...but will this one be crushed to a paste?

[Silver Sonya]

Bruce Springsteen announces a new record.

The last one was hyper-limited almost to "Death Magnetic" levels. In fact, before "Death Magnetic," it was one of those special vanguard records that sounded so bad that average consumers became curious about what was wrong with the sound. Ironically, the record was called "Magic."

This will be interesting. Did Springsteen & O'brien & Ludwig adjust the sound after the minor scandal of "Magic" or are they unrepentant? Stay tuned, music fans...

- c

[Cellotron]

Anyone else notice that a few of the most egregiously hyper limited recent album releases were at the behest of artists who have spent a heckuva lot of hours for a heckuva lot years playing at loud arena shows? In other words - I think they're requesting the squash and simply not hearing the artifacts.

Anyway - it was interesting hearing the Boss' recent Halloween release - kind of "Mannish Boy" done all dark and distorted and Nick Cave stylee. I wonder if the new album has more of this vibe as well.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Silver Sonya]

I just hope there's an archived version of "Magic" without the crazy loudness war thing applied.

I couldn't listen to that record beyond a couple of minutes. I still have yet to hear anything beyond the 2nd song.

(And I listened to the 2nd song only to confirm that the sound was consistent.)

That record is... just not even music to me.

- c

[thermos]

Is that record louder than the Paul McCartney album "Memory Almost Full?" That one is hilarious too.

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by thermos

Is that record louder than the Paul McCartney album "Memory Almost Full?" That one is hilarious too.

Oh my God, don't get me started. Don't even get me started.

- c

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by thermos

Is that record louder than the Paul McCartney album "Memory Almost Full?" That one is hilarious too.

In all seriousness, what is up with all of these classic songwriters trying to compete in the loudness war? I mean, it's no tragedy when it's T-Pain or whatever modern download-today-forget-tomorrow music. But the new Paul McCartney? What's the point? Radio play? Really?

It's such a sad lemming rush over the cliff.

I am deeply fearful for the forthcoming Beatles reissues. I hope someone somewhere pushes for a purist agenda.

- c

[lucey]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

In all seriousness, what is up with all of these classic songwriters trying to compete in the loudness war? I mean, it's no tragedy when it's T-Pain or whatever modern download-today-forget-tomorrow music. But the new Paul McCartney? What's the point? Radio play? Really?

They want to sound 'current'. Anyone who thinks famous musicians are by and large secure is fooling themselves.

[666666]

Originally Posted by lucey

They want to sound 'current'. Anyone who thinks famous musicians are by and large secure is fooling themselves.

"Current"....? "Current" = SHIT!... at least if we're talking about Death Magnetic type treatment.

Are we saying that Paul McCartney is better off with a Death Magnetic type treatment??? I CERTAINLY hope not!

New Beatles reissues...? Man, if they wreck that stuff, what a horrible shame it would be. I can't even imagine... lay the Mona Lisa on the ground and take a steaming piss all over it... I really hope this doesn't happen. Not many things make me REALLY angry, but this would be one of them.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by 666666

"Current"....? "Current" = SHIT!... at least if we're talking about Death Magnetic type treatment.

Are we saying that Paul McCartney is better off with a Death Magnetic type treatment??? I CERTAINLY hope not!

New Beatles reissues...? Man, if they wreck that stuff, what a horrible shame it would be. I can't even imagine... lay the Mona Lisa on the ground and take a steaming piss all over it... I really hope this doesn't happen. Not many things make me REALLY angry, but this would be one of them.

I'm with you. Except it's nothing to get angry over. Education and conversation, not anger.

Remastering has been a way to screw up records, er ... raise money, for some time. If anything the remastering is the problem. Nothing new there. Eventually they would have to get to the Beatles.

[666666]

Originally Posted by lucey

I'm with you. Except it's nothing to get angry over. Education and conversation, not anger.

Remastering has been a way to screw up records, er ... raise money, for some time.

Apparently, yes. Indeed a shame.

If anything the remastering is the problem. Nothing new there. Eventually they would have to get to the Beatles.

Nothing to get angry about...? Ok, well, it's at the very least sickening and extremely frustrating to see great music / recordings desecrated and made into a form that cannot be enjoyed.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by 666666

Nothing to get angry about...? Ok, well, it's at the very least sickening and extremely frustrating to see great music / recordings desecrated and made into a form that cannot be enjoyed.

Oh I'm with you. But ... for the conglomerates 'music' is not the object. They define good music as music that sells right now, meets quarterly goals, etc.

It's like porn to the puritans ... you can just ignore it.

