New Album Audio Quality

[pdr1979]

I know when BWGGK came out, there were some rumblings about the sound of the album and that it was way too loud. Hope this clears some of those thoughts up for you on the new album. Here is a reply Lillywhite sent to me via twitter today.

pdr1979
@Sillywhite What are your thoughts on overly compressed music on recordings these day's? Hope that's not the case on the new DMB album.

Steve Lillywhite CBE ‏ @Sillywhite
@pdr1979 i actually rejected the overly compressed version of new DMB so you will have to turn it up yourself, but its more open sounding.

Now I'm just hoping it actually sounds amazing and that we get a vinyl release of it.

[markus_europe]

that's great news, great great news.
you can count on lillywhite.

[jaymas9]

This is literally the best news I have heard so far. Fuck...yes.

[dmb27364041]

Fantastico!

[Quadrophenia92]

Now THIS is the kind of stuff we can concretely thank Lillywhite for

[Inter]

I am surprised Lillywhite has any authority over the mastering process, but if it turns out to be true, excellent news.

[BotheDMBFan]

This is interesting, because the U2 record he had major control over was compressed to bejesus and back.

[Jan-Willem]

This is interesting, because the U2 record he had major control over was compressed to bejesus and back.
That's probably because of Bono...

[BotheDMBFan]

That's probably because of Bono...

Doubtful. Bono is God.

[Jan-Willem]

Doubtful. Bono is God.
God doesn't have great hearing then...

[BotheDMBFan]

Neither did Bethooven.

[TwoStep2888]

I hope they compress it to the point where it's nothing but a loud droning buzz for 55 minutes. Then release it exclusively in 64k mp3, only available at davebandalbumsite.ru/ablum.exe

[TwoStep2888]

Half of dmbc would still say it's "better than 99% of everything else out there" verbatim + get rly mad at Haters

[BotheDMBFan]

I hope they compress it to the point where it's nothing but a loud droning buzz for 55 minutes. Then release it exclusively in 64k mp3, only available at davebandalbumsite.ru/ablum.exe

LOU REED METAL FUCKING MACHINE!!!!

Fuck yes. This band is no longer fucked.

[dobyblue]

LOU REED METAL FUCKING MACHINE!!!!

Fuck yes. This band is no longer fucked.

Yeah and what's even more ridiculous about that Lou Reed wankfest is that it's available in high rez on Blu-ray.

1000 thumbs down.

Great news on the new DMB record, hopefully that means it's more dynamic than the Big 3 as they're not shining examples of dynamics at all.

[ericvol]

Yeah and what's even more ridiculous about that Lou Reed wankfest is that it's available in high rez on Blu-ray.

1000 thumbs down.

Great news on the new DMB record, hopefully that means it's more dynamic than the Big 3 as they're not shining examples of dynamics at all.

So does this give you a lot of hope for the new record?

How was Lillywhite sessions done? I guess it never got mastered so it is out of the equation?

[dobyblue]

So does this give you a lot of hope for the new record?

How was Lillywhite sessions done? I guess it never got mastered so it is out of the equation?

Interesting question, I'm going to dial into my home PC later today and run the TT-DR against the Lillywhite Sessions, lol.

[sheldonlevene]

Interesting question, I'm going to dial into my home PC later today and run the TT-DR against the Lillywhite Sessions, lol.

The original files or the Karmageddon ones? I'm assuming the former.

[hmich176]

Interesting question, I'm going to dial into my home PC later today and run the TT-DR against the Lillywhite Sessions, lol.

Is there anything to run? The original leak was not mastered.

[dmb27364041]

Doubtful. Bono is God.

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:l ol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol Get out. --->

[cry_minarets458]

when he means turn it up, does he just mean something simple as turning the volume up or does he mean like messing with an equalizer to bring other parts of the song out? Sorry I'm not too tech savvy when it comes to mixing and the terminology associated with it

[Mateo2k]

If it's too loud, turn it down!

[dobyblue]

Is there anything to run? The original leak was not mastered.

Of course, because they weren't mastered we have a better idea of where Steve's mixes are at before they hit the mastering stage.

Original Lillywhite sessions (2000)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed folder: E:\Dave Matthews Band\dmb2000-04-00-lillywhites\dmb-lillywhites.audio\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Filename
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR15 -0.41 dB -17.33 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t01.wav
DR13 -2.63 dB -17.11 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t02.wav
DR13 -0.00 dB -15.40 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t03.wav
DR11 -1.33 dB -14.28 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t04.wav
DR12 -0.00 dB -13.46 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t05.wav
DR11 -0.78 dB -13.29 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t06.wav
DR11 -0.66 dB -13.98 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t07.wav
DR12 -2.18 dB -16.73 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t08.wav
DR11 -1.89 dB -15.42 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t09.wav
DR10 -0.85 dB -14.20 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t10.wav
DR13 -1.15 dB -15.90 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t11.wav
DR13 -0.13 dB -15.06 dB dmb-lillywhites-d1t12.wav
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of files: 12
Official DR value: DR12

================================================== ============================================


Karmageddon remaster (2006)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed folder: E:\Dave Matthews Band\dmb2000-04-00-lillywhites-karmageddon\audio\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Filename
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR13 -0.10 dB -14.59 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 01 - Busted Stuff.wav
DR12 -0.10 dB -13.55 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 02 - Grey Street.wav
DR10 -0.10 dB -12.75 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 03 - Diggin' A Ditch.wav
DR9 -0.10 dB -11.20 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 04 - Sweet Up And Down.wav
DR9 -0.10 dB -10.80 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 05 - JTR.wav
DR9 -0.10 dB -10.54 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 06 - Big Eyed Fish.wav
DR9 -0.10 dB -11.15 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 07 - Grace Is Gone.wav
DR12 -0.10 dB -13.54 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 08 - Captain.wav
DR11 -0.10 dB -12.35 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 09 - Bartender.wav
DR9 -0.10 dB -11.39 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 10 - Monkey Man.wav
DR12 -0.10 dB -13.14 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 11 - Kit Kat Jam.wav
DR11 -0.10 dB -12.32 dB Dave Matthews Band - The Lillywhite Sessions - {karmageddon remaster} - 12 - Raven.wav
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of files: 12
Official DR value: DR10

================================================== ============================================


Even though the Karmageddon remasters lose 2dB of dynamic range they are still more dynamic than any of the DMB studio releases on RCA. Both added to the DR database.

