soon Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 13 hours ago, RussTCB said: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliot_Scheiner Elliot is doing this remaster. No mention of mastering work on the wiki. Do you know of anything he's mastered before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussTCB Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 53 minutes ago, soon said: No mention of mastering work on the wiki. Do you know of anything he's mastered before? https://www.allmusic.com/artist/elliot-scheiner-mn0000141492/credits Not sure if that's a complete list, but it seems like it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 Man looks like just one mastering credit and that was in 2017 so he seems to just be getting into mastering? I love his work mixing Phish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 Its going to sound pretty much like Shadow of your Love the flac copy sounds great 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted May 7, 2018 Author Share Posted May 7, 2018 6 hours ago, soon said: Man looks like just one mastering credit and that was in 2017 so he seems to just be getting into mastering? I love his work mixing Phish. If I'm not mistaken he's the mastering engineer for the upcoming Toto reissues as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post EvH Posted May 7, 2018 Author Popular Post Share Posted May 7, 2018 So I downloaded Shadow of Your Love from Qobuz. The track is available as a 16/44.1 FLAC file, which is CD quality. A few preliminary remarks: - This is probably the exact same files that will be on the CD in various configurations of the box set. - This file features the same mastering as the lossy ones available on streaming servces and on download platforms such as iTunes, Google Music and Amazon. - I hope it isn't but this probably is a downsampled version of the High Res files that will be available on the Blu Ray and on the High Res files available on the USB stick. I don't think they would have gone with the trouble of making two different masterings (AC/DC did that for Rock or Bust, with different masters for the vinyl/high res releases and the CD version). So, on to the comparison. I had a few listens and opened the file in Audacity: For reference purposes, below lies the waveform for the version on the LALD single -I KNOW this isn't the same version as the "new" one but considering that the structure of the single is identical, this is useful. A few remarks: - the new version is moderately less dynamic than the old one. Now I don't know if that is really due to the mastering itself, or rather the mix of the new version which is more compressed, and more congested. The drum machine like percussions probably has something to do with that, as well as the (new?) overdubbed guitar licks pasted on top. - Interestingly enough, the older version has way more clipping (the red bars) than the new one. Clipping is when the volume of the audio exceeds the limits of what a CD is capable of perfectly reproducing, inducing audible distortion in the worst cases. That may due to the treble which was used quite heavily on this version. - I prefer the mix of the old one, and honestly the clipping is not audible. The mix of the new one is too congested for my tastes, I don't like the backing vocals or the additional guitar licks which sound out of place. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 12 minutes ago, EvH said: If I'm not mistaken he's the mastering engineer for the upcoming Toto reissues as well. Oh thats cool. He's definitely a talented mixer and producer and SOYL sounds great (like i need to say that in the face of his 25 Grammys, lol). Just stands out to me that this is his second or third mastering credit. Ive heard about mastering engineers who wont reveal equipment or their secret techniques to even respected producers. That there is such learned-on-the-job and trial-and-error skill sets involved. Sounds fantastic so far though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted May 7, 2018 Share Posted May 7, 2018 2 minutes ago, EvH said: So I downloaded Shadow of Your Love from Qobuz. The track is available as a 16/44.1 FLAC file, which is CD quality. A few preliminary remarks: - This is probably the exact same files that will be on the CD in various configurations of the box set. - This file features the same mastering as the lossy ones available on streaming servces and on download platforms such as iTunes, Google Music and Amazon. - I hope it isn't but this probably is a downsampled version of the High Res files that will be available on the Blu Ray and on the High Res files available on the USB stick. I don't think they would have gone with the trouble of making two different masterings (AC/DC did that for Rock or Bust, with different masters for the vinyl/high res releases and the CD version). So, on to the comparison. I had a few listens and opened the file in Audacity: For reference purposes, below lies the waveform for the version on the LALD single -I KNOW this isn't the same version as the "new" one but considering that the structure of the single is identical, this is useful. A few remarks: - the new version is moderately less dynamic than the old one. Now I don't know if that is really due to the mastering itself, or rather the mix of the new version which is more compressed, and more congested. The drum machine like percussions probably has something to do with that, as well as the (new?) overdubbed guitar licks pasted on top. - Interestingly enough, the older version has way more clipping (the red bars) than the new one. Clipping is when the volume of the audio exceeds the limits of what a CD is capable of perfectly reproducing, inducing audible distortion in the worst cases. That may due to the treble which was used quite heavily on this version. - I prefer the mix of the old one, and honestly the clipping is not audible. The mix of the new one is too congested for my tastes, I don't like the backing vocals or the additional guitar licks which sound out of place. Thanks for this! Can you tell if the song is in perfect time, please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussTCB Posted May 8, 2018 Share Posted May 8, 2018 On 5/7/2018 at 1:04 PM, EvH said: So I downloaded Shadow of Your Love from Qobuz. The track is available as a 16/44.1 FLAC file, which is CD quality. A few preliminary remarks: - This is probably the exact same files that will be on the CD in various configurations of the box set. - This file features the same mastering as the lossy ones available on streaming servces and on download platforms such as iTunes, Google Music and Amazon. - I hope it isn't but this probably is a downsampled version of the High Res files that will be available on the Blu Ray and on the High Res files available on the USB stick. I don't think they would have gone with the trouble of making two different masterings (AC/DC did that for Rock or Bust, with different masters for the vinyl/high res releases and the CD version). So, on to the comparison. I had a few listens and opened the file in Audacity: For reference purposes, below lies the waveform for the version on the LALD single -I KNOW this isn't the same version as the "new" one but considering that the structure of the single is identical, this is useful. A few remarks: - the new version is moderately less dynamic than the old one. Now I don't know if that is really due to the mastering itself, or rather the mix of the new version which is more compressed, and more congested. The drum machine like percussions probably has something to do with that, as well as the (new?) overdubbed guitar licks pasted on top. - Interestingly enough, the older version has way more clipping (the red bars) than the new one. Clipping is when the volume of the audio exceeds the limits of what a CD is capable of perfectly reproducing, inducing audible distortion in the worst cases. That may due to the treble which was used quite heavily on this version. - I prefer the mix of the old one, and honestly the clipping is not audible. The mix of the new one is too congested for my tastes, I don't like the backing vocals or the additional guitar licks which sound out of place. Wow.... Thank you for all of that info. Very cool of you to write all that up! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted May 8, 2018 Author Share Posted May 8, 2018 24 minutes ago, RussTCB said: Wow.... Thank you for all of that info. Very cool of you to write all that up! My pleasure ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chunder Monkey Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 This is going to be controversial and probably sacrilegious to you guys...but I personally enjoy the hot masters....I don't find I get any ear fatigue, and the perceived detail and volume to me kinda suits hard rock style music. I don't like it taken to the point where it clips like Death Magnetic, but most of the other modern loud masters I have preferred to the originals. Stuff like medadeth and motley crue and that type of music works imo. I would agree on the need for dynamic range if this were music like say the soundtrack to a film - something like the Alien movies - where the music is supposed to have a lot of quiet and loud passages and subtlety. Then you need some range. But to my mind songs like Jungle would not contain much quietness naturally. Like even the start - when it's just slash playing - if you had 1985 GNR in the room performing that - how loud would slash's amp be? This style of music is loud. It's not like slash is playing on a single clarinet right before the whole orchestra comes in....it's a huge marshal stack. So maybe i'm in a minority, but I hope we get a nice loud master for this release - after all if you don't like it there's always the old pressings to go back to - but if we get something new and it's good then everyone wins. So far I thought Shadow of Your Love sounded great - a lot better than the previous official versions of the song (even though they are different takes) - which is a hopefull sign for the whole album. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted May 9, 2018 Share Posted May 9, 2018 My favourite remasters are The Who and Stones (Virgin) remasters from the 1990s. The Who ones are terrific (they have probably re-remastered them subsequently, buggering them up). You can really hear the full acoustic timbre of Tommy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimosPeppers Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 On 5/7/2018 at 1:04 PM, EvH said: So I downloaded Shadow of Your Love from Qobuz. The track is available as a 16/44.1 FLAC file, which is CD quality. A few preliminary remarks: - This is probably the exact same files that will be on the CD in various configurations of the box set. - This file features the same mastering as the lossy ones available on streaming servces and on download platforms such as iTunes, Google Music and Amazon. - I hope it isn't but this probably is a downsampled version of the High Res files that will be available on the Blu Ray and on the High Res files available on the USB stick. I don't think they would have gone with the trouble of making two different masterings (AC/DC did that for Rock or Bust, with different masters for the vinyl/high res releases and the CD version). So, on to the comparison. I had a few listens and opened the file in Audacity: For reference purposes, below lies the waveform for the version on the LALD single -I KNOW this isn't the same version as the "new" one but considering that the structure of the single is identical, this is useful. A few remarks: - the new version is moderately less dynamic than the old one. Now I don't know if that is really due to the mastering itself, or rather the mix of the new version which is more compressed, and more congested. The drum machine like percussions probably has something to do with that, as well as the (new?) overdubbed guitar licks pasted on top. - Interestingly enough, the older version has way more clipping (the red bars) than the new one. Clipping is when the volume of the audio exceeds the limits of what a CD is capable of perfectly reproducing, inducing audible distortion in the worst cases. That may due to the treble which was used quite heavily on this version. - I prefer the mix of the old one, and honestly the clipping is not audible. The mix of the new one is too congested for my tastes, I don't like the backing vocals or the additional guitar licks which sound out of place. Thanks man!! If you want to further examine the file, drop it in this free program and it will spit out several rms numbers.... pretty cool dynamic range Analyzer. http://www.channld.com/audioleak/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 So I bought the 1986 demo of Welcome to the Jungle from Qobuz. It's a 16/44.1 FLAC file, that is to say CD quality and resolution. As we all know, the demo itself has been floating around since quite a while, it was easy to find, notably on the great Appetite for Outtakes box set. There's a massive improvement in overall clarity and quality. The bootleg was probably sourced from a cassette copy, while they obviously have used the original tapes for the upcoming re-release. I'm more enclined to say that they must have gone back to the original tapes and probably multitracks rather than a simple DAT with a mixdown, because there are noticeable differences of mixing. The various differences in sound regarding Steven's drums (because this time, there's no doubt it's him) are not simply due to the earlier generation of the source -there has been some remixing done there. The mix itself is once again a bit congested, and the overall mastering doesn't leave much room for it to breathe. With these two tracks already released allowing us to make hypothesis regarding the engineering of the whole set, I would say that the remastering job could have been worse. It probably won't be audiophile level of quality, and the original Barry Diament-mastered CD will probably reign supreme, but I'm still hoping for a respectful job and limited use of compression. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombux Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 what about loudness war there, is it OK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhazUp Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 On 5/8/2018 at 8:56 AM, tremolo said: AFD sounds good as it is. A remaster could really make it pop if done correctly, but the way remasters are done nowadays it’s all about compressing the hell out of it just to make it sound as loud as modern current music does, destroying all dynamics in the process. Californication is a prime example. Metallica’s Death Magnetic distorts a lot too and sounds like absolute garbage. I totally agree, AFD doesn't need a remaster because the original issued CD is so well done! Have you heard the Purple Rain remaster that came out last year? It is like someone wanted the music of Prince with the absolute static dynamic range of that of Death Magnetic - absolutely horrible! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 17 minutes ago, zombux said: what about loudness war there, is it OK? There has been some compression added but honestly I'm pleasantly surprised.The waveform even shows some dynamics, which is good news: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jw224 Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Just now, EvH said: There has been some compression added but honestly I'm pleasantly surprised.The waveform even shows some dynamics, which is good news: Yeah I listened to the track on tidal and was very surprised by the quality. Wow that is surprisingly good, was expecting a brick. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 It is all a load of bollocks really. Just stick with the one you own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jw224 Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Yeah, remaster nowadays just means crushed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 I gotta say, the Jungle demo sounds pretty damn good. If that's how all the demos sound, I'll be ecstatic and will make this purchase well worth it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UsedYourIllusion Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Has anyone taken a look at the It’s so easy video audio? It sounds it’s been remastered, not sure if there’s brick walking or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvH Posted June 11, 2018 Author Share Posted June 11, 2018 7 hours ago, UsedYourIllusion said: Has anyone taken a look at the It’s so easy video audio? It sounds it’s been remastered, not sure if there’s brick walking or not Not yet, will do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.