What are the causes of "The Dumbing Down of Audio"?

[pzaur]

Most new cds are way too bright sounding .

I have even stuck a lossless file into ipod and compared it to my irver with same headphone MDR 21 LP by the way. and the ipod powers it quite well.

And even a mp3 version of that file sounds better ..

I'm guessing that you think HDTV compressed to a 3-to1 ratio looks better, too. It's the same idea as compressing music.

In your opinion, the mp3 only sound better because the high frequencies and low frequencies are rolled off to decrease file size. The rolling off of the upper range has the effect of "darkening" the sound you're listening to. It also adds artifacting into the sound. Instruments in the upper and lower echelons won't be accurately represented starting at the file.

Dont believe me - why does every single review of the new Sony mp3 players, Irver, Cowon all sing praise to sound quality? If all that matters is the file and headphones shouldnt they all sound same as ipod?

No, each piece of equipment has different software and hardware inside. The file type is the starting point to creating a consistently correct sound. The software will decode the file type as it is programmed to. Some software does a better job than others.

I dare anyone to try the same file in a irver clix, or new sony walkman and cowan . And play around with the eq as well. That the way most people listen to players. Esp when there is outside noise like subway etc you have to increase the bass to compensate. No one listens to these players in their quiet bedroom. You can play any home stereo at home .

Rather large generalization. Noise isolating headphones would be a much better solution to the ambient noise issue. You're just creating self-induced hearing loss by raising the volume of your headphones. Over time, you'll have to continually raise the volume of the player due to the loss of sensitivity you've incurred by such a self destructive habit.

A good mp3 player must give user ability to play with the tone. Comparing with eq off does not prove much esp if you are in quiet location.

Turning on and off the eq is a way to change the "tone" of the music. I'm assuming that you're more interested in being able to adjust settings at mulitple Hz levels as opposed to just doing a generic on or off.

Some light reading on mp3 compression and formats:
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3

Great quote from the 3rd link:

"You can get used to awful," says record producer Phil Ramone. "You can appreciate nothing. We've done it with fast food."

Happy reading,

-pat

 

[zony]

I'm guessing that you think HDTV compressed to a 3-to1 ratio looks better, too. It's the same idea as compressing music.

In your opinion, the mp3 only sound better because the high frequencies and low frequencies are rolled off to decrease file size. The rolling off of the upper range has the effect of "darkening" the sound you're listening to. It also adds artifacting into the sound. Instruments in the upper and lower echelons won't be accurately represented starting at the file.




No, each piece of equipment has different software and hardware inside. The file type is the starting point to creating a consistently correct sound. The software will decode the file type as it is programmed to. Some software does a better job than others.



Rather large generalization. Noise isolating headphones would be a much better solution to the ambient noise issue. You're just creating self-induced hearing loss by raising the volume of your headphones. Over time, you'll have to continually raise the volume of the player due to the loss of sensitivity you've incurred by such a self destructive habit.



Turning on and off the eq is a way to change the "tone" of the music. I'm assuming that you're more interested in being able to adjust settings at mulitple Hz levels as opposed to just doing a generic on or off.

Some light reading on mp3 compression and formats:
Site 1
Site 2
Site 3

Great quote from the 3rd link:

"You can get used to awful," says record producer Phil Ramone. "You can appreciate nothing. We've done it with fast food."

Happy reading,

-pat

You are quite obnoxious aren't you? I never said the mp3 sounded better - I can clearly tell the difference between a mp3 and lossless file (esp 128 mp3). including detecting the artifacts. I said the ipod is so bad that even a lossless file played on it sounds worse than my iriver playing a mp3 version of that file.

Of course the lossless sounds better to me on the computer.


You are diverting attention from a simple observation: the ipod electronics not only does not provide suitable tonal controls to adjust the sound, it does not produce rich sound to an average headphone under normal listening conditions esp on subway. 100% Noise cancelling headphones are not necessary - the pair I have compensates enough - you have not heard the mdr21 in the subway so stop this obnoxious lecturing. in fact, the headphones I have makes the ipod sound far better than the stock headphones. Its lack of bass is only not missed by those who dont care for much bass to begin with.

If you want a real experiment- try a mid to high level onkyo amp (like A-9555)with direct sound. connect to a computer play the mp3 and listen to the bass.
Much more bass than any mp3 player including the ipod. And then compare the irver clix to the ipod with same file and same headphones - the difference is night and day. See which is closer to the onkyo amp sound.

 

[MinusTheBear]

I can see you getting banned very soon Zony if you do not calm down. You can't insult people. You have all the right to defend yourself, and yes I agree with you in your point about I-Pods but this has got to stop.

 

[Matt34]

You are quite obnoxious aren't you?

No, but your inability to debate without childish name calling is.

 

[pzaur]

I never said the mp3 sounded better

Refer back to your own quote at the top of my previous post. You just contradicted yourself.

You are diverting attention from a simple observation: the ipod electronics not only does not provide suitable tonal controls to adjust the sound, it does not produce rich sound to an average headphone under normal listening conditions esp on subway.

Did you actual read what I posted? Here is a reminder:

...each piece of equipment has different software and hardware inside. The file type is the starting point to creating a consistently correct sound. The software will decode the file type as it is programmed to. Some software does a better job than others."

100% Noise cancelling headphones are not necessary - the pair I have compensates enough - you have not heard the mdr21 in the subway so stop this obnoxious lecturing. in fact, the headphones I have makes the ipod sound far better than the stock headphones. Its lack of bass is only not missed by those who dont care for much bass to begin with.

