# What do you do when the songs you like r recorded like crapp



## Myface (May 21, 2021)

Interesting question huh? You like the song but when you hear it on your system it turns your stomach. You know what I'm talking about the songs that used to sound good on a regular system.


----------



## llebcire (Nov 17, 2016)

Typically I find a version in Flac. Depending on my mood I’ll listen or let it go. For instance I love Hendrix but most of his stuff isn’t recorded well (some is) but if I’m in the mood I’ll listen anyway.

-Eric 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Myface (May 21, 2021)

llebcire said:


> Typically I find a version in Flac. Depending on my mood I’ll listen or let it go. For instance I love Hendrix but most of his stuff isn’t recorded well (some is) but if I’m in the mood I’ll listen anyway.
> 
> -Eric
> 
> ...


Big Hendrix fan here. Man he just wow.


----------



## Lou Frasier2 (Jul 17, 2012)

I listen to oldschool punk,none of it is recorded well


----------



## jtrosky (Jul 19, 2019)

This drives me crazy as well. I find myself listening to the music that is recorded well over and over and "neglecting" the stuff that isn't recorded well.

Like you said, this was never really an issue on "lesser" systems - but once you hear a good recording on a good system. it's _so_ hard to go back to listening to music that is recorded so poorly.

To me, this is most obvious with the bass/midbass (actually, the lack thereof)....

I'm tempted to load them up in Audacity and some bass and/or treble.  Screw what the "producer intended".


----------



## Thomasluke7899 (Jan 4, 2020)

jtrosky said:


> I'm tempted to load them up in Audacity and some bass and/or treble.  Screw what the "producer intended".


That's called remastering. If you purchase the rights you could even sell your remastered version.


----------



## ckirocz28 (Nov 29, 2017)

jtrosky said:


> This drives me crazy as well. I find myself listening to the music that is recorded well over and over and "neglecting" the stuff that isn't recorded well.
> 
> Like you said, this was never really an issue on "lesser" systems - but once you hear a good recording on a good system. it's _so_ hard to go back to listening to music that is recorded so poorly.
> 
> ...


That 70's and early 80's rock sucks (AC/DC, Joan Jett, etc.). I have actually done what you are talking about with Audacity, duplicate the tracks, low pass the duplicates at 80 hz (or something else), boost them to your preference, mix those tracks back in, export your remaster. Just remember to save the original. I do it this somewhat complicated way so I can mute the boosted track to get an A/B comparison.


----------



## khlae (Dec 31, 2016)

Thomasluke7899 said:


> That's called remastering. If you purchase the rights you could even sell your remastered version.


The problem is there's only so far you can go with the already mixed down recording  
I've done stuff like this to bring the drums dynamics back and generate lost high frequency harmonics and whatever else I thought of at the time, but you generally wind up having to do each song individually to get them to sound good and not like some stupid 'sound restoration gimmick', so just go listen to better recordings unless you can make money remastering your favorite singles.


----------



## Thomasluke7899 (Jan 4, 2020)

khlae said:


> The problem is there's only so far you can go with the already mixed down recording
> I've done stuff like this to bring the drums dynamics back and generate lost high frequency harmonics and whatever else I thought of at the time, but you generally wind up having to do each song individually to get them to sound good and not like some stupid 'sound restoration gimmick', so just go listen to better recordings unless you can make money remastering your favorite singles.


A simple upload to YouTube. 💥 boom. Your a milli niary


----------



## Sirikenewtron (Nov 4, 2020)

jtrosky said:


> This drives me crazy as well. I find myself listening to the music that is recorded well over and over and "neglecting" the stuff that isn't recorded well.
> 
> Like you said, this was never really an issue on "lesser" systems - but once you hear a good recording on a good system. it's _so_ hard to go back to listening to music that is recorded so poorly.
> 
> To me, this is most obvious with the bass/midbass (actually, the lack thereof)....


Man this is me to a T


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Old'sCool (May 16, 2021)

It's a conundrum. I love some Rolling Stones, but the 1960s recordings intentionally added distortion to some tracks.

WuTang Clan were pioneers in rap, but half thier stuff sounds like it was recorded in a bathroom.

Hendrix is tough on some systems. Many don't know the original press CDs were quadrophonic. It actually sounds great in quad, but awful in 5.1+ surround.

I really can't listen to crappy recordings anymore on a goos system.

My only alternative suggestion is to search for modern covers of favorite classics, and hope the new bands do the songs justice.


----------



## Anu2g (Nov 4, 2020)

Old'sCool said:


> It's a conundrum. I love some Rolling Stones, but the 1960s recordings intentionally added distortion to some tracks.
> 
> WuTang Clan were pioneers in rap, but half thier stuff sounds like it was recorded in a bathroom.
> 
> ...


You hit the nail on the head re: Wu-Tang. Though I will say that "low quality" aspect is part of their sound. I have some of their tracks on vinyl that I play at home, and they sound better on there than on CD. It really is painful because I love listening to that stuff, but it just doesn't sound as good in my car as it should


----------



## miserlycoffin (Mar 19, 2020)

khlae said:


> The problem is there's only so far you can go with the already mixed down recording
> I've done stuff like this to bring the drums dynamics back and generate lost high frequency harmonics and whatever else I thought of at the time, but you generally wind up having to do each song individually to get them to sound good and not like some stupid 'sound restoration gimmick', so just go listen to better recordings unless you can make money remastering your favorite singles.


Where can I see your remastered versions? Looks interesting.


----------



## bbfoto (Aug 28, 2005)

Old'sCool said:


> ...*My only alternative suggestion is to search for modern covers of favorite classics, and hope the new bands do the songs justice.*


This is my general method to try to still enjoy some of the less than stellar recordings of some of my favorite songs as well.

There are a lot of covers on SoundCloud as well, though you have to weed through them even more than YouTube to find the good ones. 

Huge Hendrix fan here as well.


----------



## NW JLUR (Dec 3, 2018)

I’ve noticed some recordings sound terrible and others sound ok, but there’s no width or depth to the recording. It sounds like the vocals and all instruments are in the center of the stage. I’m not sure if it’s the system in my car or the recording since I don’t have any other references. Other recordings sound awesome.


----------



## nhtunes (Jul 31, 2016)

llebcire said:


> Typically I find a version in Flac. Depending on my mood I’ll listen or let it go. For instance I love Hendrix but most of his stuff isn’t recorded well (some is) but if I’m in the mood I’ll listen anyway.
> 
> -Eric
> 
> ...



Most of the stuff that was released while Hendrix was alive were decently recorded. All the "best of " releases and "never released" are generally horrible recordings but there are some good jams so I endure. Listening at lower volume helps. FLAC bad recordings still sound like crap. Allman Brothers have crappy recordings too, but Duane and Dickie can't be ignored. Some bands care more than others about recording quality.


----------



## nhtunes (Jul 31, 2016)

ckirocz28 said:


> duplicate the tracks, low pass the duplicates at 80 hz (or something else), boost them to your preference, mix those tracks back in, export your remaster. Just remember to save the original. I do it this somewhat complicated way so I can mute the boosted track to get an A/B comparison.



Way back, before digital, when I'd copy a crappy Dead bootleg, I'd EQ it for the new recording. Kind of pisses me off that they were sitting on pristine recordings of all their shows.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Lou Frasier2 said:


> I listen to oldschool punk,none of it is recorded well


The Violent Femmes must have shared their sound engineer.

Butthen again some of the most influential music was bootlegged from copies of copies on cassette. So content matters.


----------



## MythosDreamLab (Nov 28, 2020)

Garbage in = Garbage out

I hav tons of mp3's that sounded ok on my OEM system, but not so much on my updated system (shown below). I have tons of mp3 collections burned on CD's that are 7, 8 or 9 hours long, (created in iTunes), that I am redoing (albeit shorter) as WAV files and they sound awesome! 

I try to buy only remastered CD's when available. Not all remastered 70's stuff sound bad, I have remastered Led Zep, Deep Purple, ELP, Yes and Budgie stuff that sounds great! The opening of "Stairway the Heaven" with the acoustic guitar, you cab hear the strings being plucked, now it helps to have super hi-end Tweeters (Focal Berylium in front & Thesis 1.5 Violino's in rear)....


----------



## mumbles (Jul 26, 2010)

MythosDreamLab said:


> Garbage in = Garbage out


 ^^^ So true



MythosDreamLab said:


> I try to buy only remastered CD's when available.


 ^^^ Darn near every CD worth anything has a "remastered" version available. Although they may sound good initially, I've found that on most, "remastered" equals "compressed" and they have lost all their dynamic range.


----------



## hella356 (Dec 11, 2016)

As I'm getting somewhat of a grip on tuning, I'm realizing that only having 4 presets on my MiniDSP C-DSP 8x12 DL is a bigger limitation than I first thought it would be. As I've been playing around with different target curves, I'm realizing that many bad recordings fare better on different curves. My initial thought with the presets was:

1 - Driver focused
2 - Driver focused with windows down
3 - Four-seat "sound" - not sure that would even be considered a real tune! - including the rear door speakers for when I have the car full of people
4 - Passenger focused, for letting a single passenger enjoy the goods

Now I'm thinking (since the vast majority of the time, I'm alone in the car) that it makes sense to have 4 driver-focused presets, to provide more flexibility in accommodating cruddy recordings. I have a tiny laptop that's only purpose is tuning, so I may end up always keeping it in the car and loading (my previously assumed) presets 3 & 4 to be saved on the laptop for the rare occasions when I would use them. The pretty large percentage of bad recordings is such a pity, but I don't want to get trapped in listening more for recording quality than for what moves me musically.


----------

