Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (05/25/90)
Really-From: "Ken." <krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> In response to something I said along the lines of: >> I sincerily hope that Kate figures out that digital is better for her >>listeners even though it's more expensive. I always thought that _The >>Dreaming_ was a great recording. >Yes, but Kate has said why she preferred analog mixing to digital... >the article (interview?) was posted here sometime in the last, oh, 5 months >or so. I have it on file somewhere. Wasn't it because 1) she's more comfortable with analog, 2) digital only had a "crystalline quality" over the analog and 3) digital was more difficult to do in certain cases, while easier than others? Well, I can accept 1). I mean, I'd prefer good KaTe AAD to mediocre KaTe DDD. 2) and 3) are interesting points, but don't really discourage the use of digital (at least in her description.) Frankly, I think if KaTe engineered her AAD recordings correctly they'd be a good match for DDD. She'd be happy because she'd be using analog, and we'd be happy because we could sacrifice our stereo speakers in KaTe's name. Unfortunately, it's too early in the morning for me to be optimistic. >That said, anybody have any idea why _The Dreaming_ CD is AAD? Shouldn't >it be ADD? I always thought it was recorded digitally. Oh well. ADD it is. I think _HoL_ and _TD_ had their AADs and ADDs mixed up. BFD, but interesting. >Confused (and hoping he don't gotta wait 'til '94 for the next KT album), " ( " ), >Jeff >|Jeffrey C. Burka | "On the outskirts of nowhere | >|jburka@silver.ucs.indiana.edu | on the ringroad to somewhere, | >|jburka@amber.ucs.indiana.edu | on the verge of indecision..." --Fish | Ken. ken-b@uiuc.edu
Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (05/30/90)
Really-From: gb10@gte.com (Gregory Bossert) I enter this discussion in the spirit of gentle, learned debate, but I am forced to disagree with the general tenor of this discussion -- I think the production on HoL and TSW is superb. Comparisons with the Dreaming can be misleading; I mean, as a studio tech-head I adore the treatments, processing, etc., on the Dreaming, but then again, those treatments were part of the musical style of the Dreaming (sometimes they _are_ the music...). Personally, I'm more impressed by the subtle touches on HoL: for example, the textures in "Watching You Without Me" are just remarkable. It's the sad truth that artists and producers are subject to the whims of the record companies when it comes to mastering and pressing CDs and LPs, but I haven't heard any serious problems with the UK releases of the last few albums, and I'm listening through good near-field studio monitors. I do admit my (UK) CD of _TKI_ sounds worse to me than my US LP (?!), but then again I've been listening to the vinyl version for a long time -- maybe I'm just used to it. Point is, barring obvious distortion, wierd EQ, etc., production and mastering values are as subject to personal opinion and debate as the music itself. Vickie 'n' Chris, I hope the move goes well. Personally, I love to read your song lists, and seeing as I can't listen to the radio show anyway, I wouldn't mind if you posted lists for imaginary shows during this (hopefully) temporary hiatus from broadcasting. All these TYO stories are making me jealous: still no cable in Belmont MA. Right then. Footah! -greg -- gb10@gte.com -- "Share and Enjoy!"
Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (05/31/90)
Really-From: "Ken Brownfield." <brownfld@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
I agree that the actual production of her music is excellent. The only
part I think could be improved is what goes on these little circular plastic
things called CDs. Kate's mixing and production are a great part of her
music, just like your "The Dreaming" example.
My problem is the Analog. Not even a goddess such as KaTe can overcome
the analog. I've heard analog that is _much_ better than the analog that
comes on the Columbia (read: *gack*) pressing. Now, whether this was
Columbia's lack of brains, or the hiss is from KaTe's masters, I don't know.
But it makes it hard to buy CDs when tapes with Dolby C have less hiss!
I know that Columbia's pressings usually leave much to be desired,
because my EMI America/Manhattan pressings are all good analog. Her _TSW_
singles from EMI (UK) have only marginally better quality than the Columbia
CD. But Kate's music would song truely grand if she used her production
skills with digital. Her music has a lot of silence and a lot of dynamic
parts which show through with digital more so than in analog. IMHO, and a
moot point if she prefers analog that much.
But the fact is, it seems that the sound that's on the Columbia pressing
isn't only from a second master or whatever you want to call it, but it seems
to lose the normal dynamic quality that Kate records. Whether this is just
a master fluke or Kate's design, I don't know, but it doesn't complement her
music, IMHO.
I like _TSW_ a lot (it was my first,) don't get me wrong. But the
music would be much more striking if it came in a better form than is
currently on the Columbia CD pressing.
I listen to Kate's music on MDR-V6s, which are excellent headphones.
I haven't played her music on a good stereo yet, though. I think it's time
to take out a loan. :-)
Ken.
ken-b@uiuc.edu