MQA Off-Topic Spinoff

[Brian Lucey]

5 hours ago, Em2016 said:

 

Two of the recent albums mentioned in that interview, that he worked on, are available in MQA on Tidal.

Shania Twain - Now

Liam Gallagher - As You Were

 

I wonder if he was involved in the MQA process?

No.  the labels are doing what they want to do, as they own the material and someone in one division is making decisions for the team.

Quote

12 hours ago, Abtr said:

I listened to some of his products on Tidal and checked for dynamic range here: http://dr.loudness-war.info/. He must be mastering music to win the loudness war..

 

That doesn't say anything bad about him if he was,  since the labels direct things (I assume). But would be interesting to know.

 

These are VERY loud records, to be sure.  They are also loved by both artists, both labels ...  and both are Billboard #1s.

 

When you do 200 records a year there is no time to be an a$$hole or a snob, it's a service job and we can only make dynamic records when that is what the client wants.   Tell me, what do you do for a living?   Do you ignore your clients or do you serve them?

 

[Brian Lucey]

9 hours ago, FredericV said:

 

No, just another ad-hominem attack.
 

 

• 1.

  (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

  "vicious ad hominem attacks"
• 2.

  relating to or associated with a particular person.

   

  I would say your reply is guilty of this.   Yet I mentioned no one.  So ... ?

[Brian Lucey]

47 minutes ago, mansr said:

I'm pretty sure FredericV was defending you. The ad hominem, though not quite the right term, he refers to was from Abtr.

 

Yes of course.

 

Sorry, mastering records and replying to people without a real name is tricky !

[Brian Lucey]

3 minutes ago, FredericV said:

Correct, Abtr was attacking Brian because of the compression he used during the mastering. So Abtr was reverting to ad-hominem, which is a typical way to attack opponents.
 

 

In actual fact, those records were not compressed by me.   I use a limiter, the compression is all in mixing.  Modern pop is very compressed, and that's ok.

 

The RMS numbers mean nothing, what matters is moving air, and moving emotions.

 

We are not doing a science project.   Numbers like sample rate or RMS mean nothing.

[Brian Lucey]

3 hours ago, Abtr said:

 

Hi Brian. My apologies if I offended you. The dynamic range of your masterings says nothing about your capability to detect euphonics and harmonic distortion in MQA. I see you use tube amps..
 
Regarding some of your work, Lucinda williams: Sweet old world has DR11, which is fine, but that was 1992. Ray Lamontagne: Supernova has DR6 in 2014, and Cage The Elephant: Tell me I'm pretty, has DR5! (2015). These last two albums are unlistenable to me. They shout at me, it hurts my ears. Quite the opposite of what you call: "enhancing the connection between artist and audience."

 

So you say that you as mastering engineer are not responsible for excessive compression and that this is done in the mixing stage. Does this mean you have to work with material that is already severely dynamically compressed? That must be horrible. I don't think I could do it and probably would refuse the job. Luckily I only have to keep my boss happy and as a programmer I fully control how to make software user friendly.

 

User friendly software = easier to use = encouraging laziness right?  lol

 

I am never offended by a stranger, especially an insulting audiophile.  Yes the mixes are compressed and no you couldn't do anything I do.  I serve music and artists and production teams, it's not a Kingdom of Power.

 

Neil Young has replied to my post that you dismissed, in the positive, and yes that is him.  Maybe he can persuade you to show respect.

 

P.S.  DR=nothing to me.   

 

I'm sure your system sounds great FOR YOU and is set up to be favorable FOR YOUR STYLES of production.   That is not a standard for all, however. There is no perfection only connection.  If you are not connecting with modern music that is not the fault of one party, it's just a bad marriage, move on.

 

P.S.  Lucinda was just released, I did her last two records.   They are as dynamic as modern pop music gets.   Sweet Old World was rerecorded from scratch.  Maybe you will  like that one.  Or try Chet Faker - 'Built on Glass' it has some loud bits yet a ton of range for modern music. 

 

[Brian Lucey]

11 minutes ago, beetlemania said:

 

Yes, I didn't use the sarcasm font 'cuz I thought it was plainly silly.

