Boom, boom, boom, is it the music?

[Bubo]

I know what your point was, but copa changed only the recording being played. Are you suggesting the system detected this change and decided to change its tonality/frequency response?

Using the box method, I would say change the cd back, and become happy again, unless he first one had no bass.

 

[Copa1934]

My point was that it could be any component or several of them.

In my example, subbing one component on a working system made detection of the source obvious.

Using my teen daughter as an observer, I asked her to listen to two amps. While not horrible, she instantly asked what's wrong with that one.

The same box approach could be used in any system if you have some gear you know sounds accurate. Kiss an integrated amp and a Cd player or better still an amp with gain controls and a cd player.

I don't quite see the relevance in this example.

1. Nothing, equipment wise, changed.
2. Same artist, different tracks, different results.

The tracks can even be from the same source (LP, CD, etc.) and the results are the same, some tracks have boomy bass, others don't.

This is not about equipment, source changes etc. This is strictly about the differences in "recordings", nothing more.

The relevant points that have been brought to light, if you will, are things like placement and how that may (de)emphasize the "prominence" of the engineering of a track.

If your goal was to suggest that the up/down stream "equipment" influences what we hear I would solidly agree. But again, what you are identifying is more about how the "equipment" has (de)emphasized the source recording but not being the "cause" of what I/we hear.

 

[Bubo]

what a confusing and cryptic post. please give your definition of "boom" to help the confused.

Booming bass is usually used to describe a fault condition.

From rereading your original post several times it seems you have determined that the fault condition was in the mastering room?

If that is how the engineer mastered the recording and the artist signed off on it, then I'm not sure anything can be done.

On the other hand, the fault condition loose sloppy bass aka booming, could be frequency specific and not part of the mastering process.

 

[Copa1934]

Fault? Or compounding effect?

...If that is how the engineer mastered the recording and the artist signed off on it, then I'm not sure anything can be done.

On the other hand, the fault condition loose sloppy bass aka booming, could be frequency specific and not part of the mastering process.

Frequency specific? I and many others would likely agree. But "fault of the equipment"? Hardly. If the boomy sound were present in all/most recordings, then you would be solidly correct. Anyone who has done analysis for a living would come to this conclusion. But it's not normally present. Mostly present in certain recordings. This eliminates the equipment as the "cause". It's a simple matter of consistency. If it were the equipment, you'd hear it in everything, much the same way you hear speakers described, where "all recordings" come across the same way, either solid, boomy, loose, tight, etc.

I also agree that room conditions, and speaker placement, can either control these characteristics or emphasize them. So if not present under normal circumstances, then equipment or position are to blame. But if only certain recordings, then the source is the recordings, where the room or placement may be compounding factors.