Are you happy with the sound quality of CDs?

[Briz vegas]

I just read an interesting article on sound quality and compression on CDs

http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm

Recent reviews of CD players say current models are better than they have ever been by a significant margin. Yet it appears music fans are being given an inferior CD product with distortion and poor dynamic range. Is it a case of "great player, pity the recording sucks".

Would we buy more CDs if the sound quality was better? I think everyone reading this forum would prefer better recordings but would the average punter notice the difference on his all-in-one Sony from the local discount store.

Maybe if CDs were labelled with their dynamic range then the record buying public would demand better quality recordings.

I wonder how SACDs and DVD-A compare - is there the same level of compression on these products, not because of the technology but because of the recording.

Its interesting to read the comment that Norah Jones won the grammy for her CD because of the limited amount of engineering on the recording, not because it was well engineered.

Maybe its about time people with an interest in audio started making a noise about the quality of product we are getting. Or is it that we don't really notice. I would love to A B some recent "hot" CDs with a properly mastered version of the same album.

Any thoughts on the issue?

[peterS]

thats absolutely crazy
seems the only justification is to market the radio sound?!
sigh... I really dont get it. there is no advantage to this
its not like cd players struggle to output voltage

wait i think i got it
make the sq so fatiguing that after 15min you stop listening to it and buy another cd

[JonMarsh]

There is a huge variation in mastering effort for making CDs. Years ago Sony featured "special" CDs using what they called their Superbitmapping process for converting from high resoultion masters to the 16 bit CD data. This is the same process which can be used for converting DSD to the CD layer on SACD hybrids. They sounded much better than standard CDs, MOSTLY because they went back to 1st generation master tapes for creating the CDs (for the original recordings of these issues, (Pink Floyd, Jeff Beck, etc), there was no digital recording done at the time.

SACD's made from older recordings again usually use the highest quality masters available, and those with hybrid layers (CD Redbook) usually are the best sounding CD versions of these recordings. Police, Steely Dan, and many classical and jazz recording fall into this category. The CD layers on these disks are exemplary.

OTOH, those CD layers don't sound as good as the SACD layers.

I think you may have trouble getting a "ground swell" of complaints about CD's going; remember, this is the MP3 generation.

Now, I do have a few iPods, but they only have Apple Loss Less tracks on them, which retain the CD data bandwidth and quality. With good headphones, the difference is quite audible. On iPod earbuds, and typical ambient noise levels, probably not.

Last, I think you're misinterpreting the remarks about Norah Jones CD- it was the limited amount of "production" (i.e., layers of backing instrumentation, sound modifications on the voice (just listen to Shania Twain- but don't ask me to- harmoniziers galore). The Norah Jones CD may not be audiophile quality, but the SACD is pretty natural sounding, and there's no a lot of glitzy distracting over production on it. (yes, I have recording studio experience on both sides of the booth window, and somewhat conservative tastes).

For a somewhat different musical style, and very transparent and minimalist recording, try Rickie Lee Jones "Naked Songs".

~Jon

[peterS]

In December, 2001, several prominent individuals in the recording industry served on a panel to judge the best engineered CD for the Grammy's. After listening to over 200 CDs, they couldn't find a single CD worthy of a Grammy based on the criteria they were given. Everything they listened to was squashed to death with heavy amounts compression. What they wound up doing was selecting the CD that had the least amount of engineering. In reality, the winner didn't win because of great engineering, he won simply because he had messed with the signal the least. On second thought, maybe that was great engineering. For the record, the winner that year was Norah Jones' CD, "Come Away With Me."

[Briz vegas]

After posting my comments above I remembered that I have two copies of an alt rock CD from the early 90s, namely Penny Century by a Sydney group called Clouds. I had purchased a second copy of the CD a few years later because it had a bonus disk with early EP tracks. That second copy was mastered at a higher volume, what I now know as "hot".

I just tried a more or less level matched comparison between the 2 copies of the album.

