An Observation

[engmix]

Originally Posted by inlinenl

What about all crapsounding music in the 60/70 , where people were involved more of drugs skills then of proper/decent engineering ... lot of exceptions for sure ... or was it the vinyl limitations ???

I think a lot of this you're asking about is more in the recording and mixing. Uber loud on the verge of distorting tambourines and shakers, distorted vocals, distorted reverbs, bad drum sounds. Some would say all of this added to the vibe of the records, i might even be one of them depending on what record we're talking about.

[greggybud]

Originally Posted by engmix

I mean this with no offense, but i think although some of your points are interesting, they're not totally reality.

For instance, making a record "back in the day" was available to anyone. In fact it was easier BITD to get on the radio than it is today. How do i know this, my partner is a Radio Promoter with nearly 3 decades in that business under his belt. He pretty much states it's nearly beyond the scope of anyone other than the majors to get any reliable airplay. They've basically tied up whatever real estate that they could over the last 5-10 years. They're basically desperate economically speaking.

And lets put this in better perspective.

"back in the day" I will refer to the year 1986 when one label gave out a free CD player to Top-40 radio stations if they simply promised to add a single for just one week! Keep in mind the price of a CD player in 1986. I'm not referring to just the top 10 or 50 Top-40 major radio markets...this happened to 2 competing Top-40 radio stations in the 174th largest radio market in the USA! Notice how much money was spent just trying to jump-start a single in a small/medium market that nationwide flopped 1 week later in 1986?

It wasn't easy then, but with the FCC deregulation act in 1996 the stakes got even bigger with corporate radio.

It's still possible. Adam Young (Owl City) did it with the help of Myspace to kick start his career, but those examples are rare and it appears a lot of pure luck or relative in the business is always involved.

Society as a whole doesn't value music like "back in the day" and IMO the decline started with CD's. The sound of -6dbRMS is the norm for mainstream commercial music. With file sharing, the emphasis has and is going back to live performance.

The "art" of commercial mastering has been cheapened right along with the music. Do I really need Brian Gardner for $300 per hour or can I get away with $10 on-line from the guy in Romania? We, as ME's appreciate the differences, but for listeners..even the newer recording artists, unfortunately that line has become blurred.

[engmix]

Originally Posted by greggybud

And lets put this in better perspective.

"back in the day" I will refer to the year 1986 when one label gave out a free CD player to Top-40 radio stations if they simply promised to add a single for just one week! Keep in mind the price of a CD player in 1986. I'm not referring to just the top 10 or 50 Top-40 major radio markets...this happened to 2 competing Top-40 radio stations in the 174th largest radio market in the USA! Notice how much money was spent just trying to jump-start a single in a small/medium market that nationwide flopped 1 week later in 1986?

It wasn't easy then, but with the FCC deregulation act in 1996 the stakes got even bigger with corporate radio.

It's still possible. Adam Young (Owl City) did it with the help of Myspace to kick start his career, but those examples are rare and it appears a lot of pure luck or relative in the business is always involved.

Society as a whole doesn't value music like "back in the day" and IMO the decline started with CD's. The sound of -6dbRMS is the norm for mainstream commercial music. With file sharing, the emphasis has and is going back to live performance.

The "art" of commercial mastering has been cheapened right along with the music. Do I really need Brian Gardner for $300 per hour or can I get away with $10 on-line from the guy in Romania? We, as ME's appreciate the differences, but for listeners..even the newer recording artists, unfortunately that line has become blurred.

Good points. And i would add at one point there was a bright light returning to radio when we had a particular politician going after pay for play. But unfortunately he literally got caught with his pants down and the old way of things kept keep'n on, and as humans would have it, got even worse. And let's face it, it's true there's always one that gets through from time to time, but these days, maybe if you're insanely lucky, you'll get one medium market to play your song twice a day at 3am for 2 weeks. I hate to sound like a total buzz kill, but it's tough for the independent anything. I will say thankfully we have places like youtube. So that when something gets so big no one can stop it.

