The Role of Program Material on Audio Quality:

[swan24]

Ex: I put on a few Naxos label CDs this morning, and they sounded flat and lifeless... Now, Naxos is a discount label, no less... But every recording sounded as if it had been re-re-re-mastered, and the sound left me flat...

Took a BBC CD-- that I got free with the magazine-- of Brahms Clarinet Sonatas, and it sounded like I had cleaned out my ears... What was it?... More air around the instruments... More definition... Depth... The illusion of a performance right in front of you was evident in every selection... Now, this was a free CD... Obviously, care was taken for this CD to sound good on good equipment...

Truth be told, I've often purged my CDs, just throwing out as many as 50 at a clip... Just because they don't do it for me... I didn't even give them away, because I think it's really bad karma to give away things you don't think are any good... (m.)

[Feanor]

Ex: I put on a few Naxos label CDs this morning, and they sounded flat and lifeless... Now, Naxos is a discount label, no less... But every recording sounded as if it had been re-re-re-mastered, and the sound left me flat...

Took a BBC CD-- that I got free with the magazine-- of Brahms Clarinet Sonatas, and it sounded like I had cleaned out my ears... What was it?... More air around the instruments... More definition... Depth... The illusion of a performance right in front of you was evident in every selection... Now, this was a free CD... Obviously, care was taken for this CD to sound good on good equipment...
... (m.)

I own many Naxos CDs and I don't agree that they are all bad. But I think Naxos has generally improved in recent years; earlier Naxos tended to be much as you described.

Naxos still tends, like most labels, to be quite variable. Telarc tended to be more consistently better than average, and Reference Recordings output is pretty much all excellent.

[Worf101]

Hey Adam thanks for making my brain hurt so early in the morning.

Bad Recordings: To me a bad recording is one where, regarless of technology at the time, there are key areas of the musical soundscape missing. No bass, no mids, no treble or too much of the above is a bad recording. There are also some recordings where the music is just plain wrong or corners were obviously cut, but that often is the fault of the record producer as anyone else.

Good Recordings: Regardless of the era or the equipment used a "good" recording has sufficient bass, mids and treble to hear the full musical spectrum. The presentation is "balanced" and works. Some leeway can be given for "live' recordings where obvious compromises need be made. And addditional consideration must be given to mono recordings and still some of those are masterfull. It's amazing what George Marting and Berry Gordy were able to do with such primative gear.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Worf

[atomicAdam]

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Worf

Worf -

What about dynamics, clarity, staging? All these play a huge roll in music. Frequency unbalance can be addressed with an EQ. Granted most hi fi don't have any tone controls - but I find it much easier to drop in a high roll off IC or bass thickening speaker cables than it is to create a stage that just isn't there or breath dynamic life into a recording that is too compressed.

Sorry if I make your brain hurt more - but I prob wouldn't have said anything if you didn't say 'that's my story and i'm sticking to it' - cause now of course i want to un-stick you. (umm...don't take that in a nasty way)