Remove Ads

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pledge Music : New Album !
I won't pretend that the production on Ballet is the same as previous albums. That's not what I meant. Not at all.
Reply
Oh, and I'm not trying to suggest that you were saying that. I am (we are?) also not just saying that the production is different, but that when compared to past albums the production sounds poor. Like in quality, not style. And the poor quality of Ballet is detectable no matter how good or bad the devices are that you play these MP3s through.
Reply
Production-blah. Album-I love it.
Reply
Message from Ours Management from the pledgemusic page.

"OURS wanted to first immediately make MP3s (the most widely used format) available to pledgers after mastering on May 4, 2013.
OURS are currently working on providing higher quality FLAC format audio files to pledgers via a forthcoming update."

The problem with this statement is that the copy we have is the fully produced, mixed and mastered version. Bumping up from 320 kbps mp3's to a lossless file isn't going to make much of a difference if the album was produced, recorded and mixed poorly.
Reply
It's clear to me that the sound you guys are complaining about is due to a production choice to give the record a retro sound. I think they drew influence from Motown/old school r&b and perhaps are targeting a Black Keys-esque crowd that enjoys the "rough around the edges" sound. And while I don't generally enjoy muddy production, I think it worked here to an extent. These songs are not like anything else they've ever released, but they all flow well together. I'm enjoying the change of pace. My Fave songs so far are 1-Fall Into My Hands 2- Devil 3- Been Down 4-Boxer. Perhaps the only song that doesn't quite work for me is "Stand".
Reply
I'd also like to add one more thought- Jimmy seems to be at his best when his initial gut instincts are on display in songs. When he spends a long time tweaking and changing things (the majority of the Mercy album for example...or The Moth as a good example of a song that lost alot of "umph" because of too much perfectionism production), things seem flat. Another great example...The studio "perfected" version of Here Is the Light is nowhere near as powerful as the acoustic EP version. That's why I enjoyed Precious so much, and is why I enjoy this record thus far.
Reply
lukestanleystp Wrote:I'd also like to add one more thought- Jimmy seems to be at his best when his initial gut instincts are on display in songs. When he spends a long time tweaking and changing things (the majority of the Mercy album for example...or The Moth as a good example of a song that lost alot of "umph" because of too much perfectionism production), things seem flat. Another great example...The studio "perfected" version of Here Is the Light is nowhere near as powerful as the acoustic EP version. That's why I enjoyed Precious so much, and is why I enjoy this record thus far.

I completely agree with this and I like the performances and songwriting style we got out of it on Ballet. However, I disagree with you here:

lukestanleystp Wrote:It's clear to me that the sound you guys are complaining about is due to a production choice to give the record a retro sound. I think they drew influence from Motown/old school r&b and perhaps are targeting a Black Keys-esque crowd that enjoys the "rough around the edges" sound.

I love early Black Keys and other rough, garage rock-sounding records. The complaint that I am making isn't that it sounds rough in that way, or gritty, or retro. It sounds like I am listening to a band in the next room by putting a drinking glass to my ear and pressing it against the wall. Okay maybe that's an exaggeration, but it's that sort of feeling.

bxdash gave a good technical explanation of what compressed audio files sound like, which scares me. But I have heard some MP3s (purchased from iTunes no less) that have the dulled sound that I am trying to describe, but it sounded much better on CD. So I am still holding out hope that the FLAC/CD version will help.
Reply
feverdown Wrote:bxdash gave a good technical explanation of what compressed audio files sound like, which scares me. But I have heard some MP3s (purchased from iTunes no less) that have the dulled sound that I am trying to describe, but it sounded much better on CD. So I am still holding out hope that the FLAC/CD version will help.

There's always the opportunity for encoding errors. Imaging can be greatly affected if stereo enhancement, or phase manipulation was introduced. Though this usually requires really shitty encoders (I didn't check what was used). It's really hard for me to believe that there'd be much difference between the 320kbps MP3s and FLAC. There would probably be slight image change, and low end changes, as well as just some fairly random information brought back in. But it's miniscule, and for most folk, A/B/X comparisons, especially on their own rigs, they wont be able to tell the difference.

