Why do the new R&B HipHop albums sound so bloody odd?

[lethalmaus1]

I've listened to the new Jay-Z, Whitney houston, Joe and kanye albums and I'm so confused. These are A-list artists with horrible sounding records. The loudness and lack of dynamics is a known issue but.....

Almost all the recent R&B HipHop ablums sound so clipped, mono and lo-fi that its unbearable to listen on any nearfields. Like they've been hi-cut, lo cut and distorted to hell..... But they sound fine in cars, avantones, small consumer speakers and ipods.

Am I right in assuming that this 'crap sound' is due to mastering and mixing engineers trying to reach the ipod generation?

[Franco]

My 2 cents:

It's a funny thing with Hip Hop right now because the "A List" artists and labels as you put it, are putting out the worst-sounding crap ever, while lesser-known (to those people who only know what's commercially available out there) artists and labels are putting out albums that level-wise, sound close to what they did back in the "golden era" of hip hop (not squashed to death, great mixes).

You can't assume anything, each album is different. In the "A List" crowd however, loudness is highly important, to the point that distortion is expected (unfortunately). It's not rare in hip hop to get projects that are distorted since the tracking stage.

Originally Posted by lethalmaus1

Almost all the recent R&B HipHop ablums sound so clipped, mono and lo-fi that its unbearable to listen on any nearfields.

I never understood why people think listening to mastered material on nearfield monitors is a good thing. Then again, this is also part of what is normal today. Everyone these days has an iPod, a car system and nearfield monitors.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by lethalmaus1

Am I right in assuming that this 'crap sound' is due to mastering and mixing engineers trying to reach the ipod generation?

No. That's over-analyzing. It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'

The notion that something is purposely mastered 'bad' to make it sound better on some specific 'bad system' is a thought primarily entertained by those that tend to idealize their idols, even when they make mistakes. Personally, I'd suggest to only investigate / emulate what you think is good and not that which you think is bad Rest assured, they were trying to make a good album. Obviously, in your eyes, they have failed. There's no secret intention that you're not aware of.

[Franco]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'

I don't believe this is true either, if there's a reason why it's because (insert famous rapper/group name) is/are releasing material that is squashed, so people who want to come up to that level believe their material should sound the same.

There are artists out there that DO know squashing mixes is not a good thing, and are saying "fk it, I don't care if they're doing it, I want my stuff to sound better than that!"

Unfortunately, the majority of cats doing hip hop these days either got rid of their CDs from the 90s that sounded dope, or worse, never heard them and have never bothered to rip a track from one of them to analyze the levels.

[miro]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

No. That's over-analyzing. It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'

The notion that something is purposely mastered 'bad' to make it sound better on some specific 'bad system' is a thought primarily entertained by those that tend to idealize their idols, even when they make mistakes. Personally, I'd suggest to only investigate / emulate what you think is good and not that which you think is bad Rest assured, they were trying to make a good album. Obviously, in your eyes, they have failed. There's no secret intention that you're not aware of.

i agree in all!

[korbes]

Yes, it's a shame. I've been listening to a Hiphop album from 1999 recently, comparing it to a 2008 release (different artists though),
and escpecially in such a direct comparison situation, the differences are clearly audible.

The "old" release is much punchier and not doesn't cause my ears to bleed as does the modern record when listening over longer periods.

It's hard to understand, why musicians (in all genres) keep fighting in the loudness war when there are so many things that contradict taking part in it, like the much discussed fact that hypercompressed/limited music doesn't sound louder or better on the radio and such...

[Jesse Graffam]

I also have a theory, and it's that these artists are now doing everything themselves... the whole recording process is handled by the people around them. It's no secret that a LOT of those dudes (men and women) are what we call "Yes-Men" most or all of the time, just to stay affirmative and on the good side of the person they are working for.

Jay-Z is your boss (he runs the label too btw), says he likes the way something is mastered by one of your co-workers essentially, but you know it sounds like crap, and he asks you your opinion. What would you say??!?

[2Loud]

[QUOTE=24-96 Mastering;4566945]No. That's over-analyzing. It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'


now thats a serious quote!

