Can Bad Recordings sound Good?

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I love the bagpipes but here's the thing, you must hear them live (not saying you have not). It brings me to another point relevant to this thread.

 I was exposed to the real sound of the Bagpipes as a child at the local Caledonian Society, as my father and grandfather were born in Scotland. The men , including my father also wore a Kilt.

[sandyk]

5 hours ago, Confused said:

To my ears, I would not say it was a "bad" recording as such, although I felt that it would be (could be) a better recording if it was less compressed. 

Confused

Adele-Rumour Has It. This is what SeeDeClip Duo Pro did for this track.

Note the improved soundstage too. It can also be played directly using the Dropbox player

Alex

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zwhkyr2cp3vzfo0/102. Rumour Has It_2.wav?dl=0

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, fas42 said:

That something sounds poor says more about the playback rig,

 Not in this case. The Adele 21 recording is clearly OVER COMPRESSED, and NO decent rig will ever make it sound great or do it justice, and that includes yours too, in it's original form.

 It appears to be mastered for listening via ear buds in noisy public transport etc.

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

The numbers say that Alex is right:

 

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/159466 

 

 However, this is one of the few recent albums that can be markedly improved in about 1 minute using a suitable automated  program. The program I used was from A.S. member Graham Wilkinson of Cute Studios U.K.

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

OK - Here is another track as an example.  I would not say this is "bad" recording as such, but for me it is mixed way too bright, which makes it somewhat fatiguing and unpleasant to listen too.  I also recognise that in all probability, nobody reading this thread would want to listen to Neneh Cherry anyway, but  that is not the point, I offer this as an example of  specific recording mastering issue.

 

You should be better able to judge the mastering from the 529kbps audio

 

P.S.

 According to Sound Forge 9 there is no obvious clipping.

 

Outré Risqué Locomotive-0x0002.aac

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

As it happens, I picked up on this track sounding overly bright when listening to my own red book version.  I listened to the YouTube version, and with respect to this particular recording annoyance, the You Tube version also sounded overly bright.  OK - my red book version sounds better, but what is interesting here is that the aspect of this recording that I found to be annoying was apparent and pretty much identical to me in a You Tube clip and in a 16/44.1 version, so the recording issue came through regardless of format, and was similarly annoying to me regardless of recording format.  This perhaps goes against Frank's observation that linear distortions in the system itself dictate how I subjectively observe recording issues?  Perhaps true in some cases, but not all I think.

 

My system is very transparent and quite low distortion, and like Frank I am left wondering if something in your system may have been emphasising this problem further ?  Yes, it is a bright and dynamic sounding recording with a  wide stereo image.

 Perhaps John Dyson can verify if it has an improperly decoded Dolby-A problem.

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

What does it sound like on your system exactly?  You say it's bright, is it too bright?  All I am saying is that it sounds too bright to me, and too be honest it does not look like you are saying anything that different.  At what point does bright become too bright?  Plus, it might be a pre-emphasis issue, not Dolby A.

 

 It does sound bright, but I was left wondering if it was an artistic intent as it is quite dynamic with a wide stereo spread.

IOW, a high energy recording. Going by your description I did expect to see some clipping, but this isn't obvious in Sound Forge 9.

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

Alex's version does sound different, almost like a 1/2 way FA decode...  Doesn't sound bad.

 Hi John

 The only difference with  my version is that it was directly sourced from the YouTube .mkv container as a 529kbps .aac file ,which most of their videos now appear to have, although in recent days I have seen some .mp4 videos where 529kbps audio can also be demultiplexed from using Video S/W.

It would appear that if people want the higher quality audio inside YouTube Videos that they may have to pay for it.

Thanks for you input.

 Kind Regards

Alexf

[sandyk]

25 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

And decode it, if they want the original dynamics.  Once in a while, I have found material that isn't FA.  This makes me wonder if the 'fake DolbyA' compressors being sold today are intended to sythesize the ubquitious FeralA sound character instead of for vocal enhancement alone.   That is, is there a market for the sound qualities that were originally deemed (the ugly digital sound) back in the middle 1980s'?

 

John

 

 John

 Originally you were finding numerous examples of  tracks from different albums used in their compilation albums where it appears that with an occasional track they may not have had access to the original master, so used an internal Dolby-A copy.

However, it now apears that there are numerous recordings that must have been deliberately encoded this way, not just due to negligence, perhaps to make them sound more acceptable on AM radio as well as perhaps FM stations that used auto programming using .mp3 carts.

 

Alex

 

 P.S. 

 Has anybody tried my suggestion of using the freeware 4K Video Downloader (Windows) ,  saving the .mkv version and seeing if their existing gear can play them directly ? JRiver 26 is able to do this.

4K Video Downloader is also capable of downloading a complete play list in a fraction of the time that it takes to play them.

[sandyk]

10 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

INRE topic, every time i try something new in my audio chain, i always go to eva cassidy fields of gold.

Her voice just pulls you in like no other artist i have ever heard, but there are usually 1 or 2 "shrilling" moments...don't know if its the recording or just her voice, but that one or two notes kind of kills the song....wondering if have a tube preamp might help.

I don't know if she has any really good recordings...seems like most out there are amateurish recordings, which is a shame she never signed with a major label....

