Cleanest audio I've ever heard

Retronym

Retronym

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
13,605
I figure this is good enough for starting a new thread. I just discovered this amazing song from Mapleshade records, an audiophile company that kicks ass. Clifford Jordan Quartet's Summer Serenade, available as free download here: http://www.mapleshaderecords.com/cds/56292.php

This has something almost no music has today: Dynamic Range. It is not a victim of the current "loudness war" epidemic.
Take the 3 minutes and go listen, seriously. I can't believe how beautiful it is, and in mp3 no less! I ordered it, along with a few more albums.

Audacity chart of the incredible range this has:
graph.jpg
 
i've never known a jazz album to be normalized as a whole, its just not a part of the style. i have heard/seen the acustic (upright) bass normalized to overcome the instrunment itself, however.

the sample does sound fantasic tho, not bad for a live recording :cool:

when i was converting LP -> MP3 for a friend last month, the dynamic ranges would look exactly like the pic you posted. most of the stuff i did was opera but there were a few duke ellington records... man the warmth from LP is unbelievable, even as an MP3 conversion.
 
I listened to it and well, the recording was interesting. I liked it and have nothing against the music, but I'm not going to sing praises about how well it was recorded because I sort of disagree on it from many points. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I'd still like to add in some stuff and reasons why I feel so.

Dynamic Range - This is nothing new. Classical symphonic music has had this type of dynamic range and sometimes conductors take it too much to the extreme that the quiet parts are just too soft to hear clearly. Lots of classical CD's have hiss in them because of the low volumes that some passages are being played as barely above the noise floor of most recording equipment that it's better to leave the noise in rather than filter it out.

Very little Noise - Well, that's because the soloist and the band both were actually playing very loud that the recording equipment could be set at a level where noise wasn't a problem. There are parts where I felt the soloist was crowding the microphone so much that it sounded way too harsh. You can hear the mic clipping because of the air moving through the screen. If the soloist wasn't as close to the mic then there might have been noise in the recording. Plus a lot of background noise can be eliminated from a live performance by using the right microphone and having the right accoustics in the room. The glasses clinking in the background might have been picked up by a table near the stage because a mic was pointed in a direction where the sound could spill over slightly.
 
Good points guys. I guess my enthusiasm for this is partially due to the fact that I grew up with rock/metal and such. I am relatively new to jazz, and know almost nothing about classical. But seeing the quality of recording has me interested in further pursuits in these fields. Particularly instrumental jazz.

I also bought a cd from Dave Brubeck Quartet, called Time Out. A classic according to Amazon reviews. I compared to this graph, and while it too sounds fantastic, it is much hotter. Perhaps it is the re mastering though. But both are far, far better sounding than any rock I have ever heard, as far as recording quality. I still love rock music though :D
 
Yea, on some rock recordings I'm quite certain monkey's were at the controls.
 
aardvark sandwich said:
Particularly instrumental jazz.

I also bought a cd from Dave Brubeck Quartet, called Time Out. A classic according to Amazon reviews. I compared to this graph, and while it too sounds fantastic, it is much hotter. Perhaps it is the re mastering though. But both are far, far better sounding than any rock I have ever heard, as far as recording quality. I still love rock music though :D
Click to expand...

yeah, once you start listening to jazz a lot you'll get hooked. time out is a good album. i personally love the sound of wynton and branford marsali, as well as others. a lot of my jazz collection comes from soloists i've had the pleasure of performing with at my university's jazz ensemble as well as other muscians who have come to speak/play.
 
If you get the chance, borrow someones copy of The Best of Nina Simone. You will buy a copy shortly after. Favorite of mine: Sinnerman.
 
My new stereo setup is very transparent, and thought I thought the recording was good, the soundstage for me was pretty narrow. However, I could actually hear the trumpet (sax?) guy hitting the various keys when he was changing notes, which was pretty cool.
 
While a good pair of headphones are the cheapest and easiest solutions for good quality sound, something like this or better:
http://www.audiocubes.com/category/Headphones,+Earphones_Audiophile,+Hifi/product/Audio-Technica_ATH-A900_Art_Headphones.html

I would advise you to try to get a good pair of speakers to really appreciate good recordings, computer speakers are bloody awful as well as most home speakers under $1500. I have found the easiest and cheapest solution for best sound is a high quality full-range driver in an open-baffle. Build them yourselves, a couple examples of good drivers:
http://www.creativesound.ca/details.php?model=FR125S
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=131&products_id=282

Check out this website:
http://fullrangedriver.com/

Of course you could always buy some cheaper studio speakers too, they are usually around $150/pair or more, though I doubt will get nearly as open and beautiful sound as you will through an open baffle speaker with a good full-range driver. You do need some space for an OB speaker to "breathe" though. And you won't get much bass due to the front/rear wave cancellation but you can always use a sub if needed. I put a pair of 5" mid/semi full-range drivers in a cardboard box cut in half about 2ftx2ft for home theater and they sounded fantastic and only cost $30 each.

You can use this amp on a budget:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=300-952

This one for a little more:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=300-956

If you have money to burn, look for a good tube amp, here's a kit for $370 (only 2w per channel though):
http://www.bottlehead.com/et/adobespc/S.E.X./SEX.htm
most other tube amps will run $600 on up (even in diy kit form), and most are over $1000.
 
Rix2357 said:
Dynamic Range
Click to expand...

i think you have the wrong idea of what dynamic range is... this recoding is fairly loud, but not 1db below clipping at all times like many newer recordings...it dosent nessicarily mean dramatic changes between loud and not loud, it means not compressed to look flat...

aardvark sandwich said:
Good points guys. I guess my enthusiasm for this is partially due to the fact that I grew up with rock/metal and such. I am relatively new to jazz, and know almost nothing about classical. But seeing the quality of recording has me interested in further pursuits in these fields. Particularly instrumental jazz.

I also bought a cd from Dave Brubeck Quartet, called Time Out. A classic according to Amazon reviews. I compared to this graph, and while it too sounds fantastic, it is much hotter. Perhaps it is the re mastering though. But both are far, far better sounding than any rock I have ever heard, as far as recording quality. I still love rock music though :D
Click to expand...

thats good to hear, its fun exploring new types of music... i too am a huge fan of Dave Brubeck... if you can pick up the 2cd set "Dave Brubeck Quartet - At Carnegie Hall" its really awesome and an incredible recording when you consider it was made in 1963... Dave Brubeck's Greatest Hits is also a good compilation cd...
 
FLECOM said:
i think you have the wrong idea of what dynamic range is... this recoding is fairly loud, but not 1db below clipping at all times like many newer recordings...it dosent nessicarily mean dramatic changes between loud and not loud, it means not compressed to look flat...
Click to expand...



I think that is dynamic range. The only exception is on how it is measured and weighted.

I think one of the reasons for a compressed sound stage is that people also want to hear the counter melodies in a piece that features many different voices. If you stick with the one instrument one melody at any one time with the accompaniment absolutely not important at all, then compressing the audio doesn't make sense. It can be argued both ways in the above demonstration about dynamic range, whether or not the two drum hits are really too loud in relation to everyone else. Second a cd mastered that way may also be too quiet in an underpowered system. It is one thing to master a cd that is going to work with an audio amplifier system with a reserve of 500 watts per channel, It is a totally different world when working with equipment that may only put out 60 watts per channel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top