Go Back  The Tool Page: Opinion » Tool » Albums » 10,000 Days
User Name
Password
Closed Thread
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-08-2006, 08:50 PM

well, here you go. almost... Ludwig said it, sorry. I also spelled Barresi wrong, oh well...

Quote:
The final format was a 96k sampling rate, 24-bit-resolution master, which they downsampled to 44.1k, 16-bit. “If any record deserves to be heard in surround sound, it's this one,” Ludwig says. “There's so much tone painting and so much color. It would just be a thrill to hear it in surround sound. And with 96k, 24-bit masters, we're ready for any kind of high-resolution digital projects.”
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-08-2006, 08:50 PM   #41
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

well, here you go. almost... Ludwig said it, sorry. I also spelled Barresi wrong, oh well...

Quote:
The final format was a 96k sampling rate, 24-bit-resolution master, which they downsampled to 44.1k, 16-bit. “If any record deserves to be heard in surround sound, it's this one,” Ludwig says. “There's so much tone painting and so much color. It would just be a thrill to hear it in surround sound. And with 96k, 24-bit masters, we're ready for any kind of high-resolution digital projects.”
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
HelenA's Avatar HelenA
10-08-2006, 10:29 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Just wanted to show a very very well done track by Baressi...this is Asteroid by Kyuss, off Welcome to Sky Valley from 1994. Great dynamics, fantastic stereo programming (of vocals, the different guitars, drums and bass), no clipping, etc. Why couldn't you make WFM look like this, Joe? :(

Asteroid
So hushypushy, is this what WFM will sound/look like live? AND could this be one of the reasons why Tool seems to blow poeple away when they hear them live? I mean, obviously, they are a brilliant live band, but could this quiet/loud effect be that added exra dimension?
Old 10-08-2006, 10:29 PM   #42
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
HelenA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Milky Way
Posts: 1,724
Bincount™: 1989
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Just wanted to show a very very well done track by Baressi...this is Asteroid by Kyuss, off Welcome to Sky Valley from 1994. Great dynamics, fantastic stereo programming (of vocals, the different guitars, drums and bass), no clipping, etc. Why couldn't you make WFM look like this, Joe? :(

Asteroid
So hushypushy, is this what WFM will sound/look like live? AND could this be one of the reasons why Tool seems to blow poeple away when they hear them live? I mean, obviously, they are a brilliant live band, but could this quiet/loud effect be that added exra dimension?
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-09-2006, 03:41 AM

Compression is used even more heavily live, and it's not something distinct to Tool. Tool's energy is the the vibe between the 4 musicians. But hushypushy is actually saying, quite rightly, that this much compression is a bad thing... and it wouldnt make their live shows any better.

But, it wasn't Joe Baressi that did any of the mastering anyway? Barresi did the engineering for Tool and a Kyuss, but he didnt master Tool, and he didnt master Kyuss, Eddy Schreyer did. So, I don't really understand your point, you're saying Barresi did a bad job on 10k Days by comparing the masters of two songs that were mastered by two different people, neither of which were Barresi? Do you know what mastering is? That's all post production, and you're also wrong to say Tool didnt have control over it, they had a hand in the mastering of it aswell.

Oh, and you only have to compare the Grudge to the START of Jambi, to see that 10K Days is really loud like you say, but also, that Lateralus is startlingly quiet in comparison. But this is, like you say, to give the louder parts room to breath.

Last edited by Jimmeny; 10-09-2006 at 04:13 AM..
Old 10-09-2006, 03:41 AM   #43
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Compression is used even more heavily live, and it's not something distinct to Tool. Tool's energy is the the vibe between the 4 musicians. But hushypushy is actually saying, quite rightly, that this much compression is a bad thing... and it wouldnt make their live shows any better.

But, it wasn't Joe Baressi that did any of the mastering anyway? Barresi did the engineering for Tool and a Kyuss, but he didnt master Tool, and he didnt master Kyuss, Eddy Schreyer did. So, I don't really understand your point, you're saying Barresi did a bad job on 10k Days by comparing the masters of two songs that were mastered by two different people, neither of which were Barresi? Do you know what mastering is? That's all post production, and you're also wrong to say Tool didnt have control over it, they had a hand in the mastering of it aswell.

Oh, and you only have to compare the Grudge to the START of Jambi, to see that 10K Days is really loud like you say, but also, that Lateralus is startlingly quiet in comparison. But this is, like you say, to give the louder parts room to breath.

Last edited by Jimmeny; 10-09-2006 at 04:13 AM..
OFFLINE |  
HelenA's Avatar HelenA
10-09-2006, 04:33 AM

How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
Old 10-09-2006, 04:33 AM   #44
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
HelenA's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Milky Way
Posts: 1,724
Bincount™: 1989
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
OFFLINE |  
the bending rodriguez
10-09-2006, 07:55 AM

i think this guy nailed what i was trying to find wrong with 10kd

i couldn't put my finger on it, but i knew something was up because the strong parts weren't strong enough when it seemed like they could be
Old 10-09-2006, 07:55 AM   #45
Banned.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: wakka wakka!
Posts: 25
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

i think this guy nailed what i was trying to find wrong with 10kd

i couldn't put my finger on it, but i knew something was up because the strong parts weren't strong enough when it seemed like they could be
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-09-2006, 09:35 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA View Post
So hushypushy, is this what WFM will sound/look like live? AND could this be one of the reasons why Tool seems to blow poeple away when they hear them live? I mean, obviously, they are a brilliant live band, but could this quiet/loud effect be that added exra dimension?
I just listened to a live recording of Wings for Marie (part 1) and it was pretty cool. unfortunately i didn't see it live (i was at one of the last shows where they DIDNT play it) but the live recording goes from very quite to LOUD. just like it should. that's why i made that comment about Isis. I was somewhat appalled that Isis' albums are loud all the way (go listen to So Did We...there is an extensive clean section that's just as loud as the distortion and screaming), but when I saw them live I realized that's just how their music is. It lends itself to that. And if Tool wanted WFM to have all that damn compression and be loud all the way through, they'd turn up Adam's volume.

or MAYBE that's why they are being super strict about recording on this tour. they don't want the "real way" of playing the songs to be leaked out.....the world must not know!! (just kidding)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny
But, it wasn't Joe Baressi that did any of the mastering anyway? Barresi did the engineering for Tool and a Kyuss, but he didnt master Tool, and he didnt master Kyuss, Eddy Schreyer did. So, I don't really understand your point, you're saying Barresi did a bad job on 10k Days by comparing the masters of two songs that were mastered by two different people, neither of which were Barresi? Do you know what mastering is? That's all post production, and you're also wrong to say Tool didnt have control over it, they had a hand in the mastering of it aswell.
well, I did say that I didn't think it was Barresi's fault in the first post...and the comparison was to say "this wasn't Joe's fault". I was looking/listening to In Utero earlier (the only other Ludwig produced album I have, I think) and it has quite a bit of range. I don't know if it was either of these guys who did it. But hey times are changin' so maybe...

anyway, I don't know how often I'll have to say it, but I think Barresi did a fantastic job mixing 10kd and I love his work. Ok so what are we gonna do, go knock down Bob Ludwig's door and tell him that his mastering sucked?