I know from recent comparisons that my DVD player compresses CDs (by that I mean it isn't a particularly dynamic player. Only a few more weeks before I get me a new CD player). Despite this there was a significant difference in the quality of the sound. At more or less the same spl there was alot more life and space in the older CD, it sounded less "thick". By that I don't mean that the compressed CD gave instruments more weight, it was just more muddy with more bass but the bass was much less defined. Basically the hot CD sounded more closed in. The CD with the lower levels (more dynamic range) sounded so much better when played at the same moderate volume (35 vs about 25 for the hot CD on my CJs volume control).

Years ago when I first got the hot CD I thought is sounded better, now it seems that I was sucked in by the "louder is better" trick. Match the actual levels and the story is different.

I wish all my CDs had been mastered with lower levels and more range - it really does add to the enjoyment of music and makes it sound more live.

[dknightd]

For some reason many recent "popular" recordings are mastered compressed and loud. I guess they think this works better for radio, and portable players in noisy surroundings. Apparently loud sells these days. It is a shame though. I guess some music is supposed to be loud and compressed, but you loose the additional expression that can be provided by varying volume. Hopefully they will come around.

[Ovation]

I have some excellent sounding CDs, so I don't think it is a problem with the format. The mastering, though, is highly problematic on many titles.

[Evil Twin]

For some reason many recent "popular" recordings are mastered compressed and loud. I guess they think this works better for radio, and portable players in noisy surroundings. Apparently loud sells these days. It is a shame though. I guess some music is supposed to be loud and compressed, but you loose the additional expression that can be provided by varying volume. Hopefully they will come around.

Santana Supernatural is a typical example of this trend. Couldn't beleive how squashed the album is in dynamic range.

[gianni]

thats absolutely crazy
seems the only justification is to market the radio sound?!
sigh... I really dont get it. there is no advantage to this
its not like cd players struggle to output voltage

another cd

Yes peterS, I think you do get it - you are right, it's marketing. They wanted the CD to sound louder than they previous track as they were played by radio stations. This tactic is similar to what you hear while watching TV. I'm sure you noticed how volume on commercials is usually louder than the programs. Only problem with this for radio is that eventually, every CD was jacked up to the ceiling resulting in all the newer music being at the same level. So now, for the most part, they all sound equally poor. I hate to stereotype but in general, I'd have to say that a large portion of todays sound engineeers really are not very good. Sometimes I think THEY are the weak link in the recording chain.

I'm sure many of you have noticed this: I can usually get a pretty good feel for the quality of a CD from the first few seconds of listening. How? Usually by where I place the volume knob. On most of the recent popular releases, I usually have a much lower volume setting versus as compared to the good recordings. Quality recordings such as those on the Chesky label require on average an additional 10 points or so on the volume knob. Sure this does vary a bit based on the recording, type of music etc. In general though it applies pretty consistently.

Too bad the majority of material is in the hands of the big labels. Whether its copyright protection, or marketing leading to compressed music, it seems we are always getting the short end of the stick. In retrospect, I think this has to some degree altered my listening tastes. I do tend to avoid bad recordings which does funnel my purchases towards the smaller labels. I still buy some of the mainstream stuff however I am selective. It's ironic how this tactic of compressing music so that I might notice it on the airwaves has actually caused me to buy less music from these sources.

[twitch54]

Analog is very much alive and well !!!!

You all make very good points, that's why I still prefer quality Analog LP's !!

[Ron526]

Are there any standards to the level of CD. The volume change on some is really annoying, am constantly raising and lowering volume when listening at my preffered levels.
Just my 2 cents.
Ron526

[Briz vegas]

Are there any standards to the level of CD. The volume change on some is really annoying, am constantly raising and lowering volume when listening at my preffered levels.
Just my 2 cents.
Ron526

It would appear the answer is no. If there were a standard level, maybe it should provide -14db headroom as suggested in Bob Speers article, then we would all be better off. Judging by this article there is no actual benefit in a hot recording.

