Pre-RMAF Avalon Visit and the Avalon SAGA

Thursday night, before RMAF, I was invited along with my wife to Avalon Acoustics HQ in Boulder.  I've been very open to the fact that I'm an enormous fan of Neil Patel and his loudspeaker designs.  As such, I'm biased, but I'm disclosing my bias right up front.

The SAGA is a brand new design from Neil, with the first pair being delivered only a few weeks ago.  The pair we listened to was the 6th pair to be built. 

We started the evening with wine, good conversation and some discussion about the technicals of the SAGA.  

Boring Technical Stuff

The SAGA is a 4 way speaker that borrows some design elements and technology from its larger brother, the Tesseract.  While the crossover of the Tess is in the top section of the speaker (because of the powered 3000 watt base), the crossover in the SAGA has returned to its more traditional home, in the bottom of the speaker.  It remains a two-piece unit, however.  

The drivers consist of a 1" Carbon Glass Neodymium tweeter, a 7" ceramic midrange and two 13" Nomex Kevlar composite woofers.  Sensitivity is 92dB/4ohms and starts the recommended amplifier power at 25 Watts.   They weigh in at 260lbs each and stand about five and a half feet tall. 

Listening

The evening was my de facto kick-off to Rocky Mountain audio fest.  I was unable to take pictures of the speakers at this point, but may be able to in a future visit.  Avalon prefers to control the images of their new speakers and I don't blame them.  Eventually, as they are released into the wild, more and more pictures show up and that relaxes.  At least this is how it was explained to me several years ago when listening to the Tesseract.   So, to be completely honest, I didn't even bother to ask to take a picture.   So you're stuck with the stock photo for now. 

We had a significant amount of time listening.  We listened to a lot of different recordings, from some early analog mono recordings, to show the focal strength of these speakers (amazing!).   In no particular order, here's some of my feedback on the evenings listening.

The standout of the evening was an analog tape of Fricsay's 1958 recording of Beethoven's 9th -- the first stereo recording of the 9th, and widely considered one of the best.  The speakers made the orchestra sound like an orchestra and isn't that what it's all about? Especially on the 9th, sometimes the music exceeds the size of the system.  This was not the case at all with the SAGA.   The voices really sounded nice and that's a difficult feat to pull off throughout the entirety of the 9th, as they sometimes end up sounding pretty harsh. They certainly do on my system at home and it's no slouch. 

We also listened to Hugh Laurie's "The Weed Smokers Dream" from his album "Didn't It Rain," and with vocals sung by Gaby Moreno.  The song was written in 1936 by delta blues artist Kansas Joe McCoy.  Gaby's voice on this song is a throwback to the styles of the 1930's and brings to mind images of the Flapper culture (which faded before this song was written, but it still fits).   

There were a few other folks in the listening room with us, a few of which had no experience with high end audio at all.  The "Weed Smokers Dream" managed to elicit the exclamations of "wow" and "it sounded like she was right in the room!"  In the end, isn't that the goal of all our money and efforts in high end?  Sometimes we listen too much and lose that effusive feeling that someone new gets when they first hear a high end system.  Gaby gave the room goose bumps.

We also listened to "Saint Louis Blues"  a song written in 1914 and also from Hugh Laurie's "Didn't It Rain" which is another one of my reference recordings. The song itself provides loudspeakers the opportunity to show all their weaknesses, from voice quality, to bottom end, imaging and sound-stage depth.  The SAGA, again, excelled at all of these.  (As a side note, I'll be writing up a review of "Didn't It Rain" as it's an album that should be in every audiophile's collection.)

We put on some Deep Purple later in the evening for some "paint peeling" rock, which did peel the paint (I think) and certainly left me with the exhausted "I've just been at a Deep Purple concert" feeling.  It was a live recording and yeah... it felt like being there.  With less pot.

Yeah, but tell me how they sound...

Overall, these speakers are Avalons.  I've written before about that "Avalon Sound," and these have them.  Surely there's something so consistent in Neil Patel's designs and philosophy that he's able to retain that sort of consistently fantastic sound across speakers of all sizes and across decades of designs.  One has a tendency when writing speaker reviews to throw out terms like "transparent," "holographic," "coherent," and any of a thousand other adjectives.  While I could use those all in their most positive forms to describe the SAGA, I think I can settle on one word that summed up the experience for me. Honest.  

When a speaker can play back an a cappella passage and give you the sense that you might actually get accidentally spit on  by the artist, then that's honest.   When you can close your eyes and locate each band member, that's honest.  When a violin sounds like a violin, not a crude copy of a violin, then that's honest.  When new listeners gasp and declare, "it's like she's in the room!" then that's honest.

I was reminded throughout the evening that these speakers were just completed, either the day of or the day before our audition.  They weren't anywhere near broken in.  

As the baby brothers of the flagship Tesseract, these certainly belong in the family.  Coming in at $120,000, I won't comment on whether or not I think it's "worth it," although on the drive to Avalon that evening, my wife an I had a long conversation about what's "worth it".   I will say that her impression of "worth it" seems to have shifted towards the positive by the time we were finished listening (she's no audiophile, so I listen a lot to her feedback as a sanity check). 

For those shopping in that price range?  You'd be remiss if you didn't give them a listen.  It's a LOT of money to spend on speakers, but the folks at Avalon will find a way to get you in front of them. 

Album Review: Stan Ridgway & Pietra Wexstun

Priestess Of The Promised Land

I follow the career of Stan Ridgway  in a very off and on fashion.  From my teenage years and Wall Of Voodoo's Mexican Radio to later solo efforts such as Mosquitos.  My relationship, as I said, has been very off and on, with what seems to be bursts of Stan every year or so.  

He's got a style that evokes, to me, images of the dusty west, Johnny Cash, film noir and urban down-on-your luck souls. It always brings to mind the movie Bagdad Cafe. It's probably not fair to sum all his music up in that particular fashion, but when I imagine Stan's music, those are the images associated with it.  Even Stan and Pietra have an online FAQ for the album, which includes the following question:

Are Stan and Pietra opening up a "greasy spoon" diner or "art monster's commune" with old rusty tin tuff sheds out in the harsh hot desert soon?  I'll join 'em! Some old man flagged me down on Interstate 15 and told me they were.  I'm hungry and lonely too!

And that almost perfectly describes the atmosphere of much of Stan's work.  Oh yeah, and their answer?   You'll have to visit their page on Bandcamp to read that. 

I have enjoyed every album I've heard from Stan Ridgway, but some are definitely better than others.

Last week, Stan Ridgway and his wife Pietra Wexstun released their new album, Priestess Of The Promised Land.  Forgive me in advance for perhaps not giving Pietra her due throughout this review.  I'm not nearly as fluent in her music as I am Stan's.  But when it comes to this album, it's important to know she deserves credit as well.  She has her own band, Hecate's Angels, which I'm not familiar with (yet).  You can check out her work here.

A short discussion on methodology.

Whenever I listen to an album for my own enjoyment there are four primary things that I listen to/for.   First is, obviously, the music itself.  

Secondly, the vocal quality, which is not always the quality of the singing, but the feeling in the vocals.  This is hard to enumerate, but while Adele has a superb and pitch perfect voice, the same cannot be said for Roger Waters or Leonard Cohen -- yet I very much appreciate their vocals.  

Third, the lyrics.  Lyrics that move me (Leonard Cohen and Roger Waters!) can make the album. They do not always have to make sense, but whether they evoke imagery or emotions that appeal to me is the measure by which I judge them.  

Finally, the recording quality.  There are some extremely good songs that have been ruined by poor recording quality (thinking The Neighbourhood's Female Robbery). 

