• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Disgusted about modern sound.

#61
I think this thread is about sound production approaches being used in music currently. It's not the ten thousandth thread about whether music is as good as it used to be and how there are no good bands these days.

If you are under 30, you are probably in the wrong room. ;)
 
#62
funny-pictures-old-man-cat.jpg
 
#63
dustinfennessey said:
First mistake was listening to Audioslave ;)

Lot's of great sounding/mixed new music out there if you know what to look for. Try some of the new: Cynic, Opeth, Guapo, Russian Circles, Ulver, Porcupine Tree (or anything Steven Wilson has touched - best producer/engineer around IMO), etc. It's the mainstream big releases that sound so generic and poor.

Just my opinion of course :)
Click to expand...

Opeth is One of the most dynamic bands I've heard in my life, both in volume level, intensity and speed.

And I Do agree, most New Music is really DULL! You really have to search for those few bands that have been mastered properly.

Though I have to say - to modern Musics defense - that for example having an acoustic guitar soloing over distorted guitars is hard to hear without the tracks having been leveled out properly. And, today People dont have the time to turn the volume up/down whenever the dynamics changes. Lastly, with a lot of People listening to the Music as loud as possible it Can be harmful with too much dynamics (sudden peaks for example).

Though a compressor is a great tool for removing unwanted peaks and hiding some minor flaws (like hitting a string too softly), of course it wont sound well abused.

Note: I'm 17 :)
 
#64
Whoa, this thread has really got me intrigued and has raised some questions for me.

For the last couple of months I've been getting really irritated with a lot of music. I've noticed that when I listen to certain albums or groups I, start to get a lot of headaches, and that sometimes I can't handle the treble for some bands, they're just way too piercing, or sometimes the bass is just too overwhelming.
I'm wondering if this can be attributed to ear fatigue, and to the production of the work? Most of these problems arise with newer bands and albums.
The music and songwriting I absolutely love, but... I just can't physically listen to it for very long. I really do love the music, but I just feel like everything is just squashed in together and there isn't any "room to breathe." As strange as it sounds, it hurts when I try to listen to individual instruments because its like they're ALL right there in front of me.
Does this make sense at all?
Maybe I'm just being stupid. :confused:
 
#65
You're not being stupid, cyprus. Many of us have noticed that as well. A lot of people also know jack about setting up an equalizer correctly; they always end up doing the valley EQ (Boosted Bass and Treble, and a large cut in the Mids), to get a more aggressive sound.

One example: Both albums by Wolfmother. Great music, but I can't stand listening to it. The production, mastering and mix are terrible and really hurt my ears. Metallica's Death Magnetic is the same.

Compare that to a track like, say, "Heather" by Billy Cobham, which has a lot of Dynamic Range, or even "Dark Side of the Moon" and "Wish You Were Here" by Pink Floyd. The soft parts are soft and low in volume, and the hard parts are louder. This makes for a livelier listening experience, and less tiring.

Unfortunately, with most people having an a extremely short attention span, they need to have their 3 minute pop songs at full throttle, just to grabs their attention. Add to that crappy equipment like iPod headphones and Radio speakers, and it's good-by Dynamic Range. People who actually sit down and just listen and concentrate to the music are a minority.
 
#66
JimmyM said:
I actually like the Waves Renaissance Comp plugin. But there is definitely a potential for abuse, and I'm sure I've done it. So lately I've taken to eliminating all compression from my recordings except from my lead vocals, which I absolutely have to have it because my voice is all over the place for loudness depending on what range I'm singing in. I think they're 100% the better for it.
Click to expand...

+1

I also have the Renaissance Comp plugin. It's a very good tool for many situations.
 
#68
walkerci said:
Yeah, but before that was nofi AM radio. Another form of turd.
Click to expand...

You are correct! I do however have a friend who owns a 'hifi' 78 player. I am surprised at just how good that thing sounds. When I was a very young kid I stayed with my grandparents a while, the four bedrooms all had the am radios going and I was in the hall. The radios would all drift and you could hear the varying carrier tones of the stations. Listen to the 'swells' in Syncopated Pandemonium by Pink Floyd to get the effect.
 
