Is Recording quality the real culprit?

I think that maybe you can’t polish a turd, but perhaps you can get rid of the smell, LOL!  Growing up in the ‘70’s, I have listened to most of the classic rock from that period hundreds of times, such as Led Zep and Jerthro Tull.  Having heard the commercial release so many times, I have been drawn to bootlegs from that era, sometimes concerts that I actually attended.  I have found that with a good, well-balanced system, like I have I think, even the bootlegs that are not great sound better on my system because of the way that the soundstage is presented, with depth and width, so even if the SQ can’t be improved, the listening experience can be.  I am very pleased with the way my system presents everything, good or bad.  Good quality recordings sound amazing and bad quality recordings sound less bad.

If everything else is OK, the weakest link is the quality of the recording, compounded by the fact that our hearing declines with age You're not going to win folks. But I'll be damned if I am going to have a steady diet of only the very best recordings and forgo my favorite music.

Beato Interviews Alan Parsons

That's above my pay-grade, @thom_oz .

@immatthewj

"Without going back and looking for others, the two I am thinking of are the Cowboy Junkies first and second releases, Whites Off Earth Now and Trinity Sessions"

If your gear is god enough you can hear (in Trinity Sessions) that Margo is singing into a mic and it’s being amplified to bring her up to the volume of the rest of the band, it’s really trippy.

@fleschler , I have followed your journey and congratulate you on your room design and construction. A dream come true for sure! Continued listening enjoyment to you. My best, MrD. 

@2psyop Tell me, is there a bad Bones Howe recording?  Various genres and I haven't been disappointed.  Or Robert Fine, or many others from the 50s and 60s.  

@mrdecibel It's a coincidence that tonight I heard a Edie Gorme/Los Panchos CD that was horrid sounding just 10 years ago but I liked the performance (huge reverb on singers/Gorme sounded distorted).  I have upgraded my equipment including a near SOTA DAC/Pre-amp, transport, speakers and SOTA amps with matching cabling.  Tonight, I heard a mediocre but acceptable sounding Gorme, somewhat better Los Panchos and great guitar sound.  Overall, a real keeper until I purchase the LP (which I hope was mastered better than this).  I have 61,100 LPs/CDs/78s/R2R recordings.  This was one of the worst sounding.  Another poorly mastered early digital recording sounds acceptable with very good instrumentals and acceptable vocals.  Most recordings sound great (including monos and well recorded 78s).  Unfortunately since about 1995, pop and rock recordings suffer from poor recording technique, computer manipulation of the recording, high compression levels, etc.  Basically, worse than ever sound.  Jazz LPs and CDs have the most consistently great sound from all eras.  Many rock recordings are superior in their initial LP format than poorly remastered CDs/streaming.  85% of streamed music sounds worse than a comparable CD version with the other 15% sounding as good or better.  

@yoyoyaya  @mrdecibel +1

Great "sounding" recordings are great, but imo and ime poor sounding recordings are great too, as my primary interest in listening are the performances and the compositions. These are the reasons I listen to music to begin with. Why obtain a great system if the recordings are poor? There is magic in these recordings, musically speaking, and I hear more of the music. The music is more important than sound, and it comes before great "sound". If you understand music, I believe it is easier to listen to poor recordings, because they give us "great music". I can appreciate those recordings that are sota, but it is the music that drives my emotions. Folks who cannot listen to their systems with poorly recorded music, I feel are more interested in the "sound" first, and the music second. Nothing wrong with this; whatever floats your boat. I have catered to music listeners and audiophiles most of my adult life, and there is a distinct difference between these two types of listeners. It is wonderful when both types are combined into one. I admit I am a combination, because I appreciate it all. If the music itself was not to my liking, which is quite rare, I would likely not listen to it for it's recording quality, except to show off my system, or make adjustments to my system. But it is the music for me, 1st, and I have stated this forever. My best, MrD.  

@emerging soul - thank you. I think that playing and recording music helps a lot to understand how music is reproduced. I've spent a long time listening to, playing and recording music. The recording and reproducing camps are often divided and I try to bridge the gap between the two.

@yoyoyaya 

Amazing reply. How do you come by such great insights into all this? Other comments you make are also impressive.  Even the one thread you created about heavier vinyl is also very interesting.

A poorly recorded great album still sounds like a great album when played on a good system.

A BAD recording played on a good system still sound bad.

