Hello everyone!
Has anyone shopped/looked at stereo systems lately? Most of you're friendly and knowledgeable local Stereo/Hi-Fi shops have all but disapeared. What do ya have left?
Wal-Mart!
If it sounds better on a Wal-Mart, Best Buy oversized boom box/'stereo system' (PLASTIC)
that's what the producers and engineers are targeting for, at least here in the good ole USA! And yes automobile systems.
My rant,
Wayne
Has anyone shopped/looked at stereo systems lately? Most of you're friendly and knowledgeable local Stereo/Hi-Fi shops have all but disapeared. What do ya have left?
Wal-Mart!
If it sounds better on a Wal-Mart, Best Buy oversized boom box/'stereo system' (PLASTIC)
that's what the producers and engineers are targeting for, at least here in the good ole USA! And yes automobile systems.My rant,
Wayne
Hiya cogsncogs i love made in japan which reminds me i gotta get a good cd copie of it sometime..
Actualy i think i remember listning to that album when i was like 11 years old.
oh yeah what you were saying about boom boxe's was good too
iv'e always wanted quality music equiptment
you kinda forget the rubbish stuff even exists.
So all's left that could be done with this compression problem is for studio engineers bands ectra to release a Special version of a cd/album for people like us on this site ?
Wouldnt that be nice
of course with the internet getting faster i expect one day we could purchase a special version very easily and burn it to cd ourselves maybee also choosing our own amount of compression level to add to it.
Ok im throwing random ideas at you here but yeah
um
if im wrong please argue your point .
Be nice
Actualy i think i remember listning to that album when i was like 11 years old.
oh yeah what you were saying about boom boxe's was good too
iv'e always wanted quality music equiptment
you kinda forget the rubbish stuff even exists.
So all's left that could be done with this compression problem is for studio engineers bands ectra to release a Special version of a cd/album for people like us on this site ?
Wouldnt that be nice
of course with the internet getting faster i expect one day we could purchase a special version very easily and burn it to cd ourselves maybee also choosing our own amount of compression level to add to it.
Ok im throwing random ideas at you here but yeah
um
if im wrong please argue your point .
Be nice
Very interesting. This reminds me of a line of thought a few of my friends were following in a recent chat. I'll try to summarise what we were thinking.Rixsta said:
For the first time, we now have digital data media which can actually hold all the raw data of unmixed master tapes from the recording studio. So, if there was a one-hour recording session of Patricia Barber on 8 tracks of tape, you can probably digitise it at hi-res and fit all eight tracks separately into one SACD or DVD-A. Therefore, the technology now exists to sell the raw master tapes, unmixed, unprocessed, to the end-customer. And the customer will need the mixing and processing facilities in his SACD player. We don't need all the knobs and controls of a full mixing desk... all we need is the facility to upload a mix config file into the SACD player for each album. And the album can come with one (or more) studio-recommended mixing configs, allowing you to select the mix that you want on your player. If you don't like any of the configs, you can upload your own.
If this begins to happen, you'll see the Internet becoming a tremendous archive of config files for mixes for certain albums. Most users will use the mix configs supplied on the SACD by the publisher, but some people will create their own configs, download config files from the Net, and so on. You'll have people swapping their customised config files for a certain album. You'll see someone saying "My mix config for Love Over Gold sounds better than the studio mix, if you have slightly smallish stand-mount speakers" and so on. It will open up a totally new world of access to the music. The recording and mixing engineers won't go out of business.... they'll just become one source of mix configs. In fact, reputed mixing engineers will probably get into business selling their own fine-tuned mix config files for popular albums. "You don't like what Naxos did to their mix of Beethoven's Ninth. Try this mix config, and see the music come alive. Ten dollars, please..."
As one of my good friends often says... the possibilities are immense.
