the cure wins loudness war 2008

[japanesebaby]

I think we have the ability to garner the attention if we put our minds to it.

let's!

[splitmilk34]

I absolutely love this topic... I just said on a previous post how crappy the production on "NY Trip" and all of the new singles is.  It's utterly painful and inexcusable.  For goodness sake, Robert and The Cure built all of the earlier albums on breathtaking dynamics, sudden swells of volume and superior sound.  Hell, the inserts on the CDs and tapes all had notes saying: This was mixed to be played LOUD - So turn it UP!!! 

How I hope that the lousy sound quality of these new tunes are simply the result of "Mix 13" that they're attaching to each single.  For example, on iTunes "The Only One" is listed as The Only One (Mix 13) or something...  I have my fingers crossed.

Even the dodgy production on "The Cure" at least allowed for dynamics. 

I am really beginning to hate the digital age (and this comes from a guy who records and produces exclusively on ProTools - but at least I know how to mix with dynamics without just jacking up volume levels).

[mahood]

This was mixed to be played LOUD - So turn it UP!!! 

How I hope that the lousy sound quality of these new tunes are simply the result of "Mix 13" that they're attaching to each single.  For example, on iTunes "The Only One" is listed as The Only One (Mix 13) or something...  I have my fingers crossed.

i remember this quote to be written on disintegration sleeve notes ; and, oh yes, i played it loud 
i had hopes about the mix 13 thing too -hoping it would be the bad thing that would not appear on the album-, but unfortunately these are the tracks that sound less awful (still they sound so, regardless of their qualities --- i for one like freakshow!) when compared to the Bsides.

i do agree with a "let's declare war to loudness war" action.
it would be interesting to know who decides in the end : i hear your point, lf4, about the label deciding what's good or not (i.e. commercially speaking, although i seriously doubt this can have any effect on the sales ; in the case of bands like cure, i may even think it does the opposite). but the production seems to go this way, i mean, before even any mastering is done - this later process will just add to the ugliness of it ; so you are right perhaps, and the coproducer and RS decide that anyway it has to be done like this, because the label has said so --- then it would really be a shame.
who is to blame then ? who do we send our comments to ? maybe both.

[KingOfSomeIsland]

Sadly I doubt theres that much we can really do about it. I just try to ignore it myself. I mean its still the same music you just have to take it in differently.


"Perhaps this is just part of their MASTER PLAN"

[firecrasher]

I've found the remasters to be varied in how they were processed. I noticed the first batch (1979-1981) was pumped up quite a bit in places, but still not nearly as bad as the new stuff.

The second batch of remasters (1983-1987) was more conservative. Those all have really full dynamics - basically just like the originals, only a few decibels louder, and a bit "stronger" sound with more bass, for example.

Back to Join the Dots, the newer stuff (especially 1995 and beyond) is the same old loudness war crap. I never really compared the "remasters" against the originals, but they seem about the same.

Of course, stuff like Galore and Greatest Hits was all crushed to crap just like everything else. I'm really happy they pretty much spared the more fan-oriented stuff like the remasters, bonus discs, and Join the Dots. That would have been a tragedy if that stuff got completely mangled too.

But a remastered 39?  I guess you're talking about the German "remastered" Bloodflowers?  Never heard that one...

I'm sorry, I did an edit on my post and didn't separate my thoughts well - I just meant the overall bass sound on 39 as opposed to earlier recordings.

I don't mind the remastered recordings... isn't the actual purpose of remasters to  "cleaning up" some of the sound quality rather than just cranking the volume? It's possible quiet sounds to still be clear. I sadly read that the "new" colored vinyls on Vinyl Lovers are of poor sound quality. :(

I'm wondering if a lot of the recent loudness war has to do with the move to digital music files and things being compressed all to hell. Wasn't there an interview with Robert in the last few years where he mentioned not having as much sway in the music industry as he thought he did? The sound of the ST really jumped out at me as being harsh. :(

I'll do some searching on The Pumpkins' Zeitgeist, I know it was recorded entirely on analog. A while back I listened to Siamese Dream on 128 mp3 and CD over a pair of studio headphones and the difference was astounding.

[tigermilk]

Sadly I doubt theres that much we can really do about it. I just try to ignore it myself. I mean its still the same music you just have to take it in differently.


