| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Is Centered Vocals Important?
Trying some new(er) features in a more recent version of Goldwave software. This song has some tape hiss noise, since a lot of multi-tracks went up in smoke for Atlantic Records. However, the song had decent stereo, but the center (where vocals are) lacked amplitude. It is best to have Centered vocals, since that provides maximum audio, being equally shared in both stereo amplifiers.
Anyway, I attempted to increase the center audio without destroying the stereo sound. See what you think of The Bar-Kays - Soul Finger, 1967. Actually, this is a recent paid download, but the waveform looked like a late '80's, early '90's CD. In other words, less than impressive!... http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abps...soulfinger.mp3 Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. Jack |
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"JackA" wrote in message ... Trying some new(er) features in a more recent version of Goldwave software. This song has some tape hiss noise, since a lot of multi-tracks went up in smoke for Atlantic Records. However, the song had decent stereo, but the center (where vocals are) lacked amplitude. It is best to have Centered vocals, since that provides maximum audio, being equally shared in both stereo amplifiers. Anyway, I attempted to increase the center audio without destroying the stereo sound. See what you think of The Bar-Kays - Soul Finger, 1967. Actually, this is a recent paid download, but the waveform looked like a late '80's, early '90's CD. In other words, less than impressive!... http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abps...soulfinger.mp3 Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. Jack No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. Gareth. |
|
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 7:05:39 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"JackA" wrote in message ... Trying some new(er) features in a more recent version of Goldwave software. This song has some tape hiss noise, since a lot of multi-tracks went up in smoke for Atlantic Records. However, the song had decent stereo, but the center (where vocals are) lacked amplitude. It is best to have Centered vocals, since that provides maximum audio, being equally shared in both stereo amplifiers. Anyway, I attempted to increase the center audio without destroying the stereo sound. See what you think of The Bar-Kays - Soul Finger, 1967. Actually, this is a recent paid download, but the waveform looked like a late '80's, early '90's CD. In other words, less than impressive!... http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abps...soulfinger.mp3 Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. Jack No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. Please clarify!! Thanks. Jack Gareth. |
|
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote:
"JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 18/03/2016 00:27, JackA wrote:
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 7:05:39 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. Please clarify!! He is referring to the pain fully massive boost you put on all your mixing attempts at about 3kHZ, but you obviously can't hear, either because you have a hearing defect or your monitoring sucks. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:56:51 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 18/03/2016 00:27, JackA wrote: On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 7:05:39 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. Please clarify!! He is referring to the pain fully massive boost you put on all your mixing attempts at about 3kHZ, but you obviously can't hear, either because you have a hearing defect or your monitoring sucks. -- Tciao for Now! John. From the REAL world of Audio: "I haven't heard "Soul Finger" in y e a r s. Amazingly simple left-right-center mix with astonishingly good fidelity. I don't have anything on hand to compare it to, but this really sounds fine". Thank you anyway, John!! Jack |
|
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Gareth. |
|
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Gareth. I'd be GLAD to send you the original and then you (all combined) could impress me! Jack |
|
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 18/03/2016 20:19, JackA wrote:
I'd be GLAD to send you the original and then you (all combined) could impress me! The Youtube video has better sound balance than your attempt, and it's in mono. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Gareth. I'd be GLAD to send you the original and then you (all combined) could impress me! Jack You are avoiding the issue, Jack. Do you think your mixes have the same spectral distribution that most successful commercial mixes have? Gareth. |
|
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 4:42:58 PM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 18/03/2016 20:19, JackA wrote: I'd be GLAD to send you the original and then you (all combined) could impress me! The Youtube video has better sound balance than your attempt, and it's in mono. First off, YouTube has enhanced sound, so it is fake. Sort of like FM Stereo radio, still used with CD and HD Radio for "better than CD quality", that didn't last long since people complained. But, you already know that. And if YOU knew what the ORIGINAL stereo rendition sounded like, I had it on vinyl, you would be applauding me. Jack -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message .... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Gareth. |
|
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Well Hooray, you might just have found someone with the same affliction you have. Result. Gareth. |
|
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth. |
|
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:01:12 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Well Hooray, you might just have found someone with the same affliction you have. But they are making MONEY doing it!! Like Scott said, most people here don't understand audio. Jack Result. Gareth. |
|
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. Thank you! Jack Gareth. |
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. Thank you! Jack Jack, I apologise for being angry at you, I'm just trying to tell you something. Cheers, Gareth. |
|
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 9:16:59 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote:
"JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message ... On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:44:27 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: "John Williamson" wrote in message ... On 17/03/2016 23:05, Gareth Magennis wrote: "JackA" wrote in message Bill Inglot (Rhino Records) claims his wonderful sound quality was attributed to correct tape-head azimuth, but I'm guessing he was one who dared a "hot" mix via Sony PCM machines. No, the EQ is still shouting in my ears "HEAR THIS" You just don't get this, do you. He never will, he seems to have a 3kHz dip in either his monitoring or his hearing. Is he still boasting about his $25 Philips headphones, which have the best sound in the word? -- Tciao for Now! John. I have suggested this before, but simply A/B'ing his mix against a decent commercial recording should be sufficient to enable him not to be doing what he is doing. But I suspect he thinks most commercial recordings sound dull. Let me teach you people something. Early 90's, EMI introduced Legendary Masters series CD of particular artists. I know the series well enough to know what I was about to [pay] download would need audio work. Guess what, it didn't, someone else did the audio work [I have the CD, just buried away]. So, it's not just I who thinks recordings on CD sounded "dull". Jack Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. Thank you! Jack Jack, I apologise for being angry at you, I'm just trying to tell you something. Cheers, Gareth. Gareth, no harm done. Thank you, sir, for your input; apology accepted. I was just amazed to discover the reason behind what I heard. Just amazing to me, after many years, that is all. Cheers, Jack |
|
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote:
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Generally, we're not angry with you, but pity you for your obvious personal problem with hearing this region of the audio spectrum. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 8:40:33 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Ear shredding mixing? I'll have to save that one! Ignore what advice? I haven't read any yet. You all assume I only do 3kHz. That is worth a laugh. Generally, we're not angry with you, but pity you for your obvious personal problem with hearing this region of the audio spectrum. Well, John, be my guest and (pay) download the song, and let me hear what YOU can do with it. Talk is very cheap. Thanks. Jack -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 20/03/2016 1:39 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Generally, we're not angry with you, but pity you for your obvious personal problem with hearing this region of the audio spectrum. The others he https://www.indabamusic.com/opportun...tition/details .... wouldn't stand a chance. geoff |
|
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On 21/03/2016 01:38, JackA wrote:
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 8:40:33 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Ear shredding mixing? I'll have to save that one! Ignore what advice? I haven't read any yet. You all assume I only do 3kHz. That is worth a laugh. "Don't boost 3 kHZ" There you go. You have now had advice. Again. But you'll probably not read it or remember it, just as you never have before. We don't assume you only do 3kHz, even though that's all that shrieks at us if we listen to one of your attempts, we notice you also like to mix stuff that's been badly mangled before you start, so at best, you are on a rescue mission. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 2:49:02 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 21/03/2016 01:38, JackA wrote: On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 8:40:33 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Ear shredding mixing? I'll have to save that one! Ignore what advice? I haven't read any yet. You all assume I only do 3kHz. That is worth a laugh. "Don't boost 3 kHZ" There you go. You have now had advice. Again. But you'll probably not read it or remember it, just as you never have before.. We don't assume you only do 3kHz, even though that's all that shrieks at us if we listen to one of your attempts, we notice you also like to mix stuff that's been badly mangled before you start, so at best, you are on a rescue mission. Okay, I understand that. But where and why do you believe I boosted the 3kHz in the last song, Soul Finger. I didn't, so what's next? Jack -- Tciao for Now! John. |
|
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 1:37:11 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 20/03/2016 1:39 AM, John Williamson wrote: On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:25:31 PM UTC-4, gareth magennis wrote: What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Generally, we're not angry with you, but pity you for your obvious personal problem with hearing this region of the audio spectrum. The others he https://www.indabamusic.com/opportun...tition/details ... wouldn't stand a chance. Ah, blow their mind with my Band On The Run remix!! * PureMix.net 1 day masterclass with Fab Dupont Whoa, nice prize! Fab Jack & Fab Dupont! :-) Jack geoff |
|
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 2:49:02 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote:
On 21/03/2016 01:38, JackA wrote: On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 8:40:33 AM UTC-4, John Williamson wrote: On 18/03/2016 22:50, JackA wrote: Gareth, the problem HERE is that NO ONE ever brought up this [3kHz] topic, even if it sounds harsh or whatever. It was I who mentioned it, because I hear better than most, listen better than most, and you and others have learned something new. You are just angry and take your frustrations out on me. That is all. The problem with you boosting the 3kHz region is mentioned every time you post a sample of your ear shredding mixing. You seem not to read these posts, or if you do, you ignore them or forget them before your next attempt hits the server. Ear shredding mixing? I'll have to save that one! Ignore what advice? I haven't read any yet. You all assume I only do 3kHz. That is worth a laugh. "Don't boost 3 kHZ" There you go. You have now had advice. Again. But you'll probably not read it or remember it, just as you never have before.. We don't assume you only do 3kHz, even though that's all that shrieks at us if we listen to one of your attempts, we notice you also like to mix stuff that's been badly mangled before you start, so at best, you are on a rescue mission. -- Tciao for Now! John. A TEST coming up for you critical ear people. See if YOU can spot the flaw. Jack |
|
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
gareth magennis wrote:
" "JackA" wrote in message ... - show quoted text - Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth. " I can see where the loudness contour might confuse some folks. They probably think that the lowest parts of that graph represent our hearing's least sensitivity - exactly the opposite of what that graph communicates. Is JackA also rolling off the bottom, corresponding to the steady and steep rise in that end of the graph? smh... |
|
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is Centered Vocals Important?
On Saturday, March 26, 2016 at 2:27:35 AM UTC-4, wrote:
gareth magennis wrote: " "JackA" wrote in message ... - show quoted text - Let me teach you something, Jack. The human ear/brain system is most sensitive to frequencies around 3KHz. It is completely non linear, it's frequency response also alters hugely according to the SPL of the incoming audio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletch...3Munson_curves See that dip around 3K? We don't need that boosted, we hear that better than anything, in fact it is a REALLY ANNOYING part of the spectral frequency. It just sounds "NASTY". I can't put it any better than that, but if you wanted to make a really nasty annoying noise, you would include a lot of frequencies around 3KHz. What you are doing is actually BOOSTING your frequencies around this REALLY NASTY frequency, so all your mixes sound acutely annoying. I suspect this is because you have some auditory impediment that reduces your perception of such frequencies. Or you just can't be bothered to A/B your mixes with commercial ones. On the other hand, it is just as likely you know full well what you are doing, and are simply a Troll, trying to wind us up. Gareth. " I can see where the loudness contour might confuse some folks. They probably think that the lowest parts of that graph represent our hearing's least sensitivity - exactly the opposite of what that graph communicates. Is JackA also rolling off the bottom, corresponding to the steady and steep rise in that end of the graph? smh... This was missing bass,(no 3kHz needed) so I added some... http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abps...agicmoment.mp3 People here think CD audio is the greatest thing since sliced bread and nothing at all should be changed. Everyone is happy as a lark with audio CDs, yet, before he passed, Doug Sax mentioned, man will eventually get the hang of CD mastering. And that's why people switched back to vinyl, since you can't beat the sound of CDs. Jack |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
