Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

I've been listening to a bit of early-mid 80's pop and new wave lately. FWIW, I listen with headphones at work, and have a decent set, and a decent sound board, so I can hear a lot of suttle things you won't generally hear when listening in a car, or at home.

One thing I've noticed is that it seems that Hi-Fi hit it's pinnacle in about 1984-85... The production, mixing, and engineering from back then is just astonishing. With the abuse of dynamic compression in everything today, it's really refreshing to hear a nice dynamic mix. It's sad we have to travel time to get there though.

Just thought I'd try to spark a cool music discussion-

Thoughts?

The 80's were the pinnacle for music in a lot of ways. Good music is still being produced today but it's not nearly as creative, expressive or imaginitive as the music from that storied decade. There's something to be said for analog recordings too; I prefer ADD over DDD except for classical recordings which fare better with digital recorders than other genres.

I agree with you guys! I also feel that the digital age made musicians more dependent on technology instead of skill. With the development of pitch correction, cut and paste production and sampling, musicians and artists have become indifferent with performing at their best at all time.

I agree on the compression. Compression kills. At least it kills the dynamics in the music. When I listen to some hard rock, even with the volume turned almost all the way down, it still sounds like the music is yelling at me. I hate being yelled at. The bands sound good, but the mastering "engineers" remove all the dynamics.
Just look at the wave form of a "loud" song sometime. Most stuff looks like a rectangle with little or no dips ialong the pattern. That's just wrong.

We all have volume controls. Why is it that no one wants to use them? I don't use any compression, and it saves the dynamics. But then ppl always ask, why don't you make it louder?

I tell them, why don't you use that thing called a volume control. There is a reason that they included it in your system.

Yeah, the old loudness wars thing... Read about that a year or two ago.

I listen to a lot of old prog, like Yes and Rush, from the 80's. It's such a joy to listen to albums from that period.

Read the thread title, was hoping the topic was the movie.

Introduced me to Beta Band "Dry the Rain".

I've posted this here before, but it always makes for a good follow up, amazing article, but long:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... h_fidelity

I've never really paid too much attention to vinyl vs digital, but I trust you when you say the sound quality was better then. I would qualify that sentiment however, with the following.

It sounds better to the trained ear. If you grew up in the digital world, you don't know what you're missing so it's really only painful to those who know the difference. My kids are quite content plugged into their MP3 players. If they were to hear a vinyl record, they would probably be like "dude, what's with the scratches"?

I know digital opens the doors wider for inexperienced noobs to compete with the 'real musician who actually dedicated years to becoming a master in his trade'. My wife and her colleages were Master Photographers, who had to study lighting, composition, earn degrees, etc.

They are now competing with 10 year old's wielding cell phones (exaggerating but you get it) who charge 5 dollars to shoot your weddings because the bride and groom don't know the difference other than cost... the quality and composition suffers GREATLY, yet the only people who really notice and scream inside are the professionals who know "you can't pose like that!", or how can you NOT shoot this moment at a wedding?? It's terribly unfortunate, but how do you convince a generation what they are missing without sitting down with each and every one of them to point out the differences?... you can't. Ignorence is bliss to the ignorant, and a thorn to the enlightened.

Anyways, there is an upside at least. Immediate feedback, and the ability to play and incorporate instruments you never learned how to play from the comfort of your home (via MIDI, etc.). You can be your own band. You can spend your time refining your playing skills instead of spending your day replacing springs, gears and tubes, or spending a fortune to purchase a soundboard that you have to rent a building to house. There are a ton of upsides, so don't forget that aspect.

Kramerguy wrote:I've posted this here before, but it always makes for a good follow up, amazing article, but long:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... h_fidelity

Thanks for the link. Good read. But nobody listens. I have been telling people that since I started recording. They all still prefer loud and have little understanding of dynamics.

As child I listened to big bands, and classics like "Peter and the Wolf" (I actually found that one on a CD from the library and have it again. ) Back in those days dynamics were used for effect.

I hate loud for the sake of loud. The whole purpose of recording in a digital arena is for dynamics. It drops the noise floor so you can hear the smallest sounds without a lot of hiss, rumble, and other artifacts.

