Arcade Fire - The Suburbs

[AaronMorris]

Thoughts?

Most my clients are Top 40, R&B, RAP, Hip-Hop, and Electronica. Unfotunatly not much indie rock comes my way, but Arcade Fire is one of my favorite bands right now. I'm loving this album.

When I listen to this album in my studio, I feel like it is short on the low end. Am I just used to the earth shaking nature of my current work, or does this album seem a little lite in the low end to you too?

[Silent Sound]

Yeah, it does. The kick drums seem kinda thin too, I thought. Also, there's not much free air noise in the recordings. I like a tad of air. It lets me know I'm listening to a recording of instruments, and not a sampled sequence. Of course too much can sound amateurish. It's a balance thing.

To me, Neon Bible was one of the best sounding recordings I've ever heard. They compressed it pretty hard, but it was still a very dynamic album. I don't know how they did it...best of both worlds, somehow.

The Suburbs seems kinda stale by comparison. It's not a poorly recorded album, it just seems to me to be a step backwards.

[jdg]

sounds like they're trying to copy TW Walsh's earlier "The Soft Drugs" songs.

[AaronMorris]

Originally Posted by Silent Sound

...
To me, Neon Bible was one of the best sounding recordings I've ever heard. They compressed it pretty hard, but it was still a very dynamic album. I don't know how they did it...best of both worlds, somehow.

The Suburbs seems kinda stale by comparison. It's not a poorly recorded album, it just seems to me to be a step backwards.

Agreed. The organ on Intervention is superb.

Content wise, The Suburbs is really nice. Best digital package I have yet to see, great songwriting, its a complete album (not just a disjointed collection of singles), great arrangements and instrument choices.

[timaltman]

The Times wrote an article on Arcade Fire a week ago. Here's an excerpt:

The band took its time recording “The Suburbs,” working and reworking songs for much of a year in homes and studios, using 24-track tape. “I’d hate to take a guess at the budget,” Mr. Butler said, but he added that part of the cost was equipment the band would continue to use, including a 1940s mixing console with vacuum tubes. Each completed song was pressed onto a 12-inch disc, and the vinyl playback was recorded for the final digital master.

“We recorded it on tape, we press it to vinyl, and the digital is the archive of this physical thing that exists in the world,” Mr. Butler said. “We’re preserving it and using digital as a mode of distribution, but ultimately there was something real that was made.”

Unsurprisingly, after hitting their mix to vinyl, all the low end disappeared. I'm sure they lost consider high frequencies too. What a stupid decision. You go and use all these amazing mics, acoustic instruments full of a wide range of tonality and vintage tube gear that gives you such incredible bass response and high frequency energy and you just throw it all away to get a throwback sound? Foolish. What is the frequency response of vinyl? 100 Hz to maybe 15 kHz?

I'm listening to the album right now and it reminds me of listening to an old record player -- a mid-range assault on the ears. It's a damn shame. But don't get me wrong, the music is great. Arcade Fire is one of the greatest rock bands producing some of the best music out there right now. Maybe they know what their doing? They seem to be saying -- "Screw fidelity, it's all about the music."

[mcsnare]

The sound of cutting something to lacquer is equal parts cutting chain and playback chain. If they used a good lathe/cutter head there is very little lost in actual freq response. And then the sound of the cartridge/arm/turntable/preamp adds it's own thing as well. In my experience (and I recently did exactly what the article says the Arcade Fire did), a good cut played back on a good setup sounds airier on top, smoother in the high mids, and slightly fatter in the bass, but without quite the leading edge punch of the original source. It actually gains lots of color (distortion) that can sound pleasing. It also sounds narrower throughout most of the range except for a little spread on the top end. In the case of my project, we liked the lacquer but ended up not using it for the digital release cause the minuses outweighed the pluses.
The whole experience was very interesting and left me with the feeling that what people like about vinyl is all about the distortion from the process and not some intrinsic higher resolution or inherent sonic superiority of the medium.

Dave

[huejahfink]

I've not heard the record, but in theory it's a good idea and sounds like an artistic choice throughout, rather than a fidelity one. It sounds like they just wanted to get the digital transfer of their material as close to the end of the process as they possibly could. They probably wanted to make a record but knew that only a few geeks would buy the thing.......

