Rocker Lou Reed takes aim at new technology

In short, mp3 quality is not good enough!

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6234344.html

I agree 100%! MP3's suck, plain and simple. Lossy compression by definition means that you're stripping audio of some component that was there for a reason. It usually strips out presence and harmonics in the upper frequencies that add an emotional satisfaction to a song.

I'm about to start a thread on this very subject. Sooner rather than later.

I agree (more or less, kinda sorta, maybe)...


I think all DJs should go back to carrying vinyl masters, and using all tube equipment. ;)


Who's gonna be the first to jump on this "new" audio craze...? :sqlaugh:

Gee thats where I started with some home tube type home stereo equipment and vinyl! Wow tubes with half speed wide cut master Lps now there was some good sound!

Yes... MoFi Half-Speed Masters. Ahhh...

My first stereo was a hand me down. A Madison Fielding all tube!

Anyone else remember those little 78 RPM kiddie records? No matter what they were played on, they sounded tinny at best. One could play them on the best audiophile system available and they'd still sound tinny. This was because they were produced to be played on inexpensive kiddie record players.

The recession of tone is due in part to the devices that reproduce it today. How much tone quality can one get from those tiny earbuds anyhow?

Then when one considers that many new releases consist of little more than ghetto thug chanting and redundant bass beds, where is the need for good tone?

Like the days of the Victrola, recorded material is regressing. It's being mixed down for reproduction on inferior equipment. I think that's sad.

This is the piece I started with....

YouTube - Close N'Play by Kenner Commercial 1972

Then I moved up to a 1960s unit from Western Auto that collapsed, and the speakers hung on the front, LOL....

Like the days of the Victrola, recorded material is regressing. It's being mixed down for reproduction on inferior equipment. I think that's sad.



It seems people will accept convenience over quality. After a while, they get used to the lower quality, and their ok with it. Not just music, but cell phones, photography, customer service (what's left of it), writing and literacy.... goes on and on.

Remember when cable (pay TV) promised no commercials? If you are dumb enough ( or researching), sit through an hour of SPIKE channel. They have blocks of over 17 in a row, and about every six minutes. Now cable has pushed through REQUIRED digital. Great. De-rezed and frozen video for all. That is, all who will pay. Broadcast TV is about to get the boot, so you will either have to PAY for TV, or not have it.

Even more fun: The Nielson families used to get paid for feedback on their TV watching habits for advertising purposes.

Now? If you have an addressable box, you are paying to provide them with this info so that their advertisers can figure out new ways to take your money! ( I never use the TV connected to the box- direct cable only- and no info given...nyah, nyah)

Yup, people will get used to lower standards, being ripped off, and bad behavior if that's all there is. You are right, Fred, it is sad.... Mostly because it happened due to laziness.

It seems people will accept convenience over quality. After a while, they get used to the lower quality, and their ok with it.

But Joe if you are taking something out that you can't hear are you really sacrificng quality?

http://www.mp3.be/mp3-downloads/phases.php

MP3 Encoder in the Time Frequency Mapping or TFM stage of conversion, sample out the patterns that falls between 20 Hz and 20 K Hz or 20,000 Hz in a total of 32 different segments. These 32 segments are commonly known as subtapes. The subtapes are the pattern that human hearing can correspond to. All other sound in the audio content is un-hearable by human ears and hence is disregarded

Thanks, Joe. I think you are dead-on about the convenience factor.

Recorded material advanced by leaps and bounds with the Microgroove LP. Then came the CD. In between, other media like 8-tracks and compact cassettes surged in popularity because these media were convenient and portable. You could take your music with you.

The 8-track cartridge was an abortion from day one but the compact cassette morphed into a semi-high fidelity medium. Analog tape could never compete with the dynamic range of the LP but tape was portable and convenient. And one could make his own recordings.

Then the CD came along. The CD was portable and hi fi and did well but one could not make his own recordings at the time. Now the MP3 gadgets and downloading music from the Internet have become all the rage. Unfortunately, the MP3 is becoming the medium of choice. I say "unfortunate" because new releases may be produced and mixed down for reproduction on these devices. That's the aspect that concerns me.