I remember one day while walking into the studio where i was staffing, laying on top of one of the racks was a DAT Machine. That to me was the beginning of a very difficult transition, and a long wait for good ad / da conversion etc.

Personally speaking i think that the process of finding a good sense of loudness in a master or even a mix pre mastering can lead to some good attitude in the sound of a record. Sometimes pushing the envelope of good sense, and then backing off a bit is sometimes better than tip toeing up to a nice sound. Sometimes a record can sound too polite...

Yes the lines are blurred. But i've done some relatively inexpensive mastering for an independent record i was producing, and just didn't feel like mastering it, and like the old saying goes, you get what you pay for.

[StringBean]

There is an unquestionable superiority to something recorded and mixed in a real studio. Many producers today have never experienced that, so they think their stuff is just as good. In their bedroom where they listen, maybe the studio track doesn't sound as "good" to them. But somewhere else, the difference is obvious.

Those who take it seriously, will hire professionals to assist. It's not a knock on your pride that you didn't do everything yourself. It's not just dollars and cents--studio time is cheaper and more available than ever before. It's actually a producer's dream living in these times.

[graincloud]

When i was a teenager listening everything on shitty k7 used and re-recorded 1000000 times, stocked in a box under the sun, on a cheap walkman didnt prevent me from growing a passion for quality music and, later on, quality production.

Even if now i'm into the technical aspects of a quality production for a living, i still prefer a great creative and emotional track with the "ghetto-est" production than any tightly produced but formatted stuff we can sometimes hear coming from very professional structures with big budgets.

When great creativity gathers with technical qualities its heaven, we would all agree...but there's great emotions to be felt before the state of "technical perfection" or even "good production" imho. It's not THAT dramatic.

nobody is doomed, art isnt neither.... everything is there intact in the noise imho. I'd maybe even go as far as saying production skills have risen up. You can quite easily meet 20years old producers with pretty great productions/mixes, all made in a bedroom and 300$ of gear. At least that's my experience with "electronica" and a couple other obscure sub-genres i listen to, but i'm pretty sure its the same else where.
I think music, as an art, is doing wonderful! As an industry it's another story i guess

[platinumaudiolab]

Don't forget, people have also shifted from wanting BETTER audio to actually embracing WORSE audio in the name of convenience (mp3) or perception/convenience (over-limiting, users too damn lazy to handle gain). Over-usage of exciters to eek out a better sense of "clarity", and just jacking everything up with FX upon FX can all hurt a mix. I wrote an article about the crossroads we're at with this very issue.

I too am surprised at professional productions coming out sometimes (amateur stuff not being up to par should hardly be surprising). But this has always been the case. Listen to old records like Smashing Pumpkins Meloncollie + The Infinite Sadness (Really, you sure about that album title, Billy?). The mixing and mastering on that recording is such trash, but then again it has something like 350 songs on it so they probably ran out of time when mixing. But that didn't stop it from selling millions and millions (hell, I bought it twice myself, that's how stupid I was during the 90's). In the end its smoke and mirror and changing tastes.

People in the end just get used to the way things sound. Try explaining the sound of an electric guitar to a Granny who's last purchase was a gramophone recording of "Hello Dolly" (as the German classicalist father of an old friend of mine once said, "I just hear fizz"). People adapt, and they learn to filter out the shit and focus on the good if they hear it enough.

[Bill Williams]

Something in the converters is making people deaf...

[huejahfink]

Originally Posted by graincloud

When i was a teenager listening everything on shitty k7 used and re-recorded 1000000 times, stocked in a box under the sun, on a cheap walkman didnt prevent me from growing a passion for quality music and, later on, quality production.

Even if now i'm into the technical aspects of a quality production for a living, i still prefer a great creative and emotional track with the "ghetto-est" production than any tightly produced but formatted stuff we can sometimes hear coming from very professional structures with big budgets.