I would like to hear the other side of the arguement. I will have a bit of a browse over the break to see if I can find the rational, although like most things I am betting it is driven by a push by some marketing department to drum up sales. Pity the compressed dynamics of that drum make it sound more like tapping a spoon on a tin of cat food :rofl:

Elwood here on the left prefers cat biscuits - they make a louder crunch - :W and the poor guy doesn't have any teeth either. (brush your teeth kids)

[bigburner]

I agree with everything that Bob Speer has said in his article. Lack of dynamic range is the biggest problem with modern music today. It removes the impact from music. I notice it particularly with vocalists whose efforts are delivered at a uniform volume and therefore have any impact stripped from the recording.

If you want your song to stand out from the others on a radio station then it has to be louder than the others. Quiet songs with wide dynamic range just don't get noticed. The same applies to advertisements which are compressed to remove their dynamic range. They seem louder than the TV program but it's only because they have no dynamic range.

I feel sorry for mastering engineers who must feel pulled in all directions. The engineer knows that the label wants it loud so that it sells. On the other hand the engineer doesn't want to ruin the musician's work.

Lack of dynamic range doesn't seem to apply to less-mainstream music because it never gets put on the radio and therefore doesn't need to compete. There's a lesson there...

[miner]

One reason why I am going back to vinyl. Now, hopefully labels will be pressing more vinyl.

[Eric_C]

We just picked up Prince's The Hits 1&2 and it is one of the best sounding CD's I've heard.

It bests a lot of my DVD-A's for its clarity and definition, plus its incredibly natural sound.

I'd love to see someone else give their opinion.

Its a great piece of work and I believe Prince handles ALL of the production work from start to finish and you can really tell.

Even if your not a fan it sounds fantastic. The Beatles Love sounded as good but this has a much more natural sound to it. The mix is near perfect IMO.

Its one of the few CD's I can listen to at a normal listening level and really enjoy.

I'd like to see how this CD compares to others on high end equipment and a normal CD player. If someone has a very high end transport, then stick it in their DVD player. I think its that good of a CD that you might not notice as big of a difference as some others.

[Kal Rubinson]

It's not any of the media. It's the choice of the producer to mash the dynamics and introduce other gimmicks. There are plenty of good/excellent CDs, SACDs and DVD-As, even DVDs, but they may not have music that appeals to you.

Kal

[chasw98]

All of you must remember, too, that with modern 48, 64, 128 track virtual studios any track can be compressed in a different manner or a subgroup of tracks. And it doesn't matter whether vinyl or digital is the end medium that it will be reproduced on. (Like Jon I owned a studio for a number of years). Depending on whether you use an LA4A or an LA3 or a bank of digital compressors or peak leveler such as the kind Aphex used to build that would "dynamically" equalize the final peaks the compression can come on individual tracks or applied globally to the final mix. Compressors are used as an effect in a lot of rock and pop recordings (Mutt Lang & Shania) much the same way that distortion is used by a guitar player. But when you hand the mix to a mastering engineer that works for the big corporations and he is told to make it "stand out from the crowd", all is lost. Chesky, Telarc, and the old Mobile Fidelity did everything they could to bring Hi Fidelity popular music out to people that would pay a little more for good quality recordings. Mobile Fidelity is out of business and Chesky & Telarc don't do much pop. Go back and listen to Alan Parsons recordings or Doug Sax mastered albums to hear what can be done when you don't bow down to the corporations. OTOH, it is all about profit and we just don't hardly appear as a profit center on their screens. In the meantime, gather up your Neumanns and Nagra's and go record some live music with your favorite X-Y or M/S technique and enjoy full dynamic range.

Chuck

[Briz vegas]

It's not any of the media. It's the choice of the producer to mash the dynamics and introduce other gimmicks. There are plenty of good/excellent CDs, SACDs and DVD-As, even DVDs, but they may not have music that appeals to you.

Kal

If we had an industry standard then more of us could enjoy the better audio quality or at least we would get to hear a recording at its best. Even pop music deserves better dynamics and quality.

