Bob Dylan speaks out about quality of recorded music

Its about time someone brought this out into the media. I think he needs to listen to some modern electronica before he makes such a broad statement.

But here's my take:

With everyone taking thier shitty AAC encoded-DRM music on thier Ipods and wasting money on Ipod-interfaces, let's get some quality back in our lives. Hardrive space is getting cheap, while are people still compressing music.

Mp3 sound like shit...unless encoded at 320,
Satellite radio sounds like a 56K stream off aol from 1996.
Most modern metal albums sound like garbage...even on a nice audio system.

I'm the only one that's a stickler for audio clairity. I'm I the only one that buys a car and immediately rips out the stereo/speakers...I don't think so.

Granted, people don't like to change. I'm a little of an anomaly since I buy most of my music (drum and bass) on vinyl, but I do spend way too much money on CD's as well. For a while now, I buy mostly electronic music because it seems to be the only form of music that sounds consistently good. Deep sub-bass, and crisp trebles.

What about Super Audio CD/DVD-Audio? I'd be all over this stuff if they would release something other then the newest Meat Loaf album.

Quote:

---

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Bob Dylan says the quality of modern recordings is "atrocious," and even the songs on his new album sounded much better in the studio than on disc.

ADVERTISEMENT

"I don't know anybody who's made a record that sounds decent in the past 20 years, really," the 65-year-old rocker said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine.

Dylan, who released eight studio albums in the past two decades, returns with his first recording in five years, "Modern Times," next Tuesday.

Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway."

"You listen to these modern records, they're atrocious, they have sound all over them," he added. "There's no definition of nothing, no vocal, no nothing, just like ... static."

Dylan said he does his best to fight technology, but it's a losing battle.

"Even these songs probably sounded ten times better in the studio when we recorded 'em. CDs are small. There's no stature to it."

---

ignorance is bliss
war is peace
Bob Dylan is really old.

I'm not that bothered about MP3 quality, but anything I listen to seriously gets bought on vinyl :cool:

That statement might be too broad, but I can definitely appreciate a tightly produced record that, as Dylan says, have sound all over them. I can listen to music just for the music itself, and then I don’t really care that much about the sound quality, but if they at the same time manage to get the record out with a good sound quality, there’s nothing better than that. Mp3 files are cool since they make it easy to share music, but even in my car, with the small upgrades I made, I can (sometimes) hear the difference between a cd recorded from mp3s and the original cd. My home system is crap right now, but I would love to do comparisons on what I used to have in Norway. As far as sound quality on normal cd’s go, it’s no problem screwing up a totally good old record in the transfer process from analog to digital and back again, and there was plenty of examples of that in the early days of cd’s. I’ll think about my favorite cd’s are as far as sound quality and production goes and post later today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skier666

Its about time someone brought this out into the media. I think he needs to listen to some modern electronica before he makes such a broad statement.

But here's my take:

With everyone taking thier shitty AAC encoded-DRM music on thier Ipods and wasting money on Ipod-interfaces, let's get some quality back in our lives. Hardrive space is getting cheap, while are people still compressing music.

Mp3 sound like shit...unless encoded at 320,
Satellite radio sounds like a 56K stream off aol from 1996.
Most modern metal albums sound like garbage...even on a nice audio system.

---

Its not just clarity though but one of packaging. Reel to Reels were way better than casette but casette won because of size. MP3 is OK for what it is. Its built for noisy environs where clarity dosen't matter that much (car, gym, work, etc).
As for metal, I think it sounds worse on a clearer system. When I really need to listen to something I do it from my computer, through a mackie mixers phone amp, and finally Grado headphones and I think its a phychoacoustic thing but noiser music (metal) is more tiring to listen to through this than in my car or on generic speakers. Metal dosen't want clarity, classical and jazz do and metal producers that are taking advantage of all the latest 24 bit 192 khz mastering gear and bit dithering to increase headroom on the final product are making a mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skier666

I'm the only one that's a stickler for audio clairity. I'm I the only one that buys a car and immediately rips out the stereo/speakers...I don't think so.