Plus I've heard on some other digital releases, you can blatantly tell they have cut a lacquer and re-recorded it during the masterin and it can sound great!

[Cheebs Goat]

Originally Posted by timaltman

What is the frequency response of vinyl? 100 Hz to maybe 15 kHz?

Seriously?
Vinyl goes from a bit under 30 Hz to over 100 kHz.

[mobius.media]

Originally Posted by timaltman

The Times wrote an article on Arcade Fire a week ago. Here's an excerpt:

The band took its time recording “The Suburbs,” working and reworking songs for much of a year in homes and studios, using 24-track tape. “I’d hate to take a guess at the budget,” Mr. Butler said, but he added that part of the cost was equipment the band would continue to use, including a 1940s mixing console with vacuum tubes. Each completed song was pressed onto a 12-inch disc, and the vinyl playback was recorded for the final digital master.

“We recorded it on tape, we press it to vinyl, and the digital is the archive of this physical thing that exists in the world,” Mr. Butler said. “We’re preserving it and using digital as a mode of distribution, but ultimately there was something real that was made.”

Unsurprisingly, after hitting their mix to vinyl, all the low end disappeared. I'm sure they lost consider high frequencies too. What a stupid decision. You go and use all these amazing mics, acoustic instruments full of a wide range of tonality and vintage tube gear that gives you such incredible bass response and high frequency energy and you just throw it all away to get a throwback sound? Foolish.

That's strange. I can get on board with 'screw fidelity'. I love my analog. But I think mastering from tape straight to digital and releasing some tape>vinyl record pressings as well would have made a lot more sense.

I'm sure it came up in discussion. I guess they did what they wanted.

And I agree Neon Bible was pretty impressive.

[mattg082]

I finally just heard the vinyl with the mp3s and the vinyl of course is still night and day to me. The mp3 sounds compressed and all the life squashed out of it and the vinyl sounds big, loud,noisy and open. I actually like the string sections better on the vinyl and it works with the record on a artistic approach. The whole thing sounds very organic to me and that seems to be what they wanted.

To me cd and vinyl are like the difference between a real photograph and a digital image. Both can look good but given the subject matter one may flatter the other more. I like the concept of a modern band going straight to vinyl instead of digital to vinyl like a lot of bands do and some re-issues are now.

[mig27]

I personally dig the sound of Suburbs.
Sure, there's not a lot of subbass going on and transients are swallowed by the wall of sound, but it fits the music.

Terrific songwriting!!

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

Seriously?
Vinyl goes from a bit under 30 Hz to over 100 kHz.

Although amplitudes will be very small (to almost unmeasurable as you progress higher) in the vast majority of cuts once you get above frequencies of around 17kHz.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[12many]

I saw them last week at Madison Square Garden.. Such a good show! Arcade Fire and Spoon at the Garden - MSG.com

[phild]

Originally Posted by timaltman

The Times wrote an article on Arcade Fire a week ago. Here's an excerpt:

The band took its time recording “The Suburbs,” working and reworking songs for much of a year in homes and studios, using 24-track tape. “I’d hate to take a guess at the budget,” Mr. Butler said, but he added that part of the cost was equipment the band would continue to use, including a 1940s mixing console with vacuum tubes. Each completed song was pressed onto a 12-inch disc, and the vinyl playback was recorded for the final digital master.

“We recorded it on tape, we press it to vinyl, and the digital is the archive of this physical thing that exists in the world,” Mr. Butler said. “We’re preserving it and using digital as a mode of distribution, but ultimately there was something real that was made.”

Unsurprisingly, after hitting their mix to vinyl, all the low end disappeared. I'm sure they lost consider high frequencies too. What a stupid decision. You go and use all these amazing mics, acoustic instruments full of a wide range of tonality and vintage tube gear that gives you such incredible bass response and high frequency energy and you just throw it all away to get a throwback sound? Foolish. What is the frequency response of vinyl? 100 Hz to maybe 15 kHz?

