Is it just me or does the official release of the Black Album sound as crappy as most of the bootlegs did?

It sounds really tinny. Like its on AM radio... I can't describe it.

Sounds like all the other Warner Brothers releases that need a remastering.

BinaryJustin said:

A part of me likes the fact that the sound levels aren't over done. One of the few things that still gives this album it's original underground feel.

BinaryJustin said:

i agree. i remember getting it thinking WOW... now get to hear this on great sound quality.. only to be disappointed. another reason why i think the Black Album is kinda blah.

BinaryJustin said:

I thought that was how it was supposed to sound. As all the originals were supposed to be destroyed WB probably mastered the second one and didn't do it as well as Prince did in 87. After all he had nothing to do with the second release.

Sound levels have not always to do with mastering quality.
Technically speaking, if the levels go up all the way to (almost) 0dB (i.e. the full 16 bits of your CD are used without clipping) it's OK.
The loudness level you experience also has to do with how much the sound is compressed (in sound volume, not in data as with MP3) and that is an artistic and maybe commercial choice.
'Modern' records all 'need' that hard compressed (loud!) sound to be at least as loud as the competition; this loudness race is lame. It's unnecessary and ugly.

udo

udo said:

Amen there.

Udo, You said about the full 16bit of a CD. I have a studio program on my CPU that claims it works in 24 bit sound. If I mastered something to a CD will some of the quality be lost? I'm not worried about them because they sound fine, I'm just curious.

Cindy C
needs
serious
work

classic77 said:

yeah

CAMILLE4U said:

ummm... no. if you listen to it, the quality is basically the same as SOTT.


and he did have something to do with the second release after all: he cashed the damn check, even though he told people not to buy it fucking deadbeat...
[This message was edited Sat Mar 1 16:17:08 PST 2003 by AaronUnlimited]

udo said:

I'm not an engineer and I am asking questions only to learn.
So, is it that today we are used to hearing everything so loud that we compare it to that reference, and if it doesn't measure up we think something is then wrong or sub-par/sub-standard?
How then can the recording industry and consequently the public re-train their ears and get off this "LOUD IS BEST" merry-go-round? Should they? Or is it impossible because it stems from the artists themselves?
There is a thrill in deep bass or driving rhythm especially in dance records, so is there a time and place for hard compression?
What are folks' thoughts on all this?

The '94 release of The Black Album was manufactured
using the original 1987 mastertape. It wasn't altered
or remastered in any way. This is why it sounds a bit
crappy and comparatively quiet compared with other
contemporary releases. It is exactly the same as the
Sign O' The Times CD in quality. Prince's back
catalogue seriously needs remastering.

Japanesse pressing solves all of these punk complaints about sound quality. That and something better than the WalMart stereos that most of you are listening to it on

FACEOPHOBIA said:

Once again I am asking to learn. I always thought records were mixed, mastered, and reproduced, is the term-flat?? So that the resulting product would play in all sorts of mediums, from AM radio, to FM radio, in cars, cheap home systems to the most expensive systems???

Nope! Most of yer average pop-crap is compressed to fuck and is done so to sound full, dynamic and bassy over the radio - play it on a decent bit of hi-fi and it sounds overblown and, well, just awful!! Fatiguing even, you can't listen to it for more than 10 minutes!

That is why there are well-produced albums and those that are not - and a really decent hi-fi will show you the difference.

mistermcgee said:

Unfortunately, the recording industry has no standard when it comes to final master levels. 'Records', as you say, are tracked, mixed and mastered at thousands of different studios throughout the world and the variables at each studio are so numerous that it's difficult to come to a consensus about a standard level that a final mixed master should be at. There ARE standards to provide the engineer with reference points to track material to tape, but for the finished product the output level is according to taste and equipment.

If you listen to the CDs Hans Duff 'mastered' for Prince, you'll notice a huge bump in level compared to previous projects. Hans was probably very proud of his extra loud CDs, but did Prince a great disservice in distortion. Prince may never have heard this since it would have been more obvious upon playback of the pressed CDs (digital information has no tolerance for distortion) than on the final analog mix tapes. This is especially evident on a lot of tracks on Crystal Ball and even parts of Emancipation. Who knows - maybe Prince finally did hear this, since he got rid of Hans and hired Femi and the overall CD levels have gone back down a bit to a much less distortion-able level.