Can Bad Recordings sound Good?

[Allan F]

31 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Ergo, sometimes bad systems can make bad recordings sound less bad but they cannot miraculously make them sound good.

 

True. The inferior resolution and/or transparency of a "bad system" may tend to mask or mitigate the flaws in the recording to make it more listenable. However, the expression that "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" nevertheless applies.

[Allan F]

21 minutes ago, Summit said:

Here is what you really said.

“You keep asserting that the better the system, the better a poor recording will sound. When in reality, just the opposite is true.”

 

It would be somewhat disingenuous, IMO, to infer from George's general statement above that he intended to specifically include "boom boxes".

[Allan F]

32 minutes ago, Summit said:

A bad system isn’t really masking flaws.

 

Perhaps it's a question of semantics, but you should look up the definition of the verb "mask". The elements that you describe, such as noise, coloration, etc. mask, i.e. "conceal from view", "make indistinct or imperceptible or indistinct", "cover up", the flaws that exist in the recording.

[Allan F]

7 hours ago, Summit said:

If I experienced that poor sounding recordings would sound better on a lousy system I would buy and use a lousy system instead. Or at least have two systems one for poor and one for good sounding recordings.

 

That assumes that flaws in poor sounding recordings are all the same and will all sound better on a second "lousy" system. I don't believe that assumption accords with reality. Depending on the nature of the flaws, some bad recordings may sound better on a lousy system while others will sound worse because the artifacts produced by the lousy system are more dominant than the flaws in the recording.

[Allan F]

16 hours ago, Summit said:

Have you heard of DSP or EQ? With these you can actually mask/fix some of the flaws in poor recordings. It’s a much more efficient way than changing gear and systems. And the best part is you aren’t fixed to the flaw of one type of recording and can change things independent of record and the nature of the flaws, as well as individual preference.

 

That's fine as long as the DSP or EQ is completely defeatable when not desired. Historically, tone controls were a common feature of stereo preamps, integrated amps or receivers years ago. As I understand it, however, most had a significant and undesirable effect on phase when engaged and few were completely defeatable and out of the signal path when in their null positions, introducing undesirable artifacts. As a consequence, the benefits they provided for poor recordings were largely offset by the negative impact on the sound quality of good recordings compared to that of otherwise equivalent gear without tone controls. Of course, in those days the EQ was always implemented via hardware as software solutions were unknown.