What to trust ear or measurement?

[RayDunzl]

Apologies for bluntness, I guess, but that's the stupidest, most ignorant and least informed comment I've seen on this thread so far.

Gee, you beat me to it.

You are right, and I apologize.

Ok.

Why don't you consider adding your age and location so we have a better idea what we're dealing with (or to avoid dealing with), if you're going to continue to contribute to the conversations here.

Click your name in the banner and "account details" in the drop-down to add something. It's not hard. Many of us have figured it out already.

They obviously do care and try hard. But the truth of the matter is that regardless of their intentions, most recordings sound like garbage, at least to me.

I don't listen to "most recordings", so, much of the problem that I know is there just passes me by. If I don't find the compositions of interest, for me, it would be like complaining about the quality of a tube of 70% lean hamburger at the Dollar Store.

It's rare when a recording I would otherwise care for is "overmastered", but it does occur.

I'll have to call out Al Di Meola and dump some demerits upon him for recent works that are crushed - and he was in the control room after the performance. That's all I remember being specifically disappointed with at the moment.

 

[Chrispy]

You are right, and I apologize. I really didn't mean to imply that the people who produce music don't care about sound. They obviously do care and try hard. But the truth of the matter is that regardless of their intentions, most recordings sound like garbage, at least to me. When I do come across a recording that sounds really really good, I wonder "what did this guy do that nobody else is doing and why can't he please tell everyone the secret"? So, I misspoke and used a bit of hyperbole, but the point remains that the public, in general, is very unhappy with the sound quality of recordings and by far the bulk of them. I think this is basically accepted as true.

Probably best for you to figure out why most sound like garbage to you as that is firmly in your control. Most of what, tho? You've listened to all the recordings in the world? Or are you just talking about some narrow slice of a music genre you're interested in?

The public is generally quite happy from my observations. How the heck you came to "basically accepted as true" is just how? You've also talked to all people too? Now, for one odd "audiophile", perhaps not so happy apparently.

 

[Inner Space]

You are right, and I apologize. I really didn't mean to imply that the people who produce music don't care about sound. They obviously do care and try hard. But the truth of the matter is that regardless of their intentions, most recordings sound like garbage, at least to me.

Apology accepted. Now ask yourself, how come most recordings sound like garbage, at least to you? Could it be because you're choosing your playback equipment poorly? By looks, intuition, vague beliefs, and internet anecdata? Is it possible you would enjoy our product better if you chose better? Perhaps by paying attention to hard fundamentals like measurements? Just a thought.

 

[RayDunzl]

Listen to the first notes of Kid Charlemagne on Royal Scam

The Intro notes?

It's a synthesizer. What should it sound like?

What else?

 

[Blumlein 88]

The Intro notes?

It's a synthesizer. What should it sound like?

What else?

They didn't add that special noise to make sure it sounds better than a clean copy of the song.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I am talking about the sound quality, not trying to identify what instrument it is.

If you cannot tell what instrument it is, that tells you a lot about sound quality.

 

[RayDunzl]

I am talking about the sound quality, not trying to identify what instrument it is.

How can you judge the "sound quality" of a recording of a synthesizer you didn't hear when it was played/recorded/mixed?

 

[Inner Space]

Easy, it doesn't sound good to me. Doesn't sound clear or crisp. Sounds muddy. Tell you what. I'll record a synthesizer playing a few notes inside of a garbage can (microphone outside the can) and you let me know how it sounds to you. Maybe it will sound amazing to you simply because you weren't there when it was recorded, who knows.

Actually it sounds to me like a Fender Rhodes and a guitar tracked together and biased slightly left in the stereo mix, plus a Hohner clavinet biased slightly right. IMO an HPF has been set a little high, and a compressor used a little aggressively. I could make a case that the recorded result is less than the playing deserves. But it is what it is, and to call it not clear or crisp, or muddy, is a profound misjudgment. What on earth are you listening on?

