h a l f b a k e r yNumber one on the no-fly list
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Artists are often very particular about the way their format is
enjoyed by their audiences. Filmmakers are engaged in constant
debate over the merits of film vs video, for instance. Some, like
Tom Cruise, have taken their obsession with quality a step
further, making public statements and even
going to court with
TV manufacturers over TV device settings that they feel aren't
faithful to their artwork, such as frame doubling interpolation.
Songwriters are the same way. This was part of the inspiration
behind Jay-Z's Tidal Music startup, offering what it calls
"lossless" streaming. Music quality settings are available in just
about every major major streaming platform. Spotify has
"normal" and "extreme" quality settings available, for instance.
Tidal's "lossless" quality setting is supposed to be a step above
even that, allowing you to hear the full range of sound recorded in
the studio.
But everyone knows there's more to the quality of what you're
hearing than just frequency density. There are specific EQ
settings that a song is best played under to make sure you're
getting just the right amount of bass, treble, etc. Most music
streaming apps have an EQ available with a wide range of
presets for genres like rock, metal, jazz, country, etc. But not all
rock music is the same, and I'm surprised that when you buy an
audio track or a CD, the songs don't come with recommended EQ
settings to fine tune it for that song specifically.
And therein lies my idea. I'd like artists to label their music with
the perfect EQ settings to get that studio quality sound.
https://therational...hile.wordpress.com/
//the goal is minimal deviation from flat direct sound...// [pocmloc, Mar 24 2019]
[link]
|
| |
I'd recommend watching all Tom Cruise's work through an
opaque, sound-absorbing medium. |
|
| |
That's because you're not an artist. If you were, you'd have suggested
a 114-decibel kaleidoscope. |
|
| |
The tracks are all EQ'd at the studio, and should sound "perfect" when played on a system with a flat response. |
|
| |
There are only two reasons you'd want to apply EQ at home, that is: |
|
| |
- to compensate for the room acoustics, and
- to compensate for your own hearing profile |
|
| |
neither of which can be predicted by the record company. If there were a generic EQ setting that makes the track sound better in all situations, it would be baked into the track beforehand. |
|
| |
3. To compensate for defective, poorly designed audio system. |
|
| |
Flat response is the only setting needed. |
|
| |
I'm reminded of why I love this group so much... Thanks for the info
guys. Should I delete this? |
|
| |
No. It's an idea, nicely written and under further knowledge found to baseless. A good example of the factual side of the Bakery. |
|
| |
If my logical mind was constructed on a whole lot of these knowledge snippets, I would be very pleased. |
|
| |
Actually this idea might be complete nonsense from a technical point of view, but it might have marketing legs. |
|
| |
What artist would say 'ya know, we totally overplayed
the bass guitar on this, best if you turned it down a
bit' upon release? |
|
| |
The mysteries of marketing! "Thank you for speding the extra money to buy this deluxe CustomEQ(TM) edition of this album. To fully appreciate the enhanced qualities of this recording, use only A335 rated speakers set within 10% of the specified locations. Us an EQ setting of +27, +13, -3, -11, -44.7 and a volume of 4.77±0.3 on each channel. Wait 3.4 seconds before starting playback. If you need assistance with any aspect of your setup, call our 24-hour help line on 012 345 6789 (calls cost £5 per minute, and will be answered by an automated system which may not be able to help with all or any of your query)" |
|
| |