If you pull out a good-quality pre-late-'90s recording on almost any medium, it will destroy the dynamically-compressed "remastered" version that is streamed to

If you pull out a good-quality pre-late-'90s recording on almost any medium, it will destroy the dynamically-compressed "remastered" version that is streamed today. I wonder if this is, in fact, what his daughter likes. The sonic quality and non-fatiguing nature of well-mastered music is seriously enough to make a person LIKE the music more and play it more. It's depressing and disgraceful that everyone has incredible fidelity available, but the publishers have rendered it moot by destroying the music itself at the source. Rolling dynamic compression back was a nearly hopeless idea once the "loudness war" took off, but as time goes on it's even worse because young people will never have heard good-sounding music and don't even know how shitty it sounds today... unless they are accidentally exposed to it like this. And even then, they're not going to identify the issue and call for change. The problem isn't data compression. An MP3 of a 45 RPM record from the '80s will sound better than the Apple Lossless copy of the "remastered" version from 2017.