[pgaron]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060822/en_nm/dylan_dc_2

Bob D. must be a vinyl freak.

pgaron

[[email protected]]

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

[bob]

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

[Steven Sullivan]

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

[Andrew Haley]

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.

Consider Monosodium Glutamate: it's a very useful ingredient, and a
little goes a long way. But if you add it to everything, everything
tastes the same. So it is with compression and equalization.

From the horse's mouth:

"Basically, mastering is balancing, equalizing, compressing, and just
trying to get the most out of a musical performance. It's smoothing
out all the rough edges to make a polished, finished performance."
Steve Hall, Future Disc.

"[A] horrible trend started about eight years ago, with the invention
of digital-domain `look-ahead' compressors. First was the German
Junger compressor, then the Waves stuff, and the most infamous of all,
the TC Electronic Finalizer, a great piece of gear that's often
misused. I'm so glad these devices didn't exist when the Beatles were
making their music. Never in the history of the human race have
people been exposed to sounds as compressed as in the past few years.
It's a losing battle for musicality." Bob Ludwig, Gateway Mastering.

http://emusician.com/tutorials/emusi...ers_mastering/

Andrew.

[Chris Malcolm]

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/]

[UC]

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.

[[email protected]]

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

[[email protected]]

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

[[email protected]]

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

[Steven Sullivan]

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

[Vinyl Rules!]

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

[[email protected]]

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

[Serge Auckland]

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!

[BEAR]

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

[gofab.com]

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....

:-)

[Vinyl Rules!]

"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

[Andrew Haley]

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.

[[email protected]]

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

[Edwin Hurwitz]

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.

[Andrew Haley]

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.

[Lance Hoffmeyer]

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

[Steven Sullivan]

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