mastering Q for Steve

[Claus]

The new generation of mastering engineers have almost no experience with the recording techniques from the 50's (or earlier) to 70's... how will affect this the mastering techniques today? Is that easy to "learn or understand" the way of recording and mastering at that time?

I compare this with my job... I easily can create designs on computers and it looks pretty good, but it's harder to do the same with a paint-brush. The simplicity of a water-color painting could be more emotional as a computer-designed painting. Computer-designed paintings always look artificial in my eyes... no comparison when you go into a museum and look these masterpieces.

Maybe the mastering engineers can handle a 248-track record, but not a simple old 3-track record!

[Steve Hoffman]

Well, Claus, the new generation have their own ideas about what sounds good. Their standards are different from us older folks. I guess that's the way it always is, or the kids would still be listening to Benny Goodman.

But, to use Goodman as an example, there IS some kid out there listening to Benny Goodman. I myself got into that type of music 25 years after it was dead. Bradley Olson and others are listening to Hank Williams and Eddy Arnold. And, there ARE a few mastering engineers out there who know and care about good sound.

Rob LoVerde who works at Hit Factory Mastering in NYC is one of those "throwbacks" to an earlier more tasteful era of mastering. He is very young (to me :D ), but he really does great work, and I have no fear for the future, if engineers like him are around.

But, the Rob LoVerdes of the engineering world are few and far between. That's pretty scary. I met a young mastering engineer at CES who has never even seen (except in pictures) or used an analog reel of tape in his work. Made me feel really ancient. :eek:

[Ronald]

With all the advancements in recording techniques leading to the increases in dynamic range and decreases in noise, I cannot understand why much of today's music sounds highly compressed coupled with a juiced high end and a boosted low end. There appears to be no midrange whatsoever.

While Carlos is not a new artist by any standards, I picked up the Classic LP and Arista CD of Santana's "Supernatural" and I was amazed, or dissatisfied, that the uv meters on my cassette deck held at "0" throughout the playing of the songs. I had to cover my ears to listen through the brightness.

I picked up a San Francisco Sound issue of Moby Grape and I was floored that I could clearly hear the attack and decay of struck notes. The musical instruments sounded like individual pieces instead of a stew of sounds. My tympanic membrane did not ring after this listening. For a 35 year old recording, this was great.

Why is today's music engineered to sound the way it does?

Steve, will you be involved in original mastering of recordings?

[Gary]

Originally posted by Steve Hoffman : I met a young mastering engineer at CES who has never even seen (except in pictures) or used an analog reel of tape in his work. Made me feel really ancient.

Steve, was this person respectful of the master tapes? Or did they think it was ancient technology that should have been thrown on the trash heap years ago?

I think their attitude would have a lot to do with what they produce or engineer. For example, I know people who scorn vinyl, no matter what it sounds like. Why? It's a poor carrier of music because of pops, clicks, scratches etc. And thre was poor quality control from major record companies in the past. For example on a 20,000 pressing run, the first 3,000 were excellent quality, the next 10,000 were average and the last 7,000 were of poor quality because the cutting master was worn out. This person worked at such a pressing plant.

[ED in NY]

Claus, you make a very good point, but how do we explain Peter Mew ? I think he's older than Steve and his work gives me a headache !

Best - ED

[BradOlson]

Steve: Well, Claus, the new generation have their own ideas about what sounds good. Their standards are different from us older folks. I guess that's the way it always is, or the kids would still be listening to Benny Goodman.

Brad: Right on Steve.

Steve: But, to use Goodman as an example, there IS some kid out there listening to Benny Goodman. I myself got into that type of music 25 years after it was dead. Bradley Olson and others are listening to Hank Williams and Eddy Arnold. And, there ARE a few mastering engineers out there who know and care about good sound.

Brad: Just like I also listen to stuff such as Scott Joplin, Jimmy Dean, Glenn Miller, Patsy Cline, Bing Crosby, Mason Williams, Ssgt. Barry Sadler, etc.

Steve: Rob LoVerde who works at Hit Factory Mastering in NYC is one of those "throwbacks" to an earlier more tasteful era of mastering. He is very young (to me :D ), but he really does great work, and I have no fear for the future, if engineers like him are around.

But, the Rob LoVerdes of the engineering world are few and far between. That's pretty scary. I met a young mastering engineer at CES who has never even seen (except in pictures) or used an analog reel of tape in his work. Made me feel really ancient. :eek:

Brad: That's very sad, Steve. It's mastering engineers like you that help me appreciate the music and sound I like (and other people who grew up during the era my music came out as well) and I don't care much at all about 99.9% of the top 40 music out there today.

