I think they're just clueless, both the artists, producers, record companies, the recording and mastering technicians, etc. Give it to have that "loud," "punchy," "fat" sound to have it stick out on radio play (or in boom boxes). I don't think a lot of people realize what is possible with high fidelity systems. I know I didn't prior to 2001. I thought more expensive systems were just about BASS AND POWER. I think people just don't know what should be possible. they think "loud, punchy, fat" (and compressed, lifeless, and dull) is the best thing. And it isn't.
Why do mass marketed CD's sound so crappy?
I posted awhile ago here asking opinions regarding the poor sound quality of Coldplay's "A Rush of Blood to the Head" CD. Now I want to ask the same question of U2's latest (which is great, btw). I also find Sheryl Crow's CD's to sound underwhelming and dissapointing. Besides that fact that I love her music. What gives? Are the artists clueless? Don't they hear what their releases sound like? Are the record companies deliberately turning out crappy sounding CD's to please the masses that listen primarily on Ipods and walkman's? Man, it makes it real tough to enjoy music I really love to listen to when it sounds so damn bad.
The first track on U2's newest, "Vertigo" really rocks out, but it sounds boomy and muddled. I wanted to turn this up real loud, but it just sounded awful. I'm bummed.
The first track on U2's newest, "Vertigo" really rocks out, but it sounds boomy and muddled. I wanted to turn this up real loud, but it just sounded awful. I'm bummed.