When great creativity gathers with technical qualities its heaven, we would all agree...but there's great emotions to be felt before the state of "technical perfection" or even "good production" imho. It's not THAT dramatic.

nobody is doomed, art isnt neither.... everything is there intact in the noise imho. I'd maybe even go as far as saying production skills have risen up. You can quite easily meet 20years old producers with pretty great productions/mixes, all made in a bedroom and 300$ of gear. At least that's my experience with "electronica" and a couple other obscure sub-genres i listen to, but i'm pretty sure its the same else where.
I think music, as an art, is doing wonderful! As an industry it's another story i guess

100% agree Monsieur Cloud. This thread was beginning to read like the various mutterings of a retirement home and I was scared to jump in lest I burst the 'back in MY day' bubble. That's not to say that I disagree with all that is being said, but I think in our line of work there is a danger that you become SO entrenched in the world of technicalities that one can fail to see the wood for the trees.

[falgorian]

I'm assuming the purpose of mastering is to get the individual sounds/instruments to their appropriate frequency space so that it doesn't clash and with the audio space given, the result sounds clear. But I could be wrong. Someone earlier asked if people, I'm people, even understood what mastering was for.

Sent from my SPH-M820-BST using Tapatalk

[whiteaxxxe]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

Too many people today have never heard good sound and think that what they are getting on their IPODs with cheap earbuds is what music is "suppose" to sound like.

yes. thats it. 2 times I took teenagers to a real rock-concert (Guns & Roses and the other time Mötley Crüe / Slash ... what I think of Mötley Crüe is divided in a personal part and a musical part ... anyway ...).

both times the teenagers were - lets say - suddenly in a continuum, they never thought of could exist. they never before had heard a bass, a real bass. imagine earplugs attached to an iPhone compared with Guns & Roses 10 meter from the center of the stage. they thought they loose their minds.

in both cases they insisted the week after this experience to having a bigger/better stereo. and they changed their musical taste, drastically.

so obviously most of the problems are a lack of experience. simple as that. as a 16year old guitarist I was decades ago attached to the sounds I had experienced. for that was another time and you ran faster into a guiarist with a marshall-stack or a Vox AC30 than into bad sounding radios. (I am from the pre-trasnsistor-era ... so the radios sounded great most of time, especially when cranked up :-)))

[engmix]

Originally Posted by huejahfink

100% agree Monsieur Cloud. This thread was beginning to read like the various mutterings of a retirement home and I was scared to jump in lest I burst the 'back in MY day' bubble. That's not to say that I disagree with all that is being said, but I think in our line of work there is a danger that you become SO entrenched in the world of technicalities that one can fail to see the wood for the trees.

Pretty funny, but my original point was not about lamenting about the past and how everyone was so professional, and making records that sounded technically correct is a lost art, in fact far from it. It's about how a lot of productions i'm seeing coming out are a one pony show, waaaay more than ever. Guitar players who are great songwriters now engineering and mastering records out of their house setup, and they sound like shit...and not cool shit you hear from great bands with quirky audio aesthetics. The point is, things are changing, and i'm hearing it, and definitely not always for the better.

And another point was, i'm hearing from a few mastering engineers that i've used over the years saying that the quality of some of the records they're getting, more so than in the past, are borderline. I did some work on a record recently where the producer was apologizing for the terrible engineering, on someone's record that's getting released to the masses. Because he's not a recording engineer. And this guys going to master the record. Instead of smells like teen spirit, it smells like audio failure. Again, it's about a trend.

[inlinenl]

Well I agree for some reason on band/real live_instrument recordings ... bad drums/basses by home-studio's / budget_studio's and acoustics .. but there's also an opposite on well informed / trained and passionate guys who really can track and know how to make a record .. booking studio's for drums and finishing it of alone on their macbooks/pro's or cubase PC's .. I get a lot off that stuff and it's a joy working on that ... and NO you don't need a $ 1000,- studio ( if they still exist ) a day for making a great record / release ....

but on the other hand if you compare electronic music and I don't mean only dance you can't compare because it did not exist in the 70/80 ... some amazing stuff created by all kinds off different styles/niches etc. etc. Recording a real band straight or with overdubs is just a craft you'll have to learn and not many of us get a chance to learn it the long way ... some do , some don't ...

