Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wireline]

As a 50 year old, I would like to pass along a true story...from this past weekend.

Recently tracked a band (no one over 25) for a demo plus project...a slack time, down and dirty type of thing...Next day, when the band came by to get their product, they were ALL complaining that there was too many loud passages followed by queit ones - and they wanted it remixed so every instrument and song was the exact same volume.  I asked if they had ever heard of dynamics, and the answer was astounding: "You mean the band The Dynamics?"

How can you reply to that?  At first I wanted to laugh, then cry, then get angry...none of these occurred: I just ran the whole thing through a Sonic Timeworks Mastering Compressor set to "destroy" mode, and sent them on their way.  The clients kept asking me if I liked the 2d version better since it sounded more like what they are used to hearing....I didnt say another word about the subject, and kept changing the subject.

Too bad, too...they had some good stuff....

[maxdimario]

you should never, ever listen to what the layman considers to be true as far as ideal sound, without interpreting what he says based on your knowledge and experience.

People know what they like, but often don't know what they will continue to like.

it takes someone who knows the art to make the critical judgements of 'how much', proportion, loudness, eq etc.

most people's idea of ideal great sound is: loudness button pushed in, bass and treble almost to the max, 10 different speakers incl. tweeters, midrange, woofers, subwoofers etc. volume on the onset of distortion..

just like any other artform the people who have been through it and have studied the LONG-TERM effects of various compressions etc. can judge the right amount, the correct proportions etc.

What SONY can about this, and probably will do, is to build cd players with built-in mastering.

home multi-band compressors and eq's and tape emulators, and tube emulators etc. so that everyone at home can fuck up the signal as much as they like, and become 'experts'.


there is a HUGE difference between wrecking the audio at home and mastering it like a layman would.

[wireline]

Max, I agree 100%...

The case study I mentioned was nothing more than a demo plus mode, without any chance this would be used for any work with plans for release....everyone knew this before going in...I threw in some extra time/effort to give their work a more polished feel....all to no avail...I guess no good deed ever goes unpunished...

Back to topic, though....I am beginning to wonder if the sources are not a big part of the 'culprit' in the compression wars...by this I mean the quality of the instruments and equipment used...for example, there really is no way I know of to make a 59 Les Paul or Martin D28 sound bad, regardless of signal chain/genre...its gonna sustain...OTOH, the onslaught of lesser priced/quality instruments (and stuff we use) needs a WHOLE lot more tweaking to get it 'right' I think.  The first thing I USED to reach for was compression...now its EQ and pan...

It also doesn't help when clients are using as a reference an el-squasho deluxe CD played back through a system so aptly described above....

[Eric Rudd]

maxdimario wrote on Wed, 12 October 2005 12:48

you should never, ever listen to what the layman considers to be true as far as ideal sound, without interpreting what he says based on your knowledge and experience.

Or anyone, for that matter.

Eric

[wavdoctor]

Paul Frindle wrote on Wed, 12 October 2005 02:21

Barry Hufker wrote on Tue, 11 October 2005 22:36 Recording is as much fashion as it is anything else.  Types of sounds go in and out, gear goes in and out, engineers go in and out...  But a good sound is always a good sound.  I don't think a good engineer/producer of any era would be opposed to "a good sound". <snip> Barry I completely agree with all you have said As for whether they would have used more compression back then - well many actually did use compression artistically to produce some very interesting new styles. What perhaps they didn't do however - is use it universally and continuously for years and years - just to make things ever louder (arguably) at the risk of everything else What's interesting is the variety of things that actually influence and create new fashions in pop music, most of which seem to have gravitated towards the initial fashion the music is first heard. For instance in the early days when pop wasn't 'allowed' in the U.K.(!) we used to listen to radio Luxembourg in the evenings. And of course it faded in and out and phased this way and that as it bounced around the atmosphere and I swear that for the kid I was at the time, listening to a record that didn't do this was something of a culture shock. I had actually attached the nauseous hurdy-gurdy fading of that distant AM station to the listening experience. Roll in the 60's flanging craze? Later when we briefly had some temporary (albeit illegal) freedoms supplied by off-shore pirate radio stations (that led to an unprecedented and very lucrative explosion of pop culture and art), they hit the compression quite hard to overcome insufficient transmission power on AM and of course get louder than the other stations. Yet again - actually buying a record I was used to listening to on radio was often a real shock. And once again I had sometimes become so used to the radio compression and 5KHz band limiting that the record was even a disappointment - of course it sounded 'better', but not necessarily nearly as exciting. And I am reminded of a chance conversation I had with a punter around 10 years ago where he was complaining that the discs he bought never sounded as good as they had done previously on the (now state owned replacement) radio 1. I remember telling him that IMO this was because the stations were using multi-band compression (optimod) to maximise loudness and the studios/mastering guys hadn't adopted this universally - yet. What he wanted to hear had been learned by listening to his music primarily over the radio in his car all day. He was not alone, what with an ever greater proportion of the U.K. population stuck in grid locked cars much of the day? It was only a year or so later that an engineer friend of mine was complaining that his clients were wanting to mix using the station (radio 1) style compression so that it sounded more like the radio and would possibly be less messed up by the radio compression when played out on air (where crucially punters get to decide whether to buy it or not). And he was asking me what I thought would be the result of the the music getting this sort of compression applied twice? Well that's basically what we are now listening to, the CD is as compressed as the radio used to be back then - and the sound from the radio is now ................ So what we currently have IMVHO is a fashion heavily influenced by radio engineers, who were/are still obsessed with the idea that the most important factor in ensuring a good listener following was to be louder than anyone else. And what the hell - the vast majority of the listening public are stuck in cars anyway - there's a good reason for some hefty compression? IMVHO this fashion of sound reproduction is also affecting the kinds of musical art we produce - i.e. that which is suitable for reproduction in an environment without dynamic range or any reliable dynamic tonal consistency. And those that grow weary of the relentless and cacophonous screamings this produces find shallow peace by being relegated to drifting off to an enforced sleep to the (arguably inane and lifeless) whimperings of the likes of Dido et al. We are either being driven insane by a cacophony so relentless (in RMS terms) you could drive the national power grid with it or being bored to sleep - nothing in between As you may have gathered - I am aching for (and living in hope of) some more real blasting and moving f****** rock music, where hitting a kick drum produces something more that a vague 'wumph' accompanied by momentary suck out of LF and MF, where a saturated guitar sings out and can move you to elation or almost to tears with it's depth of expression and tone, instead of simply bending your ear with objectionable and brash distortion that serves only to 'momentarily displace' the freq spectrum of what used to be the rest of the programme before it started playing, where the emotion delivered by the whole is something more than just an increasing sense of agitation, where the emotional challenge it imparts is something a whole lot deeper than simply one of how long you can put up with it before you actually just turn it off - or even worse - resort to a Dido-induced oblivion! Mind you - has anyone done a statistical study involving the advent of 'Dido-esque productions' and a possible increase in motoring accidents - caused by spontaneous somnolence? Sorry - this seems to have turned into a (dynamic) rant?

My sentiments exactly, I find myself slamming the radio dial off more frequently than ever...
I like the way you write and think Paul...
Harry

[Eric Rudd]

Paul Frindle wrote on Wed, 12 October 2005 02:21

IMVHO this fashion of sound reproduction is also affecting the kinds of musical art we produce - i.e. that which is suitable for reproduction in an environment without dynamic range or any reliable dynamic tonal consistency. And those that grow weary of the relentless and cacophonous screamings this produces find shallow peace by being relegated to drifting off to an enforced sleep to the (arguably inane and lifeless) whimperings of the likes of Dido et al.

What I find interesting is that many ultra-squished mixes today rely so heavily on the "telephone" vocal effect as a way to eek out some sort of dynamic/sonic contrast.

We used to try to make things bigger as a way to develop contrast and excitement. Now we have to make things smaller because there is no where else to go.

Hmmm......

Eric

[vernier]

Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose.

[Eric Bridenbaker]

Maintaining a sense of contrast is one of the big challenges when working on a production. The problem is, how can there be any contrast if there is no range to play with?

It's akin to turning the "bright" up on the monitor, and "contrast" down, and then trying to get the colours to look vibrant and detailed... it can't be done!!

For those that have not already seen it, check out Chris Johnson's "Evergreen" study:

http://www.airwindows.com/analysis/Dynamics.html

The sonogram graphics tell the story quite well.

Cheers,
Eric

[Paul Frindle]

vernier wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 16:49

Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose.

Yep - and BTW her releases do make for some pretty fierce intersample peak errors too

[maxdimario]

Quote:

Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose.

Well....as you know, she is marketed to the average housewife, and therefore.. marketing studies have shown that the 'clothespin sound' can create an immediate emotional bond between the music, and housewives who are putting the clothes out to dry, while the cd is playing.

[Ronny]

maxdimario wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 13:06

Quote: Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose. Well....as you know, she is marketed to the average housewife, and therefore.. marketing studies have shown that the 'clothespin sound' can create an immediate emotional bond between the music, and housewives who are putting the clothes out to dry, while the cd is playing.

She can pin her clothes to my bed post anytime she wants.

[compasspnt]

I'll let Mutt know that...

[Ronny]

compasspnt wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 16:08

I'll let Mutt know that...

I heard that her and Mutt were no longer an item, personally that is, not sure bizwise.

[JamSync]

maxdimario wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 18:06

Quote: Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose. Well....as you know, she is marketed to the average housewife, and therefore.. marketing studies have shown that the 'clothespin sound' can create an immediate emotional bond between the music, and housewives who are putting the clothes out to dry, while the cd is playing.

WTF do you know about "the average housewife"? Would you say this about the "average black laywer" or the "average hispanic doctor"?

This is appalling bullshit. It cripples my daughter's opportunities to advance in the creative arts. I've advanced so far that I don't give a fuck about what any guy says about me or my studio, but dammit, this crap really pisses me off.

Do your own clothes, make your own supper, wash your own underwear, and stop putting women in some stupid box.

JESUS.

[Ronny]

JamSync wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 23:22

maxdimario wrote on Thu, 13 October 2005 18:06 Quote: Yep, Shania Twain has that telephone effect, and a few other things added that makes it sound like a clothespin is on her nose. Well....as you know, she is marketed to the average housewife, and therefore.. marketing studies have shown that the 'clothespin sound' can create an immediate emotional bond between the music, and housewives who are putting the clothes out to dry, while the cd is playing. WTF do you know about "the average housewife"? Would you say this about the "average black laywer" or the "average hispanic doctor"? This is appalling bullshit. It cripples my daughter's opportunities to advance in the creative arts. I've advanced so far that I don't give a fuck about what any guy says about me or my studio, but dammit, this crap really pisses me off. Do your own clothes, make your own supper, wash your own underwear, and stop putting women in some stupid box. JESUS.

Right on, KK.