Katy Perry & Taylor Swift EQ observations...

[audioaddict]

Picked up Katy Perry's "One of the Boys" album on CD and downloaded Taylor Swift's big single "You Belong to me" from itunes.

The one glaring observation is how bright these recordings are, in particular the refrains. I'm fairly tolerant of pop music EQ, but this was a little much IMHO.

I'm going to have to assume this is all an A&R/record company thing....there are some big names involved with the mastering here.

[edva]

Compensating for hearing deterioration in the music-listening public? Wonder why....

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by audioaddict

Picked up Katy Perry's "One of the Boys" album on CD and downloaded Taylor Swift's big single "You Belong to me" from itunes.

The one glaring observation is how bright these recordings are, in particular the refrains. I'm fairly tolerant of pop music EQ, but this was a little much IMHO.

I'm going to have to assume this is all an A&R/record company thing....there are some big names involved with the mastering here.

yup.

very poor decision making - all backed up with "you can't argue with sales"..... which is of course bollocks. Jazz Samba hasn't sold millions - but is arguably a fantastic recording. Mixing for sales is a different world than mixing to support the art.

[Mjohnson11287]

This whole thing kinda worries me. With the whole loudness wars issue, and "mixing for sales" as the post above mentions, Im starting to feel like Hi-Fi is just going to end up dead! At this point, artists should be releasing multiple available versions of their songs: super-slammed brick-waveform versions for streaming and the internet, and high dynamic range .wav or apple lossless for everyone else. I'd even pay extra.

[narcoman]

not dead, just niche. Which, to be honest, it always has been.

[Colin Leonard]

how do those masters sound on little computer speakers or cheap earbuds though? probably pretty good, and the reality is that the vast majority of listeners of those albums are listening on their laptops or ipods.

it's too bad that this is the way it has gone, but that is just the reality of it.

[Mjohnson11287]

Originally Posted by narcoman

not dead, just niche. Which, to be honest, it always has been.

I guess so, but I still feel as though it's at a low point. At least in the 70's and 80's it was considered "cool" to have a good sound system, and people took pride in their ability to playback music w/ the quality it was meant to have. It's one thing for the consumer world to lose interest and move towards cheaper, lo-fi playback, but it's just depressing to see the industry move towards catering to that market. i guess Business is Business lol.

[bitmob]

I've been wondering if it might be that people listen to their music so loudly nowadays that everyone is starting to lose some of their hearing in the higher frequencies, thus finding excessively bright mixes perfectly acceptable. Sometimes I can hear a person's earbuds from fifteen feet away and I can't help but think what their hearing is going to be like by the time they hit their 40s.

[Cellotron]

I had one client that sent me in an evaluation track prior to scheduling that wanted me to match the vibe of a Brad Paisley track for their own track that had similar instrumentation. It was definitely interesting to hear Hank Williams' ( MasterMix - audio mastering - DVD authoring ) approach as he's been doing a bit of the current Nashville "new country" artists (including Taylor Swift) that have been getting more prominence these days. Things weren't really all that limited in comparison to most pop tracks out these days but it still sounded LOUD in that mids and upper mids were pushed a good bit forward. Overall the Paisley track sounded good though, although a tiny bit distorted and more edgier than I would necessarily prefer at some peak places, and a little hollower than I would have chosen for myself. The track definitely had really good energy and clarity so I can see why they took the approach they did - with the vibe emphasizing the "pop" side and not a document of a band as it would sound live - and I think that Mr. Willams definitely is very good at what he does.

Anyway - the client was happy with what I got for them and booked the album with me, but then made the decision to make their full release a lot warmer, fuller and less upper mid forward than what the other "new country" stuff is being put out these days - which I think was the better decision.

It does point towards eq as one possible way of achieving perception of increased loudness in preference to just increasing average levels. Sometimes this technique can have merits - but like everything in mastering it can be pushed too far as well.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[edva]

bitmob, I have seen studies that indicate exactly that. People are in general getting deafer.

[mdoelger]

I had an experience that was kind of eye opening to me. I went into the store and bought a nice 180 € sony walkman. the highs were so hyped I couldn't believe it. I bought it because everyone was raving about the super sound of it.

