[BC] Could our concept of audio be all wrong?

[Xmitters at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/12/09 7:56:00 PM Central Standard Time,
broadcast-request at radiolists.net writes:

 > Over several years, my wife was exposed to good quality audio both on my
home
 > system and the radio stations I had prior to 1989.  She can now pick out
bad
 > audio almost faster that I can.  She doesn't have the "ear" to know what
 > compression/limiting/excessive EQ is, but she knows what sounds good and
bad.
 >   And, she won't listen to music radio at all.
 >
 >  Jim Graham
 >
 >  jgprods at bellsouth.net

Jim:

I'll use a Clinton-ism by saying that it all depends on your definition of
"our."  If you mean our industry, I say that you are absolutely right. If you
mean engineers, then no.

I've always booted heads with the PD on processor settings, and I have won
most of the time.

The broadcast industry in general, I believe, has a rather arrogant attitude
toward believing that listeners are all stupid, and/or don't care. It's true
that listeners have a live, and are too busy to call/argue with someone at the
radio station. Instead, they TURN TO OTHER KINDS OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA FOR THEIR
ENTERTAINMENT. Sound at all familiar?

Sure, most people don't have the knowledge to make a pointed critique about
what's wrong with our processed audio in the same words as we can. But, I
believe most people know crummy audio when they hear it.

Our industry believes that because they (listeners) don't call in bitching
about our perceived lousy audio, that they must like it that way. Most people
think that their complaint will be simply laughed off, and the station will
blame the listener's receiver or otherwise not take responsibility for the
complaint, just as every other service provider is reluctant to take 
responsibility
for a customer complaint.

Highly compressed audio is required to satisfy our caveman instincts that the
strongest will survive. If the station sounds "weak" on the radio, then those
instincts kick in. I find myself feeling uncomfortable when I switch between
a top 40 and our classical, until I give our station a good listen, and
conclude that the dynamic range is reasonable. BUT my first impulse 
is OMG, we sound
whiny and wimpy compared to the rockers. Well, Duh!

Unfortunately, we, as in our industry, are going to be saddled with this cave
man survival of the fittest instinct regardless of our mode of transmission.
We could save a lot of money and effort if we ALL (all stations) committed to
good audio (as in significantly unmodified/untouched), and adjust our audio
for best sound, but that will simply not happen.

I started appreciating this fact after reading the Orban Optimod 8100 setup
where Bob makes the point that by adjusting the processing a particular way,
you're assuming that EVERY piece of music lacks the SAME audio 
characteristic by
EXACTLY the same amount. Fortunately I got my training from an
engineer-owner, we knew the processing was right when the console 
monitor sounded just like
air, only air being a little louder. We then called it a day.

So yes, our industry has it all wrong in my opinion, and I don't listen to
radio for entertainment purposes for similar reasons as your wife says. I play
entertainment music from my CD collection.

Our only hope is if ASCAP/BMI gets into the processing side of licensing, and
only permits the stations to broadcast the musical work as it was
recorded/written, and with no sonic alterations. Audio proofs, of 
some form, would have
to come back so we can demonstrate that our system does not materially change
the audio quality, but for an agreed upon amount. None of us here 
will ever see
that day.

Otherwise, all we are doing with digital, IBOC and everything else, is
satisfying our natural instinct to discover, advance, and make 
progress. The crappy
sound of most stations is debatable if that result qualifies as "progress."
But it's DIGITAL so it's gotta be better; it's either there, or not 
there. yea,
right.

Jeff Glass, BSEE CSRE
Chief Engineer
WNIU WNIJ
Northern Illinois University