The death of High Fidelity?

[squeegy200]

I noticed this trend years ago when I worked in a retail audio store. From my experience, most of the customers who entered my store found quality of reproduction irrelevant. Most associated sound pressure with sound quality.

However, audio enthusiasts could still seek audio equipment that suited their tastes knowing that available software could sound good if the right equipment was reproducing it.

However, that may no longer be true.

See article from Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...fidelity/print

[basite]

true, good recordings are becoming rare (mostly in the pop music business, classical music is almost always good recorded these days, and jazz is well recorded too, so are some other albums)

they still exist though, but most pop music is flat sounding, no imaging, no depth, disorted, no balance,...

High end audio equipment (or good equipment, to not use the word 'high end') is also still available, but there is just more crap out there than there used to be...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[Feanor]

...
See article from Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...fidelity/print

"The loudness war" has been the occassional topic of conversation for years. Fortunately it doesn't affect classical recordings that I mainly listen to, at all.

It's true that the average slack-jawed yokel is not much interested in sound quality. But I question whether he ever really was. The heyday of hi-fi was the '70s and early '80s when advertising was stoking public interest and having a stereo was a status symbol. Think about it: what was missing in those days? Answer: home video equipment. The great unwashed lost interest in hi-fi once VCRs hit the scene. Hi-fi per se was at the same time displaced by portable equipment for which sound quality almost irrelevant.

But high fidelity isn't dead, it is just resticted to more dedicated aficionados. The fact is that there is more high quality equipment available today than ever before.

[Mr Peabody]

The problem is recognized, now will enough people care or enough people in the industry care, like those mentioned, to effect any change. Maybe they will leave it up to the artist. I remember way back when Supertramp's, Breakfast in America came out they got some recognition for putting the cassette version out on a high bias (chrome) tape opposed to the normal crap cassettes. If done properly I could almost see the reversal of the trend becoming a marketing tool. Joe Blow's new album now released in uncompressed high fidelity!

[squeegy200]

The problem is recognized, now will enough people care or enough people in the industry care, like those mentioned, to effect any change. Maybe they will leave it up to the artist. I remember way back when Supertramp's, Breakfast in America came out they got some recognition for putting the cassette version out on a high bias (chrome) tape opposed to the normal crap cassettes. If done properly I could almost see the reversal of the trend becoming a marketing tool. Joe Blow's new album now released in uncompressed high fidelity!

I've noticed a handful of artists releasing their work in digital format but also offering LPs in the first releases. In some cases, they've even overlooked the CD format. I know iTunes is also considering a "lossless" download store to parallel their regular download format. They would offer uncompressed recordings for enthusiasts.

Your fortune telling skills may not be far off.

[emaidel]

High Fidelity has been "dying" almost since it got started. Many people purchased reel-to-reel tape decks to record their friend's LP's, and more often than not, used cheap tape to do so, not wanting to spend the extra money for better tape. The result? Generally poor recordings, and pale comparisons of the original material.

Then my favorite disabuse of quality happened - 8-track tapes which sold like hotcakes and sounded horrible. Eventually, 8-track went bye-bye, and cassette tapes took hold. All the while, whether it be reel-to-reel copies, 8-track or cassettes, the LP held supreme in terms of quality of sound, yet sold in the lowest numbers.

CD's all but killed LP's, and I won't go into the never-ending argument as to which sounds better, but at least all can agree that CD's are at least decent sounding (I have a much higher opinion). CD's are also the best available source material generally available today, but MP-3 has taken over due to the immense popularity of i-Pods.

Much as I hate to say it, the American consumer has almost always chosen convenience over quality, and continues to do so. It is people like us here at AR (and other similar sites) that keep "high-fidelity" alive.

[melvin walker]

High Fidelity has been "dying" almost since it got started. Many people purchased reel-to-reel tape decks to record their friend's LP's, and more often than not, used cheap tape to do so, not wanting to spend the extra money for better tape. The result? Generally poor recordings, and pale comparisons of the original material.

Then my favorite disabuse of quality happened - 8-track tapes which sold like hotcakes and sounded horrible. Eventually, 8-track went bye-bye, and cassette tapes took hold. All the while, whether it be reel-to-reel copies, 8-track or cassettes, the LP held supreme in terms of quality of sound, yet sold in the lowest numbers.

CD's all but killed LP's, and I won't go into the never-ending argument as to which sounds better, but at least all can agree that CD's are at least decent sounding (I have a much higher opinion). CD's are also the best available source material generally available today, but MP-3 has taken over due to the immense popularity of i-Pods.

