Andrew Gaydenko wrote: >Hi all, > >Few days ago there was discussion in the list about mastering-CD/compressing/ >limiting/gain-upping and so on. I have strange feeling from the discussion. >Does it mean, that, indead, we (all CD-listeners) listen DAMAGED with such >compressing music? I don't mean any music/sound engineering work! I'm saying >about market demands (compressed music is more sutable for cheap audio quipment, >isn't it? And compressed sound seems to be better at low volume level, don't it?). > >If it is true (i.e., a market demands to damage music) - are there any (software) >tools to anti-compress a dynamic range? And - is it worth even to try to expand >dynamic range? > > I don't like to think of it as damage, it's too negitive. It is altering the sound of the original but when your crossing formats and distribution destinations like radio/television/CD/etc, the sound is always going to get altered in some way. My take on compression is that it's a good thing if used wtih sensitivity. Most popular music isn't too concerned wih dynamic range anyway. Amplifiers are loud, drums are too, hell a trumpet is a pretty loud instrument when you get down to it. Where absense of compression realy shines is certian "audiophile" recordings of classical/chamber music. I have this CD of solo piano music of Alberto Ginestera on the M.A. Recordings label that sounds unbelieveable. If you're into Argentinian solo piano music from the late 20th century, this recording is an example of an excellent performance that's reproduced on the CD perfectly. They even break down how it was recorded and give a photo of the rig at the session. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00000G4UP/qid=1048103292/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-9353385-4431349?v=glance&s=classical -lee