Brought it back to the store and bought some simple 30 € mp3 player and thought it's better to buy some good earbuds together with it. Again I went for sony and spend 50 € on earpuds.

Hyped highs no definition in the lower mids. WTF. Now I'm listening on the cheap earpuds which came along with the player. No hyped highs. Strong lower mids. A little bit muddy, but you get used to it in no time. And it doesn't hurt all day.

I guess nowadays HI-FI actually means highs only.

Yeah, I like those MP3 artifacts boosted!

[lucey]

Originally Posted by mdoelger

Yeah, I like those MP3 artifacts boosted!

ouch ...


Sure it's ignorance, but brighter is louder is better

[Red Mastering]

Originally Posted by narcoman

... Mixing for sales is a different world than mixing to support the art.

this is a quote !!!
Narc - a big handshake from me

[Chris Lago]

Originally Posted by bitmob

I've been wondering if it might be that people listen to their music so loudly nowadays that everyone is starting to lose some of their hearing in the higher frequencies, thus finding excessively bright mixes perfectly acceptable. Sometimes I can hear a person's earbuds from fifteen feet away and I can't help but think what their hearing is going to be like by the time they hit their 40s.

Ha, I feel the same way! I listen to music at a very reasonable level, and I cannot handle high volumes. I have to wear shure in ears when I go to clubs. Oh by the way, what's up with that Meet Me Halfway's slammed up master? It's so hot that it distorts everywhere, like at the beginning of the song, then in the chorus. It's an awful mastering.

[MMski]

Loud sounds cause hearing damage in the mid range, and you lose high frequencies with age, not abuse.

[edva]

Yeah, earbuds are a problem, environmental noise is a problem, and, what really gets to me, live performance volume levels that actually do permanent damage to the ears of people who love music enough to attend shows or patronize clubs with live music.
The guys who mix too loud (most of them IMHO) are literally destroying our audience base, and lowering the bar for quality audio across all mediums, IMHO.

[Ben F]

What makes it worse is lower bit rate mp3s make audio sound thin/bright anyway. If anything you would think music would be getter 'warmer' to sound more realistic.

[Multi-Monitors]

Originally Posted by narcoman

yup.

very poor decision making - all backed up with "you can't argue with sales"..... which is of course bollocks. Jazz Samba hasn't sold millions - but is arguably a fantastic recording. Mixing for sales is a different world than mixing to support the art.

I totally agree... fortunately Taylor Swift isn't an artist...

[flatfinger]

I won't listen to that , period. Can't stand cymbals that "fry" . They could at least do it in the mix phase and put a sub-buss in for the cymbals and not crank the upper end so much on those . Annoying does'nt even start to describe it .

[edva]

Originally Posted by MMski

Loud sounds cause hearing damage in the mid range, and you lose high frequencies with age, not abuse.

Yeah, but I can hear the bass much clearer now.

[jmhgtr]

Perhaps being a bit naive here...but I think of it as more of a psychological thing...a super bright mix (especially vocal) makes you feel as though the band/singer is in fct in your ear. Where everything these days is all about "Me! Me!", I tend to see it as more of an attempt to create as much intimacy with the singer as possible during the listening experience.

[dcollins]

Originally Posted by MMski

Loud sounds cause hearing damage in the mid range, and you lose high frequencies with age, not abuse.

That isn't true. The hair-cells that detect high frequencies are the closest to the outside world and the first to go from loud sounds...........


DC

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by edva

Yeah, earbuds are a problem, environmental noise is a problem, and, what really gets to me, live performance volume levels that actually do permanent damage to the ears of people who love music enough to attend shows or patronize clubs with live music.
The guys who mix too loud (most of them IMHO) are literally destroying our audience base, and lowering the bar for quality audio across all mediums, IMHO.

Sometimes there's no-one to blame other than pure ignorance on behalf of venues and artists:

Two weekends ago I went to see a band I'd seen before (and have a copy of their album) play in a local venue on a "quiet" Sunday afternoon.

I get there and find the band was relegated to a corner in the front bar. No engineer, just one powered PA speaker (behind the mic), the other on the floor for foldback. The band room (with stage and full PA) remained empty.

We were blasted with The Vocals of Ultimate Boominess and I measured sustained music levels of 110dB(A) from the furthest corner of the room.