I'm not saying it's not gonna be different. Shit happens.

An anecdote is that my honest first reaction was that I thought someone was pissed at the band and posted a bunch of early/unfinished mixes and demos of the record by hacking into all their social media. No joke. I know better, but that was my initial thought it was so odd to me.

I'm inclined to agree with lukestanleystp. It reminds me of older motown vibe and mid range pump. Sounds a lot like old records on my parental unit's stereo when I was a kid, when I walk away from the rig and lose the stereo image. It might lose some of the 6kish and 12+kish bump on the vinyl. In general you want to master vinyl differently, with less "hype". Oddly this recording has 0db clips, they're rounded though, so I'm guessing analog gear was used.

I believe for most folk though, it's about expectations derived from the past albums. It's a radically different sonic experience, and its jarring because of that. Some will grow accustomed to it. Some will not. Some will still find it problematic, and look past it. Some wont.

It's not my cup of tea. I dig the songs a lot. I am in love with the energy in the songs, and the production and performances make it that way to an extent. My ears tune into a few other things that make it a difficult listen, though. Some things I can't abide, as an active listener.

That said, I'm a jackass with this. I can't often listen to, arguably, one of Muse's best records: Origins of Symmetry. To me it's a noisy midrangy over saturated mess of great songs. (the irony is now they've hit the opposite side of the spectrum, with super polished, hyped up boring songs). So this doesn't make it bad. It's subjective.

I love the songs. I love the energy. I can't crank the songs and feel the energy.
Reply
lukestanleystp Wrote:It's clear to me that the sound you guys are complaining about is due to a production choice to give the record a retro sound. I think they drew influence from Motown/old school r&b and perhaps are targeting a Black Keys-esque crowd that enjoys the "rough around the edges" sound. And while I don't generally enjoy muddy production, I think it worked here to an extent. These songs are not like anything else they've ever released, but they all flow well together. I'm enjoying the change of pace. My Fave songs so far are 1-Fall Into My Hands 2- Devil 3- Been Down 4-Boxer. Perhaps the only song that doesn't quite work for me is "Stand".

It's like you and me are the same person.
Reply
bxdash Wrote:
feverdown Wrote:bxdash gave a good technical explanation of what compressed audio files sound like, which scares me. But I have heard some MP3s (purchased from iTunes no less) that have the dulled sound that I am trying to describe, but it sounded much better on CD. So I am still holding out hope that the FLAC/CD version will help.

There's always the opportunity for encoding errors. Imaging can be greatly affected if stereo enhancement, or phase manipulation was introduced. Though this usually requires really shitty encoders (I didn't check what was used). It's really hard for me to believe that there'd be much difference between the 320kbps MP3s and FLAC. There would probably be slight image change, and low end changes, as well as just some fairly random information brought back in. But it's miniscule, and for most folk, A/B/X comparisons, especially on their own rigs, they wont be able to tell the difference.

I'm not saying it's not gonna be different. Shit happens.

An anecdote is that my honest first reaction was that I thought someone was pissed at the band and posted a bunch of early/unfinished mixes and demos of the record by hacking into all their social media. No joke. I know better, but that was my initial thought it was so odd to me.

I'm inclined to agree with lukestanleystp. It reminds me of older motown vibe and mid range pump. Sounds a lot like old records on my parental unit's stereo when I was a kid, when I walk away from the rig and lose the stereo image. It might lose some of the 6kish and 12+kish bump on the vinyl. In general you want to master vinyl differently, with less "hype". Oddly this recording has 0db clips, they're rounded though, so I'm guessing analog gear was used.

I believe for most folk though, it's about expectations derived from the past albums. It's a radically different sonic experience, and its jarring because of that. Some will grow accustomed to it. Some will not. Some will still find it problematic, and look past it. Some wont.

It's not my cup of tea. I dig the songs a lot. I am in love with the energy in the songs, and the production and performances make it that way to an extent. My ears tune into a few other things that make it a difficult listen, though. Some things I can't abide, as an active listener.

