The Difference Between Then and Now

[extremeit]

I understand a small amount about the recording process in the 60's and 70's. Why is that when I listen to the remixed and mastered editions of say Frank Sinatra, or The Beatles, are the records so much better sounding than the newly mixed versions on cd?

You'd think with the technology that we'd have, you wouldn't loose the sound, but enhance it. It just seems like when anything is digitally remastered, you loose the genuine sound of the original recordings.


Derek


www.myspace.com/leger

[Roland]

Originally Posted by extremeit

I understand a small amount about the recording process in the 60's and 70's. Why is that when I listen to the remixed and mastered editions of say Frank Sinatra, or The Beatles, are the records so much better sounding than the newly mixed versions on cd?

You'd think with the technology that we'd have, you wouldn't loose the sound, but enhance it. It just seems like when anything is digitally remastered, you loose the genuine sound of the original recordings.


Derek


www.myspace.com/leger

Possibly it's more to do with the fact that when getting paid for a job some people feel the need to try and justify their fee. Half the trick with these records were that the tools were limited, they couldn't do much in the way of eq and compression as much of the kit had little in the way of control. A good example comes to mind of seeing a PA engineer on an open air gig with an exceptional trumpet player, I overheard him say that the sound on the mic was in his opinion "lumpy", he then spent 10-15 minutes eqing it and made one of the best players in the UK sound like a college grade hack.


Regards


Roland

[juicylime]

Originally Posted by Roland

Possibly it's more to do with the fact that when getting paid for a job some people feel the need to try and justify their fee. Half the trick with these records were that the tools were limited, they couldn't do much in the way of eq and compression as much of the kit had little in the way of control. A good example comes to mind of seeing a PA engineer on an open air gig with an exceptional trumpet player, I overheard him say that the sound on the mic was in his opinion "lumpy", he then spent 10-15 minutes eqing it and made one of the best players in the UK sound like a college grade hack.


Regards


Roland

Hhhmm, I'm not sure that's it. I believe there's something in it but I also beleive that our ears and expectations have wrapped the sound of these bygone days in an aura of nostalgia and reverence. Good music is good music, whether it's Crosby, Stills and Nash laying down on analouge or Dire Straits polishing of a digital gem. Perhaps some future format and style will be invented that comes to dominate the next 5 millenia of sound recording and audio students will have a good laugh at how we niavely divided our music and recording technology into nice little decade size chunks that to their ears sound...well, pretty darn similar! But then again, maybe not......

[Roland]

Originally Posted by juicylime

Hhhmm, I'm not sure that's it. I believe there's something in it but I also beleive that our ears and expectations have wrapped the sound of these bygone days in an aura of nostalgia and reverence. Good music is good music, whether it's Crosby, Stills and Nash laying down on analouge or Dire Straits polishing of a digital gem. Perhaps some future format and style will be invented that comes to dominate the next 5 millenia of sound recording and audio students will have a good laugh at how we niavely divided our music and recording technology into nice little decade size chunks that to their ears sound...well, pretty darn similar! But then again, maybe not......

Hi Juicylime, I think you have missunderstood my comments and the original question. The original poster was decrying the reissued versions of old tracks, not old recordings vs new ones, I agree there have been plenty of them, and in those cases people are comparing a few tracks from a large era of time with current output and maybe being too nostalgic about it. My point was directed at why someone re-mastering an old classic might make a pig's ear of it, whilst not always the case there are several well noted examples of.

Regards to all


Roland

[juicylime]

Originally Posted by Roland

Hi Juicylime, I think you have missunderstood my comments and the original question. The original poster was decrying the reissued versions of old tracks, not old recordings vs new ones, I agree there have been plenty of them, and in those cases people are comparing a few tracks from a large era of time with current output and maybe being too nostalgic about it. My point was directed at why someone re-mastering an old classic might make a pig's ear of it, whilst not always the case there are several well noted examples of.

Regards to all


Roland