[jordanstoner]

The problem is that "modern" is not the same as "timeless." Some people are keen to that, but not all. DaVinci's work could be remade by an impressionist or cubist, but it would only be a reworking of a masterful piece of art to fit in a specific niche that was trendy at the time. DaVinci's work created its own niche in its own right, and what kind of marketing guru would have the balls to want to re-issue a master work like the Mona Lisa in current art trends?

Sometimes good art should be left alone, even if the technology exists to make it "more pristine."

Ok, well, it's at the very least sickening and extremely frustrating to see great music / recordings desecrated and made into a form that cannot be enjoyed.

The problem is that some people actually do enjoy it that way, else there would be no market. Pushes for remasters and the like follow the trends and the money, they are almost never labors of love or sparks of musical creativity. However, what makes great works of art "great" is that they are able to capture everyone's imagination and interest, whereas tailor-made art that fits into a specific niche may please some more than the original, but it's a considerably more narrow audience.

[phild]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I am deeply fearful for the forthcoming Beatles reissues. I hope someone somewhere pushes for a purist agenda.

- c

Who's doing the Beatle re-issues?

[666666]

Originally Posted by jordanstoner

...The problem is that some people actually do enjoy it that way, else there would be no market....

People actually like Death Magnetic with crackling digital distortion and ultra fatiguing levels, etc??? Many hate it, and I guess many might not realize the mess because they're half deaf, listening on Ipods while skateboarding down the street or whatever. I don't think anyone specifically "likes" it, the squashed crackling distorted treatment that is. What about true music fans that would like to actually ENJOY the music?

I don't think it's the public that likes / wants this horrendous audio treatment, it's the individuals at the labels / mastering engineers etc that THINK they know what people will prefer, and the fear that the competition might be "louder", etc... and this has all somehow snowballed into a situation where the music of today is completely unlistenable. How ironic... music that you can't listen to.

Gee, maybe today's artists could offer downloads of their music "pre-ruined"... so if the label wants to ruin the music for CD production and mp3s, ok, fine... but at least, in addition, offer the music as PROPERLY mastered excellent sounding tracks that music fans can actually enjoy. Otherwise the people who love the music the most and have the ability to appreciate it the most get seriously hurt here. Doesn't ANYONE care about any of this? What a bunch of greedy gutless thickheaded deaf whorres.... they are shitting on great art, it's a real tragedy, it really is.

All I can say is THANK GOD the greatest bands of all time existed back BEFORE this modern day audio nightmare. Imagine if every Beatles, Hendrix, Zeppelin etc album was squashed with raging digital distortion, clicks and pops everywhere, crunching and crackling, and zero dynamic range, ear-splitting brightness... ok, I'll never complain again, I guess we all need to be ever thankful that the good stuff made it through unscathed. Ok, some of this older stuff was sometimes less than perfect in terms of pristine fidelity, but none of it could ever be considered even a fraction as bad as the squashed crackling popping stuff coming out today.

At least back in the day, any lack of fidelity was due to limitations in technology or lack of money... and it was somehow still always musicial. Today, the big label productions have all the money and technology they need to make stellar fidelity productions... but they CHOOSE to make a sickening mess... no excuses, if music is GOOD, it will sell, I just don't buy that squashing a program until it distorts and has zero dynamic range is going to sell more records. Yeah, it's just a big scam run by a bunch of deaf thieves that have ZERO regard for art. What a shame that these muthafckrs are in the positions they are in.

Ehhh.... ok, this is my "loudness war" rant number 57 I think... and every time I do it I promise I will never do it again... but I can't help it!!!! It's just too upsetting. A weekly venting is essential to my sanity.

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by phild

Who's doing the Beatle re-issues?

I don't know.

The person I would nominate would be Metropolis' Tony Cousins, because I think he would do a fantastic hi-fi, respectful, musical job. But I'm sure the politics involved in a Beatles reissue is intense...

If someone tells me Tony Cousins is doing the Beatles reissues, I'm going to jump up and do the least dignified happy dance ever.

- c

[James Meeker]

Originally Posted by jordanstoner

DaVinci's work could be remade by an impressionist or cubist, but it would only be a reworking of a masterful piece of art to fit in a specific niche that was trendy at the time.

I don't think I'd say impressionism or cubism is "trendy." As of right now, they are kind of timeless.

[Rappinghood]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I don't know.

The person I would nominate would be Metropolis' Tony Cousins, because I think he would do a fantastic hi-fi, respectful, musical job. But I'm sure the politics involved in a Beatles reissue is intense...

If someone tells me Tony Cousins is doing the Beatles reissues, I'm going to jump up and do the least dignified happy dance ever.

- c

He did a good job on the 'Love' album or was it Tim Young? I really hope they're not done in America either way.

Maybe Abbey Road might do it as it's EMI owned. Are they actually re-releasing the Beatles catalogue then? This is the first I've heard of it above casual rumour!

[kjg]

Originally Posted by James Meeker

I don't think I'd say impressionism or cubism is "trendy." As of right now, they are kind of timeless.

+1

Van Gogh on the other hand.. He's all hip. Totally hyped that guy :P

And btw, I'd much rather have a Picasso in my house than the Mona Lisa but that is something else completely... Love Davinci's drawings and technical drawings though.

Originally Posted by jordanstoner

DaVinci's work created its own niche in its own right, and what kind of marketing guru would have the balls to want to re-issue a master work like the Mona Lisa in current art trends?

Be glad he didn't make any records... I'm sure they'd be crushed in this day and age to compete on itunes.

What's up with DJ Tiesto's remixes of "the Fool on the hill", btw? Anybody heard that yet? How about the Fall out boy cover of "A day in the life"?

[phild]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

I don't know.

The person I would nominate would be Metropolis' Tony Cousins, because I think he would do a fantastic hi-fi, respectful, musical job. But I'm sure the politics involved in a Beatles reissue is intense...

If someone tells me Tony Cousins is doing the Beatles reissues, I'm going to jump up and do the least dignified happy dance ever.

- c

Maybe I'm the only one who thought that the Capitol Re-issues sounded really good?

[Silver Sonya]

Originally Posted by phild

Maybe I'm the only one who thought that the Capitol Re-issues sounded really good?

My prayer is that there is no compression used in the new Beatles reissues. The White Album does not need to be louder.

Please, God, just a respectful hi-fi transfer and maybe a little corrective EQ. No extra comp/limiting, please.

But now I have totally drifted OT of this thread...

- c

[arf]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

My prayer is that there is no compression used in the new Beatles reissues. The White Album does not need to be louder.

Please, God, just a respectful hi-fi transfer and maybe a little corrective EQ. No extra comp/limiting, please.

But now I have totally drifted OT of this thread...

- c

Does raise the question of what God thinks of the loudness wars.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

My prayer is that there is no compression used in the new Beatles reissues. Please, God, just a respectful hi-fi transfer and maybe a little corrective EQ. No extra comp/limiting, please.

"Pray, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. "

Ambrose Bierce - THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY

[kjg]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

"Pray, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. "

Ambrose Bierce - THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY

Good one!
Thx for posting

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by lucey

I'm with you. Except it's nothing to get angry over. Education and conversation, not anger.

i'd love to be a fly on the wall in that meeting - the one where you educate paul mccartney!

[lucey]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

i'd love to be a fly on the wall in that meeting - the one where you educate paul mccartney!

First point is that I wasn't talking about the Beatles.

Secondly, does McCartney even have a say in the Beatles remasters? If he does, I have no hope of anyone that famous being open enough to listen to anyone else about the sound of their music. Everyone around him is probably like you and is happy to kiss his ass or he gets rid of them.

And just because he was a Beatle it doesn't mean that in 2008 he's not vulnerable to feeling insecure about a new record sounding current. He's not young anymore and with age can come insecurity ... for anyone. With decades of touring and age often comes hearing loss, as well. Not saying he's got a problem ... but these are potential factors.

[bionic]

LOL Arf...

I asked him the other day and he said he's having trouble listening through 2 or 3 prayers these days, what with all the limiting and clipping people are putting on them.

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by lucey

First point is that I wasn't talking about the Beatles.

Secondly, does McCartney even have a say in the Beatles remasters? If he does, I have no hope of anyone that famous being open enough to listen to anyone else about the sound of their music. Everyone around him is probably like you and is happy to kiss his ass or he gets rid of them.

And just because he was a Beatle it doesn't mean that in 2008 he's not vulnerable to feeling insecure about a new record sounding current. He's not young anymore and with age can come insecurity ... for anyone. With decades of touring and age often comes hearing loss, as well. Not saying he's got a problem ... but these are potential factors.

memory almost full sounds like crap.

it was just a funny image - someone from gearslutz lecturing sir paul mccartney on how to make records.

tangentially, he certainly _would_ have a say in beatles reissues, as one of two surviving beatles.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

memory almost full sounds like crap.

it was just a funny image - someone from gearslutz lecturing sir paul mccartney on how to make records.

tangentially, he certainly _would_ have a say in beatles reissues, as one of two surviving beatles.

Have not heard that record. If the Beatles catalog was sold, then he's out as far as I know ... and as far as your comedic projection, I never "lecture" any artist of any stature about anything!

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by lucey

Have not heard that record. If the Beatles catalog was sold, then he's out as far as I know ... and as far as your comedic projection, I never "lecture" any artist of any stature about anything!

i'm up for some beatles remasters. but i'd REALLY like to hear some re-MIXES. the alternate takes on anthology sound awesome. so does love and i even like let it be NAKED.

i'd just love to hear those tracks cleaned up!