I'm listening to the album right now and it reminds me of listening to an old record player -- a mid-range assault on the ears. It's a damn shame. But don't get me wrong, the music is great. Arcade Fire is one of the greatest rock bands producing some of the best music out there right now. Maybe they know what their doing? They seem to be saying -- "Screw fidelity, it's all about the music."

All that mastering going on and no mastering credit on the liner notes?

[Clayphish]

Personally, I don't miss the low end at all. It more or less reminds me of the time I used to listen to my Dads vintage vinyl which all lacked in the low end. My only gripe is that the vocals sound a bit too scooped and ghosty. But thats about it.

Fun album

[lakeshorephatty]

Really great album. Sounds solid. I think some of you guys are just too picky....

[Teddy Ray]

The album is horrid content wise.

Hipster shlock, just like spoon, okkervil river, so on and so forth.

theyve jumped the shark.

[jeff_free69]

Originally Posted by Silent Sound

To me, Neon Bible was one of the best sounding recordings I've ever heard. They compressed it pretty hard, but it was still a very dynamic album. I don't know how they did it...best of both worlds, somehow.

I have to respectfully disagree. As much as I loved that album I thought it sounded flat (ie dimensionless and mushy) . On my mp3 player and $30 phones no big deal. But when I play the first track "Black Mirror" on a good system, its like what did they do to the drums? Maybe you can chalk it up to artisitic choice, but where's the snare?

Maybe they got it loud by EQ-ing out the mids and avoided harshness (?), but something about it strikes me as weird.

BTW I'm not totally anti-loud, recent favorite is "Dead Weather /cowards ", which by all meaure is WAY too loud, yet somehow sounds "right" to me.

[timaltman]

Originally Posted by Teddy Ray

The album is horrid content wise.

Hipster shlock, just like spoon, okkervil river, so on and so forth.

theyve jumped the shark.

Very likely true. But I need to live with the album a while yet before I rip it up.

Arcade Fire seems to embrace retro recording techniques for the sake of retro recording techniques, snubbing the innovations that so many engineers, producers and mad men have worked at for years and years.

In response to the old school vinylists who have posted -- give me a break. Mixing to vinyl is OK if you want something to sound old but it causes signal degradation. If you're into that, you could easily reproduce that effect in the digital domain. You just have to do the proper testing to see what's going on. I'm sure someone could build a "Vinylizer" plug-in no problem.

If I ever have to cut tape again I will probably quit this job and become an electrician. I'm joking but seriously, let's move on already!

[Jesse Graffam]

Originally Posted by timaltman

What is the frequency response of vinyl? 100 Hz to maybe 15 kHz?

It depends on the mastering gear before the lathe computer, the cutting system itself, and of course the playback gear.

MFSL's GAIN2 cutting system goes up to 122kHz. That's higher than 192kHz digital, but who's counting.

Originally Posted by timaltman

I'm listening to the album right now and it reminds me of listening to an old record player -- a mid-range assault on the ears.

Hopefully some day you can enjoy well cut vinyl of a great recording on a legitimately flat playback setup. thumbsup

Originally Posted by Cellotron

Although amplitudes will be very small (to almost unmeasurable as you progress higher) in the vast majority of cuts once you get above frequencies of around 17kHz.

Most needles roll off about there. How high can you go?

Originally Posted by timaltman

If you're into that, you could easily reproduce that effect in the digital domain. You just have to do the proper testing to see what's going on. I'm sure someone could build a "Vinylizer" plug-in no problem.

It depends... the things going on with some needles is pretty complicated because of the interferometry and it happening mostly in physics not electronics.

Great example is Ortofon's SPU cartridges...
http://www.ortofon.com/index.php?opt...110&Itemid=102
Those sell like hotcakes in some scenes that have caught on to it (hi Vincent), and it's definitely not a transparent sound. But listen to one, and tell me that you don't like it strictly for enjoyment purposes in comparison to a purely reference setup.

If it's so easy then where are the plugins? I'm not saying it's not easy, I'm just wondering why you think it's so easy.

[copperx]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

Seriously?
Vinyl goes from a bit under 30 Hz to over 100 kHz.

[Cheebs Goat]

Originally Posted by copperx

Why the face palm?

[lpkyer]

I agree, it's a good album but to me it's not a breath of fresh air like the first and second albums were.
This album sounds a lot more "New York" than "Montreal" imo.

[mitchel]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

Why the face palm?

[sharonagnello]

Arcade Fire's The Suburbs was mastered by George Marino at Sterling Sound. Yes, it is a shame that the mastering credit was omitted in the artwork.

[huejahfink]

Originally Posted by Jesse Graffam

where are the plugins?

iZotope Vinyl - Authentic Lo-Fi Vinyl Simulation for Pro Tools, VST, MAS, Audio Unit, and DirectX audio applications

Not saying it's accurate, but there's one. I remember Opcode made one "back in the day" too.

[baikonour]

Hi think it sounds pretty good, sure not as big as Neon Bible, but it suits the aesthetic of the record really well IMO. Artistically, and for a band which is becoming as big as Arcade Fire, it shows their integrity not to conform with the earbuds/ computer monitors friendly smash n' bright and so unsufferable corporate "indie" sound.
Personnaly I think the album could have been a bit more concise. But still, this is a coherent and interesting album. I'm a few years older than Win Butler and Regine Chassagne but the lyrical and musical content echoes my exprerience of living in the suburbs in the 80's.

[realmike15]

As far as I'm concerned, Funeral is still their best album. To be fair, this one is very listenable album though and by no means *bad*.

As for the critiques of the recording techniques. I don't think you understand, these guys aren't looking for the latest and greatest in recording techniques. They have a style they want to pursue, and that's how they record, period. All one would have to do to understand this mindset, is listen to a Tom Waits album. Do you think that man gives a shit about the techniques we talk about here on a daily basis? No, he has a sound in his mind and will do whatever it takes to achieve it. No matter how unconventional or frowned upon that method is.

I think people need to be a little more open minded on this forum about recording techniques. There is no right and wrong, it's whatever the artist is going for.

[subby33]

Originally Posted by Teddy Ray

theyve jumped the shark.

Yes. A sold out Madison Square garden, and the 80,000 people who came to see them at Lollapalooza (which I attended) all agree this band is completely irrelevant and passe.

/sarcasm

Anyway. The Suburbs is a really good album, but its very chill and more "confined" than their previous work. Also, I've noticed Win is signing in his vocal range, which is a good thing, because his voice would blow out very early in the tours. I saw them pretty well into their touring schedule and his voice sounded perfect. One thing holding the album back is that its simply too long. They are a good 10 album track band, not 16. Too many songs were either not realized enough or should have been B-Sides.

With that said. I feel the mastering on this album is very lackluster. Funeral felt open and wide, with amazing seperation between instruments. Neon Bible was pretty good, but a step back soundwise, simply because it sounded muddy. However, the energy and low end was still there. The Suburbs to me sounds squashed, very mid range, and very little dynamics going on.

However, I still enjoy the album quite a lot. To be honest, audio quality to me is nowhere near a #1 priority. Some of the worst mastered albums are my faves. Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness anyone? My friend would always say that Flood must have a button on his consoles called "mud", cuz thats what all his mixes sound like. However I still love that album.

But anyway, yes, I feel The Suburbs is a step backwards in terms of audio quality and their sound. It feels restricted where-as Arcade Fire is a very unrestricted band. Anyway, I could go on forever. Funeral is still their best sounding and best written album, and I have a feeling it probably will be forever. Just to add, Funeral was half recorded in their apartment and half recorded in a studio. The effects and recording of Win's voice is actually very terrible . . . but it adds to the feel of the album. Studio quality production isn't always a plus in some instances.

[Cheebs Goat]

Originally Posted by subby33

However, I still enjoy the album quite a lot. To be honest, audio quality to me is nowhere near a #1 priority. Some of the worst mastered albums are my faves. Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness anyone? My friend would always say that Flood must have a button on his consoles called "mud", cuz thats what all his mixes sound like. However I still love that album.

Dude...what? Back when Mellon Collie came out, it's biggest sonic offense was "not as much ear magic as Siamese Dream". But nothing has the amount of ear magic heard in Siamese Dream, so it wasn't worth complaining.

These days, Mellon Collie sounds like sugar-frosted orgasm in comparison to a typical new release.

Worst mastered? You're crazy. :p