Chris A Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Yea, when I listened to certain favorite tracks by some of the artists that I identified above (some of which are my favorites, some of which aren't), I found myself wanting to pull in more bass. Now I know why. One of the more recent artists ("new" is a relative thing I've found with CDs produced in the last 15 years I'd classify as "new"... ), Avril Lavigne--yes one of the loud autotune queens--has several CDs out with DR ratings less than 7 (i.e., these CDs are LOUD), but I've found today that most of her music tracks have various degrees of attenuated bass lines varying from a cut off at 100 Hz to 40 Hz (yes, you can still cut off bass lines at 40 Hz and hear the difference when you re-EQ to put those sub-40 Hz parts back in). Some of her tracks have sub-30 Hz "emphasis sustain" electronic bass lines that you basically can't hear until you boost the bass line using the methods shown here (but just not using nearly as much boost). When you finally can hear these emphasis sustains, you're not searching to hear them anymore - they are there for everyone to hear plainly. Some of the mastering on the newer discs strains credibility and the imagination as to why someone would want the sound like it is, but what I've found is that even these tracks have some wiggle room in terms of bass restoration, and in the process, the DR ratings for these tracks jump upward by 3-4 DR ratings points (i.e., 3-4 dB of crest factor increase) due mainly to the restoration of kick drum dynamics, and sometimes bass line transients. Couple this insight with the knowledge that most of the newer CDs have significantly boosted upper midrange/treble in the 1-10 kHz region in various amounts, and you can actually do a bit of reconstruction and taming of some of these mixes--not spectacular, but noticeable, yielding much easier listening. My wife yesterday was sitting in the right hand chair while she was texting, etc. while I was reconstructing bass lines and rebalancing treble using a trial-and-error approach, track by track. She stopped and commented on one of the final remixes, saying: "I didn't know that the music didn't have to hurt while listening to it" ....this while I reduced the 1-10 kHz bands on some rock tracks that are notable for sounding forward and harsh, even old tracks that "were supposed to hurt while listening to them", in her own words. I find that I now can easily see what has to be done to correct these tracks, to undo really poor mastering. It all just got a lot simpler, IMHO. Chris Edited January 28, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Interesting stuff! I tested this on the Brian Bromberg track and can see that I got the same Frequency Analysis as you. I normalized before and after equalization but there were a couple of selections I wasn't sure about so I just left them at default. "Remove and DC offset" was checked. Normalize maximum amplitude to: -1 dB was checked and selected. I thought this might be changed to 0 without issue but I left it alone. Should I have done something different here? I checked the DR rating on the original and new track. Both were the same. There is certainly more meat to Brian's bass now! Ambient noise was a little high in the house tonight but from what I could tell it did nothing to hurt the sound and did sound better to me. Understand that I do NOT have subs in the room right now (I haven't built them yet). I am limited to the bass that a braced LaScala bin is capable of but I could play it in the other room with the Cornwalls too I suppose. I am not usually one to mess with EQ... certainly not at the analog level. I don't see the harm at this level though except for the amount of work. Individually adjusting each track is pretty labor intensive and I am not sure I trust my ears for that. I admit that I keep wondering if I'm actually part of the "more louder bass is more better" crowd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) I'm actually surprised that you could hear any real changes from La Scala bass bins only, which really begin to roll off at ~70 Hz. All the changes in the Bromberg track are really below 50 Hz. This is actually good news if you do hear a difference. Your Normalize settings are good. I moved the maximum amplitude up to -0.3dB which is the maximum that it should be according to various sources, not the least of which is the DR Database guys. I don't normally recommend checking "normalize each track separately" because if you have a low frequency spike in one of the tracks but not the other (usually because someone bumped a microphone physically during recording), that track will be significantly reduced in amplitude relative to the other track. Sometimes, however, there are LF artifacts left on one track after normalization that induce DC bias on that track at the ends, resulting in a small "click" when the track starts and stops. You can also use "fade in" and "fade out" on the ends of the problem track to zero the trace at each end. Chris Edited January 28, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I'm actually surprised that you could hear any real changes from La Scala bass bins only, which really begin to roll off at ~70 Hz. All the changes in the Bromberg track are really below 50 Hz. This is actually good news if you do hear a difference. When I still had my LS, after pulling the mids down a bit, the whole balance was better. I could easily hear all the bass on Victor Wooten's bass on the Flecktones CDs. Granted, it wasn't booming, but was there and satisfying to me. Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzannucci Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 At this point, I decided to investigate the reasons why it sounded so bad. My tool of choice: the freeware tool Audacity. The Audacity audio editor was one of the things that came with this USB plug-in device allowing L-R in and out audio connections. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the compression and general messing up going on. Hopefully I can transfer some old vinyl into digits. http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/UCA222.aspx If you can find a Creative Labs X-Fi Elite Pro http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1877574,00.asp It allows you to do 24/96 and has a built in phono preamp if needed. Not easy to track down though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 e Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I'm actually surprised that you could hear any real changes from La Scala bass bins only, which really begin to roll off at ~70 Hz. All the changes in the Bromberg track are really below 50 Hz. This is actually good news if you do hear a difference. Your Normalize settings are good. I moved the maximum amplitude up to -0.3dB which is the maximum that it should be according to various sources, not the least of which is the DR Database guys. I don't normally recommend checking "normalize each track separately" because if you have a low frequency spike in one of the tracks but not the other (usually because someone bumped a microphone physically during recording), that track will be significantly reduced in amplitude relative to the other track. Sometimes, however, there are LF artifacts left on one track after normalization that induce DC bias on that track at the ends, resulting in a small "click" when the track starts and stops. You can also use "fade in" and "fade out" on the ends of the problem track to zero the trace at each end. Chris Yeah, it's softer on the LaScala's for sure but it is still there. Subs are getting closer to the top of my "Projects" list. I've got Claude's bass bins half built now and subs are going to be next I think. I heard "Blue Bossa" on an incredible system and setup over a year ago and it is clearly burned into my memory! Do you mind sharing your EQ from that track or do you remember if it varied much from the other track? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Back in the olden days, we turned up the bass and treble knobs. Real time curve adjustment. The fancy new AVR's aren't so easy to do this with, particularly since CD mixes are all over the place. You can EQ a source by navigating through settings, but it is slow and cumbersome to say the least. Definitely not as simple as walking up to your receiver and turning a bass pot. I like your idea of remixing to your own taste and having a digital library of music. To me, this makes a digital library a worthwhile project for anybody who loves music. All of my songs are on iTunes. I know I can remix the songs I ripped, but I wonder how hard it will be to remix a song I purchased from iTunes. I can burn iTunes purchased songs to CD, rip back to computer as flac, remix as you showed, import back into iTunes from new flac, and have now 2 copies of the same song in iTunes. Perhaps hide the original, so the remixed one only shows. I still want to use iTunes as big of a pain as it is. I am familiar with it, and I have an iPhone, an AppleTV, and iTunes on my computers. edit: I am going to look into virtual CD RW applications. I'm reading up on TotalMounter right now. second edit: looks like the easiest is AudioCDBurner Edited January 28, 2015 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axz Hout Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 f Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 OK, I am stumped and need some help. The program I linked to does not work with Windows 8.1, and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to make FLAC files from iTunes files so I can process them unless I burn individual CD's, then rip them back into something like foobar as flacs. Are there any other ways which are faster? Waiting on CD's to burn then ripping them is gonna take a long long time.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babadono Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Chris, I am wondering if this device would have any merit in restoring this lost bass in an easy peasy way: http://dbxpro.com/en-US/products/120a Certainly not as accurate but easier on the fly adjustments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 OK, I am stumped and need some help. The program I linked to does not work with Windows 8.1, and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to make FLAC files from iTunes files so I can process them unless I burn individual CD's, then rip them back into something like foobar as flacs. Are there any other ways which are faster? Waiting on CD's to burn then ripping them is gonna take a long long time.... Dbpoweramp can convert just about anything into anything quickly. Audacity can open and save your FLAC files. I don't mind having two copies of FLACs... I just add to the album name something like "EQ Test" or similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Chris, I am wondering if this device would have any merit in restoring this lost bass in an easy peasy way: http://dbxpro.com/en-US/products/120a Certainly not as accurate but easier on the fly adjustments? Seems like the crossover would be a little high? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Chris, I am wondering if this device would have any merit in restoring this lost bass in an easy peasy way: http://dbxpro.com/en-US/products/120a Certainly not as accurate but easier on the fly adjustments? You could certainly do that. Note that this unit says that it's "synthesizing" bass, whereas this process shown above is simply re-equalizing what's already there on the tracks. If you're using a music player (like foobar2000 or the like), you could easily program in some sort of boost curve using a parametric equalizer add-in to approximate the equalization curves found above, and you could save your hard earned bucks. It's your choice, clearly. Chris Edited January 28, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted January 28, 2015 Moderators Share Posted January 28, 2015 Have you come across any CDs that either didn't have rolled off bass or the hump? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyrc Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) I'm actually surprised that you could hear any real changes from La Scala bass bins only, which really begin to roll off at ~70 Hz. All the changes in the Bromberg track are really below 50 Hz. This is actually good news if you do hear a difference. ... Chris Yeah, it's softer on the LaScala's for sure but it is still there. ... The Belle Klipsch is supposed to be very much like a La Scala, and our Belle center channel (in my room) has an actual peak at 60 Hz, and in rolling off below that still will growl softly at 40 Hz. Our Klipschorns will growl cleanly at about 28 Hz, and will emit a faint, slightly distorted bass sound at 24 Hz, then, below that, becomes inaudible, and invisible on a REW curve Back in the olden days, we turned up the bass and treble knobs. Real time curve adjustment. ... How I wish they would bring them back! The "real" tone controls on my Marantz, only have a range of +/- 6 dB, whereas tone controls in the old days sometimes had +/- 20 for the bass, and a little less for the treble (Dyna, McIntosh, Luxman). I don't use the virtual sliders on the Marantz, because they turn off Audyssey (which does a good job on the rest of the spectrum, but is bass-shy, at least in our room, and is not intended for correction of idiocy in the production of CDs). Edited January 28, 2015 by Garyrc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 On 1/28/2015 at 2:55 PM, dwilawyer said: 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 Diana Krall - Stepping Out (except low bass below 50 Hz, which is rolled off) Paquito D'Rivera - Portraits of Cuba Lyle Lovett - Joshua Judges Ruth, Lyle Lovett and His Large Band 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 Peter White - Promenade Thelonius Monk - Monk's Dream James Taylor - (studio albums after Never Die Young) Grover Washington - Winelight James Newton Howard and Friends (Sheffield Lab) Don Harriss - Elevations Vince Guaraldi Trio - A Boy Named Charlie Brown Stereophile Test Discs 1-3 (most tracks) Jerry Junkin - Dallas Wind Symphony - Holidays and Epiphanies ... The Music of Ron Nelson Dunedin Consort - The Messiah (Linn records) Leo Kottke - 1971-1976 Did You Hear Me? Redbird - Redbird Erick Leinsdorf and the LA Philharmonic, The Leinsdorf Sessions Vol. 1 (Sheffield Lab) 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. (EDIT 19 July 2016) I've looked at virtually all my discs and have found that classical albums suffer as much, if not more than pre-1991 popular music (rock and its derivatives, soul, R&B, blues, etc.), before hard-core multi-band compression was used in mastering. After 1991, most of the popular music albums that I've examined are categorically trashed by comparison. It takes a great deal of unmastering effort to partially restore these discs that were newly produced in the last 25 years (i.e., not remastered old albums). Virtually all CDs from 1983-1991 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, Chris 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet_Hollow Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 This CD right here....one of the best sounding pop albums I've got, no joke. Overall 13 DR rating with a couple tracks above that. Sounds friggin' amazing when dialed in correctly. The Pat Benatar songs will clear all the headroom your system has tucked away. They positively slam. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cradeldorf Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Oddly enough I think I see what your doing here, It looks alot 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 It looks like dbPoweramp is going to work great to convert the iTunes songs to FLAC. I tested a couple and it is very fast. I'm excited to get started on my favorite songs. 1 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.