I try to listen to an album at least 4 times to determine whether or not I like it.  There are, obviously, songs that don't strike you at first, but after a few listens suddenly become a song that gets stuck in your head.   In my opinion this is a reflection of the complexity of music. 

Finally, The Album

My initial impression of the album was that it was classic Stan Ridgway.  There's no mistaking his voice or his style.  I suspect that if Stan wrote music/vocals for another artist that I would be able to pick it out, even if their singing style was nothing like Stan's.  I'm just boasting so lets not test that theory -- I just like to think it's true.  

Having said that, the sound was very comfortable to me, and I could slip right in to that mood of some of his other solo albums (Snakebite and Black Diamond come to mind).  I suppose that helped me immediately enjoy the music overall.  That doesn't mean there aren't songs that will need to grow on me (Blue Oceans At Dusk, Boozehole and Nightworld are the most obvious), but the song Priestess Of The Promised Land was a song that was immediately Stan and I know that it's going to end up on my playlist, along with She's Wearing You Down.

The vocals are typical Stan.  There's not much to say about that.  If you've heard Stan Ridgway, you know what he sounds like, and this sounds like him.  His voice hasn't suffered with age like other artists (again, Roger Waters?) and the songs would sound right at home with 1989's Mosquitoes.

Lyrically, it's also typical Stan.  It evokes images of the west, desert colors and small town simplicity. They highlight the small moments in life such as "her car window rolls down, her hand makes a wave, and she's wearing you down," which capture moments that we all immediately understand and likely relate to. 





This finally brings me to the recording quality.   I reached out to Stan and had asked what equipment was used in the recording of this album, but have yet to receive a response.  Should I receive one, I'll update it here. 

This is of particular interest because I believe it's self produced and I must say that the quality is superb.  The music itself is heavy on acoustic instruments and avoids being too heavily layered.  This is music that wouldn't sound much different at all if performed live and "unplugged."   The vocals were clean and clear, and the guitar didn't sound too large on the sound-stage.  Rather it's mixed properly in a way that makes the guitar match the size of the vocals. Other instruments in the mix are appropriately sized.  Far too many recordings these days sound like a vocal with a 10-foot-tall guitar.  Scaling of the individual instruments is important to me.

If you want a great album to show off your high end stereo?  This should go on your short-list -- especially for anyone who is already a fan.

In summary, I can recommend this album for anyone who doesn't know Stan as a good starting place to learn his music although Mosquitoes might be the better choice (I haven't listened to it in a very long time and can't comment on recording quality).

If you're a Stan Ridgway fan, then what are you waiting for?  You will not be disappointed at all. 

The album is not released on any medium other than digital download (available in FLAC and 320kbps mp3).  Stan and Pietra indicate that this is because:

The current industry climate for manufacturing such items and recouping the costs is hard for all music makers at this time.  They love physical albums too but right now its a bit dodgy on the "making money back" part.  Stan and Pietra have chosen this digital release strategy for the time being.

I listen almost exclusively digitized music, so this doesn't bother me at all.  While you can listen to the music online, please consider giving the artists what you think the album is worth.   The distribution site lets you choose how much you would like to give the artists.  If you like it, be generous.  It's hard to make a living out there, even for well established musicians.   Besides, I want them to make enough money to open that greasy spoon.

You can purchase the album on BandCamp at the following URL:

Priestess Of The Promised Land - 2016 - bandcamp

Album Review: Stan Ridgway & Pietra Wexstun

Priestess Of The Promised Land

I follow the career of Stan Ridgway  in a very off and on fashion.  From my teenage years and Wall Of Voodoo's Mexican Radio to later solo efforts such as Mosquitos.  My relationship, as I said, has been very off and on, with what seems to be bursts of Stan every year or so.  

He's got a style that evokes, to me, images of the dusty west, Johnny Cash, film noir and urban down-on-your luck souls. It always brings to mind the movie Bagdad Cafe. It's probably not fair to sum all his music up in that particular fashion, but when I imagine Stan's music, those are the images associated with it.  Even Stan and Pietra have an online FAQ for the album, which includes the following question:

Are Stan and Pietra opening up a "greasy spoon"diner or "art monster's commune" with old rusty tin tuff sheds out in the harsh hot desert soon? I'll join 'em ! Some old man flagged me down on Interstate 15 and told me they were. I'm hungry and lonely too! 

And that almost perfectly describes the atmosphere of much of Stan's work.  Oh yeah, and their answer?   You'll have to visit their page on Bandcamp to read that. 

I have enjoyed every album I've heard from Stan Ridgway, but some are definitely better than others.

Last week, Stan Ridgway and his wife Pietra Wexstun released their new album, Priestess Of The Promised Land.  Forgive me in advance for perhaps not giving Pietra her due throughout this review.  I'm not nearly as fluent in her music as I am Stan's.  But when it comes to this album, it's important to know she deserves credit as well.  She has her own band, Hecate's Angels, which I'm not familiar with (yet).  You can check out her work here.

A short discussion on methodology.

Whenever I listen to an album for my own enjoyment there are four primary things that I listen to/for.   First is, obviously, the music itself.  

Secondly, the vocal quality, which is not always the quality of the singing, but the feeling in the vocals.  This is hard to enumerate, but while Adele has a superb and pitch perfect voice, the same cannot be said for Roger Waters or Leonard Cohen -- yet I very much appreciate their vocals.  

Third, the lyrics.  Lyrics that move me (Leonard Cohen and Roger Waters!) can make the album. They do not always have to make sense, but whether they evoke imagery or emotions that appeal to me is the measure by which I judge them.  

Finally, the recording quality.  There are some extremely good songs that have been ruined by poor recording quality (thinking The Neighbourhood's Female Robbery). 

I try to listen to an album at least 4 times to determine whether or not I like it.  There are, obviously, songs that don't strike you at first, but after a few listens suddenly become a song that gets stuck in your head.   In my opinion this is a reflection of the complexity of music. 

Finally, The Album

My initial impression of the album was that it was classic Stan Ridgway.  There's no mistaking his voice or his style.  I suspect that if Stan wrote music/vocals for another artist that I would be able to pick it out, even if their singing style was nothing like Stan's.  I'm just boasting so lets not test that theory -- I just like to think it's true.  

Having said that, the sound was very comfortable to me, and I could slip right in to that mood of some of his other solo albums (Snakebite and Black Diamond come to mind).  I suppose that helped me immediately enjoy the music overall.  That doesn't mean there aren't songs that will need to grow on me (Blue Oceans At Dusk, Boozehole and Nightworld are the most obvious), but the song Priestess Of The Promised Land was a song that was immediately Stan and I know that it's going to end up on my playlist, along with She's Wearing You Down.

The vocals are typical Stan.  There's not much to say about that.  If you've heard Stan Ridgway, you know what he sounds like, and this sounds like him.  His voice hasn't suffered with age like other artists (again, Roger Waters?) and the songs would sound right at home with 1989's Mosquitoes.

Lyrically, it's also typical Stan.  It evokes images of the west, desert colors and small town simplicity. They highlight the small moments in life such as "her car window rolls down, her hand makes a wave, and she's wearing you down," which capture moments that we all immediately understand and likely relate to. 





This finally brings me to the recording quality.   I reached out to Stan and had asked what equipment was used in the recording of this album, but have yet to receive a response.  Should I receive one, I'll update it here. 

This is of particular interest because I believe it's self produced and I must say that the quality is superb.  The music itself is heavy on acoustic instruments and avoids being too heavily layered.  This is music that wouldn't sound much different at all if performed live and "unplugged."   The vocals were clean and clear, and the guitar didn't sound too large on the sound-stage.  Rather it's mixed properly in a way that makes the guitar match the size of the vocals. Other instruments in the mix are appropriately sized.  Far too many recordings these days sound like a vocal with a 10-foot-tall guitar.  Scaling of the individual instruments is important to me.

If you want a great album to show off your high end stereo?  This should go on your short-list -- especially for anyone who is already a fan.

In summary, I can recommend this album for anyone who doesn't know Stan as a good starting place to learn his music although Mosquitoes might be the better choice (I haven't listened to it in a very long time and can't comment on recording quality).

If you're a Stan Ridgway fan, then what are you waiting for?  You will not be disappointed at all. 

The album is not released on any medium other than digital download (available in FLAC and 320kbps mp3).  Stan and Pietra indicate that this is because:

The current industry climate for manufacturing such items and recouping the costs is hard for all music makers at this time. They love physical albums too but right now its a a bit dodgy on the "making money back" part. Stan and Pietra have chosen this digital release strategy for the time being. 

I listen almost exclusively digitized music, so this doesn't bother me at all.  While you can listen to the music online, please consider giving the artists what you think the album is worth.   The distribution site lets you choose how much you would like to give the artists.  If you like it, be generous.  It's hard to make a living out there, even for well established musicians.   Besides, I want them to make enough money to open that greasy spoon.

You can purchase the album on BandCamp at the following URL:

Priestess Of The Promised Land - 2016 - bandcamp

Kicking off Rocky Mountain Audio Fest

It's almost that time.  Rocky Mountain Audio Fest kicks off tomorrow afternoon.  While I did try to get a press "early access" pass (or whatever it is) I was declined.  Bloggers as "press" are determined on a case-by-case basis, and I'm simply too new to be considered.   I understand RMAF-People.  I only wept for a few hours. 

Anyway, back to the subject at hand.  I will be kicking off RMAF this year by visiting Avalon Acoustics in Boulder, Colorado this evening (Thursday Oct 6th) to demo the new Avalon SAGA loudspeaker and the new Avalon Pro Monitor 3 from Avalon's pro audio division.  

I had seen the SAGA several months ago in an unfinished state while designer Neil Patel was finishing up details of the crossover and even unfinished it was a beauty.   I'm really looking forward to hearing it.   Stay tuned for some feedback.

The Pro Monitor 3 will also be featured at RMAF in Room 1030 (Summit) where they are partnering with Switzerland based NAGRA Audio presumably to highlight the two companies professional and audiophile class recording and playback solutions.  They are, as the name implies targeted to recording and engineers (and end users, as well!).

I'm certainly less familiar with Pro Audio and the equipment used in mixing and mastering (I'm not even certain I use the terminology correctly), but I do know that previous versions of the Pro Monitor 3 have an almost cult-like following.   I'll be hearing them possibly tonight and certainly at RMAF itself.  

Stay tuned for some review-like articles on these two speakers.  

RMAF Affordable Audio Systems

John H. Darko (@darkoaudio) has pointed out that Rocky Mountain Audio Fest (RMAF) has set aside 5 rooms at RMAF specifically for "affordable hi-fi".   These systems cover the range of $500 - $5000 and include digital, analog and headphone systems -- in all 15 systems will be highlighted.  

I will be going out of my way to take a look at these and some of the equipment that they recommend.  Stay tuned!  And read John's article here for more information:

RMAF To Show 15 "affordable" systems.

Rocky Mountain Audio Fest Coming Fast!

October 7th through the 9th the Rocky Mountain Audio Fest is coming to Denver, Colorado.  I'll certainly be attending, probably with a notebook or more in tow in order to give some first impressions of some of the gear that I'll be seeing there.  If you're local to the Denver area, it's a must see.  The tickets are inexpensive at $25 for a three day pass (seniors and active military get in at half price).  

The list of exhibitors is over 300 and includes huge names such as Avalon, Jeff Rowland Design Group, Wilson, Ayre, PS Audio and more.   It's taking place at the Denver Marriot Tech Center at 4900 S. Syracuse St.