 

It's particularly annoying around 47 seconds in. Perhaps this track/ album would be a good candidate for John Dyson's DNHRDS Decoder (Dolby-A decoder) ?

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

This recording is gold 😁, in your armoury of evaluation 'tools' - it has some 'difficult' bits, and that's telling you exactly where your system is at …

Sorry Frank, but  NO System change for the better is going to correct this problem.

The difficult bits on this track sound less shrill on her album " Eva Cassidy - Live At Blues Alley 1998"

[sandyk]

35 minutes ago, fas42 said:

My experience is quite other ... when recording playback makes the vocals shrill at some point, this is always a sign that the distortion of the replay chain is too high

 

That's absolute BS Frank.

My Class A HA, Class A Preamp and Class A P.A. ALL have distortion figures with close to 4 zeroes in them.

 Both my Musical Fidelity X-DAC V3 and Silicon Chip designed DAC in my main system also have very low measured distortion.

 Perhaps you have ears like a typical valve amplifier where it goes into soft limiting when clipping ?

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Alex, you're trying to assert that the measured distortion figures of one component in the chain matters more than the final audible distortion of the entire chain, including all anomalies due to noise and interference factors figuring into the equation.  

 

 In this case I have quoted the distortion figures of ALL of the components in the chain other than the headphones or speakers, and the total will be well above average .

 

Like it , or not,

GI = GO 

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, fas42 said:

My method doesn't "compensate" - it removes weakness in the playback chain which add disturbing anomalies; the logic is that the brain no longer has to cope with these when listening, and so "bad" recordings no longer have to fight through the extra murkiness of that 'other' distortion.

 

 Perhaps your playback chain has a lot of inherent weaknesses , but mine doesn't . That is both with measurements and audibly, as verified by others as well.

[sandyk]

9 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

So, your rig would do a brilliant job with that recording I just posted above, say …

 Actually, it doesn't sound too bad, especially considering that it was recorded 55 years ago, and is only 128kbps .aac audio or a little less.

 I will see how the 529kbps audio sounds shortly.

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

 But subjectively, everything can change, dramatically - the flaw exists, but in another space ... the cocktail party effect kicks in, at full strength - and those "other voices talking in the room", disappear ...  

 

Does that happen when you are home alone too ?

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

I was just reminded of a track that I've linked to before, which in my book is extremely telling of system status - a truly special voice in a track which is extra dodgy; I have it on a super budget release, and nothing has been done in the mastering to "clean it up" - the big moments in this can be hard going; so, an excellent "measure",

 

 

Frank

Here this is with the YouTube 529kbps "hidden" Audio

Click on  " Read More" and you will also have access to the original YouTube Video with 125kbps .aac audio

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek391tauf91n961/Dionne Warwick - Who Can I Turn To (Scepter Records 1965).m2t?dl=0

[sandyk]

13 minutes ago, Confused said:

Taking these results at face value, it would appear that a touch of distortion in the system actually masks the listener's ability to pick up THD in the recording, whereas the headphone listeners with lower overall THD in there actual listening apparatus did rather better

 

It took a survey by Archimago to tell us that ?

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Because the “obvious” added distortion you talk about doesn’t exist. It’s imaginary.

And, like I have said before, even if that “distortion” were real, there is certainly nothing you can do about it! If designers like John Curl, Dan D’Agostino, Nelson Pass, etc., weren’t able to eliminate that “added distortion”, what makes you think that you can? (That’s a rhetorical question, BTW. Don’t bother to try to answer it)

 

Some designers even utilise a little added distortion with their choice of input and output semiconductors

[sandyk]

11 hours ago, fas42 said:

in my world most high end rigs that I come across I could not live with; their added distortion is just too obvious, and becomes highly irritating;

 A high end rig , should by definition be transparent.

However some designers utilise a small amount of deliberate distortion products of the even order to make them sound slightly warmer. This includes Nelson Pass, and with at least one of his designs, AKSA from DIY Audio (Hugh Dean) in Melbourne .

[sandyk]

34 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

That was my first thought...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znodcpMzcnA

 

[sandyk]

23 minutes ago, shtf said:

56 minutes ago, Racerxnet said:

Quit adding fuel to Franks fire!

 

 

This thread will never die out while George keeps taking the bait .😉

[sandyk]

8 hours ago, Confused said:

I guess having explored the can bad recordings sound good thing, I fancy hearing what a more state of the art type recording might sound like.

 The attached Classical track isn't state of the art, but it has close to the widest dynamic range you will normally hear on the CD medium.

It was recorded by the BBC..

It is a .wav file sent as an Uncompressed Zip.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/gawsr167ixi59c6/Mahler Resurrection 2-2a.zip?dl=0

 

[sandyk]

53 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Do you have a measurment of its dynamic range?  Who are the performers?  

 

I don't have the measurements, but John Dyson checked this recording to see if it had improperly decoded Dolby-A and made that remark.

 This double CD was originally sent to me by a Music Teacher in the U.K. who has heard the Master tapes and knows the hall it was recorded in. Ian originally sent me the CDs as a gift as he wasn't happy with his own rip of it.

[sandyk]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Fun to listen to live but hard when one has turn turn the volume to literally 100 at home, just to hear the quietest passages, when the loudest ones hit it can disturb the entire household and neighbors. 

 Try it on your new headphones . 😉