How do you want your treble roll-off served?

[sandyk]

40 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

That said, I think it's an overstatement to call the performance "unlistenable," but gmg is absolutely correct about the distortion on the strings - for example from about 16:30 to 17:15 (approximately) in the YouTube clip. gm also is correct that recording lacks air, and it presents a relatively small soundstage and somewhat closed-in feeling.

 

How do you know that much of that isn't due to too low a  bit rate .aac encoding and compression?

 If you DL it directly the best you can hope for is 187Kilobits audio. (15KHZ MAX. too, IIRC)

Direct play from YouTube isn't even as good as that either.

[sandyk]

27 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Well I know because I have both the original LP and the SACD from Sony in the early 2000s, and a later Redbook re-release. They all sound pretty much the same. I've done enough recording to know the symptoms of gross overproduction and early solid state sound. 

You are doing early solid state sound an injustice !

 This recording is bloody awful. (at least the YouTube version is)

 The attached is the YouTube audio converted to 16/44.1 LPCM. At least there is no clipping evident in the recording.

 

[sandyk]

44 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

 

I agree with you that YouTube's compression - which, alas, typically is 124kbps and not even 187-191kbps - makes this stuff sound worse. And I would also request that you re-read my full comment, because I do mention the role of YT compression elsewhere in my comment. So I do agree with you on the general issue of YT audio compression.

 

However, if you have listened to that particular video, and you seriously think that the obviously analogue distortion and overload in the section in question is not due to the original recording and/or the condition of the LP and/or overload in the mic used to capture the video, but rather is due to YT compression, then we're going to have to agree to disagree, to put it mildly.

 I am not saying that. I am simply saying that to judge a recording properly, you need something way better than  YouTube which hobbles the audio so that the record companies don't have too worry about losing sales due to people saving the YouTube versions instead of buying them.

[sandyk]

7 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

Please don't threadcrap. Thank you.

 

You left yourself wide open to this when you made this  uncalled for comment.

 

 

Quote

So no, my interconnects are not soldered on, and no, I don't have homemade dampening material stuck inside my components. And for that matter, I don't have a -7dB or whatever EQ curve applied to my system. And yet somehow my system, while modest and certainly not without its faults, sounds consistently balanced, open, transparent, neutral, and not at all harsh to me, with all kinds of music played at a variety of volumes. (And just to be clear, Frank, this last paragraph should in no way be mistaken for an invitation to have you tell me other tweaking methods/aspects I should try.)

 

[sandyk]

15 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

I know that coming to consensus instead of just trying to win an argument isn't really your thing, Alex, but you know full well that the comment you quoted was a direct response to the argument the other two were having, and anyone here can read the relevant comments for themselves and see the connection. Is there no way we can see our way clear to being content with the fact that we agree about the negative effects of lossy YT audio compression and then just calling it a day beyond that?

 I had intended to leave it at that, until you put the sting in the end of your reply.

Quote

. Please don't threadcrap. Thank you.

 

Neither do I appreciate the way you started this reply to me.

 It's not exactly the best way to get the desired cooperation from someone else is it ?

 

 

[sandyk]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

You think so? You're joshing, right? I mean early transistor amplifiers, whether the power kind or those found in mixing consoles, suffered from slew rates of less than 1 volt /microsecond, huge amounts of negative feedback causing a concomitant high amount of TIM. Plus, the effects are cumulative. Each microphone channel added it's problems to the whole and then there is the accumulated noise and distortion of each tape recorder channel. FAS42 notwithstanding, recordings made with that process are the worst in stereo history. As much as I love some of the performances (EO/PO; Copland's Lincoln Portrait, Adlai Stevenson, narrating) They are really difficult to listen to (for me anyway).

 

Yes, I well remember the sound of a 741 vs. a decompensated 748 etc. where with the sound of air conditioning the 741 made it sound like a dull roar, and how crappy your typical 6V6GT output stage with 10% distortion in many radios sounded .

Yet there were many very good recordings that rival those of today, many of which have severe limiting and compression etc.

 I seriously doubt that too many studios raced in and replaced their mixers with crappy 741 stages ! 

There are many very good sounding albums from artists such as Julie London from those early days.

Have a good  look at the attached photo of a Julie London album. Many of Julie's recordings were from the 1956-1957 era and later remastered in 2006.

Incidentally, the original recording of Peggy Lee- Fever from May 19, 1958 sounds fabulous, or at least it did BEFORE the additional mixing.

(I have a copy of this track from before the additional mixing )

 

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Hugo9000 said:

Wow!  Transistorized Spectra-Sonic Sound!  The ultimate in High Fidelity!  I'll have to check out that Julie London record, Liberty really knew what they were doing!  Now all we get is MQA and other lo-fi...

 

 

YouTube doesn't do it any favours, but also remember that this recording was made almost 51 years ago !

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

And then there is the one about how many additional clowns can fit in the car after it has been fully sorted out.

 

I feel sure there would be just enough room for yourself,Ralf11 and the resident self proclaimed " Troll"

 

How about the 3 of you sticking to the intent of the thread instead of all the personal attacks ?

 Perhaps you can't locate the IGNORE button  ?

 

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Found it:

 

Didn't work too well for you did it, as you found my reply within seconds.

 

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=clown+face&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjNkI2p5v_dAhUTzmEKHQhqCXQQ_AUIDigB&biw=1920&bih=934#imgrc=kSfVjOYjFHy39M:&spf=1539309388420

 

Creepy clown is probably quite appropriate for the several members in this thread intent of disrupting it !

 

[sandyk]

57 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I disagree. The only thing Alex has in common with Trump is that they are both grumpy old men.

 

 This reminds me of something you and Trump have in common.