There's some pretty interesting sounding seminars that will be taking place, including "How to buy a HiFi System: The process of price." which sounds particularly intriguing to me. 

Check out their page and register here.   Drop me a note if you're going!

Rocky Mountain Audio Fest

The Problem with new music and poor listening

Having spent a lot of time interacting with Avalon Acoustics in the past few months -- whose speakers range in price from $7000 to $360,000, and owning an amp and pre-amp that come from Jeff Rowland who produces the electronics ranging in price from $9500 to $58,000 I've been learning a lot and thinking a lot about music reproduction and how things like the law of diminishing returns applies (does a $9500 amp sound $48,500 worse than the expensive one?). Anyway, an individual replied with the idea that Millennials are just Uncool (and by implication don't make good music).

This got me to thinking about writing this overly long diatribe. So I'm ready to wax philosophical on why the state of Music sucks so bad today.

January 22nd of 2016, the sales of OLD music outpaced the sales of NEW music. I think there's some solid reasons why. Follow along, and apologies in advance for any snobby tone.

Algorithmic Music

First, lets start with algorithmic music: That's right, music made via algorithm. By algorithm, I mean computers that write songs. You've heard it and you don't even know it. See, some folks think that a computer can write a song to match the qualities of other popular songs that appeal to certain audience. This has been surprisingly effective at creating some big hits from newer artists (think Ke$ha and the Cast of Glee -- who had more billboard hit songs than Elvis). The products have names like "Band in a Box" or "Automated Composing System" and can even be used in conjunction with automated lyric creating software such as the "TALE-SPIN" and "MINSTREL". Once a song is "written" (generated?), some are run through software like "Hit Song Science" which predicts its probability of being a hit. "I Gotta Feeling" by the Black Eyed Peas is one such song and it hit the top of the Billboard pop chart after scoring 8.9 out of 10 on the "Hit Song Science" software, meaning that it got the honor of being released as a single.

Do We Listen Wrong?

Secondly, lets look at "listening to music". You ask anyone if they listen to music and they almost invariably say yes. But no. No they don't. Most people play music while they do something else. But listening to music is setting aside all other activities to sit down, in order to JUST listen to music. So, not to be snobbish about it, but odds are you don't listen to music. You clean the house and dance around and sing along and play music in the background. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. I do it! But it's a very different experience than sitting down and really listening. Audiophiles are a small group of consumers, so studios/engineers mix for "the masses" which means loudness (more on that later).

Do we listen wrong.  Part II -- Earbuds

Earbuds: Besides the fact that numerous studies have shown a clear link between earbuds and hearing damage -- millennials are the primary victims of this -- and the fact that they're just awful, they remain very popular. But there's another reason to eschew earbuds. That's not how music is meant to be heard. Music is designed to be heard in stereo. The philosophy is that on a fair stereo, it should replicate the band playing in front of you. On a superb stereo, you can get a spacial sense of where the trumpet player is standing, and where the saxophone player is standing on the virtual stage in front of you. It's how great quality music is mixed and mastered and how it's intended to be listened to. Using earbuds or headphones puts the sound in the middle of the inside of your head and that experience is lost. There is one notable exception and that's Binaural recordings, which are recorded with microphones placed inside the ears of a model of a human head. The results can absolutely stunning, but nobody really records that way because who buys music that's really only MEANT to be listened to on headphones. Now -- media with both a binaural mix and a stereo mix, that might be interesting. There's impressive examples on Youtube. Surround Sound suffers some of the same problems as above. You listen to a band playing in front of you, not whilst sitting in the middle of the band with the drummer behind you and the lead singer in front of you. Music is recorded, mixed, mastered and released primarily in stereo for a reason. Surround sound is for movies.

