CD mastering

[daveK]

While we continue to wait for remastered Herb Alpert CDs, I have a question concerning CD mastering. As you probably all know, when CDs were first manufactured in the 80s they sounded really good. Then we found out that most record companies didn't master from original tapes, so they could have sounded better (the Bob Dylan catalog is a good example). So in the 90s most companies went back and remastered their most popular catalog product again and everyone went out and bought the titles again and were happy with the improvements. Now another decade down the line, I make compilations that include songs from discs remastered 6 to 10 years ago alongside songs from CDs remastered in the past couple of years. The playback level is so much louder on the new stuff and the stuff that I thought sounded so great several years ago doesn't sound so good now. :| I said earlier that I have a question so I guess I should get to it. How many times are we going to have to buy our favorite albums on CD in the next 30 years? I know I've bought Jimi Hendrix' "Are You Experienced" 3 times since 1988. Each issue has sounded much better than the previous ones. Will there actually come a time when a reissue of a disc comes out and 10 years later it becomes apparent that there's no way to improve the sound. This is it! It doesn't get any better! We'll never have to remaster (Jethro Tull, John Coltrane, The Partridge Family, whoever) again!!
This question made much more sense in my head. When I write it down, it seems more like random lunatic ramblings.

 

[Rudy]

Sorry I missed your question--haven't had much "down time" lately to catch up here.

Anyhow, part of the problem with recent CDs, especially those released during the past decade, is that they are TOO loud...they are actually compressed using a digital "brick wall" limiter. In other words, it isn't the same kind of analog limiter that has a gentler slope to it. These digital limiters are used during mastering to make the apparent volume of a CD much louder, but not go over the 0dB limit of digital audio. If you look at the waveforms of old discs vs. many new ones, you will find that the newer discs have waveforms that are severely clipped off as they get louder. Once you realize which discs are compressed worse than others, you can easily recognize how they sound.

The thing with some (but not all) early CDs is that the labels didn't necessarily use the best source tapes. Labels like Mobile Fidelity and DCC released gold discs made from the best two-channel tapes they could find, and they also refrained from using the limiters. Some VERY early CDs were just mastered at too low of a level--the engineers were afraid of going over the 0dB level (which results in a burst of distortion, not a "soft" overload like you'd get with analog tape).

Some recent remasters are quite good, depending on the engineer that does them. Bob Ludwig, Bill Inglott (Rhino) and Vic Anesini (Sony) are three who work for major labels who do a good remastering job. In fact, the recent ABKCO Rolling Stones remasters (in digipaks) are "silent hybrid" discs, with both CD and SACD layers for high-definition sounds. Likewise, the newest batch of Bob Dylan discs are hybrids and sound very good as well. On the other hand, there are hacks out there who feel they must run everything through a hard limiter, NoNoise and EQ to make it more "modern". One of the worst examples is the recent Beatles compilation entitled "1"...it sounds even worse than those horrid Beatles CDs from the mid 80s! The better sounding CDs today have minimal processing. Too much processing, and they sound superficially good but on closer listening, are lacking a natural sound that has the "breath of life" to it.

So as for buying new reissues of existing albums? The only thing I can say is, "It depends." Sometimes the new remasters are so messed with, they're not worth buying. Others ARE worth it. And good mastering put onto the new SACD or DVD-Audio discs make them a worthwhile purchase for some of us who have the players to play them on. That's one reason I've been buying random Rolling Stones hybrids...they sound great and I don't want to miss out.

When I make CD compilations, I run into the same difficulty. The average volume of old vs. newer CD tracks makes compilations tricky to assemble. I use a program called CD Architect that lets me adjust the levels of individual tracks. I can always pull the volume down on the newer tracks so they sound the same as the older ones, OR I can add some analog-like compression to the quieter tracks to bring up their level a bit.

If I can find some waveforms to post here over the weekend, I'll show everyone how much some of the newer recordings are compressed.

 

[Murray]

Anyhow, part of the problem with recent CDs, especially those released during the past decade, is that they are TOO loud...they are actually compressed using a digital "brick wall" limiter...[snip] On the other hand, there are hacks out there who feel they must run everything through a hard limiter, NoNoise and EQ to make it more "modern".

I'm afraid that one of these "hacks" mastered the new Corrs CD. I can't believe how LOUD this thing is! The verses aren't too bad, but the choruses are way too loud and distorted. I find it uncomfortable to listen to after awhile. I can't help but imagine how incredible the album would sound if it had been mastered "flat" (NO limiter, NoNoise, or EQ). The last Shania Twain CD is even worse - I only listened to it twice, it hurt my ears so much that I filed it away in disgust.

I wonder if the trend toward loud compressed CDs had anything to do with car CD players. I have many CDs that I bought in the '80's that sound wonderful when played at home in a quiet room, but they are useless in the car. The quieter passages can't be heard over the road noise. With newer CDs, I can hear every note in the car (but they sound awful on a home system).

Question for Harry: Is the mastering on the Japanese Corrs CD any better?

Question for Rudy: Is there anything that I could do to improve the sound of my CD? Is there a way that the volume levels can be evened out a little, or the clipped peaks restored? I think that there is a "clipped peak restoration" plugin available for Sound Forge, but I wonder how well it works.

Murray
...who'll be listening to his Corrs CD mostly in the car...

 

[Rudy]

Murray--unfortunately there's nothing you can do for it. The big battle today: "louder is better", and that's at the expense of the music. I haven't heard the Shania Twain CD personally, but I HAVE heard it's also an ear-bleeder. The problem isn't so much loudness (you can always turn down a volume control), but the hard limiting/compression that sucks all of the dynamic range out of the music. In other words, loud and quieter portions are about equal in peak loudness, and percussive elements are severely limited ot be the same equal loudness as well.

One good example would be for me to find an old 80s CD and a new reissue CD of the same music, and show how much different the waveforms look. Also through examples, I could rip the samples "as is" to show how much louder the track plays back. PLUS, I can also create another sample where I make the average volumes the same, lowering the louder track until the average levels are the same. You can then hear how much more "smashed" the newer recording sounds.

You know what I think about these heavily limited CDs? They don't sound so much loud as they do fatiguing. Instead of a natural sounding music, you have a constant drone of the same average level. It's the reason you no longer play the Shania Twain CD--loudness can be tamed with a volume control, but severely compressed music is a lot harder to lsten to, IMHO.

That "clipped peak restoration" I believe is geared more toward live sounds that were recorded directly to the computer and accidentally recorded at too high of a level, clipping off the tops of the waves and creating a burst of distortion. It's more like "damage control", I think. Might be worth trying, but it's like asking Sound Forge to reconstruct the music from data that is no longer there.

 

[Harry]

[Question for Harry: Is the mastering on the Japanese Corrs CD any better?

No. In fact, if there's any difference at all, it would be that the US version is the cleanest - but that's purely subjective.

I listened to the Japanese version for a week, noticing the same overload in the loud passages as everyone else. When I got the US version, it somehow sounded just a tad cleaner. My thought is that perhaps Atlantic in the US owns the actual masters, and farmed out digital submasters to the other countries. It seems to me that if you copy a smashed digital product, even digitally, it continues to get worse with each copy. (Is that right?)

FWIW, it doesn't matter all that much to me. I notice it, but I experience none of the "fatigue" that others claim. To the contrary, I could listened to this Corrs CD for hours on end.

Do I wish it sounded better? Sure, but I'm just happy to have it. Do I wish that masterers would stop this loudness war? Absolutely, but it's not going to stop me from buying the music I love.

[edit: The mastering engineer on the new Corrs CD is listed as Stephen Marcussen]

Harry
NP: Reagan Farewell on the TV

 

[andywithaz]

To you techies out there, do you think that we could make a list of the best mastered CDs and the worst mastered CDs??

I don't mean to sound stupid but I can't really tell if a CD is mastered well or not. I have a lot of CDs that are really loud and they sound pretty good to me, but I am just an amateur at this audio stuff. ( I havent even bought a SACD player yet.)

Please help me out.

 

[Rudy]

It seems to me that if you copy a smashed digital product, even digitally, it continues to get worse with each copy. (Is that right?)

If it's a straight digital copy, you're just copying numbers...so in theory it should sound the same. If the recording came out on DVD-A or SACD, it still could be smashed to some extent...it depends on the point at which the compression was applied. Usually though, the CDs sound the worst in that respect.