"Backspacer: Another Release Ruined By The Loudness War"

jmk

kiljoythemerciful wrote:

I notice a big difference in sound between my vinyl S/T and cd - more so than I normally notice between the two formats - yet I'm pretty sure it was not an analog recording session.

Where can we found out how Pearl Jam's albums have been recorded, for a fact? You say you're pretty sure S/T was analogue? Why do you think so?

I remember something about Binaural being the last recorded on analogue tape, but I might be wrong.

NMyTree

kiljoythemerciful wrote:

NMyTree wrote:

You see, the problem with that is this. If they use the same digital source for the vinyl release (which is what a lot of artists have been doing). As opposed to actually using the orginal analogue master tapes (if there are any) and changing the EQ and compression; then, the vinyl releases are nothing more than a vinyl version of exactly what is ont he CD. And that's a pointless and comepletely defeats the purpose of a vinyl release.

Couldn't the songs be recorded digitally and when put onto CD format be squeezed, brick-walled, etc. But then couldn't that same digital recording be put on a vinyl format and not have to undergo some of the treatment that it would if it was going onto a CD or into a digital file?

In other words, I don't think the loudness factor completely relates to the fact that it was recorded digitally rather it has more to do with how the recordings are transferred and presented on the various formats.

I notice a big difference in sound between my vinyl S/T and cd - more so than I normally notice between the two formats - yet I'm pretty sure it was not an analog recording session.

There's no valid reason why music being mixed/EQ'd for CD, has to be highly...excessively compressed.

There are literally hundreds of examples of albums/CDs that are not brickwalled. And they sound beautiful.

I have CD's that sound as good as analogue-based vinyl records, without the weaknesses and flaws of vinyl. Absolutely gbeautiful sounding.

Brickwalling started as a fad, because the Big Labels felt like they needed to do something to get people's attention, through radio stations playing music. They felt like ...if they brickwalled the EQ, that it would jump out and grab people by the balls and get their attention. And with certain types of artists/music...that actually works for it.

But them, they started doing it to all CDs and all artists and genras of music. And that's not a good thing.

There's no valid technical mastering reason or technical requirement for brickwalling CDs. None whatsoever.

It's just a ploy by the big record labels,,,,,which turned into a terrible fad and now......a terrible standard.

NMyTree

jmk wrote:

NMyTree wrote:

hedave wrote:

why do you think PJ puts there stuff on vinyl, doucher. music mixes digitally now, homo. are we seriously bitching about this?

You see, the problem with that is this. If they use the same digital source for the vinyl release (which is what a lot of artists have been doing). As opposed to actually using the orginal analogue master tapes (if there are any) and changing the EQ and compression; then, the vinyl releases are nothing more than a vinyl version of exactly what is ont he CD. And that's a pointless and comepletely defeats the purpose of a vinyl release.

Does Pearl Jam record their music into analogue master tapes or is it recorded digitally somehow?

I know for a fact that everything Jack White is recording/producing or making, may it be the White Stripes, the Raconteurs or the Dead Weather, is recorded on analogue tape but who else does it?

I don't really agree with you on the case of the vinyl and cd sounding the same if there's no original analogue master tape as the source for the vinyl. The vinyl records have better dynamics even though the source is digital.

I didn't say that Cds and vinyl all sound the same. I said that a lot of record labels/engineers are using the same digital source (which is highly brickwalled) for the vinyl versions of their releases. Not all, but a lot.

And no, you don't have to use the same source and the same brickwalled EQ. But a lot do.

SomethingCreative

I really didn't think it was too bad...maybe just me?

NMyTree

kiljoythemerciful wrote:

Couldn't the songs be recorded digitally and when put onto CD format be squeezed, brick-walled, etc. But then couldn't that same digital recording be put on a vinyl format and not have to undergo some of the treatment that it would if it was going onto a CD or into a digital file?

In other words, I don't think the loudness factor completely relates to the fact that it was recorded digitally rather it has more to do with how the recordings are transferred and presented on the various formats.

I notice a big difference in sound between my vinyl S/T and cd - more so than I normally notice between the two formats - yet I'm pretty sure it was not an analog recording session.

All recordings require some compression in the recording process and mixing process.

Preparing for CD and Vinyl requires different adjustments (like the RIAA EQ Curve for vinyl) and processses.

Even in analogue master tapes, there is compression when mixing and preparing for cutting to vinyl. But what were talking about here is gorssly excessive use of comression and EQing.

It's like saying you're going out for a few drinks and you drink a case of beer and down 30 shots of Vodka. Without a doubt,, you'll be fucked up beyond all comprehension and risk your life doing it.

You could have just had a six pack or 7-8 beers and a few shots. And you would have avoided doing that terrible damage to yourself.

Well, Brickwalling EQ is the case of beer and esxcessive compression is the 30 shots of vodka. it's fucked.

12345AGNST1

EVERY new cd is like this. What the hell are you gonna do about it other than bitch and moan?

This cd sounds perfectly fine to me. Especially after the shit distortion on Avocado.

sifoxy

better loud than too late

slightofjeff

sifoxy wrote:

better loud than too late

Nice.

NMyTree

slightofjeff wrote:

sifoxy wrote:

better loud than too late

Nice.

Actually, that was really dumb

If you're going to blurt out some cliche catch phrase, at least come up with something more creative and clever.

NMyTree

long red wrote:

if it's too loud, you're too old.

Or one can argue that someone with this type of cliche catch-phrase rolling off her tounge; is too ignorant to know better. As well as being a mindless sheep.

Flagg

slightofjeff wrote:

I don't even know what the fuck this is supposed to mean.

I guess what you don't know *really* can't hurt you.

For a really good example listen to the Death Magnetic CD, and then go find the rip from the Guitar Hero version. The GH version is nowhere near as "loud" as the CD and you can hear all kinds of stuff that you cannot hear at all on the CD. I am no way an audiophile and my untrained ear can hear a world of difference betwen the tow.

Also, throw in a Vs. CD and crank the volume all the way. Then try that with Self Titled.

I think "Loud" is a bad term for it personally. It is easy to misunderstand what it means.

And Backspacer is nowhere near as bad as Self Titled. At least I can turn Backspacer up in the car and not have it distort out.

NMyTree

Flagg wrote:

slightofjeff wrote:

I don't even know what the fuck this is supposed to mean.

I guess what you don't know *really* can't hurt you.

For a really good example listen to the Death Magnetic CD, and then go find the rip from the Guitar Hero version. The GH version is nowhere near as "loud" as the CD and you can hear all kinds of stuff that you cannot hear at all on the CD. I am no way an audiophile and my untrained ear can hear a world of difference betwen the tow.

Also, throw in a Vs. CD and crank the volume all the way. Then try that with Self Titled.

I think "Loud" is a bad term for it personally. It is easy to misunderstand what it means.

And Backspacer is nowhere near as bad as Self Titled. At least I can turn Backspacer up in the car and not have it distort out.

Well, Loudness is appropriate because it's the EQing that has all the instruments (and vocals) all at the same level and in your face. Furthermore, these brickwalled discs are mixed at a higher (louder level).

So yeah, Loudness ism accurate. As is excessive compression.

on2legs

NMyTree wrote:

long red wrote:

if it's too loud, you're too old.

You clearly don't understand the concept of EQ Loudness and excessive Compression.

Excessive EQ Loudness robs the music of it's dynamic crescendos and dyanamic peeks. And in doing so, it robs the music of it's soul, natural melodic balance and emotion.

As well, it creates a HUGE amount of nasty, excessively bright and harsh distorion that highlights third order harmonics.

Essentially, what that does....is ...it prevents one from cranking one's stereo system and utilizing one's stereo system at it's best.

Hey.. there these things out there called girls and they are really interesting. You might want to check them out.

Evacuation Rules

Who cares about sound quality really? I'm perfectly happy with my 128k MP3's and cheap earbuds. I still have a black & white TV and an 8-track catridge player too. I don't have time to upgrade that stuff, I've got beer to drink and frat parties to go to and girls to fuck...

slightofjeff

Evacuation Rules wrote:

Who cares about sound quality really? I'm perfectly happy with my 128k MP3's and cheap earbuds. I still have a black & white TV and an 8-track catridge player too. I don't have time to upgrade that stuff, I've got beer to drink and frat parties to go to and girls to fuck...

That's the spirit!

kataractkid

Turn it up to 11!

cippociappo

sifoxy wrote:

better loud than too late

Post of the month

I_GOT_no_IDea

NMyTree wrote:

long red wrote:

if it's too loud, you're too old.

You clearly don't understand the concept of EQ Loudness and excessive Compression.

Excessive EQ Loudness robs the music of it's dynamic crescendos and dyanamic peeks. And in doing so, it robs the music of it's soul, natural melodic balance and emotion.

As well, it creates a HUGE amount of nasty, excessively bright and harsh distorion that highlights third order harmonics.

Essentially, what that does....is ...it prevents one from cranking one's stereo system and utilizing one's stereo system at it's best.

well put dude, very well explained. i think most listeners won't pick up on it though - the majority will be concentrating on melody and lyrical content. i do feel the compression is not as overdone as on S/T though.
it is interesting that audio quality does actually influence our love for songs in the end - factors like loudness and compression can make a huge difference as to how soon our ears are fatigued and how quickly it takes us to get sick of listening to a song. while most will say that they don't give a fuck about sound quality (and i have to say i'm one of these people to a degree!), it'll be affecting them without even knowing... scary!

on2legs

Evacuation Rules wrote:

Who cares about sound quality really? I'm perfectly happy with my 128k MP3's and cheap earbuds. I still have a black & white TV and an 8-track catridge player too. I don't have time to upgrade that stuff, I've got beer to drink and frat parties to go to and girls to fuck...

Huh?

satansbed

Evacuation Rules wrote:

Who cares about sound quality really? I'm perfectly happy with my 128k MP3's and cheap earbuds. I still have a black & white TV and an 8-track catridge player too. I don't have time to upgrade that stuff, I've got beer to drink and frat parties to go to and girls to fuck...

this man knows how to live