Granted, people don't like to change. I'm a little of an anomaly since I buy most of my music (drum and bass) on vinyl, but I do spend way too much money on CD's as well. For a while now, I buy mostly electronic music because it seems to be the only form of music that sounds consistently good. Deep sub-bass, and crisp trebles.

What about Super Audio CD/DVD-Audio? I'd be all over this stuff if they would release something other then the newest Meat Loaf album.

---

Those newer formats are great (at my old work they had silent rooms for audio production/testing with sonex absorbers and everything and a Denon 7.1 system with SACD/DVD-Audio. Sounded totally incredible. But thats there. How much will this help in the real world of your car, in the gym, at work, etc?

Of couse Dylans shit sound better in the studio. He's sitting in a room that cost 6 figures to build and soundproof, listening to his music off a 24 bit 192 kHz protools system played through a $200000 mixer on $50000 worth of amp and monitor speakers. To most people its about what is good enough and MP3/CD is just that.

MP3 was designed by a german dude for a more efficient and compact file size, and that was the only reason. It was the only show in town for a long time, and gained popularity with the masses as the mp3 players hit the market, first the Rio then ipod. For an mp3 to be equivalent to CD quality, it has to be something like 14000 kbps, right? They're all sampled at 44khz which is plenty enough for the human ear. Myself, I can't tell the difference beyond about 224kbps. Now we have .ogg/vorbis, aac, FLAC, etc. All kinda the same thing but vary in efficiency and quality.

As far as comparing analog recording to digital recording, analog always seems warmer, that's true, but I think it's because of frequency saturation. The technique for recording with tape was to saturate it by clipping just a little bit so the quieter sounds were picked up better, and so I think the whole audible spectrum benefitted. You can't do that with digital recording mediums or the distortion sounds like shit.

Funny though, that the new electronic releases are recorded in digital but pressed to vinyl, which is then played on a turntable which acoustically reproduces the sounds which are picked up by a needle mic and then amplified to high heaven thru a phono amp. It's like shrinking a 8 megapixel image down to a thumbnail, the zooming in on it and taking a polaroid of the screen. There's just something about vinyl though that sounds really nice and warm, I can't deny that.

Quote:

---

Those newer formats are great (at my old work they had silent rooms for audio production/testing with sonex absorbers and everything and a Denon 7.1 system with SACD/DVD-Audio. Sounded totally incredible. But thats there. How much will this help in the real world of your car, in the gym, at work, etc?

---

Well, for one thing, listen to a band like the Haunted, Cradle of Filth, Lamb of God etc. Without a sub-woofer present, I don't even bother. If they'd master these in 7.1 for a car system to hear every instrument, bass etc in a separate channel would be heaven like. To be honest, its hard to listen to any music without a sub.

I listen to most of my music in the car, so my best audio system is in there. Yeah, there's a lot of wind-noise at 80 mph but I know of few places where I can listen to music as loud on a daily basis.

At the gym, you're not there to listen to music, you're there to work out. However, I still use the highest quality level as possible. The issue there is more of how can we get good earphones that can stay in your ears. The earbud phones are fine for lifting weights but not when you're running. You could wear a pair of studio headphones but they'd fill with sweat. To this day, the old school yellow Sony sports are the only phones I've used that stay in my ear and sound adequate.

Quote:

---

Of couse Dylans shit sound better in the studio. He's sitting in a room that cost 6 figures to build and soundproof, listening to his music off a 24 bit 192 kHz protools system played through a $200000 mixer on $50000 worth of amp and monitor speakers. To most people its about what is good enough and MP3/CD is just that.

---

Yeah, I should have mentioned that as well. Good point. But why can't the consumer demand it to sound like the studio? Ok, I guess if money is no object, I could go run out and buy some McIntosh speakers, etc

Its all about who's mastering the final product. For example, even with brand new vinyl records by the same artist, some sound muffled, some the volume is too high, some too low, but thank god most sound amazing when done right.

