Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Anyone else unhappy with the sound on some of the tracks? Especially when there is fuzz in the background. Isn't there technology to take that out? I know the recordings are supposed to be rough and raw, but at least the background noise could be cleaned up so I can crank these tracks on my stereo!
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:36 pm Posts: 2189 Location: Back to Jer-Z
As I've mentioned before, I'm seriously underwhelmed by the quality of stuff that was put on here. And I understand it was culled from the best that they had, but maybe then it's best left on the Outcesticide bootlegs (which we expect to sound crappy) and not a $50-60 major label boxed set.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 4470 Location: Knoxville, TN Gender: Male
SniffleBiscuit wrote:
As I've mentioned before, I'm seriously underwhelmed by the quality of stuff that was put on here. And I understand it was culled from the best that they had, but maybe then it's best left on the Outcesticide bootlegs (which we expect to sound crappy) and not a $50-60 major label boxed set.
I agree. I'm glad I picked it up from Target for cheap.
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:50 pm Posts: 3955 Location: Leaving Here
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I'm pretty happy with it nontheless just for the "new" factor of some of it.
This would be a good thread to add to the boxed set one already started....
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:03 pm Posts: 26481 Location: virginia Gender: Male
i would like to hear all the songs from the box set, but im not much of a nirvana fan anymore, and now hearing about the not so good quallity or the sound, i have a feeling i wont end up getting it.
_________________ what is that a titleist..............Hole in one
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
cltaylor12 wrote:
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I don't buy that. I think once you transfer it to digital you can take out the fuzz from the background. I could be wrong. I mean, I'm no producer, but fuck ... it's 2005. We should have the technology to fix it, or they should have waited longer to release it.
Can I also say that there is a lot of shit on that box set that I really do love!?
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:51 am Posts: 15460 Location: Long Island, New York
just_b wrote:
cltaylor12 wrote:
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I don't buy that. I think once you transfer it to digital you can take out the fuzz from the background. I could be wrong. I mean, I'm no producer, but fuck ... it's 2005. We should have the technology to fix it, or they should have waited longer to release it.
Can I also say that there is a lot of shit on that box set that I really do love!?
How long did you want them to wait? Hardcore fans have been waiting YEARS for something like this.
_________________
lutor3f wrote:
Love is the delightful interval between meeting a beautiful girl and discovering that she looks like a haddock
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:53 pm Posts: 2918 Location: Right next door to hell.
just_b wrote:
cltaylor12 wrote:
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I don't buy that. I think once you transfer it to digital you can take out the fuzz from the background. I could be wrong. I mean, I'm no producer, but fuck ... it's 2005. We should have the technology to fix it, or they should have waited longer to release it.
Can I also say that there is a lot of shit on that box set that I really do love!?
Could they have made it sound better than they did? Possibly..
Can you just 'take out the fuzz' from a recording? No.
It's fairly easy to cut frequencies out of a recording, but tape hiss and other noise found on low-quality recordings covers a wide range of frequencies. Those frequencies are also shared by the guitars, vocals, drums, etc.. You can't just selectively drop the noise but leave the music, even with the latest digital technology.
It would certainly be possible to cut out the noise more than they did on these recordings, but they would be sacrificing the quality of the music, and in a case like that I'm sure they were trying to maintain the best sound quality they could while reducing the noise on the recordings.
A shitty recording is a shitty recording, and no amount of technology can make a 4-track demo sound like it was recorded professionally.
_________________ There's just 2 hours left until you find me dead.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 2:47 pm Posts: 13660 Location: Long Island Gender: Male
owen meany wrote:
just_b wrote:
cltaylor12 wrote:
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I don't buy that. I think once you transfer it to digital you can take out the fuzz from the background. I could be wrong. I mean, I'm no producer, but fuck ... it's 2005. We should have the technology to fix it, or they should have waited longer to release it.
Can I also say that there is a lot of shit on that box set that I really do love!?
Could they have made it sound better than they did? Possibly.. Can you just 'take out the fuzz' from a recording? No.
It's fairly easy to cut frequencies out of a recording, but tape hiss and other noise found on low-quality recordings covers a wide range of frequencies. Those frequencies are also shared by the guitars, vocals, drums, etc.. You can't just selectively drop the noise but leave the music, even with the top digital technology.
It would certainly be possible to cut out the noise more than they did on these recordings, but they would be sacrificing the quality of the music, and in a case like that I'm sure they were trying to maintain the best sound quality they could while reducing the noise on the recordings.
A shitty recording is a shitty recording, and no amount of technology can make a 4-track demo sound like it was recorded professionally.
so there you have it......or maybe not.....to be continued
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Clubber wrote:
owen meany wrote:
just_b wrote:
cltaylor12 wrote:
I don't think they did much "remastering" on anything in particular. Also, for tracks that were recorded onto cassette tape, there probably isn't all that much improvement they can make upon them no matter how hard they try.
I don't buy that. I think once you transfer it to digital you can take out the fuzz from the background. I could be wrong. I mean, I'm no producer, but fuck ... it's 2005. We should have the technology to fix it, or they should have waited longer to release it.
Can I also say that there is a lot of shit on that box set that I really do love!?
Could they have made it sound better than they did? Possibly.. Can you just 'take out the fuzz' from a recording? No.
It's fairly easy to cut frequencies out of a recording, but tape hiss and other noise found on low-quality recordings covers a wide range of frequencies. Those frequencies are also shared by the guitars, vocals, drums, etc.. You can't just selectively drop the noise but leave the music, even with the top digital technology.
It would certainly be possible to cut out the noise more than they did on these recordings, but they would be sacrificing the quality of the music, and in a case like that I'm sure they were trying to maintain the best sound quality they could while reducing the noise on the recordings.
A shitty recording is a shitty recording, and no amount of technology can make a 4-track demo sound like it was recorded professionally.
so there you have it......or maybe not.....to be continued
Yeah, he sounds convincing to me. Probably as solid a resource as you'll get on an internet message board.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