Regarding rock v jazz historical recording quality, a key difference is that rock music is played on amplified instruments and is in general played a lot louder. This creates major issues with spill and achieving adequate levels of separation. In addition, you often have more instruments - or more instrumental tracks where overdubbing is involved - and more instruments sharing the same frequency range. All of this requires more outboard equipment and more complex mixing desks, so in terms of purity, the signal path is more compromised. And despite the fact that classic outboard gear from the fifties and sixties is now lusted after, a lot of it doesn't sound that great if you apply hi fi technical standards to it. Lastly, when multitrack recording was limited to four or eight tracks it necessitated signficant amounts of bouncing to get the desired track count, and bouncing seriously compromises fidelity. So it's not that surprising that historic jazz on average sounds a lot better than historic rock.

As a classical listener I find this not a big problem. 😆

@megabyte I suspect that jazz drew the better engineers and gear due to 'cred'; a more 'established' popular genre with the cognoscenti while early R&R was a bastard child of 'the kids' who just wanted loud & raucous...

Then, acts like the G. Dead appeared that not only wanted to have feckless concert sound with the Wall of Sound, but recording that reflected the same.....

Art pushed tech, which pushed art, and the cycle still continues.... ;)

I like to peruse the sound gear at live concerts and events to see what's being thrown at us.  Given the amount of screens and sliders that even smaller venues are cropping up, AI-run sound in the studios isn't far off....

"...soon you'll be dancing to "The White Zone is for loading or unloading Only..."

F. Zappa, "Joe's Garage" (I forget if it's Act One or Two....)

...or the sound of camera drones fluttering about....

....or the prices of tix to concerts.....makes going to a baseball or B'ball game cheap in contrast.....

"Living in the modern world is like having bees in your head....."  Firesign Theatre.

OP   So why are we wasting our time spending so much money on audio equipment?

Because we want the best what is available for now or near future. We always want the best clean sound recordings and many audio companies have improved the sound. So far, this is the cleanest sound recording and audio playback system yet. Alex/WTA 

 https://wavetouchaudiopro.com/

Oh boy!

I mainly listen to orchestral and jazzey stuff. I'm 71, so old guy. When I look at some of the vinyl that I have from the 60's and some of the new remastered or otherwise remade from original tape recordings from DG you see that the engineers and mastering are noted with pride. Some of the jackets even list the microphnes used to record the sound. It is after all, science. Steely Dan as an expample usually credited the technical side. It is so easy to record now to an OK degree we are loosing the appreciation for the science. Who wants OK? Not me.

@mapman Science and technology provides the tools used to both create and playback recordings.    That part is not an art.   There are right ways and wrong ways to do it.

Is that why designing equipment is called State of the art?

And in the 70s it was radio. 

"Give me more cowbell"...Sorry couldn’t resist.

I think as has been stated most of the pop recordings today are made to appeal to the earbud generation. That is, compressed and constrained. Sad...

ozzy

As your system evolves everything is improved, even bad recordings. It can be no other way. As others have said you just need to embrace the "suck" and look for the aspects of these bad recordings that you like better in the improved system. Far worse to put together a system that makes everything sound the same. I think this is the reason so many embrace vintage equipment. 

Yeah those terrible mastering technicians. Like they had the final say in how the performance was recorded. Its called appealing to the greatest number of folks and mixing for the most common playback devices. Always has to be someone to blame I guess. I tend to blame the artists more than the technicians. Yeah just do whatever you want just give me my cocaine. 

@ibmjunkman  Good One 🤣

As for AI entering the picture, I was very interested in George Martin's son using AI to dissemble and then re-mix the Revolver LP.  I assume if the time, money and interest were there, they could take a four channel recording and re mix it using a 32 or 64 track console and create a whole new and improved version of some classic LPs?  Will this be the next frontier of re-mining the archives?  Will it be done in stages?  First the 16 track version on 180 gram vinyl for $125, followed shortly by the 32 track version for $170 and so on and so on........    The list is endless of recordings that could be new and improved.

@searchingforthesound ....Ever since I ’graduated’ from Treble+Bass, to adding Loudness and later Midrange, what I heard in the spaces I’ve occupied has only tended to improve as my ’tempered’ use of eq became more....’broadened’.

The advent of DSP, even when done manually, was a Great Leap Forward in dealing with random rooms with porschitt acoustics...when it went to more (11>31) channels of fq to being able to push 100 and more,....

...which....finds you spending over an hour over a 3.5 minute snip.....'Just 'cuz it annoys you.....'

Pick your depth.....no holding your breath..... ;)

@emergingsoul is where I see AI getting into the ’mix’, as it was and became.

Obviously, a long learning curve awaits, but AIs’ are being a surprise on many levels; something us ’amateurs’ really haven’t grasped yet.

Generational Programming is already in progress for AI: One ’teaches others’, who ’teach others’....’scaling’ in that sense...

...on about the 4th >5th generation....’they’ Forget ’things’....!?

"I can do that all by myself, Thanx HAL....(*sotto voce* "...’springhead, fu2....")"

I look forward to ’discussions’ with my audio and general purpose ’puters.....

’Pulling the plug’ Is Not a Threat anymore....

Waiting for AI to be turned loose into those mixes.... ;)

AI will be the true savior for a "music first" audiophile. I suppose it wouldn’t matter for the gearheads who have 3 audiophile recordings of lousy artists on repeat all year. In consideration of how lousy some mastering technicians are and the sheer volume of trash recordings out there (did too many great artists so wrong)...these guys need to be FIRED as soon as it’s feasible.

H%$! Yes. Whenever I've advised a newb regarding equipment, I always begin with that issue. Nothing they can do with that. Plan to set things up for the good recordings. Just live with the rest if you like the music. 

I always find it odd that there are so many poor classic rock recordings from the 60’s through the 90’s but so many great jazz recordings from the 40’s through the 60’s. It’s like recording quality got worse as technology got better. 

I’m basically done with having put together my system. At this point, I buy the best quality recordings that I can find, and try not to worry about the gear anymore.

@asvjerry 

Interesting about AI influence on recordings.  is another aspect of AI going to be how it will influence Recording sessions? Since no one really understands AI, probably too early to know but no doubt it will become more common with what we listen to in addition to all the musical aspects of it, and now it's the Recording studio influence.

Maybe AI Will help design better speaker crossovers. And DSP Control of Systems.  Currently I can't stand DSP interfaces being so difficult to work with.

As long as you take a passive approach to music reproduction through your system, then yes. You are stuck with the sound quality baked into the source. My approach to music listening is more reactive, so I do what I can to compensate for poor productions of great performances by expanding the dynamic range of overly compressed material, adding room tone back into overly dry recordings, restoring the bottom octave of commercial releases that have had it whacked out to "fit" the medium, etc.

No, all this manipulation doesn't make a crummy recording sound as great as a truly well-produced release, but it does improve my enjoyment of it, and that's my goal. Before I start catching a ration of shite about altering the musician's intent, let me remind everyone that most release approvals are phoned in, so the musicians rarely have any idea of how the end product actually sounds.

@feldmen4 , I was totally  unaware of Sharon.  I guess I'll have to order a copy.  I discovered the Junkies rather late (right after Natural Born Killers came out on VHS) and then I bought everything I could find by the CJ.  Which at that time ended at Crescent Sun Pale Moon.  at that time there was one song on Caution Horses that really really got me--Sun Comes Up It's  Tuesday Morning, but the reast of the CD was never my favorite.  At that time Black Eyed Man was always on my playlist when ever I fired my system up.  Southern Rain was like my reference song when I was auditioning new equipment.

As far as WOEN and Trinity, the SACDs are sublime.  They are works of art.

Anyway, thanks for the heads up on Sharon.  It is now on my list, and it is a short list.

I struggled with this for several years and finally came to the conclusion that it's more the recording rather than the equipment that gives you the separation and sound stage. I wondered why all sound engineers didn't record in audiophile quality to make it sound really good...... Then it hit me.... it isn't us the audiophiles who buy the most music.... it's the kids with not so good sounding equipment so they realize they don't need to record for quality. Another possible reason is to cover up the singing quality of quite a few famous singers who really don't sing that well so mediocre recording helps cover that up. When a famous singer has the backup singers singing along with them on most of their recordings, you know that is one.

Music is an art.  So is the mastering that goes into making recordings.  Everyone does it differently.  
 

Science and technology provides the tools used to both create and playback recordings.    That part is not an art.   There are right ways and wrong ways to do it.  
 

If it’s done right, you get to hear all the artistry that went into making a recording.   You can also then season to taste so that as a whole it sounds good to you.

My system is pretty resolving and has cause me to understand there are a lot of crap recordings out there

In my experience all recordings sound better on a good system than a poor system.

@searchingforthesound 

I don’t want to wonder into a fight, but an equalizer will do nothing for an over driven microphone, to much compression, or tape hiss. If someone wants to put EQ into their system, more power to them.