The obvious flaw in this approach: how much will a full mixing hardware in an SACD player cost? Won't it be too expensive? Well, the answer is ... not really. A large part of the cost (not a majority, but quite a large part) comes from the controls... the knobs and switches and meters. When you eliminate all that, the cost drops a lot. And then, if you do all the mixing in the digital domain, digital electronics may be less expensive than analog circuits to do the same job. And for controls, all you need is a data link to a PC, which will run a special software program to display a mixer console. That way, those who want a full-fledged mixing desk can get it without the costs of physical pots and switches.
What do you think?
configs mix-remix compression little, lot?
Rixta wrote:
You can already do something like that in a prog like "Sound Forge". Compression/expansion. But once the waveform is clipped it stays clipped! I haven't tried expansion in sound forge so I can't comment on the quality/artifacts.
tcpip wrote:
Yes, but very unlikely. Not cost effective. Plus you'd be playing around with someone's work, you would need license from the recording company eg. Warner, EMI etc. to remix, re-eq, RE-PRODUCE. Otherwise copywrite infringment. There might be some bands willing to do that from like say their own web site. But I don't see anything like that in the near future for the major record labels.
I don't think a lot of bands or producers would like a **it load of config files with different mixes-eq's (that they worked so hard on) and such that were done by you or me and everybody's uncle floating all over the net. Would you?
Yeah I've had that same dream many times to remix an album and do it RIGHT! But that would be in my mind how I wanted it to sound and not theirs.
Sorry guys but that's the way I see it.
Cheers
Wayne
Rixta wrote:
You can already do something like that in a prog like "Sound Forge". Compression/expansion. But once the waveform is clipped it stays clipped! I haven't tried expansion in sound forge so I can't comment on the quality/artifacts.
tcpip wrote:
Yes, but very unlikely. Not cost effective. Plus you'd be playing around with someone's work, you would need license from the recording company eg. Warner, EMI etc. to remix, re-eq, RE-PRODUCE. Otherwise copywrite infringment. There might be some bands willing to do that from like say their own web site. But I don't see anything like that in the near future for the major record labels.
I don't think a lot of bands or producers would like a **it load of config files with different mixes-eq's (that they worked so hard on) and such that were done by you or me and everybody's uncle floating all over the net. Would you?
Yeah I've had that same dream many times to remix an album and do it RIGHT! But that would be in my mind how I wanted it to sound and not theirs.
Sorry guys but that's the way I see it.
Cheers
Wayne
Re: configs mix-remix compression little, lot?
From the conceptual and legal point of view, what I've suggested is no different from having separate tone controls for the left and right channel. Even such controls allow a very, very primitive version of mixing, and we don't see any IPR infringement issues there, do we?
But then, that's me. I can't account for the opinions of a lot of bands and producers.
I can't comment on cost effectiveness, and that's a moving target anyway. But about copyright infringement, I seriously doubt there will be any such issues. I'm not suggesting making copies or republishing music here. I'm only suggesting that we (the end-user) be given the equivalent of super-sophisticated tone controls.cogsncogs said:
From the conceptual and legal point of view, what I've suggested is no different from having separate tone controls for the left and right channel. Even such controls allow a very, very primitive version of mixing, and we don't see any IPR infringement issues there, do we?
Yes, I would. How many bands do you know which will mind it if their listeners, sitting in the privacy of their own living rooms, tweaked the tone controls to suit their tastes?
But then, that's me. I can't account for the opinions of a lot of bands and producers.
tone controls
I don't think we are talking about tone controls here, at least I'm not.
I was thinking more along the lines of REMIXING, Re-Producing and Remastering. I think that's a lot different than tone controls IMHO. It's akin to changing the lyrics and the music itself. In your own living room is one thing. But uploading a (your's or mine) config file available for anybody to download is another. That was my thinking.
I would love to have the 16 track master of Pink Floyd's DSOTM!!, and a several hundred others! 
Cheers
Wayne
I don't think we are talking about tone controls here, at least I'm not.
I was thinking more along the lines of REMIXING, Re-Producing and Remastering. I think that's a lot different than tone controls IMHO. It's akin to changing the lyrics and the music itself. In your own living room is one thing. But uploading a (your's or mine) config file available for anybody to download is another. That was my thinking.
I would love to have the 16 track master of Pink Floyd's DSOTM!!, and a several hundred others!
Cheers
Wayne
If someone wants uncompressed music, you can find it here:
http://www.ampcast.com/karoliina
Especially Entropy 1 - overture has no compression of any kind.
Nearly direct output of the synthesizers.
No equalization either. I dislike equalization as well because
it makes the music sound different than I intended with
the original sound.
I have heard some complaints from people that the recording
is low quality because it has low volume level. The low volume
level is because it has great dynamic range and the highest peak
is at 0 level and the other area is lower respectively. Compression reduces sound quality, not only in classical music recording, but I feel that also in electronic music. I can use compression however to create a sound I intend to do.
As comparison, some my old tracks are heavily compressed.
For example TrueDreams 3.
If you listen to Entropy 1 overture and the old version of TrueDreams 3 or TrueDreams 4, you'll notice the difference. The Entropy 1 sounds much more airy and is easier
to listen at high SPL levels. However, to hear it properly, one
needs a moderately high quality audio system. It will be pain with built-in laptop speakers. You will need high volume setting to hear the low volume thunderstorm from the background properly.
The thunderstorm is by the way 100% synthetic, no samples were used. The sound is a Nord Modular patch called donnerwetter. I think it was created by my music friend Fin (Christian Worton, www.worton.com which previously owned this Nord).
Best Wishes,
Karoliina
http://www.ampcast.com/karoliina
Especially Entropy 1 - overture has no compression of any kind.
Nearly direct output of the synthesizers.
No equalization either. I dislike equalization as well because
it makes the music sound different than I intended with
the original sound.
I have heard some complaints from people that the recording
is low quality because it has low volume level. The low volume
level is because it has great dynamic range and the highest peak
is at 0 level and the other area is lower respectively. Compression reduces sound quality, not only in classical music recording, but I feel that also in electronic music. I can use compression however to create a sound I intend to do.
As comparison, some my old tracks are heavily compressed.
For example TrueDreams 3.
If you listen to Entropy 1 overture and the old version of TrueDreams 3 or TrueDreams 4, you'll notice the difference. The Entropy 1 sounds much more airy and is easier
to listen at high SPL levels. However, to hear it properly, one
needs a moderately high quality audio system. It will be pain with built-in laptop speakers. You will need high volume setting to hear the low volume thunderstorm from the background properly.
The thunderstorm is by the way 100% synthetic, no samples were used. The sound is a Nord Modular patch called donnerwetter. I think it was created by my music friend Fin (Christian Worton, www.worton.com which previously owned this Nord).
Best Wishes,
Karoliina
Re: tone controls
Mee too
as for the pink floyd mee too lol
The album Meddle by floyd i love
cogsncogs said:
I don't think we are talking about tone controls here, at least I'm not.
I was thinking more along the lines of REMIXING, Re-Producing and Remastering. I think that's a lot different than tone controls IMHO. It's akin to changing the lyrics and the music itself. In your own living room is one thing. But uploading a (your's or mine) config file available for anybody to download is another. That was my thinking.
I would love to have the 16 track master of Pink Floyd's DSOTM!!, and a several hundred others!
Cheers
Wayne
Mee too
as for the pink floyd mee too lol
The album Meddle by floyd i love
Karoliina said:
How about a passive Equilizer maybee they would not add much unwanted sound and colour ect
I think i use too much eq in my music because my speakers and amp are S**te
but i think if you want it to sound right in general you will have to use at least a small amount of equilization.
even if it's to match the sound of all the instruments in a recording.
but then again a muffled or relaxed sound on say a keyboard might be the effect you want so it dosent sound so upfront in a piece of music.. It's all just a matter of taste but in general i say only use small amounts of eq.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.