[decemberlov]

when he means turn it up, does he just mean something simple as turning the volume up or does he mean like messing with an equalizer to bring other parts of the song out? Sorry I'm not too tech savvy when it comes to mixing and the terminology associated with it

pretty sure this

[dobyblue]

when he means turn it up, does he just mean something simple as turning the volume up or does he mean like messing with an equalizer to bring other parts of the song out? Sorry I'm not too tech savvy when it comes to mixing and the terminology associated with it

Stricly volume.

What he means is, YOU should have control of the volume, but the unfortunate side effect of making all the quiet parts loud is that the loud parts can't get louder, they're already at the maximum volume the media can offer.

www.turnmeup.org

[cry_minarets458]

I gotcha. Okay...thanks, guys!

[sheldonlevene]

Stricly volume.

What he means is, YOU should have control of the volume, but the unfortunate side effect of making all the quiet parts loud is that the loud parts can't get louder, they're already at the maximum volume the media can offer.

www.turnmeup.org

That was a really interesting yt video btw. You posted it in the other thread, but it was pretty informative. Thanks.

[ibeheath]

I know when BWGGK came out, there were some rumblings about the sound of the album and that it was way too loud. Hope this clears some of those thoughts up for you on the new album. Here is a reply Lillywhite sent to me via twitter today.

pdr1979
@Sillywhite What are your thoughts on overly compressed music on recordings these day's? Hope that's not the case on the new DMB album.

Steve Lillywhite CBE ‏ @Sillywhite
@pdr1979 i actually rejected the overly compressed version of new DMB so you will have to turn it up yourself, but its more open sounding.

Now I'm just hoping it actually sounds amazing and that we get a vinyl release of it.

Ants should be super duper excited about this. We now just need to hope that management doesn't mess with Sterlings work. Then we will be golden!

[dobyblue]

Ants should be super duper excited about this. We now just need to hope that management doesn't mess with Sterlings work. Then we will be golden!

Sterling was responsible for Death Magnetic and Big Whiskey.

Let's hope that Sterling doesn't mess with Lillywhite's work or that Lillywhite has enough say in the matter than his tweet wasn't referring to Big Whiskey but rather the first mastering of the new album and he sent it back for being too loudness wars enhanced.

Seems like Jensen is on auto pilot these days. I wrote him a letter last week, old school snail mail:

Dear Mr Jensen:

I’m writing to you regarding the upcoming Dave Matthews Band album. As Sterling Sound has mastered Under the Table and Dreaming, Crash, Before These Crowded Streets, Busted Stuff and Big Whiskey and the Groogrux King I’m guessing there is a good chance you will once again be called on to master the new album due out later this year that Steve Lillywhite has been producing.

When I look at these five albums there have been vastly different mastering techniques used. For example Crash and Big Whiskey have copious amounts of digital clipping while Before These Crowded Streets seems to have lots of limiting yet with the exception of Big Whiskey they all have similar amounts of dynamic range, between 8~9dB. That’s not very dynamic when you consider the artist, but if we’re thankful for small mercies it’s better than many other CD’s of late. Then there’s Big Whiskey, it was reduced down to only 5 dB of dynamic range in places and no song other than the acoustic track “Baby Blue” has more than 6dB of dynamic range. It is another example of CD done wrong. Why was this so dynamically hyper-compressed when so many people can use leveling software on their portable music devices if they’re concerned about changes in volume? Is it the artist asking for this? Or did the label ask for it? Or did the producer Rob Cavallo ask for it or not leave you any headroom to work with and if so how did the vinyl turn out so much better than the CD? Or are you just so used to releases in the pop/rock genre being dynamically lifeless that you just do it automatically?

I wrote to Red Light Management in 2009 to complain about the mastering on Big Whiskey, finally we get an album from DMB that’s songwriting approaches the big three and it sounds lifeless and cold on any system better than your average iPod dock. RLM said that they would forward my concerns to Bruce Flohr. I am not sure if he will address them, but I guess we’ll find out later this year. Since I have spoken to RLM the live releases have increased in dynamics and the “Live Trax vol. 21” release that came out a few months ago had an average dynamic range of 11dB. That’s the first release from DMB to see more than 10dB since the independent release “Remember Two Things” in 1993 which had 15dB of dynamic range.

I’m sure you are fully aware of this, but when you listen to the difference between Vlado Meller’s awful mastering of “Stadium Arcadium” for CD and the 4LP 180g set that was mastered by Steve Hoffman directly from the 30ips analogue tapes it’s enough to make you weep for all the music that has been massacred by losing its dynamics.

So I’m writing you to beg you, if you are going to master the new Dave Matthews Band album will you PLEASE consider those of us that love the band’s music. You are one of the biggest names in mastering and you wield a lot of influence. I have no doubt if you do a dynamically alive mastering, like the kind found on some older CD’s like the 13dB of dynamic range found on 1990’s Rust in Peace by Megadeth, or the 13dB of dynamic range found on Red Hot Chili Peppers’ Blood Sugar Sex Magik, the band will agree that it sounds like what they heard in the studio. It’s time to get dynamics back in popular music. And if all else fails can you please at least ensure the vinyl is done without hyper-compressed dynamics?

Best Regards,


I hope he finds it respectful.

[sheldonlevene]

Sterling was responsible for Death Magnetic and Big Whiskey.

Let's hope that Sterling doesn't mess with Lillywhite's work or that Lillywhite has enough say in the matter than his tweet wasn't referring to Big Whiskey but rather the first mastering of the new album and he sent it back for being too loudness wars enhanced.

Seems like Jensen is on auto pilot these days. I wrote him a letter last week, old school snail mail:



I hope he finds it respectful.

Wow. That was nice. Hopefully something good comes out of it.

[Inter]

Seems like Jensen is on auto pilot these days. I wrote him a letter last week, old school snail mail: Excellent. :thumbsup

[pdr1979]

Wow, now this is what I'm hoping for hence the message I sent to Steve that started this post.

[jaymas9]

Stricly volume.

What he means is, YOU should have control of the volume, but the unfortunate side effect of making all the quiet parts loud is that the loud parts can't get louder, they're already at the maximum volume the media can offer.

www.turnmeup.org (http://www.turnmeup.org)Nail hit directly on head per the usual. :thumbsup

I forget who said it, but it was a quote something like: "without the quiet, there can actually be no loud." in reference to the importance of good DR. So true.

[character111]

I'm excited about the effort and attention to detail that hopefully has been put into the post-production.

I gotta say - I'm not super purist about dynamic range in and of itself - I don't like a quiet part being so quiet that I have to turn it up and here floor noise. I like good, clean but strong levels for quiter parts or instruments - but that can be achieved through proper engineering while tracking. Not by over-compressing after the fact.

What really annoys me though about limited dynamic range are the secondary effects of it. The clipping. The sound of a compressor pumping during transitions between parts that were originally at different levels. The mid-range build up as a result of compression and louder volume. And listening fatigue that comes from listening to it.

So this is good news if it happens.

[BruceW]

this is the most encouraging news since finding out Lillywhite was producing...now hopefully he isn't blowing smoke, or is only doing it half-way

[ElijahSoRight72]

this is the most encouraging news since finding out Lillywhite was producing...now hopefully he isn't blowing smoke, or is only doing it half-way

I don't think Lillywhite would screw this up. I think he really takes heart in what he does and even if the songs suck (they won't), Steve will at least make them sound like gold.

[BruceW]

I don't think Lillywhite would screw this up. I think he really takes heart in what he does and even if the songs suck (they won't), Steve will at least make them sound like gold.
I agree with that

[character111]

A lot of people have mentioned the over-compression and reduced dynamic range of the Big 3 - although being done in the 90s, they are still better than albums released in the past decade (since the loudness war trend has increased). I don't know if Lillywhite considered the dynamics of the Big 3 to be acceptable, or if he turned the mixes over to a mastering engineer and was not involved in the project at that point. But if he has final say over the mastering on this project, that is a very good sign and shows perhaps even more dedication and attention to detail this time around.

[JoshW]

www.turnmeup.org

WOW! This sums up so much of what I've been searching for, and the reason these "good" headphones I've been trying out have all been lackluster. I knew there was something, but I couldn't put it in to words.

Is also explains why BWGGK falls flat on my home theater, when it should be slamming the subwoofer on the opening of Shake Me.

[scobz144]

I hope we get something with the dynamics similar to the intro of watchtower on RR95. When the bass, sax, and drums come in, it sounds much better than other watchtower recordings I've heard.

[dobyblue]

WOW! This sums up so much of what I've been searching for, and the reason these "good" headphones I've been trying out have all been lackluster. I knew there was something, but I couldn't put it in to words.

Is also explains why BWGGK falls flat on my home theater, when it should be slamming the subwoofer on the opening of Shake Me.

:thumbsup

It falls very flat.

Now try listening to the original 1991 CD of Red Hot Chili Pepper's Blood Sugar Sex Magik, for example "Give It Away" and see what a difference the impact of a great recording can have. The kick drum, the bass, what a difference.

I wish we would see reissues of all the DMB CD's with lovely open dynamics, but I fear if they're ever "remastered" they would be even worse, closer to Big Whiskey than Blood Sugar.

[dobyblue]

Did all the dynamic range logs for the DMBLive series tonight - it's not pretty. Worst of all is that the most recent full band DMBLive appears to be the worst of all.

http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/index.php?search_album=DMBLive&sort=album&order=asc

[kyledmb]

Did all the dynamic range logs for the DMBLive series tonight - it's not pretty. Worst of all is that the most recent full band DMBLive appears to be the worst of all.

http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/index.php?search_album=DMBLive&sort=album&order=asc

Not pretty? So help me out here...what is an example of a good dynamic range? I understand clipping and all, but the numbers don't mean anything to me yet. Take Crash's Cry Freedom. Was this over compressed? It would be an insanely dynamic song if mastered properly. What was the DR value and what should it have looked like?

[kyledmb]

Also, is there any good cheap/freeware software for the Mac out there that I can analyse the DR of my library?

[dobyblue]

Not pretty? So help me out here...what is an example of a good dynamic range? I understand clipping and all, but the numbers don't mean anything to me yet. Take Crash's Cry Freedom. Was this over compressed? It would be an insanely dynamic song if mastered properly. What was the DR value and what should it have looked like?

Yes it was over compressed. Good DR starts at 11 I'd say, but even 10 would be desirable in this day and age. Anything above 11 is great and 13 is usually wide open and dynamic. Cry Freedom = DR8. It should be DR14.

It's pretty sad that the Dave solo show from 10.24.02 is substantially less dynamic than Megadeth's Rust in Peace for example.

Comparing Live Trax 5 to Live Trax 21, both 1995 shows, the latter is much more dynamic and open.

The DR scale is at the top of the page - http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

There is also a link on the right to download Mac OS version of the DR meter.

[RiotAct]

I hope they compress it to the point where it's nothing but a loud droning buzz for 55 minutes. Then release it exclusively in 64k mp3, only available at davebandalbumsite.ru/ablum.exe

Half of dmbc would still say it's "better than 99% of everything else out there" verbatim + get rly mad at Haters

ahahahaha nice

[mr_potown]

I can't pretend to be an expert in any of this stuff, but I have a questions for someone who may know better.

