
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2003 8:18 am No matter what producer you use, make sure he/she knows a thing or two about dynamic contrast. http://www.airwindows.com/analysis/Albums/index.html Everything these days is way too loud and in your face. Everything is compressed to all hell. Even acoustic oriented stuff is mastered and engineered to the point of being taxing on the ears (Beck - Seachange is guilty of it. The music may be nice, but the production and mastering isn't dynamic in volume and therefore everything sounds kind of the same) Older music is not as loud. That's why on the back of Exile on Main Street it says PLAY IT LOUD. Dark Side of the Moon is the most dynamic stuff also. To put it simply, tell the record label hellhounds that you want things quieter to leave room for the instruments to exist. A good producer understands this and will agree with you. It's the executives you'll need to sway. Since everything on the radio is trying to be louder than the next thing, all they care about is making that impact on the radio. Timeless music always makes a bigger impact than louder music. |
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
most CDs are mastered by someone who has no idea what they're doing. The volume is way off optimal so it doesn't sound too soft, because people turn their volume down because other mass produced dreck is also mastered too loud. Sigh. _________________ God is a place you will wait for the rest of your life |
|
|
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 | Posts: 407 | Location: Houston, Texas
|
|
|
It seems like the trend lately is to make everything sound as loud and full as possible no matter what volume the consumer is listening at. They've gotten pretty good at it. The people that produced and mastered Michelle Branch's music seemed to have become gods at this (I mean, EVERYTHING IS SO LOUD ALL THE TIME). The problem is, this is stupid. There's no point. Everyone knows how to work the volume. And all radio stations are equipped to make things as loud as everything else with their own compressors and stuff. Double sigh. |
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
|
|
|
My band just had our album mastered, and we were adamant about keeping the dynamics intact. The mastering engineer was great and a complete pro (Doug Van Sloun, who's done Bright Eyes, Cursive and others), and he showed us some graphs similar to those from records that are out now. Linkin Park and Norah Jones were horrible, no dynamics whatsoever, just as loud as fricking possible. Rarely did they fluctuate more that 6db....it was crazy. Knowing Elliot Smith's records I'm sure Eisley will be fine. Great topic, Veem. |
|
|
Joined: 20 Aug 2003 | Posts: 2261 | Location: Ames, Iowa
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
Joined: 20 Aug 2003 | Posts: 2261 | Location: Ames, Iowa
|
|
|
very cool topic, indeed. four stars! i remember reading someone ranting about this not too long ago, somewhere else. would someone mind going into the technical details a little? i'm just curious.. _________________ hello. |
|
|
Joined: 23 Aug 2003 | Posts: 5978 | Location: Austin, Texas
|
|
|
theenvycorps wrote: If you listen closely, it's so loud that the cd actually distorts when she belts out with her voice. Yep, exactly why it's bad. You max the upper range to the point of clipping and leave nearly the bottom half unused. Quite annoying. _________________ God is a place you will wait for the rest of your life |
|
|
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 | Posts: 407 | Location: Houston, Texas
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
You have to realize that loud is diffrent from full. A full sound is great if treated correctly the right dynamics is a key as well. Dynamics give the song emotion and allow you to draw the listener tward the climax of the song. Im also not opposed to the loud sound the "wall of sound" has been around for decades but now there using digital to do it which I belive is horrid. The warmth of analog will never be reproduced by digital, what producers need to realize is that true musical sound cannot be put into 1's and 0's and sound good. |
|
|
Joined: 05 Nov 2002 | Posts: 1479 | Location: Dallas, Texas
|
|
|
Andrew wrote: You have to realize that loud is diffrent from full. A full sound is great if treated correctly the right dynamics is a key as well. Dynamics give the song emotion and allow you to draw the listener tward the climax of the song. Im also not opposed to the loud sound the "wall of sound" has been around for decades but now there using digital to do it which I belive is horrid. The warmth of analog will never be reproduced by digital, what producers need to realize is that true musical sound cannot be put into 1's and 0's and sound good. I think that what everyone here is referring to is when every element is so loud as to make the recording harsh in parts and just muddy overall. I agree with you completely about "full" sounding recordings--I'm all for that. It's just a different matter when everything is cranked up together so much that everything lacks definition and dynamics. |
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
Last edited by bgburroughs on Thu Dec 04, 2003 3:03 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
I know the difference between loud and full. I'm not talking about that. The distinction is there to be made, but full is another conversation. There's really nothing wrong with full because it's, well, an effect. Loud is a simple concept. I'm not for certain that digital is the culprit also. It's just that all these trends have become the standard as digital became more prominent. Analog equipment is cooler to work with though. |
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
I forgot to mention My Bloody Valentine's Loveless... I think it's one of the very few albums that can really pull off the loudness, because that's the whole essence of the music. And even at that, the sound is never harsh, and the beautiful melodies always poke through the wall of sound. |
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2003 | Posts: 2290 |
|
|
|
Joined: 28 Nov 2003 | Posts: 15 | Location: Outer Space
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing City Forum Index -> eisleyBlog -> Eisley: If you want that timeless sound you're going...
Page 1 of 2 goto page | next >>
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
|
|
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
|
|