Album quality is of course hit or miss, depending on who the recording engineer was, the producer, the mixing and mastering engineer, and the label. Ironically most young artists don’t have a clue and go with the flow of whatever those with "supposedly" better technical knowledge tell them. [I still wonder why Adele’s "30" sounds so bad].

Steve Gutenberg recently mentioned that a 1959 live recording of Harry Belafonte sounds "audiophile" with a great soundstage and imaging, along with dynamics, while a 1970s recording of Al Kooper sounds compressed to hell, but both can be enjoyed.

I mean yeah you can eat a quality steak, but you can still enjoy hamburger. You just have to let go of the idea that everything is going to sound great.

Many popular albums for whatever reason, done in the 1970s are "thin" sounding. I can usually make these sound a bit fuller with a touch of EQ and I do. At least in the 1970s most of the albums weren’t compressed to hell as happened later on during the evil spawn from Hell, ’loudness wars’ done for freaking AM and FM radio.

Think of your audio system as a TV. Maybe 8K and maybe you have it tweaked to the best picture quality it is technically capable of, but then you watch something like The Blair Witch Project that was recorded on a VCR with 240 lines of resolution. LOL. No, you can’t polish a turd, and if you try, you most likely won’t like the result.

Considering some people believe a digital signal can sound better or worse depending on a cable or "connection" material, it wouldn't be surprising to find that some of them would believe their system could improve the sound of a poorly recorded song (but they'd be wrong about that too).

Before the age of streaming we were at the mercy of the recording quality. 

With streaming, and millions of recordings so easy to access we can populate our favourites folders  with music that is wonderful and well recorded as well.

For example, This week I wanted to listen to some Ella Fitzgerald. A tidal search offered up well over 200 albums, including the Clap Hands Here Comes Charlie! which Analog Productions released as a 2 LP set.

Now I have a bunch of Ella to listen to without having gambled on buying any albums that sound poor. Audiophiles and music lovers have never had it so good!

Excessive compression is easily number one culprit, luckily I don't listen to a lot of this overly produced drivel. Perhaps recording quality has helped subconsciously steer me towards less commercial artists. Still, I'd say unlistenable recordings few and far between, I can usually hear past the warts and get into the music.

I'd suggest the ability to listen to lesser recordings says as much about us as our systems. Quit the critical analysis of sound, accept it as presented, once you get past this you can enjoy the performance.

When I was a young person over half a century ago I thought that a bad recording was doomed to provide an unsatisfying listening experience too.  Then I got a pair of Stax electrostatic headphones, SR-5s.  One night, after enjoying Workingman’s Dead in its glorious Wally Heider produced stereo sound, I put on a Chess reissue of Howling Wolf…More Real Folk Blues…and was flabbergasted that these crude, raunchy, monaural recordings, often displaying gross mic overload, sounded thrillingly alive and immediate.  I learned that a truly linear, cohesive, distortion free transducer, like electrostatic headphones, could let any recording shine.  This was before punk rock, of course!  Having speakers that do this trick is a more challenging task.

Comparing car audio to a HEA system with vinyl playback is ludicrous!

I believe you have to consider the mixing and mastering as well as the recording.  I have some originals on vinyl and CD that do not sound nearly as good as the remastered version streamed on Qobuz.

My biggest issue is with vinyl pressing quality. I can't even hear what they intended in the studio because most modern pressings are so poor. Sure there's a few high fidelity companies and people trying to push the envelope, but there's just so much horrid vinyl out there it makes the music unlistenable for the modern music fan. 

There are so many good recordings nowadays but you have to pay the premium.

I still sing along in my car with a subwoofer under my seat. It's all beating a log with a stick. The real question is why we enjoy it so much. Too many equate audio as some sort of search. It can be but to some it is a sad intersection of insecurity and cash/debt.

@immatthewj - that’s exactly where my mind went when @curiousjim mentioned single mic recordings. The Junkies also cut their third album as a single mic recording in a church (like Trinity Sessions) called Sharon. However the record execs didn’t like the product and it was only released by the band in 2022. Sharon has several songs that wound up on Caution Horses (Tuesday Morning, Cheap is How I Feel, Powderfinger) along with other songs. I’m a Junkies junkie so maybe I’m not a good judge but it’s not clear to me what the issue was with Sharon. I think I’ll play it next to see if I can find the problem(s) 😀

Matt