Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Should sound quality determine reviews?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Should sound quality determine reviews?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
Author
Message
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 28270
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote richardh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 00:08
It's certainly a tricky subject. My favourite album Brain Salad Surgery has way too much compression and distortion. Eddy Offord was sorely missed especially when you compare it to the previous album Trilogy which was spot on production wise. So I probably should deduct a mark for it but I could never do that!
I do like the grainy analog approach of some retro bands such as Elephant 9 and Astra. That is what I really want not the sterile approach that is more typical. However I think the music is always 99% of the thing and sound quality 1%. So really its better to stick to commenting about the music  .


Edited by richardh - March 07 2020 at 00:09
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17708
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 00:24
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

...
Also a great observation about live-in-the-studio being an underused approach.


Hi,

A really great example of this is NEKTAR's Sounds Like This ... and the funny thing is ... that was EXACTLY what you heard in concert ... the band was that tight and good!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17708
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 00:29
Originally posted by Squonk19 Squonk19 wrote:

No - a great song can survive indifferent production, but a good mix can enhance a good song and make it great. However, it doesn't mean a classic song can't hit new heights if the remix/remastering is done well.

Hi,

I'm not sure this is totally true. 

If you have a great singer, that knows what he/she is singing about, you can have a home recording set from the nickel shop at Amazon, and that person will still sound good ... why? The voice -- their instrument -- is flawless in its delivery and no one can miss that!

You and I will likely say that it is a shame that it was not recorded with better equipment, but a great singer and deliverer of words is rarely concerned with the external side of their work ... they will still sound good!

The quality of the recording, is not the reason why something is great ... it was PF's adjusting to the sonic nature of "sound" that helped DSOTM, and DG makes sure each and every note is heard ... and that it sounds perfect ... and that is more on the player than it is on anyone else ... but you and I will always agree that it makes it all sound even better! You can even hear how good it was in the bootlegs ... which after a few times, you know the difference ... THE PLAYER and the BAND!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Frenetic Zetetic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 09 2017
Location: Now
Status: Offline
Points: 9233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frenetic Zetetic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 01:26
Originally posted by Man With Hat Man With Hat wrote:

Yes. If I can't hear the music clearly it's a big drag on enjoying the music. 

It really is as simple as this to me. If it sounds like I'm listening to your band through drywall, over the phone, underwater, it's ruining your art for me.

Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

Sound quaity is important, but not the most important part. Orchestation, compsition, instrumentation, etc, also play a role in getting an overall picture of a record.

Oh definitely...but what if you can't hear the complex layers of harmony because of the mixing job? That's my gripe! It's like downloading a 1080P picture in 56K; all that color loss LOL.

Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Only if it's truly awful where one has to turn up the volume to really hear it.

This.

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.

"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Back to Top
friso View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 24 2007
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote friso Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 08:43
Put on your favorite album on YouTube. Select the lowest possible bitrate and see if you still enjoy the music as much. You won't. Sound quality matters.

I'm guitarist and songwriter for the prog-related band Mother Bass. Find us at http://www.motherbass.com. I also enter stages throughout the Netherlands performing my poetry.
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 08:53
Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.
I  disagree. Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment, with great care, proper microphones and the right expertise. Foxtrot  sounding good to you is an indicator of the rule as opposed to the exception.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
ExittheLemming View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11420
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ExittheLemming Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 10:52
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.
I  disagree. Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment, with great care, proper microphones and the right expertise. Foxtrot  sounding good to you is an indicator of the rule as opposed to the exception.


Yep, 'Frenetic' is blowing smoke up his backside. Shocked Ask yourself the question: why do VST/AAX/AU/RTAS audio plug in manufacturers flood the market with best selling products that offer to 'replicate the vintage analogue productions of yesteryear from right inside your DAW'? Stick the words 'Abbey Road' on the packaging and bedroom producers will be robbing the aged and infirm to buy them.


Edited by ExittheLemming - March 07 2020 at 10:59
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 11:17
Originally posted by Hercules Hercules wrote:

Sound quality matters enormously to me.
My hi-fi (Pink Triangle Anniversary TT, SME V arm, Ortofon Cadenza Blue cartridge + Audiolab 8000C/8000P amps + Mission 753 Freedom speakers) is incredibly revealing.

Any faults in the mix/recording can make some music unlistenable, unenjoyable and hence it colours my review.

SQ matters huge to me also, it can very much affect how I respond to the music as well it can determine how much I spin that record. Herc's key word above is "revealing". I have many examples where the SQ is dismal and you don't hear or pick up the nuances that make a passage engaging. 

There are many delicate sound structures in classic prog, most reissue CDs from the 90's were done horribly, brick-walled to death, which is still occurring BTW, and all u hear is a wall of noise. Dynamics and resolution are gone. Pick up a well recorded, properly mixed and mastered album and you will hear these nuances and it will affect how you react to the music, if not then you have a hearing deficiency. Shocked

Like Herc my system is very revealing, some may ask "how do you know this?" Two reasons, 1) Go and listen to a high end system, it costs you nothing to do this. 2) I grew up with analog, and clearly remember how my records sounded back in the day, today's analog gear are light years better than what I had in the 70/80s. So my 70's records sound different, but what I hear now are all the nuances that my Lyra Delos cartridge is capable of reproducing, as well the audio gear before and after it that helps immensely. 

I don't review here, but did on another site that does not exist anymore and it (SQ) clearly makes a different impression.
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 07 2020 at 11:48
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.
I  disagree. Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment, with great care, proper microphones and the right expertise. Foxtrot  sounding good to you is an indicator of the rule as opposed to the exception.

I have 3 copies of this brilliant album and my best sounding version is the 2008 Nick Davis remix mastered at 1/2 speed. The blanket from my speakers has been removed, the sound is much more open and revealing compared to my 1972 original issue that is simply veiled, this is a known thing on all Genesis early albums....but I only know this because I have a base to compare, then and now. I do have a 1978 German pressing copy that sounds pretty good, much better than my 1972 version. \
There are many many versions available, not all are done well, if you really want to find those well done records you have to research.

I'm not sure what you mean Steve by "Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment....." Take for example ITCOtCK, original copy tapes were botched, this is a classic known story. The tape recording heads were either misaligned or very dirty when creating copies for other countries to master from, the original recording had been stolen. They had to use these copies to create what we have today, albeit what Fripp, Tony Arnold and SWilson have done is pretty awesome now.

You can read about it here.

Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 28270
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote richardh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 00:19
so that's all cleared up then LOL
Back to Top
Frenetic Zetetic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 09 2017
Location: Now
Status: Offline
Points: 9233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frenetic Zetetic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 00:36
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.
I  disagree. Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment, with great care, proper microphones and the right expertise. Foxtrot  sounding good to you is an indicator of the rule as opposed to the exception.

As someone that records, mixes, and masters music as a professional hobby I fail to see how your comment contradicts mine. Of course it was analog, what the hell else would they be using...? How does that preclude some recordings sounding more clear than others...?

Even other users have chimed in with personal experience with clarity of sound on this one. I have two versions of the album and while the 2008 remix is obviously the most clear, my other copy (assuming a 90's pressing) sounds plenty passable mix-wise.

"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 03:38
Originally posted by Grumpyprogfan Grumpyprogfan wrote:

^ The production on Steely Dan's Aja  or Jellyfish's Spilt Milk is overdone, but I would not call either mix sterile. Superb is a better description.

No idea about the Jellyfish album.  But about Aja, while it's not sterile, I would definitely call it an album that's too well recorded, to the point where all the rock and roll energy is sucked out of it and it sounds more like a jazz ensemble.  Entirely possible that that's what they wanted, this topic as with many others becomes about us listeners projecting our likes and dislikes on the album independent of the makers' own goals.  That said, for me, Royal Scam is the album I love to play in the mornings on the commute (especially Monday mornings LOL) because it's so kickass while Aja works better in the evening or on cloudy, rainy days.  It's very languid and luxuriant but energetic it isn't.
Back to Top
Mortte View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mortte Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 03:39
I am lo-fi guy, so itīs possible rough production can even rise my rating (I think todayīs music suffers a lot too clean production). But of course if the music sounds as recorded in some very bad equipment from the audience, itīs too much even for me. Got one "Let them eat vinyl" -live release from Beefheart (I think itīs bootie), after buying that never bought anything they released.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 03:44
On topic, this is so subjective because I wouldn't say it is about sound quality per se (because most professional albums are well recorded if by that is meant capturing the sound faithfully).  It is usually an issue of either mixing or too much compression (too little in odd cases like Aja above).  Recordings where the vocals are too much in the background in the mix, overcompressed recordings (see loudness wars), recordings where drums are too loud in the mix or sound too trebly, these are some qualities that I may find irritating, sometimes irritating enough to mar my opinion of the album.
Back to Top
handwrist View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2019
Location: Lisbon
Status: Offline
Points: 135
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote handwrist Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 05:40
It depends. Trout Mask Replica good, St Anger snare bad. 