 

[Sal1950]

Is it possible you would enjoy our product better if you chose better? Perhaps by paying attention to hard fundamentals like measurements? Just a thought.

Bingo, you beat me to it.

Easy, it doesn't sound good to me.

It's an artificially created sound. Maybe you wouldn't like it live either.

 

[LTig]

I am talking about the sound quality, not trying to identify what instrument it is.

This track?

I can't complain, sound on my near field studio monitors (Genelec 8020a + Kef PSW2000 Sub) is good. I have heard much worse.

 

[RayDunzl]

Actually it sounds to me like a Fender Rhodes and a guitar tracked together and biased slightly left in the stereo mix, plus a Hohner clavinet biased slightly right. IMO an HPF has been set a little high, and a compressor used a little aggressively.

Ok, I miss on my "synthesizer" guess, by a little bit...

Did you peek?

 

[Inner Space]

Ok, I miss on my "synthesizer" guess, by a little bit...

Did you peek?

View attachment 101908

Honestly no, I didn't peek, but I worked with those keyboards many times, and the signature "clang" of both is burned in my brain. And I'm guessing the guitar on the opening is Carlton, not Becker. Sounds more like him.

 

[Inner Space]

I've listened to the song on countless setups for the past 40 years. We all have different ears and tastes, or "profound misjudgments" as you like to call them.

The profound misjudgment is nothing to do with taste or ears. It's not knowing - after 40 years! - what instruments you're hearing, and calling a sharp, clangy sound "muddy". (Perhaps recording engineers should pay no attention - seems hardly worth it with listeners like you.)

 

[RayDunzl]

Honestly no, I didn't peek, but I worked with those keyboards many times, and the signature "clang" of both is burned in my brain. And I'm guessing the guitar on the opening is Carlton, not Becker. Sounds more like him.

Good experienced ear, then.

I'm no pro, and deaf to the top end of things.

We didn't have a Rhodes or Clavinet in the band (1981).

Maybe I could easily identify a cheezy Casio or that other thing that became known as the Smegmatone.

 

[Rock Rabbit]

Without measuring no science no progress, no way to make a better product or more precise device. With that Steve Gutenberg way of thinking we would be in the stone age of audio listening to crystal radio and gramophone...and SG without a YouTube channel ouch!

 

[Inner Space]

Maybe I could easily identify a cheezy Casio or that other thing that became known as the Smegmatone.

LOL. There are more cheezy Casios on famous recordings than you would think. They were great for minor "tidying up" after everyone else went home. I bought my daughter one for Xmas in about 1985 - should have tax-deducted it, because it spent more time in the studio than her bedroom.

 

[LTig]

Actually it sounds to me like a Fender Rhodes and a guitar tracked together and biased slightly left in the stereo mix, plus a Hohner clavinet biased slightly right.

I'm probably as deaf as @RayDunzl in the upper octave but still I wondered 'cause I couldn't detect a synth. Maybe I'm not so deaf after all ...

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Easy, it doesn't sound good to me.

"Good to you" only has any value if you know what the instrument sounds like. That is somewhat easier with traditional instruments with which we are familiar. Synthesizers, by their nature, can be made to create a wide range of frequencies, waveforms and combinations and, unless you were there at the recording, it is difficult to know how it should sound.

 

[BDWoody]

Yeah, I don't know, that sounds pretty weak. Plus, who said I don't know what those instruments sound like? I think you are really reaching.

I think you are trolling at this point.
Let's see if you can be productive in other threads.

 

[LTig]

What bother's me most is the sound of the snare drum (I'm a drummer, btw).

Well this is the first posting where you mention the snare at all.

Being a drummer myself I agree that the snare drum does not sound very crisp and dynamic, but this is true for the overwhelming number of recordings. A notable exception is the remake of Jon Lords Concerto for Group and Orchestra from 2012, or the old classic Tricycle by Flim & the BBs. And of course a drum sounds quite different to the drummer playing it than to the audience, so you cannot expect that a recorded drum sounds like you experience it when you play it.