| Page: 1 2 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
Pop Music Sucks
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Tue Jan 21, 2003 @ 11:04pm |
 Coolness: 685595 | What kind of equipment are the headphones hooked up to? A chain is only as strong as the weakest link. If you get a 100% top of the line, $300k pre/amp+speakers, and you hoo it up with a sony cd player (not counting the SACD players) your sound is going to sound like shitty sony. Get a top of the line system and use cheap 50$ interconnects and the sound is gonna sound like cheap ass. Before you can even begin to talk about quality, you have to have what it takes to really hear quality, or else you'll just be talking about something that you don't even know what it sounds like. NIN's The Fragile recorded AND masterd on Apple Performa's running Pro Tools at 16 bit, and it sounds amazing on good systems, but it sounds like ass on cheap systems, because cheap systems and weak components are incapable of reproducing what it was meant to sound like. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» nothingnopenope replied on Tue Jan 21, 2003 @ 11:07pm |
 Coolness: 201230 | if a cd only sounds good on very expensive systems then it was not mastered right, 90% of people do not listen to a cd on expensive systems. The thing is commercial cd's are mastered for cheap systems and radio. The reason songs are mastered loud is to compete for volume on the radio.. which is sad. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Tue Jan 21, 2003 @ 11:28pm |
| Coolness: 685595 | What I'm talking about has nothing to do with competing for volume. They can't put it on too loud over the airwaves or there's gonna be clipping. And then, with the radio format there's inherant quality loss, so if your using a radio brodcast as your only reference source, it's about as poor as you can get short of 128k and lower MP3s. Pick up some stereophile magazines and see that a lot of their "recomended records of the month" are pop/rock, then read the reviews on the quality of the mastering and the quality of the sound. The dynamic range is in all of the recordings you are probably thinking of, you just lack equipment that can properly reproduce it. You probably even use the EQ settings on whatever you listen to music through and taint the sound with your own changes instead of listening to it flat like it should be; nothing cut, nothing boosted. And then, it *STILL* goes back to the limits of your equipment. IF it's not capable of handling the proper frequency range output by the record, obviously it's going to sound like ass, but NOT THROGH FAULT OF THE MASTERING ENGINEER. They get payed hundreds of thousands of dollars to do a job RIGHT. If they didn't, they would not hold that job for very long and someone would be brought in to re-master it before the music was released.
The whole basis of your argument is POP music is badly mastered. Any radio-friendly music is badly mastered. Truth is, while some of them might be badly mastered, 99% are not. You just lack the equipment to reproduce the recording properly and as a result you are incapable of hearing the work and quality put into the mastering process and you decided to take it all out on the music that you hate, and "pop" music just happens to be your scapegoat. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed Jan 22, 2003 @ 12:24am |
| Coolness: 685595 | yeah! Hardcore like getting pounded in the ass!
I love porn. *Patiently waits for ScottyP to come back and delete the usless messages and accidentally delete all my posts, too* scottyp says: no I will leave your posts, I can EDIT too though :-) |
Pop Music Sucks
| Page: 1 2 |
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