I mostly agree . . . if there's a 24-bit file of the same master I find a small but worthwhile sonic difference compared to CD resolution - not so much "more information" but "more relaxed and musical". Thanks for stopping by. Many insiders end up getting flamed around here (and on other fora) and quit visiting after too much abuse . . . Best wishes.

 

I have thick skin, thanks though

 

Yes 24 is better than 16 ... yet very system dependent.   People with gear and ears can hear it of course. 

 

We need to sell the 24 bit files at the native rate and call it a day.   So simple and so difficult.  People who do not make music put their "creativity" into other places in their psyche that are less benevolent.  Manipulation and/or Force of Will most often result.

 

When multiple rates are sold of the same master, we get into PREFERENCE.   This makes the audiophile invest not only in the playback system as a form of creativity, yet also in the results of each format ... this last step is unreal and unhealthy.   The definitive master exists.  Always.   And if we are not ABing the ACTUAL MASTER to the OTHER format, we CANNOT say anything definitive, ever ... nothing except I like it, or I don't like it.   More personal investment and pseudo creativity.

 

P.S. MQAs harmonic distortion and slight brightess are two very old tricks to make people "like" something subjectively.

 

[Brian Lucey]

28 minutes ago, labjr said:

When new re-masters have a large reduction in dynamic range compared to older masters or the same albums, how is this what the artist intended?

 

That is a different topic.  Remastering is often done by the label for $. Not approved by the artist.  However even when the artist is involved they might want it loud.  Why is that?  BECAUSE THEY ARE INSECURE.  

 

No matter who they are, when it's time to release the baby into the teeth of the world, most artists are insecure about being too old, too quiet, not cool, too this or too that ... basically ... fear of being IGNORED.   And they are competing for attention in a world of louder and louder work since the 50s. Some artists get it more than others, yet when they are listening on a playlist they need a certain something.

 

Demos are loud today, mixes are competing with demos, masters are competing with mixes.  ALL LOUD thanks to cheap or free limiters in the hands of anyone.   THIS IS REALITY not some blame the ME bullshit.

 

FACTS:

1. Everything I do is approved by the artist and GUIDED by the artist.  600 a year.  The aim is to MOVE AIR when loud, get my work net to OTHER WORK and let me know.  I move air and have low end at volumes that no one else can do.

 

2. There is a line that I don't like to cross, and yet I will cross it to SERVE THE ARTIST.  I have at times spoken up, and will do so again if needed, YET IT'S USUALLY IN VAIN.

 

3. The loudness trend is MOSTLY fading.  There are always POP records from MAJOR LABELS who will succumb to fear, and those records are so well done that they sell anyway, so it's not going away soon.   But you think the ME is responsible?  No.

 

4. I am responsible for UPGRADING THE MIXES at ANY DR.   Thus DR=nothing.   And I am responsible MOSTLY increasing the musicality ... for MOST people ... SERVING the PRODUCTION TEAM. 

 

5. If you don't like modern levels in records there is no pleasing you  Fair enough..

 

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I understand that completely, notice the difference between what the artist heard in the studio (my words) and what the artist intended (your words). Dr is an artistic decision, as is the selection of microphone and guitar. 

 

However, when someone says DR = nothing to me, that's very concerning. I'd love to know if artists had to listen to their own dynamically compressed music every night on the road if they'd think twice about it. If they still like it, maybe they need to get instruments and microphones with far less dynamic range, to reduce what is necessary in the DAW. 

 

 

I am the studio also, you have it all wrong.

 

DR = nothing means that I'M NOT A DOGMATIC ASSHOLE.   I am interested in the most MUSICAL result GIVEN THE SITUATION.

 

My louder records are ALL BETTER SOUNDING THAN THE MORE DYNAMIC MIXES.  Dynamics iS NOT THE MAIN THING in music.

 

Maybe it is to you?  Ok.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Fair Hedon said:

But you do understand that Brian and other mastering engineers receive mixes that already have lowish DR..and that IS what the artist intended.

 

Thank you.  

