Red Mosquito

I think most longtime musician's ears are so badly damaged that they can't hear compression problems.

Is it compression that makes shit abrasive and painful to listen to on headphones? I.e Californication by the chilli peppers or raw power by the stooges? I had to lower the volume in the entire albums to get them to not shred my eardrums when I've got songs on shuffle. Or is that just cause its so loud? Or brickwalled, I know that word too. Shit ain't cool.

I still think its them listening to bobs suggestions more because they're more easy going now that's the problem rather than bob doing anything different.

I say problem, we need another album to see if there even is a problem, but ima keep bitching till then anyway.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

stip wrote:

theplatypus wrote:THERE IS NOTHING PEARL JAM CAN DO, NO CRIME SO HORRIFIC AND EGREGIOUS, THAT STIP WON'T (at least passively) ATTEMPT TO DEFEND

not remastering their stuff for the vinyl that audiophiles want is pretty weak, and I'm in general not a fan of the compression. I'm more interested in finding out why this seems to be the direction the entire industry is moving in, and radio seems pretty flimsy on its own given how people consume music. if thejambi is right then it makes more sense

For the most part, the loudness wars did start with radio. Most casual listeners, and even more discerning listeners upon hearing a song in a less engaged manner, will either equate loudness with good sound, or at least be more immediately grabbed by a song if it's perceived as louder. So sometime in the late 90s or so, record companies wanted their music to sound as loud as possible when it's played on the radio (which was traditionally where people would hear a song for the first time). This led to an absurd amount of one upness among mastering, which in turn gave us some hideous sounding releases such as RHCP's Californication (which is often cited as the classic example of the loudness wars pushed to their limits)

that makes sense. I was just wondering why it wasnt moving back with radio's decline.

stip wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

stip wrote:

theplatypus wrote:THERE IS NOTHING PEARL JAM CAN DO, NO CRIME SO HORRIFIC AND EGREGIOUS, THAT STIP WON'T (at least passively) ATTEMPT TO DEFEND

not remastering their stuff for the vinyl that audiophiles want is pretty weak, and I'm in general not a fan of the compression. I'm more interested in finding out why this seems to be the direction the entire industry is moving in, and radio seems pretty flimsy on its own given how people consume music. if thejambi is right then it makes more sense

For the most part, the loudness wars did start with radio. Most casual listeners, and even more discerning listeners upon hearing a song in a less engaged manner, will either equate loudness with good sound, or at least be more immediately grabbed by a song if it's perceived as louder. So sometime in the late 90s or so, record companies wanted their music to sound as loud as possible when it's played on the radio (which was traditionally where people would hear a song for the first time). This led to an absurd amount of one upness among mastering, which in turn gave us some hideous sounding releases such as RHCP's Californication (which is often cited as the classic example of the loudness wars pushed to their limits)

that makes sense. I was just wondering why it wasnt moving back with radio's decline.

Once a habit becomes established practice, it's hard to change, I guess.

On the whole, I think things have improved slightly since the early-to-mid 2000s. Even in regards to Pearl Jam, we now have dynamic 24-bit versions of their live shows and Backspacer and Mind Your Manners are less compressed than S/T (though not quite as dynamic as their 90s output).

What if Pearl Jam fans banded together and made the boys an offer:

Instead of offering up any more of this delux remaster bullshit that makes our ears bleed, we, your loyal fans, will pay for you to record your next album with a high quality analog set up since you, the band, don't give a shit either way.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20024387-47.html

And from another geeky explanation:

"(T)here's still some "magic" in the coloration of analog tape that we have not yet been able to reproduce in an all-digital recording, especially for popular music forms that often crave the sound of tape saturation. Analog tape has its own problems, but when operated within its linear range, unlike digital recording, it has never been accused of making sound "colder."

Guys, they're just upping the loudness on these records now so they can have uncompressed reissues to release way down the road. after all the remixes.

I generally believe the remasters are simply increased volume (I can say Vs sounder brighter, but that's it).

If you guys read books and like music, I heartily recommend Perfecting Sound Forever, it's quite fascinating (it should be at a library near you). It really gave me reasons why some things sound the way they do: why Albini sounds so good (answer: presence), why CDs from the 80's sounded shitty, why you can't hear bass unless you turn the volume up, why some 128k mp3s sound better than others, etc. The entire idea of "presence" makes a ton of sense for an audiophile and makes you want to seek out the really good sounding records.

For the thread at hand, the book has a chapter "The Loudness War" and it explains a lot of people's thoughts here: it's an arms race to be heard over the din of radio and it's degrading the sound, and the author even makes the case that it's hurting bands' careers because of the listening fatigue of the solid brick. The example he gives is Oasis, and I was in love with "What's the Story" but one day I just couldn't listen to it anymore. All of Oasis' albums are incredibly loud and grating and I knew this subconsciously because finding out what the heck was going on. Avocado sounds like the first trio of Oasis albums, which is one of the reasons I can't listen to it much (also: I can't find it).

I was a radio DJ from 97-00 and saw first hand what RHCP did to the meters whenever I played Scar Tissue: most of the time you didn't have to adjust the volume to keep the song from peaking. RHCP would jump all the way and you'd have to pot it down, same thing with Lenny Kravitz's "Fly Away," then countless others.

Point being: I kind of thought PJ's records would sound better on record than CD and was always kind of disappointed. They didn't really sound much better, I realized they simply had an affinity for the medium, not the sound. The only albums that sounded markedly better on vinyl were Mirrorball and Binaural (I haven't spun Riot Act enough to know one way or another). Mirrorball sounds PHENOMENAL on vinyl, far better than the CD (which muddied up the sound). Could a 1995 album produced by Brendan O'Brien have the same problem compression issues commonplace today? I checked the record it credits a separate "vinyl master," so that has to be some factor (combined with how it was recorded and who the artist is - Neil Young has always had great sounding records). Binaural sounds good because it was probably the way it was recorded (with the binaural mics, I think BoB came in at the last minute and mixed some stuff for that one). Didn't look to see if it was a separate vinyl master.

However, it does seem like PJ are learning:



Ukelele Songs is too spartan to really spot a difference, but Backspacer does sound better. When I listen, I want the vocals and music to sound as if they're in the room with me (the aforementioned presence), and at points Backspacer succeeds (the quiet songs).

TL;DR: BoB isn't the cause of shitty sounding records, society is.

nomorecrackpipes wrote:TL;DR: BoB isn't the cause of shitty sounding records, society is.

That's probably one of the best posts I've read on here. You know your shit, man. Thanks.

Although now that I'm more informed, I'm also more disillusioned.

Excellent post, nomorecrackpipes.

Ill listen to Backspacer and Ukelele songs on vinyl this weekend.

Avocado sounds better on vinyl too.

PJ didn't listen to Brendan O'Brien during No Code. They had him there to record, not much else. They decided to set up and play live in the studio to the point of even having a PA on Eddie's vocals and BoB was forced out of his comfort zone to try and work with their demands.

For Backspacer, PJ went out of their comfort zone to work in Brendan's. And look how cheesy and lame BoB's comfort zone is.

VinylGuy wrote:Avocado sounds better on vinyl too.

I will, too, but I looked at it for the same "vinyl mastering" note and saw none; not even a "mastered by" credit. Maybe they disowned it like an "Alan Smithee Film." I can only assume it's Gateway since they do most of PJ's stuff.

That book profoundly crystallized all the little things over my years of listening to music, I can't recommend it enough. I liked Albini going into the book, and I really like him (and Neil Young) after it.

nomorecrackpipes wrote:If you guys read books and like music, I heartily recommend Perfecting Sound Forever, it's quite fascinating (it should be at a library near you).

I'll second this recommendation. It's a thoroughly excellent book and I really think anyone interested in music and the way it sounds will get a lot out of it.

Birds in Hell wrote:

stip wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

stip wrote:

theplatypus wrote:THERE IS NOTHING PEARL JAM CAN DO, NO CRIME SO HORRIFIC AND EGREGIOUS, THAT STIP WON'T (at least passively) ATTEMPT TO DEFEND

not remastering their stuff for the vinyl that audiophiles want is pretty weak, and I'm in general not a fan of the compression. I'm more interested in finding out why this seems to be the direction the entire industry is moving in, and radio seems pretty flimsy on its own given how people consume music. if thejambi is right then it makes more sense

For the most part, the loudness wars did start with radio. Most casual listeners, and even more discerning listeners upon hearing a song in a less engaged manner, will either equate loudness with good sound, or at least be more immediately grabbed by a song if it's perceived as louder. So sometime in the late 90s or so, record companies wanted their music to sound as loud as possible when it's played on the radio (which was traditionally where people would hear a song for the first time). This led to an absurd amount of one upness among mastering, which in turn gave us some hideous sounding releases such as RHCP's Californication (which is often cited as the classic example of the loudness wars pushed to their limits)

that makes sense. I was just wondering why it wasnt moving back with radio's decline.

Once a habit becomes established practice, it's hard to change, I guess.

On the whole, I think things have improved slightly since the early-to-mid 2000s.

Slightly, but yeah.

Birds in Hell wrote:

nomorecrackpipes wrote:If you guys read books and like music, I heartily recommend Perfecting Sound Forever, it's quite fascinating (it should be at a library near you).

I'll second this recommendation. It's a thoroughly excellent book and I really think anyone interested in music and the way it sounds will get a lot out of it.

I'll pick this up.

WtOB? wrote:PJ didn't listen to Brendan O'Brien during No Code. They had him there to record, not much else. They decided to set up and play live in the studio to the point of even having a PA on Eddie's vocals and BoB was forced out of his comfort zone to try and work with their demands.

For Backspacer, PJ went out of their comfort zone to work in Brendan's. And look how cheesy and lame BoB's comfort zone is.

That's the working relationship they need to get back to, the " thanks but we got this " approach. I hope we get a bob thrown out of the room song a la bugs. The last 3 albums haven't really had a weird little experiment track have they? Unless you count help help or you are as one

stupidmop wrote:

WtOB? wrote:PJ didn't listen to Brendan O'Brien during No Code. They had him there to record, not much else. They decided to set up and play live in the studio to the point of even having a PA on Eddie's vocals and BoB was forced out of his comfort zone to try and work with their demands.

For Backspacer, PJ went out of their comfort zone to work in Brendan's. And look how cheesy and lame BoB's comfort zone is.

That's the working relationship they need to get back to, the " thanks but we got this " approach. I hope we get a bob thrown out of the room song a la bugs. The last 3 albums haven't really had a weird little experiment track have they? Unless you count help help or you are as one

Now that it's clear to everyone that Lightning Bolt is a total failure, I think it's time for drastic changes in this band. They need to get rid of Cameron and McCready and replace them by harmless and Strat, then have McParadigm take care of everything related to sound, production and fine liquors. Spenno will be in charge of vault/bootlegs/live releases, Thejambi will do the artwork (with a little help from Sgt. Crackpot for the booklet pictures) and NIGHTMAREBLACK0206 WILL WRITE THE PRESS RELEASES. B will be running the 10C so we can still have something to bitch about.

nomorecrackpipes wrote:
TL;DR: BoB isn't the cause of shitty sounding records, society is.

"Society" isn't all that relevant when it comes to Pearl Jam and how they records sound. They aren't even closely commercially relevant enough for this to even matter.

I do remember an idiotic remark by Ed around s/t was released. He was praising how Sleater Kinney's album was so loud that almost blew his car speakers up. So that's why s/t was that loud guess.

Mine wrote:

nomorecrackpipes wrote:
TL;DR: BoB isn't the cause of shitty sounding records, society is.

"Society" isn't all that relevant when it comes to Pearl Jam and how they records sound. They aren't even closely commercially relevant enough for this to even matter.

I do remember an idiotic remark by Ed around s/t was released. He was praising how Sleater Kinney's album was so loud that almost blew his car speakers up. So that's why s/t was that loud guess.

When did they forget that guitar and drum tone can give them this 'loudness' they're so desperate to achieve? It used to; have they forgotten? The irony with S/T is that the production is 'loud' instead of the actual, uh, music. Their guitar sounds generally sound weak now. I was listening to 'Go' from Live on 2 Legs this morning and thinking wow, what's happened?

harmless wrote:

Mine wrote:

nomorecrackpipes wrote:
TL;DR: BoB isn't the cause of shitty sounding records, society is.

"Society" isn't all that relevant when it comes to Pearl Jam and how they records sound. They aren't even closely commercially relevant enough for this to even matter.

I do remember an idiotic remark by Ed around s/t was released. He was praising how Sleater Kinney's album was so loud that almost blew his car speakers up. So that's why s/t was that loud guess.

When did they forget that guitar and drum tone can give them this 'loudness' they're so desperate to achieve? It used to; have they forgotten? The irony with S/T is that the production is 'loud' instead of the actual, uh, music. Their guitar sounds generally sound weak now. I was listening to 'Go' from Live on 2 Legs this morning and thinking wow, what's happened?

I don't think they know enough about mixing to know how to achieve what. I get the impression that they never were that good at knowing how to treat their music well enough. There's always a detectable room for improvement. Most of their catalogue begs for a sense of space and some subtlety in the arrangements. O'Briens approach of more is more exaggerates what is their main weakness.