Audiophile or AudioFool

Audio Equipment: As an Audiophile, I listen to high end equipment, nothing says that great sound has to be super expensive. But as a general rule, a $250 stereo will sound nothing at all like a $3000 stereo (not always the case!). Don't walk into a store and buy on features and how many buttons and lights and watts it puts out (some of the finest amps in the world put out numbers like 8 watts). Go to an audio store and actually listen to what you want to buy before you buy it. Take your favorite CD with you and demo the gear. Most audio stores are very happy to oblige. You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it, would you? Same with Stereo's. That is unless you've decided only to have music as your background sound, in which case, go right ahead and buy those bose or yamaha speakers and amps. I purchased my gear used, it was a few years old and one person called them "vintage". The speaker designer said they weren't vintage they were classics. Even so, they're high end and they sound great and they're 1/3 the cost than they were new. I don't buy into the $100/foot speaker cables, or any cable that carries digital that costs more than a few bucks. People who don't understand digital buy that crap.

Audio Setup

The tv show Elementary drives me absolutely nuts. Sherlock Holmes owns a McIntosh C2300 -- a vacuum tube pre-amp that sells for $4500, an $8000 MT10 McIntosh Turntable, and a $4500 McIntosh MC152 amplifier. With that kind of gear he uses Energy CF-70's speakers (at $500/pair) arguably the most important part of the system and probably used because they look okay. But putting THOSE speakers on a $15000 plus set of equipment? Insane. He should be running speakers that more closely match the level of equipment he has in the rest of the system. There are great speakers that are inexpensive... but those, in my opinion, are not even close to being them. They are what audio nuts call "Mid-Fi" whereas the McIntosh gear is consider "Hi-Fi". He did it exactly backwards.

But none of this matters, because the smartest man in the world has his speakers set in the corners of the room facing each other. So really, even the best of the best speakers (which, by the way come from Avalon Acoustics but I'm TOTALLY biased) are going to completely lose that sense of the band "playing right in front of you" (imaging) in that configuration. He's using them as noisemakers and that's all.

Your listening position and your speakers should be in a triangle with the distance between the speakers being roughly 85% of the distance to the listening area. In other words, if you're sitting 10' away from the speakers, the distance between the speakers should be roughly 8.5 feet apart. Refer to the manufacturer and your ears to determine how much you should toe-in each speaker (i.e., point them towards the listening position).


Processing of Music

AutoTune and Vocoders: Making people who can't sing singers, since Cher brought AutoTune to the world with her song "Believe" in 1998, and the Vocoder that cursed the world with hits from The Black Eyed Peas. Hey guys! -- We hear it, it sounds like crap and we know it probably means you can't sing. As Autotune improves with technology, our artists will be picked more and more by their looks and fashion than their actual talent and they'll write even less of their own music than they do now -- which is not insignificant.


Even more processing, this time of some of the good stuff.

Finally: The Loudness War. Remastered disks are always better than the original, right? Wrong. Since the 1990's the trend in poor quality audio engineering has been to greatly increase the loudness of music. This causes clipping and distortion and compression of the dynamic range. It exploits instantaneous perception to the human ear that louder is better. If you play an original recording and then a newer "remaster" back to back without touching the volume knob -- if it's a victim of the loudness war -- you'll notice the newer "remaster" sounds a LOT louder (frequently in the range of 6db or roughly 50% louder in perceived volume). The trade off is that the already loud parts (drums or other aspects the artist intended to be louder) get cut off on the high and low end, meaning that they end up sounding "the same or similar loudness" as everything else in the song, which was not the artists intent and flattens out the song, compressing it and making it sound less dynamic. Fine if you're having a dinner party with music in the background. Terrible if you're sitting and actually listening to music.


tl;dr version of all this? Modern music sucks because we don't listen, when we do listen, we don't do it "right," the artists frequently do lack talent and are often chosen to be famous for reasons other than their musical ability and the music is so compressed that even the best of songs sound absolutely craptacular.