Here's a question for you computer/sound engineering pros--how do you improve the sound quality on "The Work" compilations--Vols. 1-8? Or can you? Being a newbie to sound manipulation via the internet, I would love to hear suggestions on the process of manipulating sound recordings to get a "better sound." One note: these are not sound files but recordings on a CD (I think from the original). Wide open to any suggestions from experts--I'm here to be edu-ma-cated!

There's only one way: OPEN THE VAULT.

ernestsewell said:

Yeah, for sure, that would be the easiest way (well, then again, maybe not). But, I notice that some tracks on Vol. 1 such as "Something In The Water Does Not Compute" and "Delirious" have much better bass, treble, and volume than other songs. Isn't there a way to manipulate the sound via internet technology to improve upon it, or am I just shooting in the dark? I see you (mostly guys) talking about this subject all the time (converting and manipulating sound files, etc); can't someone offer some constructive suggestions and/or websites to go to so I can start "edu-ma-cating" myself on how to do this? Would really appreciate it!

poetcorner61 said:

You can only do so much before it starts to sound butchered. Of course there are techniques and ways, but it's limited.

You can't chrome plate a turd. Degraded and multi-generational tapes that make up some of the bad sounding tracks can't really be helped that much other than EQing to your tastes. There are folks that can squeeze better sound from decent source material, but if the good stuff is missing to begin with, you usually exacerbate another problem area by tweaking something else. Since The Work came out, better sources have surfaced for some songs and have been included on Work It 2.0.

Foefur and other's have put their spin on "remastering" Prince music, but they never start with crap in the first place.

That said, find some free software and give it a go.

squirrelgrease said:

Thanks! That info is missing from my internet sources! Good to know!

Man, ya just gotta laugh when a serious thread sinks like a rock to the bottom of the pond and BS threads rule the day! Guess I better jump on the BS Bandwagon!

My advice is to get a copy of Jewel Box or Yellow. Take a listen to how shit the quality of boots were nearly 20 years ago. Then when you listen to The Work, they'll sound crystal clear.

Alternatively grab yourself 'audio cleaning lab' and have a bash yourself, it works well on some stuff and there's plenty of ways to tweak stuff.

Erik

If you really want to try, first get lossless copies of the stuff you want to tinker with - there's no use in playing around with mp3s.

Get a sound editing suite like Sound Forge and have a play around.

There's some tips there, but the most important thing to remember is as others said - if you start with crap, there's little you can do to alter it. One trick you may benefit from is that its better to subtract than add - for example, if you want more treble, its better to drop the bass and mid levels, rather than add more treble to the mix.

Have at it:

http://forum.audacityteam.org/

Keep in mind it takes years to learn how to properly remaster anything and you aren't going to be able to do much with some mp3 or even bootleg cd.

Call up Prince and ask him for the original tapes and studio notes and you should be able to get into a studio or mastering lab and do some REAL remastering that will actually sound good. Yeah. I hear he's real cool about that stuff. Lends out studio reels all the time...

gamera said:

And even after years you still can't "remaster" anything without having the actual "masters".

vc40 said:

Exactly. That's the key right there. People like to throw that word around because they did something that sounds good to THEM, but in reality, it's just another (probably compressed) file going through another set of filters.

And in reality, I believe the people who put The Work together searched and dug for the best possible source, whether that was a DVD, an original cassette or otherwise. But some things have just suffered loss over the years, or were never great to begin with.

Slightly off subject, but who wouldn't LOVE to see his back catalogue remastered by someone other than Prince? Some outside perspective could really breathe some new life and fidelity into these albums. When I put in my CD of Sign O The Times it frankly sounds like shit. I don't mean that the songs aren't great or that the source recording is shit, but the mastering job just sounds like it wasn't given much thought. It's one of his classic albums, and to me it's tragic how awful it sounds on disc. AWFUL. I have bootlegs from this era that sound better. Mastering can be pretty specific to format. ie. an album will likely be mastered differently for a vinyl release than for a digital release. It doesn't sound like anybody ever bothered to do any work making an appropriate master for the CD releases of any of his old albums. Sad sad sad.

gamera said:

The main problem I see is that all of those bad sounding Prince CDs were mastered back in the early days of CD and haven't been touched since, save for the odd track that may have appeared on Girl 6 or to a lesser degree Ultimate. There wasn't a complete understanding of the ins-and-outs of CD mastering back then and Prince's albums seemed to be decidedly rushed into the digital age.

squirrelgrease said:

Exactly. I don't know that they changed the masters AT ALL. Is this the same mastering job they did for the cassette or something? The original master for the vinyl release? It sounds horrible. I've thought aboutrunning a little compression over those things to make it a little more loud and listenable, but I don't want to be smashing the shit out of the dynamic frequency range. So, yeah... what the hell? It's not a job I can do well without the original mix or even better the actual tapes so I'm just screwed. Stuck listening to a totally shit sounding cd of one of my favorite records of all time by any artist. Lame deal.

gamera said:

It's my understanding that all of the '80s Prince CDs were mastered with a lineage of 2-track mixdown > U-matic 3/4" tape > almost no digital tinkering > physical stamped master > glass master. The U-matic was originally developed as a video cassette, but it's audio track was almost immediately adopted as the go-to medium for CD mastering, as there were not many other options. We all know in hindsight how 1980s video tape technology left a lot to be desired. This combined with the lack of refining before the CD pressings, makes for the flat sounding catalog we have today.

As far as compression goes, I appreciate loudness for what it does in bringing levels to that of modern CDs, but a little compression goes a long way. Too much makes some discs unbearable. I've recently bought newly released CDs by my favorite artists and the sound is so compressed that it's painful to listen to. I'm actually going to have to tweak those discs somehow and re-rip them. Maybe ripping them to lossy and burning again will help - a ghastly scenario anyway you cut it.

squirrelgrease said:

Well said (see the new Metallica CD). Tasteful remastering is possible (the new Beatles CDs; Black Sabbath remasters), but it seems to be in short supply overall. My big fear is that P's catalog finally gets a remastering job... and they ruin it by compressing the hell out of it. But I can dream they approach it w/ the same reverance as the folks @ Abbey Road did w. the Beatles...

Edit - Nerd Link: http://turnmeup.org/
[Edited 2/17/10 14:07pm]

BlackbeltJones said:

Death Magnetic is excruciatingly bad on a listening level. Another terrible one is Grant Hart's "Hot Wax". The songs are terrific, but the sound is awful.

Interesting link. Thanks.

gamera said: