Clean isn't always better

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 07:44:47 -0800, Jay Kadis <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu>
wrote:

>> > The flushing up of the low-amplitude sonic details by compression and
>> > limiting and judicious spectral tweeking with EQ make the sound realistic
>> > in the sense that you can hear the details of the sounds even when they
>> > would have otherwise been masked in a complicated mix. But it's not what
>> > you would hear in the tracking room. <snip>

Wrong wrong wrong wrong WRONG! It's not "hyper-anything" except
"hyper-compressed!" It's not realistic at all; in fact, far from it.
It's the modern-day equivalent of Top 40 AM radio with 25 dB of
compression, nothing more. If it were ANY kind of "realistic," those
"subtle details" would be way down in the grass, where they're
SUPPOSED to be. THAT'S realism. Compressing the hell out of
everything is an attempt to DEFEAT realism, to make the track
something it's not. Same basic musical ethics as Milli Vanilli or
Enrique Iglesias. Simply, a fraud.

I heard all this same stuff back in the early '70s when guys were
compressing every track on a 48 channel mix "so each part can stand
out." If they'd have gotten their noses out of the coke long enough
to LISTEN, they'd have realized that all they created was flavored
pink noise, where EVERYTHING is competing for attention with
everything else. No depth, no dynamicism, no anything but high level
NOISE. The more things change, I swear, the more they stay the same.
Want it to sound good in a car? Fine, compress away, but don't try to
pawn it off as any sort of "realism."

So, call it "hyper-compression"..."hyper-clipping"...whatever. Just
don't show me a moldy melted cheese sandwich and try to tell me it's
the Virgin Mary, because I'm NOT buyin' it, even for the opening bid.

dB