Since you seem to be dragging this thread off course (like they usually go, eventually) just start another thread to debate the qualities of different mp3 players. Obviously, you have a thing for any mp3 player not named iPod and feel that they are automatically better. Please, set up some sort of tangible test that measures sound pressure levels at different frequencies from each of the mp3 players mentioned and post the results. In the meantime, take a chill pill, post something about the original post, stop contradicting yourself, and yes, you can have your own opinion about what mp3 player you like the best and not everyone has to agree with you. FYI - that was lecturing.

Louder does not equal better.
I'm done with this tangent from the original post.
No, I don't own an iPod or any portable mp3 player.

-pat

 

[zony]

I like to lick batteries

I couldn't come up with an intelligible response so I'll wail around on the floor like a four year old in the cereal aisle that just got told he couldn't have the Fruity Pebbles.

 

[pzaur]

Matt - Thank you.

 

[Matt34]

Then buy one and go to hell!


Nice to see so many morons here ---

Just some advice to anyone who buys an ipod and doesn't like the sound - return the damn thing and NEVER post on these moronic forums.
Someone is bound to tell you to get better headphones and to use higher bitrate mp3s or lossless.

Just say no to ipods and stop being like SHEEP!

I think Sheep is really going to hate that he missed this guy using his name in vain like that.

 

[pzaur]

A shame it is...

-pat

 

[MinusTheBear]

I can see you getting banned very soon Zony if you do not calm down.

Originally Posted by zony
Then buy one and go to hell!


Nice to see so many morons here ---

Just some advice to anyone who buys an ipod and doesn't like the sound - return the damn thing and NEVER post on these moronic forums.
Someone is bound to tell you to get better headphones and to use higher bitrate mp3s or lossless.

Just say no to ipods and stop being like SHEEP!


I called this one. Not much of a shock.

 

[zhimbo]

Dude needs to practice meditation a little. And write more clearly. And read better.

Thanks Matt!

 

[aberkowitz]

In New York City, you undoubtedly have a better than average selection of radio stations. If you ever get a chance to do so, it would be instructive for you to drive across the country. I have done this a couple of times, and there are some places where you will be lucky to get two FM radio stations. Typically, they will either both be country stations, or they will be Christian radio. That is when I am glad I have other options in the car, like playing CDs, or just listening to the sound of the engine and the tires on the pavement.

Still, your point about looking for good stations is an excellent suggestion. Some people complain about their area, when there is a station or two that they might actually like, if only they would take the trouble to search for it. The thing is, of course, that one is unlikely to like absolutely everything that is broadcast on any station, so one might reject a station based on trying it once, when they happen to be playing something the person does not like. So it is a good idea to try this on several occasions on different days before giving up completely on the idea, and then, of course, stations sometimes come and go, or change format, in which case one will have a new opportunity to find something one likes.




One of the funny things about people looking down on those who listen to top 40 music is that many of them also listen to top 40 music—just from a different era.

To pull this thread back on track....

Pyrrho- amazingly enough it's actually been in my experience that most places have BETTER radio than NYC in my opinion. When I lived in Chicago I much preferred the radio stations in IL, IN, and MO. The selection was actually much broader... the only thing I found better in NYC was NPR.

I also loved your point on Top 40 radio.

 

[pzaur]

Matt - from your edit isle should be aisle. Two different meanings


Too few companies own too many radio stations. There isn't enough variance and the stations that do stray from the pack are ostracized because they don't toe the line enough. It's a catch-22 if you own a station and play a large number of different artists that aren't mainstream. So much cool stuff out there that is never heard because:
1) The artists don't want to be part of a large record label
2) The artists haven't been "discovered"
3) Without the record label the artists don't get the support they should in marketing.

Record labels don't want a band anymore. They want an image. Mistakes can be digitally corrected in production. Good bands can perform live. They bad ones can't.

-pat

 

[MinusTheBear]

Matt - from your edit isle should be aisle. Two different meanings


Too few companies own too many radio stations. There isn't enough variance and the stations that do stray from the pack are ostracized because they don't toe the line enough. It's a catch-22 if you own a station and play a large number of different artists that aren't mainstream. So much cool stuff out there that is never heard because:
1) The artists don't want to be part of a large record label
2) The artists haven't been "discovered"
3) Without the record label the artists don't get the support they should in marketing.

Record labels don't want a band anymore. They want an image. Mistakes can be digitally corrected in production. Good bands can perform live. They bad ones can't.

-pat

The "best" radio stations I have ever heard are university/college radio stations. Soooooo much good stuff...

 

[pzaur]

The "best" radio stations I have ever heard are university/college radio stations. Soooooo much good stuff...

Agreed!!

-pat

 

[mike c]

crap. missed the fun again. shame on me for not being awake at 5am (local time).

 

[Sheep]

The problem with music nowadays? Two words: mastering engineers.

NO! It's not the engineers fault. They are just doing what they're told. You might reply "But they should say no, and not make poor recordings". Sure, then you'll have jobless engineers. They do what they're told, because if you play it cool, you stay in that seat for a long time. Which is exactly why I will never go into music. Producers are the ones to blame. They are not even needed. If a band cannot figure out what they should sound like, they shouldn't be a band. Good musicians don't need someone to tell them what to do. Timbaland can go **** himself.

SheepStar

 

[Sheep]

I think Sheep is really going to hate that he missed this guy using his name in vain like that.

****!

SheepStar

 

[Seth=L]

I missed this too? Darn it all to crap!

I wouldn't ever buy an iPod, but Zony was way off in left field.

 

[zhimbo]

I missed this too? Darn it all to crap!

I wouldn't ever buy an iPod, but Zony was way off in left field.

I would never buy one either. But I'm sure he thought I was a "fanboy".