Crappy Mastering on the Brighten the Corners Set

[bburl]

Utterly disappointed. Why make it so loud? (for those who don't know, see "loudness war" at wikipedia). It's not like the music has to stand out on an ipod as people who buy this set are already fans. Why not make the best possible sounding set, a definitive one? Maybe Matador wants to re-release these discs in 5 years with the tag "Now Mastered without god awful amounts of compressions and clipping!" or "Newly remaster, now it will sound good on your stereo not just your crappy ear buds".

I guess I will have to download matador releases before I buy them so I can see what the quality is before I hand over my money, and in this case I would have kept it. Mastering with this amount of clipping...shameful. And in comparison to the disc from the 90's, bloody awful.

Thanks for LP though.

[strifeknot]

The compression is very disappointing and totally unnecessary.

[bburl]

I did an audition wave comparison for the audio geeks 2008 vs 1997 for
Transport Is Arranged:

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u186/bburl/transport_2008.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u186/bburl/transport_1997.jpg

It's hard to believe that mastering like the first pic would have got you fired at one time, now it's required, at least in the pop/rock world. C'est la vie.

[bburl]

& here is Greg (the guy who remastered the BTC set) talking about loud mastering: http://www.artistshousemusic.org/videos/mastering+engineer+greg+calbi+on+compression+and+t he+loudness+war+in+mastering

[stevethehouse]

The average listener can't really even tell the difference when an album that's just barely 10 years old has been remastered... so this is what they do... they compress the shit out of it and turn it up to the point of clipping.

[tinobeat]

It seems louder than the original, though I haven't done the A/B, but its certainly not "modern rock radio" loud, where there's no air to breathe in the songs and its all claustrophobic.

[Jesper]

This is a somewhat baffling thread.

The album, as some of you have noted, was mastered at Sterling Sound by Greg Calbi. We mastered over more than two days, from original tapes, and went back for several revisions, i.e. we spared no expense in getting it right.

The material was approved by Scott and Steve from the band, and while I was the only one attending the mastering session, both Scott and Steve were actively involved in the mastering process. I think it would be fair to say that we take mastering very seriously, and that we never release anything that hasn't been approved by the artists themselves.

It also would be an understatement to say that Greg Calbi, widely considered one of the top mastering engineers in the world, has been on the forefront of the ANTI-loudness movement ever since such a movement has been needed. And every time I work with him we talk about this problem.

I am curious if this 'clipping' that bburl is mentioning comes from a CD or a download. It seems it is a download and perhaps there is something awry with it? It definitely should not be clipping on either format and while this BTC is louder than the original release (CDs are louder now compared to 10 years ago, and I'm not talking about ridiculously loud aberrations either), we actually tried to stay quite faithful to the original George Horn EQ as we all really liked what he did with the album originally.

[stevethehouse]

There is definitely clipping on the CD and an overall loudness problem that wasn't on any of the previous Pavement re-issues. A song like "Fin" sounds really bad on the re-issue because the dynamics are lost. Everything just sounds so cluttered together sonically.

What do you say in response to the side by side sound wave comparison, Jesper?

[bburl]

Yeah Greg is a legend but he does what his client wants, and if that's a loud cd that's what he gives them. He's not like say Hoffman who will refuse to do a compressed clipped mastering job, so seeing Greg's name on a disk is no guarantee that the sq will be stellar, although he is definitely a gifted mastering guy.

And the clipping is evident on the screenies. If you look at the middle you will see a heavy line that divides the left channel from the right. Then slightly above that for the left channel is another lighter line, and then if you go up to near the top there is a second light white line. Those two lines are zero db, anything that goes past those lines is clipped because the max that can be reproduced is 0 dB. On the Pavement disks, there is a lot of clipping. Sure there are some worse offenders out there, but that doesn't make this one good. And yes it was from a retail cd bought through Insound. I dont have the chutzpah to complain about something I download, only about things I actually purchase.

Anyway, I really care about music which is why I sometimes speak up about these things. But I realize this is 2009, and finding a properly mastered rock/pop cd like the gorgeous Chinese Democracy is akin to finding a hen's tooth, but hope springs eternal. I guess I just thought that Matador had done such an amazing job on the set, it was a shame that the mastering had to taint it. I mean I would have been ecstatic if I had gotten a properly mastered 2 disc set with a bonus LP for under $20. As it is, I know I'll be listening to my 11 year disc when I want to Brighten the Corners.

[Jesper]

I am posting this unedited response from Calbi to bburl and others. Hope this helps illuminate the topic. Best, JE