 

1 hour ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

I suppose there is a limit. A DR = 1 to 3 will sound rather poor. I checked the database and some albums that sound very good - vocals clear and precise etc, have a DR on average of 6 to 8.

I agree with the wall of sound statement - i have some albums like that - no realistic distinction between instruments.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

This is all very subjective.  

 

Again my role is to IMPROVE the mixes and SERVE THE ARTIST.

 

 

[Brian Lucey]

Being intelligent and understanding how records are made, are discrete.  I don't see a lot of understanding here.

 

Sorry to YELL yet YOU ALL SEEM DEAF TO THE REALITY.  Maybe it's a matter of ignorance, so I am sharing.

 

DR as a number on an island means nothing.  Those measuring have no idea what is going on in the production team. We are given a set of mixes.  The artist signs off.  The article describes my aims, and Neil agrees.

 

DR as a main priority in mastering is not correct.  It's a factor, yet a record that moves air can measure with less dynamics than a flat sounding one.  Listen, don't measure.  That is #1.

 

My work is always more punchy than the mixes, always.  Even when it's louder.  How is this possible?  Transients = emotion not just overall DR.  

 

I will simply push if asked, until it breaks, to my taste.  Which is obviously shared by many.

When I try to send dynamic work ... it is rejected ... 99% of the time.   1 in 100 or 200 asks for a more dynamic record.

 

 

[Brian Lucey]

20 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

OK - thanks.

Was the low DR/Loudness War due to the record labels or artists targeting the music for Mid-Fi or Low-Fi products, or radio ?

Since audio enthusiasts are in the extreme minority, then what we prefer will be ignored.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

Fear and Love ... these are the main human motivations. 

 

Fear = a need for loudness, for decades.  Monkey brain. 

 

Fear is millions of years old.

 

I see the trend decreasing, except in major label pop.  Yet not to -9.   That's over for now at least.

[Brian Lucey]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 I love hearing real instruments sound like real instruments. Drums sound like drums rather than sticks hitting paper. 

 

Your taste is stuck in time

 

We are "old" when we are stuck.

 

That's sad.

 

I like all eras of music.

[Brian Lucey]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

I haven’t seen anyone say “DR [is] a main priority in mastering.” Your putting words in people’s mouths, projecting. 

 

You'd probably have many fans here if you’d take everyone seriously and as individuals, without projecting some weird audiophile stereotype on us. 

 

We all understand the company paying the bills has the final say with respect to the sound of a record. If they didn’t they’d move on to the next engineer. 

 

We like dynamic range. That’s not a bad thing. We own many versions of the same recordings, all with different DR values. For the most part, those with higher DR sound better. We love music. Better sounding recordings help us love music even more. We feel closer to the artist. When Miles Davis, Jack Johnson, or Eddie Vedder sound like they are in our rooms, it’s an amazing experience. 

 

 

 

Someone was spouting DR numbers as if that was a common thing ere, and I didn't see a lot of countering him.  So I did.  Stop measuring.  It's just dumb.

 

Modern music is DISTORTED and NOT DYNAMIC.  Sorry, had to yell.   Seems so obvious.

 

Having said that, it can sound great.  My records sound great.  Defined as the best positive compromise of all parties in the process.

 

If you need more dynamics, listen to older records. 

 

I don't smash like a Vlado Meller and some others, and my loud records move air which is key to emotion, not DR.    I am happy with that middle ground.

[Brian Lucey]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I’m 41. Your ageism is pretty sad. I have a preference for real sounding instruments. That’s got nothing to do with age. 

 

I’ve had the new Taylor Swift on repeat for days. I love it. Gaga’s Joanne record is amazing, can’t stop listening. Big fan of Nicki Minaj and Kendrick Lamar. Earlier today I was listening to Billie Holliday and reading as much as I could about her life. Being at Capitol Studios a few weeks ago was an amazing experience because Nat King Cole is one of my all time favorites. 

 

Pigeon holing me only shows your ignorance Brian. 

 

Look brother, you started this with your dynamic range elitism, now you listen to modern music that's at -5? 

 

I won't reply to you further.  You are talking in circles just to win an argument.

 

 

 

[Brian Lucey]

2 hours ago, Mordikai said:

What is the "move air" thing Mr Lucey keeps mentioning? I'm not being a smart- alec. 

 

 

If drivers, specifically larger low end drivers, "move air" then the kick and bass are not overly smashed.   This is not about the overall dynamic range ... it's more about the way the instruments maintain transients at any level of limiting or compression.  Louder records with less dynamic range can actually have more punch, if you do it right. 

[Brian Lucey]

5 hours ago, mansr said:

Stop it already. This bickering is distracting from the real conversation. Brian delivers what his clients desire, as should any professional. If you happen to not share those tastes, then don't listen to that music. Now get back to exterminating MQA.

Thank you

 

33 minutes ago, mansr said:

MQA will turn on the blue LED of reassurance. That's all you need. And all you need to know.

lol

41 minutes ago, synn said:

 Nice.

 

Not sure what the latest promo material for MQA says, but will it magically make up for the dynamic compression implemented at the mastering stage?

lol

49 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

I understand this fully. And with the notice that it was my complaint (a couple of pages back) that Crime of The Century has a too high DR, I could tell Chris @The Computer Audiophile that it is exactly that one where drums (kick drum ahead) sound like paper. Odd eh ...

 

But @Brian Lucey, the sort of mistake you may make here (it would be a thinking mistake) is that where higher dynamics will overdrive the (bass) driver and only imply distortion instead of pushed air, this is a fault in the loudspeaker of concern; It is not fast enough.

Now of course you could try to tell us that 99% of even audiophiles don't use fast enough drivers, but that would be a bit of BS IMHO because with a solution like yours we don't even have the opportunity to fix it.

Your solution implies woolly bass, if that would be an English term for the opposite of taut.

 

I'd agree that for many a "slow down" solution could work out for the better, but once you start referring to the smash board top 100 ...

No. And never.

 

Peter

 

 

 I'm not making a thinking mistake.  I master for all playback, some great, most bad.  No "wolly bass"   Fail.

[Brian Lucey]

2 hours ago, Abtr said:

Yes, that would ultimately have the same effect as DR compression, but it might in this case damage your hearing.

 

It's not the same effect.   Turning up a dynamic record is never the same as a more limited or compressed record.

 

The sound of density is modern by definition, and that can't be had with Aja on Stun.

 

No. no. never.

31 minutes ago, Abtr said:

As @Brian Lucey suggested, extreme DR compression may be the result of fear. Possibly the fear of the artist to be ignored, but more likely the fear of the production team to be exposed as incompetent. Extreme DR compression effectively masks most mixing/mastering errors..

 

This is the most arrogant, ignorant and ridiculous thing you have said so far.

 

Please post any commercial release, or home made release, and point out even one "mixing error" ... as far as the "mastering errors" as I have said the mastering is always approved by the team.

 

I don't care for a lot of people's work, as would be expected, but that is taste, not "errors".  Feel free to post even one example of a mastering error.

 

Your taste is you, you are not the King. 

 

 

[Brian Lucey]

1 hour ago, Abtr said:

 

The drums on the (DR16) MFSL release of Crime Of The Century (Supertramp) sound too thin. They sound fine in the 'normal' (DR13) releases.. 

 

Sounds too thin TO YOU.   Not an error,  just your taste.

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

Wouldn't clipping in the final release be considered an error?

In the 80s clipping was an error.  And the straight transfers form tape sound bad as a result.

 

Clipping as a form of limiting, has been done on purpose for decades.  I do it daily.   Not an error.

 

The concept of "error" implies a rule or standards and this is art.   There are no standards and no rules.

 

Sorry if that's too much chaos for you but the music you love is made by artists so ... there is value in stretching your worldview if you are attracted to their work.  From Mozart, to Hendrix to clipping, it's all about playing with the rules.

 

There are no errors in a release if you don't like the music or production.  The notion is absurd.

 

An error is only something like a bad edit, or an audible pop that was missed, or a sound that some call offensive that was NOT chosen for the artistic effect.   