so much good stuff around and not only technical but also amazing song_writing ,
but maybe there's a deep ocean full of life beneath the pale surface ..
there always will be good music , if it is heard by the millions I don't know .. and I think it does not need to be like that ..

also I think it's good people can make their own music , in their own time, in their own studio, the way they want it .. it's a start and you'll never know where it ends up... if you have a great base on people trying to record music it will benefit the pro's more higer up in the food_chain ... really maby sales may be down on records & cd's but in a whole I think the music industry is making more profit then ever ... not only the few EMI's or SONY's but it's more wide and personal .. I think it's good for music & people ..

it's good to cherish our history/culture and great records made in the past , but there's the past and there's today ...


yep !

[The_K_Man]

Originally Posted by platinumaudiolab

Don't forget, people have also shifted from wanting BETTER audio to actually embracing WORSE audio

People in the end just get used to the way things sound. Try explaining the sound of an electric guitar to a Granny who's last purchase was a gramophone recording of "Hello Dolly" (as the German classicalist father of an old friend of mine once said, "I just hear fizz"). People adapt, and they learn to filter out the shit and focus on the good if they hear it enough.

Well, I sure snapped a few necks when I pulled into my local gas station blasting an original cut of "Peg" by Steely Dan. They watched me as I went inside to pay and were still staring at my car when I came out. Then it shuffled to something by Katy Perry and they all went back to pumping their gas.

People do notice...

[cuebism]

There's a reason why gear made with the musician in mind tends to have simpler/clearer ergonomics, less buttons and options to choose from.

A musician needs to have as little technical obstacle between his creativity and the recording process as possible.

Having to plug in and re-route cables, boot up various devices, set controls and parameters on various analogue/digital interfaces can seriously alter/harm one's creative flow.

This is why many musicians tend(ed) to record sketches of their ideas by singing/whistling them into their dictaphones or devices like iphones today.

But that was their sketch, a quick draft just to not forget that one creative idea.
The production was a separate step and would follow at a place and time more suited for professional audio work.

The problem nowadays are these all-in-one music production software offerings that make it all look so easy and convenient.
Here the draft gets turned into the final product, supposedly ready for distribution.

Today's diy musicians/producers find themselves composing, recording, arranging, mixing, mastering, marketing and even selling their own music, all from within one and the same room.

Many diy producers do of course double-check their tracks in their car or at the club.
But what are the details they focus on after being locked in one and the same (untreated?) room - drafting, producing, arranging, mixing and mastering this one track for days and days?
Surely not the same details that a fresh pair of ears would focus on upon first listen.
I mean, even the most seasoned mastering/mixing engineer looses perspective at some point when working too long on a track, right?

It's too little exchange, reflection & referencing these days, thanks to the software imposed illusion of the one-man-does-it-all artist.


Oh and on the other side there's the "let's do it all analog like back in the day" guys who tries to record and mix everything with the least digital help as possible, striving for lo-fi and analogue warmth.
Needless to say that their results can be just as horrible if they too lack a basic understanding of audio engineering principles.

The internet creates the illusion that we are all in touch with each other, have an audience, our sounds reach out to many by the click of a button.

What the internet doesn't do, is frown when hearing your master for the first time.

[engmix]

Originally Posted by cuebism

There's a reason why gear made with the musician in mind tends to have simpler/clearer ergonomics, less buttons and options to choose from.

A musician needs to have as little technical obstacle between his creativity and the recording process as possible.

Having to plug in and re-route cables, boot up various devices, set controls and parameters on various analogue/digital interfaces can seriously alter/harm one's creative flow.

This is why many musicians tend(ed) to record sketches of their ideas by singing/whistling them into their dictaphones or devices like iphones today.

But that was their sketch, a quick draft just to not forget that one creative idea.
The production was a separate step and would follow at a place and time more suited for professional audio work.

The problem nowadays are these all-in-one music production software offerings that make it all look so easy and convenient.
Here the draft gets turned into the final product, supposedly ready for distribution.

