Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
pgaron wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. I don't know if he is a vinyl freak but he is mostly right. The vast majority of pop recordings over the past 20 years have been really bad. I think he does overstate his point. There have been a few sonic gems in that time. But then he probably hasn't heard everything. I wonder who mastered his CD. He seems to feel there is a big difference between it and the master tape. Scott |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
pgaron wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. First of all, it's Dylan. He thinks everything is atrocious. Second, he's not alone. A lot of people complain about recordings these days, with some justification. The compression fixation is well-documented, just for starters. Given his voracious interest in Americana, he's probably quite the vinyl freak, but he doesn't specifically lay the blame on digital (unlike our friend Little Steven from an earlier thread). Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Be interesting to know how much he hears as lost when comparing original tapes to releases directly, rather than just *remembering* the studio sound. And I wonder what he thinks of his remastered catalog, compared to earlier versions? bob |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
bob wrote:
does later, even if it's the same tape. Be interesting to know how much he hears as lost when comparing original tapes to releases directly, rather than just *remembering* the studio sound. And I wonder what he thinks of his remastered catalog, compared to earlier versions? Be interesting to know how good Dylan's hearing is these days. ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
bob wrote:
pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. First of all, it's Dylan. He thinks everything is atrocious. Second, he's not alone. A lot of people complain about recordings these days, with some justification. The compression fixation is well-documented, just for starters. Given his voracious interest in Americana, he's probably quite the vinyl freak, but he doesn't specifically lay the blame on digital (unlike our friend Little Steven from an earlier thread). I've always found Dylan's records to be among those of rather good audio quality. He's quite right that a lot of pop music sounds disgusting in audio quality if you don't listen to it in a motor car with the engine turned up or a disco where the volume way exceeds the good definition range of the human ear. Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Studios are interested in hearing the tiniest imperfections as easily as possible, and often choose speakers and headphones with slightly unnatural characterists which have the virtue in the studio of magnifying typical imperfections. This has the side effect that when the quality is good you'll hear some tiny little details that more natural reproduction would fail to emphasize. I'm assuming of course that in comparing studio with home he's using a top quality home system. He can afford one! -- Chris Malcolm DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
pgaron wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. pgaron He must not have heard any Dead Can Dance recordings. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Steven Sullivan wrote:
bob wrote: does later, even if it's the same tape. Be interesting to know how much he hears as lost when comparing original tapes to releases directly, rather than just *remembering* the studio sound. And I wonder what he thinks of his remastered catalog, compared to earlier versions? Be interesting to know how good Dylan's hearing is these days. Given his age you gotta figure there's upper frequency loss. Hmmm things may be worse than he says. Scott |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
UC wrote:
pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. pgaron He must not have heard any Dead Can Dance recordings. LOL probably not. They do have some pretty cool sounding records. Great music too. Scott |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
bob wrote:
Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Be interesting to know how much he hears as lost when comparing original tapes to releases directly, rather than just *remembering* the studio sound. And I wonder what he thinks of his remastered catalog, compared to earlier versions? I'd think if Dylan cared about sound quality which it seems he does, he'd be able to afford a pretty decent home system to say the least. Scott |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
UC wrote:
pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. pgaron He must not have heard any Dead Can Dance recordings. And you won't either, on the radio at least (except maybe on satellite) ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
The last issue (#45) of "Hi Fi+ had a great article on Dead Can Dance.
But I'm biased: I wrote the article, not Dennis Davis ;-) If you haven't read it, please do - My main point was that there are still some good musicians producing some great-sounding recordings. One of their CDs was being used by McIntosh and others at this year's CES as a demo album. But I still prefer DCD on vinyl where possible. wrote: UC wrote: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. pgaron He must not have heard any Dead Can Dance recordings. LOL probably not. They do have some pretty cool sounding records. Great music too. Scott |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Vinyl Rules! wrote:
The last issue (#45) of "Hi Fi+ had a great article on Dead Can Dance. But I'm biased: I wrote the article, not Dennis Davis ;-) If you haven't read it, please do - My main point was that there are still some good musicians producing some great-sounding recordings. One of their CDs was being used by McIntosh and others at this year's CES as a demo album. But I still prefer DCD on vinyl where possible. I thought their entire catalog was available on LP. Scott |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Chris Malcolm wrote:
bob wrote: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. First of all, it's Dylan. He thinks everything is atrocious. Second, he's not alone. A lot of people complain about recordings these days, with some justification. The compression fixation is well-documented, just for starters. Given his voracious interest in Americana, he's probably quite the vinyl freak, but he doesn't specifically lay the blame on digital (unlike our friend Little Steven from an earlier thread). I've always found Dylan's records to be among those of rather good audio quality. He's quite right that a lot of pop music sounds disgusting in audio quality if you don't listen to it in a motor car with the engine turned up or a disco where the volume way exceeds the good definition range of the human ear. Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Studios are interested in hearing the tiniest imperfections as easily as possible, and often choose speakers and headphones with slightly unnatural characterists which have the virtue in the studio of magnifying typical imperfections. This has the side effect that when the quality is good you'll hear some tiny little details that more natural reproduction would fail to emphasize. That's not been my experience this (Europe) side of the pond. Here, the studios I've had to do with use monitors that can go loud *and* uncoloured. Genelec, ADAM, PMC, B&W801s, Dynaudio amongst others. The idea is to have 'speakers which *don't* magnify anything, as the mixing and any EQ is done against these speakers as reference. Then, a mix is checked using "normal" domestic 'speakers, which in studio parlance are called near-field monitors to make sure that there is nothing important in the mix (mostly at the bass end) which will disappear when using small home 'speakers. It is true that in some smaller studios, I have seen highly coloured 'speakers (often JBL) being used, but these studios are not what one would call first-rate, often little better than home project studios. S. I'm assuming of course that in comparing studio with home he's using a top quality home system. He can afford one! |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Serge Auckland wrote:
Chris Malcolm wrote: snip Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Studios are interested in hearing the tiniest imperfections as easily as possible, and often choose speakers and headphones with slightly unnatural characterists which have the virtue in the studio of magnifying typical imperfections. This has the side effect that when the quality is good you'll hear some tiny little details that more natural reproduction would fail to emphasize. That's not been my experience this (Europe) side of the pond. Here, the studios I've had to do with use monitors that can go loud *and* uncoloured. Genelec, ADAM, PMC, B&W801s, Dynaudio amongst others. The idea is to have 'speakers which *don't* magnify anything, as the mixing and any EQ is done against these speakers as reference. Then, a mix is checked using "normal" domestic 'speakers, which in studio parlance are called near-field monitors to make sure that there is nothing important in the mix (mostly at the bass end) which will disappear when using small home 'speakers. It is true that in some smaller studios, I have seen highly coloured 'speakers (often JBL) being used, but these studios are not what one would call first-rate, often little better than home project studios. S. Nor on this side of the "pond"... Big high quality studios use BIG high-quality monitoring speakers that always do two things well, go very loud and stay clean at high levels. On this side of the pond I don't think we see too many Dynaudio, B&W or ADAM stuff... but there are some of the big Genelecs around and quite a few of the newer breed of things found in the glossy pro studio mags hanging in studios... but we're talking 2x15" + mids and something on top that goes loud, high and without much distortion... Once you get into /any/ speaker that does loud at low distortion you have the potential to hear all sorts of details that would otherwise be lost, be it in a studio or in a home. Also the better studios have better control over reverberation vs. frequency vs. decay than do most homes. If required, the studios are EQ'd for something of a "flat" response in many cases (you decide if they go for a flat power response or freq response at one location or not - I'm not gonna debate it), but no matter what they do take time to get an /uncolored/ sound if they can. So, I don't see /magnification/ of defects in studio speakers of high caliber, I see /blurring over/ of defects in most home audio systems, even some so-called "high-end" systems... the converse of your thesis seems to be true... _-_-bear |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
