CD sound...

[jww]

Just out of curiosity, what is the general consenses on the sound of the Japanese cds vs. currrently available US releases for the Brasil 66? I have the UK 2-cd set, and to me, it sounds a bit overly loud/distorted with increasing volume on my component system. I am sure changing my equilizer settings would help, but everything else sounds fine through the system (tapes/cds/lps) without equilizer adjustments. Am I noticing something that anyone else has with the UK set? I am considering ordering all 10 Japanese re-issues, since I have only compilation cds, but was interested in opinions on the sound I may get. Also, on Melody Blvd. no Herb Alpert Presents is listed, but Mas Que Nada shows up. I assume this is it, but does anybody know for sure? Thanks again. JWW 3rd shifting...

 

[Harry]

Sound quality generally varies from CD to CD, just as it can with any recorded material. And different release copies of the SAME album will often have differences -- in fact that's sometimes the REASON it's being re-released.

The UK 2-CD Mendes set came with that little sticker proclaiming that it had all been "re-mastered", and indeed, much of it sounds quite different from the Japanese CD couterparts, which tend to sound just like cleaned-up LP sound. The UK set producers seemed to have run the material through an equalizer, boosting the bass a good deal, and mastering the whole thing at a rather loud level in comparison to most other CDs. Short answer -- yes, we've noticed!

The two that came out on Verve in the US have the cleanest and most pleasant sound IMHO.

I would expect the new Japanese releases to sound pretty much the way the LPs did. The Japanese are not known changing things in the mastering process, but seem to go to great lengths to make the CDs as exact but smaller representations of original LPs.

I also would imagine that the newer-issued versions of the early albums will sound exactly the same as the earlier versions of the same albums. I've not seen the word "re-mixed" or "re-mastered" in conjuction with any of these August releases. Bottom line -- if you've already got the Japanese releases of things like HERB ALPERT PRESENTS through CRYSTAL ILLUSIONS, I feel you might be buying duplicates if you picked them up again. With those it might be better to take a wait-and-see attitude. Someone, somewhere will buy them and either let us know here or on a review on a retailers page.

Personally, I'll be buying the ones I don't already have professional copies of: STILLNESS, PAIS TROPICAL, LIVE AT EXPO 70, and PRIMAL ROOTS.

Harry
...with "sound" reasoning, online...

 

[jww]

Thanks again Harry--
You put into words what I was attempting to describe. A lot of bass end boost (not necessarily distorted) and with a sound/volume much higher than other discs. I have found that to be the case with other "new" reissues (beach boys for one), that when remastered they are louder but not necessarily better. Everything seems boosted, hiss, bass etc..
I don't have any cds of the original lps, just compilations, so I was thinking of getting the "set" If you think they will sound ok (like the lps, but without the pops,clicks etc.) thats good. I don't think remixing is generally better. Some things should remain the way they were originally. Thanks, JW

 

[Harry]

If you don't have the original Japanese releases and want to get the set, then these should be fine.

Perhaps YOU can be the one to let us know how they sound when you get them!

Harry
NP: early morning silence

 

[Rudy]

The UK set producers seemed to have run the material through an equalizer, boosting the bass a good deal, and mastering the whole thing at a rather loud level in comparison to most other CDs. Short answer -- yes, we've noticed!

I'm not certain if EQ is used or not. The problem with most earlier CDs is that they came from LP masters where the bass and treble were intentionally rolled off so it could be recorded onto vinyl. When we hear a genuine "remastering", it's usually taken from better tapes, which have the bass/treble intact. Plus, with the tape being a generation much closer to the original multitrack master, there are added levels of tape noise and rolloffs that are removed. (This is also why some reissue producers prefer to go back to a multitrack and try to recreate the mix that way--they can get the best sound into digital. The Led Zeppelin 4-CD box set was done this way.)

When I put a vinyl LP onto CD, I'll use EQ to compensate for the rolloffs, but unless there's something seriously wrong with the master, I don't unnecessarily boost it. (LPs are even more difficult because some studios would roll off the high end the further you got toward the center of the LP, because the inner grooves were tighter and harder to reproduce.)

The loudness, though, is a thorny issue.

Original CDs made in the 80's were very conservative in regards to setting the levels. Unlike analog, digital's peak recorded signal is at the 0dB level, when the analog-to-digital converters run out of bits to represent the data. And it's a very unpleasant breakup/spitting sound when the signal goes over the top. Problem is, if you record it too low, you're also adding undue distortion, since there are fewer bits available to represent the signal. (Quantization error may be the correct term for this.) If anything, an extremely low level signal will sound very fuzzy, or it will be masked with "dither" (an intentional "white noise" added to mask this distortion).

The best example--if anyone has the original CD pressing of Synchronicity by the Police (released around 1983 or 1984), play the very end of "Tea In The Sahara" and turn your volume all the way up. Ugly!

So digital sound, imperfect as it is, gets some tweaking by engineers. It's one thing to "maximize" the signal, so that the highest peak throughout an album will hit just under the 0dB mark w/o distortion. However, most engineers today will use compression. If compression is done correctly, you don't even notice it. (In fact, it may help ever so slightly to keep the signal in the higher-end of the scale where the encoding is more linear.) However, the "volume wars" are still with us, and a lot of artists want their CDs mastered as "hot" as possible. Which means ultra-compression.

Look at the waveform in a sound file editor and you'll a very flat top to the waveform. That's compression. Watch the meters on your digital recorder (DAT, MD, CD-Recordable) when you do a direct digital dub from CD, and the meters literally "slam" into the 0dB level, only backing off as a song fades out. That's compression. It literally sucks the life out of a recording (loss of dynamics, other than a dull "thudding", plodding sound)...and this type of digital "brick wall" compression sounds far different than the standard type of "limiting" compression used on LPs and on radio (which I can duplicate using one of my dbx processors).

IMHO, most new CDs today sound terrible since they're so badly compressed. Once you know what to listen for, it is instantly recognizable, and instantly annoying. Even someone like David Benoit (on his recent CD Fuzzy Logic) is a victim of this kind of overhyped CD mastering. Remasters are usually better since the engineers try to preserve what's on the tapes, vs. trying to win volume wars on radio and on the sales charts.

-= N =-

 

[jww]

Thanks Neil for the detailed description of cd sound/recordings. Do you have a preference as to US/UK/Japan release for the Brazil 66? Again, I have only the compilation cds, but have the original lps. I have made tapes (I don't have a cd burner on my computer or a stand-alone) from the lps, but generally do not record them through the equilizer. I may be doing something wrong, but if I record through the equilizer setting (the "v", med-high bass, low midrange, high treble) the tapes do not sound as good when played in the car or at work. Trying to replicate the "v" in the car with med-bass and high treble does not sound so good. I seem to get better results recording w/o equilizer, then adjust levels in car as above and they sound really good. Anyway, the lps sound very very good, as I have bought muliple copyies over the years, trying to get the best sound from the old vinyl. Also, I have nearly all the songs on disc with the FourSider, UK comp, greatest hits and Fool on the Hill disc (most songs through Stillness, that is) Thanks for you input.

Also, if I were to get a cd burner for the computer could I run turntable into it? Would I get better sound or a replica of the vinyl from a stand-alone cd recorder for the component system? Thanks again to all... JWW

 

[Rudy]

Thanks Neil for the detailed description of cd sound/recordings. Do you have a preference as to US/UK/Japan release for the Brazil 66? Again, I have only the compilation cds, but have the original lps.

I own the LPs, but only a couple of CDs, so I can't comment on the Mendes titles. I still wonder if any CD, though, can touch the Mobile Fidelity vinyl I own of Herb Alpert Presents....

Also, if I were to get a cd burner for the computer could I run turntable into it? Would I get better sound or a replica of the vinyl from a stand-alone cd recorder for the component system? Thanks again to all... JWW

Transfering sound properly to a computer is not an easy (or inexpensive) project. Sure, you can run a cable from your stereo to the sound card, but the majority of sound cards do not have good analog-to-digital converters, along with the analog sections being noisy. Better off to just get a stereo component CD recorder and use that (they're certainly cheap enough these days).

-= N =-