Today's diy musicians/producers find themselves composing, recording, arranging, mixing, mastering, marketing and even selling their own music, all from within one and the same room.

Many diy producers do of course double-check their tracks in their car or at the club.
But what are the details they focus on after being locked in one and the same (untreated?) room - drafting, producing, arranging, mixing and mastering this one track for days and days?
Surely not the same details that a fresh pair of ears would focus on upon first listen.
I mean, even the most seasoned mastering/mixing engineer looses perspective at some point when working too long on a track, right?

It's too little exchange, reflection & referencing these days, thanks to the software imposed illusion of the one-man-does-it-all artist.


Oh and on the other side there's the "let's do it all analog like back in the day" guys who tries to record and mix everything with the least digital help as possible, striving for lo-fi and analogue warmth.
Needless to say that their results can be just as horrible if they too lack a basic understanding of audio engineering principles.

The internet creates the illusion that we are all in touch with each other, have an audience, our sounds reach out to many by the click of a button.

What the internet doesn't do, is frown when hearing your master for the first time.

Illusion is right. Lack of perspective and honest feedback can be deadly to a production. I've seen a few people get so wrapped up in the process of making their record using every single cpu generated bell and whistle because they can, verses focusing on why they were doing what they're doing in the first place, writing a good song and being a good singer, which is what was attractive about them in the first place. Then they play you their song and it's whiz-bang production of shitty songs. No one was there to knock around some sense into the process.

Or the reverse, which is more what i'm talking about. Good songwriters and players running the production and engineering show, and not really with success.

And yes, some get it right, and we talk about those folks too.

[engmix]

Originally Posted by The_K_Man

Well, I sure snapped a few necks when I pulled into my local gas station blasting an original cut of "Peg" by Steely Dan. They watched me as I went inside to pay and were still staring at my car when I came out. Then it shuffled to something by Katy Perry and they all went back to pumping their gas.

People do notice...

you're definitely coming off like an old fart, but very cool none the less. And not because KP didn't get the love as much as SD, i happen to really like some of her records, and mostly because of the production, but the exceptionality and badass of SD is what it is.

[The_K_Man]

Originally Posted by engmix

you're definitely coming off like an old fart, but very cool none the less. And not because KP didn't get the love as much as SD, i happen to really like some of her records, and mostly because of the production, but the exceptionality and badass of SD is what it is.

Katy's production is IMO too dense - too many elements in the same volume range. Most likely a producer's decision. I would enjoy Katy's even more, if it were produced like 70s era Steely or Fleetwood Mac, or like most other artists of that era actually!

One dynamics standout though: California Gurls! Can really crank that one and I never fatigue from it. Sadly though that is a top 40 exception, nowadays.

Old Fart, ehh? That's why I'm here.

[cuebism]

Originally Posted by The_K_Man

Old Fart, ehh? That's why I'm here.

welcome to gearfartz.com

[Th3_uN1Qu3]

Originally Posted by greggybud

The "art" of commercial mastering has been cheapened right along with the music. Do I really need Brian Gardner for $300 per hour or can I get away with $10 on-line from the guy in Romania? We, as ME's appreciate the differences, but for listeners..even the newer recording artists, unfortunately that line has become blurred.

Uh, what's wrong with Romania? I don't work for $10, and i don't work online.

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by greggybud

And lets put this in better perspective.
The "art" of commercial mastering has been cheapened right along with the music. Do I really need Brian Gardner for $300 per hour or can I get away with $10 on-line from the guy in Romania? We, as ME's appreciate the differences, but for listeners..even the newer recording artists, unfortunately that line has become blurred.

Reminder: discrimination besides being reprehensible is not allowed here.
We can argue about cables, bits, maths and loudness but please keep origin, race, gender, religion, politics and personal beliefs out of here.

[wado1942]

but on the other hand if you compare electronic music and I don't mean only dance you can't compare because it did not exist in the 70/80

Hey, J. M. Jarre did better electronic music in his kitchen during the 70s than a lot of guys today!