[Grant]

Ronald, it started with hip-hop music, then filtered down to alternative music. Now it's everywhere, fuled also by the idea that the CD must be louder than than the next guy's. The hyped up volume sounds good on cheap, bookshelf stereos that most average people listen to nowadays. Now, it's what people expect. People also don't like adjusting the volume knob. They like compression for this reason.

Although most engineers hate these pumped-up CDs there are some who get egotistical about how high they can jack up the volume on a CD cleanly.

[BradOlson]

I looked at the VU meters by sampling many CD's in my collection and VU meters moved and I could hear the instruments clearly on Bill Haley & The Comets's "From The Original Master Tapes" mastered by Steve (great job BTW), The Archies Sony Special Products CD, Who's Next (I just bought your remaster in a discount store bargain bin, Canadian version). Modern country is overproduced and mastered at a loud volume as well.

[Todd Fredericks]

The majority of the music business cares about selling not art. Look at how many un-talented people own mansions and great people serve them. If record companies thought pop music was 45 minutes of wobble tones then they would push that.

Todd

[Dave]

Todd,

I couldn't agree more (sigh).

Let's hope that there will always be a mastering engineer that sticks to Steve's philosophy when mastering.

[Patrick M]

Ed makes a good point (you beat me to it!). Who are most bitched about on this forum? Astley, Mew, Inglot, right? Are these guys young whippersnappers? Don't think so. [Note that Steve cleverly puts "N/A" in the "birthday" field of his profile.]

Also, what evidence is there that this hyped up CDs sound better on a boombox? I don't buy this.

And anyway, how is this any different than crappy US Beatles LPs mastered umpteen years ago, with cruddy EQ and echo/reverb/whatever added?

10 years ago, we would have been bitching about the CDs of the day. 10 years later, we suddenly think the CDs of 10 years ago were great. Come on. See a pattern developing?

Lastly, when were record companies *not* interested in making money? Anyone who releases an album and doesn't just keep their tapes at home, I presume, has some interest in selling that product. Even McCartney talked about writing for a swimming pool, and all the Beach Boys, with the possible exception of BW, were keen on wealth. BW was at least interested in being wildly successful, if not wealthy.

IOW, let's be realistic, not revisionistic (if that's a word).

[ED in NY]

Well said Patrick.

Personally, (with the exception of Steve Hoffman and 1 or 2 others), I could care less who mastered the CD. All I care about is whether or not it sounds good to my ears. Obviously, when I see Steve's name on a CD, I feel completely confidant that I'm going to be getting a quality sounding product, because I've yet to be disappointed by his work. When I see Jon Astley's or Peter Mew's name listed on a CD it certainly throws up a red flag because I've been disappointed by their work on various titles in the past.

However, as I've mentioned previously I LIKE the 3 recent Jethro Tull CD's that Peter Mew apparently worked on. Not only do I like them because IMHO do I feel that they are the best sounding versions to appear on CD thus far, but also because I think Peter Mew did a good job on them. When or if Steve gets a crack at doing these Tull titles I don't doubt they'll even sound better but until then I'll stick with these, just as I'll stick with Steve's work on Deep Purple's "Made In Japan" over Peter Mew's remastered version because to my ears Steve's sounds (much) better.

It's all just my humble opinion fellow music lovers.

Happy Listening ! - ED

[Uncle Al]

When I first "bought in" to compact discs (around '83 or '84), one of the first things I noticed was how "active" the VU meters were on both my equalizer and tape deck when playing a digital source. While a great many of those early CD's were a little "harsh" (mostly due to poor masters or the engineer's lacking familiarity with the technology), they certainly took advantage of the increase in dynamic range.

As the format got popular, and eventually became dominant - I watched those very same meters begin to "freeze".

I fear that regardless of the resolution and capabilities of the format, eventually mass market popularity will equal an increase in compression. After all, CD's offer more dynamic range than lp's, but it is no longer used. SACD's and DVD-A offer even greater capabilities, but as techniques improve, I fear ANY format that gains mass acceptance will be "dumbed down".

[Grant]

Originally posted by Patrick M

Also, what evidence is there that this hyped up CDs sound better on a boombox? I don't buy this.




I didn't say "better" just "good". Remember, this subjective.