Audiophile sound quality not really difficult to make?

Why does the preamp need to be more powerful? The term powerful disturbs me (in general). How do you put more power into a given load when you are running a fixed line level? If you want the preamp to have a specific sound describe that.

On that note, you can make freakishly good recordings using simple techniques... provided of course that what you are recording does not require any post-processing which is the realm of multi-channel recordings (more than 2) and where things become impossible.

I honestly think simplicity is what makes a good recording. Thats how MFSL does all their remasters, anyway.

Consider that excellent recordings were made 40 and 50 years ago with equipment that was nowhere as good as what you have.  I think it's more about how you use what you have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by revolink24 

I honestly think simplicity is what makes a good recording. Thats how MFSL does all their remasters, anyway.

Simplicity is always a good thing. Too bad MFSL doesn't use their ears (or proper research) most of the time.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik 

Consider that excellent recordings were made 40 and 50 years ago with equipment that was nowhere as good as what you have.  I think it's more about how you use what you have.

X 2! Some of the best recordings I have ever heard used less than 5 microphones and technology with specs that are worse than even the cheapo gear you can find at guitar center!

Go find a 1970s Teac Reel to Reel, get two basic Shure mikes place them at different parts of the room and record straight into the recorder. You will be floored at how much a basic set-up like this blows away the digital compression out there!

Recording a natural analog source is totally diffent than rendering electonicly produced noise. A man sitting and playing an acoustic instrument is making noises that aren't music, yet lends itself to the acoustic experience. Beside the instrument sound, the man is breathing, his fingers imperfectly move, and his clothes rustle. To some this is distancting crap that needs to be edited out somehow, to others it's a perfect rendition of a live performance. To me, perfection is enhanced by a few artifacts.

With electonic music, all bets are off. Either you agree with the final product or you don't. It's a totally manipulated construct, so there's not much sense talking hi-fi when there's no acoustic reference.

nothing sounds better than a Neumann U87 through a vintage preamp...difficult? no. pricey? yes.

Mic-Fi and Head-fi go hand-in-hand. On the head-fi side, it's all about headphones, amps, and DAC; on the mic side, it's all about mics, preamps, and ADC. Both have one thing in common: "sorry about your wallet!" I'm surprised Mic-Fi.org doesn't exist, not even the .com one. Someone better get to it. I'd like to know more about the recording (input) side of the audio chain besides the output side. I'd like to be able to record someday.

A little off topic but can you share your file that you recorded? thanks! 

Simplicity is always best when it comes to recording. A nice pure sound. The fabled "Jazz at the Pawnshop" (which I think sucks - dull and vaguely amateurish) is so-loved for its sound when you can tell its nothing more than a pair of goods mics stuck on poles. Yes, simplicity is definitely the appeal with that recording. But that's why I think albums like Dark Side of the Moon deserve credit and are considered a milestone because they're using overdubbing and a lot of other fancy techiques and it still sounds good.