Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Oddly enough I think I see what you're doing here, It looks a lot like my cool edit pro program...and just for the record I have purchased 2 cd's in the last 3 years and have become convinced that they are all junk as they were both unlistenable. haven't wasted a dime since on them. This was my own motivation for recently using Audacity to see if I could do something to fix at least the older CDs that I've acquired that I know haven't been more or less permanently damaged via compression during mastering. The results in general are pretty spectacular, which led me to write about that process here. What I've found is that the worst sounding CDs actually can be found from the late 1980s-1990 just before wholesale compression started in the popular music business, and the two reasons why they sound bad, bass attenuation and treble boost (from 1kHz-10kHz), is perfectly reversible--as long as the separated drum tracks and the bass tracks (typical in most multitrack recordings of that era) were attenuated at the same level. Some CDs I've found have been mixed with bass-attenuated kick drums prior to mixing with the bass line, and there's nothing that I can do to resurrect the kick drum performance. Same thing for treble voice tracks that have been treble-boosted prior to mixing with over treble instruments. These mixing disasters are permanent. What I've also found is that I can partially restore compressed music tracks, at least the bass lines and dial back some of the treble boost, but you can really hear the constant-loudness droning on and on in these tracks after restoring these two frequency bands. It can be very boring listening to restored loudness war tracks since the mastering engineers took away virtually all dynamics. If you've ever listened to harpsichord music for an hour or so at concert volume (which is actually pretty low in the 65-70dBA range), you'll understand the listening fatigue that sets in. I've found that some of the re-release CDs from the mid-late 1980s of 60s/70s rock bands (that sound almost exactly like their older phonograph record counterparts) have both bass attenuation and treble boost imposed on them (a clue of what I'm going to find when I turn my attention to restoring vinyl records). Right now, once this class of CDs are restored, the music sounds amazingly natural and listenable, something like a new recording but in general much less forward and harsh. But here's the deal: the dynamics of the music have to be there to start with - not compressed into oblivion. Even very badly mastered 1980s CDs (with original dynamics) can turn out to be really listenable and enjoyable recordings once they are restored, IMHO. Chris Edited January 30, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) There are some other observations and implications of this exercise: The "harshness" of Klipsch loudspeakers relative to other loudspeaker brands can now be explained - and it's not the fault of the loudspeaker, but the select music tracks (with treble boost) that is played on them. Kudos to Klipsch for not trying to "EQ their loudspeakers" to compensate for the generally poor mastering and quality of released popular music tracks. The tendency for many people here to be satisfied with only La Scala and Belle bass performance can now be explained: the low bass that these two bass bin types cannot reproduce well has typically been removed from popular music tracks to begin with. I find that many people are astounded by having good low bass available to them--like first hearing Khorns with a good recording that doesn't have low bass attenuation. I've noticed that Khorn owners prefer listening to the type of music typically doesn't have mastering "fixes" on the tracks, i.e., mostly classical but also some notable jazz recordings from the cool/bebop era (1950s-60s). This type of music shows the real advantage of owning Khorns, which easily reproduce cleanly down to 31 Hz. All this popular music mastering foolishness described above begins to explain all of this. I believe that we've got generations of folks that are used to hearing "canned music" that has these two characteristics - and many of those people like to think of themselves as "audiophiles" on other forums and owning other brands of loudspeakers, etc. YMMV. It is now clear that there are many "closet EQers" that are boosting their low frequencies--pretty much all the time. There is a get-out-of-jail-free-card reason why they have been doing this--and for a very long time, indeed. It's going to be interesting to see what happens when it becomes clear that audiophiles can recover at least some of the fidelity lost by popular mastering practices over the years. Will these listeners prefer to hear their old recordings mastered more naturally (and much less harshly) or will they continue to listen to their old recordings stoically unchanged to the insights above? Perhaps now the "anti-EQ audiophile crowd" will begin to see why digital EQ/restoration is actually their friend, and necessary for hearing true "hi-fi". Chris Edited April 16, 2015 by Chris A 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) By the way, all this "forward treble, missing bass" louder mastering of popular music reminds me of flat panel televisions playing certain kinds of demonstration video when strolling through Costco, etc. These videos are usually pumped up to "look cool" at the store. The real question is this: once those flat panel TVs are bought and taken home, how many owners realize their unnatural color states that are preloaded into the default settings of the screens then go online to find better color-, intensity-, and contrast-balanced settings...or do the owners simply "plug-and play" the sets as-is for the rest of their operating lives? An interesting question, IMHO...and directly apropos to audio, too. Chris Edited January 30, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnA Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Have you come across any CDs that either didn't have rolled off bass or the hump? Yes, a few (digital discs only): The Yellowjackets SACDs (there are three of them) Many DVD-As with 5.1 recorded in the last 15 years Earth, Wind & Fire - The Very Best Of (two discs) - but this has serious HF boost issues that must be EQed out Paquito D'Rivera - Portraits of Cuba Lyle Lovett - Joshua Judges Ruth Patricia Barber - Companion (SACD) David Chesky - Club Del Sol (Virtually any Linn SACD) David Sanborn - As We Speak (mostly free of bass attenuation) Steely Dan - Aja (MFSL) (there is some LF attenuation below 40 Hz) Any DVD from Gordon Goodwin's Big Phat Band Ana Caram - The Other Side of Jobim The Alan Parsons Project - Stereotomy (1985 CD - with partial attenuation below 40 Hz) Peter White - Promenade Tom Scott - New York Connection Thelonius Monk - Monk's Dream That will have to do for now - it's a bit time consuming to look for these. I haven't looked in my classical discs yet. Virtually all CDs suffer from the missing octave problem, unfortunately., and all of them have some form of upper treble boost (the "hump") above 4 kHz to some degree, CDs Chris I have some of those CDs and like them, especially "Josua, Judges and Ruth". Is there an easier way to identify non-/less EQ'd CDs that having to put each through Audacity? I have it on the Linux side. I have been trying to buy any DVD-As I find interesting, but it's getting difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 d 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 f 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 How do you get music from U- tube to play through Audacity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Is there an easier way to identify non-/less EQ'd CDs that having to put each through Audacity? I have it on the Linux side. I have been trying to buy any DVD-As I find interesting, but it's getting difficult. I wish there were - except of course SACDs and DVD-As, which you already know have good intact bass tracks. Generally, SACDs have full bass because, in general, there is no mastering used for these discs due to the relative unavailability of editing software for DSD/DST formatted tracks.. The DVD-As have bass tracks because there is a separate track set aside for bass--which is typically boosted 10dB relative to the other full-range tracks. Any 5.1 music disc with subwoofer tracks (i.e., 5.1, etc.) have to have sub-80 Hz information in order to be able to call it a subwoofer track. I find 100% of these have good bass - if they are music discs. What I've found is that the mastering engineers for DVD-As will even compress the full-range tracks on DVD-As: just listen to the Elton John DVD-As - they're extremely loud, but still have deep bass. Oops, these are actually multichannel SACDs - that clearly have been converted to PCM from the analog master multitrack tapes (i.e., the mixing engineer's console recording tapes) - edited - then converted to DST. Chris Edited January 31, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 I found that the Heart discs that I have were actually very difficult to do much with other than re-equalize the bass. YMMV. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) How do you get music from U- tube to play through Audacity? First save the video tracks to your hard disc using a YouTube utility (or browser add-in), rip the video track's audio to mp3 or other lossless format, then open within Audacity. A pain, I know. There may be a way to directly rip YouTube audio to a local audio file. Edited January 30, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 g 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 l 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Whenever I hear a notable CD or disc that I've had spectacular success with Audacity in terms of bass curves, I'll try to post the xml EQ curve here since they are so small. This one is for Diana Krall's notable CD - "Stepping Out", and this curve significantly improves the performance of all three instruments (Krall's piano, Clayton's bass, and Hamilton's kick drum). Make sure that you use "Normalize..." with the first two check boxes checked after using this filter on each track. Diana Krall - Stepping Out CD Bass EQ curve - Audacity.XML Edited January 30, 2015 by Chris A 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyrc Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) "forward treble, missing bass" louder mastering ... I get (but hate) why they compress the dynamic range to make their recordings sound louder. I also get why, if mixing for vinyl, they might cut back the bass. But, with the much touted dynamic range of CDs, why do they think they have to cut the bass? I really don't get why they push the treble forward. I'm one of those with Khorns and a classical and jazz collection. Most of those sound pretty good, but even with them I sometime help along bass. That tends to work, and I'm grateful for the clarity and effortlessness of the Khorns. But I can't think of a pop/rock/metal CD that sounds as good on my Khorns as similar (sometimes the same, on Lp) used to sound on my old JBL system -- which really did have foreward mid/treble. Back then, I used old fashioned pre-amp bass boost (~~4 to 12 dB bass boost, or so, with 20 dB available). So far, BD movies through a system including the Khorns, have better sound than pop/rock/metal CDs, IMO. Edited January 30, 2015 by Garyrc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Interesting before and after DR stats. Before EQ: foobar2000 1.3.1 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1 log date: 2015-01-30 22:01:36 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Analyzed: Diana Krall / Stepping Out -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR Peak RMS Duration Track -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR10 0.00 dB -12.73 dB 4:31 01-This Can't Be Love DR9 0.00 dB -12.74 dB 3:57 02-Straighten Up And Fly Right DR12 0.00 dB -15.61 dB 4:05 03-Between The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea DR10 0.00 dB -13.21 dB 4:24 04-I'm Just A Lucky So And So DR13 0.00 dB -17.46 dB 5:35 05-Body And Soul DR11 0.00 dB -14.90 dB 6:22 06-42nd Street DR12 0.00 dB -15.42 dB 4:33 07-Do Nothin' Till You Hear From Me DR11 0.00 dB -13.10 dB 7:08 08-Big Foot DR12 0.00 dB -14.81 dB 4:08 09-Frim Fram Sauce DR14 0.00 dB -19.03 dB 5:26 10-Jimmie (Written By Diana) DR10 0.00 dB -12.87 dB 4:43 11-As Long As I Live DR11 0.00 dB -13.63 dB 4:52 12-On The Sunny Side Of The Street -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of tracks: 12 Official DR value: DR11 Samplerate: 44100 Hz Channels: 2 Bits per sample: 16 Bitrate: 893 kbps Codec: FLAC ================================================================================ AFTER EQ: foobar2000 1.3.1 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1 log date: 2015-01-30 22:02:01 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Analyzed: Diana Krall / Stepping Out EQ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR Peak RMS Duration Track -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DR14 -0.30 dB -18.43 dB 4:31 01-This Can't Be Love EQ DR15 -0.30 dB -19.42 dB 3:57 02-Straighten Up And Fly Right EQ DR14 -0.30 dB -19.40 dB 4:05 03-Between The Devil And The Deep Blue Sea EQ DR14 -0.30 dB -20.92 dB 4:24 04-I'm Just A Lucky So And So EQ DR14 -0.30 dB -19.47 dB 5:35 05-Body And Soul EQ DR14 -0.30 dB -18.63 dB 6:22 06-42nd Street EQ DR13 -0.30 dB -17.60 dB 4:33 07-Do Nothin' Till You Hear From Me EQ DR13 -0.30 dB -17.51 dB 7:08 08-Big Foot EQ DR15 -0.30 dB -18.44 dB 4:08 09-Frim Fram Sauce EQ DR15 -0.30 dB -21.28 dB 5:26 10-Jimmie (Written By Diana) EQ DR12 -0.30 dB -16.17 dB 4:43 11-As Long As I Live EQ DR13 -0.30 dB -16.60 dB 4:52 12-On The Sunny Side Of The Street EQ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of tracks: 12 Official DR value: DR14 Samplerate: 44100 Hz Channels: 2 Bits per sample: 16 Bitrate: 823 kbps Codec: FLAC ================================================================================ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I don't have time to warm up the VRD's tonight so I'm listening with the Beyerdynamic T5p headphones which give a very real and clear response top to bottom as well as taking the room out of the equation. Checking out the EQ'd version of Diana Krall, "Stepping Out" now. Well, the bass certainly comes through on these more than the LaScalas! Seems like a little much on the low end but it does give a nice support to some of the frequencies on up. I'm thinking I might experiment with your EQ a bit and tame it down just a bit at your lowest EQ peak to hear how that goes. Could you talk more about how you arrived at your EQ levels? I'm wondering how much of this is to your ear vs. looking at the frequency analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 31, 2015 Author Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Could you talk more about how you arrived at your EQ levels? I'm wondering how much of this is to your ears. looking at the frequency analysis. For this recording, there were three factors that helped me set the EQ where I did: Now knowing the spectral analysis of kick drums and string basses from the sources that I mentioned at the top of this thread, adjusting both the lowest frequency of the spectrum plot to peak around 40-50 Hz, with slow roll-off down to the mid-20 Hz region for kick drum impulses. The spectral plot shape was used both as a starting point and as a last check on the next two factors. Listening carefully to the recording all the way through, twice, at concert volume on the setup, checking for naturalness of the performance. My in-room response is actually rising toward the bottom end, so if anything the resulting bass line using the supplied filter on the recorded tracks should actually be a slightly less than sitting in the studio with the players at the microphone positions, which is the reference position for these tracks that were recorded in a fairly reverberant studio. Studios of that time didn't have effective bass absorbers below about 100 Hz since those devices had yet to be invented, so the bass lines and kick drums were routinely attenuated at the consoles or at mastering time. (Fortunately here the bass attenuation most likely occurred at mastering since they are so alive sounding.) Comparing actual in-room performance carefully with the DVD "Diana Krall--Live in Paris" which I've owned for over ten years now and use for final evaluation of any changes to the setup in 5.1 mode. I find that most people are surprised by the actual levels of jazz string bass resonance and kick drum room pressurization especially after listening to two-channel recordings with attenuated bass for most of their lives. The high bass frequency SPLs exist both on-stage and in the audience. In fact, string bass and kick drum levels are always the most dramatic difference between most two channel recordings and real life in my experience. (Now I know why.) If you listen again to Brian Bromberg's Wood bass-restored tracks, you will hear a very aggressive palette of instrument subharmonic percussive effects in addition to the normal frequencies of the string bass. These performances are almost never reproduced anywhere near actual studio recording levels in two channel recordings, but these bass transients are present in real life. I've attended many such performances over the years of jazz string bass and kick drums, and listened at home in surround sound recordings, such as the three DVDs by Krall (Live in Paris DVD, Live in Rio BD, Love Scenes DTS 5.1 DVD) in addition to other jazz combo recordings including Stanley Clarke's captivating electric and double bass playing in a Return to Forever BD that I also use for reference in my setup. Listening on headphones to an unprocessed string bass/kick drum recording is, I find, actually a bit disorienting due to the big transients involved. This recording, restored, needs a good listening room to play back well. Edited January 31, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.