That said, I'm a jackass with this. I can't often listen to, arguably, one of Muse's best records: Origins of Symmetry. To me it's a noisy midrangy over saturated mess of great songs. (the irony is now they've hit the opposite side of the spectrum, with super polished, hyped up boring songs). So this doesn't make it bad. It's subjective.

I love the songs. I love the energy. I can't crank the songs and feel the energy.

Damn I love OOS. I love the messiness proper goosebump album that. And yeah their newer stuff is a whole different world.
Reply
inn Wrote:Damn I love OOS. I love the messiness proper goosebump album that. And yeah their newer stuff is a whole different world.

It's all subjective, based on what we listen for both subconsciously and consciously. What we hope for and long for in our passions. I think that record has some of their best songs, and the energy is unbridled. It works. It's also a record that makes my ears and eyes flinch. It's particular to how my hearing works and what I subconsciously tune into. I have a very Goldilocks preference. I'm fucking high maintenance.

A great and hilarious, point of reference for me is, it's really hard for me to have sex with music on. Which should be ridiculous for a musician, but unless it was back when I was high as a fucking kite, that shit distracts.

Some things are masterpieces for many people, Somethings are calculated, some things are divisive driven by artist perspective, some things are train wrecks.

I don't think this is in the latter selection. I've heard those. I've been a part of those.

Such is the way with actual art. We get challenged. It's up to us as individuals to choose to accept, or decide it's Kobayashi Maru.

Reply
This album reminds me of Sour a lot. The way Jimmy layers his vocals, and a lot of the feel of the songs reminds me of those old songs a lot. Honestly makes you wonder what went on in all of these epic record company fights he's been a part of through the years, what he wanted Vs. what they wanted from him. I like most of these songs a lot, and i can easily picture them all live, which i could picture being what the band was going for. Everyone who likes them seems to consider them a live band, maybe he just wanted to convey more of that in the production. I play with my EQ automatically on any music i listen to, looking for the level of clarity and depth of sound i want, no matter how the music is recorded. I have a 160 gig iPod Classic, and for most music, i just set the EQ to Electronic. Seems to make the sound of this album a lot more crisp. The only thing that still seems to really suffer is the sound of the symbols crashing, there seems to be no saving those. But that's all background stuff to me anyway. Love the urgency of a lot of the songs, kinda a new tempo for a few. Couple of songs also remind me of the way he sings in the Neverending White Lights songs he's done too.

Really looking forward to seeing them in town here in Columbus July 2nd! 5 days before my birthday no less. I am scrounging for someone who can go with me, but if i can't twist my brother's arm, i may just be chillin there awkwardly by myself, no way i am missing this!

Oh yeah, and i am moving in the beginning of July, do i need to contact Pledge to make sure my items get shipped to my parents house or something? With them announcing the album going 'public' in June, i don't know what that means for when we can expect merch to ship...
Reply
Oh, and as far as stuff that sounds different, in Get em Out, the energy in Jimmy's voice near the end when he says something like "The end is comming now, the answer's been allowed, it's pushed up to my face i guess i better learn to get around" gives me freakin goosebumps! I think i will come to love this stuff just like the rest of it.
Reply
bxdash Wrote:
inn Wrote:Damn I love OOS. I love the messiness proper goosebump album that. And yeah their newer stuff is a whole different world.

It's all subjective, based on what we listen for both subconsciously and consciously. What we hope for and long for in our passions. I think that record has some of their best songs, and the energy is unbridled. It works. It's also a record that makes my ears and eyes flinch. It's particular to how my hearing works and what I subconsciously tune into. I have a very Goldilocks preference. I'm fucking high maintenance.

A great and hilarious, point of reference for me is, it's really hard for me to have sex with music on. Which should be ridiculous for a musician, but unless it was back when I was high as a fucking kite, that shit distracts.

Some things are masterpieces for many people, Somethings are calculated, some things are divisive driven by artist perspective, some things are train wrecks.

I don't think this is in the latter selection. I've heard those. I've been a part of those.