On 23 Aug 2006 00:57:00 GMT, in article ,
stated: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. I don't know if he is a vinyl freak but he is mostly right. The vast majority of pop recordings over the past 20 years have been really bad. Is that right? How is it that you've managed to hear "the vast majority of pop recordings" in the last 20 years? I'm impressed. I think he does overstate his point. He's in his 60s. He's cranky and his hearing can't be that great. Wait a minute -- that sounds like most audiophiles I know.... :-) |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
"Into the Labyrinth" is the last one I've been able to find on vinyl,
and I've only found their vinyl in the UK on the Goth label they started recording with. wrote: Vinyl Rules! wrote: The last issue (#45) of "Hi Fi+ had a great article on Dead Can Dance. But I'm biased: I wrote the article, not Dennis Davis ;-) If you haven't read it, please do - My main point was that there are still some good musicians producing some great-sounding recordings. One of their CDs was being used by McIntosh and others at this year's CES as a demo album. But I still prefer DCD on vinyl where possible. I thought their entire catalog was available on LP. Scott |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Andrew Haley writes:
writes: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. I don't know if he is a vinyl freak but he is mostly right. The vast majority of pop recordings over the past 20 years have been really bad. I think he does overstate his point. There have been a few sonic gems in that time. But then he probably hasn't heard everything. I wonder who mastered his CD. He seems to feel there is a big difference between it and the master tape. I'm sure there is. That's what mastering engineers do. There's another posting in the Guardian today: "Seeing the full quote from Bob Dylan, it would seem his complaint is really about the mastering process, where there are issues. In North America particularly, many CDs are mastered using excessive amounts of compression in order to attain the maximum overall level - sometimes to the point of audible distortion. This part of the process often takes place without the participation of the producer, and under the instruction of the record company. The reason high levels are desired is so that tracks played on radio do not seem quiet in comparison with the preceding track. There is no benefit for domestic listeners because they could simply turn up the volume." Mike Howlett, chairman of the Music Producers Guild (UK) http://arts.guardian.co.uk/comment/s...ticle_continue Andrew. |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Andrew Haley wrote:
Andrew Haley writes: writes: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. I don't know if he is a vinyl freak but he is mostly right. The vast majority of pop recordings over the past 20 years have been really bad. I think he does overstate his point. There have been a few sonic gems in that time. But then he probably hasn't heard everything. I wonder who mastered his CD. He seems to feel there is a big difference between it and the master tape. I'm sure there is. That's what mastering engineers do. There's another posting in the Guardian today: "Seeing the full quote from Bob Dylan, it would seem his complaint is really about the mastering process, where there are issues. In North America particularly, many CDs are mastered using excessive amounts of compression in order to attain the maximum overall level - sometimes to the point of audible distortion. This part of the process often takes place without the participation of the producer, and under the instruction of the record company. The reason high levels are desired is so that tracks played on radio do not seem quiet in comparison with the preceding track. There is no benefit for domestic listeners because they could simply turn up the volume." Mike Howlett, chairman of the Music Producers Guild (UK) http://arts.guardian.co.uk/comment/s...ticle_continue Andrew. It is a plague on pop music. I don't remember who it was but some one in the biz attributed this to the CD multichanger. makes sense. Scott |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
In article ,