[lethalmaus1]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

No. That's over-analyzing. It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'

The notion that something is purposely mastered 'bad' to make it sound better on some specific 'bad system' is a thought primarily entertained by those that tend to idealize their idols, even when they make mistakes. Personally, I'd suggest to only investigate / emulate what you think is good and not that which you think is bad Rest assured, they were trying to make a good album. Obviously, in your eyes, they have failed. There's no secret intention that you're not aware of.

There's nothing to emulate from these records... just expressing my bewilderment and disappointment.

I work in Mongolia which has emerged from communism and heavy music censorship (8 years ago) so old school hip hop and rnb here is unfortunately eminem, 50 cent, Tupac, Dre, Rkelly, Usher and Destiny's child. No RunDMC, Africa Bambaataa, Marvin gaye..........I try and make a difference.

Kids come to me with the latest Jay-z record and tell me they want their albums to have a similar sound and I waste my breath explaining that its not an ideal sound and, the virtues of a balanced frequency response and punchiness not 'pancakeness' in music. My clients are by far and large happy but i predict soon ill have to cave in and distort the hell out of shit just to please them.

If I'm gonna sell out I might as well throw away my TC6000, S3As and HD system, get a cheapo made in China computer with mini jack out for monitoring, crack T -racks and soundblaster speakers and give what the clients want....hell I might even move to NY with my 'new gear' and give you guys a run for your money.....

[lerone]

I think theres been a massive shift in the production value of modern hip-hop. In the 'golden era', the sounds that were used seemed more varied; different, well-used textures, better performances & more inventive arrangements. Now, it seems theres far more rookies, using the same patches & sample packs, who just don't cut the mustard. Its like how the whole autotune mallarky just spiraled out of control: people just keep on ripping each other off, almost unashamedly... only now they're just doing it far more carelessly too. Its simply too many untalented jokers getting lucky. If you chucked a rock recording in Dr Dre's direction, he could actually turn it into a record because hes actually a real craftsman, not just pretending to be one. Hopefully in 2010+, things will start to change in popular music, there have been some good indications recently.

[Busdeez]

I think the same, I'm depressed most of the time I put a new cd in the computer. Clients also ask for similarity in "mastering sounds" (even if they come to me with demo quality clipped mixes)...What I do is keeping a sample of the rare well mixed and then mastered songs (say some Lil Wayne tracks, or whole cds like Robin Thicke's Evolution or the last Scarface "Emeritus") and make em listen to the difference between those songs and some JayZ, Kanye 808 bullishit masters...sometimes it works and we try to work in the best direction, punchy of course but "distortion free" (if the mixes allow it).I started engineering hip hop cause I loved ow it sounded back in the eary 90's, sometimes I ask myself if in this decade I would have chosen the same path....

[aof21]

I noticed this as well. For some of the work we do, I work with the instrumental versions of the songs and I started to notice how poor quality these tracks were. The sounds are all thin, digital, stock-type sounds. Very wimpy, sound like mp3s even before they are converted to be mp3s!

Someone pointed something out in the Hip Hop forum that I had never thought of before, not sure if it's true, but it makes perfect sense. Its possible a lot of this is driven by the labels. In the late 90s, most artists still were going to big-budget studios and hiring session musicians or professional producer / programmers / arrangers to put together their beats. Now, it is literally bedroom producers. If a label can find a relatively catchy beat from a bedroom producer, they can pay them $5,000 for it, heck maybe as little as $500 for it and that bedroom guy thinks he's hit the jackpot!. Now all the label needs to do is pay to get the vocals professionally done and get it mastered super loud and it passes as a major label song.

I think they've realized if they can use cheap beats from bedroom producers, they save a ton on production costs, throw the million dollar voice on it and master it loud enough and most people don't notice the difference!

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by aof21

I noticed this as well. For some of the work we do, I work with the instrumental versions of the songs and I started to notice how poor quality these tracks were. The sounds are all thin, digital, stock-type sounds. Very wimpy, sound like mp3s even before they are converted to be mp3s!

In the late 90s, most artists still were going to big-budget studios and hiring session musicians or professional producer / programmers / arrangers to put together their beats. Now, it is literally bedroom producers. If a label can find a relatively catchy beat from a bedroom producer, they can pay them $5,000 for it, heck maybe as little as $500 for it and that bedroom guy thinks he's hit the jackpot!. Now all the label needs to do is pay to get the vocals professionally done and get it mastered super loud and it passes as a major label song.

