Dynamic compression
- Thread starter manicm
- Start date
Revolutions
Well-known member
- Aug 6, 2023
- 919
- 1,121
- 2,770
Al ears
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2008
- 12,462
- 7,245
- 56,570
I would doubt that.
Compression on a CD version of any album has been a fact for years now for the simple reason that it is unnecessary when pressed on vinyl.
record_spot
Well-known member
- May 30, 2015
- 376
- 254
- 19,270
At £67 for the vinyl pressing, I'll not be troubling Apple's balance sheet anytime soon. See also the CD set.
The LPs alright, but nothing special either ranging from an 8 to 13 on the Dynamic Range Database for the 2023 LP release for the 67-set.
The LPs alright, but nothing special either ranging from an 8 to 13 on the Dynamic Range Database for the 2023 LP release for the 67-set.
Revolutions
Well-known member
- Aug 6, 2023
- 919
- 1,121
- 2,770
Remember that these are remixes largely from 1960s mono recordings (at least the red album). The stems wouldn’t have a big dynamic range to begin with.
twinkletoes
Well-known member
- Nov 16, 2021
- 1,013
- 773
- 6,070
Because you physically can’t push vinyl in the same way, if they could I’m sure they would.
Vinyl these days tend to end up with better sounding recordings at least in my experience.
And my small cross section of my record collecting and where I have double dipped enabling me to do a side by side comparison.
Heck some of those new cassettes that you get with those record bundles actually sound better listening through a friends system.
Vinyl these days tend to end up with better sounding recordings at least in my experience.
And my small cross section of my record collecting and where I have double dipped enabling me to do a side by side comparison.
Heck some of those new cassettes that you get with those record bundles actually sound better listening through a friends system.
No, these are the new 2023 mixes between last year and this year, remixed my Giles Martin. And more songs have been added.
Revolutions
Well-known member
- Aug 6, 2023
- 919
- 1,121
- 2,770
Yes
They are. But most Beatles albums were recorded on 2 or 4 channels. Add up all the guitars, vocals, other instruments and drums, you’re going to have easily 16 separate channels that have to be mixed down to 2 or 4 channels. That gives you 4 instruments per channel, that once laid down onto tape can only be panned l/r or volume adjusted as a group.
To create a true stereo mix, it took some insane technology to ‘de-mix’ the tracks and isolate each instrument/sound. With that the engineers were able to do things like a stereo mix of the drum kit, which might have had 6-8 mics mixed down into 2 tracks. It’s literally magic.
My point about the dynamic range, and linked to the complaints about loudness - the only way to play with the volume of these de-mixed stems is compression. Once you start boosting or reducing the gain, it’s going to negatively affect the fidelity of the actual recording. I’m guessing they were still a little ways away from completely restoring a single stem to be as flexible as a guitar track recorded in a modern studio, so there were likely limits to how far they could extend the dynamic range beyond the original without massively affecting sound quality.
They are. But most Beatles albums were recorded on 2 or 4 channels. Add up all the guitars, vocals, other instruments and drums, you’re going to have easily 16 separate channels that have to be mixed down to 2 or 4 channels. That gives you 4 instruments per channel, that once laid down onto tape can only be panned l/r or volume adjusted as a group.
To create a true stereo mix, it took some insane technology to ‘de-mix’ the tracks and isolate each instrument/sound. With that the engineers were able to do things like a stereo mix of the drum kit, which might have had 6-8 mics mixed down into 2 tracks. It’s literally magic.
My point about the dynamic range, and linked to the complaints about loudness - the only way to play with the volume of these de-mixed stems is compression. Once you start boosting or reducing the gain, it’s going to negatively affect the fidelity of the actual recording. I’m guessing they were still a little ways away from completely restoring a single stem to be as flexible as a guitar track recorded in a modern studio, so there were likely limits to how far they could extend the dynamic range beyond the original without massively affecting sound quality.
record_spot
Well-known member
- May 30, 2015
- 376
- 254
- 19,270
That explanation sounds plausible enough, until you look at the stats for the - in this case - 67-70 vinyl and CD versions of the 2023 reissues:-
LP - https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/204370
CD - https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/203943
Huge difference between the two. The dynamic range is there alright, I used to have the 62-66 set in red vinyl from the 1980s, but I'm surprised at the gulf between the 2023 reissue formats.
Oh and thanks for the explanation, but I've been around for a few years now, one of the last of the Boomer generation and pretty acquainted with the Beatles...!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram