Jethro Tull - Aqualung 40th Anniversary Special Edition (part3)

Continued from here:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=267548

 

Welcome Tulltapes! You aren't the one that put the Passion Play clips together on youtube are you?

 

I just got finished listening to the 24/96 stereo version of the "new" Aqualung.

For the most part I like the new mix. However, on "Cross Eyed Mary" the lead guitar was ridiculously way to high in the mix and the flute was buried. I also didn't like the compression used on the acoustic guitars, it just sounded cheap. Otherwise many parts of the mix were brilliant.

The mastering is another story. I am blaming the mastering on this release for it's harsh sound. I have other Steve Wilson mixes from Opeth (Heritage) and Steve Wilson's last release. Both of these sound great. However the King Crimson stuff is treble happy, as well, which is probably mastering.

The new aqualung has tinny/harsh vocals, especially when Ian is pushing his voice. There are tinny pianos, tinny guitar solos, and tinny flute sounds throughout. There are virtually no lower mids on this release.

I don't know why this even needed to be mastered. It should have been a flat transfer. Hi-res masters do not need the treble boosted in order to bring out details in the recording.

I sincerely hope that Thick as a Brick is not mastered, but a flat transfer or at least give it to Steve Hoffman for the Breath Of Life style mastering and not the nasty mastering that is on Aqualung.

The new mix is refreshing and well done, but I can't get past the treble, expecially on the voice.

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=7228711&postcount=1020
Hey tulltapes, welcome to the kid from Divinities, Massey Hall. Here's to Tull.
http://thejethrotullboard.proboards...display&board=albums&thread=2172&page=1#15448

 

Tullman....didn't you already post the above comment in the other thread?

 

"Do you still see me even here?"

Hello, Steven Wilson,

Did Peter Mew make any adjustments to the 5.1?

Thank you

 

After several listens of the new stereo mix in 24/96 on the Blu Ray, I have officially changed camps. At first I was enamored, but now I am a dude that prefers the old mix on the DCC CD.

 

The mastering may not be to your liking, but I would have a difficult time characterizing it as "harsh"

I sincerely wish people would be responsible and respectful around the SHF, so that when producers and engineers visit, they actually stay and interact with us so that we can glean some insight on their processes.

 

Agreed,I don't find this harsh at all.

 

Well, everyone hears things differently and everyone likes to beat their own drum, especially on this forum. (Wilson appears to have a great attitude and doesn't let some of the squabbling ruffle him. I hope he continues to share his insights here.) I think it's one of the best sounding remix/remasters of the year and it's brought new life to a classic recording. I haven't enjoyed Aqualung this much in a long time and I very much look forward to Thick as a Brick. I just hope that that package is more affordable because I couldn't bring myself to shell out for the full set this time. Hopefully I'll be able to snag the Blu-Ray somewhere down the line.

 

Yeah, I just didn't want it to get buried so soon.

 

Mostly some of the distorted guitars and vocals when Ian is pushing his voice are harsh. I guess saying everything is harsh may be a bit over the top.

Listen to the piano at the beginning of Locomotive Breath. Now, tell me, does that sound like a grand piano? It sounds tinny to me or like a digital sample piano.

The flute timbre is tinny as well. Do you like the compression SW put on the acoustic guitars? The compression on the acoustic guitars is just a minor complaint though.

 

I am not going to be a suck up and lie about my feelings. There are plenty of rump swabs on here to do that.

My complaint is not with Steve Wilson. I only had a couple of quibbles with the mix. I like the mix. I think the mix on most of the songs is brilliant.

My complaint is with the EQ on the mastering and for anyone to say that this is one of the best remasters is mind boggling and frightening. Peter Mew cranked the treble which is exacerbated on hi-res recordings. Steve Wilson said as much. Thick as a Brick should not get anywhere near Peter Mew, or else we'll have another treble fest.

 

There are many different grand pianos...some have a darker sound, some have a more aggressive sound. How do you know what they actually recorded? The drums on every previous version sound like cardboard boxes, does that sound natural to you?

 

Jethro Tull - Aqualung 40th Anniversary Special Edition(part3) Let the record show...

Hey guys - The tones on the new CD are pretty much as they came up from the multi track tapes - the 1971 mix doesn't sound like what is on the tape, so most of the highs and lows were apparently lost somewhere in the mixing process - a faulty mixing console, misaligned tape machine, misleading studio monitoring, stoned engineer, or all of the above, who knows?! In a broader sense now we work with digital we can hold on to frequencies that for years analogue just couldn't maintain through 3-4 generations (recording, mixing, cutting master, vinyl..etc), so I have a suspicion it's the ability to actually finally be able to reproduce the frequencies that were always there that we now consider to be a trademark of digital, and why the perception that analogue is "warmer" persists. On top of this a lot of us have lost the ability to hear frequencies above 10k and would be less sensitive to them, so in that sense it's impossible to produce a perfect "everyman" top end EQ. But I'm really not an expert on these things at all, I can only say subjectively speaking that the old mix sounded not good to me, and Ian certainly felt that way too (not that the artist is always right about these things either!) I guess it just comes back to whatever your preference might be in terms of hearing bottom end and clarity at the expense of some of that perceived "warmth".