Such is the way with actual art. We get challenged. It's up to us as individuals to choose to accept, or decide it's Kobayashi Maru.

Just out of interest what are some well known albums you class as masterpieces technically/production wise?


I wonder if the production choices were to make the sound more like a band rather than just Jimmy singing with a band playing with him. I know after he got back from solo touring in London etc he said he didn't want to do that again and wanted to go as a band which he did.

I've been listening to the album a lot since it was released and I'm sad to say I don't find it magical, I don't dislike it because the music style is to my taste, in fact I enjoy it and I'll sing along but I have yet to find it magical.
Reply
aint nobody got time for that! Smile honestly I could list records I love for all kinds of different production reasons all day, and every time someone asks I feel like I leave things out.

I don't want to take away from discussion of the record, so I'll PM something short and quick.
Reply
bxdash Wrote:
feverdown Wrote:bxdash gave a good technical explanation of what compressed audio files sound like, which scares me. But I have heard some MP3s (purchased from iTunes no less) that have the dulled sound that I am trying to describe, but it sounded much better on CD. So I am still holding out hope that the FLAC/CD version will help.

There's always the opportunity for encoding errors. Imaging can be greatly affected if stereo enhancement, or phase manipulation was introduced. Though this usually requires really shitty encoders (I didn't check what was used). It's really hard for me to believe that there'd be much difference between the 320kbps MP3s and FLAC. There would probably be slight image change, and low end changes, as well as just some fairly random information brought back in. But it's miniscule, and for most folk, A/B/X comparisons, especially on their own rigs, they wont be able to tell the difference.

I'm not saying it's not gonna be different. Shit happens.

An anecdote is that my honest first reaction was that I thought someone was pissed at the band and posted a bunch of early/unfinished mixes and demos of the record by hacking into all their social media. No joke. I know better, but that was my initial thought it was so odd to me.

I'm inclined to agree with lukestanleystp. It reminds me of older motown vibe and mid range pump. Sounds a lot like old records on my parental unit's stereo when I was a kid, when I walk away from the rig and lose the stereo image. It might lose some of the 6kish and 12+kish bump on the vinyl. In general you want to master vinyl differently, with less "hype". Oddly this recording has 0db clips, they're rounded though, so I'm guessing analog gear was used.

I believe for most folk though, it's about expectations derived from the past albums. It's a radically different sonic experience, and its jarring because of that. Some will grow accustomed to it. Some will not. Some will still find it problematic, and look past it. Some wont.

It's not my cup of tea. I dig the songs a lot. I am in love with the energy in the songs, and the production and performances make it that way to an extent. My ears tune into a few other things that make it a difficult listen, though. Some things I can't abide, as an active listener.

That said, I'm a jackass with this. I can't often listen to, arguably, one of Muse's best records: Origins of Symmetry. To me it's a noisy midrangy over saturated mess of great songs. (the irony is now they've hit the opposite side of the spectrum, with super polished, hyped up boring songs). So this doesn't make it bad. It's subjective.

I love the songs. I love the energy. I can't crank the songs and feel the energy.


I have to disagree. FLAC is noticeably better. The differences can vary.

Absolution by MUSE is a great example, I have purchased the CD, downloaded it from iTunes @ 320...then "found" the uncompressed FLAC online.....then done comparisons...FLAC is SO MUCH better the sound takes over your speakers, it's not even close.

EDIT to ad: Even if you convert a FLAC file BACK to 320 MP3, it's still better.


Reply
feverdown Wrote:Oh, and I'm not trying to suggest that you were saying that. I am (we are?) also not just saying that the production is different, but that when compared to past albums the production sounds poor. Like in quality, not style. And the poor quality of Ballet is detectable no matter how good or bad the devices are that you play these MP3s through.


I agree, POOR production quality...and NOT poor by choice.


:confused:


That being said, I LIKE the songs, except for Been Down, that bass line is week. (almost amateurish)

EMERGENCY, may be my favorite...but the poor production is killing me..

