In Reply to: Without your legalistic posturing it's obvious you still don't get the point! posted by Don Till on March 3, 2010 at 07:01:51:
You mean like an elementary school orchestra? So what?
Of course if one is in denial about his system quality he will never assign "bad sound" to his system
If some recordings sound good and some sound bad on the same system, then clearly it is NOT the system that is fundamentally flawed. Experienced listeners are aware of any number of recording faults - and, like me continue to listen through them for content they enjoy.
if you can break from the crowd and listen to what these people are actually saying.
You mean like posts you previously referenced? Todd talks about high compression and corrected pitch. Scott acknowledges the obvious disparity of recording quality. Presto likewise points out the difference between music he enjoys regardless of recording quality and well recorded content. The only "bad system" comment is about truly poor PA systems that will sound bad regardless of what they're playing. Do you disagree with any of these viewpoints? I certainly don't.
You can't seem to differentiate between sound quality and musical content choice.
rw
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "sound bad because what was recorded actually sounds bad." - E-Stat 03/3/1007:50:17 03/3/10 (3)
- RE: "sound bad because what was recorded actually sounds bad." - Don Till 08:26:19 03/3/10 (2)
- It all boils down to what you consider bad - E-Stat 09:01:36 03/3/10 (1)
- Bingo! - Don Till 20:56:28 03/10/10 (0)