Honestly the biggest problem with the sound of music in general today is the manner in which it's recorded. Protools pretty much sounds like shit compared to a giant, delicious Neve analog board.

Even in drum & bass, almost all of the new recordings were mastered on digital systems and they all sound like crap compared to vintage Metalheadz and Reinforced stuff.

The perfect example is in 'Talking Headz' when they show Ed + Optical working on the title track to Wormhole. Optical is running a Korg Triton into effects boxes into a 64 channel Neve board. That album is truly a wonder to listen to. It's produced so fucking well I can't believe it. Kid A by Radiohead is the same way.

The problem becomes when you're like the guy selling the $20k reference speakers. He listens to Steve Vai recordings because they sound good, not because he likes the music. That pretty much takes all the fun away.... so fuck that.

Dylan has a point, but when you deal with truly high-end audio gear, it's easy to take the fun out of listening.

Yeah....I think you've got it Mitch.

They repressed Wormhole with new artwork. I like that album so much I'm thinking about buying that copy as well.

Have you taken a listen at Virus Vaults? What about the new Breakage album?

Dylan is obviously tone deaf based on his singing, so do we really want to listen to his opinion on how bad music sounds these days?

heres a revelation:

Maybe its not the quality of the recording that sucks, but rather the music itself that does the sucking. Just a thought.

Funny how Dylan makes a comment on how poor the sound quality of music is these days and then goes out and releases his entire catalog as a package deal on ITunes.

I used to own tube amps driving Quad speakers fed by a super sensitive cartridge / turntable combo, and I had to sit in one spot in the room (specially arranged just for this) to hear the music "correctly". Fuck that. I think the I Pod - MP3 revolution is the greatest thing to happen to music since the Ramones. I take it anywhere, and it's only rock and roll.

Bob's spoiled. As said above, he's heard the best in studios, and he's relatively rich, so he can afford the best setup by a pro at home. Lucky him.
I have tickets to see him in less than 2 weeks. He better not sound like shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benny Profane

I have tickets to see him in less than 2 weeks. He better not sound like shit.

---

Muuuuuumble...mmmmmummmmmble....fdsfsubmmmble....

Saw him live about 10-12 years ago and that's ^ all I really understood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arty50

Muuuuuumble...mmmmmummmmmble....fdsfsubmmmble....

Saw him live about 10-12 years ago and that's ^ all I really understood.

---

I saw him 2 years ago for the first time - the sound was superb, and he was in great shape and in good spirits. I have heard reviews of his performances from the time you speak, and all were bad. He wasn't healthy back then, and who knows what else. But he's back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skier666

Yeah....I think you've got it Mitch.

They repressed Wormhole with new artwork. I like that album so much I'm thinking about buying that copy as well.

Have you taken a listen at Virus Vaults? What about the new Breakage album?

---

Not heard the whole Virus Vaults... just the two Bailey mixes he did on Radio1. The quadrant6 remix is probably the best way he could've possibly opened the first mix. Rigmasher is without question one of my favorite tunes of all time, and Bailey dropped that in mix #2.

I really, really miss the Ed + Optical of old. Virus 1-6 was pretty much the sounds of the robot apocalypse packaged nicely into a few 12" singles.

Been trying to keep up with dubstep... I think there's promise. The Vex'd set on Breezeblock is one of the better things I've heard in a while.

There's nothing like the warmth & subtle natural compression of analog. There's nothing like digital for ease of production. I combined the 2 for my CD & was very happy with the results.

Maybe Dylan didn't have a much of a choice on the Ipod deal & that's why he made the statement.The homogenization of the music industry has been horrific!

heh. More to the quote (from the Rolling Stone with his face on the cover out now)

"CD's are small. There's no stature to it. I remember when that Napstar guy came up across, it was like, "Everybody's gettin' music for free." I was like, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothin' anyway.""

heh