Reply
jasecolmn84 Wrote:Oh yeah, and i am moving in the beginning of July, do i need to contact Pledge to make sure my items get shipped to my parents house or something?  With them announcing the album going 'public' in June, i don't know what that means for when we can expect merch to ship...

You can update your mailing address, you have to go into the pledge specifically, if I remember right. I moved in February and it was one of the first things I updated. Wink
Reply
I'm really hoping the later-released version clears up the majority of the issues people have discussed with this album. The more I listen to it, the more I hear the muffled sounds people are referring to. It could be cleaned up significantly and still retain the retro feel, so I hope it does.

Otoh, I'm not expecting it to. I don't think the band would have released mp3 versions of songs that were so far from the "final" version that they'd be embarassed to release them. We might get a little more clarity, a little more darkness and umph, but otherwise I imagine it will stay relatively the same.

I had to let each of the albums aside from Distorted Lullabies grow on me. That one is pure magic and the others are more of an acquired taste, imo. But like someone said above, it's subjective. Seems like a lot of people here really like The Heart and Mercy and those are probably my least favorites.

Anyway, here's hoping.

Side note: Anyone have lyrics for any of this?
Reply
Hmontesjr Wrote:I have to disagree. FLAC is noticeably better. The differences can vary.

Absolution by MUSE is a great example, I have purchased the CD, downloaded it from iTunes @ 320...then "found" the uncompressed FLAC online.....then done comparisons...FLAC is SO MUCH better the sound takes over your speakers, it's not even close.

EDIT to ad: Even if you convert a FLAC file BACK to 320 MP3, it's still better.

I agree that FLAC is better, the perception of "how much" depends on the music, and you're ears. I find that for most people, they can't tell the difference, especially on what they listen to music on.

Absolution is a pretty wide and deep mix, and like I said the stereo image opens up a bit with FLAC/CD in comparison to Mpeg, and it makes depth more perceptible. All MP3s will lose this, and anything with high dynamic range/contrast and depth (say film scores/classical) will feel like you can "reach in" to them compared to MP3.

but the amount that is perceptible is not... absolute...across all recordings nor all people. :clap:

It's not going to be "radically" different, and I don't want to smoke screen people into believing that it will be. 320kbps should be giving you a fairly true sense of the recordings. Unless something went wrong with the encoding process. There is a reason it's become a standard format for most people. Again...for better or worse.

I'm mostly offering all this up as techie blah blah folks. I'm not telling you there's something wrong with the record. There's a shit ton of stuff out there that everyone hears differently. That's the magic of music and recording. Some of my favorite records I hated upon initial listening, and now can't live with out. Much of that was because it didn't agree with my listening trends at the time.

Risks, challenges, rewards, disappointment, gratification. They all play in the sandbox, sometimes some kids find new toys, other kids find raccoon shit

that could just be play dough.... that you're allergic to for a while.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Zoe released an album blasko66 0 287 11-16-2020, 01:45 PM
Last Post: blasko66
  Singles, Album, Tour SoundscapeMN 5 994 10-23-2019, 08:52 PM
Last Post: SoundscapeMN
  New Album Name and Release Date! eveofabyss 124 13,259 12-31-2018, 08:08 PM
Last Post: jlatham
Bug New album - dumb question delight 2 985 01-29-2016, 05:41 PM
Last Post: delight
  Listening Party (for the new album) in early 2016 SoundscapeMN 4 1,155 06-14-2015, 07:56 AM
Last Post: northstar80
  New solo album in the works jade 35 3,400 08-10-2014, 11:17 PM
Last Post: HOURS
  'Devil' Music Video eveofabyss 8 973 08-25-2013, 12:07 PM
Last Post: inn
  album release party - may 14 jmwood42 1 794 05-15-2013, 07:42 AM
Last Post: SoundscapeMN
  Thought about the upcoming album luciddream71 6 959 02-08-2013, 08:37 AM
Last Post: Xxtayce
  Who should produce Ours' next album? northstar80 15 1,654 09-27-2012, 02:42 PM
Last Post: northstar80

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)