A very interesting post on mastering recordings

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 7161 times.

BrysTony

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #20 on: 25 Oct 2014, 03:57 pm »
The original post was a very interesting post on mastering recordings.  The rest of the thread -- not so much.

Tony

Quiet Earth

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1788
Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #21 on: 25 Oct 2014, 05:57 pm »
Freo,

First, I appologize for getting you all ruffled up. I think you are a nice guy and it wasn't my intention to bash you personally. So I am sorry for that.

I think you assume that very few of us if any, have heard ATC speakers or speakers like them. It might surprise you to know that a lot of us have heard them and some people here may even have owned them. So it is not a diss on ATC or other studio quality speakers, and it is not a diss on electronics that are designed for laboratory grade "accuracy". It is the notion that if I have assembled a system (of any brand) that constantly spotlights how dreadful most of my recordings are, then it is time to change the gear for something that reminds me how good most of my recordings really are. This is a way better approach than blaming the mastering engineers, the recording personnel, or the artist.

Oh, and I could care less if Jimmy Page listened to the final mix of Houses of the Holy in the back seat of a Pinto. (Is that even possible?  :D) Good for him if he did.

Folsom

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #22 on: 25 Oct 2014, 06:28 pm »
QE,

While I like to be able to appreciate not-amazing recordings the one caveat that's often key no matter what gear you have is SPL. A lot of terrible recordings are a lot funner to listen to if the volume is KCANK3D. I like to listen to Lorde - Royals often. It's fun and good, but it could have used a lot better dubbing and stereo control over the snaps and bass; it's a little short on dynamic range too. But if I turn it up, it's still a blast. On the other side, I can listen to Gold by Ryan Adams are medium volumes and have fun; he even uses a gritty microphone setup (still slightly dynamic).

The point is coming, and that's that we aren't all lucky enough to be able to blast loud ass music all the time, so some higher grade stuff can be a little more consistent.

Although this made me think about maybe doing something to allow more listening to more material. If you're cooking or something else, perhaps some omnidirectional and intentional space loading, or LCS, etc, might be a good option. The two channel setup that nearly needs it's own room is a curse in many ways. But for many recordings it's blissful. Perhaps even having speakers that you can turn on/off "room listening" would be nice. The other trick in my mind is to get speakers closer to the wall via benign less noticeable treatment (and or wall cut outs even).

Most people want to attain good listening anywhere, hence a gazillion plastic pieces of shit that ipods plug into. A few quality pieces, maybe even built into cabinets running a simple NOS DAC and a DSP that will correct the massive problems, could provide some nice sound. There's some stuff like that out there, Sonos etc, but it's not near where it could be. It doesn't send quality sound everywhere, it's pretty localized. You can do better with some bookshelves speakers on a wall somewhere.

Wayner

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #23 on: 25 Oct 2014, 06:44 pm »
I do think it is possible to assemble what one might consider a fairly high end system, and have some less the desirable playback. Julian Hirsch of Stereo Review days coined the term "a wire with gain" and if a system was close to this concept, it would simply amplify what ever was fed into it. While the concept sounded good on paper, the reality was that such a system would "reveal the limitations of the source tape", to wit if the master recording sounded like crap, the magnificent stereo would amplify it, true to life levels and also sound like crap.

Does that mean we like some coloration to the sound? Perhaps the answer is yes. After all, many pioneers of early hifi were claimed to actually voice components, so that no mater what was played into them, it would sound OK, and as the source fidelity improved, so would the sound of the system.

Was this clever marketing? Perhaps, but the reality of it all was that in the over-all scheme of things, the colored system won the coin toss, because it did make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

 

Wayner

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #24 on: 25 Oct 2014, 06:51 pm »
If I might also add this, that never have I ever had such strong beliefs about system "synergy". We could all have the same source components, like CD player, preamp and amp, but make the speaker the variable and I can tell you that every system would sound different. I have learned this from my vinyl room where I have 4 different systems. Some speakers simply sound better with specific amplifiers. Swapping out components usually led me to much unhappiness, and I have learned to leave everything hooked up the way it is.

I understand where Freo-1 is coming from......

konut

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1574
  • Came for the value, stayed for the drama
Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #25 on: 25 Oct 2014, 08:33 pm »
I have found that no system is perfect. One must prioritize  the strengths and weaknesses to personal preferences. Fortunately there are enough choices out there that, if one is diligent, a system can be assembled to suit ones taste.
     Some recordings will emphasize the weaknesses. This is inevitable.  The question then becomes, do these weaknesses inhibit my enjoyment of the music? If the answer is yes, then perhaps either you really don't like the music as much as you thought, or your system needs an adjustment. The problem with this is that if you adjust for a certain recording, then other recordings become objectionable. My solution is to try to assemble as neutral a system as possible and let my enjoyment of the performance stand and fall on its own. I enjoy past the weaknesses. I know that there are many that cannot do this. 
       Having said all that, it's not what the subject of the OP posted about.  :duh: Most of the "music industry" couldn't care less about a niche market that ranges in its opinion about what "quality" is from asceticism to "did you hear about that tweak from aliens?". They want to produce "product" that will make money. WE are not their market. Complaining about it won't change it. To quote Firesign Theater, "Live it, or live with it"!

Freo-1

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #26 on: 25 Oct 2014, 10:28 pm »
Freo,

First, I appologize for getting you all ruffled up. I think you are a nice guy and it wasn't my intention to bash you personally. So I am sorry for that.

I think you assume that very few of us if any, have heard ATC speakers or speakers like them. It might surprise you to know that a lot of us have heard them and some people here may even have owned them. So it is not a diss on ATC or other studio quality speakers, and it is not a diss on electronics that are designed for laboratory grade "accuracy". It is the notion that if I have assembled a system (of any brand) that constantly spotlights how dreadful most of my recordings are, then it is time to change the gear for something that reminds me how good most of my recordings really are. This is a way better approach than blaming the mastering engineers, the recording personnel, or the artist.

Oh, and I could care less if Jimmy Page listened to the final mix of Houses of the Holy in the back seat of a Pinto. (Is that even possible?  :D ) Good for him if he did.


Thanks, QE.  I meant no ill will or disrespect  to anyone/anything on this subject.  Most audiophiles I know in this area were not familar with these brands.  If that is not the case, then I'm sorry as well. 


The main issue I was trying to get across was that speakers like ATC/Dynaudio, etc. do present music much different than many of the speakers out there.  They allow the listener to hear deeper into the mix/mastering process (which is what this thread is about).  It was a bit of a shock to me (and a revelation).  In my case, that was the sound I was after (especially after owning Acoustat speakers for close to 15 years).  I totally get that other audiophiles may not want that out of their audio systems.  Regarding your observation about the recordings, tube DAC/phono stages can help out a lot.   :D   That's why I have a DIY tube setup as well as lab reference SS gear. 


Konut made a lot of good observations.  The loudness wars are well alive and kicking.  We audiophools are a niche market.  The audio engineers during the audio golden age seemed to have taken more care to get the best out of the recording sessions.  Having said that, I do have a fair bit of classical and jazz recordings of recent vintage that are well mastered.   


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

*Scotty*

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #27 on: 25 Oct 2014, 11:24 pm »
For myself, I think when a system is "dumbed down" to the point that recordings whose characteristics are not compatible with a High Fidelity system sound "listenable" you have probably compromised the system to the point that you miss out on what is possible from the best mastered modern recording of all types. I also think what people need is not coloration added to their systems but a good dose of masking. I enjoy a lot of recordings on my car stereo while driving. The lower fidelity of the car stereo plus the added road noise make recordings that have problems palatable.
 With a enough masking in place all sorts things that might be noticed within the context of a High Fidelity system just disappear. Ideally you could just push a button and presto problems gone.
Scotty
 

Diamond Dog

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2219
  • Chameleon, Comedian, Corinthian and Caricature
Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #28 on: 26 Oct 2014, 12:31 am »
For myself, I think when a system is "dumbed down" to the point that recordings whose characteristics are not compatible with a High Fidelity system sound "listenable" you have probably compromised the system to the point that you miss out on what is possible from the best mastered modern recording of all types. I also think what people need is not coloration added to their systems but a good dose of masking. I enjoy a lot of recordings on my car stereo while driving. The lower fidelity of the car stereo plus the added road noise make recordings that have problems palatable.
 With a enough masking in place all sorts things that might be noticed within the context of a High Fidelity system just disappear. Ideally you could just push a button and presto problems gone.
Scotty

I'm not sure if they need to get "dumbed down" so much as built/assembled with an ear towards an outcome that best suits a given listener's tastes. As I've re-built much or most of my system this year, I've gone for openness and clarity as opposed to what I realize now was perhaps better described as stridency. What I once thought to be an absence of colouration ( yes, with a "u"...God Save The Queen  :green: ) was just a different form of colouration. The system is certainly no less resolving than it was - far from it. I do find that the changes have made even the most notoriously poor recording/mastering efforts in my collection - such as the Genesis Trick of the Tail SACD I'm listening to right now - more enjoyable. I can hear deeper into recordings and perhaps that de-emphasizes the shortcomings for me at least in some sense by changing my focus. And when I hear a really well-mastered effort, it's AWESOME.
 
Perhaps the concept of some form of tone controls, long taboo among purists, needs to be reconsidered as a possible way of allowing the less-than-optimal stuff to be made more palatable for those who feel the need. Slap some lipstick on that pig... or wipe some off as required. Compressed is compressed but at least the crazy brightness of many recordings could be beaten back a bit. My current speakers do offer that ability to a point so maybe it's an idea whose time has come again...All I know for sure is that the music industry has extremely limited interest in catering to folks like us so we really need to find our own way to make that silk purse Wayner referred to.

I have found that no system is perfect. One must prioritize  the strengths and weaknesses to personal preferences. Fortunately there are enough choices out there that, if one is diligent, a system can be assembled to suit ones taste.
     Some recordings will emphasize the weaknesses. This is inevitable.  The question then becomes, do these weaknesses inhibit my enjoyment of the music? If the answer is yes, then perhaps either you really don't like the music as much as you thought, or your system needs an adjustment. The problem with this is that if you adjust for a certain recording, then other recordings become objectionable. My solution is to try to assemble as neutral a system as possible and let my enjoyment of the performance stand and fall on its own. I enjoy past the weaknesses. I know that there are many that cannot do this. 
       Having said all that, it's not what the subject of the OP posted about.  :duh: Most of the "music industry" couldn't care less about a niche market that ranges in its opinion about what "quality" is from asceticism to "did you hear about that tweak from aliens?". They want to produce "product" that will make money. WE are not their market. Complaining about it won't change it. To quote Firesign Theater, "Live it, or live with it"!

I agree with all of this.

D.D.

studiotech

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #29 on: 26 Oct 2014, 03:13 am »
"Perhaps the concept of some form of tone controls, long taboo among purists, needs to be reconsidered as a possible way of allowing the less-than-optimal stuff to be made more palatable for those who feel the need."

Yes D.D.!

If you the average audiophile knew just how many layers of tone control(EQ) and processing were applied during the average modern recording, they would be appalled.  The long held taboo against any form of EQ or tone controls at home is asinine and just one more audiophile "truth" that is pure BS.  The same goes for DSP.  Outside of the tiny realm of audiophile approved record labels that use purist micing technics and no/minimal processing, all modern recordings have their waveforms so processed and manipulated it is amazing.  What's one more slight adjustment at home if the overall balance is too bright?  I've got my entire CD collection ripped now and for the worst sounding offenders that I love the music, I just re-remaster it myself to tame brightness or boost a thin bottom end.  Overly compressed?  That's another matter that cannot effectively be undone.

Audiophiles spend way too much for minor benefits or changes to their sound from cables, different components and tweaks.  Buy a great freaking EQ and most of your tonal balance problems are solved.  Something like this is a fantastically transparent product used in the finest studios and mastering facilities.  I wish more audiophile rags would educate about the benefits of such designs.  Even better if you are Pc or Mac playback based because virtual implementations of these processors can be had for several hundred, not several thousands of dollars!

http://www.z-sys.com/pp_2ch.html#z-q2

or

http://www.weiss.ch/products/eq1

Greg Begland


Russtafarian

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1117
  • Typical reaction to the music I play
Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #30 on: 27 Oct 2014, 06:27 pm »
Quote
Audiophiles spend way too much for minor benefits or changes to their sound from cables, different components and tweaks.  Buy a great freaking EQ and most of your tonal balance problems are solved. 

Yup! :thumb:

That's why I have this in my system:
   
http://www.avalondesign.com/eq2055.html

+6db @ 50Hz (peak) and -6db @ 5kHz absolutely transforms all those zippy-sounding vinyl pressings from the '80s.

Russ

klao

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #31 on: 27 Oct 2014, 06:35 pm »
I'm not really even qualified to be called an "audiophile", nor do I have much knowledge about music recording and mastering.  As a moderately avid music listener, I can however observe that some well recorded materials with proper mastering would sound reasonably good in rather modest/basic playback system.  They would of course show their special quality in the better system. 

For examples, since my college years (early 90's), I did like both the music and the sound quality of these two compilation albums:  Lionel Richie - Back to Front, and James Ingram - The Power of Great Music.  I had them in CDs and played back on the early generation of (cheap) Pioneer DVD multi-player through very modest Acoustic Energy AE109 speakers driven by locally (Thailand) made amplifications.  Even in the car's sound system, I've always enjoyed these CDs.

Years gone by and I happened to hear bit by bit more about different versions of LP or even CD "pressings", reissuing, re-mastering, etc.  I didn't really care much about those until last of couple of years that I got involved in re-issuing a vinyl-LP album whose recording rights belong to my family.  Bernie Grundman came highly recommended, so we sent the master tapes to his facility in Hollywood.  Then I googled to find out about Bernie and his studio.  There you go, he's one of the best mastering engineers that do care a lot about the quality of his gear and the signal purity passing through all his work chain.

Last week, I was just going back to those two CDs' files that I ripped.  With the my much better listening environment and system now, it was obvious I could enjoy more deeply into the recordings.  Wondering about the technical details, I brought the CDs out from storage and read the credits.  Guess what?  Bernie Grundman got involved with both albums.  : )


Freo-1

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #32 on: 27 Oct 2014, 08:23 pm »
I think an equaliser can help in some cases.  However, it could just as easily detract from the overall sound. 


The reason many do not like them is that it adds more electronics in the signal path, and the unit's electronics may not be of the same quality as the rest of the playback system.  Well regarded analog equalisers are not cheap.   


Keep in mind one of the reasons well made tube gear can sound so good is twofold:  1) Tubes are inherently more linear than sand devices, and  2) The circuits are simpler, with less gain stages and low to moderate feedback.   

PRELUDE

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #33 on: 27 Oct 2014, 08:32 pm »
A couple of comments:


1) Some of the best sounding recordings I have heard are Jazz and Classical from the mid 50's through the 60's.  I think the engineers back then knew what they were doing.  Even some rock recordings, such as early Savoy Brown have amazing presence, depth, and clarity.  No loudness wars back then.


2) I have ATC speakers with the Super Linear mid driver, and they are among the very best speakers available, regardless of price.  I find them to be superior to "Audiophile Speakers", such as Wilson Audio.  The drivers are MUCH better.


3) I have some outstanding modern recordings.   The Cream 2005 Reunion on Blu Ray is incredibly life like.  Several SACD Classical recordings  I own are stunning.  Can't say the same for most rock/pop recordings today.
Hi Freo,
What model ATC speakers do you have? are they active?

Freo-1

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #34 on: 27 Oct 2014, 08:39 pm »
Hi Freo,
What model ATC speakers do you have? are they active?


No.  I had a chance to get a pair of ASL 50's from the dealer, but it was just a bit outside of the price range.   :duh:


I have the SCM-19's.  Here is a review:


http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/audio-visual/hi-fi-and-audio/hi-fi-and-av-speakers/atc-scm19-hi-fi-98230/review


I have the matching C1 subwoofer, along with a SVS SB13 Ultra.  The SCM-19's have the 6" Super Linear driver, a real outstanding performer.  I use both Electrocompaniet and DIY tubes with them.  It seems that many ATC owners who have the passive models wind up buying EC gear to drive them.  Both sound outstanding, with different character traits.

PRELUDE

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #35 on: 27 Oct 2014, 09:14 pm »

No.  I had a chance to get a pair of ASL 50's from the dealer, but it was just a bit outside of the price range.   :duh:


I have the SCM-19's.  Here is a review:


http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/audio-visual/hi-fi-and-audio/hi-fi-and-av-speakers/atc-scm19-hi-fi-98230/review


I have the matching C1 subwoofer, along with a SVS SB13 Ultra.  The SCM-19's have the 6" Super Linear driver, a real outstanding performer.  I use both Electrocompaniet and DIY tubes with them.  It seems that many ATC owners who have the passive models wind up buying EC gear to drive them.  Both sound outstanding, with different character traits.
Well, it is not end of the world and for next time try to get the scm 50's(active) and enjoy the music. :thumb:
I personally like the Electrocompainet stuff for not only the sound but for quality build as well.

Freo-1

Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #36 on: 27 Oct 2014, 09:19 pm »
Well, it is not end of the world and for next time try to get the scm 50's(active) and enjoy the music. :thumb:
I personally like the Electrocompainet stuff for not only the sound but for quality build as well.


Me too!   :thumb:   The speakers sound great with higher powered tube gear as well. 

Russtafarian

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1117
  • Typical reaction to the music I play
Re: A very interesting post on mastering recordings
« Reply #37 on: 27 Oct 2014, 10:13 pm »
Quote
I think an equaliser can help in some cases.  However, it could just as easily detract from the overall sound. 


The reason many do not like them is that it adds more electronics in the signal path, and the unit's electronics may not be of the same quality as the rest of the playback system. 

I understand the concern.  Ideally, an EQ is installed in a tape loop or with a switch to take it out of the signal path when not being used. 

Learning to EQ is an art and takes some training and practice.  But it's worth the effort and it will make you a more perceptive listener.  For me, having the ability to tweak an irritating recording into something fun to listen to is just too cool an opportunity to pass up.

Russ