Unfotunately, Chris said it in a nutshell. Ppl have no idea what they're missing. They may have a $5,000 entertainment system in thier homes, but if the recordings are crap, it'll sound like crap, & that, ladies & gents, is what the music world produces these days. No one knows better, so no one cares...

Hey Chris - All too true. The photography analogy is as well-fit as any.

I'd argue one point, simply because I happen to know something about photography, and that is:

I know nothing about it! I SUCK at it. I mean, much like drawing, I'm completely worthless when it comes to physical art.

That being said, I also understand and appreciate a GREAT work of art when I see it (going to go into paintings instead of photos to make my analogy though). I've always loved the work of Thomas Kinkade. I've noticed at galleries now that there are MANY copycat artists to his general style, yet none of them hold a candle to the sheer quality of a true kinkade painting. Why? Because, even though I know dick about paint types, canvases, and can't even draw in the lines, I can tell what appeals to me, and can see the differences in quality between the higher quality and the lower 'copycat' quality.

Same thing with music. If I played the digital remaster of 'Dark side of teh moon' through a quality Kilpsch system, and then put in even the same album, but a low quality standard cd, into a typical panasonic home stereo, Hellen Keller would be able to notice the difference...

It's not that 'kids today' don't notice, it's that they were never given the opportunity. Everything today is taught to be quick, easy, effortless. There's still "audiophiles" in the world, most older, sure.. but there's also ALWAYS going to be an underground movement among the youth, and tomorrow it could go mainstream as fast as you or I can snap our fingers.

I recently had stumbled onto a pair of Klipsch speakers (2' tall 1.5' wide), I got the serial and determined them to be from 1982, and a high end model. They were kept in pristine condition, not even a scratch on them. I was given the oppoortunity to buy them for $200. I didn't really have the $$ or know the value, so I offered to help sell them. I went to a audiophile site and put them up for sale for best offer.

They sold in two hours. $800. Two days later I got an offer for $1200. The folks who owned them gave me a $200 cut for arranging everything, so it all worked out in the end, but people are still clearly into hi-fi.

BTW- I got to hear them when demo'ing them for the sale, they were freeking AMAZING. I kicked myself for not buying them lol.

OK soooo what should we do different ??
Perhaps that should be the point of this thread.

PLAY LIVE, Cant beat that with a stick.

sanshouheil wrote:OK soooo what should we do different ??
Perhaps that should be the point of this thread.

First off, WRITE more dynamic music. Bring back highs and lows, quiet time in songs. Not every song, of course, but think DYNAMIC. Know that variations aren't just on notes and emphasis, but on volume and intensity itself. "let it breathe, man"..

Other than that, when you are in the studio, you absolutely must REFUSE to let the engineer/producer use any compression, with exception to very minor amounts that he can explain why it's necessary to use it at each and every point.

Look at the wavelength as explained in that article. I've used a sound program (on my other pc.. trying to remember the name of it) that brings up the entire song in wavelength form so you can see graphically if the song is dynamic or compressed.

Kramerguy wrote:

sanshouheil wrote:OK soooo what should we do different ??
Perhaps that should be the point of this thread.

First off, WRITE more dynamic music. Bring back highs and lows, quiet time in songs. Not every song, of course, but think DYNAMIC. Know that variations aren't just on notes and emphasis, but on volume and intensity itself. "let it breathe, man"..

Other than that, when you are in the studio, you absolutely must REFUSE to let the engineer/producer use any compression, with exception to very minor amounts that he can explain why it's necessary to use it at each and every point.

Look at the wavelength as explained in that article. I've used a sound program (on my other pc.. trying to remember the name of it) that brings up the entire song in wavelength form so you can see graphically if the song is dynamic or compressed.

So here is an issue we recently have come across.
Apparently, if a recording is not significantly compressed. Or as I have heard it termed Radio Mix or Radio Mastered. You don stand a snowball chance in hell of getting airplay. Something to do with format and volume I think.
You may consider it somewhat silly for an amateur band to be concerned about airtime, but, If one is going to record a CD. Would one not want to create at least a window for the opportunity ?

That being said. I thought our CD sounded great after being mixed down. And that it got fluked up in the mastering stage.
I really wish I knew more about this. But the learning curve looks like a full circle from where I sit.