Legacy Edition too compressed?

24

Comments

  • hitman
    hitman Posts: 469
    i wasn't trying to rip anyone in this thread in particiuliar.... i haven't even heard it and i'm sure that it'll sound "over the top" by audiophile standards...

    but really, going in... did you/we not expect this? can you actually be surprised by the squashed levels and over- compression? i knew it off the bat, ,when i heard the announcement... but i bought it.... cause that's what PJ fans do! i've been in enough mastering sessions of my own to know that over-compression is a fact of life these days...
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    BH71937 wrote:
    i wasn't trying to rip anyone in this thread in particiuliar.... i haven't even heard it and i'm sure that it'll sound "over the top" by audiophile standards...

    but really, going in... did you/we not expect this? can you actually be surprised by the squashed levels and over- compression? i knew it off the bat, ,when i heard the announcement... but i bought it.... cause that's what PJ fans do! i've been in enough mastering sessions of my own to know that over-compression is a fact of life these days...

    I pretty much wasn't holding my breath in it being done with quality sound in mind. I always have a little bit of hope in me though, that "this, this'll be the one to finally change things a bit". I thought maybe since they were trying to go all out with updating things by getting O'Brien to remix it they were also attempting to make it sound as good as possible, not just blast the quality out of it.

    Just because over-compression is a fact of life these days doesn't mean people should put up with it and be silent about it. More people need to complain so that the people that control this crap will be pressured into making things sound good once again.
  • QT31085
    QT31085 Posts: 33
    sorry to burst the bubble of you people "wanting more people to complain". but the majority of music listeners don't care or don't know. those of us who can actually tell are in a huuuuge minority.
  • DD164485
    DD164485 Posts: 149
    edited March 2009
    Double Post
    Post edited by DD164485 on
  • DD164485
    DD164485 Posts: 149
    The vinyl does not have the extra songs on it(not enough room)
    Drop In the Park sounds great. Like both pressings of TEN It's transfered from a digital source. Not to mention it's pressed on beautiful 180 gram vinyl.

    I'm so beyond happy that Pearl Jam (and Sony I guess) decided to do this the right way as opposed to the punk ass way. They could have easily cheaped out.

    It really pisses me off when bands release the album on vinyl that's pressed from a digital source.
    It's a total cash grab, meant to sucker all the rubes who don't know any better.

    Basically if you press the vinyl from a digital source, you defeat the whole purpose of pressing the album to vinyl in the first place. Digital Source vinyl is basically like putting a CD on a turntable. It's a total rip off for anyone hungry for that "warm" vinyl feeling.

    You've really got to be careful when buying vinyl these days. Alot of so called "Audiophile" online stores try and cash in on the vinyl craze by taking a CD Master and pressing it to vinyl to make a quick buck.

    I bough a so-called "Audiophile" version of "Tommy" a few years back and was horrified when I compared the sound qaulity of my "original scratched to shit version" and this so called "Remastered 180 gram Audiophile pressing". My scratched original copy blew the new version out of the water.

    Once again Pearl Jam has done right by their fans.
    Good Job!!
  • DewieCox
    DewieCox Posts: 11,432
    I am pretty new to vinyl. Is 180g actually supposed to be better sound quality, or is it basically to make the vinyls more resilient?

    In my (much more, relatively) limited experience. It matters not, the weight of the vinyl, but the recording and mastering process. Bands that record in analog and do right by the vinyl sound the best.
  • DD164485
    DD164485 Posts: 149
    DewieCox wrote:
    I am pretty new to vinyl. Is 180g actually supposed to be better sound quality, or is it basically to make the vinyls more resilient?

    In my (much more, relatively) limited experience. It matters not, the weight of the vinyl, but the recording and mastering process. Bands that record in analog and do right by the vinyl sound the best.

    180gram does nothing for sound.
    It is however less prone to warping/wear and tear. Bascially built Ford tough.

    Most new vinyl releases especially re-releases, get the 180-200 gram treatment.

    But like you said above, What it all comes down too is the mastering process. If it's mastered from a digital transfer, then you've been duped...you've basically just paid to have a big black CD to put on your turntable.

    Thankfully this was not the case with the pressed vinyl in which Pearl Jam has provided us. They did it the right way.
  • TooMuchBlood
    TooMuchBlood Posts: 312
    Overly compressed is my fear.
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    QT31085 wrote:
    sorry to burst the bubble of you people "wanting more people to complain". but the majority of music listeners don't care or don't know. those of us who can actually tell are in a huuuuge minority.

    Trust me, you aren't telling me anything I don't already know.
  • Spencer
    Spencer Posts: 867
    I'd already expected the CD's to be brickwalled, so I'm in no way surprised - I'd be way, way more shocked if they were as dynamic as the original "Ten"!

    Glad to hear they got the LP's right (well, seems so from the post a few above mine), makes me even more glad I bought the Spr Dx Ed. I just think of it as a vinyl boxset with some additional CD's with loud audio for listening in the car sometimes.
  • jmk
    jmk Posts: 425
    DD164485 wrote:
    The vinyl does not have the extra songs on it(not enough room)
    Drop In the Park sounds great. Like both pressings of TEN It's transfered from a digital source. Not to mention it's pressed on beautiful 180 gram vinyl.

    I'm so beyond happy that Pearl Jam (and Sony I guess) decided to do this the right way as opposed to the punk ass way. They could have easily cheaped out.

    It really pisses me off when bands release the album on vinyl that's pressed from a digital source.
    It's a total cash grab, meant to sucker all the rubes who don't know any better.

    Basically if you press the vinyl from a digital source, you defeat the whole purpose of pressing the album to vinyl in the first place. Digital Source vinyl is basically like putting a CD on a turntable. It's a total rip off for anyone hungry for that "warm" vinyl feeling.

    You've really got to be careful when buying vinyl these days. Alot of so called "Audiophile" online stores try and cash in on the vinyl craze by taking a CD Master and pressing it to vinyl to make a quick buck.

    I bough a so-called "Audiophile" version of "Tommy" a few years back and was horrified when I compared the sound qaulity of my "original scratched to shit version" and this so called "Remastered 180 gram Audiophile pressing". My scratched original copy blew the new version out of the water.

    Once again Pearl Jam has done right by their fans.
    Good Job!!

    You wrote: "Like both pressings of TEN It's transfered from a digital source".

    Didn't you mean analog source? That's what you wrote earlier and also pointed later how good it is that they didn't use a digital source.
    Stockholm - 07/07/2012
  • glorified G is here
    glorified G is here Posts: 419
    could someone explain compression and why its viewed as a negative. My hearing isn't the greatest after too many loud shows, so I'm just wondering what happens to the music. Is it all one steady loudness, without subtle peaks and quiet spots, or distorted or what? thanks :?:
    7/28/1992 Lollapalooza Cincinnati, 9/22/1996 Toledo, 8/20/2000 Cincinnati, 6/24/2006 Cincinnati, 8/5/2007 Lollapalooza Chicago @ Grant Park, EV solo 8/21/2008 Chicago @ Auditorium Theater
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    gregory1 wrote:
    could someone explain compression and why its viewed as a negative. My hearing isn't the greatest after too many loud shows, so I'm just wondering what happens to the music. Is it all one steady loudness, without subtle peaks and quiet spots, or distorted or what? thanks :?:

    I'm not very good at explaining it in technical terms; I can tell when I hear it I just can't verbally express it that well. The best I can do is throw out a couple links to you.

    A short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

    You said your hearing isn't the greatest anymore so that still might not help you and in that case here is a write up:

    http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm
  • Spencer
    Spencer Posts: 867
    gregory1 wrote:
    could someone explain compression and why its viewed as a negative. My hearing isn't the greatest after too many loud shows, so I'm just wondering what happens to the music. Is it all one steady loudness, without subtle peaks and quiet spots, or distorted or what? thanks :?:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
    The phrase loudness war (or loudness race) refers to the music industry's tendency to record, produce and broadcast music at progressively increasing levels of loudness to attempt to create a sound that stands out from others.

    This phenomenon can be observed in many areas of the music industry, particularly broadcasting and albums released on CD and DVD. In the case of CDs, the war stems from artists' and producers' desires to create CDs that sound as loud as possible or louder than CDs from competing artists or recording labels.

    However, as the maximum amplitude of a CD is at a fixed level, once that level has been reached, the overall loudness can only be increased by reducing the dynamic range. This is done by amplifying the lower-level program material, while the loudest peak sounds are either destroyed or severely diminished. Certain extreme uses of dynamic range compression can introduce distortion or clipping to the waveform of the recording.
  • DewieCox
    DewieCox Posts: 11,432
    Compression takes the loudest bits and makes them quieter, the quitest bits and makes them louder, and mashes them with the mid volume bits.
  • glorified G is here
    glorified G is here Posts: 419
    OK, even with my hearing I could tell the difference on the youtube clip, plus I saw and heard the one where Smells Like Teen Spirit was played as its original quality sound, then what it would sound like if it was released in 2008. Damn compression! I didn't realize what the difference was, but I've had conversations with friends that vinyl albums sound better to me than CD's and now I know why. Mad Season's Above on vinyl is incredible sounding and its because of the dynamic range of the recording. Thanks for the responses, I really appreciate it!
    7/28/1992 Lollapalooza Cincinnati, 9/22/1996 Toledo, 8/20/2000 Cincinnati, 6/24/2006 Cincinnati, 8/5/2007 Lollapalooza Chicago @ Grant Park, EV solo 8/21/2008 Chicago @ Auditorium Theater
  • Black Circle Spin
    Black Circle Spin Posts: 55
    edited March 2009
    Sorry to hear Pearl Jam have gone this route (overly compressed). They should know better. Wasn't Ten originally recorded on analog tape? It should still have a little warmth from that...maybe it comes through on the vinyl.

    On a related tangent, I know cd's are 320 kbps, and that lossless audio is 1411kbps, digitally speaking. I'm 100% pro-analog, but if they started producing lossless cd's at normal volume levels than a lot of today's crappy bands would sound so much better. Vinyl will always be a niche thing, but I hate that fact that it's often the only way to get the purest experience.
    Post edited by Black Circle Spin on
    I'm not too concerned with PJ20, because I celebrate the band's existence every year.
  • rsimms3
    rsimms3 Posts: 13
    This is what digital compression looks like using Even Flow - Original, Remaster, and Remix.
    FYI - Digial Compression does NOT make the loud parts quieter, the loud parts are limited at or just below 0db which you can clearly see in the Remix version because the green (the wave form) is almost a solid in the preview window meaning every piece of the track has had the volume increased dramatically to the point that if the volume wasn't limited, the entire song would be distorted from being too loud. The second set shows a spectral representation which shows that all frequencies above 19000-20000HZ were eliminated somewhere during the Remaster/Remix process, not so with the original.

    Wave Form
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenOriginal1.PNG
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenRemaster1.PNG
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenRemix1.PNG

    Spectral View
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenOriginal2.PNG
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenRemaster2.PNG
    http://home.comcast.net/~simms3/EvenRemix2.PNG
  • Black Circle Spin
    Black Circle Spin Posts: 55
    Great detective work, rsimms3. My ears hurt just looking at that waveform.
    I'm not too concerned with PJ20, because I celebrate the band's existence every year.
  • Flagg
    Flagg Posts: 5,856
    I am not an audiophile at all but all I know is I can take the VS. CD and put it in my car and crank it up and it sounds great. I put Death Magnetic in there and can barely turn the volume above 3 before it starts distorting out and making the speakers rattle and sounds like shit.
    DAL-7/5/98,10/17/00,6/9/03,11/15/13
    BOS-9/28/04,9/29/04,6/28/08,6/30/08, 9/5/16, 9/7/16, 9/2/18
    MTL-9/15/05, OTT-9/16/05
    PHL-5/27/06,5/28/06,10/30/09,10/31/09
    CHI-8/2/07,8/5/07,8/23/09,8/24/09
    HTFD-6/27/08
    ATX-10/4/09, 10/12/14
    KC-5/3/2010,STL-5/4/2010
    Bridge School-10/23/2010,10/24/2010
    PJ20-9/3/2011,9/4/2011
    OKC-11/16/13
    SEA-12/6/13
    TUL-10/8/14

Categories