Thats the last thing they want to do after the shit job he's done on Bruce's Magic....although saying that, i guess again its the mastering thats the problem.....
From what I understand, that while the mastering is the issue in many cases, mastering engineers absolutely hate mastering an album too loud. In many cases the artist or the record executives will call them up and complain if an album isn't worthy of competing with other overly loud albums. It's gotten so that, many times, artists will just skip trying to argue with a mastering engineer about this issue and have the producer make it louder from the get go.
From what I understand, that while the mastering is the issue in many cases, mastering engineers absolutely hate mastering an album too loud. In many cases the artist or the record executives will call them up and complain if an album isn't worthy of competing with other overly loud albums. It's gotten so that, many times, artists will just skip trying to argue with a mastering engineer about this issue and have the producer make it louder from the get go.
So would you say the awful result on Magic is more likely to be o'brien's fault?
'The more I studied religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself.' - Sir Richard Francis Burton
From what I understand, that while the mastering is the issue in many cases, mastering engineers absolutely hate mastering an album too loud. In many cases the artist or the record executives will call them up and complain if an album isn't worthy of competing with other overly loud albums. It's gotten so that, many times, artists will just skip trying to argue with a mastering engineer about this issue and have the producer make it louder from the get go.
Most of the time it is the final mixdown engineer getting pressure from the record label to compete with louder discs. Artists very rarely have any control over this process unless they have some sort of artistic freedom clause in their contract so they are involved in all aspects of the final mixing stages. The 'loudness' craze on albums these days has to stop. It's not rocket science: loudness breeds clipping.
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
So would you say the awful result on Magic is more likely to be o'brien's fault?
I wouldn't be able to say as each situation is different but it is possible as he may have been pressured into it or thought it would be something good.
Most of the time it is the final mixdown engineer getting pressure from the record label to compete with louder discs. Artists very rarely have any control over this process unless they have some sort of artistic freedom clause in their contract so they are involved in all aspects of the final mixing stages. The 'loudness' craze on albums these days has to stop. It's not rocket science: loudness breeds clipping.
That is good to know. I was just repeating what I've been told by some mastering engineers. I guess where I heard it was artists was from the whole compilation CD thing. An artist would stress that they wanted their music to "compete" in loudness
"It should also be noted that most artists are not active partakers in the loudness war. However, the corporate production structure takes the power away from the band immediately after the recording process itself is completed. Many bands have their records made overtly loud and thus distorted against their will. Several organizations have been founded to attempt to put the choice back in the hands of the bands."
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Yeah, but he's overly paranoid about his music coming across as over-produced and too commercial. I think they make their records sound less than great on purpose.
you're pulling my leg, right?
because what you say there is the total opposite of what i was getting at.
too commerical = sound quality poor
the over produced music has poor quality. so pj's music is not commercial/over produced so therefore pj's tunes should sound better in quality.
why is making sure the music you work so hard on sound the best it can, a bad thing?
twisted reasoning i think.
*~Pearl Jam will be blasted from speakers until morale improves~*
I really wish Sony and Pearl Jam would hire Steve Hoffman to remaster/master their whole current catalogue of albums/CDs, from the original analogue master tapes; and also hire him to do all of their future albums.
No one, and I mean no one masters/remasters like Steve Hoffman!!!!!
When he masters for CD, from the original analogue master tapes; the CDs sound amazingly beautiful!!! It's like listening to a beautifully mastered 180gram vinyl record, but with all the advantages of digital......with the smoothness, warmth and richness of good analogue; but none of the flaws of vinyl or the nastyness of poorly mastered digital.
Steve Hoffman Rules!
We should get a petition started to have Sony and Pearl Jam hire him!!!!:D
Hire Steve Hoffman To Master and Remaster All past, Current and Future Pearl Jam albums!!!!
Excellent idea!
"I'll end up alone like I began..."
"You need the patience of like a National Geographic photographer sitting underneath the bush in a tent, trying to get a picture of zebras fucking or something for the first time." -Eddie Vedder
Elliot Scheiner would be a great option for the day when (hopefully) Pearl Jam's albums are released in a surround sound format. All of the R.E.M. DVD-Audio surround sound mixes he worked on sound fantastic.
"I'll end up alone like I began..."
"You need the patience of like a National Geographic photographer sitting underneath the bush in a tent, trying to get a picture of zebras fucking or something for the first time." -Eddie Vedder
My wish is for PJ's catalog to be released on SACD. That and Rush's back catalog, but first things first.
Can you imagine No Way, Rearview Mirror, Immortality, In My Tree, Nothing As It Seems, and, oh, EVERY other song in hi-fi surround sound? I'd never leave my home theater room!!!!
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I think Binaural has the best sound of any of their albums
I would be curious to see how it translates to 5.1 and/or hi-fi formats. I don't know much about the fidelity aspect of binaural recordings. I wonder if the recording is close to lossless like good analog....does anyone here know?
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I would be curious to see how it translates to 5.1 and/or hi-fi formats. I don't know much about the fidelity aspect of binaural recordings. I wonder if the recording is close to lossless like good analog....does anyone here know?
