ksgemini63 said:

Agreed 100% luvsexy4all said:

our lifetime wont get any of this stuff.....

prince shouldve made us happy...

WhisperingDandelions said:

Noodled24 said:

No, no, no, I'm not saying anything about the quality of the album's musical content. I think we can assume at least 95% of Prince fans think SOTT is a great album, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about good or bad as it relates to the sound quality.

And yeah, I know it's the quietest Prince CD, I'm not disputing that, I'm just asking if anyone has any other reasons why they think it "sounds bad" and.... based on your response again talking about volume, I don't think anyone does have any other reasons.

No. It's an amazing album. I think it has a unique sound which should be preserved.

ha, I wouldn't call it an "issue" though, unless your volume knob is broken.... I mean there's catalogues on disc put out from third generation copies of the masters with wonky smley-face technicolor EQ... Prince's early discog is good... and certainly better than that ear-bleeding brickwall mastering he favored in the late 90s and 00s, no?

The 90's mastering doesn't bother me in the slightest.

djThunderfunk said:

WhisperingDandelions said:

Prince's early discog is good... and certainly better than that ear-bleeding brickwall mastering he favored in the late 90s and 00s, no?

This is a point I've tried to make many times. I can work with SOTT, a little EQ & volume adjustment and is sounds great, on vinyl AND CD.

I'm not disputing that if you mess with the levels and crank the volume to max the CD then sounds louder... But I'm saying the reason you have to do that is because the CD is unusually quiet.

I can't do anything to improve the sound of say HitNRun Phase One. It's so brickwalled it just sounds bad. No amount of EQ or volume adjustments can improve it.

I'm sure this has more to do with the music than the volume the CD was mastered at?

Most of you want the 80s albums remastered. I want the ones from the last 20 years remastered. Just sayin'...

To what end? i.e, What would you then be able to do with HNR that you can't now?

[Edited 7/15/16 15:48pm]

Because more recent albums are brickwalled they sound BAD. If they were remastered without brickwalling and without the distortion that comes with it the result would be a much better listening experience. So, to what end? Enjoyment!!

Noodled24 said:

djThunderfunk said:

Most of you want the 80s albums remastered. I want the ones from the last 20 years remastered. Just sayin'...

To what end? i.e, What would you then be able to do with HNR that you can't now?

djThunderfunk said:

Because more recent albums are brickwalled they sound BAD. If they were remastered without brickwalling and without the distortion that comes with it the result would be a much better listening experience. So, to what end? Enjoyment!!

Understood, However most of the distortion is inaudible. You literally need to open it in some audio software view the waveform then point to it and say "that's the distortion". That's not always the case but often is.

[Edited 7/16/16 14:19pm]

Noodled24 said:

djThunderfunk said:

Because more recent albums are brickwalled they sound BAD. If they were remastered without brickwalling and without the distortion that comes with it the result would be a much better listening experience. So, to what end? Enjoyment!!

Understood, However most of the distortion is inaudible. You literally need to open it in some audio software view the waveform then point to it and say "that's the distortion".

Frankly most P-fans were listening to cassette tapes back in the day, and bootlegs have never been perfect in terms of audio quality. A fraction of a second of audio clipping in "The Breakdown" seems like nothing IMO.

If you consider that distortion inaudible I would buy some new speakers.

djThunderfunk said:

Noodled24 said:

Understood, However most of the distortion is inaudible. You literally need to open it in some audio software view the waveform then point to it and say "that's the distortion".

Frankly most P-fans were listening to cassette tapes back in the day, and bootlegs have never been perfect in terms of audio quality. A fraction of a second of audio clipping in "The Breakdown" seems like nothing IMO.

If you consider that distortion inaudible I would buy some new speakers.

Well, with respect mate, which distortion? We're a few posts in and you've yet to raise any specifics?

As noted earlier the "brickwall effect" isn't exclusive to Prince. It applies to all music from the 90s onwards.

Ultimately, if you're not a fan of HNR. Slightly tweaking the levels of the individual tracks at the mastering stage isn't going to change the album so much that you suddenly love it.

[Edited 7/16/16 14:59pm]

Noodled24 said:

djThunderfunk said:

If you consider that distortion inaudible I would buy some new speakers.

Well, with respect mate, which distortion? We're a few posts in and you've yet to raise any specifics?

As noted earlier the "brickwall effect" isn't exclusive to Prince. It applies to all music from the 90s onwards.

Ultimately, if you're not a fan of HNR. Slightly tweaking the levels of the individual tracks at the mastering stage isn't going to change the album so much that you suddenly love it.

[Edited 7/16/16 14:59pm]

I do like the music. The disc just doesn't sound good. Specifically? All of it. EVERY track. And yes I would say the same about the majority of music from the last 20 years. Good music sounds awful when mastered so loud. If you don't agree, that's great for you. I personally do not enjoy it.