Having to plug in and re-route cables, boot up various devices, set controls and parameters on various analogue/digital interfaces can seriously alter/harm one's creative flow.

This is why many musicians tend(ed) to record sketches of their ideas by singing/whistling them into their dictaphones or devices like iphones today.

That's exactly why I keep a cassette 4-track fairly ready to go. Those ARE sketches, though, and that's where they stay, because that's where they belong. I think Tom Petty said when he started, he had a notebook with hundreds of songs, but there weren't enough good ones to fill an album.

Today's diy musicians/producers find themselves composing, recording, arranging, mixing, mastering, marketing and even selling their own music, all from within one and the same room.

Correction, within the same $500 box. A lot of these guys are working on laptops with earbuds, doing a quick mix on their lunch break etc. largely on freeware or cracked software. That's also where they watch their movies, listen to their purchased and illegally downloaded music, play their games, do their homework etc. The world for some of these guys has gotten incredibly small.

Then they play you their song and it's whiz-bang production of shitty songs.

I forget who, but I saw an interview with a well known producer that said he used to get cassettes in the mail all the time with horrible, incomplete recordings, but once and a while he'd get one that's full of great songs. Now he gets CDs (and links via E-mail more often now) with really polished productions, but there's no song.

Katy's production is IMO too dense - too many elements in the same volume range. Most likely a producer's decision. I would enjoy Katy's even more, if it were produced like 70s era Steely or Fleetwood Mac, or like most other artists of that era actually!

I'm finding it's common for all sorts of genres to contain a ridiculous number of tracks.
I got a mix from a guy recently who asked if his stuff was ready to master. It was absolutely awful: bad songs, poor vocal performances, atrocious recording & mixing etc. I said he could have it mastered, but he wouldn't be happy with it because the recording wasn't good. He said it took the band months to record/mix it and almost split over the painful process, so they couldn't redo it. I said it needed a remix at the very least. He clearly had it with the concept of mixing himself, so he sent me the files for one of the songs.

Here's what he had for his 3-piece band:
hihat
overhead 1
overhead 2
snare top
snare bottom
tom 1
tom 2
floor tom
bass drum (outer)
bass drum (inner)
room mic 1
room mic 2
electric guitar 1 - DI
electric guitar 1 - ampDI
electric guitar 1 - close mic
electric guitar 1 - room mic
repeat process through "guitar 8"
Bass DI
bass amp DI
bass close mic
bass room mic
Vocal -1
Vocal -2

That's 50 tracks.... AFTER he had comped the takes together without effects (per my request)... for a 3-piece band. I can't figure out why he would need any more than maybe twelve tracks. Not a single track was good... not one of them. The drums were poorly tuned. Every drum mic had tons of hihat in it because the guy was a totally bashing it and was obviously in the corner of a tiny room. The guitar was all static, like a Fender Twin with treble & gain on "10" and the bass on "0". I won't even talk about the vocals. I sent him an MP3 of the rough mix I got in about five hours, which he said was way better than what he did in several days. Well, it still sucked in my opinion and I never got the rest of the songs, nor did I get paid for my time "because the band couldn't wait that long to get it done". I should note that I only used maybe 1/3rd of the tracks he had.

All I can say after my frustrated rambling on this example is... WHY!? WHY would anybody spend so much time and energy, waste that many tracks and not have a clue of how to record? The answer is, this is the DIY age and anybody with a computer can get "that big, clear, expensive production" sound on their laptops. This band had no producer, no engineer, not even any past studio experience. They literally knew nothing about recording except for reading somewhere that you get the big, clear sound by using multiple paths to capture every track.

A friend of mine got it worse. He got over 200 tracks for a single he had to mix and he spent almost a week trying to figure how to piece it together, only to find out that they sent him the wrong version.

Back in the 70s, studio time was expensive, so you BETTER get people in there who know what they're doing. Oh, and you only have 16-24 tracks, so use them wisely. I think that's the big difference. The fact that everybody CAN do stuff cheaply, on their own is a good thing. The fact that everybody DOES do it, is a bad thing.