Originally posted by hoserama:I'd have to compare but I thought the Vancouver mix was better. There wasn't the phasing issues on vocals, and cranked shrill eq in that one. At least quite so much
Originally posted by hoserama:I'll argue that the scope of the star system is very vague, and thereby not very useful. It is a very simplistic rating system. [...]
Originally posted by fastcars:[..]
Any chance you are going to clean it up or if it can be fixed like the Chicago 2015? That one was a big improvement!
Originally posted by hoserama:I'll argue that the scope of the star system is very vague, and thereby not very useful. It is a very simplistic rating system. Then again, as you've stated before, samples are easily provided so one can easily check the sound. It sounds like you're emphasizing a rating as more of a recording enjoyment, rather than a technical assessment of sound quality.
It's like reviewing movies. A 4 star movie may have bad CGI and poor lighting, but might be a really good film. I have the same issue with a lot of film reviewers distilling a review into star system like U2S does. But doesn't seem like it's going to change any time soon!
I'd argue the Seattle IEM mix to be a 2.5 stars at best, at least in my book. A clean Bono feed by itself of the show (which sounds like they have, as do I) would be a preferable listen to the messy mix.