The more I research this, the more appalled I am. Bob Ludwig has so many awards and a crapload of recognition and a loooooong history of mastering famous albums and the album turned out like this? It makes me wonder how it really went down when the master tapes were sent to Gateway Mastering to be finished, and who was really in the studio when it all happened. Was Tool there? Barresi? From reading interviews with Ludwig, it seems that he does all the work and then shows the bands the finished products. Here are some interesting tidbits...

source: http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_bob_ludwig/

Quote:
Usually, I master an album in one day, which, on average, gives me one-half to one hour per song. Under certain circumstances, I have to ask the song to be remixed.
this one is particularly interesting:

Quote:
One other thing to avoid is the excess use of compression. I am really glad that the new digital compressors weren't around when The Beatles were making records. It is a common belief that music that sounds louder sounds better and more exciting, especially when you are listening to it for shorter periods of time. However, it is my experience that a louder album will wear you out faster than an album that has greater dynamics, and it might make you not want to listen to it again.

Compression is also something that you can never undo, unlike EQ, which we always can tweak later. If you are in doubt about how much compression to use, the advice is to use less and to let us do the job. The studio monitors today are generally a lot better than what they used to be, and from a mixer's perspective, it is easier today to get the EQ right. The best thing is to get the EQ as close as possible in a mix environment, and let us only do some touch-ups. This obviously requires that you are familiar with your speakers and the room you are working in.
i like that one a lot, but this one is my favorite:

source:http://www.musictap.net/Interviews/L...Interview.html

Quote:
MusicTAP: What is the usual process from when Gateway is contacted for a project to the final release?

Bob Ludwig: Someone calls us and schedules a day I can work on their record. Either I do it alone, or the producer and sometimes, artists attends. The day arrives, I listen to their raw tape and hear in my head how I think it could sound. I turn the knobs on the right gear to make it sound like I hear it in my head. I master it, discuss if any remixing needs to be done and do any further editing that needs to be done. When the artist, producer, A&R person and the manager all agree I have gotten as much musicality out of their original master tape as possible, the approved master is copied to the appropriate medium desired by the plant (PCM 1630, exabyte DDP tape, Pre-master CD-R, or Yellow Book CD-ROM.) The actual parts going to the plant are quality controlled from top to bottom by one of my engineers, usually with headphones to catch problems one can’t hear in speakers, and notes are made of any abnormal sounds that are in fact approved.

On very rare occasions the artists may ask me to approve the final CD pressing (they can sound quite bad or match what we have given them) which I may do.
wait, what's that? Usually he's alone? Producer and arist are sometimes there? hmm. Well, Tool did produce this album so perhaps they were there.

But notice that last one. RARE occasions the artist will ask for the final CD pressing to be approved---which may sound quite bad? So it makes me wonder, is Ludwig being his usual audiophile snob self (read his interviews...he claims that most of the time, MP3 in its highest bitrate is passable, which is complete and utter bullshit for all but 0.000001% of the known inhabitants of planet earth) and just saying that the CDs aren't pressed correctly? he did say this:

source: http://www.paudio.com/Pages/learning_Ludwig.html

Quote:
One thing I always say is, "Never turn your back on digital." (laughter) The fact that it worked a hundred times in a row is no guarantee that it will work the hundred-and-first. That's why computer verification is very necessary, or listening to it.
Or does he mean that something will turn out to be compressed to hell like 10,000 Days? I can't tell what he means by "quite bad". Calling 320kbps MP3 quite bad is one thing, calling an album that lacks dynamics bad is another.

The only explanations that I can think of are that Tool insisted on this (for some reason...don't ask me why), that Ludwig totally fell off his game and went backwards on some of his statements, that some bigwig intervened and did this, OR that we are all wrong and the album sounds perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA
How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
All the sound goes through a soundboard, there's a dude mixing it. He can change levels or mess with anything while the show is going on. Also, there are lots of other things like compression pedals for guitar. Compression is actually pretty great for a guitar, it increases sustain, and it also boosts the volume of the soft notes and lowers the harder ones for more even sound.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-09-2006 at 09:49 AM..
Old 10-09-2006, 09:35 AM   #46
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA View Post
So hushypushy, is this what WFM will sound/look like live? AND could this be one of the reasons why Tool seems to blow poeple away when they hear them live? I mean, obviously, they are a brilliant live band, but could this quiet/loud effect be that added exra dimension?
I just listened to a live recording of Wings for Marie (part 1) and it was pretty cool. unfortunately i didn't see it live (i was at one of the last shows where they DIDNT play it) but the live recording goes from very quite to LOUD. just like it should. that's why i made that comment about Isis. I was somewhat appalled that Isis' albums are loud all the way (go listen to So Did We...there is an extensive clean section that's just as loud as the distortion and screaming), but when I saw them live I realized that's just how their music is. It lends itself to that. And if Tool wanted WFM to have all that damn compression and be loud all the way through, they'd turn up Adam's volume.

or MAYBE that's why they are being super strict about recording on this tour. they don't want the "real way" of playing the songs to be leaked out.....the world must not know!! (just kidding)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny
But, it wasn't Joe Baressi that did any of the mastering anyway? Barresi did the engineering for Tool and a Kyuss, but he didnt master Tool, and he didnt master Kyuss, Eddy Schreyer did. So, I don't really understand your point, you're saying Barresi did a bad job on 10k Days by comparing the masters of two songs that were mastered by two different people, neither of which were Barresi? Do you know what mastering is? That's all post production, and you're also wrong to say Tool didnt have control over it, they had a hand in the mastering of it aswell.
well, I did say that I didn't think it was Barresi's fault in the first post...and the comparison was to say "this wasn't Joe's fault". I was looking/listening to In Utero earlier (the only other Ludwig produced album I have, I think) and it has quite a bit of range. I don't know if it was either of these guys who did it. But hey times are changin' so maybe...

anyway, I don't know how often I'll have to say it, but I think Barresi did a fantastic job mixing 10kd and I love his work. Ok so what are we gonna do, go knock down Bob Ludwig's door and tell him that his mastering sucked?

The more I research this, the more appalled I am. Bob Ludwig has so many awards and a crapload of recognition and a loooooong history of mastering famous albums and the album turned out like this? It makes me wonder how it really went down when the master tapes were sent to Gateway Mastering to be finished, and who was really in the studio when it all happened. Was Tool there? Barresi? From reading interviews with Ludwig, it seems that he does all the work and then shows the bands the finished products. Here are some interesting tidbits...

source: http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_bob_ludwig/

Quote:
Usually, I master an album in one day, which, on average, gives me one-half to one hour per song. Under certain circumstances, I have to ask the song to be remixed.
this one is particularly interesting:

Quote:
One other thing to avoid is the excess use of compression. I am really glad that the new digital compressors weren't around when The Beatles were making records. It is a common belief that music that sounds louder sounds better and more exciting, especially when you are listening to it for shorter periods of time. However, it is my experience that a louder album will wear you out faster than an album that has greater dynamics, and it might make you not want to listen to it again.

Compression is also something that you can never undo, unlike EQ, which we always can tweak later. If you are in doubt about how much compression to use, the advice is to use less and to let us do the job. The studio monitors today are generally a lot better than what they used to be, and from a mixer's perspective, it is easier today to get the EQ right. The best thing is to get the EQ as close as possible in a mix environment, and let us only do some touch-ups. This obviously requires that you are familiar with your speakers and the room you are working in.
i like that one a lot, but this one is my favorite:

source:http://www.musictap.net/Interviews/L...Interview.html

Quote:
MusicTAP: What is the usual process from when Gateway is contacted for a project to the final release?

Bob Ludwig: Someone calls us and schedules a day I can work on their record. Either I do it alone, or the producer and sometimes, artists attends. The day arrives, I listen to their raw tape and hear in my head how I think it could sound. I turn the knobs on the right gear to make it sound like I hear it in my head. I master it, discuss if any remixing needs to be done and do any further editing that needs to be done. When the artist, producer, A&R person and the manager all agree I have gotten as much musicality out of their original master tape as possible, the approved master is copied to the appropriate medium desired by the plant (PCM 1630, exabyte DDP tape, Pre-master CD-R, or Yellow Book CD-ROM.) The actual parts going to the plant are quality controlled from top to bottom by one of my engineers, usually with headphones to catch problems one can’t hear in speakers, and notes are made of any abnormal sounds that are in fact approved.

On very rare occasions the artists may ask me to approve the final CD pressing (they can sound quite bad or match what we have given them) which I may do.
wait, what's that? Usually he's alone? Producer and arist are sometimes there? hmm. Well, Tool did produce this album so perhaps they were there.

But notice that last one. RARE occasions the artist will ask for the final CD pressing to be approved---which may sound quite bad? So it makes me wonder, is Ludwig being his usual audiophile snob self (read his interviews...he claims that most of the time, MP3 in its highest bitrate is passable, which is complete and utter bullshit for all but 0.000001% of the known inhabitants of planet earth) and just saying that the CDs aren't pressed correctly? he did say this:

source: http://www.paudio.com/Pages/learning_Ludwig.html

Quote:
One thing I always say is, "Never turn your back on digital." (laughter) The fact that it worked a hundred times in a row is no guarantee that it will work the hundred-and-first. That's why computer verification is very necessary, or listening to it.
Or does he mean that something will turn out to be compressed to hell like 10,000 Days? I can't tell what he means by "quite bad". Calling 320kbps MP3 quite bad is one thing, calling an album that lacks dynamics bad is another.

The only explanations that I can think of are that Tool insisted on this (for some reason...don't ask me why), that Ludwig totally fell off his game and went backwards on some of his statements, that some bigwig intervened and did this, OR that we are all wrong and the album sounds perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA
How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
All the sound goes through a soundboard, there's a dude mixing it. He can change levels or mess with anything while the show is going on. Also, there are lots of other things like compression pedals for guitar. Compression is actually pretty great for a guitar, it increases sustain, and it also boosts the volume of the soft notes and lowers the harder ones for more even sound.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-09-2006 at 09:49 AM..
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-09-2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
well, here you go. almost... Ludwig said it, sorry. I also spelled Barresi wrong, oh well...
Thanks for that. I see what you are saying about the compression and lack of dynamics in 10,000 Days. I actually feel that this may have been their best album if it had the production of Lateralus. For example, the part in the title track where Maynard yells "give me my wings" around 5:35, it sounds like it should transition into a heavier section, but it just ends up sounding anti-climactic. It keeps the same level of intensity, and I'm really not sure that is how the band intended for it to sound like. I couldn't even appreciate that part of the song until I learned it on guitar and I realized what Adam was playing. That part sounds to me like it should be heavy, but it just isn't on the CD. Or maybe it's just how the band intended it to sound like.
Old 10-09-2006, 01:32 PM   #47
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
well, here you go. almost... Ludwig said it, sorry. I also spelled Barresi wrong, oh well...
Thanks for that. I see what you are saying about the compression and lack of dynamics in 10,000 Days. I actually feel that this may have been their best album if it had the production of Lateralus. For example, the part in the title track where Maynard yells "give me my wings" around 5:35, it sounds like it should transition into a heavier section, but it just ends up sounding anti-climactic. It keeps the same level of intensity, and I'm really not sure that is how the band intended for it to sound like. I couldn't even appreciate that part of the song until I learned it on guitar and I realized what Adam was playing. That part sounds to me like it should be heavy, but it just isn't on the CD. Or maybe it's just how the band intended it to sound like.
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-09-2006, 03:33 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA View Post
How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
Compression is just something that affects a signal. Whether that signal is a live one or a prerecorded one, it doesnt matter, it has the same effect - that is, to flatten the loudest peaks and then to heighten the lower peaks, so that the difference between the high peaks and the low peaks isn't as much.

So, like hushypushy says, all the sounds go into a giant sound desk, and then you just route the sound you want to compress to a box that does compression, and then route the output from that box to the PA system.
Old 10-09-2006, 03:33 PM   #48
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenA View Post
How is compression used live? I thought 'compression' was part of the post-production process? How can a live show be possibly post-production?
Compression is just something that affects a signal. Whether that signal is a live one or a prerecorded one, it doesnt matter, it has the same effect - that is, to flatten the loudest peaks and then to heighten the lower peaks, so that the difference between the high peaks and the low peaks isn't as much.

So, like hushypushy says, all the sounds go into a giant sound desk, and then you just route the sound you want to compress to a box that does compression, and then route the output from that box to the PA system.
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-09-2006, 10:37 PM

an interesting thing, go to Statistics-->analyze in cool edit pro, you see a lot of interesting data...here's the analysis of Rosetta Stoned:

Code:
	Left	Right
Min Sample Value:	-32768	-32768
Max Sample Value:	32767	32767
Peak Amplitude:	0 dB	0 dB
Possibly Clipped:	51	53
DC Offset:	-.001 	-.001 
Minimum RMS Power:	-68.88 dB	-69.35 dB
Maximum RMS Power:	-4.77 dB	-4.39 dB
Average RMS Power:	-10.73 dB	-11.3 dB
Total RMS Power:	-10.43 dB	-10.98 dB
Actual Bit Depth:	16 Bits	16 Bits

Using RMS Window of 50 ms
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-09-2006, 10:37 PM   #49
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

an interesting thing, go to Statistics-->analyze in cool edit pro, you see a lot of interesting data...here's the analysis of Rosetta Stoned:

Code:
	Left	Right
Min Sample Value:	-32768	-32768
Max Sample Value:	32767	32767
Peak Amplitude:	0 dB	0 dB
Possibly Clipped:	51	53
DC Offset:	-.001 	-.001 
Minimum RMS Power:	-68.88 dB	-69.35 dB
Maximum RMS Power:	-4.77 dB	-4.39 dB
Average RMS Power:	-10.73 dB	-11.3 dB
Total RMS Power:	-10.43 dB	-10.98 dB
Actual Bit Depth:	16 Bits	16 Bits

Using RMS Window of 50 ms
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-10-2006, 01:44 PM

Can you explain what those statistics mean, hushypushy? Why is that data interesting?
Old 10-10-2006, 01:44 PM   #50
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Can you explain what those statistics mean, hushypushy? Why is that data interesting?
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-10-2006, 02:28 PM

Well, it says that is peaks at 0db. This means, the highest peak in the audio is at exactly 0db - the point at which clipping will occur.

It also points out alot of points at which the track clips (Possibly clipped, 51 and 53).

The RMS power is, well, basically the percievable volume (not quite but essentially), the most significant figure is the average RMS power of -10.43db, which is the average loudness. Most commercial releases can be somewhere between -16db and -10db. -10.43db is pretty damn loud.

Last edited by Jimmeny; 10-11-2006 at 01:55 PM..
Old 10-10-2006, 02:28 PM   #51
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Well, it says that is peaks at 0db. This means, the highest peak in the audio is at exactly 0db - the point at which clipping will occur.

It also points out alot of points at which the track clips (Possibly clipped, 51 and 53).

The RMS power is, well, basically the percievable volume (not quite but essentially), the most significant figure is the average RMS power of -10.43db, which is the average loudness. Most commercial releases can be somewhere between -16db and -10db. -10.43db is pretty damn loud.

Last edited by Jimmeny; 10-11-2006 at 01:55 PM..
OFFLINE |  
valhalla
10-11-2006, 07:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike09 View Post
The part in the title track where Maynard yells "give me my wings" around 5:35, it sounds like it should transition into a heavier section, but it just ends up sounding anti-climactic.
To my ears, the biggest fault I hear is how "weak" Adam's guitar is when Lost Keys segues into Rosetta Stoned. It should be louder, heavier or thicker. For some reason it just falls flat in the mix.
Old 10-11-2006, 07:48 AM   #52
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 83
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike09 View Post
The part in the title track where Maynard yells "give me my wings" around 5:35, it sounds like it should transition into a heavier section, but it just ends up sounding anti-climactic.
To my ears, the biggest fault I hear is how "weak" Adam's guitar is when Lost Keys segues into Rosetta Stoned. It should be louder, heavier or thicker. For some reason it just falls flat in the mix.
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-11-2006, 09:15 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny View Post
It also says points out alot of points at which it clips (Possibly clipped, 51 and 53).
I believe that's the track that has the most "possibly clipped". don't quote me on this but I think it said 0 on both sides for Jambi (surprised me!).

I was listening to NIN like always and you know what, The Fragile has INCREDIBLE dynamic range. it really does. unfortunately, it (apparently) clips all over the place. The Day the Whole World Went Away is a wonderful example of this. it has some very very very quiet parts, some medium parts, and some extremely loud parts. Possible clipped samples? 16055 and 11629. But I can't even hear the clipping (probably masked by the distortion) and it sounds good to me. The jury is still out on whether the vinyl or the CD is better...the vinyl has no clipping at all, but much less dynamic range. The quiet parts are still exactly as quiet (says wav analyzer) but the loud parts are considerably less loud. Of course, each version has its own merits but that's NIN, not Tool, so I'll stop now.

I guess my point of showing that analysis is to say, "wait a second, there might be clipping" because I stared at wavs for a long time and I didn't find any square blatant cut-off peaks (a la Californication) but I did find a lot of pointy peaks that peaked right at 0db.

I'm very anxious for a vinyl release of this album. Not because I like vinyl better (it sucks) but I want to hear what they're gonna do with it. If there really is a difference, there will be quite a fanfare...
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-11-2006, 09:15 AM   #53
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny View Post
It also says points out alot of points at which it clips (Possibly clipped, 51 and 53).
I believe that's the track that has the most "possibly clipped". don't quote me on this but I think it said 0 on both sides for Jambi (surprised me!).

I was listening to NIN like always and you know what, The Fragile has INCREDIBLE dynamic range. it really does. unfortunately, it (apparently) clips all over the place. The Day the Whole World Went Away is a wonderful example of this. it has some very very very quiet parts, some medium parts, and some extremely loud parts. Possible clipped samples? 16055 and 11629. But I can't even hear the clipping (probably masked by the distortion) and it sounds good to me. The jury is still out on whether the vinyl or the CD is better...the vinyl has no clipping at all, but much less dynamic range. The quiet parts are still exactly as quiet (says wav analyzer) but the loud parts are considerably less loud. Of course, each version has its own merits but that's NIN, not Tool, so I'll stop now.

I guess my point of showing that analysis is to say, "wait a second, there might be clipping" because I stared at wavs for a long time and I didn't find any square blatant cut-off peaks (a la Californication) but I did find a lot of pointy peaks that peaked right at 0db.

I'm very anxious for a vinyl release of this album. Not because I like vinyl better (it sucks) but I want to hear what they're gonna do with it. If there really is a difference, there will be quite a fanfare...
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-11-2006, 06:47 PM

How can you say vinyl sucks? The sound quality is actually better than a CD.
Old 10-11-2006, 06:47 PM   #54
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

How can you say vinyl sucks? The sound quality is actually better than a CD.
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-11-2006, 10:24 PM

Well keep in mind I said vinyl sucks. I mentioned nothing of quality. Quality is not one of the things I consider when I think about vinyl versus CD.

I don't want to get into why vinyl sounds better because...well....it doesn't. It has the POTENTIAL to be much higher. Why? Because sound is analog, and so is vinyl. Because you can have a much higher sampling rate with analog (because you know, it's an actual wave). The problem is, you have to have some crazy leet equipment to play a record properly. I have a Technics belt drive turntable from 1982 and a Denon amp from the 90s. I have Lateralus on vinyl and it sounds like shit--it has tons of noise, it skips, blah blah. I popped Lateralus into an old Technics CD player through the same amp and it sounds fantastic. To play a record properly you're going to need a nice direct drive turntable, calibrated correctly, with a nice arm, and a really nice needle. How much does all that shit cost? You can buy any old CD player with a generic DAC and it sounds perfect.

The "sound" is bullshit, it's totally imagined. I'd love to put any audiophile to a blind test on vinyl encoded from the same mix. Sometimes it's legitimately different--they used a different master for The Fragile, for example, and the mix and dynamic range is different, and the songs are actually different themselves (new endings, beginnings, etc, to adapt to 6 sides of vinyl rather than 2 CD sides). But when they master the exact same mix (whether it came from analog or digital, doesn't matter) to vinyl and CD, it will sound exactly the same (played under ideal conditions).

Ok, but the sound is not really what matters. I actually typed up that blurb about sound and I'll leave it there. Let's revisit the first thing I said. You need a hell of a system to play records. But let's say you are an audiophile, you have an infinite budget for purchasing the l33test diamond needles and crazy tone arms and pro turntables. alright. Vinyl wears out. It costs more to make and it's harder to make (you have to constantly recalibrate the machine; CD pressing plants require much less maintenence for much greater output) and it ends up costing much more for the consumer. Many artists and mastering facilities have gone to digital in the past 20 years; once you've gone from A->D that's it, going back to A doesn't really make it any more special. Many records are made from the digital master. You've got to clean records, make sure they are free from static, and be careful where you store them so they don't warp. The most cleaning I ever do to my CDs is taking the soft part of a T-shirt to rub the dust off. It's a ton of work to properly digitize them, and it's pretty hard to pop a vinyl into your computer, portable music player, or car stereo.

Vinyl is nice and it has its own benefits i suppose. But CDs have so many more benefits and much fewer deficits. And these new SACDs and DVDAs have enough bitrate and sampling rates to make any audiophile dump vinyl. There is a limit to human hearing. What is it, something like 98% of the population can't tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and CD audio? I ABXed it over and over, transparency to me comes at like 100kbps OGG and about 120kbps MP3. There is absolutely no reason that albums should come out on vinyl except for collectors' value (big artwork! yay!) or like in this case where we might have a sliver of hope that the vinyl might have more dynamic range or less clipping (such as The Fragile...ah yes, my golden example).

Out of all the people I've talked to about their vinyl to CD experiences, no one liked vinyl better. These were all adults, people that grew up with vinyl. They all said that the advent of CD was a change for the better. Even my audiophile uncle who spends ludicrous (to me) money on audio equipment and who owns dozens of MFSL CDs and LPs says that vinyl is only good for one thing, better vocal reproduction.

Of course, if you want to discuss this further in a logical, friendly, and subjective manner (as opposed to just yelling at each other stating that our opinion is better because we can "hear it"), I can start up a new thread in Socialize and let everyone go crazy on it. Man, people are really really passionate about their vinyl, aren't they? I never understood that...when I finally got a record player and bought some new vinyl I put it on and was expecting multiple orgasms as soon as the first note reverberated...and you know what, it was pretty disappointing.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-11-2006 at 11:18 PM..
Old 10-11-2006, 10:24 PM   #55
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Well keep in mind I said vinyl sucks. I mentioned nothing of quality. Quality is not one of the things I consider when I think about vinyl versus CD.

I don't want to get into why vinyl sounds better because...well....it doesn't. It has the POTENTIAL to be much higher. Why? Because sound is analog, and so is vinyl. Because you can have a much higher sampling rate with analog (because you know, it's an actual wave). The problem is, you have to have some crazy leet equipment to play a record properly. I have a Technics belt drive turntable from 1982 and a Denon amp from the 90s. I have Lateralus on vinyl and it sounds like shit--it has tons of noise, it skips, blah blah. I popped Lateralus into an old Technics CD player through the same amp and it sounds fantastic. To play a record properly you're going to need a nice direct drive turntable, calibrated correctly, with a nice arm, and a really nice needle. How much does all that shit cost? You can buy any old CD player with a generic DAC and it sounds perfect.

The "sound" is bullshit, it's totally imagined. I'd love to put any audiophile to a blind test on vinyl encoded from the same mix. Sometimes it's legitimately different--they used a different master for The Fragile, for example, and the mix and dynamic range is different, and the songs are actually different themselves (new endings, beginnings, etc, to adapt to 6 sides of vinyl rather than 2 CD sides). But when they master the exact same mix (whether it came from analog or digital, doesn't matter) to vinyl and CD, it will sound exactly the same (played under ideal conditions).

Ok, but the sound is not really what matters. I actually typed up that blurb about sound and I'll leave it there. Let's revisit the first thing I said. You need a hell of a system to play records. But let's say you are an audiophile, you have an infinite budget for purchasing the l33test diamond needles and crazy tone arms and pro turntables. alright. Vinyl wears out. It costs more to make and it's harder to make (you have to constantly recalibrate the machine; CD pressing plants require much less maintenence for much greater output) and it ends up costing much more for the consumer. Many artists and mastering facilities have gone to digital in the past 20 years; once you've gone from A->D that's it, going back to A doesn't really make it any more special. Many records are made from the digital master. You've got to clean records, make sure they are free from static, and be careful where you store them so they don't warp. The most cleaning I ever do to my CDs is taking the soft part of a T-shirt to rub the dust off. It's a ton of work to properly digitize them, and it's pretty hard to pop a vinyl into your computer, portable music player, or car stereo.

Vinyl is nice and it has its own benefits i suppose. But CDs have so many more benefits and much fewer deficits. And these new SACDs and DVDAs have enough bitrate and sampling rates to make any audiophile dump vinyl. There is a limit to human hearing. What is it, something like 98% of the population can't tell the difference between 128kbps MP3 and CD audio? I ABXed it over and over, transparency to me comes at like 100kbps OGG and about 120kbps MP3. There is absolutely no reason that albums should come out on vinyl except for collectors' value (big artwork! yay!) or like in this case where we might have a sliver of hope that the vinyl might have more dynamic range or less clipping (such as The Fragile...ah yes, my golden example).

Out of all the people I've talked to about their vinyl to CD experiences, no one liked vinyl better. These were all adults, people that grew up with vinyl. They all said that the advent of CD was a change for the better. Even my audiophile uncle who spends ludicrous (to me) money on audio equipment and who owns dozens of MFSL CDs and LPs says that vinyl is only good for one thing, better vocal reproduction.

Of course, if you want to discuss this further in a logical, friendly, and subjective manner (as opposed to just yelling at each other stating that our opinion is better because we can "hear it"), I can start up a new thread in Socialize and let everyone go crazy on it. Man, people are really really passionate about their vinyl, aren't they? I never understood that...when I finally got a record player and bought some new vinyl I put it on and was expecting multiple orgasms as soon as the first note reverberated...and you know what, it was pretty disappointing.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-11-2006 at 11:18 PM..
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-11-2006, 10:43 PM

I got destroyed in that argument.

Last edited by mike09; 10-11-2006 at 10:50 PM..
Old 10-11-2006, 10:43 PM   #56
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

I got destroyed in that argument.

Last edited by mike09; 10-11-2006 at 10:50 PM..
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-11-2006, 11:21 PM

You win 500 respect points from me for admitting that :)

reminds me, sort of, of a mark twain quote:

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Now, I didn't think you were a fool, but the second part is very applicable. I've been trapped into situations where I was just pulling info out of my ass and sigh, there's a limit to the amount of bullshit one can hide in there. Sometimes I wish I'd done the noble thing and just given up.

Anyway, apologies all around for the offtopic rant.

Back on topic....I listened to a few live recordings of WFM/10kd and all I can say is WOW! It sounds so much better. They go from quiet bass and guitar sections into LOUD heavy sections, there are a couple recordings I've heard where it just explodes into clipping because it gets so loud that the audience mics can't handle it. This leads me to believe that Tool did not intend for the album to be like this (contrary to the Isis example, where their album AND live are purposely compressed).
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-11-2006 at 11:24 PM..
Old 10-11-2006, 11:21 PM   #57
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

You win 500 respect points from me for admitting that :)

reminds me, sort of, of a mark twain quote:

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Now, I didn't think you were a fool, but the second part is very applicable. I've been trapped into situations where I was just pulling info out of my ass and sigh, there's a limit to the amount of bullshit one can hide in there. Sometimes I wish I'd done the noble thing and just given up.

Anyway, apologies all around for the offtopic rant.

Back on topic....I listened to a few live recordings of WFM/10kd and all I can say is WOW! It sounds so much better. They go from quiet bass and guitar sections into LOUD heavy sections, there are a couple recordings I've heard where it just explodes into clipping because it gets so loud that the audience mics can't handle it. This leads me to believe that Tool did not intend for the album to be like this (contrary to the Isis example, where their album AND live are purposely compressed).
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope

Last edited by hushypushy; 10-11-2006 at 11:24 PM..
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-12-2006, 05:45 PM

Yeah, I try and not argue with things I'm really not well-informed on. BTW, would you happen to still have any of those WFM/10KD live recordings that you said sounded great? I'd love to hear them.
Old 10-12-2006, 05:45 PM   #58
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Yeah, I try and not argue with things I'm really not well-informed on. BTW, would you happen to still have any of those WFM/10KD live recordings that you said sounded great? I'd love to hear them.
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-12-2006, 07:20 PM

sure, check your PMs ;)
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-12-2006, 07:20 PM   #59
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

sure, check your PMs ;)
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
apathetic goat's Avatar apathetic goat
10-13-2006, 01:42 AM

Do you think you could tell me to check my PMs too?

It's so good to finally see someone debunk the analog vs digital thing convincingly. I'm tired of all these people who blindly believe that vinyl sounds better than audio without even testing it to see if it's true. I personally can't even tell the difference between 128kbps and anything any higher than that.

Last edited by apathetic goat; 10-13-2006 at 01:44 AM..
Old 10-13-2006, 01:42 AM   #60
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
apathetic goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 90
Bincount™: 1
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Do you think you could tell me to check my PMs too?

It's so good to finally see someone debunk the analog vs digital thing convincingly. I'm tired of all these people who blindly believe that vinyl sounds better than audio without even testing it to see if it's true. I personally can't even tell the difference between 128kbps and anything any higher than that.

Last edited by apathetic goat; 10-13-2006 at 01:44 AM..
OFFLINE |  
Aware
10-13-2006, 03:36 AM

I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
Old 10-13-2006, 03:36 AM   #61
Level 3 - Talker
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-13-2006, 04:38 PM

There just needs to be a lot more dynamics on the album.
Old 10-13-2006, 04:38 PM   #62
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

There just needs to be a lot more dynamics on the album.
OFFLINE |  
Cloudshaper's Avatar Cloudshaper
10-14-2006, 01:59 AM

After reading this I can't help but thinking. Not to say that everything tool does is perfect and that they’ll never make mistake. But what if they didn't want to have such a big dynamic range on this song? That it's all very well thought out. I see the song as a very emotional for maynard (duh!) and I see as a very big muscle that's slowly is tightening. I Think it would have ruined the song if it had been quiet quiet quiet LOUD! I think it would have been boring. They have done that before (The patient etc.) I like that it goes loud loud loud LOUD!
Old 10-14-2006, 01:59 AM   #63
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
Cloudshaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: in my pants
Posts: 65
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

After reading this I can't help but thinking. Not to say that everything tool does is perfect and that they’ll never make mistake. But what if they didn't want to have such a big dynamic range on this song? That it's all very well thought out. I see the song as a very emotional for maynard (duh!) and I see as a very big muscle that's slowly is tightening. I Think it would have ruined the song if it had been quiet quiet quiet LOUD! I think it would have been boring. They have done that before (The patient etc.) I like that it goes loud loud loud LOUD!
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-14-2006, 07:22 AM

It wouldn't be quiet quiet quiet loud, the song builds up, or atleast it does just looking at it from a compositional standpoint. Basically, I'll put it this way. It ends up sounding like "Echoes" when it probably should end up sounding more like "Stairway to Heaven".
Old 10-14-2006, 07:22 AM   #64
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

It wouldn't be quiet quiet quiet loud, the song builds up, or atleast it does just looking at it from a compositional standpoint. Basically, I'll put it this way. It ends up sounding like "Echoes" when it probably should end up sounding more like "Stairway to Heaven".
OFFLINE |  
Cloudshaper's Avatar Cloudshaper
10-14-2006, 08:55 AM

But everyone is talking about how they would like the song to have more dynamic impact. I just like that it is so stretched out. It goes like mezzo forte -> forte -> fortissimo
Old 10-14-2006, 08:55 AM   #65
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
Cloudshaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: in my pants
Posts: 65
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

But everyone is talking about how they would like the song to have more dynamic impact. I just like that it is so stretched out. It goes like mezzo forte -> forte -> fortissimo
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-14-2006, 10:30 AM

The song does not get hard enough when it needs to on the album. I guarantee the song sounds 100 times better in concert.
Old 10-14-2006, 10:30 AM   #66
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

The song does not get hard enough when it needs to on the album. I guarantee the song sounds 100 times better in concert.
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-14-2006, 03:15 PM

Subjective tastes aside... how many songs don't sound 100 times better live?
Old 10-14-2006, 03:15 PM   #67
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Subjective tastes aside... how many songs don't sound 100 times better live?
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-14-2006, 06:05 PM

maybe 99 times better, but 100 times honestly may be pushing it :p
Old 10-14-2006, 06:05 PM   #68
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

maybe 99 times better, but 100 times honestly may be pushing it :p
OFFLINE |  
9331
10-14-2006, 08:26 PM

Yeah, after reading this thread I definately notice the lack of dynamics all throughout this album. Question to HushyPushy, is it better to have a song played at 96kbps vs 128?
__________________
...star stuff contemplating star stuff... -Carl Sagan

Get the FACTS about FACTS!
Old 10-14-2006, 08:26 PM   #69
Level 7 - Loquacious
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 352
Bincount™: 52
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Yeah, after reading this thread I definately notice the lack of dynamics all throughout this album. Question to HushyPushy, is it better to have a song played at 96kbps vs 128?
__________________
...star stuff contemplating star stuff... -Carl Sagan

Get the FACTS about FACTS!
OFFLINE |  
apathetic goat's Avatar apathetic goat
10-15-2006, 01:45 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em View Post
I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
I know what you're talking about and I'm still not even sure if this is the 'clipping' phenomenon that everyone talks about. I hear that kind of crackling in lots of other CDs too. Pretty much everything made after 2001 seems to have crackling somewhere.
Old 10-15-2006, 01:45 AM   #70
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
apathetic goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 90
Bincount™: 1
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em View Post
I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
I know what you're talking about and I'm still not even sure if this is the 'clipping' phenomenon that everyone talks about. I hear that kind of crackling in lots of other CDs too. Pretty much everything made after 2001 seems to have crackling somewhere.
OFFLINE |  
Aware
10-15-2006, 02:13 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
I know what you're talking about and I'm still not even sure if this is the 'clipping' phenomenon that everyone talks about. I hear that kind of crackling in lots of other CDs too. Pretty much everything made after 2001 seems to have crackling somewhere.
The only album I can really hear it on is 10,000 Days. I'm guessing that the crackling has to do with the way the software handles the clipping?
Old 10-15-2006, 02:13 AM   #71
Level 3 - Talker
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
I know what you're talking about and I'm still not even sure if this is the 'clipping' phenomenon that everyone talks about. I hear that kind of crackling in lots of other CDs too. Pretty much everything made after 2001 seems to have crackling somewhere.
The only album I can really hear it on is 10,000 Days. I'm guessing that the crackling has to do with the way the software handles the clipping?
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-15-2006, 05:31 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em View Post
I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
could be tons of things. i doubt it's the file. update your drivers and turn your windows sound volume to about 75%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9331
Yeah, after reading this thread I definately notice the lack of dynamics all throughout this album. Question to HushyPushy, is it better to have a song played at 96kbps vs 128?
I can't tell you that. You need to decide what sounds good to yourself. Do an ABX test and see what your limits are. Some people listen to 64kbps OGG and can't tell the difference from the CD. Download Foobar and check off the box to install the ABX comparator when you're installing it. Rip a song and encode it to MP3, then compare the MP3 to the WAV. If you can tell the difference, raise the bitrate. If you can't tell the difference, the bitrate is fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny
Subjective tastes aside... how many songs don't sound 100 times better live?
Sounds like a rhetorical question; are you saying that every song sounds better live? It's down to a lot of factors, but my point (and others') about these Tool songs is that...holy crap...they go quiet and then loud, they aren't compressed. We aren't speaking of "better" in any other way (well, i wasn't).

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudshaper
After reading this I can't help but thinking. Not to say that everything tool does is perfect and that they’ll never make mistake. But what if they didn't want to have such a big dynamic range on this song?
yeah, that's what I said a little earlier. Hey, it's possible. They might like it a lot. I bet a lot of people love the dynamics on this album and would disagree with me. Nothin' wrong with that.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-15-2006, 05:31 PM   #72
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em View Post
I'm not sure if this is related, but when I play 10,000 Days, particularly the beginning of Vicarious with foobar2000, either from a 320 kbit/s MP3 ripped with EAC or straight from the CD I hear crackling. Is this clipping? I'm using Audio-Technica ATH-AD700s with an X-Fi XtremeMusic.
could be tons of things. i doubt it's the file. update your drivers and turn your windows sound volume to about 75%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9331
Yeah, after reading this thread I definately notice the lack of dynamics all throughout this album. Question to HushyPushy, is it better to have a song played at 96kbps vs 128?
I can't tell you that. You need to decide what sounds good to yourself. Do an ABX test and see what your limits are. Some people listen to 64kbps OGG and can't tell the difference from the CD. Download Foobar and check off the box to install the ABX comparator when you're installing it. Rip a song and encode it to MP3, then compare the MP3 to the WAV. If you can tell the difference, raise the bitrate. If you can't tell the difference, the bitrate is fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny
Subjective tastes aside... how many songs don't sound 100 times better live?
Sounds like a rhetorical question; are you saying that every song sounds better live? It's down to a lot of factors, but my point (and others') about these Tool songs is that...holy crap...they go quiet and then loud, they aren't compressed. We aren't speaking of "better" in any other way (well, i wasn't).

Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudshaper
After reading this I can't help but thinking. Not to say that everything tool does is perfect and that they’ll never make mistake. But what if they didn't want to have such a big dynamic range on this song?
yeah, that's what I said a little earlier. Hey, it's possible. They might like it a lot. I bet a lot of people love the dynamics on this album and would disagree with me. Nothin' wrong with that.
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-16-2006, 02:16 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Sounds like a rhetorical question; are you saying that every song sounds better live? It's down to a lot of factors, but my point (and others') about these Tool songs is that...holy crap...they go quiet and then loud, they aren't compressed. We aren't speaking of "better" in any other way (well, i wasn't).
Yeah it was rhetorical and it wasn't aimed towards you anyway. There is of course a difference between live and recorded, but (agai, subjectively) I think most people enjoy being at the gig more than listening to the CD. It's more of a special occassion, it's louder. I think gigs, the vast majority of the time, are better than CD.

The point in my saying this is because mike was saying 'oh yeah the CD is compressed, I like it, but I guarantee it'll sound better in concert'. But, in my opinion, that statement doesn't mean anything, because live concerts are compressed just as much as studio recordings, if not more (10KD aside maybe :P)... thus leading to my above point on concerts.
Old 10-16-2006, 02:16 AM   #73
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Sounds like a rhetorical question; are you saying that every song sounds better live? It's down to a lot of factors, but my point (and others') about these Tool songs is that...holy crap...they go quiet and then loud, they aren't compressed. We aren't speaking of "better" in any other way (well, i wasn't).
Yeah it was rhetorical and it wasn't aimed towards you anyway. There is of course a difference between live and recorded, but (agai, subjectively) I think most people enjoy being at the gig more than listening to the CD. It's more of a special occassion, it's louder. I think gigs, the vast majority of the time, are better than CD.

The point in my saying this is because mike was saying 'oh yeah the CD is compressed, I like it, but I guarantee it'll sound better in concert'. But, in my opinion, that statement doesn't mean anything, because live concerts are compressed just as much as studio recordings, if not more (10KD aside maybe :P)... thus leading to my above point on concerts.
OFFLINE |  
Aware
10-16-2006, 02:45 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
could be tons of things. i doubt it's the file. update your drivers and turn your windows sound volume to about 75%.
Drivers are the latest and the volume is always less than 75%. As I said, it still happens when I listen straight from the CD and this is the only album that I can really hear it.
Old 10-16-2006, 02:45 AM   #74
Level 3 - Talker
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
could be tons of things. i doubt it's the file. update your drivers and turn your windows sound volume to about 75%.
Drivers are the latest and the volume is always less than 75%. As I said, it still happens when I listen straight from the CD and this is the only album that I can really hear it.
OFFLINE |  
apathetic goat's Avatar apathetic goat
10-16-2006, 11:29 AM

Ph1em I'd like to compare notes with you.

I hear this phenomenon at the following times:

Vicarious: Sprinkled throughout 0:45 to 1:07 along with a gigantic amount caused by the guitar at 3:47.

Jambi: When the drums and bass kick in at 0:05. Hissing, white noise and crackling.

Wings For Marie: Relatively clean with a tiny bit during the heavy section, most noticeably near the end of it (4:22).

The Pot: 4:52.

Rosetta Stoned: 6:52 - 7:03

I hear a lot more, but these seem to be the worst affected areas. Do you hear it in the same places?
Old 10-16-2006, 11:29 AM   #75
Level 5 - Deep Thinker
 
apathetic goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 90
Bincount™: 1
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Ph1em I'd like to compare notes with you.

I hear this phenomenon at the following times:

Vicarious: Sprinkled throughout 0:45 to 1:07 along with a gigantic amount caused by the guitar at 3:47.