The cost has gone to heaven and the sound quality has gone to hell. One may easily pay a lot of money for a new television that's HD and 3D and whatever. But that high-dollar set contains tiny, little loudspeakers that sound horrid.

Poor sound reproducton tone doesn't seem to matter to many people because they've never been exposed to true musical compositions anyhow. The Boston Philharmonic would be wasted in MP3 format but how many people have been exposed to a true high fidelity orchestral recording?

Not very many, I'd wager.

But Joe if you are taking something out that you can't hear are you really sacrificng quality?

http://www.mp3.be/mp3-downloads/phases.php

Booooooooooooooo!!!!! To Jeff, for throwing all of this technical jargon and such at us!!!!!!!!!! :spshocked:

But Joe if you are taking something out that you can't hear are you really sacrificng quality?
A lot of what is stripped from the audio by lossy compression is in upper spatial cues and harmonics that add a fullness and richness to the sound. Some people argue that it impacts the bass more, but I think it's the highs. The first thing you notice about lower bitrates is that the cymbals are neutered and the vocals start sounding like an AM radio.

With storage becoming less and less expensive by the week, the reasons for using a lossy compression format to save space are vaporizing.

We need a DJ who will devote himself to vinyl.

I laugh at those commercials where a bunch of kids are dancing around a cell phone playing music.

I also laugh at the ones where people are bragging about the awesome picture quality, as they watch a movie on a 1.5" x 1.5" screen. Ya, why sit and enjoy a movie at the theatre or a large screen, when you can walk down the road or drive and watch it on your phone? The advantage of the phone is obvious!

There was a movie producer (or something like that) on TV once, talking about this new "revolution" in cinema: using a video phone. He noted that, for today's (I'll add "devolved") culture, the video phone is not that good..."but it's good enough."

But Joe if you are taking something out that you can't hear are you really sacrificng quality?



Jeff, I truly thank you for asking this question!


First, not everyone hears in the same way. Some can hear the differences, even as some can't. I pick up the lost lower harmonics, which makes MP3s sound tinny to me. Some miss the top harmonics, and to them they sound too bassy and and somewhat less clear. Some miss the harmonics within the music (midrange), which causes it to sound flat, or lacking in richness. Some are more sensitive to the rythm or have a well tuned ear for pitch, and are annoyed by the random compressions and/or key changes caused by an imperfect conversion or download. However, that's not all of it. We hear with more than our ears, though they are the main hearing organ, We also "hear" with our bodies. The vibrations, the harmonics, and how the music fits with our own internal rythms. This is one reason why tastes in music differ. Some people can sense that the music doesn't sound right, but can't explain why.

The point is, in many cases the lacks in MP3s are noticeable. If you tell me that a room full of drunks may not be bothered, I won't argue with you. I know many PC based DJs that put on very successful shows. However, measured objectively on an oscilliscope, and subjectively by audiophiles, my switching to MP3s would be a downgrade. Since I can't see spending money to downgrade, I wouldn't, except that I bought the stuff before I knew better. It now sits idle.

One other observation. My karaoke shows attract a base of around 60% professional grade singers. By this I mean singers that would be pros if their interests didn't lie elswhere. I have a sous chef, a hairdresser, a physical therapist, and others who have been offered recording contracts and turned them down. One of my singers, Dara Elyse, spent years training for opera, is a pro, and recently recorded a solo ( with piano accompaniment) live album at Lincoln Center in NY.

I tell you this because many of them have told me that although they like what I do, they initially came in because I use CDs instead of MP3s - and they notice the difference.

I also advertise the fact that I use CDs and CD+Gs on my mailing flyers, and get enough positive feedback to tell me it's a good selling point.

I don't knock anyone using MP3s, I am only explaining why I don't. Unlike other things, MP3s are what they are and can't improve. What is required, if one wants PC produced music to equal CDs and other hard media, is a new type of software base.

BTW, Fred: I always think of 8 tracks as the MP3 of it's time...:spgrin:

We need a DJ who will devote himself to vinyl.

I laugh at those commercials where a bunch of kids are dancing around a cell phone playing music.

I also laugh at the ones where people are bragging about the awesome picture quality, as they watch a movie on a 1.5" x 1.5" screen.

There was a movie producer (or something like that) on TV once, talking about this new "revolution" in cinema: using a video phone. He noted that, for today's (I'll add "devolved") culture, the video phone is not that good..."but it's good enough."



