Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Best "mastered" albums of the decade?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best "mastered" albums of the decade? - Page 16

post #226 of 232

Hey there LFF,

 

Nice to see you own the same Immerseel set and comparing the stock master to yours pretty clear what you mean by rolled-off treble.

 

I can clearly hear why you say that stock master makes it sound like it was recorded in a stuffy, blancket packed room... actually to much because I'm listening to these recordings with an headphone and the difference is pretty abismal, lol.

 

I usually only listen to music with headphones.

I believe that through speakers the differences should clearly favor your master.

Do you work your master with(and for) only speakers, or with(and for) headphones to?

 

It's just that the difference in treble volume (with my headphone) is so big that I can't say I prefer your master, despite being clear that the instruments in it sound much clearer and "unobstructed" than in stock mud... strings and horns so different... naturally your master has more perceptible noise than stock... I feel this extraneous noise irks the sound quality a bit...

 

Personally, I prefer the stock master but I can see how yours is the more faithfull one.

I guess it's just a matter of re-educate my ears...

But I have never heard these period instruments in live conditions so it's very difficult for me to judge how they should sound...

 

Comparing these two masters makes me feel that the mastering process of a recording is conditioned, in a big way, by the hardware setup of the recording sessions...

I mean, I feel that if the microphones used in the recording of these performances were of higher quality, your master could have lower noise floor and a cleanner treble and sound overall...

Guess it's a matter of intention and compromisse all around...

Oh, what do I know?!

Just talking out of my ass now...

 

You've picked up my interest, I think I'll PM you...


Edited by kkl10 - 9/7/12 at 7:15am
post #227 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkl10 View Post

Hey there LFF,

 

Nice to see you own the same Immerseel set and comparing the stock master to yours pretty clear what you mean by rolled-off treble.

 

I can clearly hear why you say that stock master makes it sound like it was recorded in a stuffy, blancket packed room... actually to much because I'm listening to these recordings with an headphone and the difference is pretty abismal, lol.

 

I usually only listen to music with headphones.

I believe that through speakers the differences should clearly favor your master.

Do you work your master with(and for) only speakers, or with(and for) headphones to?

 

It's just that the difference in treble volume (with my headphone) is so big that I can't say I prefer your master, despite being clear that the instruments in it sound much clearer and "unobstructed" than in stock mud... strings and horns so different... naturally your master has more perceptible noise than stock... I feel this extraneous noise irks the sound quality a bit...

 

Personally, I prefer the stock master but I can see how yours is the more faithfull one.

I guess it's just a matter of re-educate my ears...

But I have never heard these period instruments in live conditions so it's very difficult for me to judge how they should sound...

 

Comparing these two masters makes me feel that the mastering process of a recording is conditioned, in a big way, by the hardware setup of the recording sessions...

I mean, I feel that if the microphones used in the recording of these performances were of higher quality, your master could have lower noise floor and a cleanner treble and sound overall...

Guess it's a matter of intention and compromisse all around...

Oh, what do I know?!

Just talking out of my ass now...

 

You've picked up my interest, I think I'll PM you...

 

I usually do classical masters on headphones for various reasons.

 

The noise in most classical recordings is usually do to multiple mic's being used. Even with minimalist recording techniques, some noise will always be present due to the sensitivity of the microphones. Most of these recordings are actually made with high quality microphones. The noise you hear is always present and if you are ever in an anechoic chamber, you'll get to experience this. It's a strange experience and you'll actually start to hear your heart after awhile but I digress...

 

What it comes down to, in the end, is subjective preference. Many mastering engineers aim to eliminate this noise completely and as a result, the instruments and performance suffer. I rather have a little bit of noise and a lot more natural sounding music than a stuffy, mid-centric sounding performance that sounds like nothing in real life.

post #228 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post

I haven't heard the first set but I did remaster the Immerseel set for someone last year.

 

In terms of dynamics, it's great. Very large dynamic range. In terms of actual mastering...it's meh. confused_face.gif

 

Why? It's a typical classical mastering in the sense that the mid-range is overly emphasized and the treble has been reduced by at least 10db. It sounds like it was recorded in a stuffy, blanket packed room...not a concert hall..as there is absolutely no air surrounding the instruments. Some mastering engineers, particularly those who do classical, love reducing the treble as it eliminates hiss/noise and gives the instrumentation a warmer sound which audiophiles love. However, I feel it robs the performance of life and naturalness.

 

Compare the sound. First is stock retail...second is how I feel it should sound like (volume matched for fair comparison):

 

http://www.sendspace.com/file/mz1t4a

 

The difference in the horns and strings is not subtle (at least to me) and they sound much more lifelike with the restored treble.

 

That said, I did enjoy the performance of the Immerseel set, enough that I got it for myself.


LFF, I enjoyed the comparison PCM you remastered.  I have been a music lover since middle school and was in a symphony band for 7 years and agree with the sound of the horns on your remaster.  The original is way more polished than i have ever heard at a live performance.  In many ways beauty without imperfection isn't beautiful and this applies to many human senses.  Anyway I like to listen with a good pair of cans like the sennheiser hd 580's because the open type headphones really shine on the mid and high frequency range although the bass is diminished but for the right type of music the transparency is amazing.  Thanks.

post #229 of 232

this thread actually questions my quest for better gear

when there is so much bad mastered modern music around.

 

Since I'm more into electronic music

here is my recommendation.

 

Monolake - Ghosts

Monolake - Silence

 

Stunning production (well actually best electronic music production, I have heard),

though be warned you have to be in the right mood for this kind of music :)

 

Tipper's music is also amazingly produced. 

 

Oh look what we have here, there is actually a new tipper album called "forward escape"

probably worth checking out.


Edited by frix - 5/6/14 at 2:19pm
post #230 of 232

RAM- Daft Punk

post #231 of 232

It is beautiful.

post #232 of 232

Listen to Touch, Contact, Instant Crush

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Best "mastered" albums of the decade?