[78-L] Recording Quality - a relative term

[Dave Burnham]

I've always felt that recording quality peaked between 1958 and 1963. I'm talking here only about the skill of putting mikes in front of musicians and capturing a realistic, (if that was their goal), and exciting sound. Sound carriers, (LPs, tapes etc.), still had a long way to go. I demonstrated my belief to a senior music producer by playing for him the Mercury SACD of "Poet and Peasant Overture" and "Light Cavalry Overture" and he agreed that the sound left no room for improvement. The SACD of Reiner's  "Pines of Rome" is also top drawer. These SACDs were made about 10 years ago so they were made from tapes which were about 40 years old, just imagine what these tapes would have sounded like 50 years ago!  

db

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 28, 2014, at 11:18 PM, Rodger Holtin <rjh334578 at gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
> Owing to many bouts of ear infections, advancing age and years of surface
> noise (Goodyear : asphalt/concrete while on the clock and diamond :
> shellac/vinyl in my off-hours) I'm no longer the golden ear of my youth, so
> I must rely on other experts, or reputable opinions of some kind.  (So why
> am I daring this subject here, anyway??)  
> 
> 
> 
> It seems to me that the overall quality of recording topped out a long time
> ago, and all the improvements I've seen since starting in radio and
> recording studios in 1970 seems like so much chasing after ever-diminishing
> returns.  Tape was easier than disc, but as Dr. Biel has pointed out
> numerous time, not better than the existing disc method then in place.
> Digital has certainly made it all easier to use, much easier than tape, to
> be sure, but I don't think anybody really argues that the quality was
> improved over what we could get on tape.  OK, so there's still some
> surface/carrier advantage in digital over tape, or disc, but I understand
> that even digital carries its own noise.  I know that's true when it gets
> over-processed, but prior to processing does digital have its own noise?
> Microphones, mixers, speakers, headphones and all that other stuff has
> become smaller, but I'm not buying that it's all that much better in terms
> of audio quality that makes any difference to the hearer.  Maybe it's more
> reliable, and lightweight, but better?  Maybe the machinery can show us some
> graphic display of improvement in ranges well beyond what we can hear, but
> can we hear any improvement?
> 
> 
> 
> So what's the real answer, or the majority opinion here?  Is recording
> quality still improving?  Has it maxed out?  If so, when?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rodger
> 
> 
> 
> For best results use Victor Needles
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l