I think they've realized if they can use cheap beats from bedroom producers, they save a ton on production costs, throw the million dollar voice on it and master it loud enough and most people don't notice the difference!

I think this is a perfect summary of the problem. It's driven by the withering of music profitability and the resulting push towards the cheapest and fastest productions. No money? Less profession results.

Not always, but on average, definitely.

[Jamon]

One possible contributing factor often overlooked is that it is common for samples to be recorded off the web, which means sampling lossy compressed formats like MP3, MP4, and FLV.

[Toro]

another hip hop HITLER thread .

[glissando]

Originally Posted by Busdeez

I think the same, I'm depressed most of the time I put a new cd in the computer. Clients also ask for similarity in "mastering sounds" (even if they come to me with demo quality clipped mixes)...What I do is keeping a sample of the rare well mixed and then mastered songs (say some Lil Wayne tracks, or whole cds like Robin Thicke's Evolution or the last Scarface "Emeritus") and make em listen to the difference between those songs and some JayZ, Kanye 808 bullishit masters...sometimes it works and we try to work in the best direction, punchy of course but "distortion free" (if the mixes allow it).I started engineering hip hop cause I loved ow it sounded back in the eary 90's, sometimes I ask myself if in this decade I would have chosen the same path....

Yes! Dre is just a great producer...period.

[Kayo]

Originally Posted by lethalmaus1

Am I right in assuming that this 'crap sound' is due to mastering and mixing engineers trying to reach the ipod generation?

Couple of things here..
This is not related to hip-hop music only.

· Artist pressure, to be heard louder than their neighbours in the queue.
· A&R pressures, to make it sellable and localized genre sounding.
· Mastering engineers pressured to perform miracles to attain competitive levels and volumes, from audio comparisons which themselves were already at their teething edge..
· Artist learning, that looking past the needs of the music to the needs of the markets and it’s wants, is more important monetary wise etc.. A crash course in conformity of sorts!
· Keeping a grip of the whole production chain, from recording to CD print, is getting unbelievably difficult for the artist.
· Since saturation for volume has become a norm, many a blends of saturations have now started to emerge. A menu of saturation tangents are now a commonality in mastering sessions worldwide.
· Only the market and its demands can change the LOUDNESS levels, and not the players. The equation [demand & supply] applies here.


Read.. only if bored!
IMO.. For many, getting into music or the music business itself, has turned into a game of fame, money and fortune by sales alone, and not just passion for their music. Because, passion alone doesn’t pay bills, especially bills for big mansions and luxurious cars and excessive life styles etc… For that, you need cut throat sales and a continuous flow of cash to fill the coffers. To make that transpire, you need to play the competitive game that already exists and is being played as I inscribe, and has existed for some time now.. which is, LOUDNESS is better or, for some extremes, superior music. That’s the mantra! Unfortunate, but so is the situation in Africa! And, we must all collectively work to change both of those situations..

As we all in the “music business” now know, to the unaware, LOUDER music is better music, and as unfortunate as it is, the only way to elevate this problem or norm is to educate the market, vis-à-vis the listener or buyer. The rest are in bed with the game of LOUDNESS. We all know who those are, some of them amongst us.. such as myself! When mastering, I am forced to tow that LOUDER game, even if I don’t agree with the decision at hand etc. Pressures from the top permeate through-out the entire production chain, right down to CD print deadlines etc.. and the knock on effect is.. LOUDNESS wins. Every time! Why? Because, the market demands it! Remember, the markets been trained to believe in the perception, that louder is better by the labels, as LOUDNESS is their favourite competitive sword for the apparent reasons etc.. And, as they compete day in and day out, the LOUDNESS climbs exponentially. Thus, the many charts online showing levels rising as the years go by.. Not that surprising now, is it?

In the end, after all the chips have been counted, my priorities lie in making money, that’s why one starts a business, and following given instructions is part of having a business. You do what the client wants, cause they pay you for that service rendered. Period! With that in mind, one can see, the production line will produce everything and anything the market demands. To change things, the markets needs must change.

Look at American Idol for instances, many a times you hear judges saying “ you need to be a package, not just a good singer”. You need to be a sellable or a marketable package, for the bosses atop, who are to fork out mullah, for your promotion, and await a hefty recoup on this exercise, and so, we the judges, are under pressure to put you, the “artists” under pressure, to dress, to look, to sound sellable. A marketable package, after which.. the entire production chain is put under similar pressure to perform and conform to the original mantra, that is.. “this artist is now sellable, make it happen people” and thus another money train leaves the station, loud as ever!

Ditto the demands of the chain and follow through and you get paid, plus more work.


Thus, the only way to break this money train, which juices up the LOUDNESS wars in tandem, is to reduce or change its demand, by educating that buyer or listener. DEMAND cleaner less fatiguing sounding music! And, if the demand reaches critical mass for that kind of clean sounding music, then the production line will churn them out like waffles!

Until then, be ready to read more of these irate threads…

KAyo

[billby]

Bin reading slutz for a couple of years now

Havent felt the need to post much

Read about, tested, compared and bought alot of gear (and had alot of laughs lately) thanks to all the contributions posted on this site thumbsup


This post above me by Kato pretty well sums it all up and has given me a better perspective on whats been going on in our beloved industry of late

Didn't our parents \ grandparents \ great-grandparents etc have a simliar gripe with 'loud' music?
Without the luxury of hindsight, oscilloscopes, big a$$ speakers and steely dan lps as comparison

We all know what happend, recording \ listening technology and techniques advanced to what we expect today - this beast we produced...demanded ourselves. We will in future disregard and evetually accept again these things as the right things to do, as Kato states, as market demands

IMO, swings and roundabouts........"not to worry son, we'll come good next year"

...imagine it....quiet will be cool.........()

[Kayo]

Originally Posted by billby

Bin reading slutz for a couple of years now

Havent felt the need to post much

Read about, tested, compared and bought alot of gear (and had alot of laughs lately) thanks to all the contributions posted on this site thumbsup


This post above me by Kato pretty well sums it all up and has given me a better perspective on whats been going on in our beloved industry of late

Didn't our parents \ grandparents \ great-grandparents etc have a simliar gripe with 'loud' music?
Without the luxury of hindsight, oscilloscopes, big a$$ speakers and steely dan lps as comparison

We all know what happend, recording \ listening technology and techniques advanced to what we expect today - this beast we produced...demanded ourselves. We will in future disregard and evetually accept again these things as the right things to do, as Kato states, as market demands

IMO, swings and roundabouts........"not to worry son, we'll come good next year"

...imagine it....quiet will be cool.........()

I concur.. Amen! to that thought.. Nonetheless, it could be longer than a year.. Don't hold your breath.

Cheers,
KAyo

[smoke]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

No. That's over-analyzing. It'll likely either be the effects of loudness or the artists thinking that sounding 'rough' will give them 'street cred'

Are you talking about the sound quality or the lyrical content/deliberate grunge/edge/distortion?

No matter how hard you want to be, you're not clipping your album for cred. Sure many of the recording techniques and sounds are used to sound rough, just as a gentle touch and sweet sounds are used for ballads.

[vx2000]

We did get a chance to hear Whitney Houston's new CD.

It does not sound good for many reasons, not just over compressed and harsh.
I did not hear every song, although the David Foster tune sounded the best, both musically and sound production (not surprised here).

Also, there's some SERIOUS performance issues on that CD. I realize this is out of a mastering engineer's hands. There's one song on the CD where the bass was played sloppy. It's not slight, the timing is horribe. When we played it in the studio we all just looked at each other in disbelief that they blessed it "good enough" during their tracking sessions...WTF over

[Barfunkel]

Originally Posted by lethalmaus1

I work in Mongolia which has emerged from communism and heavy music censorship (8 years ago) so old school hip hop and rnb here is unfortunately eminem, 50 cent, Tupac, Dre, Rkelly, Usher and Destiny's child. No RunDMC, Africa Bambaataa, Marvin gaye..........I try and make a difference.

Kids come to me with the latest Jay-z record and tell me they want their albums to have a similar sound and I waste my breath explaining that its not an ideal sound and, the virtues of a balanced frequency response and punchiness not 'pancakeness' in music. My clients are by far and large happy but i predict soon ill have to cave in and distort the hell out of shit just to please them.

Producing hip hop in Mongolia sounds like the coolest job ever.