When I listen to BWGGK I often think that its missing some depth - as an example the string parts on Baby Blue and Squirm. When I compare them to Halloween and Stone the BTCS songs, sound so much fuller even though its a quartet vs a full orchestra (I believe). The Big whiskey strings sound like they were played on a keyboard. LITHOG sounds small to me because I compare it in my mind to Dreaming Tree. Is there a difference in the mixing / mastering or were the earlier parts just written better?

[kyledmb]

When I listen to BWGGK I often think that its missing some depth - as an example the string parts on Baby Blue and Squirm. When I compare them to Halloween and Stone the BTCS songs, sound so much fuller even though its a quartet vs a full orchestra (I believe). The Big whiskey strings sound like they were played on a keyboard.

I agree and have notice exactly what you are talking about with the depth of sound issue. I am no pro, but from what i understand this is due to over compressing. Check some of the resources that doby has posted...

BWGGK seems like its sound is hitting a brick wall all the way through.

[dobyblue]

Haven't listened to Baby Blue on a good system via CD but it's the only full song on the CD that has decent dynamic range and the waveform looks good as well. It certainly sounds great on the vinyl.

Look at the difference between Big Whiskey on CD and vinyl:

CD - http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/details.php?id=7351
Vinyl - http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/details.php?id=21007

LITHOG sounds really nice on vinyl.

[HAWNEY HAWNEY]

Gaucho, presented without comment.

http://i48.tinypic.com/30rl72f.jpg

[curly31989]

Gaucho, presented without comment.

http://i48.tinypic.com/30rl72f.jpg

Yeah my DR test showed a 7! Come on, what's with these guys! It drives me nuts.

[dobyblue]

Expect another shitty sounding CD folks.

[arriflex]

It can also be the MP3 encoding process to a degree.

[dobyblue]

It can also be the MP3 encoding process to a degree.

Agreed but at 320 Kbps I don't expect it to be much more than 1~2dB better on the CD. Hopefully it's 5dB better or more on the vinyl.

[Inter]

No doubt the vinyl edition is the one to get.

[dobyblue]

Here's a comparison of Gaucho 320 Kbps .mp3 with Funny The Way It Is directly ripped from the CD.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4364/ftwiivsgaucho.png

You can see less clipping and a little more headroom in the main dynamics. 7DR vs 5DR is almost a perceived doubling in dynamics so this should sound noticeable better than Big Whiskey when it comes out, but still it sucks that it's only a little better and not a dynamic range champion.

[mrpeters]

Gaucho, presented without comment.

http://i48.tinypic.com/30rl72f.jpg


iTunes mastering?

[mattinbeloit]

I just wanted to point out that the mastering on this album is pretty tasteful, it could be a hell of a lot louder and a lot of the dynamic range has been preserved. Don't get too wrapped up in the science, use your ears. I was surprised at Gaucho, I'm glad Lillywhite stepped in and apparently turned down the louder master. By modern standards, this new song is undercompressed.

I'm a recording engineer and am about to have an album mastered by Bob Ludwig at Gateway Mastering in a month or two. I've been doing dummy masterings of my songs to see if there's anything specific I want him to do. The only reason I'm pointing this out is because I've been mixing like crazy and working non stop the past two weeks and have been very focused on mastering. Personally, I'm an avid fan of not overcompressing stuff to crap in the mastering stage, and I think I might of told them to make it a bit louder if I was the engineer (Thank God I was not :) ).

I threw Gaucho into ProTools and ran it through some outboard gear just to compress it a bit more to see what happened. It's not the same when you're trying to apply mastering techniques to a file that's already been mastered, but you can still get a good idea as to why they made the decisions they did. I'm really impressed with how they treated the song. My biggest gripe was that I wanted to hear more low end bass frequencies in the mix, but as soon as I tried adding some in and giving it a bit more compression, the song lost a lot of it's openness and space. There are some nice sub frequencies that are left space to breath and do their thing, especially towards the end where Stefans bass gets all distorted. I was also surprised at how prominent Dave's vocals are.

It all boils down to having a nice, open, simplistic mix. This could of easily been overdone and turned into a wall of sound like some of the Big Whiskey stuff. Instead, we get a stripped down production that is accurate of the band, which is what Lillywhite is know for in a lot of his work. From the standpoint of an engineer, I would say this is "quality" work in regards to the issues brought up in this thread. Tasteful mastering and typical Lillywhite production, a good combination for this band IMO!

[dobyblue]

I just wanted to point out that the mastering on this album is pretty tasteful, it could be a hell of a lot louder and a lot of the dynamic range has been preserved. Don't get too wrapped up in the science, use your ears. I was surprised at Gaucho, I'm glad Lillywhite stepped in and apparently turned down the louder master. By modern standards, this new song is undercompressed.

I'm a recording engineer and am about to have an album mastered by Bob Ludwig at Gateway Mastering in a month or two. I've been doing dummy masterings of my songs to see if there's anything specific I want him to do. The only reason I'm pointing this out is because I've been mixing like crazy and working non stop the past two weeks and have been very focused on mastering. Personally, I'm an avid fan of not overcompressing stuff to crap in the mastering stage, and I think I might of told them to make it a bit louder if I was the engineer (Thank God I was not :) ).

I threw Gaucho into ProTools and ran it through some outboard gear just to compress it a bit more to see what happened. It's not the same when you're trying to apply mastering techniques to a file that's already been mastered, but you can still get a good idea as to why they made the decisions they did. I'm really impressed with how they treated the song. My biggest gripe was that I wanted to hear more low end bass frequencies in the mix, but as soon as I tried adding some in and giving it a bit more compression, the song lost a lot of it's openness and space. There are some nice sub frequencies that are left space to breath and do their thing, especially towards the end where Stefans bass gets all distorted. I was also surprised at how prominent Dave's vocals are.

It all boils down to having a nice, open, simplistic mix. This could of easily been overdone and turned into a wall of sound like some of the Big Whiskey stuff. Instead, we get a stripped down production that is accurate of the band, which is what Lillywhite is know for in a lot of his work. From the standpoint of an engineer, I would say this is "quality" work in regards to the issues brought up in this thread. Tasteful mastering and typical Lillywhite production, a good combination for this band IMO!

Great production, shitty mastering. Sorry, you're wrong. Under NO circumstances can any mastering be "a hell of a lot louder" than 0.00dB peak, that's actually physically impossible.

Brickwall Bob, good luck with that.

[dobyblue]

Sorry but I have to follow up on the last comment because it upsets me that someone would suggest this song is well mastered simply because they're in the industry, when the same industry is the main root of the problem.

Here's a look at the waveform for Gaucho, dynamic range of 7dB.

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/4294/dmbgaucho.png

-----------------------------------------------
Statistics for: Dave Matthews Band -- Gaucho.mp3
Number of Samples: 12477310
-----------------------------------------------

left right

Peak value: -0.00 dB --- -0.00 dB
Avg RMS: -10.20 dB --- -10.01 dB
DR channel: 7.45 dB --- 7.02 dB
-----------------------------------------------

Official DR value: DR7
===============================================


Here's a look at the waveform for Megadeth's "Tornado of Souls" from 1990's Rust In Peace, dynamic range of 12dB.

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/3032/megadethtornadoofsouls.png

-----------------------------------------------
Statistics for: 07 - Tornado Of Souls.wav
Number of Samples: 14241360
-----------------------------------------------

left right

Peak value: -0.55 dB --- -0.43 dB
Avg RMS: -14.00 dB --- -13.86 dB
DR channel: 11.63 dB --- 12.08 dB
-----------------------------------------------

Official DR value: DR12
===============================================

Here's a look at the waveform for Phil Collins' "Take Me Home" from 1985's No Jacket Required, dynamic range of 14dB.

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/9387/pctakemehome.png

-----------------------------------------------
Statistics for: 10 - Take Me Home.wav
Number of Samples: 15592584
-----------------------------------------------

left right

Peak value: -0.18 dB --- -1.83 dB
Avg RMS: -18.03 dB --- -18.74 dB
DR channel: 14.68 dB --- 13.66 dB
-----------------------------------------------

Official DR value: DR14
===============================================

Both the Megadeth track and the Phil Collins track can't be much louder when you look at the peak value, without compromising the dynamics. 7dB of dynamics is not "good" by 2012 standards, it's still poor. It's poorer than Under The Table and Dreaming, Crash and Before These Crowded Streets which were not champions of dynamic range to begin with, all three of them are over-compressed unless you have the vinyl of BTCS.

You should NOT accept that this is good mastering, it's good production...there is a big difference. If this is the result of Lillywhite saying no to loud DMB then the 2012 album was originally setting up to be the equivalent of Death Magenetic.

Sorry, but this isn't subjective, it's measurable poor. The Lillywhite Sessions weren't mastered, they have ample dynamic range. Mastering should not be synonymous with ruining dynamics.

For what it's worth here is the Lillywhite Sessions version of Captain, dynamic range of 12dB.

http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/9044/dmbcaptain.png

-----------------------------------------------
Statistics for: 8 - Dave Matthews Band - Captain.wav
Number of Samples: 14337792
-----------------------------------------------

left right

Peak value: -2.18 dB --- -2.45 dB
Avg RMS: -16.64 dB --- -16.82 dB
DR channel: 12.50 dB --- 12.48 dB
-----------------------------------------------

Official DR value: DR12
===============================================

Sorry Matt, but the dynamic range has NOT been preserved even though it well could have been. This is not acceptable at all and only people buying the vinyl are likely to get a nice open dynamic mastering of this DMB album.

I believe you're confusing mastering with production and suggest you compare Vlado Meller's CD mastering of Chili Pepper's Stadium Arcadium with Steve Hoffman's vinyl mastering to understand better why Gaucho sounds as flat as it does on a nice hi-fi system.

[mattinbeloit]

Great production, shitty mastering. Sorry, you're wrong. Under NO circumstances can any mastering be "a hell of a lot louder" than 0.00dB peak, that's actually physically impossible.

Brickwall Bob, good luck with that.

First off, I understand what you're saying, but I'm going to kindly disagree with you. It really urgs me when I see people use phrases like "in the industry" to try and make people like me seem like puppets or something. I enjoy what I do, and it frustrates me to see people get so mad over something so trivial. I'm sorry that my professional (Take that with a grain of salt) opinion would make you so mad.

To be blunt, music and engineering is as much an art as it is a science. I'm glad that you're being technical and taking the time to show everybody why it's important not to destroy dynamic range because the "industry" thinks we're all too lazy to turn the volume up.

I'm fully aware of the technical side of it all, that being said I've been spending more time as of late using my ears as opposed to looking at waveforms in a computer. I made my decisions in terms of the production and mastering component before I even looked at the waveform and I decided I liked it. Could the master be less hot? Of course it could, welcome to modern music....

I just wanted to point out that it was short sided of you to say I was wrong. I'm not wrong, it's an opinion about sound and it sounds good to me. You can show me all the data you want, but the sound is going to affect my decision more than a waveform. Just wanted to point that out... Keep on posting data about the masters though, it's a great discussion and good to dissect, just don't let it get in the way of having a discussion about something subjective rather than concrete.

:bounce

[dobyblue]

It's not an opinion that this could be a hell of a lot louder, you can't get louder than 0.00dB.

I know that dynamics aren't everything, the tracks off Remember Two Things are more dynamic than any other DMB release available but the production is obviously not at the level of what the top producers bring to the table.

Modern music is not the way it is because of fans of music, it's the way it is because people are foolish enough to think that their record will "stand out" more if it's "loud" while a) everything sounds the same volume on the radio anyway and b) most stuff now sounds the same on CD and DD because you can't get it any louder. The problem is that there is no way to get those dynamics back once you undo them. They should be doing one mastering for iTunes, and then a dynamic mastering for CD and vinyl.

When the vinyl gets released have a good listen to Gaucho on CD and then on vinyl and I believe you will retract your opinion and conclude that the more dynamic mastering sounds a lot better. That is what anyone who has heard the vinyl of Big Whiskey concurs in my experience, to go from 5dB of DR to 11dB with the same production, big difference.

Is this better than BW? Yes, but BW is close to being the worst you can get so saying it's marginally better than "very bad" is a small mercy.

It is art, imagine going back to when the Mona Lisa was painted and removing one of the primary colours. That is what the loudness wars feels like in terms of music to me.

[mattinbeloit]

It's not an opinion that this could be a hell of a lot louder, you can't get louder than 0.00dB.


Yes, I know.... I was refering to perceived loudness as opposed to the db level. Sorry for being technically incorrect, I was trying to dumb down my opinion so that most people would understand what I was talking about. Dynamic range is lost in the mastering process because everyone wants their song to sound louder, there are ways to go about that that do not involve compression or limiting. Sorry for not being clear, I was trying not to be technical on this forum :)

I was the TA for a recording class, and one of the things we did every Friday was set up a turntable in the contol room and compare a bunch of new CDs with their records. We would also import the CD and record the record into the computer, look at the wave files and talk about the differences, you can pretty much guess how that went. I remember the day we listened to Big Whiskey, because we listened to the Raconteurs Consolers of the Lonely.

Big Whiskey sounded great on record, so did Consolers. Two students mentioned that they liked the Raconteurs better on CD, when I asked them why they said it just sounded dirtier and more like a record. It kind of hit me at that point that younger people who are used to hearing crushed music, it's become so normal to hear songs that way that when you give someone music with range in it, something sounds off to them. Most people can't put into words what their are hearing, and for whatever reason, that difference just translates in "bad". I had a similar discussion when I wad watching American Idol with another engineer. This girl went up to sing in the original lineup stage, and she sounded like they had autotuned her voice. There wasn't any processing going on, she just heard people on the radio sound like that, thought it was normal, and imulated it.

Doing listening tests to compare different things can be a real pain in the ass, theres a lot of prep work to make sure you match levels and what not in a way that will gives listeners an accurate comparrison. Studies have shown that for some reason, people will like something because it seems louder. In the age of itunes and automobiles, people will skip a song if its too quiet. We're lazy creatures. So going back to my statement of "it could be a hell of a lot louder", when comparing the new song with other modern music, I had to trun it up a bit more than I normally do. I'm constantly comparing my music and other music on 5 or 6 speakers and in my car, so I know where the volume dials usually sit for modern music. Gaucho was quieter then most of the new releses lately and they could of easily made it sound a bit louder by sacrificing some dynamic range. I don't know if anyone is familiar with a technique called converter clipping, but it's one of the things done in mastering sometimes o make music sound louder. A converter is a device that turns audio into digital data. Mastering engineers especially will spend tens of thousands of dollars on quality converters, they can have a big impact on the quality of your music. One of the many benefits of a quality converter is that your audio will not "clip" as easily. Clipping is the sound you get if you record a sound source too loud. If you're not careful, especially in the mastering stage, you can get clipping by making your source too loud. If the mastering engineer has a great converter, it means they can send the song through it at a hotter level and not get any audible clipping. Even though your levels are in the red and you're technically clipping your converter, it can still sound fine. So converter clipping is one technique used to make music louder. Again, the setback is that you're losing some of that dynamic range. The good thing about converter clipping os that it's not as audibly obvious as something like a compressor. I ran Gaucho through a nice set of converters and was able to make ot sound a bit louder by clipping the converters and still have it sound fine. You usually cant do that with newer music that's been mastered because they've already gone that route. So again, another reason why I was surprised and another obvious choice that Lillywhite probably turned down at the mastering stage, which again is why I mentioned it could of been louder in regards to perceived loudness, which is the goal when mastering for more level.

[Inter]

^^ wow, you truly are the embodiment of the modern recording industry.

[mattinbeloit]

^^ wow, you truly are the embodiment of the modern recording industry.


Not really sure how to take that, haha. At any rate, just some food for thought. I'm not saying I support crushing dynamics into oblivion in the mastering stage, but I understand the reasoning behind it. I'm not a mastering engineer, I'm a recording engineer. I have friends that run mastering houses, and the unfortunate reality is that they have very little control over how much range is preserved in their work. They are given references and the client tells them what they want and the mastering engineer does it. If they refused to make something louder on personal grounds and opinions, clients go somewhere else. I know guys in Nashville that have done that, and now they are working office jobs. So if I somehow come off as a negitive embodiment, I guess its because my life depends on it and I've had to do things I didn't like because thats what the client wanted. Its their album, not mine. Enter the roll of a producer!

[Inter]

^^ Well said and I understand your sentiment. My comment was not necessarily negative. I know all too well the way things have become.

[mattinbeloit]

^^ Well said and I understand your sentiment. My comment was not necessarily negative. I know all too well the way things have become.

I just wanted to make sure it didn't seem like I was trying to justify any decisions people make in mastering, I simply wanted to throw some ideas out. :D

[dobyblue]

Yes, I know.... I was refering to perceived loudness as opposed to the db level. Sorry for being technically incorrect, I was trying to dumb down my opinion so that most people would understand what I was talking about. Dynamic range is lost in the mastering process because everyone wants their song to sound louder, there are ways to go about that that do not involve compression or limiting. Sorry for not being clear, I was trying not to be technical on this forum :)

I was the TA for a recording class, and one of the things we did every Friday was set up a turntable in the contol room and compare a bunch of new CDs with their records. We would also import the CD and record the record into the computer, look at the wave files and talk about the differences, you can pretty much guess how that went. I remember the day we listened to Big Whiskey, because we listened to the Raconteurs Consolers of the Lonely.

Big Whiskey sounded great on record, so did Consolers. Two students mentioned that they liked the Raconteurs better on CD, when I asked them why they said it just sounded dirtier and more like a record. It kind of hit me at that point that younger people who are used to hearing crushed music, it's become so normal to hear songs that way that when you give someone music with range in it, something sounds off to them. Most people can't put into words what their are hearing, and for whatever reason, that difference just translates in "bad". I had a similar discussion when I wad watching American Idol with another engineer. This girl went up to sing in the original lineup stage, and she sounded like they had autotuned her voice. There wasn't any processing going on, she just heard people on the radio sound like that, thought it was normal, and imulated it.

Doing listening tests to compare different things can be a real pain in the ass, theres a lot of prep work to make sure you match levels and what not in a way that will gives listeners an accurate comparrison. Studies have shown that for some reason, people will like something because it seems louder. In the age of itunes and automobiles, people will skip a song if its too quiet. We're lazy creatures. So going back to my statement of "it could be a hell of a lot louder", when comparing the new song with other modern music, I had to trun it up a bit more than I normally do. I'm constantly comparing my music and other music on 5 or 6 speakers and in my car, so I know where the volume dials usually sit for modern music. Gaucho was quieter then most of the new releses lately and they could of easily made it sound a bit louder by sacrificing some dynamic range. I don't know if anyone is familiar with a technique called converter clipping, but it's one of the things done in mastering sometimes o make music sound louder. A converter is a device that turns audio into digital data. Mastering engineers especially will spend tens of thousands of dollars on quality converters, they can have a big impact on the quality of your music. One of the many benefits of a quality converter is that your audio will not "clip" as easily. Clipping is the sound you get if you record a sound source too loud. If you're not careful, especially in the mastering stage, you can get clipping by making your source too loud. If the mastering engineer has a great converter, it means they can send the song through it at a hotter level and not get any audible clipping. Even though your levels are in the red and you're technically clipping your converter, it can still sound fine. So converter clipping is one technique used to make music louder. Again, the setback is that you're losing some of that dynamic range. The good thing about converter clipping os that it's not as audibly obvious as something like a compressor. I ran Gaucho through a nice set of converters and was able to make ot sound a bit louder by clipping the converters and still have it sound fine. You usually cant do that with newer music that's been mastered because they've already gone that route. So again, another reason why I was surprised and another obvious choice that Lillywhite probably turned down at the mastering stage, which again is why I mentioned it could of been louder in regards to perceived loudness, which is the goal when mastering for more level.

I think if you had read through the thread before posting you would have noted a lot of this has been discussed already. For example:

Here's a comparison of Gaucho 320 Kbps .mp3 with Funny The Way It Is directly ripped from the CD.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/4364/ftwiivsgaucho.png

You can see less clipping and a little more headroom in the main dynamics. 7DR vs 5DR is almost a perceived doubling in dynamics so this should sound noticeably better than Big Whiskey when it comes out, but still it sucks that it's only a little better and not a dynamic range champion.

Double blind listening tests also have their faults, not the least of which would be unfamiliarity with the material. Then again I've met recording engineers who can swear they can tell the difference between 24/96, DSD and 24/192 conversions of the same DXD (32-bit/354kHz) master.

Personally I think there are a lot of people here who do NOT need anything dumbed down for them. There have been excellent discussions on mastering and studio techniques for years here.

I'm not willing to be complacent.

[mattinbeloit]

Ya, I usually can't tell the difference once you get above 44.1 in audio quality. The biggest benefit of having higher bit rates is headroom when mixing, I still record everything at 48k 24 bit and have been for years. I've gone 88.2 for live classical music a handful of times if it's a more dynamic show (Handel's Messiah).

[mr_potown]

Not totally related to the dmb album discussion, but here's an article on the vinyl vs. digital debate.

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4303

I thought this was interesting considering all the prior comments showing that vinyl recordings tend to have a higher range than their digital counterparts.

"Digital proponents tend to point out objective difference, such as the fact that a digital signal can accommodate a higher dynamic range, which is the difference in loudness between the quietest and loudest parts of the recording."

If that's true then it seems like vinyl isn't actually better on its own - its that vinyl is marketed to people who want to hear a better sound and get it. Why can't / don't they take advantage of digital to make it sound it even better? Seems silly.

One last thought - I've been keeping up with a lot of the threads out there on the new album - a lot more reading than posting. I must say this is the most enjoyable ones to read / back read based on the generally good natured discussion that is sometimes lacking elsewhere. Thanks to everyone for keeping it informative and positive. :thumbsup

Now back to Progress Updates...

[ibeheath]

BW vinyl is a very different animal than its cd counterpart.

[character111]

If that's true then it seems like vinyl isn't actually better on its own - its that vinyl is marketed to people who want to hear a better sound and get it. Why can't / don't they take advantage of digital to make it sound it even better? Seems silly.

That's a good point. There have been CD formats that are higher quality than standard CD quality, but they didn't really catch on (SACD for example). Some people have argued that it was too expensive to mass produce them, but that's most likely a catch-22: they were probably only too expensive because they were not the standard product. If one of those formats had been used from the beginning, it would be the standard and the cost would be lower.

[blusi]

I want to have a 5.1 sourround version. :D

[character111]

I want to have a 5.1 sourround version. :D

Buy 3 copies of the CD, and put them in 3 different stereos in the same room. Push play on all 3 at the same time. :lol

[dobyblue]

Buy 3 copies of the CD, and put them in 3 different stereos in the same room. Push play on all 3 at the same time. :lol

Or maybe someone can steal the original multi-track tapes and we can make our own analog-sourced 24/192 5.1 PCM mix for Blu-ray release.

No-one in the band's camp is big about surround, only one studio song available to date and that's Bartender and it's crappy 448 Kbps Dolby Digital quality. Still, I enjoy listening to it and think it opens up the song nicely as it's a little subdued in stereo.

That's a good point. There have been CD formats that are higher quality than standard CD quality, but they didn't really catch on (SACD for example). Some people have argued that it was too expensive to mass produce them, but that's most likely a catch-22: they were probably only too expensive because they were not the standard product. If one of those formats had been used from the beginning, it would be the standard and the cost would be lower.

I agree, if SACD had been the only format and all releases not from specialty audiophile labels like the SHM-SACD single-layer only releases had been hybrid releases like Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon 30th, allowing a CD-layer to play in any system, I think it would have caught on. But with DVD-Audio launching simultaneously, requiring two players in order to buy all studio's material, requiring multi-channel analogue connections as well (who has two receivers in the same system, no receiver has two multi-channel analog inputs to the best of my knowledge), it was just a disaster waiting to happen.

It was no different with HD DVD and Blu-ray. Two players, although at least one HDMI cable, required to watch all studio's content, people didn't want it. It was heading for a niche format until Warner made the smart move and dropped HD DVD.

With Blu-ray we now have one format, one HDMI cable, all discs play on all players, manufacturing is really cheap, it's prime time for the labels to give high rez one last shot. Releasing The Beatles 24/192 masters, Thriller in 5.1/2.0 high rez, etc., would be a great start.

I thought this was interesting considering all the prior comments showing that vinyl recordings tend to have a higher range than their digital counterparts.

"Digital proponents tend to point out objective difference, such as the fact that a digital signal can accommodate a higher dynamic range, which is the difference in loudness between the quietest and loudest parts of the recording."

If that's true then it seems like vinyl isn't actually better on its own - its that vinyl is marketed to people who want to hear a better sound and get it. Why can't / don't they take advantage of digital to make it sound it even better? Seems silly.

Agreed, it SUCKS! Steve Hoffman puts out amazing sounding CD's on the AP label. A lot of Mobile Fidelity's CD's were great too. Vinyl has what, 60~80dB of dynamic range under good conditions, CD has 96dB, SACD has 120-something dB and DVD-Audio has 144dB. When you look at Gaucho using only 7dB of dynamic range, it's sad. Dire Straits Brothers in Arms original CD has 16dB of dynamic range, no wonder it was touted as the first BIG reason to buy a "silver disc" (CD) player back in the early 80's.

One last thought - I've been keeping up with a lot of the threads out there on the new album - a lot more reading than posting. I must say this is the most enjoyable ones to read / back read based on the generally good natured discussion that is sometimes lacking elsewhere. Thanks to everyone for keeping it informative and positive. :thumbsup

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

Awesome to hear! :D

[mattinbeloit]

Not that it matters (Because it waz Stand Up), but didn't they release a dual layer disc with Stand Up in 5.1? Also curious about the Bartender surround sound mix, where can I get that?

[dobyblue]

Not that it matters (Because it waz Stand Up), but didn't they release a dual layer disc with Stand Up in 5.1? Also curious about the Bartender surround sound mix, where can I get that?

Unfortunately not, Stand Up [DualDisc] was a HUGE disappointment. I hoped it would have a 5.1 mix, then I was somewhat sated when I read it was coming out with a 24-bit/48kHz stereo program on the DVD side.

Then after only a couple days I remember they changed the "24-bit stereo" on the website to "Enhanced Stereo" and I began to get nervous. Fucking Sony! They released it as a 16-bit/48kHz "Enhanced Stereo" track and the only other thing on it was the 16-minute or so movie with clips of the band in and around the studio.

Bogus.

The 5.1 Bartender is found on the bonus DVD included with Busted Stuff. I don't know if most of them still have it, if all of them have it, or not. It has two tracks from the "upcoming" (at the time) Folsom Field show and then Bartender 5.1 audio only is the 3rd track on the DVD.

[xnad]

That was a great letter...lets hope he listens

[mattinbeloit]

Unfortunately not, Stand Up [DualDisc] was a HUGE disappointment. I hoped it would have a 5.1 mix, then I was somewhat sated when I read it was coming out with a 24-bit/48kHz stereo program on the DVD side.

Then after only a couple days I remember they changed the "24-bit stereo" on the website to "Enhanced Stereo" and I began to get nervous. Fucking Sony! They released it as a 16-bit/48kHz "Enhanced Stereo" track and the only other thing on it was the 16-minute or so movie with clips of the band in and around the studio.

Bogus.

The 5.1 Bartender is found on the bonus DVD included with Busted Stuff. I don't know if most of them still have it, if all of them have it, or not. It has two tracks from the "upcoming" (at the time) Folsom Field show and then Bartender 5.1 audio only is the 3rd track on the DVD.

48k 16bit? Wow, that was pointless...

[dobyblue]

That was a great letter...lets hope he listens

Thank you.

48k 16bit? Wow, that was pointless...

:lol

No doubt, I was like :BANG

Said as much in my Amazon review - http://www.amazon.com/review/R34YSIKRULMZXZ

[blusi]

Buy 3 copies of the CD, and put them in 3 different stereos in the same room. Push play on all 3 at the same time. :lol

:eek






















:lol As a little child I tried something like this with two stereos. :D But it didn't work. :p

[dobyblue]

:lol As a little child I tried something like this with two stereos. :D But it didn't work. :p

I remember being on hallucinogenics trying to set up music, using two of the same CD's in two different car stereos. It turns out they didn't play at exactly the same speed because if you got it linked up really well after about 2 minutes it would begin to sound like the sound was bouncing off a stadium wall 200ft away, lol.

Eventually my one buddy was able to get a link cable to wire his Alpine front head to another buddy's Denon front head, then they were in perfect sync.

4 10" and 2 15" woofers. Great beach parties. This was @ 1991 so no iPod's or anything like that back then. Everything was lossless.

[phatphoto]

May have been mentioned in another Thread, but after reading this thread, I thought I should add that Steffan during his interview with Cali here @ a radio station in Boston did announce that the new album will also be released on Vinyl and the Band is aware of the resurgence of Vinyl which is why they chose to release it on Vinyl.

[dobyblue]

Get the new DMBLive folks, 13dB of dynamic range. Stunningly dynamic release, what a huge and pleasant surprise. Not expecting this for the new album but if these pre-'96 shows keep coming out like this I'll be a happy dude.