#70
I just have to say something about this thread: the premise is based on a subjective thing. Is modern music utter crap? Is it digital and robotic and lifeless? Is it just a wall of sound?

Well, of course it is... if you think it is. But that's an opinion, not a fact. Some people DO like that modern sound... myself included (not just noise, but actual music even if it's loud).

Edit: As for most people not devoting time or money to listen more carefully to their music... you have to remember that most (if not all) of the TB-ers are thinking like musicians. Most people ARE NOT musicians, so it's fair to expect them to be oblivious to certain subtle things in music, like dynamics. Most people cannot tell you what the bass sounds like, let alone whether the music is compressed or not.
 
#71
I don't think dynamics, especially of the performance and recording process, mixing and mastering included, are very subjective: there's an absolute and measurable difference in the softest parts and the loudest and how those differences convey the intention of the song. Well written/performed/played or not might be a taste thing, and I can admit that sensitivity and appreciation of dynamics might also be subjective, but space and breath in music are what makes it live. I'm not knocking modern songwriting, but the modern sense of recording is atrocious. Thankfully there are those who resist the temptation to compress the holy hell out of their music.
 
#72
Tech gets ahead of itself - it's doing so right now, in audio production, IMO. Recording is 'easy' now, and almost everyone has access to many, many tools & devices.

But, take this for instance: You can let me loose in a killer carpentry shop, and I'm still going to get you a birdhouse or a cutting board right off the start. After 20 years in that carpentry shop, I might make you and sweet desk or chest, and it'll be strong, and useful, and last.

It'll take 20 years to learn technique behind the tools.
 
#73
dlenaghan said:
I don't think dynamics, especially of the performance and recording process, mixing and mastering included, are very subjective: there's an absolute and measurable difference in the softest parts and the loudest and how those differences convey the intention of the song. Well written/performed/played or not might be a taste thing, and I can admit that sensitivity and appreciation of dynamics might also be subjective, but space and breath in music are what makes it live. I'm not knocking modern songwriting, but the modern sense of recording is atrocious. Thankfully there are those who resist the temptation to compress the holy hell out of their music.
Click to expand...

Well, you said it. Dynamic variations themselves are measurable, but the musical perception of it is not.

I do agree in that music needs to breathe and is better (at least to me) when there are noticeable changes in pace and space.

If anything, I think the sound modern music is much more clear and powerful. But yes, I also agree that sometimes it is just loudness for the sake of loudness. Now, if the studios kept the dynamic and organic feel of older records with the crispness of modern technology, it would be awesome!
 
#74
Example of "modern" recording technique that I find unlistenable at worst and very annoying at best. I like the music (sue me) but I can't listen to it over a decent playback system because the recording is pumped up to ridiculous levels.

Invalid Link Removed
 
#75
mellowinman said:
I do a lot of mixing and mastering. There is only ONE standard I will use for correct dynamics.

"Honky Tonk Woman" by the Stones.

THAT'S Rock and Roll, kids.
Click to expand...

Yeah I also look back to a lot of the classics and really listen to what they do when mixing. I like how they utilized space within the balance (like when a solo comes out of right or left field), used volume before compression, etc. Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Bob Marley, and then I look to more obscure artists and listen to stuff on a lower budget, like Funkadelic, a whole bunch of reggae, and kind of go from there. Still with that said, after all the mixing, I still believe in paying for good mastering. It's the difference between having stuff that can be played on the radio, and having stuff that can be played in your buddies car. I wish I knew more about what went into it, but I do notice it as a necessary finishing touch.
 
#77
OldDog52 said:
Example of "modern" recording technique that I find unlistenable at worst and very annoying at best. I like the music (sue me) but I can't listen to it over a decent playback system because the recording is pumped up to ridiculous levels.

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

Yikes. That wore my ears out in less than 30 seconds.

Unlistenable to me. And there's no way to turn it down! It's loud or nothing.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back