I don't know if this is what you are looking for but when I run it through my Cool Edit 2000 program the peaks are a bit flat. Not near as bad as the stuff today, but still a bit flat for my tastes. The Average RMS Power of the loudest part of the song "Of the Girl" reads out as -11.29dB.
Now that is a relatively quieter song. To put things in perspective Grievance came out as -9.93dB for the Average RMS of th loudest part of the song and it was -10.36dB for the entire song.
Maybe it's just me, but on Binaural and Riot Act the quiet songs have sounded pretty good, and the louder ones like crap. On Pearl Jam they almost all sound like crap.
Maybe it's just me, but on Binaural and Riot Act the quiet songs have sounded pretty good, and the louder ones like crap. On Pearl Jam they almost all sound like crap.
I don't think it is just you. It has to do with the overly loud mastering of the CDs. The quieter songs have sounded okay because they are quiet, so when amped up they don't suffer as badly, but when you take an already loud song and smash all the data into the upper headroom of the CD, it certainly suffers.
I don't think it is just you. It has to do with the overly loud mastering of the CDs. The quieter songs have sounded okay because they are quiet, so when amped up they don't suffer as badly, but when you take an already loud song and smash all the data into the upper headroom of the CD, it certainly suffers.
Yeah. Insignificance sounds like a wall of noise, as does Get Right, Comatose ( I could go on)... and not in a good way.
Yeah. Insignificance sounds like a wall of noise, as does Get Right, Comatose ( I could go on)... and not in a good way.
Yeah, I hear ya. It amazes me that many of the people in charge think that a wall of noise is what we want. Personally, I want to actually HEAR what is going on in the music. I think it is time people stopped trying to think for others and just tried to make something that sounded good.
I think it is time people stopped trying to think for others and just tried to make something that sounded good.
Those are 2 separate issues unfortunately. The loudness war is what causes the clipping issues for the most part. That's not the mixdown engineers thinking for others, it's them doing what the label tells them, mainly: make the disc as loud as it can be in relation to others so it's never quiet in relation to other songs on the radio.
Sound quality in its purest form is something almost all 'real' musicians strive for. 'Wall of sound' is something that some bands strive for on purpose, but not PJ as far as I know. Sometimes the band is just trying to thicken up the sound a bit and thus uses layering techniques to create a wall of sound that really fills up the sonic landscape in terms of thickness and power (Rush's 'Vapor Trails' album and the Pumpkins 'Siamese Dream' are 2 perfect examples).
Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Those are 2 separate issues unfortunately. The loudness war is what causes the clipping issues for the most part. That's not the mixdown engineers thinking for others, it's them doing what the label tells them, mainly: make the disc as loud as it can be in relation to others so it's never quiet in relation to other songs on the radio.
Sound quality in its purest form is something almost all 'real' musicians strive for. 'Wall of sound' is something that some bands strive for on purpose, but not PJ as far as I know. Sometimes the band is just trying to thicken up the sound a bit and thus uses layering techniques to create a wall of sound that really fills up the sonic landscape in terms of thickness and power (Rush's 'Vapor Trails' album and the Pumpkins 'Siamese Dream' are 2 perfect examples).
Yeah, I understand that. I was referring to the the labels, or anyone who pressures the people doing this stuff to make it louder. They are essentially making a choice for the consumers that everything needs to be so loud.
Excessive compression is a massive problem in today's music industry. Many artists and mixing engineers don't like it. unfortunately they don't make the final decision in the majority of cases. The question is, who is going to dare take the first step 'backwards'?
Nowadays it's common practice for mastering engineers to make music as loud as possible. The thing is, radio stations squash the shit out of the music as well to make the music they play seem louder than other stations' music. In some cases you might be looking at a 100:1 compression ratio when music eventually gets played on the radio.
Some good articles which provide food for thought:
Excessive compression is a massive problem in today's music industry. Many artists and mixing engineers don't like it. unfortunately they don't make the final decision in the majority of cases. The question is, who is going to dare take the first step 'backwards'?
Nowadays it's common practice for mastering engineers to make music as loud as possible. The thing is, radio stations squash the shit out of the music as well to make the music they play seem louder than other stations' music. In some cases you might be looking at a 100:1 compression ratio when music eventually gets played on the radio.
Some good articles which provide food for thought:
That second article was great. I'm now listening to 'Modern Times' and understand why it sounds better than anything else - analog sound brings the music directly from the studio to your stereo. It's more 'live' sounding and carries more emotion than a flat compressed/remastered digital signal.
Remastered motown music is a great example. Listen to the original 'dock of the bay' by Otis Redding and then listen to the remaster. The 'clarity and punch' of the classic motown beat is completely lost in the remaster! It actually makes me angry that modern recording techniques take the soul out of music and people don't even know it.
I never experienced a problem with my copy of the Avocado CD. Sounds plenty punchy through my system and my headphones. However, if I were to play it on my son's boombox, I'm sure the sound quality would suffer. I can see the future now - digitally demastered.
Comments
From what I understand, that while the mastering is the issue in many cases, mastering engineers absolutely hate mastering an album too loud. In many cases the artist or the record executives will call them up and complain if an album isn't worthy of competing with other overly loud albums. It's gotten so that, many times, artists will just skip trying to argue with a mastering engineer about this issue and have the producer make it louder from the get go.
So would you say the awful result on Magic is more likely to be o'brien's fault?
Most of the time it is the final mixdown engineer getting pressure from the record label to compete with louder discs. Artists very rarely have any control over this process unless they have some sort of artistic freedom clause in their contract so they are involved in all aspects of the final mixing stages. The 'loudness' craze on albums these days has to stop. It's not rocket science: loudness breeds clipping.
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I wouldn't be able to say as each situation is different but it is possible as he may have been pressured into it or thought it would be something good.
That is good to know. I was just repeating what I've been told by some mastering engineers. I guess where I heard it was artists was from the whole compilation CD thing. An artist would stress that they wanted their music to "compete" in loudness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipping_(audio)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
"It should also be noted that most artists are not active partakers in the loudness war. However, the corporate production structure takes the power away from the band immediately after the recording process itself is completed. Many bands have their records made overtly loud and thus distorted against their will. Several organizations have been founded to attempt to put the choice back in the hands of the bands."
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
you're pulling my leg, right?
because what you say there is the total opposite of what i was getting at.
too commerical = sound quality poor
the over produced music has poor quality. so pj's music is not commercial/over produced so therefore pj's tunes should sound better in quality.
why is making sure the music you work so hard on sound the best it can, a bad thing?
twisted reasoning i think.
"You need the patience of like a National Geographic photographer sitting underneath the bush in a tent, trying to get a picture of zebras fucking or something for the first time." -Eddie Vedder
"You need the patience of like a National Geographic photographer sitting underneath the bush in a tent, trying to get a picture of zebras fucking or something for the first time." -Eddie Vedder
Can you imagine No Way, Rearview Mirror, Immortality, In My Tree, Nothing As It Seems, and, oh, EVERY other song in hi-fi surround sound? I'd never leave my home theater room!!!!
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I would be curious to see how it translates to 5.1 and/or hi-fi formats. I don't know much about the fidelity aspect of binaural recordings. I wonder if the recording is close to lossless like good analog....does anyone here know?
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
I don't know if this is what you are looking for but when I run it through my Cool Edit 2000 program the peaks are a bit flat. Not near as bad as the stuff today, but still a bit flat for my tastes. The Average RMS Power of the loudest part of the song "Of the Girl" reads out as -11.29dB.
Now that is a relatively quieter song. To put things in perspective Grievance came out as -9.93dB for the Average RMS of th loudest part of the song and it was -10.36dB for the entire song.
I would consider that a bit too loud.
I don't think it is just you. It has to do with the overly loud mastering of the CDs. The quieter songs have sounded okay because they are quiet, so when amped up they don't suffer as badly, but when you take an already loud song and smash all the data into the upper headroom of the CD, it certainly suffers.
Yeah. Insignificance sounds like a wall of noise, as does Get Right, Comatose ( I could go on)... and not in a good way.
Yeah, I hear ya. It amazes me that many of the people in charge think that a wall of noise is what we want. Personally, I want to actually HEAR what is going on in the music. I think it is time people stopped trying to think for others and just tried to make something that sounded good.
Those are 2 separate issues unfortunately. The loudness war is what causes the clipping issues for the most part. That's not the mixdown engineers thinking for others, it's them doing what the label tells them, mainly: make the disc as loud as it can be in relation to others so it's never quiet in relation to other songs on the radio.
Sound quality in its purest form is something almost all 'real' musicians strive for. 'Wall of sound' is something that some bands strive for on purpose, but not PJ as far as I know. Sometimes the band is just trying to thicken up the sound a bit and thus uses layering techniques to create a wall of sound that really fills up the sonic landscape in terms of thickness and power (Rush's 'Vapor Trails' album and the Pumpkins 'Siamese Dream' are 2 perfect examples).
Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
Yeah, I understand that. I was referring to the the labels, or anyone who pressures the people doing this stuff to make it louder. They are essentially making a choice for the consumers that everything needs to be so loud.
Nowadays it's common practice for mastering engineers to make music as loud as possible. The thing is, radio stations squash the shit out of the music as well to make the music they play seem louder than other stations' music. In some cases you might be looking at a 100:1 compression ratio when music eventually gets played on the radio.
Some good articles which provide food for thought:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/10/digitalmusic
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17777619/the_death_of_high_fidelity
That second article was great. I'm now listening to 'Modern Times' and understand why it sounds better than anything else - analog sound brings the music directly from the studio to your stereo. It's more 'live' sounding and carries more emotion than a flat compressed/remastered digital signal.
Remastered motown music is a great example. Listen to the original 'dock of the bay' by Otis Redding and then listen to the remaster. The 'clarity and punch' of the classic motown beat is completely lost in the remaster! It actually makes me angry that modern recording techniques take the soul out of music and people don't even know it.
Digitally demastered? That rules!!!!!!
GOD BLESS!!