"Perhaps this is just part of their MASTER PLAN"

Yes that's right! There's nothing we can do about it. Sure it's noisy and crowded, but that's how they wanted it I suppose. It does make you think though, what it would be like if they would do something like Faith again, simple and subtle. But then, that would be making a step backwards and fans would crucify them for repeating themselves.

As far as remasters go I've always preffered the remasters over the originals for a much clearer sound. In my opinion.

In conclusion, I really do like the new songs.

[firecrasher]

Hmm.. I started to get curious as to how much the volume increased in remastering and just put some screenshots of A Forest and The Hanging Gardens on my flickr account. Take a look if you'd like, A Forest is quite a lot louder!!! I'm not a big fan of Audacity so I didn't really look for clipping.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/firecrasher/sets/72157605713349371/

[japanesebaby]

Sadly I doubt theres that much we can really do about it. I just try to ignore it myself. I mean its still the same music you just have to take it in differently.


"Perhaps this is just part of their MASTER PLAN"

Yes that's right! There's nothing we can do about it.

come on guys, at least we could do what the SP fans did and try to get it into the beand's attention - can they change it anymore? you're right, probably nothing can be donw. but that doesn't mean it's futile to even discuss it, try to bring the topic up. good causes are always worth discussing - even when things can't be changed just like that.

Sure it's noisy and crowded, but that's how they wanted it I suppose.

seriously i can't believe they'd ever want this. like stated in the thread above by some, just listen to the past cure albums, listen to 'disintegration' and listen to the depth of the sound in it. robert is not some "let's make everything fast and easy blahblahblah" kind of american idols winner, he's a professional musician who knows what quality should sound like.
but are you saying he really wanted to ruin his own music? i cannot believe such a thing at all.

[KingOfSomeIsland]

Sadly I doubt theres that much we can really do about it. I just try to ignore it myself. I mean its still the same music you just have to take it in differently.


"Perhaps this is just part of their MASTER PLAN"

Yes that's right! There's nothing we can do about it.

come on guys, at least we could do what the SP fans did and try to get it into the beand's attention - can they change it anymore? you're right, probably nothing can be donw. but that doesn't mean it's futile to even discuss it, try to bring the topic up. good causes are always worth discussing - even when things can't be changed just like that.

Sure it's noisy and crowded, but that's how they wanted it I suppose.

seriously i can't believe they'd ever want this. like stated in the thread above by some, just listen to the past cure albums, listen to 'disintegration' and listen to the depth of the sound in it. robert is not some "let's make everything fast and easy blahblahblah" kind of american idols winner, he's a professional musician who knows what quality should sound like.
but are you saying he really wanted to ruin his own music? i cannot believe such a thing at all.

I see it as less self-sabotage and more of a want to adopt a more modern sound. I mean they did the same thing in '87 with Kiss Me Kiss Me Kiss Me being specifically mastered for CD rather than vinyl. And with RS being the infamous control freak that he is I seriously doubt he would ever allow music that he didn't approve of to be officially released.

I don't see it to be so much of an issue anyways. Its not as if they're bastardizing their old recordings with bad modern-style mastering. It's just their new stuff...

[Bloodflower]

The loudness thing doesn't bother me half as much as it seems to bother most people in this thread. For me, it's a mild irritation. It doesn't stop me from enjoying the new songs, not by a long shot. I guess I just don't get it. I know, the recordings are louder, that that affects the dynamic range, yada yada; I guess it just doesn't bother me very much. And I think I'm the average person out there in that respect; we just don't care, if we even notice.

Good luck with the petition, though.

[japanesebaby]

I see it as less self-sabotage and more of a want to adopt a more modern sound. I mean they did the same thing in '87 with Kiss Me Kiss Me Kiss Me being specifically mastered for CD rather than vinyl.

but these are two completely different things, to adopt something that could be called "a modern sound" and to actually let someone intentionally distort your recording...

and if the "modern sound" means all recordings are being partially destroyed during the mastering process (because they are getting distorted due to the insane volume boost, which means they have artifacting all over them), why on earth would anyone want to adopt such a thing? it's not the same things as accepting to use something "modern", somehting that's been upgraded - it's giving up into a bad trend that seems to dominate. but even if it's a dominating trend, it doesn't mean it's good and should be accepted without questioning.

seriously, why would anyone want to make their recordings sound shittier than they are, before releasing them to the public? it makes no sense to me at all and no "modern sound" can really explain it. because this "modern sound" is simply a crappy sound.
as i work with music myslef but never worked in a studio environment, it's a really huge mystery to me, why the studios do this. you would think that the biggest hi-fi freaks are the ones that work there in the studios, people who really pay attention to every little detail of the sound and who can work for weeks, just in order to find exactly the sound that they want. i know some studio people and they are mostly like this - but thanks to this volume destroying trend, they are being forced to destroy their own detailed work? sounds horrible.

I don't see it to be so much of an issue anyways. Its not as if they're bastardizing their old recordings with bad modern-style mastering. It's just their new stuff...

i'm not sure i understand what you mean. maybe it doesn't matter people who only listen to the old stuff and don't even intend to listen to the new material, if that's what you're saying. but to anyone whos interested to the new stuff too...
just their new stuff? maybe... but why would that be any less important than the old stuff?

this IS a very serious issue because it means that everything that enters the shelves is already mangled, distorted, mishandled and partially ruined. it's like selling goods that had their "best before" date three years ago and pretednign it's brand new and fresh.

i think unfortunately the studios are counting on the buying public not caring about it so much because they've already gotten everyone used to the distortion with itunes, crappy earphones that people use with ipods etc. - and i do find this rather alarming and sad. this general inflation of quality. that people accept volume-destruction and distortion it causes on the sound as something that's "supposed to be" part of the original release. because whichever way you look at it, it shouldn't be!

[lostflower4]

Yeah, there's nothing really "modern" about this trend. It's just basically that the record labels want Britney Spears' new album to be just as loud, or a tad louder than, Hilary Duff's new album.

And I guess The Cure's label is concerned that if their recordings aren't pumped to this level, people might decide to buy one of the above-mentioned releases instead. Seriously, it almost makes me laugh - but it's the sad truth.

As for people who say we can't do anything about it, it sure as heck can't hurt to try. There are tons of people out there fed up with this practice, and it's about time something serious was done!

There's really not much new music out there that grabs my interest, so it's been easy for me to be passive about this. But when my favorite band starts getting mangled like this, it's another story.

To the people who "aren't that bothered by it", consider yourself lucky, I guess. It doesn't mean the problem isn't there.

Here's a great video demonstrating the practice. It might open the eyes of some people who are less educated on these matters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

[splitmilk34]

Yeah, and let me add this:  When I started using ProTools I got a book on the program.  It said within the first 10 pages of "How to Record using ProTools" that you should record everything at the highest volume possible without the sound clipping.  Not only did this go against everything I'd ever learned previously, but it also was just plain wrong... Imagine if your acoustic guitar was as loud as your drums AND vocals. 

This whole "practice" is very annoying, but I do believe that the band will not allow such a terrible thing to take place on the final mix of the new album.  It just bothers me that people who don't love music are able to ruin it for the rest of us. 

And don't think for one second that some of this "loudness" isn't due to anticipation of illegal downloads.  The mastering tech is probably making things a little extra loud for the multiple times it will be converted to crappy 128kpbs mp3.  I may be stretching a bit with this point, though.

[firecrasher]

Yeah, and let me add this:  When I started using ProTools I got a book on the program.  It said within the first 10 pages of "How to Record using ProTools" that you should record everything at the highest volume possible without the sound clipping.  Not only did this go against everything I'd ever learned previously, but it also was just plain wrong... Imagine if your acoustic guitar was as loud as your drums AND vocals. 

This whole "practice" is very annoying, but I do believe that the band will not allow such a terrible thing to take place on the final mix of the new album.  It just bothers me that people who don't love music are able to ruin it for the rest of us. 

And don't think for one second that some of this "loudness" isn't due to anticipation of illegal downloads.  The mastering tech is probably making things a little extra loud for the multiple times it will be converted to crappy 128kpbs mp3.  I may be stretching a bit with this point, though.

You're right, both my Firebox and Cubase/Ableton etc all recommend recording at the highest possible volume before the evil Clip light appears.

Do you think that has something to do with why Robert's vocals have been mixed into the stratosphere on the last couple of albums, just to stand out from the wash of volume?

I'm sure the downloads factor into it, but there are plenty of people who just rip their cds to their computer or copy them for car usage. Or buy them off iTunes etc. 

[splitmilk34]

I can't really guess at why Robert's vocals have been mixed really high.  That could certainly have something to do with it... plus, when levels are pushed to the limit on all of the instruments it makes it really hard to not only mix vocals in, but to the EQ them to give them the proper "spacing"... hence the claustrophobic sound of the new singles.