Andrew Haley wrote: Andrew Haley writes: writes: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. I don't know if he is a vinyl freak but he is mostly right. The vast majority of pop recordings over the past 20 years have been really bad. I think he does overstate his point. There have been a few sonic gems in that time. But then he probably hasn't heard everything. I wonder who mastered his CD. He seems to feel there is a big difference between it and the master tape. I'm sure there is. That's what mastering engineers do. There's another posting in the Guardian today: "Seeing the full quote from Bob Dylan, it would seem his complaint is really about the mastering process, where there are issues. In North America particularly, many CDs are mastered using excessive amounts of compression in order to attain the maximum overall level - sometimes to the point of audible distortion. This part of the process often takes place without the participation of the producer, and under the instruction of the record company. The reason high levels are desired is so that tracks played on radio do not seem quiet in comparison with the preceding track. There is no benefit for domestic listeners because they could simply turn up the volume." Mike Howlett, chairman of the Music Producers Guild (UK) http://arts.guardian.co.uk/comment/s...ticle_continue Andrew. What's silly about this race for loudness is that radio stations themselves often squish the heck out of their signal and the songs that end up sounding the best (ie still punchy and strong) are the ones that have been least compressed. This overcompression is really a plague. Very weird that we often have to go back a much more limited (as it were) medium in dynamic range to hear some decent dynamic range. CDs do have a potential to sound much better in this respect, but in practice, it's all user error. My 02c Edwin PS Bob Katz, another mastering engineer, has a good discussion of this in his book about mastering as well his website. I consider his mastering book a must read for anyone interested in recording in this day and age, not just engineers. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
writes:
[Compression] is a plague on pop music. I don't remember who it was but some one in the biz attributed this to the CD multichanger. makes sense. It's not just pop music, I'm afraid. I have one possible hope, inspired somewhat by the recent de-Spectorization of _Let It Be_, that one day there may be "audiophile remasters" of some of the more important albums that have been treated in this way. A few of the albums mentioned at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war are now so famous for being over-compressed that it might be worthwhile. A question: has any recording ever been re-released to correct overdone mastering? Andrew. |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Started a thread on mastering about a year ago on r.a.pro.
Two points came up concerning mastering: 1) Mastering is an art form which creates a sound most/some people prefer 2) Mastering is also done so that the music, even with somewhat poor recording, will sound good on substandard systems (certain boom boxes, car stereos ...) I asked this question because I sometimes record when I play my classical guitar. I found that when I played the recording back it sounded as if I was listening to someone playing in front of me. Hence my question, why would someone want to add compression ... by mastering instead of just listening to the raw recording. Lance bob wrote: pgaron wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2 Bob D. must be a vinyl freak. First of all, it's Dylan. He thinks everything is atrocious. Second, he's not alone. A lot of people complain about recordings these days, with some justification. The compression fixation is well-documented, just for starters. Given his voracious interest in Americana, he's probably quite the vinyl freak, but he doesn't specifically lay the blame on digital (unlike our friend Little Steven from an earlier thread). Finally, I'll bet the music always sounds better in the studio than it does later, even if it's the same tape. Be interesting to know how much he hears as lost when comparing original tapes to releases directly, rather than just *remembering* the studio sound. And I wonder what he thinks of his remastered catalog, compared to earlier versions? bob |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Dylan Calls Modern Recordings "Atrocious"
Andrew Haley wrote:
writes: [Compression] is a plague on pop music. I don't remember who it was but some one in the biz attributed this to the CD multichanger. makes sense. It's not just pop music, I'm afraid. I have one possible hope, inspired somewhat by the recent de-Spectorization of _Let It Be_, that one day there may be "audiophile remasters" of some of the more important albums that have been treated in this way. A few of the albums mentioned at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war are now so famous for being over-compressed that it might be worthwhile. A question: has any recording ever been re-released to correct overdone mastering? IIRC, this is in the offing for Rush's 'Vapor Trails'. ___ -S "As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy, metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
About the reviewer | Audio Opinions | |||
Why don't mp3 conversions of my recordings sound so good? | Pro Audio | |||
Are modern recordings so bad that they would sound the same if recorded on a cassette? | Audio Opinions | |||
DVD Audio: Surround to Put You Inside Orchestra? | Pro Audio | |||
Why all the bad recordings | High End Audio |