Why do I prefer to listen to old hits in lo-fi settings?

Or it could be that songs were mixed for optimum sound when played on equipment available at the time. I think the old radio stations used less normalization than is current practice, so that might be an issue. And a song that is mixed to sound really good on a 2 inch speaker may be too much on an audiophile outfit or home theater simulated surround sound. Or maybe music just sounds better when crunching pickles.

For me the question is: why do I prefer to listen to old hits, period. :P
 
TBH, I listen to the Beatles, Elvis and old Charlie Christian on my studio monitors all the time, and I don't think I enjoy them any less. Obviously, that set-up is quite flat. But that's how I like music.
 
That being said, there's obviously some kind of knee jerk reaction upon hearing those old albums the way I used to hear them, on a cheap turntable or even AM radio. Warm and fuzzy feeling all around.
 
I heard Hound Dog yesterday at Home Goods, and my mood sensibly switched. I went from impatient/anxious to be done running errands to just enjoying myself. In a similar situation, a hit from the last 10-15 years would have me boiling... The poor quality speakers would have rendered things worst, if at all possible.
 
Though, come to think of it, maybe not. Putting up with the excessive bass and high frequencies requires yet more mental energy. 
 
Modern mixes and modern aesthetics, both auditive and visual, are basically, more often than not, a relentless agression on the senses as far as I'm concerned. It's like they filter out the essential to be able to bring you more of what should be mere dressing... I guess audio equipment is designed to allow just that, too.
 
 
 

I'm ashamed to say, I've started listening to AM radio in my car, on the oldie's station. When I'm driving around at night I listen to those old radio programs from the 40's.
 
I am sooooo past it. 

I do believe some people are writing and performing some very good music these days, regardless of how much I hate the production values.
 
Yet, to me, the sweetest sounding pop music was released in the mid-late 70's.
 
One album I'm obsessed with sonically is the soundtrack to Rocky 2. It's so smooth and glowing - like honey for the ears. Seems that from 78 on, post Van Halen 1, music production for the genres I like started changing drastically. I love lots of it, but something was lost.
 
I prefer to develop a stronger relation with material that I really like than to constantly search for new music. It seems odd to me to think that hundreds of thousands of artists can pour out millions of songs year after year and remain relevant, especially in a genre as formula-driven and simplistic as popular music. 

Beepster
My opinion... it's the fact all our new fangled gear is over accentuating the bass on everything to placate the dance/hip hop pop crud that's infected the industry.
 
Don't get me wrong... I love GOOD dance and GOOD hip hop and like listening to it through a system capable of ball rattling, bowel churning epicness.... but that low rumble is a relatively new thing in audio production (and the playback equipment).
 
Turn off your sub woofer or put it through a system that is era consistent and I bet it'll sound way better.
 
 
In fact... could you tell my neighbors to turn off their sub woofers while you're at it? Fookin' things should be banned in apartment buildings. lol...
 
 
Of course you've likely got flat freq monitors/headphones too which would probably get rid of that low end crap naturally but also accentuate the flaws in the recordings of the time (which would sound better through a stereo system of the time).
 
I know you've got a VRM Box and maybe this is a stupid suggestion (but I've been tempted to try it myself) is run your monitors out of it (with a Y splitter) to get the speaker emulation. Of course you get the room emu too which would likely ruin the whole thing but yanno... simulated speakers anyway.
 
Really though I think all new equipment should have "I'm listening to ball rattling modern dance stuff" and "I'm listening to ANYTHING else" settings.
 
That sub bass shiz started in dance halls where you couldn't hear anything else except the rattling sub bass. Now it's expected to be in our homes (and pissing off our cranky old neighbors). Now EVERYTHING has to be mixed that way and it's annoying.
 
Meh.
 
Hi, sharke. ;-)

 
Hi Beepster, 
 
I agree with you about the overdone bass in much of today's music. For some genres it's obviously quite appropriate and not exactly a new thing - look at reggae. Mind you, even back in the days of Bob Marley they were pretty much restricted by how much bass they could carve into a vinyl record without the needle jumping out. No such limitations with digital and as such bass has gone through the roof. 
 
Don't get me wrong, I love some bass heavy music. As you may know I have a healthy love of (good quality) electronica, and sometimes the in your face bass is sublime. There is something about sub bass that takes you into another world, especially when the frequencies are so low that you feel them more than hear them, yet you can still "feel" the pitch of the notes. Done well and heard on a system that can reproduce it, you will be affected in an almost ancient, tribal kind of way. Sub bass frequencies can be profound if used properly. 
 
But I cannot stand these modern remasterings of old music where it sounds like all they've done is crank the bass up. One example I always use is Talking Heads' "Born Under Punches," one of my all time favorite tracks. I love the sound of those early Talking Heads records - they were such open, airy mixes and balanced perfectly IMO. The bass guitar is bright and funky sounding with a lot of high end and just sits perfectly in the track. Cut to the 2005 remastered version and they appear to have tried to simulate how it would sound if played through Beats headphones, i.e. an overblown low end. So unnecessary and ruins the original mix. 
 
I think some have missed the point here though. It's not that these old tracks were mixed so that they only sound good on cheap equipment. I can still appreciate that it's a good mix, and of course hi-fidelity equipment is certainly nothing new. It's just that I enjoy it better through AM radio for some reason. Mind you, this doesn't apply to all old music. I'd much rather listen to Steely Dan, Miles Davis or the Mahavishnu Orchestra on top quality gear. It's more the old classic top 40 hits that I enjoy better through the radio. 

Well...I keep hoping but with just a few exceptions older is still better. By almost any yardstick except, perhaps, production values. And, really, even by that delineator. I mean when ol Blue Eyes recorded with a full orchestra they all had to play and perform it perfectly from start to finish. And then the engineers had to record it perfectly and mix and master it perfectly...all with the tools on hand in the 40s, 50s and 60s. And those records still stand the test of time. Sheesh.

yorolpal
Well...I keep hoping but with just a few exceptions older is still better. By almost any yardstick except, perhaps, production values. And, really, even by that delineator. I mean when ol Blue Eyes recorded with a full orchestra they all had to play and perform it perfectly from start to finish. And then the engineers had to record it perfectly and mix and master it perfectly...all with the tools on hand in the 40s, 50s and 60s. And those records still stand the test of time. Sheesh.

Years ago I read an interview in an audiophile magazine with a guy who had this incredible setup in his basement, and he stated very firmly that by far and away the best recordings he had ever heard were the BBC's Last Night Of The Proms from the 1950's. 

"older is better"
 
My hypothesis - because it's been ingrained in us after EONS of listening to it.