Ever since the early 80s my preference has always been for alternative music or independent artists who put the music first. Even if they could only play 3 chords they loved those three chords and they preferred the artistic freedom away from the big labels. Now with home recordings etc it should be easier for artists to put what they want on a CD without compressing and distorting it for some marketing person. I use the word "should" as I am pretty sure that marketing or corporate requirements probably still get imposed on anything that they are hoping to sell to the "masses"

Isn't the solution to give the radio stations a compressed version of the recording and sell CDs without the added compression. Alternately allow people to buy an uncompressed version on line (keep it on CDs, I don't want to download my music, or at least not albums. I like my music to be tactile not virtual.)

[Eric_C]

I'd like to get a list going of well produced high quality CD's.

Regardless of the genre. We like all kinds of music but I think Prince is a great artist and if anything is true to the way he feels about music. The quality of his CD's, or my perception, is just amazing.

I saw the Cowboy Junkie's on Soundstage last week and it was fantastic. I went out and picked up a used CD from them and it sucked, the production was horrible. So, dummy me, I order their $25 nearly out of print SACD thinking, its an SACD...its not as bad, but thats not saying much. Worst sounding SACD I own and I wrote Music Direct about a refund.

The wife bought a Bob Marley Greatest Hits Digital Remaster and it was pretty decent but done on their smaller label.

It'll never get anywhere but I think I should have the right to take back poorly produced CD's. I'm not talking about CD's I don't like, I'm talking CD's that are poorly produced, compressed, etc. Its a license to rip someone off and the more noise the RIAA makes about piracy the more they should have a return policy for poorly produced material.

We'll see what Music Direct says about my refund, hell I'll take a credit.

[DL86]

Slayer's Reign In Blood album I beleive has massive dynamic range considering I have to really turn up the volume to get to my normal listening level beyond any other CD I own. Ok maby not everyone's cup of tea but I had to point it out.

Also Metallica's albums before the black album was released all have a large dynamic range, I think this is largely due to them not being mainstream. After the black album was released things all changed and they have started to become "hotter" as the mainstream albums started being released, but I still enjoy listening to all of them.

[Eric_C]

I can't find my copy of Reign in Blood but I do have Seasons in the Abyss, South of Heaven, and Christ Illusion.

I haven't given then a listen besides Christ Illusion on the home system. I'll have to dig them up today and give it a try.

Master of Puppets to me anyways is too low to begin with. I didn't think it was that good of a recording. In my car I have not only play it at high volume but also use the CD Boost feature and bring the volume level up like 3-4db in order for it to be heard as well as some of my other CD's. I have MB Quartz speakers and a Solobaric sub. The range on my Pioneer deck go from 0-40. Other CD's are deafening at 33-34, with Master of Puppets I have to get it to 35 with the CD boost to get it to where others would be around 30 which is my normal listening level.

Maybe it has to do with where I sourced the CD...see my other thread I just decided to post

I only have the Black album on DVD-A which sounds good but lacks of life to it. I'll give the 2.1 track a listen today.

[Kal Rubinson]

If we had an industry standard then more of us could enjoy the better audio quality or at least we would get to hear a recording at its best. Even pop music deserves better dynamics and quality.

Apparently, that market doesn't demand it.

Isn't the solution to give the radio stations a compressed version of the recording and sell CDs without the added compression.

Sure but that extra labor and cost can only be justified if the market wanted it. Apparently, it does not.

Kal

[BimotaRich]

CD Sound

CDs can sound VERY good if well mastered, but most are not, and many releases from vinyl were rushed out the door and sound a bit harsh. To add insult to injury many of the early CDs suffer from track rot (due to insufficeint seals around the edge to keep air out from between the layers which eventually causes small holes in some CDs reflective surfaces). I would like to see better mastered material or better yet a switch to a higher resolution format that features more channels (at least 3)... but it is the basic mastering that is most important. Sony Superbit Mapping, HDCD, and K2 labeled discs generally sound good as do Chesky and Mobile Fidelity disks. But the future of CD is dead... sales continue to decline and the next generation seems more influenced by convenience and price than quality. DVD-A and SACD likewise show little life in the market place (indeed most record stores dont stock them or if they do they generally do know anything about them and have them just mixed in with the rest of the stock. MP3 killed the audiophile... and I morn his passing...