 

Would you like to tune all the vocals to eliminate the errors?  Perfection has NO place in music production.   None.

[Brian Lucey]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

People are posting comments from a good place and a place of curiosity and their limited knowledge. Often we learn about other industries from what we can read online. 

 

You have a golden opportunity to shed light on your industry with people who actually care about what you do and will support you. Please consider giving people the benefit of the doubt by not calling them arrogant, ignorant, and ridiculous. They honestly are posting from a good place. 

 

Letting people know how it really works, or the real story could be incredibly valuable for everyone. 

 

Trying to avoid you yet as this is your sandbox here are my personal forum rules:

 

1. When someone posts with respect or curiosity, they get respect and kindness plus information.

2. When someone posts with insults, lack of respect, stupidity, hubris, or judgment about music being fucked simply because it has not their taste in DR ... or when they have NO IDEA into the process and start to pontificate like they are anything more than an expensive stereo buyer ... they get a reply in kind.

 

Please don't blame the messenger if your board has some people with more ego than information and more attitude than tact.

 

 

I like audiophiles, you care, you listen ... yet you all create only with the playback.  You have no expertise in the production side.  Leave the rest to us and ask politely to get a polite reply.

[Brian Lucey]

6 minutes ago, Abtr said:

 

If the DR16 (MFSL) Crime Of The Century release is correct, then why have *all* other releases DR13 or even DR9?  

 

There is no "correct"

 

Remastering blurs that line, unfortunately.

[Brian Lucey]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I agree about perfection. I don’t like it. However, I wish auto tune as a way to “perfect” vocals was used less. It’s a cool effect when used like T-Pain. 

Remember when you were going to

 

STAY ON TOPIC ?

 

 

Sorry, needed to yell that one as you promised last time to do so.  Please take Auto Tune complaints to the other areas of your forum.

 

P.S.  He can really sing well, it was a musical choice, an effect.

[Brian Lucey]

2 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

What is your take on cables for hifi, that cost £2,500 per metre, or more ?.

Hifi buffs luuuurve cables. And spending money.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

I use Acoustic Zen.   Is there a thread on cables over $4000/m ?  Happy to reply there.

[Brian Lucey]

5 minutes ago, Abtr said:

 

You implied that the drums on the DR16 MFSL release of Crime Of The Century are correct (not an error). So, again, why do all the DR13 and DR9 versions exist? 

 

 

Never implied anything about anything being "correct"

 

Your worldview is about rules and standards and that is not this world.

 

The other releases blur the lines, that is not to say they are not correct.

 

GREY AREAS ARE REAL !

 

Remastering as I have said is usually about label money, not artistic intent.   Re-releases have VARYING degrees of approval by the artist, from 0 to 100%

[Brian Lucey]

1 minute ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

Thanks. I use standard 79 strand, and general good quality cables for interconnects.

I am a bit of a miser. Tried expensive cables - heard no difference.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

Great !  Same money and sounds great.

 

If you can't hear it, then it doesn't matter.

 

There is no standard here, this is all subjective.  No playback is ever the same, even the same room on a different day will change due to temperature and humidity.

[Brian Lucey]

Just now, mansr said:

Can you guys please discuss non-MQA topics in some other thread?

 

Agree

 

It seems too much to ask however.

 

If only there was a moderator posting who could ....

[Brian Lucey]

I can see why pros leave this place, the founder is in denial as to his own 'tude and thus to his peers.

 

2 million people?  I see 20 or so.

 

 

 

[Brian Lucey]

2 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

Reading your posts brings a question to mind.

 

Did you become this arrogant and abrasive as a result of working in the music industry or were you drawn to the industry because it's a good fit for your personality?

 

What exactly is arrogant and abrasive in my post you referenced?

 

Facts

1. Audiophiles create nothing, except a playback system. And yet some act like experts in the music creation process.

2. Your signature quote is quite full of yourself.   There are millions of musics, each one unique and potentially valuable.  It's not a good and bad polarity.  Your personal LIKE or DISLIKE is narcissism and opinion not fact.    An artist like Duke can say that as a quip, you cannot as a signature, as you are no one in music except a consumer.