What bothers me more is that I was the only one complaining, knowing full well that if the band could have heard themselves they'd have been livid too, but they just weren't playing for the size of the room.

So, while our state government alone is set to spend $363 million on upgrades to a single sports venue (the tennis centre), as well as a new $38 mil ice skating rink, long-established music venues literally face closure due to ludicrous liquor licensing laws & costs (designed to combat violence from city nightclubs). Point being: sports people have minimum standards, while nothing of the sort (yet) exists for the otherwise still thriving music scene, nor is requested, let alone demanded, by artists.

Just 10% of the figures above would go a long way to alleviating noise & acoustical issues in music venues, and education.

For any other locals, here's the rally (and the government – in an election year – has so far already taken notice, meeting today with music industry reps):
SLAM

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by dcollins

That isn't true. The hair-cells that detect high frequencies are the closest to the outside world and the first to go from loud sounds...........


DC

Yes but noise induced hearing loss is generally in the 6-8Khz range- making 'intelligibility' difficult. So the Ts and Ses are harder to hear. The top end goes with age, the mids are affected by noise induced hearing loss.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by edva

what really gets to me, live performance volume levels that actually do permanent damage to the ears of people who love music enough to attend shows or patronize clubs with live music.
The guys who mix too loud (most of them IMHO) are literally destroying our audience base, and lowering the bar for quality audio across all mediums, IMHO.

The best thing to do when it comes to loud concerts, sporting events (racing), power tools, lawn work, whatever... is to use hearing protection.

Live concerts being mega loud is nothing new. I remember seeing the Clash back in...well it was a while ago... it was so loud that it felt like my rib cage was going to cave in from the sound pressure.

[audioaddict]

Originally Posted by jmhgtr

Perhaps being a bit naive here...but I think of it as more of a psychological thing...a super bright mix (especially vocal) makes you feel as though the band/singer is in fct in your ear. Where everything these days is all about "Me! Me!", I tend to see it as more of an attempt to create as much intimacy with the singer as possible during the listening experience.

Disagree.



The blunt truth is that for most inexperienced listeners, pronounced treble & bass sounds "better". It sounds more "lively" , and then there's all that low bass...

Super bright is just tinny and harsh. Over time this will become apparent and then you'll wonder why the hell you liked this in the first place (I was one of those people).

Real vocal presence is in the midrange...not that it has to be excessive midrange where it's "loud" but that's where it lies.

BTW, in the world of high end audiophile systems, there has been a trend to MATCH this ridiculous high end push....not by all manufacturers but most of the big names certainly have gone closer to this preference over the last 10-15 years.

And amplifiers for the most part have gotten thinner sounding as well to support these similar goals.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by tresperros

this is a quote !!!
Narc - a big handshake from me

.... i owe it all to my parents really, and my producer, Frank....

aw shucks....

[Musiclab]

I listened to a Taylor Swift song, I think it was called Love Story, by the time you got to the hook and everything was in, it was smashed bright and everything was indistinguishable

[da goose]

Originally Posted by bitmob

I've been wondering if it might be that people listen to their music so loudly nowadays that everyone is starting to lose some of their hearing in the higher frequencies, thus finding excessively bright mixes perfectly acceptable. Sometimes I can hear a person's earbuds from fifteen feet away and I can't help but think what their hearing is going to be like by the time they hit their 40s.

There is actually something really BAD going on concerning this issue.
Believe it or not but there are kids of the age of 16 to maybe 22 going to parties and when they DON'T have a loud beep in their ears the next morning lasting at least 2 days the party sucked.
In fact.. some people on the forum i talk about are PROUD and laughing of their hearing problems! I'm really not kidding!

This really makes me mad and frustrated, they really don't get it..

[masterizer]

Originally Posted by Colin Leonard

how do those masters sound on little computer speakers or cheap earbuds though? probably pretty good, and the reality is that the vast majority of listeners of those albums are listening on their laptops or ipods.

it's too bad that this is the way it has gone, but that is just the reality of it.

Very true Colin, I think we can also thank the iPod for many listeners experiencing hearing loss. I see people in public all the time with the buds soo loud I can here what they're listening to very clearly.