Michael Jackson Thriller - Analog or Digital Multitracks?

Re: Original CD

This might be an explanation why the original CD sounds duller than the Grundman mastered LP.

 

It's remarkable, because Swedien's Accusonic Recording process involved using two multitrack tape machines synched together. Basically, what he did was record instuments as usual, but then placed mics all over the room and other places for ambience. Just about everything had an extra ambiance pickup. That's how he got such a lush, spacious sound on everything he recorded with Quincy Jones 1978-on up. But, a lot of it was Quincy's production. Q likes "ear candy", meaning little bits of vocal or instrumental pieces that were dropped in strategic places in a song to keep up the excitement.

Again, "Bad" is a 100% digital recording made on Mitsubishi's first multitrack DASH recorder. Swedien didn't like what digital did to Michael's voice. It made it sound thin, and it was hard to mix his frail little voice over all the tracks.

 

So if it's 100% analog, why not listen to Thriller on vinyl ? The Thriller LP has fantastic sound and dynamic !

 

This has been one interesting discussion. My original intent was merely to find out how Thriller was recorded, but in the midst of the discussion I've learned a few other things:

1. I assumed "hiss" was always a given if analog tape is used in the recording process. Listening to the Thriller SACD with very revealing headphones (Sony MDR-SA5000) with my modded Denon 2900 (pure DSD) as source reveals very little if any hiss. Bruce Swedien should be commended!
2. I assume from SH's comment that the SACD is a flat transfer of the Master tape? If so, then the SACD of Thriller is the current digital high-rez version of choice!

 

Well, it's the only hi-rez version available.........

As I said above, if you want to hear the album as originally released then you need to hear the EQ tape. This was used for the LP and the original CDs were made from a dub of the EQ tape.

If, on the other hand, you want to hear how the master tape sounds you need to have the SACD (or apparently the re-mastered CD).

I prefer listening to the original CD - I guess the EQ tape is ingrained in my mind since that's what I've been listening to for the last 20 years!

 

Is it just me, or is there quite a lot of clipping during the chorus of Smooth Criminal on the recent remaster? I'm thinking of the synthesized bass drum kicks...

Also, is the Acusonic process related to the AcoustiSonic Process?

I have a Branford Marsalis CD, I think it is either Trio Jeepy or Renaissance that says it was recorded using that process.

On some tracks it sounds rather terrible. All the instruments, excluding the saxophone, are mixed very low, so it doesn't really sound like the performers are interacting, it is more like Marsalis is playing over the top of a backing tape...

 

Aw, no way man! There are tons of analog recordings with no, or virtually no hiss!

 

Once again, this thread gives way too much credit to the recording format.

 

Sound like an interesting gripe - what do you mean in this particular case?

 

It sways people's thinking. If everyone thought Thriller was a digital recording (even though it's not) they'd blame it for stuff like voices being shrill, the horns not being loud enough or a less intriguing presentation (not that this album suffers from any of that). Digital recording gets blamed for a lot of sins committed by the recording, mix and mastering engineers. Too much voodoo for me.

 

Maybe, although I had been wondering why "Bad" was harder and less easy to listen to than "Thriller" recently. Rather than it being a simple case of analogue being easier on the ear than digital I believe it is a case of 1982 analogue being easier on the ear than 1987 digital. From a recording engineer's point of view, the equipment used and the knowledge about and familiarity with a particular format are far more important in the overall results than the formats themselves in this case. The fact that analogue was well understood compared with digital back in the 80s led to a lot of bad sounding digital recordings which gave digital a bad name.

Things may be different now but 20 years ago there was something to be said for digital not sounding as good as analogue - it's just that the reasons behind this go beyond the format itself.

 

I agree, I have a plain jane pressing hand selected by Tom Port over at Better Records that is superb. Very analog sounding, from something close to the master, excellent tonal balance, with great bass and dynamics. A really fun LP to listen to.

 

Agree. The difference in sound is not necessarily digital's "fault" (and I love analog). I think Off the Wall sounds better than Thriller (s**t, I think it's a better album, period, though I do think Thriller is excellent), and they're both obviously analog...

 

I was listening to the CD remaster and the SACD tonight. They were both mastered by Bernie Grundman and sound similar. It's a bright record.

The SACD appears to have its polarity reversed. The CD has some added compression but it's not much. The loudness of these discs were roughly the same.

Anybody notice how crap the drum sounds are? They're so thin and shallow. Does anybody think that snare sound is anything but lame?

 

The original Epic LP was bright, but I just don't hear it in either the remastered CD or the SACD.

Huh??? Wow! So, if I reverse the polarity of the remastered CD...hmmmmm...

They sound good to me...full and warm...except on "Beat It" and "Human Nature".

 

There's a bright quality to them. It's far from dark.

I tried that. They're different transfers and don't line up.

The frequencies are there it's the tones I'm talking about. The snare drum has no thump or bloom. It's just a dry, shallow, papery sound.

 

You make a great point, Jamie.

The format doesn't matter... it's all in the engineer's or engineers' hands (no pun intended). IMHO, "Thriller" is an excellent example of an engineering masterpiece and it's no surprise to me that it's the best selling album of all-time (in competition with another finely engineered album, The Eagles Greatest Hits).

 

I am sure that the dry, bottomless and airless sound of Thriller was intentional, and its success justifies it. It gave the album a certain aggressivity and punch. I personally prefer the lusher, more relaxed 70s-soul sound of Off The Wall.

 

There's noticeably a bit more hiss on "Off The Wall" as well.

 

The first run copies of "Thriller" sound excellent to my ears. This is a record you have have to watch out for though because the quality of US LP pressings vary wildly depending on when they were pressed. According to the Goldmine Collectible Album Guide that inside sources claimed that as much as 75-80% of the LP pressings were shipped defective because CBS used stampers way beyond what they should have been. Since the album was selling anywhere from 500,000 to 1,000,000 copies a week(which is still unprecedented for an album in the vinyl era)at it's peak, rather than slow down production to make new metal parts, the company was using what they had until they wore out. The end result being those copies sound quite dull compared to an earlier copy. The unfortunate thing is most people couldn't tell the difference between a good copy and one with compromised sonics. I did discover one way you can tell other than by listening to the record is to just look on the back of the jacket. First run copies of "Thriller" credit only Quincy Jones as the producer of the album. After "Billie Jean" was released as a single, the credits were amended to include a co-production credit by Michael Jackson. It is most of these copies that are dodgy qualitywise.

 

I think of "bright" as meaning trebly. I'll give it to you that his vocals are thin. The tracks sound as if some compression has been added.

However, that's the sound they were going for, a decidedly lighter pop sound that de-emphasized some of the R&B elements. If you remember back to the early 80s, this was a very significant issue in black music, making things palatible for the white pop audience. This overlooked detail is the main reason "Thriller" is different from "Off The Wall".

 

"Off The Wall" relaxed and lush??? No way!

 

I have a first-run pressing and I still don't like the sound of it.

 

Sure. I was referring to the production and the intended sound.

 

I'll give you "lush" if you are referring to the ballads, but the dance songs 1,3, & 4 on the first side? "Relaxed" ain't the word for it!