-Steven Wilson


I checked my mix notes for the title track of the album. I actually took treble off some instruments: Some brightness removed from the drums in the 10-12K range, and some taken out on the electric guitar at 8k. The bass is flat, nothing added or taken off. The recipients of added top end clarity were the piano (6db at 8K, but this was largely to match the sound on the original mix, it was recorded very dull), acoustic guitar (2db at 10K) and the lead vocals (2db at 8K). Apart from the piano, these are quite minimal adjustments.

I also compared Pete's master with my original mix - he seems to have added some extra brightness, around the 10-12K area - I can't say I prefer it that way, but again it's a taste thing.

-Steven Wilson

 

+1
I agree with the "tinny" sound and it just does not sound right.
Glad I got the DCC when it first came out as it will be my go to copy from now on.
Sadly I may sell this set eventually.

 

Well...I did hear the old mix and the piano sounded more natural to me. I have played many different Steinway and Baldwin pianos and have heard live Bösendorfer pianos and none of those sound like what I hear on Locomotive Breath.

 

I agree 100%. This new Aqualung, as a re-mix is great; but the mastering SUCKS!!!

 

I can still hear above 15K and I bet most here can as well.

I definitely liked the drum and bass sound better on the new mix.

Not a surprise about the piano here. This only reinforces what I have said about the piano sound.

I can't I prefer the extra brightness Pete added either. Please, keep Pete away from "Thick as a Brick".

 

Thanks so much for posting these details, and thanks for your great work on this and on the Crimson albums, especially. I hope you don't take some of the negativity and criticism that appears often on the forum over small details too much to heart. Taste does vary widely as do people's systems and hearing. I don't hear much above 10K either, so a lot of the EQ decisions people take strong issue with don't bother me much. I do seem to develop fatigue over distortion at mid-treble frequencies, though, which may also be what some folks term brightness or harshness. Another problem may also be expectations conditioned by a familiar mix and mastering which people have heard for years on end with classics like this album. You've probably noticed that there is a divide between "originalists" who don't even approve of the concept of new mixes, and those who enjoy a fresh and hopefully improved sonic perspective when it can be had. I'm in the latter camp.

 

To these ears it DOES sound like a silent grand piano recorded for a rock band some 40 years ago (in a not so grand studio, but whatever, I don't want to go this route again). It's definitely "grander" now, there's a plenty of air and fine detail (and I'm speaking about the CD version only). Actually, experiencing this very intro brought to the table one the most (pleasantly) shocking discoveries of the remix, I was totally immersed!

 

I am not a musician, but the piano in the LB intro sounds very good and very natural to me (redbook stereo remix). Though I now realize what a previous poster of way back in the thread had pinpointed about this intro: it's not as dramatically polarized between quiet beginning and surge of volume when the rock part hits, as the original mix.

Likewise, I have just checked the "Hymn 43"/"Slipstream"/"Locomotive Breath" sequence. There MUST be something odd (or let's say peculiarly designed) about any mastering work where Slipstream sounds louder than Hymn 43...... I haven't checked any of the graphs and no meter readings, and it might be just an impression. Yet it is a strong one for me.

 

Just for the fun of it, and to give each person to express their opinion in a "one man/woman, one vote" style, I created a poll about the new version of "Aqualung".

It would be nice if everybody would express their opinion in the poll.

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=271297

 

Guys, I have no problem if people dislike aspects of the remix (one million people would produce 1 million different mixes after all, and the same is true of mastering). However, incorrect assumptions I feel I have to respond to!

There is no compression added to the acoustic guitars on my mix - they were recorded with heavy compression - it's always been there, and might I suggest that you are hearing the "cheap" compression because you can actually hear it for the first time?

I think I opened a can of worms when I quoted my mix notes for just the title track. Unlike on Aqualung there is no EQ added or taken off the piano on the intro of Locomotive Breath. It sounds tonally exactly as it came off tape - I'm not sure what you are hearing, it sounds the same to me except without all the murk and tape hiss. To reiterate; the piano EQ I added on the title track was to match the sound of the piano on the original, not to make it brighter for no reason. What came off tape was considerably duller than both old and new mixes (I'm sure you understand that they did add EQ to instruments when they did the original mix, and didn't just push up the faders!)

I'm not sure the piano on the album is a grand piano at all, do we have this information to hand already? It sounds like an upright to me - if that info is not out there I can check with Ian to see if he remembers. It does sound more characteristic of a bar room upright on the whole album, but I've always quite liked that about it. If you thought my new mix was suddenly going to make it sound like an exquisitely recorded Steinway D then you over-estimate the possibilities of remixing!

Pete's mastering is good - hardly any limiting, a nice tight low end, and I didn't mean to overstate the extra brightness, it's really not extreme and sounds far from harsh to me, just crystal clear, but at the expense of a *little* of the warmth (let's keep some perspective here).

To those people (at least the ones over 30) who think they can hear above 15K, I would be very skeptical of that - try this test:

http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/can-you-hear-this-hearing-test/

I haven't found anyone over 30 who can yet, though I'm sure there are a few out there. In fact many can't hear 15K either. See what you can hear....

SW

 

Thank you for the information and input.