Unfortunately, "good enough" is becoming the name of the game. I used to be a movie theatre buff. The size of today's Imax screens was the standard size at the local theatre. When home videos nailed the industry (only to be nailed themselves by cable and downloads), the cineplex was born, or as I call them, airports. 15 movies on baby screens, a "butter-flavor" ( ick) station for your styrofoam popcorn, and a generally unpleasant experience now. However, they are in business because lazy cheap people got used to the lower quality of the experience...

..."airports"... :splaugh:

"Good enough" isn't good enough anymore. Not to me, at least. :)

Folks, I'll be the first to admit that my hearing ain't the greatest. I probably couldn't tell ya the difference between a high bitrate MP3 and a CDA when reproduced on a home stereo. This is my basis for staying with CD sound at the shows. I may not be able to tell the difference but I cannot risk the chance that the audience has the same less-than-stellar hearing I possess.

Over the years we have received several compliments on our system tone. Everyone knows our speaker rig isn't top-end, lol but we have tried to keep it tweaked so's it covers the range of human hearing without harshness.

But I digress. Digital technology has allowed us to take ancient master recordings and make them sound as though they were recorded yesterday.

It is ironic that, with the sound managing technology we have now, the same technology is being misused to set a standard for poor tone. I just don't understand it. :dontknow:

Here's my Catch-22...

I make a living off of selling DJ software. That generally requires playing MP3 files.

Yes, there is a certain amount of loss -- but how noticeable is it, at any given moment in time, given the variables involved?


I test and listen all day, through some decent quality studio equipment. When a train or oil truck is not going by, I can hear the difference. When they ARE going by, or the phone is ringing, I can't.

That to me, is acceptable loss, given the noise floor presented -- much like a bar/wedding/party.


On the other hand, if I could stop the ambient noise around me, recluse myself into a nice quiet room -- I would prefer vinyl and tubes. I would also request that people stop talking, so that I may listen to the music in peace. :) ;)



I think what I'm saying is -- if yer listening through a set of earbuds, or hopping away on the dancefloor, does it really matter, or is it just an ego thingy, saying "I have the best sound"...?


Thoughts...?

I think what I'm saying is -- if yer listening through a set of earbuds, or hopping away on the dancefloor, does it really matter, or is it just an ego thingy, saying "I have the best sound"...?


Thoughts...?

I think that you just hurt my feelings to a point beyond that of repair. :spembarassed:

Rick's post makes for thought. In essence, the MP3 works in much the same way.

Let's pose a scenario: Say you're watching a program on television. All is quiet in the house and you can hear the sound well.

Then, for reasons only dogs can understand, your dog just starts barking his head off. You're seeing the television picture and the actors' lips are still moving but the sound has been overridden by the dog's barking. The television sound is still there but you can't hear it over the dog's barking.

This is basically what an MP3 file does. It removes softer sounds that are overcome by louder sounds.

Thoughts?

Thoughts?

Still hurts.

I think what I'm saying is -- if yer listening through a set of earbuds, or hopping away on the dancefloor, does it really matter, or is it just an ego thingy, saying "I have the best sound"...?


Thoughts...?


I can only answer that in my case it isn't ego, it's business. If it costs more to downgrade, why the hell would I do it? Also a matter of integrity. Offering top quality to my customers is how I became successful. Changing that makes no sense.

I've said this before. There's a reason for all the sounds being there. You strip some out, and the sound is changed--maybe slightly, maybe substantially. That's all I need to know. I'd rather have all of the source signal with all of the music in the song. Call it elitist, but it's my love of the music.

I can only answer that in my case it isn't ego, it's business. If it costs more to downgrade, why the hell would I do it? Also a matter of integrity. Offering top quality to my customers is how I became successful. Changing that makes no sense.

Think on this for a moment Joe...


You consider it downgrading, but I consider it upgrading.


By being able to have your client's requests in play within milliseconds, are you downgrading?

Given your noise floor (which I will assume you put through the OScope as well as the music), you can easily see that it probably makes no difference, since they can't hear the nuances.

You have to carry a lot more sh_t!