Jambi: When the drums and bass kick in at 0:05. Hissing, white noise and crackling.

Wings For Marie: Relatively clean with a tiny bit during the heavy section, most noticeably near the end of it (4:22).

The Pot: 4:52.

Rosetta Stoned: 6:52 - 7:03

I hear a lot more, but these seem to be the worst affected areas. Do you hear it in the same places?
OFFLINE |  
mike09's Avatar mike09
10-16-2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny View Post
Yeah it was rhetorical and it wasn't aimed towards you anyway. There is of course a difference between live and recorded, but (agai, subjectively) I think most people enjoy being at the gig more than listening to the CD. It's more of a special occassion, it's louder. I think gigs, the vast majority of the time, are better than CD.

The point in my saying this is because mike was saying 'oh yeah the CD is compressed, I like it, but I guarantee it'll sound better in concert'. But, in my opinion, that statement doesn't mean anything, because live concerts are compressed just as much as studio recordings, if not more (10KD aside maybe :P)... thus leading to my above point on concerts.
The dynamics are what would be better in concert. This cd would sound even better in concert than other cds would in concert due to the vast difference in sound between the cd version and the live version. Understand?
Old 10-16-2006, 12:27 PM   #76
Banned.
 
mike09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 1,985
Bincount™: 664
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmeny View Post
Yeah it was rhetorical and it wasn't aimed towards you anyway. There is of course a difference between live and recorded, but (agai, subjectively) I think most people enjoy being at the gig more than listening to the CD. It's more of a special occassion, it's louder. I think gigs, the vast majority of the time, are better than CD.

The point in my saying this is because mike was saying 'oh yeah the CD is compressed, I like it, but I guarantee it'll sound better in concert'. But, in my opinion, that statement doesn't mean anything, because live concerts are compressed just as much as studio recordings, if not more (10KD aside maybe :P)... thus leading to my above point on concerts.
The dynamics are what would be better in concert. This cd would sound even better in concert than other cds would in concert due to the vast difference in sound between the cd version and the live version. Understand?
OFFLINE |  
Andorion's Avatar Andorion
10-16-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
An excellent example: go to 4:10 in Wings pt 1. Or maybe earlier. But listen when the heavy part comes in. It's this quiet stuff and then then a loud riff hits. But uh....it has absolutely no impact.
Try this. It's really anticlimactic, and a great example of why this album feels so flat.
Old 10-16-2006, 01:48 PM   #77
Avatar of the Gods (tdn $upporter)
 
Andorion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: LA
Posts: 324
Bincount™: 13
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
An excellent example: go to 4:10 in Wings pt 1. Or maybe earlier. But listen when the heavy part comes in. It's this quiet stuff and then then a loud riff hits. But uh....it has absolutely no impact.
Try this. It's really anticlimactic, and a great example of why this album feels so flat.
OFFLINE |  
Jimmeny's Avatar Jimmeny
10-16-2006, 03:37 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike09 View Post
The dynamics are what would be better in concert. This cd would sound even better in concert than other cds would in concert due to the vast difference in sound between the cd version and the live version. Understand?
Not having a go man. But, what you say is an opinion, not a fact.
Old 10-16-2006, 03:37 PM   #78
Level 9 - Obstreperous
 
Jimmeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Bincount™: 30
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike09 View Post
The dynamics are what would be better in concert. This cd would sound even better in concert than other cds would in concert due to the vast difference in sound between the cd version and the live version. Understand?
Not having a go man. But, what you say is an opinion, not a fact.
OFFLINE |  
hushypushy's Avatar hushypushy
10-16-2006, 04:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em
Drivers are the latest and the volume is always less than 75%. As I said, it still happens when I listen straight from the CD and this is the only album that I can really hear it.
Sucks. I notice you're from Australia. Do you have the Australian pressing? You might want to (OMGOMGOMGOMG) download another country's FLAC rip and see if there's any difference (either subjectively, or objectively by doing a bit comparison).
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
Old 10-16-2006, 04:34 PM   #79
Level 11 - Clamorous
 
hushypushy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 3,750
Bincount™: 3988
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph1em
Drivers are the latest and the volume is always less than 75%. As I said, it still happens when I listen straight from the CD and this is the only album that I can really hear it.
Sucks. I notice you're from Australia. Do you have the Australian pressing? You might want to (OMGOMGOMGOMG) download another country's FLAC rip and see if there's any difference (either subjectively, or objectively by doing a bit comparison).
__________________
"You think my lack of tact is bad, which is subjective. Personally I think it's great." -misanthrope
OFFLINE |  
Aware
10-16-2006, 11:56 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Ph1em I'd like to compare notes with you.

I hear this phenomenon at the following times:

Vicarious: Sprinkled throughout 0:45 to 1:07 along with a gigantic amount caused by the guitar at 3:47.
Yes. Definitely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Jambi: When the drums and bass kick in at 0:05. Hissing, white noise and crackling.
I can't really hear anything here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Wings For Marie: Relatively clean with a tiny bit during the heavy section, most noticeably near the end of it (4:22).
Nothing here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
The Pot: 4:52.
Yep.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Rosetta Stoned: 6:52 - 7:03
It's quite bad there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
I hear a lot more, but these seem to be the worst affected areas. Do you hear it in the same places?
I agree with you. Mostly it is quite subtle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Sucks. I notice you're from Australia. Do you have the Australian pressing? You might want to (OMGOMGOMGOMG) download another country's FLAC rip and see if there's any difference (either subjectively, or objectively by doing a bit comparison).
I do have the Australian pressing. I shall have a look for a foreign FLAC rip.
Old 10-16-2006, 11:56 PM   #80
Level 3 - Talker
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 12
Bincount™: 0
Re: 10,000 Days IS compressed to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Ph1em I'd like to compare notes with you.

I hear this phenomenon at the following times:

Vicarious: Sprinkled throughout 0:45 to 1:07 along with a gigantic amount caused by the guitar at 3:47.
Yes. Definitely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Jambi: When the drums and bass kick in at 0:05. Hissing, white noise and crackling.
I can't really hear anything here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Wings For Marie: Relatively clean with a tiny bit during the heavy section, most noticeably near the end of it (4:22).
Nothing here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
The Pot: 4:52.
Yep.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
Rosetta Stoned: 6:52 - 7:03
It's quite bad there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apathetic goat View Post
I hear a lot more, but these seem to be the worst affected areas. Do you hear it in the same places?
I agree with you. Mostly it is quite subtle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hushypushy View Post
Sucks. I notice you're from Australia. Do you have the Australian pressing? You might want to (OMGOMGOMGOMG) download another country's FLAC rip and see if there's any difference (either subjectively, or objectively by doing a bit comparison).
I do have the Australian pressing. I shall have a look for a foreign FLAC rip.
OFFLINE |  


Closed Thread

Rate This Thread
You have already rated this thread
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Quick Reply

Forum Jump

all posts © their respective authors. the tool page is not responsible for any of their thoughts, brilliant or otherwise.