advertisement


CD tonality/musicality and a different take on mastering issues

Tony L said:
No, it's the exact reverse of that! If anything they sound like a 'main monitor mix', but with a bit of the DIY manual NR I was on about earlier. There's little attempt whatsoever made to compensate for small speaker bass absence or to compress. I suspect one reason I and a lot of the Steve Hoffman crowd like them so much is I'm, like most of them, a big speaker user. In fact I'm a user of exactly the speaker that would have been in most of the studios at the time! Remember if you have a monitor with a character the exact reverse of that character is stuck to tape, e.g. use NS10s and you end up with a dull recording with flubby hyped bass (the reverse of a rather dry forward speaker).

The main reason I'm pretty certain these CDs are not cut from "vinyl masters" is this obvious lack of compression. If they really were the vinyl mix they'd sound like the records and have some obvious dynamic compression! Remember compression, used in moderation, has the exact opposite effect to that most people expect - it makes things sound fatter, bigger and way more punchy (it does so by effectively increasing the length of transients by reducing the height). It's great fun to play around with a compressor - I used two own several!



Near-Mint (Record Collector grading jargon).
Click to expand...


Which is one of the main reasons ALL vocals are compressed to some degree as a matter course when being committed to the mix, irrespective of final replay solution.

Compression is also a significant factor in the "old school" bass sound in Reggae.
 
GTM said:
Which is one of the main reasons ALL vocals are compressed to some degree as a matter course when being committed to the mix, irrespective of final replay solution.
Click to expand...

Agreed, same obviously goes for drums too. Big time!
 
Tony L said:
No, it's the exact reverse of that! If anything they sound like a 'main monitor mix', but with a bit of the DIY manual NR I was on about earlier.
Click to expand...

Yes, because it sounds as though they've mastered using something with a strong BBC balance, which means they sound bright and forward on something reasonably flat.

I'm not implying anyone used LS3/5s in the process, just using them as an example.
The LS3/5 is voiced with a large speaker balance - boosted mid bass, recessed presence and a lift at the very top. Obviously it has no low bass and doesn't go loud.
Just like a typical 70s and 80s MM cartridge in fact!
 
Robert said:
I'm not implying anyone used LS3/5s in the process, just using them as an example.
Click to expand...

Ok, I was thinking LS3/5A = rather crisp, bright and, aside from a 100Hz bump, rather bass-light. Had you said BC1 I'd have got what you meant! LS3/5As are anything but lacking treble - T27s are nice but a bit tizzy.
 
Tony L said:
Ok, I was thinking LS3/5A = rather crisp, bright and, aside from a 100Hz bump, rather bass-light. Had you said BC1 I'd have got what you meant! LS3/5As are anything but lacking treble - T27s are nice but a bit tizzy.
Click to expand...

I don't find them bright as in forward and cool tonally, quite the reverse.
They are fizzy and tinkly at the very top but i don'r hear that as bright.

The terminology is getting in the way.

I'll happily go with BC1 for the example.
 
Robert said:
Classical and jazz fare a lot better.
Click to expand...

Is that the answer, that a lot more care is taken with classical recording. I am primarily a classical listener, and like you, Robert, I acquired my first CD player (also a Sony, a 50-something-or-other ES) in 1985. However, unlike you, I fell in love with CD and since then have bought precisely one vinyl record (and that because it was never issued on CD).

My test disc was this:

images


(link)

I used it because it's brilliant, I'd played the LP to death and I knew every nuance of the performance. And the two were indistinguishable (apart from the clicks and pops of the vinyl). Then there was this:

41QfzjobidL._SL500_AA300_.jpg


(link)

This was simply stunning in CD form, the way the little bells hung in the air. The great recordings made by Walter Legge made the transfer to CD without problems. There were a few problems with some producers trying to take advantage of the bigger dynamic range by introducing big volume differences (forgetting that not many of us actually listen to our hi-fis in concert halls), but there were mercifully few of those. The classical producers simply did the job better.
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Thanks tones, thats another £20. Bloody expensive hanging around here these days!

It's interesting reading this tread alongside the 'is remastered better' thread.
The whole thing seems like pot luck.
 
I've been listening to the Recollection GRM vinyl reissues cut by Rashad Becker. They sound fantastic. Regardless of the music he is involved with, I found this interview with him fascinating. He talks about the best sounding records - in his experience - being mastered and cut by someone with a 'vision' of what that record should sound like.

I don't agree with everything he says, but well worth reading and insightful.

http://www.monolake.de/interviews/mastering.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top