Mastering



Moderator: Ghost Hip

Re: Mastering

Postby StopReferencing » Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:02 pm

Well that's like...a total remix though. And I prefer that remix, the 1997 one -- I like its heinousness. I'd put pretty much the entire Times New Viking catalog in the "unlistenably loud" category before the Raw Power remix. YMMV.

There are plenty of first generation CDs that have fucking terrrrrible masters -- Beggars Banquet by the Stones springs directly into my cortex. There was a lot of jazz stuff where they abused the new-at-the-time digital noise reduction technology, thus deadening the record entirely, only to smash the high end and compression when remastered in the oughts.

Nothing is good ever, is what I'm saying. Except for that 1997 Raw Power CD.
Image
StopReferencing

User avatar
FAMOUS
FAMOUS
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:41 pm
Location: The South of the North

Re: Mastering

Postby Inconuucl » Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:13 pm

I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless. :idk:
Le Ciel Inconnu (I was a whale once.)
Image
NSFW: show
Chankgeez wrote:We should have a game show à la Name That Tune

Inconuucl: I can shoegaze that tune with 5 pedals.
other contestant: I can shoegaze that tune with 4 pedals.
Inconuucl: I can shoegaze that tune with 3 pedals.
other contestant: OK, shoegaze that tune!
Inconuucl: :!!!:
Inconuucl

User avatar
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:35 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Mastering

Postby StopReferencing » Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:15 pm

Inconuucl wrote:I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless. :idk:


Is that the one that has an extremely obvious digital blip/error, or is that Isn't Anything?

The MBV remasters are alright -- mostly seemed like goosing low mids.
Image
StopReferencing

User avatar
FAMOUS
FAMOUS
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:41 pm
Location: The South of the North

Re: Mastering

Postby D.o.S. » Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:27 pm

I believe that's on Isn't Anything, although I've never listened to the remasters myself. Whichever one came out first. I always thought that was pretty hilarious, though: audiophiles waiting decades for the album and all.
good deals are here.
escapecraft is here.
UglyCasanova wrote: It's not the expensive programs you use, it's the way you click and drag.


Achtane wrote:
comesect2.0 wrote:Michael Jackson king tut little Richard in your butt.

IT'S THE ENNNND OF THE WORRRLD AS WE KNOW IT
D.o.S.

User avatar
IAMILFFAMOUS
IAMILFFAMOUS
 
Posts: 29819
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:47 am
Location: Ewe-Kay

Re: Mastering

Postby Inconuucl » Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:37 pm

That's because Kevin Shields isn't as good a producer/mixer/audio worker as people making him out to be. :idk: Just because you make something amazing by abusing your tools doesn't mean that you can use them normally. A bigger example of this is Devin Townsend's mix of As the Palaces Burn by Lamb of God. There were hardware errors there too, but man. Luckily he got a lot better, although his heavier mixes lack bottom end sometimes.

Not that I'm against one abusing their tools, mind you. :lol: :cool:
Le Ciel Inconnu (I was a whale once.)
Image
NSFW: show
Chankgeez wrote:We should have a game show à la Name That Tune

Inconuucl: I can shoegaze that tune with 5 pedals.
other contestant: I can shoegaze that tune with 4 pedals.
Inconuucl: I can shoegaze that tune with 3 pedals.
other contestant: OK, shoegaze that tune!
Inconuucl: :!!!:
Inconuucl

User avatar
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:35 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Mastering

Postby GardenoftheDead » Tue Apr 21, 2015 3:06 pm

StopReferencing wrote:
Inconuucl wrote:I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the original and 2012 remaster of Loveless. :idk:


Is that the one that has an extremely obvious digital blip/error, or is that Isn't Anything?


No, that's on Loveless. Specifically the 2nd disc of the remaster that's taken from 1/2" tapes used during the tracking of the album has an artifact from a botched transfer job a few minutes into What You Want. This has been present ever since the remaster was leaked in 2008 and wasn't fixed by the time it finally shipped.

The 1st disc of that package is taken from the original DAT master and it sounds just find.

The trick with mastering is that it's only supposed to be a coat of audio polish. If the original mix sucks, the mastering job can't save it.
GardenoftheDead

IAMILF
IAMILF
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:26 pm

Re: Mastering

Postby coldbrightsunlight » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:16 pm

There are people who don't like the '97 raw power CD? :wha?:
füzz lover. Friend. Quilter evangelist.

I make music sometimes:

https://nitrx.bandcamp.com/

https://mediocrisy.bandcamp.com/

https://fleshcouch.bandcamp.com
coldbrightsunlight

User avatar
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 13539
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:20 pm
Location: UK

Previous

Return to Music



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


Sponsored Ad. (Please no inflated/repetitive clicking. Thanks!)



ilovefuzz.com is not responsible for user-submitted content. Users participate at their own discretion and risk.