[Jesse Graffam]

Originally Posted by vx2000

We did get a chance to hear Whitney Houston's new CD.

It does not sound good for many reasons, not just over compressed and harsh.
I did not hear every song, although the David Foster tune sounded the best, both musically and sound production (not surprised here).

I dunno if that's track #1, but if so then I agree. Musically the album is a total loss for me, after track 1. At first when I heard track one I thought I was in store for an amazing soul/disco album. Sadly - not so. By the time Akon was on deck I knew it was over for me.

Oh, and I can't be the only person disgusted by the use of auto-tune on the album. I mean it's one thing to use it like on the Akon tune, for creative effect... but MANY of the tracks had it on her voice, not intended for the average Joe to notice. THIS IS A WHITNEY HOUSTON ALBUM!!! What the heck, ehh?

[lerone]

Originally Posted by uncajesse

I dunno if that's track #1, but if so then I agree. Musically the album is a total loss for me, after track 1. At first when I heard track one I thought I was in store for an amazing soul/disco album. Sadly - not so. By the time Akon was on deck I knew it was over for me.

Oh, and I can't be the only person disgusted by the use of auto-tune on the album. I mean it's one thing to use it like on the Akon tune, for creative effect... but MANY of the tracks had it on her voice, not intended for the average Joe to notice. THIS IS A WHITNEY HOUSTON ALBUM!!! What the heck, ehh?

Its just completely undermining her talent. Sad....

[nukmusic]

Originally Posted by lethalmaus1

I've listened to the new Jay-Z, Whitney houston, Joe and kanye albums and I'm so confused. These are A-list artists with horrible sounding records. The loudness and lack of dynamics is a known issue but.....

Almost all the recent R&B HipHop ablums sound so clipped, mono and lo-fi that its unbearable to listen on any nearfields. Like they've been hi-cut, lo cut and distorted to hell..... But they sound fine in cars, avantones, small consumer speakers and ipods.

Am I right in assuming that this 'crap sound' is due to mastering and mixing engineers trying to reach the ipod generation?

Are you listening to the actually CDs or mp3s?

Originally Posted by Toro

another hip hop HITLER thread .

kinda seems like it..LOL But hey few every ONE that hates rap, there are TONS that love it.
I just think people get overly technical with things.

Although I wasnt too impressed with the sound quality of the last Jay-Z LP. I did like the music/songs. But I think its more of a choice of quality sounds during production and recording vs what the mix or mastering engineers are doing with the files they receive.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by smoke

No matter how hard you want to be, you're not clipping your album for cred. Sure many of the recording techniques and sounds are used to sound rough, just as a gentle touch and sweet sounds are used for ballads.

TBH the 'they wanna be 'street' thing was more of a tangent, really. Loudness for loudness sake will surely be the reason for most less than stellar sounding major releases.

Still, every other week I have a punk / rock / metal band that say that compared to their idols, their mixes don't sound 'mean enough' / 'hard enough' / 'bad enough' ... And more often than not, the inevitable loudness crunch automatically "fixes" that.
And the other day I did a session where we deliberately distorted the kick of an r&b ballad (at the mastering stage), even though not at all necessary, only to emulate the loudness crunch sound of one of the client's reference discs.... made him a happy camper... he felt that it now sounded more 'real'. Artists make all kinds of associations with the sound of loudness...

[San-to-the-D]

Originally Posted by nukmusic

Are you listening to the actually CDs or mp3s?




kinda seems like it..LOL But hey few every ONE that hates rap, there are TONS that love it.
I just think people get overly technical with things.

Although I wasnt too impressed with the sound quality of the last Jay-Z LP. I did like the music/songs. But I think its more of a choice of quality sounds during production and recording vs what the mix or mastering engineers are doing with the files they receive.

Aye the tunes are not bad but like it was said earlier, the overal mix and master is a bit odd for some of the songs e.g the excellent 'empire state..' on blueprint 3,great song but some of the effects and so on are strange when you listen to it the whole way through i thought it sounded better on MTV music awards (the one kanye gatecrahed for the 2nd time...)

If you go back and listen to Blueprint 1 by Jay-Z from 2001 compared to Blueprint 3 now then there is no comparison, the original sounds 10 times better overall.thumbsup