[chasw98]

Apparently, that market doesn't demand it.

Sure but that extra labor and cost can only be justified if the market wanted it. Apparently, it does not.

Kal

Like Kal said! Where is Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab when they are needed?

Chuck

[Kal Rubinson]

MP3 killed the audiophile... and I morn his passing...

I am not so sure. Certainly, iPods/MP3s are convenience tools, not concerned with achieving maximum quality but I believe that audiophiles were, and still remain, a small minority. It's just that, with the rise of decent mass-market electronics and an overwhelming onslaught of affordable speakers, many people SEEM like audiophiles or lapsed audiophiles. They ain't. What has happened is that the a/v market has become more inclusive but the specialist/devotee segment remains. Unfortunately, we have no voice in the big decisions concerning standards and media because we remain a minority.

Kal

[NMG]

I am not so sure. Certainly, iPods/MP3s are convenience tools, not concerned with achieving maximum quality but I believe that audiophiles were, and still remain, a small minority. It's just that, with the rise of decent mass-market electronics and an overwhelming onslaught of affordable speakers, many people SEEM like audiophiles or lapsed audiophiles. They ain't. What has happened is that the a/v market has become more inclusive but the specialist/devotee segment remains. Unfortunately, we have no voice in the big decisions concerning standards and media because we remain a minority.
Kal

I think that is a very good observation Kal.

[Jeff]

If there was ever a time the music industry tested the public as far as "do they want quality", it was with the release of SACD and DVD audio. Given what's happend with those formats, I think the industry received a clear message. :cry:

[Kal Rubinson]

If there was ever a time the music industry tested the public as far as "do they want quality", it was with the release of SACD and DVD audio. Given what's happend with those formats, I think the industry received a clear message. :cry:

And that was not a surprise. What is annoying, of course, to me are all those reprobate audiophiles who continue to cling to their LPs to the exclusion of these new media and who continue to regard multichannel as a devil's design. Many within our midst failed to accept SACD/DVD-A or, even, assess them fairly.

Kal

[chasw98]

You would also think that artists who are recording and producing could be very much more creative given 5 channels to mix in versus 2 channels!

[PewterTA]

All it leads to is the 'big' record companies finding a 'format' or 'mold' of what sells and slowly forcing every artist to fit that mold so they can maximize the profit.

My favorite example (for people that know of them), is the Dave Matthews Band. Their first three CDs, reference quality (in mine and a lot of people's opinion) and may even lead to their first 5 "studio" albums. I'm not of course counting Remember two things and Recently. Now you get to their latest album "Stand Up" and you can tell that while good, it's definitely 'louder' and not as well produced. They changed producers and went for a different sound which is fine and I have no problems with it. To me though, it's not NEAR the quality that their older albums were. Don't get me wrong, it's a lot better than MOST CDs these days, but it does not have NEAR the dynamic range the older ones had.

It really makes me sad, I still enjoy listening to the older albums and being completely taken away by what's all "in" the music and being able to discover that.

Record companies have taken all the fun of that away in order to "sell sell sell" and make it all quick, easy, and convenient.

Whatever happened to the days of listening to an album for MONTHS on end after you purchased it because there really wasn't a whole lot "new" out and you really enjoyed it. I can still to this day tell every single note to Metallica's Black album because I swear I wore that CD out from listening to it so many times. Heck, I think that was towards one of the last albums I really did that with...

We as a society are just moving at too fast of a pace anymore...I think it's slowly going to self-destruct and start pushing/urning for the old way of being a relaxed and carefree time.

At least that's what I hope.

...am I starting to show my age or what? And I'm not even 30 yet!

[Briz vegas]

I am now just the wrong side of 40 but I still like new releases by young artists. I guess my taste is a little more eclectic than it was, but I still like stuff like the Cat Empire, Metric and Howling Bells. In the AM or when the mood takes me I like Mozart, Vivaldi or much of what is played on our national classical FM radio station. In all music the recordings sound should be dictated by the artist and the other creative types, not by a suit (man.....where is the hippie smilie).