I agree with other posters that there is such a thing as overproduction, both in terms of modern compressing habits, and due to sterility of sound (like mentioned Aja vs previous albums).

And then it depends also on the type of music being played: Steely Dan wouldn't sound good recorded like Beefheart, and vice versa.


Edited by handwrist - March 08 2020 at 05:41
Back to Top
JD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 07 2009
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18446
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 09:44
Determine?? No
Be considered and critiqued?? Absolutely.
Thank you for supporting independently produced music
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17708
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 11:53
Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

...
Oh definitely...but what if you can't hear the complex layers of harmony because of the mixing job? That's my gripe! It's like downloading a 1080P picture in 56K; all that color loss LOL.
...

Might as well use a classical music example, but I'm not sure that it can make a difference on many of the folks here ... 

A rock'n'roll staff has .... 4 lines ... Frank Zappa liked 10 or more if he could ... now try opera ... some 20 lines on the staff ... and YOU WILL NOT HEAR EVERYTHING REGARDLESS OF HOW IT IS RECORDED.

For this reason, Stokowski was known for moving the instruments around on some recordings, so he could get the emphasis he wanted, and for recording ... right after WW2, this was incredible, and no one could imagine that anyone would mess with the orchestra setup and sittings!

Sound is AN IMPORTANT PART OF MUSIC ... however, it should not be the music! Unplug the effects if you don't believe me!  Now comes the ugly duckling ... things like Tangerine Dream are more about bringing the sound to life ... now you are really stuck! Embarrassed
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 12:59
Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Few have the actual experience and understanding of the work involved to make a record sound good. Old records sounding fuzzy is fine. New recordings sounding bad is no excuse IMHO!

For the record (lol) I think the production on Foxtrot is crystal clear to my ears.
I  disagree. Almost all audiophile grade recordings were done back in the day on analogue equipment, with great care, proper microphones and the right expertise. Foxtrot  sounding good to you is an indicator of the rule as opposed to the exception.

As someone that records, mixes, and masters music as a professional hobby I fail to see how your comment contradicts mine. Of course it was analog, what the hell else would they be using...? How does that preclude some recordings sounding more clear than others...?

Even other users have chimed in with personal experience with clarity of sound on this one. I have two versions of the album and while the 2008 remix is obviously the most clear, my other copy (assuming a 90's pressing) sounds plenty passable mix-wise.
First off, I said that Foxtrot sounded good to you. Audio quality ultimately is subjective, and there's no accounting for taste. Secondly, there's no guarantee that a recording will sound great based solely on the fact that it's digital, as a a single sub par microphone and can wreck the sound. 

Thirdly, a monkey cannot record music, equalize it, mix it and master it. There appears to be plenty of monkeys that record music as a professional hobby. How do I know? I recorded music professionally for 45 years, starting out in NYC and then went to Nashville before going with Capital Records in California and then returned to Columbia Records in NYC. Before retiring in 2013, I was a freelance mixer and lacquer cutter in London. And in most of my later time I was employed to fix the botch jobs recorded digitally by numerous "professional hobbyists". Mixing and mastering engineers make good coin cleaning up after people. I'm not saying that you're of simian class, however, your credentials may impress the man on the street but they don't mean much to a professional who spent so much time fixing digitally recorded disasters.



Edit: friendlier response.




Edited by SteveG - March 09 2020 at 04:29
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
tdfloyd View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 06 2008
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1002
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tdfloyd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 13:05
Sound quality is huge.  I'm not enjoying an album if my feelings about it are that this would be a great album if they re-recorded.  For me there are plenty of examples of albums I don't listen do because i don't like the production .  Third, Earthbound,  Tony Williams Emergency, some of Genesis etc.  Some diminish the enjoyment, others make it unlistenable for me
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slartibartfast Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 08 2020 at 14:32
Well you can divvy up points.  Quality of the music first.  Sound quality second.  Simple.  How heavily you want to weigh each.  Not so simple. LOL
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.180 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.