Hey all,
This is a sort of "reporting" from what I learned last California Audio Show, partly due to Phasure organizing a few of the seminars/sessions there.
This is not to bash on anything or anyone, but it sure is about venting mere disappointment;
I won't mention any names of persons or companies, although some digging may reveal who or what I am talking about. It is about names of fame for 100% sure and actually I should not say a thing and respect what was said or what I saw and heard.
But I won't.
More or less driven by the audience almost all of the sessions landed on "hires" and how to get it to the homes, how to play it best and how to not confuse us consumers with undecided formats and whatever which makes me yawn soon. I saw no depth in anything which was more encouraged for by the ever lasting answers to questions which questions IMO should not have been asked in the first place. Anyway, the questions were asked by persons/reviewers who deemed it necessary to ask the same or similar question at each session and which to me (read : us all here) are from ancient history. I guess this happens when people don't join audio forums but instead are in their listening chair always, possibly reading audio magazines. I am not sure.
While the above is not to be blamed on those persons of course, I'd say that the panel members sort of are. So, those names of fame. Actually it is so that I could not imagine that no more depth was available in panel members and that it all merely was about going along with the stream of the audience. Possibly a bit of the American way ?
But what to do with it.
I can not give the examples but I'd hope that someone who was there right away agrees with me, without examples. Anyway, if I was to derive the future of good audio recording (or reproduction) I sure was left empty handed. And completely disappointed.
The above is about the theory. Therefore it was great for me that there was also practice in order - recording sessions which could be joined. Recording sessions which far away were supported by one of those sessions as well. Mutual proof of what I just said above;
First off - and you will not be able to imagine it - the sound of the 100% live played recording session sounded as the most poor "recording" I own. Let's keep in mind : the recording company is of fame just the same. So, reading forums or reports otherwise are huray this and yahoo that, but the live sound already was total sh*t to me. First of all, all was killed to dead by piles of bass traps which cost a car in total, and something like a piano (wing) sounded like blanketed but then 10 fold. It hurt my brains because I wanted to squeeze out some highs which just were not there. Remember, just played live in the room.
Then singing started. Oh boy oh boy, I now wonder what the heck I am doing to get those S-es right from my speakers. Well, I *have* them right, but these ? it again sounded like the worse recording or "digital" or whatever to name it. Horrible. Maybe someone thought that all those bass traps would help for that, but they did not. Maybe, just maybe the positioning of piano and singer should not have been in a corner ...
But it gets worse;
Maybe people recall my "report" about some introduction of DSD playback through Pure Music and dCS here in Holland. The host was former Turtle Records including there still alive recording engineer and again all sounded total sh*t. But, talking about that with the recording engineer ended in a fight because it is as it is and it can't get better. And then to think that I regard Turtle Records the best out there. Sadly that is only so in our homes, and apparently not in the recording studio. Here, at CAS, it was the same;
All together I had been talking to the recording engineer for hours and there I learned the theories. DSD theories in particular and for sure not always for the better. But, of course the best is made out of it, and all the reasoning came across as correct. Still the same guy literally told me "that is her voice with those S-es". Aha. So I told him that at least now he could use his De-Esser.
Which he can't on his Sonoma, unless he goes to PCM first. Just saying ... (hint-hint).
Then I talked in person to possibly the greatest name, and witnessed by one guy from the audience I was told that no way any "Arc Prediction" could be without ringing *and* show no aliasing. Math would proove that according to him. Ok, so I don't know sh*t and I didn't care. But I do care a bit about the (again) closed minded response which no way will bring any of us any further in this world. And mind you, this is where the recordings are being made and I guess they will be stuck forever.
Might anyone involved read this, so be it. Maybe it is not 100% justified that tiny me expresses about this like how I just did, but I guess that at least a little counterweight is needed for the great guys. I am just vastly disappointed.
I have to add :
I am explicitly not talking about the session with the Aurality guys and Jon Reichbach (and me myself); I think that was great and had the depth needed. Maybe this was beyond the audience here and there - maybe I encouraged for that myself, but to me this is always better than keeping up appearances which even are of the wrong kind.
If anyone (involved) likes to respond, please go ahead. I will stand for what I just said. And stand corrected when needed.
Peter