I notice that the December issue of Hifi News has an article on this topic. Bit of a concidence as I only read it today in the newsagent (yes I was one of those people that skim magazines in newsagents)

[Eric_C]

The biggest problem is within all of your posts:

Record Companies & Recording Industry. There are no artists anymore who have control over their music. At least very few.

Those smaller labels everyone mentions are still partly in it for the music and the sound.

The rest have no shame and would sell you sh!t in a jewelcase if you'd buy it.

[Brandon B]

But they would demand that only you get to smell it. If you let your friends smell it, they would slap with with a copystink violation suit.

BB

[PewterTA]

LMAO @ Brandon

Ain't that the truth.

[Nick M]

HAHAHA @ Brandon! :lol:

I definetly notice a difference in quality between recordings of CD's. Some sound like they are incredibly clear, while others seem as though something is missing. Big orchestral pieces often seem to suffer the most, while single singers or small bands sound incredible.

The one thing I absolutely can't stand are the ever-so-common tracks that are horrendously cut together. Some of them sound like multiple WAV files overlapping one another. This is very common in pop music. For instance, I think Christina Aguilera has a great voice, but can't stand the majority of her songs because they are chopped to hell. Same with a lot of rock songs where there is a bass guitar, drums, rhythem guitar, and then two guitars entwined within a great solo... but only four band members... :rant:

I love real and raw performances, and the same is true for recordings. Live recordings and those outside soundproof rooms are by far my favorite. Sometimes it's these recordings which seem to lack enough information... especially with the background. To me the environment gets to a certain depth and then it's like there is a wall. This may be that the mics are simply non sensitive to pick up anything further, or it may be the limitations of the recording format. Most things like amplified instruments and vocals sung directly into a mic have plenty enough detail for me though. It's the environmental stuff, and instruments/voices that are being picked up from a semi-distant mic that seem to fall a bit flat.

Enough of my rambles... :lol:

[Briz vegas]

I agree that recordings of live performances are often the best.

Recently we had a number of live gigs on tv that were recorded in France a few years ago. ABC 2 in Australia is a free to air digital channel so I run digital into my receivers DAC. Radiohead and PJ Harvey were my two favourites and the sound was so good that I just had to turn it up. Very entertaining - almost as good as being there.

[dknightd]

Besides radio marketing, I think I big part of it is the general increase in noise of our society and lifestyle. To truely appreciate music with large dynamic range you have to have a quiet background. And you have to sit there and listen. How many people just sit and listen to music these days? Not really that many I'm afraid. These days it seems most people listen to music on the go, in an at least somewhat noisy environment. A 60 db dynamic range is not much use if the background noise is 40db (or more.)
I recently had to purposefully compress a piece of music, and burn it back to CD, so that my wife could enjoy it while she was driving. At home I had to pause a song because a garbage truck was driving by the house, and interupted my listening. For many people I think there is SO MUCH NOISE where they listen that low level details are basically lost. So maybe somewhat compressed recordings reflect the world we live in?
(that does not explain the ones that are far too much compressed - I think those
are designed to compete against radio advertising, but I can't remember the last time I listened to radio so it does me no good)

p.s. another vote for live recordings - less temptation to "tweak" the sound.

[twitch54]

I agree that recordings of live performances are often the best.

Agreed........ and sometimes they are the worst !!! very little middle ground with live recordings.

[PewterTA]

Whoever produces the DMB LiveTrax collection should get a bonus for his/her recordings of the shows. They are some of the best live recordings I've ever heard put on CD. Just enough crowd noise when needed to tell it's live and everthing sounds exactly like you're there (for anyone that goes to the shows).

[meltdown]

Like Kal said! Where is Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab when they are needed?

Chuck

I have a few of their LP's and would rather spend my last 30 bucks on a slab of of their vinyl anyday before I took a chance on a remastered cd. There are some very good cds and sacd's out there and there are some ripoffs. Besides I dont mind getting up every 20 minutes and flippin the platter, by that time I need another beer anyhow.