Bad recording/master: it is a crime!!!

[Sal1950]

The saddest part of the situation is that we feel those published DR database numbers would/should be an embarrassment to the responsible studios.
While there are many others that would look on them as a very successful project and something to work towards achieving.
I remember an blog by a engineer (Mark Waldrep?) where he told of receiving the master back 3 times with instructions to "make it louder"

 

[DonH56]

Yup.

https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-mark-waldrep-aix-recordsitrax-part-1-3

 

[NorthSky]

"°°°"
"As someone that produces only REAL HD-Audio tracks on my label AIX Records AND distributes REAL HD-Audio downloads at iTrax.com, I'm astonished at the lack of information by audio writers, technical professionals and average consumers when it comes to what is and what isn't a high definition audio recording. Even Neil Young, a staunch crusader for better quality music formats, has it wrong. He records on analog tape and then masters to digital for distribution. Sure, he should be able to give his fans the fidelity that he prefers but it's not high definition because the analog tape machine established the ultimate fidelity of his delivered tracks no matter what happens later in the production chain.

"What I am hoping for is that music lovers will add another way of experiencing music to their palette of playback options."

I'm not saying that everyone should give up his or her vinyl, tubes and embrace 5.1 surround delivery. What I am hoping for is that music lovers will add another way of experiencing music to their palette of playback options. One you've heard the increased dynamics and extended frequency response in a "stage" POV mix, I believe you'll be "blown away".
_____

Speaking of Neil Young and Pono:
• http://www.noise11.com/news/r-i-p-pono-neil-young-kills-off-his-digital-player-20170423

 

[captain paranoia]

I was curious so I listened to this new video:

Maybe you should try a better source than YouTube. Or is YouTube streaming CD quality or higher now?

 

[NorthSky]

Maybe you should try a better source than YouTube. Or is YouTube streaming CD quality or higher now?

One of my granddaughters was visiting last weekend and she had the CD in her lunch bag, she asked to listen to it. She's 10. ...Out of 10.

I'm not going to tell her about dynamic range and loudness wars.

 

[NorthSky]

As for YouTube I have no clue, it's not my source of audiophile music listening. I only use YouTube to demo stuff for you people.

The audio resolution is probably on par with MP3?

Anyway, we're talking the venerable CD medium here. Do you want me to buy you one, it's very cheap.

Or, for your own personal convenience:
• http://time.com/5018129/taylor-swift-reputation-album-release/
• https://www.refinery29.com/2017/11/180151/how-to-stream-taylor-swift-reputation

Tune number 5:
• https://www.amazon.com/reputation-Taylor-Swift/dp/B077H93JN4

 

[NorthSky]

And if you only listen to that YouTube music video you get 192 kbps audio resolution, dispensable audio quality compared to the LP, except for the tics and pops and background noise, but more in line with the CD, if you can discern with your ears, depending of your age.

• https://www.h3xed.com/web-and-internet/youtube-audio-quality-bitrate-240p-360p-480p-720p-1080p

 

[RayDunzl]

Maybe you should try a better source than YouTube. Or is YouTube streaming CD quality or higher now?

Let's compare a YouTube I uploaded (since replaced by UMG/YouTube) to the CD, both as played in-room:

Carla Bley, Copyright Royalties, from the album Social Studies

Which is YouTube, which is CD?

I'd say YouTube can be good, but as always, GIGO.

 

[captain paranoia]

I only use YouTube to demo stuff for you people.

My pont was that YouTube is not a good way of demonstrating quality (or lack thereof) in audio recordings, since, as far as I am aware, YouTube does not use high quality audio streaming.

It's like those TV adverts trying to show how wonderful the picture of a new TV is, by showing an advert on your existing, crappy old TV...

You hadn't mentioned that you had access to the CD...

I don't need convincing that loudness wars is a real, hideous problem that destroys music. Just that YouTube is not a good way of demonstrating the problem.

 

[NorthSky]

Ok.

 

[Don Hills]

And if you only listen to that YouTube music video you get 192 kbps audio resolution ...

That article is out of date. The current maximum bitrate for Youtube videos is 128 kbps AAC. They're also loudness adjusted to reduce track-to-track loudness differences.

 

[NorthSky]

Do you have a new updated link?
___

• https://www.tutorialguidacomefare.c...p-2160p-max-bitrate-which-compresses-youtube/

 

[NorthSky]

• https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/6hzque/audio_quality_from_music_videos_on_youtube/

● https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1799040

 

[NorthSky]

 

[Don Hills]

The doom9 thread describes the situation well.
Maximum audio bitrate is 128 kbps for AAC, ~160 kbps for Opus.
All new uploads are transcoded to these rates, and legacy clips at different rates are progressively being transcoded.

 

[NorthSky]

I was curious so I listened to this new video:

I was looking for audio sound quality and artistic talent with high musical emotion. I found none, zero. Then it crossed my mind that it's probably because I need to upgrade my hi-fi stereo sound system.

How is your hi-fi system, that tune sounds good through it, you feel the emotional connection, the artistic talent from the artist singer, the quality music recording...all that jazz?

It doesn't seem to sound natural in my setup, the vocals seem mechanical, prefabricated, cardboard caricatures, manipulated, antiseptic, green psychiatric hospital walls, mint Listerine, Fisher toy radio for newborn babies you suspend above their cribs...

Do I need a new system setup, or maybe change my music style?

• https://etcanada.com/news/308387/ta...ripping-off-kenzo-ad-directed-by-spike-jonze/

Pop music business as usual.
___

Extra: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/entertain...-stop/ar-BBKdpcK?li=AAggSpD&OCID=ansmsnnews11

 

[NorthSky]

The doom9 thread describes the situation well.
Maximum audio bitrate is 128 kbps for AAC, ~160 kbps for Opus.
All new uploads are transcoded to these rates, and legacy clips at different rates are progressively being transcoded.

Ok.

 

[Timbo2]

I'd say YouTube can be good, but as always, GIGO.

I wind up listening to YouTube fairly often. It's an easy way for me to listen to J-Pop. I throw on an automatic mix and let it run when I'm working and not critically listening. I've found that it really depends on the source.

The official uploads from the music companies usually sound good, but the "non-official" fan made uploads from source CD usually sound better. OTH, sometimes the files have been through many cycles of compression and have many artifacts.

J-Pop in general seems to suffer less from the loudness wars than Western pop music, but it is by no means immune.

I'm by no means an audio engineer, but to me it looks at minute 1:23 the engineer here takes mix and proceeds remove all the peaks...

 

[RayDunzl]

to me it looks at minute 1:23 the engineer here takes mix and proceeds remove all the peaks...

It has been "limited/compressed"...

Not clipped... no flat-tops seen, anywhere...

 

[Timbo2]

It has been "limited/compressed"...

Thanks! That's what I meant.