Dear Sir,
Enclosed find two snapshots of my edit windows dealing with the issue of cd levels on the new Pavement re-issue. The new re-issue is 4.5 db louder than the original. The reasons for the louder levels on today’s CD’s are many and complicated, and I have spoken and written about them at length in interviews and panels I have moderated. I greatly appreciate your opinion in wanting to keep the music dynamic and powerful, however, you must understand that as a mastering engineer hired by artists, labels, managers and producers, I can also appreciate their opinion of how loud there music needs to be to “compete” (a term I often hear, probably before 75% of the sessions I do). I appreciate theirs maybe a tad more because they are paying me to best represent their music. There isn’t a session that goes by (and I master 130-170 albums a year) during which I am not aware of this one tenet: make the music as loud as possible while keeping the dynamics. That being said, please refer to the files I have provided…The snapshot marked “Various” contains a millisecond snapshot of files which have been pushed to the limits of digital compression. You will see that the peak of the wavefrom extends over time in both frames, but more so in the lower one. This causes a sound which becomes edgy and can border on distortion. Then note the snapshot of the Pavement waveform…the lower panel is the “97 copy and the upper one is the 2008 on which I just did. Although it is compressed in terms of maxing the level, I, as always, leave enough room for the dynamics I feel drive the song. This is, of course, if it is my call, which it is not always, but in the case of “Brighten the Corners” it was. Now, you may feel that the ’97 one is more powerful and sounds better, but I do not. The original mix and ’97 CD was actually quite compressed on the analog side…I feel that my 2008 version is more powerful, has fuller more driving bass, and when listened to on what most people listen on, will ultimately be more satisfying. Obviously, you do not. I greatly admire Steve Hoffman’s work, as do many people over the last twenty or so years…Steve has his clients, and I, George Marino, Ted Jensen, Tom Coyne, Chris Geringher, Chris Athens and Leon Zervos all have ours. Their customers need to be satisfied that their investment in their projects will move their potential audience, and I can tell you from years of experience that giving them the levels of 1997 will not satisfy them, and they will ultimately abandon us if we go in that direction.
Anyone who know me knows that I do not crush the levels as a matter of routine, but in the case of this Pavement album, I felt that the slightly more compressed, louder 2008 version would satisfy their old fans and gain them new younger ones. I am sorry you were disappointed,
But after all, and thank goodness, recording is an art form, and not everyone always agrees, or should agree, on what is good art. The Pavement re-issue has no distortion or any defects in any way, and so it stands as my interpretation of their sound, circa 2008.

Respectfully yours,
Greg Calbi

[Jesper]

sorry if those images made the window widen making it hard to read Calbi's statement. I am posting it again here:

Dear Sir,
Enclosed find two snapshots of my edit windows dealing with the issue of cd levels on the new Pavement re-issue. The new re-issue is 4.5 db louder than the original. The reasons for the louder levels on today’s CD’s are many and complicated, and I have spoken and written about them at length in interviews and panels I have moderated.

I greatly appreciate your opinion in wanting to keep the music dynamic and powerful, however, you must understand that as a mastering engineer hired by artists, labels, managers and producers, I can also appreciate their opinion of how loud there music needs to be to “compete” (a term I often hear, probably before 75% of the sessions I do). I appreciate theirs maybe a tad more because they are paying me to best represent their music. There isn’t a session that goes by (and I master 130-170 albums a year) during which I am not aware of this one tenet: make the music as loud as possible while keeping the dynamics.

That being said, please refer to the files I have provided…The snapshot marked “Various” contains a millisecond snapshot of files which have been pushed to the limits of digital compression. You will see that the peak of the wavefrom extends over time in both frames, but more so in the lower one. This causes a sound which becomes edgy and can border on distortion. Then note the snapshot of the Pavement waveform…the lower panel is the “97 copy and the upper one is the 2008 on which I just did. Although it is compressed in terms of maxing the level, I, as always, leave enough room for the dynamics I feel drive the song. This is, of course, if it is my call, which it is not always, but in the case of “Brighten the Corners” it was.

Now, you may feel that the ’97 one is more powerful and sounds better, but I do not. The original mix and ’97 CD was actually quite compressed on the analog side…I feel that my 2008 version is more powerful, has fuller more driving bass, and when listened to on what most people listen on, will ultimately be more satisfying. Obviously, you do not. I greatly admire Steve Hoffman’s work, as do many people over the last twenty or so years…Steve has his clients, and I, George Marino, Ted Jensen, Tom Coyne, Chris Geringher, Chris Athens and Leon Zervos all have ours. Their customers need to be satisfied that their investment in their projects will move their potential audience, and I can tell you from years of experience that giving them the levels of 1997 will not satisfy them, and they will ultimately abandon us if we go in that direction.

Anyone who know me knows that I do not crush the levels as a matter of routine, but in the case of this Pavement album, I felt that the slightly more compressed, louder 2008 version would satisfy their old fans and gain them new younger ones.

I am sorry you were disappointed,
But after all, and thank goodness, recording is an art form, and not everyone always agrees, or should agree, on what is good art. The Pavement re-issue has no distortion or any defects in any way, and so it stands as my interpretation of their sound, circa 2008.

Respectfully yours,
Greg Calbi

[bburl]

Thanks Jesper & Mr. Calbi, I really appreciate the responses.

I think the key is when Mr. Calbi writes "...and when listened to on what most people listen on...". I guess I would hope that the engineer would be using studio monitors to determine what sounds good and not $20 ear buds, just as I would hope the studio would be quiet and not have recorded bus noises to simulate the theoretical listening environment of the average listener. But, of course, goosed bass and lots of digital compression are the de facto standards today in rock/pop music. & I have no doubt he is right when he says "...and I can tell you from years of experience that giving them the levels of 1997 will not satisfy them, and they will ultimately abandon us if we go in that direction." I would say it might be possible that fans are abandoning music because of the quest for loudness, and maybe that's part of the reason sales are tanking. Maybe dynamic music works better on a subconscious level and by abandoning that people are less emotionally involved in the music. I don't think everything wrong in the music business today is because of piracy.

But at least every once in a while a nutter like Axl Rose will have a rock album mastered properly so those of us who don't listen to ipods while riding on buses can hear what rock music using today's technology can sound like when used to its full potential.

Just as final note, I am not arguing that the 1997 version is vastly superior to the 2008 version, far from it. Using the word 'crappy' was a tad harsh. As far as examples of good vs not-as-good mastering goes, this one is fairly mild. It's just that this is a definitive re-issue of an established band whose fans are probably making enough money now to buy good audio equipment, so I would have hoped that perfection would have been the goal in the mastering sessions.

But hey, I know it's a lost cause. High fidelity is dead in rock and pop.

[anazgnos]

Why are there digital glitches throughout "Westie Can Drum" and a few other tracks on disc 1?

These images comes from a clean rip straight from the commercial CD made in EAC.

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/9973/glitch1.jpg

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/485/glitch2.jpg