Options

backspacer sound?

2»

Comments

  • Options
    lostdogs77lostdogs77 Posts: 93
    "The Wall" is a good example of a great rock album with a classic feel. It is hard to believe
    that new music is victim to shitty mixing and engineering. I'm surprised the actual band members and
    management of PJ are not more upset about this. The compression and loudness really do limit the greatness
    of a song or album.
  • Options
    dannydanny Posts: 2,270
    Stu42 wrote:
    So what do you guys think are the chances that backspacer is going to be properly produced and mastered? I love self-titled, but it is possibly the worst sounding record in my entire collection, and has gotten to be borderline unplayable. Have Brendan O'Brien is a good step, but he's shown to be as vulnerable to loudness wars as anyone else. Its a shame cause pearl jam is so much better then that.
    Personally, I say we got a 1:2 chance mostly because I wanna stay optimisitic and got some sounds like it'll kill on headphones. What does everyone else think?


    i just want to hear it!
    danny d
  • Options
    lostdogs77 wrote:
    "The Wall" is a good example of a great rock album with a classic feel. It is hard to believe
    that new music is victim to shitty mixing and engineering. I'm surprised the actual band members and
    management of PJ are not more upset about this. The compression and loudness really do limit the greatness
    of a song or album.

    Yeah, when I really started getting into this topic about 3 or 4 years ago I was really surprised that Pearl Jam aren't more upset about this too (I was especially surprised with the release of their S/T) because I remember reading in past interviews that when they go into the studio to record they mostly do things to try to recreate the live experience. Over compression and bad mastering definitely does not recreate the live experience.

    Tool seemed to hold out for quite awhile too since Lateralus is really really well done. One Thousand Days not so much, but even that one is still listenable.
  • Options
    hailhail82hailhail82 Posts: 330
    PJ, once again, needs to take a cue from Neil. The remasters on Archives Vol. 1 (I have the DVD set, so the resolution is 24/96) are unlike any digital format I've heard, new or old. I'm sure the Blu-Ray sound is much better too. Talk about warmth, as well as separation and clarity. It's like sitting in a control room.
    Using the word "methinks" in your message board posts doesn't make you look smart.
  • Options
    hailhail82 wrote:
    PJ, once again, needs to take a cue from Neil. The remasters on Archives Vol. 1 (I have the DVD set, so the resolution is 24/96) are unlike any digital format I've heard, new or old. I'm sure the Blu-Ray sound is much better too. Talk about warmth, as well as separation and clarity. It's like sitting in a control room.

    Nice, you make me want to check this out.
  • Options
    hailhail82 wrote:
    PJ, once again, needs to take a cue from Neil. The remasters on Archives Vol. 1 (I have the DVD set, so the resolution is 24/96) are unlike any digital format I've heard, new or old. I'm sure the Blu-Ray sound is much better too. Talk about warmth, as well as separation and clarity. It's like sitting in a control room.

    Nice, you make me want to check this out.

    Neil is one of a kind in terms of his dedication to high fidelity. All of his compact discs are audiophile quality, not only the Archives sets. I've been listening to Archives Vol. 1 non-stop for the past week. It's a fascinating listen. I don't agree with most people's complaints about the content. It's a hell of a box set that is worthy of it's reputation. I can't wait for the second one. It's gonna be the shit!
Sign In or Register to comment.