the first electret condensor was invented in 1916 at Bell labs IIRC. It may surprise you to know that there has been a huge resurgence in ribbon mic usage over the last ten or 15 years since cheaper Chinese models with excellent characteristics have flooded into the market. Although they have never been truly out of fashion, Bruce Swedien made extensive use of ribbons (B&O ribbons I think, although he says he has moved on to Royers these days) when he layed the tracks down for Michael Jackson's Thriller album - for instance. Ribbons have a corrugated aluminium foil 'membrane' and so have more mass than more modern mic designs, and therefore respond more slowly to changes in air pressure (sound) meaning they tend towards being somewhat darker, and some might say apply a mechanical limiting to transients. They sound fantastic in the right place.

And that is the same now as it ever was, the best mic for a given application is the one that sounds best in that application at that time, it has nothing to do with the era in which it was designed or the type of mic or anything else. All that matters is does it sound better than the rest of your options in that particular scenario....

[The Admiral]

I think part of the issue is that people don't know what good sounds like, as all the music they hear generally comes on tv - which is generally set up to pump out plenty of boom and tizz, because that is what a lot of current music uses in it's soundscape. Also, Kids don't listen to music the way I certainly used to - buying an album, reading the sleeve and sitting down to listen to it a side at a time. Music is disposable wallpaper, and the days of artists being allowed to take 2 or 3 albums to find their feet, and then build a body of work, have gone. If you don't have a hit with the first single, you are toast, and it's back to karaoke at Wetherspoons. I saw today the One Direction have effectively 'saved' Sony Records, based on all the income they have generated in the USA. The sad part of that is that they are probably all on 'wages', have no part in any of the royalties, and once their ship has sailed, all they will have to look back on is some tattoos and hazy memories of booze and groupies ( not all bad then perhaps). The wages thing was one of the big issues with S Club I 'm told : worked their arses of for about 2 years non stop and earned about £80k a year. Not bad for 18 year olds we might think, but by comparison with what they earned for the Svengalis - peanuts. And what are they doing now - pushing prams around the estate, or trolleys in Tesco's car park - or panto in Wigan, for 4 weeks a year. The demise of good sound is another symptom of the demise of music as an art form generally IMHO and the impact of the commoditisation of it by corporations.

Edited January 8, 2013 by The Admiral

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='paulpirie8' timestamp='1357559102' post='1924333']
This came up in discussion the other day when one of my friends argued that my Hi-Fi took up too much space in my room. He claimed that all you need is a "Micro Hi-Fi" which you can pick up for pennies.

I can remember even when I was a kid that every house would have (or seemed to have, IME) a big, proper Hi-Fi with seperates for CD, cassette and vinyl as well as a decent amp and speakers. Now though people seem to just have an All-in-one stereo with tiny speakers that sound pretty terrible. I could probably count the people I know with a proper Hi-Fi on both my hands.

I'm no audiophile but I love having one place I can listen to music as it should sound; good.

So I suppose my question is: Has the quality of sound become less important when buying a new stereo than size/cost etc?

Cheers,

Paul
[/quote]

To me, it would be ideal, but in practice, it wouldn't really work, because their is the expense of getting the gear to have it sound like it should, then finding a safe and comfortable place to keep it, then actually remembering to make use of it, and make time to actually purposely sit down and listen to an album.

Would it be a bad idea to listen to albums and such through studio monitors?

[51m0n]

Its a perfectly good idea to listen to albums through studio monitors.

For one thing it will help you learn the monitors, for another some of the finest monitors used in studios and mastering suites around the world today are better known as top of the range hifi (B&W 800 series in Abbey Road for instance)

[cheddatom]

I guess the implication of the OP is that older music fans are much more concerned about quality of sound that younger people who've grown up with mp3s?

Of the young music fans I know, most have spent way more than I ever would on a pair of headphones - misguided maybe, but it certainly shows concern for the quality of sound. I don't know if this is indicative of a common trend though

[quote name='lettsguitars' timestamp='1357562898' post='1924448']
Walking around with headphones permanently glued to your ears with a constant flow of mp3 music restricted to only the last 60 years of material makes you deaf to quality. IMO!
[/quote]

Are you saying that everything recorded before 1953 sounded better than anything recorded after?!?!? Nuts!!!!

Edited January 8, 2013 by cheddatom

[Leonard Smalls]

[quote name='The Admiral' timestamp='1357605666' post='1925401']
I think part of the issue is that people don't know what good sounds like, as all the music they hear generally comes on tv - which is generally set up to pump out plenty of boom and tizz, because that is what a lot of current music uses in it's soundscape. Also, Kids don't listen to music the way I certainly used to - buying an album, reading the sleeve and sitting down to listen to it a side at a time. Music is disposable wallpaper,
[/quote]

Aye!
I played the Kraftwerk "Minimum Maximum" live DVD to a youth t'other day. Previously he'd been going on about the ultimate sound quality of his Beats 'phones/iPod and the "awesome bass" of his Logitech 5.1 computer audio system.
He's now going to go and buy a proper stereo like this one!