As Prince's albums have not had multiple releases featuring successive remastering, I'll use Led Zeppelin as an example: The original releases just didn't have the punch (much like the early Prince CDs), the early 90's remasters sound great and the recent re-remaster deluxe editions from last year sound bad to me. If I had to choose between the original releases that needed some EQ tweaks upon playback and the frequency-squashed releases from the past year I would choose the originals. Fortunately I don't have to make that choice as they did a good one in the 90s.

Don't presume I must not like the music on HNR because I think it sounds bad. This is about loudness and squashed frequencies. I don't like it. If you do, lucky you, that's all they're doing nowdays. Enjoy.

[Edited 7/16/16 17:09pm]

Noodled24 said:

djThunderfunk said:

Because more recent albums are brickwalled they sound BAD. If they were remastered without brickwalling and without the distortion that comes with it the result would be a much better listening experience. So, to what end? Enjoyment!!

Understood, However most of the distortion is inaudible. You literally need to open it in some audio software view the waveform then point to it and say "that's the distortion". That's not always the case but often is.

.

If you can easily see the distortion then it's evil that could have been prevented.

Why else record at higher bitdepths, higher samplerates to lose that resolution by fscking up when mastering for a CD?

Nowadays one can elegantly compress the sh1t out of audio without destroying it.

That does not mean it sounds nice after this treatment but it emphasizes that the treatment has a quality to it.

.

For people that suffer from the dynamics, they could consider obtaining a multiband compressor/limiter to reduce the dynamics to their taste. (can be done in software if you play all your music from a computerized collection)

udo said:

Noodled24 said:

Understood, However most of the distortion is inaudible. You literally need to open it in some audio software view the waveform then point to it and say "that's the distortion". That's not always the case but often is.

.

If you can easily see the distortion then it's evil that could have been prevented.

If you can hear the distortion then it's a problem. If you're seeing the distortion then you're viewing a waveform... and while technically there is some distortion there. If it's not audible and you need to see it... who cares?

It's VERY audible. So I care.

djThunderfunk said:

It's VERY audible. So I care.

Well... ok, what do you consider to be the most obvious example? (Not "The Breakdown")

There's a massive clip right at the beginning of 'From the Lotus' that I'd point to as an audibly cringeworthy level peak.

[EDIT: in the 4-5 second mark]

[Edited 7/18/16 14:08pm]

derrick31 said:

That's not a bootleg. That's how the Sign of The Times' cd sounds and why it, along with his other 80's work, needs serious remastering. SOTT is the worst sounding of them all.

Would the sound problems on the SOTT CD also be present on a digital copy of the album purchased from iTunes or is it a CD-specific issue?

SOTT is the worst sounding official CD in his catalog, and I think it is because it sources a vinyl master that is cut suiting what sounds best on what SIDE of the vinyl album.

Sorry, it needs a remastering, and not just a brickwall (although the way I listen to Prince, it mightas well be )

breakdown2k14 said:

My sign of the times CD has low volume tracks also one that comes to mind is "the ballad of Dorothy parker".its really low sound compared to the song "It",which sounds normal volume.

This is exactly what I mean. Tracks are usually duller at the end of a "side" of wax.

Tracklist

KingSausage said:

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that angle before, that SOTT is weak/quiet on some tracks because they were the ends of sides on the records. It's great that the vinyl copy avoids inner groove distortion by such maneuvers, but if the CD is created from that vinyl master, it's going to sound like balls.

.

Finally a reasonable and technical explanation...!!

udo said:

KingSausage said:

Cinny said:

breakdown2k14 said:

My sign of the times CD has low volume tracks also one that comes to mind is "the ballad of Dorothy parker".its really low sound compared to the song "It",which sounds normal volume.

This is exactly what I mean. Tracks are usually duller at the end of a "side" of wax.

Tracklist

A1	Sign "O" The Times	5:02
A2	Play In The Sunshine	5:05
A3	Housequake	4:38
A4	The Ballad Of Dorothy Parker	4:04
B1	It	5:10
B2	Starfish And Coffee	2:51
B3	Slow Love	4:18
B4	Hot Thing	5:39
B5	Forever In My Life	3:38
C1	U Got The Look	3:58
C2	If I Was Your Girlfriend	4:54
C3	Strange Relationship	4:04
C4	I Could Never Take The Place Of Your Man	6:31
D1	The Cross	4:46
D2	It's Gonna Be A Beautiful Night	8:59
D3	Adore	6:29

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that angle before, that SOTT is weak/quiet on some tracks because they were the ends of sides on the records. It's great that the vinyl copy avoids inner groove distortion by such maneuvers, but if the CD is created from that vinyl master, it's going to sound like balls.

.

Finally a reasonable and technical explanation...!!

djThunderfunk said: