Re: [ARSCLIST] Compression (was Re: [ARSCLIST] A fundamental Flaw ...)

[Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Dale Francis wrote:

> > I think the discs should be uncompressed and there should be a
> > compression control on the player.
>
> a) this means that the artist has no control of the final product

Not quite sure I understand...

I guess it depends on how one defines the "final product." Many artists
are subject to the inclinations of the producer/record company. Further,
the musician has no control over the listening environment and/or
equipment of the listener is using.


> b) having to replace blown speakers from students
>   who were experimenting with adjusting levels... ( electronic music
> classes )
>         this idea would probably void speaker and amp warranties

Which is why I would fuse the speakers...sometimes saving a speaker...

For me, an excessive (subjective) amount of compression diminishes the art
of the music. A range of dynamics in art music can be highly significant.

A story I may have related before...listening to Kapell's Frick Museum
performance of Pictures (highly compressed radio broadcast recording) and
then listening to Jon Samuels' "decompression" (without a doubt a
questionable thing to do) was a revelation...to my ears, it turned a good
performance into a great performance. Was it a fair representation of
Kapell's playing...I believe that one can make a reasonable attempt to
decompress...As an experiment, I did it with a Houston Symphony
performance, Walton conducting his Second Symphony. I knew the piece well,
plotted out the dynamics of the Szell recording, listened with score and
made about 100 changes in amplitude to the composer's performance. Is it
real...well, perhaps it was not totally unlike what Ampico did in the
early days, having a well informed musician notate the dynamic changes as
another musician recorded the roll. Not the same thing, but perhaps a bit
similar.

Karl