Give me a GOOD reason, to go back to the old days of hauling around a few thousand pounds worth of meaningless plastic, that nobody will hear (except maybe 1 out of 10000)...?

Think on this for a moment Joe...

1) By being able to have your client's requests in play within milliseconds, are you downgrading?

Given your noise floor (which I will assume you put through the OScope as well as the music), you can easily see that it probably makes no difference, since they can't hear the nuances.

2) You have to carry a lot more sh_t!


3) Give me a GOOD reason, to go back to the old days of hauling around a few thousand pounds worth of meaningless plastic, that nobody will hear (except maybe 1 out of 10000)...?


1) For me, there's no speed difference. I could say it's because I'm lightning fingered ( I WON a speed loading contest against a PC guy), but that's not it. I have at least 10 discs pulled and laid out in advance, plus one cued in in the second player. If I wanted to, I could cue up from across the room via remote. In my case, there is no speed advantage.


2) Since many of my customers want to use the discs they practiced with, I still must carry a player. The only difference is the discs- I carry around 1200, not enough extra "sh_t" to make a difference. Also, as previously posted, many of my customers come to me BECAUSE I'm disc based.


3) I don't want you to go back to doing anything you don't want to, nor do I care if anyone else does. I have been explaining why I have no desire to go digital. There are no advantages for me, and plenty of possible pitfalls including unhappy customers. Remember also that I work in upscale restaurant bars, and no longer do saloons full of screaming drunks. The sound comes through, and is appreciated in MY venues. These are MY reasons. I'm not trying to convince anybody. If anything, I might be offering advice only to those who haven't already changed.

When a new type of music software that can duplicate full sound becomes available, and when PC hardware becomes more reliable, I'll be happy to carry less and jump on the bandwagon. Even though it's been around quite awhile, I consider MP3s to be a transitional format, like 8-tracks or the betamax. I'm sure that the real deal is just around the corner, but it's not here yet, and there's no reason to jump on the wagon early.

I love using this example regarding those who always want to be first on the "cutting edge":

If you own a HDTV set now, you screwed yourself.

Now you're probably thinking " Oh, man, this Luddite doesn't even like HDTV!" WRONG, tube breath....

HDTV is terrific, and a proven medium that's been used in Europe for over 30 years! So what's the problem?


1) Technology made available as "new" in the US always costs a fortune.
HDTV is not yet the standard format here, and is still broadcast on less than 50% of the channels. Two things:

A) If you had waited until HD becomes the standard - a year TOPS- Competitive pricing would have bought your costs WAY down.

B: Standard broadcasts received on HDTVs are inferior ( read blurry) to those received on standard TVs. So MOST of what you are seeing is inferior video, for which you paid an exhorbitant price.

By the end of 2008, the prices will be WAY down. One other thing they don't tell you- You can adapt ANY TV to HD with a device that will fit into a cigarette pack. How do I know? I co-designed it for the medical imaging industry back in 1979! It's called the AIM circuit, and was used to create hi-def medical images using standard monitors.

So my bottom line message is: If you've switched over, and you're successful, relax and enjoy. If you haven't, and you're successful,don't be pushed. You may do better to wait until the NEXT "next big thing". It may be better....

Give me a GOOD reason, to go back to the old days of hauling around a few thousand pounds worth of meaningless plastic...

It's vinyl!...VINYL!! :sptongue:

It's vinyl!...VINYL!! :sptongue:



Mr. Spinner, er, I mean K, You reminded me of one other thing to add to the speed issue.

After one gets enough experience, the speed of cueing their selected media is almost identical. Not just disc versus PC, but ANY media. I started karaoke with dual cassettes and lyric sheets, and knew how to read the meter. that means the next song was cued and ready, just like my discs. I know K doesn't do karaoke, but I'm willing to bet he can cue dual turntables as fast as any CD or PC guy. It's all in the readiness, organization, and knowing your media- WHATEVER it is.... Hence the "jockey" part of our name. Professional handling.

There is something to be said for technological advances: Choices. :)

Back in 1955 if you bought a new Buick and had to hitch a hoss to it to get you to work in the morning, that was fine because there was no alternative.

We have alternatives and choices today. Whatever one's weapon of choice, it is still a choice. :)

Mr. Spinner,

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...I'm a covert operation. :spwink: