[DaveNote]

I know very little about the mysteries of recording. But I am aware of the debates among audiophiles about compressed audio formats. Therefore, this article may be of interest to AudioCircle members if they haven't already read it:

http://audiophilereview.com/audiophile-music/c-o-m-p-r-e-s-s-i-o-n.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AudiophileReview+%28Audiophile+Review%29

Dave

[sfraser]

Dave, I think you are confusing dynamic range compression which is what the the article is about and "compressed audio format's". The latter (example MP3 ripping ) uses a formula to determine which portions of the  music content can be dropped with to reduce the overall "bits per second". The 1st is  playing around with the dynamic range   and or average  gain of the music.

[DaveNote]

Dave, I think you are confusing dynamic range compression which is what the the article is about and "compressed audio format's". The latter (example MP3 ripping ) uses a formula to determine which portions of the  music content can be dropped to reduce the overall "bits per second". The 1st is  playing around with the dynamic range   and or average  gain of the music.

Thank you sfraser for pointing out my confusion, now one of my more constant states. As I said in my OP, I know very little about the recording industry, and your clarification proves that I was not just being modest.

However, both the article and your clarification also proves my long held view that audiophiles who think that they have discovered the nirvana of producing music on their system that is the equivalent of real, live performances are kidding themselves because the recording process makes an image (normally a processed one) not a duplicate of what is recorded. The most that can be hoped for is that we obtain an accurate reproduction of the end product produced by the recording process, and, as you point out, whatever an audio format does to that end product.

Dave

[Laundrew]

"The most that can be hoped for is that we obtain an accurate reproduction of the end product produced by the recording process, and, as you point out, whatever an audio formate does to that end product..."

Dave

I think that this statement nicely sums our quest for the ultimate audio experience. For example, once you record an acoustic guitar - it is not really a true guitar any longer but a reasonable facsimile. When anything is copied, it always loses something in the process.

Be well...

[Mag]

Compression, I'm referring to really bad compression irritates me something fierce to the point I won't listen to the song.

I don't have many cds that I can think of that are really bad. One that many audiophiles are probably aware of is Vapor Trails by Rush. The thing is you may not be aware of bad compression unless you know what it sounds like.

Another good example is from a TV. When I visit at my parents place they usually have the TV on. The sound coming from the tiny TV speakers is compressed along with elavated volume. I find that while I'm trying to visit I am being irritated by the compression from the TV.

I don't have that problem with my TV, except for those annoying commercials. That's when I mute the sound or change channels.