How much of a CD's sound is due to the production, how much is due to the mastering?

I was just wondering how can one tell, especially for new recordings, how much of a CDs sound is because of the production of a recording and how much is in the mastering?

I ask because I got the new REM CD today and it sounds very low-fi and very loud. The instruments sound very digitally processed, very unnatural. However, the packaging is very gritty as well. So I was wondering how much of this is in the production and how much is in the mastering?

I am new here, so please be gentle.

 

True. And you're not going to ever get an audiophile listening experience without good work in both fields.

 

So if we don't like the sound on a new release, we can't really place the blame anywhere.

Unless the artist steps forward and states their dissatisfaction with the sound, I imagine. Then you can get a clearer understanding of the issue.

With the is REM one though, the instruments don't really sound like instruments. The music sounds like an amplified low bitrate MP3.

Is there a way to listen to these LOUD CDs to minimize fatigue (other than playing it low.) If one really loves the music, but it literally hurts to listen to it, one is screwed.

 

Not really. That's why people absolutely covet well-mastered cd, vinyl pressings, etc. because in the end after the high end source, amp, and speakers/headphones, if you have an overly compressed hot crap CD you cannot bring out any true potential of the system or really get into the music.

the media is the bottleneck basically. nigh impossible to obtain a well-mastered media source in many cases.

 

Yeah.

The only method I have used is to crank it till it hurts (usually 3pm or so on the dial) and pretend that I am seeing the band at some dive bar in the front row.

 

No way to tell for sure, but mastering compression is pretty much on the overall mix and in production you can usually identify compression on indivdual tracks or groups if you know how to listen for it.

If the overall mix is squashed by the production team, I'd suspect it is usually more compressed than peak limited, but perhaps things are different these days.

 

Why sacrifice your hearing amigo?

Sadly, if the production and/or mastering aren't up to snuff or worth squat then I personally wouldn't bother. Not trying to be a buzzkill here.

 

I know, but this is one of my very favorite bands and I actually love the songs. A very sad day indeed, as this is the first release that this type of thing has happened to me.

 

There are certain albums I run across, where virtually every pressing whether it be LP, or CD, sounds excellent. Even the worst sounding pressing even sounds good.

James Taylor's 'Sweet Baby James' is a good example. I've heard some great sounding standard LP's, and some great sounding CD's. It just so happens I've had the luxury of hearing the actual master tapes, and it seemed to be a great recording from the get go. It almost seems one would really have to go out of their way to screw it up.

 

I know how you feel. You're not alone. We've all dealt with this. I know this is cold comfort.

There's no way to undo the damage. The only thing you could do would be to rip the cd to wav files and lower the volume and adjust the EQ a little. This won't fix anything. It'll allow you to turn it up louder but that's about it. But once something is compressed, it can't be undone. Sad yet true.

 

Is this a brand new release from REM or a remaster of an older title? Just curious.

 

Thanks and yes, I know. And since it's a new CD, there's no chance of finding a better sounding one in some used store.

 

Brand new. It's strange because to me, all of their albums have a beautiful, natural sound - at least compared to this one.

 

Well for the most part you are right and specifically if you're talking about peak limiting, but gentle overall compression can be quasi reversed using an expander. In fact there were some expanders sold to consumers in the 70's to do just that. Of course there are plenty of problems with this approach including lags and they were not generally well received. IIRC they were mostly used for classical recordings.

 

From the DVD of the same release, there's a video of Michael listening to mixes, remarking "that's loud, it moves the air in the room. If I had hair, it would be blowing." This sounds like even he doesn't like it, yet it gets released that way.

 

I imagine it also can't improve the sound of the instruments.

 

It seems that the majors are finally willing to give us good examples of what not to do... Or, perhaps, they just want to kill the CD and this is the best way to do it.

 

Well you can't have good sound if both aren't good.

That's the shame in it; you can't undo what is done. It's funny that back in the '50's and '60's, you have recordings and often releases that were superior to the playback. So far superior they can satisfy in the important respects on our best modern setups. Many folks observed that playback environments will vary and technology will change, so just record it so it sounds good and make sure the record will track ok for pretty much everyone who buys it... Now we have people willfully degrading the product exclusively for the latest perception of the lowest percieved denominator (whom they claim don't care about sound, just to make the absurdity logic more obvious) as if no one else who plays it does or will ever matter.

 

I've ordered the LP. One can hope that the sound is a little more relaxed on vinyl, but it's no guarantee. I see that you say you might get a turntable someday. Well, if they LP isn't a turd, maybe someday will come sooner than you thought . . .

 

They do appear to be doing their best from just about every angle to undermine their CD sales. Really.

 

I've used this local phrase before, but here it goes (paraphrased), "Their enemy would not do a better product for them."

 

That's what I was afraid of. Seems like a trend. Another obvious example is "Magic". Disturbing!

And I agree, their earlier albums sound fine.

Here are some cool clips I found:


http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23899715#23898741

 

So, now the record companies have decided to castigate their consumers? What is this, antimarketing?

 

Or I may turn away from buying new releases altogether. I have no desire to give money to those who are responsible for this.