stuff...
-
markee2004
- takin' a dinner break
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:48 am
- Location: Oxford
stuff...
I guess this is a question nobody can REALLY answer, but I have always wondered why there is such a big difference between 80's/90's, and 60's/70's records (and before). Just like if you compare nevermind to seargent peppers say, there is just so much more bass, and the bass sounds just so much more realistic. It almost seems like there was a low frequency cut off point on 60's/70's(/previous) recordings. You can usually hear it especially on the drums. And I suppose I'm just wondering if it was a styallistic choice, or if gear is just better now. Although the white stripes album 'white elephant' was made only with 60's gear, and that sounds more like a modern recording, so it's a tough question. I guess the extremes would be an album like thirteenth step compared to an albm like who's next. I'm just interested to know why they sound so different, because it certainly wasn't the instruments.
you can buy all the equipment in the world but it won't write the music for you.
One of the reasons for the sound difference is that in the days of vinyl records they had to be careful with the bass so that they could fit more minutes of music on each side of the record. If there was a lot of bass the grooves had to be bigger and the record would be shorter. If there was a huge amount of bass the stylus would jump out of the groove. A Morcheeba record simply couldn't have been made in the 60's. In the old days mastering was the process of optimizing the sound of the final mix to better suit the limitations of the cutting lathe.
Record lathe technology did improve in the 70's even before CDs. They came up with better cutter head technology and better pressing systems and you can hear the improvement of vinyl records as the 70's progressed.
Record lathe technology did improve in the 70's even before CDs. They came up with better cutter head technology and better pressing systems and you can hear the improvement of vinyl records as the 70's progressed.
I used to have a copy of Kill "Em All on vinyl. Clocked in at close to 60 minutes. No bottom end at all. Like listening to an am radio.8th_note wrote:One of the reasons for the sound difference is that in the days of vinyl records they had to be careful with the bass so that they could fit more minutes of music on each side of the record. If there was a lot of bass the grooves had to be bigger and the record would be shorter. If there was a huge amount of bass the stylus would jump out of the groove. A Morcheeba record simply couldn't have been made in the 60's. In the old days mastering was the process of optimizing the sound of the final mix to better suit the limitations of the cutting lathe.
Record lathe technology did improve in the 70's even before CDs. They came up with better cutter head technology and better pressing systems and you can hear the improvement of vinyl records as the 70's progressed.
white elephant was recorded with equipment from the 60s...and maybe even mixed, i don't know (can anyone verify that?)...but was likely mastered in a modern environment, which is why it sounds like a 'modern' record.
i would also guess that, in the 60s in particular, more intruments were distance-miced...and that as track limitations became less of a concern, close-micing became more popular.
i would also guess that, in the 60s in particular, more intruments were distance-miced...and that as track limitations became less of a concern, close-micing became more popular.
-
markee2004
- takin' a dinner break
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:48 am
- Location: Oxford
-
Professor
- ghost haunting audio students
- Posts: 3307
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 2:11 pm
- Location: I have arrived... but where the hell am I?
The thing about the record grooves is right on and very true, though it did effect overall volume as well as bass specifically. It's the whole reason the RIAA equalization curve is built into the records and reversed on the phono inputs on your stereo.
But another consideration is that in some case the gear really was different too. Transformers would be among the bigger culprits, particularly the ones inside microphones, but also those in the electronics. Tubes are another factor in bass performance. They both produce very pleasant harmonic distrotions that color the sound, but they also both have trouble passing low frequencies cleanly and articulately. And then there's good old analog tape, which has also been accused of making prettier sounds but also of blurring low ends, of course depending on the type of tape, width of tracks, and even the order or tracks on the tape.
Of course, all those factors can be replicated by recording with 'vintage' gear, but I suspect the modern mastering and also just the modern aesthetic choice is going to effect the sound where some of those specifics are concerned.
-Jeremy
But another consideration is that in some case the gear really was different too. Transformers would be among the bigger culprits, particularly the ones inside microphones, but also those in the electronics. Tubes are another factor in bass performance. They both produce very pleasant harmonic distrotions that color the sound, but they also both have trouble passing low frequencies cleanly and articulately. And then there's good old analog tape, which has also been accused of making prettier sounds but also of blurring low ends, of course depending on the type of tape, width of tracks, and even the order or tracks on the tape.
Of course, all those factors can be replicated by recording with 'vintage' gear, but I suspect the modern mastering and also just the modern aesthetic choice is going to effect the sound where some of those specifics are concerned.
-Jeremy
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 92 guests