Much as I hate to say it, the American consumer has almost always chosen convenience over quality, and continues to do so. It is people like us here at AR (and other similar sites) that keep "high-fidelity" alive.

Well said , there is very little to add !

[jim goulding]

Well, your inimitable friend will add something. There are artists, those who play instruments (a few) and those who record them (more than a few), who keep high fidelity alive. Labels (people), even. When was the last time the majority mattered to art? We're a few, and discovery is our pleasure.

[melvin walker]

Poor quality recordings started with the beginning of stereo. One reason that a mono recording of Miles Davis " Kind of Blue " is more valuable than the stereo version , although both was sold at the same time.
To sell stereo records the big recording companies introduced greater dynamics , dynamics was always a problem with analog recordings.
Popular , classical and jazz all suffered from the decision of the recording companies to appeal to the new market by adding more dynamics , which increased sales of records as well as audio equipment. All this began in the early 1960's.

The true audiophile found himself buying recordings pressed in Europe. Example RCA ,
and Columbia pressed records differently in Europe. One could buy a European version of a recording avoiding American versions. The problem was one had to go to Europe to buy the recording.
Than there was European recording companies , Philips and Grammophon which could be purchased in America.
Problem they only recorded classical music.

Later some small recording companies started using the digital process in recording.
The problem was that in transferring an analog recording to digital some of the detail was lost.
But with the change in musical taste to rock and country , and with the decline in jazz and classical it made little difference. We in America had dumb down in our musical taste .
It was only a matter of time before audio equipment caught up.

Do we care ? some do , others must make a living. I once heard it said that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of an American.

[basite]

Poor quality recordings started with the beginning of stereo. One reason that a mono recording of Miles Davis " Kind of Blue " is more valuable than the stereo version , although both was sold at the same time.
To sell stereo records the big recording companies introduced greater dynamics , dynamics was always a problem with analog recordings.
Popular , classical and jazz all suffered from the decision of the recording companies to appeal to the new market by adding more dynamics , which increased sales of records as well as audio equipment. All this began in the early 1960's.

The true audiophile found himself buying recordings pressed in Europe. Example RCA ,
and Columbia pressed records differently in Europe. One could buy a European version of a recording avoiding American versions. The problem was one had to go to Europe to buy the recording.
Than there was European recording companies , Philips and Grammophon which could be purchased in America.
Problem they only recorded classical music.

Later some small recording companies started using the digital process in recording.
The problem was that in transferring an analog recording to digital some of the detail was lost.
But with the change in musical taste to rock and country , and with the decline in jazz and classical it made little difference. We in America had dumb down in our musical taste .
It was only a matter of time before audio equipment caught up.

Do we care ? some do , others must make a living. I once heard it said that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of an American.

Hereby, I again understand that you think everything vintage is good and new things are evil.

I do find it weird that you gave Kind of Blue as an example (I own this both on CD as on Vinyl), because I find it really nice. This is were mono fails. It has depth, but IMO stereo introduced a critical new thing too. It's called imaging. When Davis' suddenly 'appears' midway between the speakers, that's fantastic. And I wonder what it is that you have against dynamics? I agree that overly agressive dynamics can be bad, but without the dynamics, music would be dull and boring sounding (also reffered to as 'flat').
I don't know if you own 'Ron Carter - Blues Farm', but you should definately try this.

Also, what's wrong with rock? I can understand you like jazz (so do I, I enjoy every bit of it, both new and old jazz, like Miles Davis, for example). But what's wrong with rock?

I also think I understand why you don't like modern recordings. When I look at your equipment list, I can only think about how hot a new recording must sound through those JBL('s)...

I experienced this myself with my Advents (The Large Advent speaker, by Henry Kloss), I had a double pair (I still have it, but I kinda ran out of space ), driven by a Mcintosh integrated. I also found them sounding much better with vinyl as with CD's (of course, vinyl always sound better, but I think you get the point...). If a cd was recorded as being 'neutral sounding', the advents would sound pretty harsh, it kinda fell apart, and the vinyl recordings opened the Advents up, everything suddenly came alive. Now I have (new) Thiel speakers, and cd's also open up the speakers now (although only with good recordings), and so does vinyl.



Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[melvin walker]

Hereby, I again understand that you think everything vintage is good and new things are evil.

I do find it weird that you gave Kind of Blue as an example (I own this both on CD as on Vinyl), because I find it really nice. This is were mono fails. It has depth, but IMO stereo introduced a critical new thing too. It's called imaging. When Davis' suddenly 'appears' midway between the speakers, that's fantastic. And I wonder what it is that you have against dynamics? I agree that overly agressive dynamics can be bad, but without the dynamics, music would be dull and boring sounding (also reffered to as 'flat').
I don't know if you own 'Ron Carter - Blues Farm', but you should definately try this.

Also, what's wrong with rock? I can understand you like jazz (so do I, I enjoy every bit of it, both new and old jazz, like Miles Davis, for example). But what's wrong with rock?

I also think I understand why you don't like modern recordings. When I look at your equipment list, I can only think about how hot a new recording must sound through those JBL('s)...

I experienced this myself with my Advents (The Large Advent speaker, by Henry Kloss), I had a double pair (I still have it, but I kinda ran out of space ), driven by a Mcintosh integrated. I also found them sounding much better with vinyl as with CD's (of course, vinyl always sound better, but I think you get the point...). If a cd was recorded as being 'neutral sounding', the advents would sound pretty harsh, it kinda fell apart, and the vinyl recordings opened the Advents up, everything suddenly came alive. Now I have (new) Thiel speakers, and cd's also open up the speakers now (although only with good recordings), and so does vinyl.





Keep them spinning,
Bert.

I have the mono , stereo and CD version of "kind of Blue". Why add anything to a recording. That is the main reason in St.Louis several audiophiles purchased their LP's
in Europe to avoid the juice-up version of many recordings made in America.
As posted earlier the recording industry was more interested in attracting new buyers than
producing quality recordings. The American automobile industry followed the same path.
Pzazz rather than quality. Now we have home entertainment. systems , where audio has taken a back seat to video.

Rock music or rock and roll was no different , again quality was not it's most important product. Most rock entertainers can neither sing , dance or act. As they said in "Singing in the Rain" A triple threat. With most modern adolescent driven anything the end results is even lower quality , we now have hip-hop and rap . The glorification of the slums. The put-down of women.

To say that that the technology of today in audio is not an improvement is nonsense.
There is some outstanding audio equipment available. That does not mean that we do not have the Stradivarius of audio equipment. The equipment of a time when we cared about the music we listened to or the movies we watched. We respected women and removed our hats when entering a room.
As Frank Sinatra said in "That's Entertainment " We can wait around and hope but we will
never see that again.

[E-Stat]

To sell stereo records the big recording companies introduced greater dynamics...

I think you have that reversed. Compressing the signal has always been about optimizing the sound for radio play, typically listened to in a car.

The true audiophile found himself buying recordings pressed in Europe. Example RCA , and Columbia pressed records differently in Europe. One could buy a European version of a recording avoiding American versions. The problem was one had to go to Europe to buy the recording.

Other good labels were Decca, EMI, and Telefunken. One of my mentors subscribed to Gramophone and ordered vinyl across the pond (in the 70s).

Later some small recording companies started using the digital process in recording.The problem was that in transferring an analog recording to digital some of the detail was lost.

I'm surprised you haven't heard of Telarc. They released the first digitally sourced recordings using Dr. Tom Stockham's new open reel recorder. They were not transfers. One of the earliest releases (1978) was The Firebird with the ASO. I had the good fortune to witness that event and play a very minor role (I was the official timer).

It was only a matter of time before audio equipment caught up.

While that is an accurate portrayal of the mainstream, my view is not nearly that cynical. We have FAR better gear available today than in the past. While the best is still astronomically priced, one can get very good sound for a reasonable amount in inflation adjusted dollars.

rw

[Feanor]

Poor quality recordings started with the beginning of stereo. ...
To sell stereo records the big recording companies introduced greater dynamics , dynamics was always a problem with analog recordings.
Popular , classical and jazz all suffered from the decision of the recording companies to appeal to the new market by adding more dynamics , which increased sales of records as well as audio equipment. All this began in the early 1960's.

The true audiophile found himself buying recordings pressed in Europe. Example RCA, and Columbia pressed records differently in Europe. One could buy a European version of a recording avoiding American versions. The problem was one had to go to Europe to buy the recording. Than there was European recording companies , Philips and Grammophon which could be purchased in America. Problem they only recorded classical music.

Later some small recording companies started using the digital process in recording. The problem was that in transferring an analog recording to digital some of the detail was lost.
But with the change in musical taste to rock and country , and with the decline in jazz and classical it made little difference....
...

I wasn't involved at the time, but I'll bet poor recordings when back further than stereo. But do I'll agree that there were always bad stereo recordings; my personal experience with audio goes back to about 1971. There were poor recordings then and that predates digital recording by several years and CD by over a decade.

Many early CDs, especially those that were originally LPs reissued on CD were quite bad. (Early CD players were pretty awful too, but that is another subject.) To hear some audiophiles you would believe that poor sound originated with CD but in fact there were always a few good CDs, and since the late '90s, at least for classical, most are pretty good. Personally I doubt that it ever was the CD medium, but rather poor recording or master practice that has caused so much abhorance of CD.

If fact there are far more great classical recordings being released today than ever before. I don't know (or care) about popular genre, but there it seems there current issue is too little dynamic range -- not too much as per Melvin.

[Slippers On]

This is a fast moving forum subject and so I'll keep it brief.

Basite.. you never cease to amaze me with your depth!!

Melvin... you speak with heart and knowledge!

Some of these posts belong in the "Audiophile Debate" forum. This is the sort of content which will bring future audiophiles along.


Regarding Miles Davis' Kind of Blue. I have Mono and Stereo versions on LP and CD..........then they fuc**d it up by discovering it was recorded at wrong pitch! Agast, I have to start collecting again!.

Are some of you guys saying that European versions of LPs are better than US?

Slippers shuffling

[Mr Peabody]

Talking about going back in time, when a new release comes out on LP and not CD. If the LP is $30.00 like many of the new vinyl that will leave me out. I also to this point have not downloaded any music. If this is the future it may leave me out.

[Mr Peabody]

Isn't dynamics the opposite of compression who is the bad guy in this story.

[melvin walker]

Isn't dynamics the opposite of compression who is the bad guy in this story.

Why add or remove anything from a performance. Isn't thats what live vs recorded sound is all about? Audio is about ? The nearnest one can come to live !
Do we need to add more color to a rose ? more depth to a Monet painting ? are darken
a sunset ?
The bad guy is addition whether compression or dynamics.

[Slippers On]

Going for a piss, just learn't that I've been ripped off for 30yrs:-(

[Mr Peabody]

I'll probably post a thread but I heard the Dynaudio Sapphires today and at $16.5k they must undoubtedly be the best value in speakers going. They have a unique cabinet design and finish and there are only going to be 1,000 pair made. You'd think a speaker of limited number and quality would cost much more. The Temptations are $35K. Going backward there were 2 Clayton Audio, Class A, 300 watt monoblocks, T+A preamp and SACD player. Wow, what an impressive system. This is not the first time I heard Clayton Audio but it is the first time I've been blown away by them, talking about power, and power in reserve. The bass response of the Sapphires being driven by the Clayton's was incredible. High Fidelity isn't dead, and you can get astounding sound but in this case it carries a price tag. There is much more expensive gear though and comparatively this system was fairly priced.

[MudFlap]

Okay .... Here's a post from the Audio Maven Peanut Gallery.

The death of HiFi....??

Nah.... as long as there's the few (or many) of us out there that appreciate the beauty of clean gear and perfect pitch there will always be room for HiFi.

Thank God.

My listening isn't as refined as many (or even most) .... but when I hear something special it keeps me wanting more.

mf

[blackraven]

Here are 2 interesting addresses that I found a while back that are very interesting and concern upsampling.
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-digital-audio

http://www.audioholics.com/education...ats-technology

[Mr Peabody]

The first article is almost scary as some one who uses an Audio Note DAC. I think I must have missed the intended info on the 2nd link.

[blackraven]

The second link just FYI for anyone interested in other audio reviews.

[blackraven]

I have to agree with you on multichannel sound. It never really appealed to me. However, after hearing 2ch SACD sound with the marantz SA8001 SACD player which is a 2ch SACDP, I'm convinced that it sounds better that standard CD. If I had mostly SACD's then this would be my favorite format. Also, magnepans fill my room with sound that who needs multi channel except for hometheater.

[pixelthis]

I have to agree with you on multichannel sound. It never really appealed to me. However, after hearing 2ch SACD sound with the marantz SA8001 SACD player which is a 2ch SACDP, I'm convinced that it sounds better that standard CD. If I had mostly SACD's then this would be my favorite format. Also, magnepans fill my room with sound that who needs multi channel except for hometheater.

SACD is my favorite format.
After talking about it, got out my kinda blue, sounded amazing as usual.
Gonna play my Ivan Linns complilation later.
Sacd has been a pleasant surprize, unlike DVDAUDIO its a non gimmicky high rez format,
and seems to be hanging in there.
Sony did it right, appealing to the high end listener , they knew that this was the main market.
I hope it makes it, there needs to be something for those of us who want a modern high rez format, the video game generation have their cheap Mp3s, the "audio conoseuirs
their scratchy LPS and distortion laden tubes.
WE TYPES WHO JUST LOVE GOOD, PURE, ACCURATE AUDIO deserve our little piece of land also