OK, finally made it to listen to the song on proper headphones and now it sounds better – but also worse. The track is full of clippings, very incompetent production job! Brickwalled to the max and beyond … all the crackling and clicks you can hear almost constantly are not some futuristic percussion effects but simply cut-off wave forms. It's appalling to hear (and see) such a thing in a puportedly professional production! This wouldn't even happen to amateurs. Whoever in their team is responsible for this should immediately be fired – no, wait, what if it was Mick himself … LOL

Here's a screenshot from WaveLab, shortly after three seconds into the song. No matter where you look into the file you find such clippings. The file is the official .wav file I bought from qobuz.com. They charged me 2 EUR for this. I should ask my money back.



As for Mick's voice, I don't really hear a vocoder. His lead vocals are often doubled unisono an octave down. Whether by himself or someone else I can't tell (and I'm not eager to find out).

Here are some vocoder examples. The first one is from a 1965 German SciFi series, the countdown starting at ca. 9". My first time to hear a vocoded voice (when I saw the replay in 1967): [youtu.be] , a demo: [www.youtube.com] , a fun one: [www.youtube.com] , and Kraftwerk used vocoders constantly: [www.youtube.com] [www.youtube.com]

Quote
doitywoik
OK, finally made it to listen to the song on proper headphones and now it sounds better – but also worse. The track is full of clippings, very incompetent production job! Brickwalled to the max and beyond … all the crackling and clicks you can hear almost constantly are not some futuristic percussion effects but simply cut-off wave forms. It's appalling to hear (and see) such a thing in a puportedly professional production! This wouldn't even happen to amateurs. Whoever in their team is responsible for this should immediately be fired – no, wait, what if it was Mick himself … LOL

Here's a screenshot from WaveLab, shortly after three seconds into the song. No matter where you look into the file you find such clippings. The file is the official .wav file I bought from qobuz.com. They charged me 2 EUR for this. I should ask my money back.

As for Mick's voice, I don't really hear a vocoder. His lead vocals are often doubled unisono an octave down. Whether by himself or someone else I can't tell (and I'm not eager to find out).

Here are some vocoder examples. The first one is from a 1965 German SciFi series, the countdown starting at ca. 9". My first time to hear a vocoded voice (when I saw the replay in 1967): [youtu.be] , a demo: [www.youtube.com] , a fun one: [www.youtube.com] , and Kraftwerk used vocoders constantly: [www.youtube.com] [www.youtube.com]

No offense, but YAWN.
Sounds great to these ears. Particularly given the fashion it had to be created.

This doesn't have to do with the fashion it was created. It simply sounds awful and it could have been avoided. I'll return to listen to it over the laptop speakers.

Interesting to hear someone else's perspective even if it goes against my own opinion (I love the tune), especially when you lay out all the technical stuff like that doitywoik.
That chart all looks like a foreign language to me, but does it tell you anything about Charlie's drumming being tampered with? I think the term was "quantized"...
As for Mick's vocals, you say you don't really hear a vocoder,but Ian mentioned it was a Melodyne which someone else said is a fancy word for vocoder.
Personally I don't hear a vocoder at all, but still think there's some sort of minor effect used in a couple spots, and more than just a doubling of his vocals.
It has the curvy/bendy effect going on to my ears, but you think that was done by doubling Micks vocals? Or maybe Mick's vocals being blended with Matt Clifford's?

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Blah, blah,blah. You techno-nerds sure know how to suck the life out of what is a pretty good Stones song. By the time you get to page 100 of this thread all you'll be hearing are 0's and 1's. You really need to get a hobby other than hanging around here, virus or no. Wake up and smell the #%&*%# roses!

Quote
doitywoik
This doesn't have to do with the fashion it was created. It simply sounds awful and it could have been avoided. I'll return to listen to it over the laptop speakers.

Still yawn.
I'll respectfully disagree with your opinion that the speed and circumstances the single was rushed out during a pandemic doesn't have anything to do with "it".(assuming, despite your tech-pertice and data, there is an "it").

No disrespect, but it's a bit like eating a really, really good sausage.
Someone then says, "Any idea what they put in that sausage? It's rubbish.

And I reply, "I could care less, this is a great, great, sausage".
Like that

Quote
northof49
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Blah, blah,blah. You techno-nerds sure know how to suck the life out of what is a pretty good Stones song. By the time you get to page 100 of this thread all you'll be hearing are 0's and 1's. You really need to get a hobby other than hanging around here, virus or no. Wake up and smell the #%&*%# roses!

LOL, and true. The wilted whiners who devote so much time on nonsense, I am so thankful for the life I live.

Does Merry Clayton's voice also distort in Gimme Shelter, amateurs in that case? Maybe yes, but they made a masterpiece.

The 12 string in Wild Horses has distortion in places. Amateurs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 12:03 by DandelionPowderman.

Really honestly haven’t the Stones always tinkered with their studio efforts, maybe more so on their most solid works? When Jagger says he doesn’t want to make a good album but a great album lookout...haha. Layers of guitars, added instruments and vocals. They have their own unique method to their wonderful madness



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 12:44 by Maindefender.

Quote
Hairball
Interesting to hear someone else's perspective even if it goes against my own opinion (I love the tune), especially when you lay out all the technical stuff like that doitywoik.
That chart all looks like a foreign language to me, but does it tell you anything about Charlie's drumming being tampered with? I think the term was "quantized"...
As for Mick's vocals, you say you don't really hear a vocoder,but Ian mentioned it was a Melodyne which someone else said is a fancy word for vocoder.
Personally I don't hear a vocoder at all, but still think there's some sort of minor effect used in a couple spots, and more than just a doubling of his vocals.
It has the curvy/bendy effect going on to my ears, but you think that was done by doubling Micks vocals? Or maybe Mick's vocals being blended with Matt Clifford's?

It seems a virtual drum...a glacial sound.
The drum it's the only thing i don't like about this song and i had the same negative feeling with "Hide Away"; a good song with a virtual drum.
[youtu.be]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 14:19 by KRiffhard.

Quote
doitywoik
OK, finally made it to listen to the song on proper headphones and now it sounds better – but also worse. The track is full of clippings, very incompetent production job! Brickwalled to the max and beyond … all the crackling and clicks you can hear almost constantly are not some futuristic percussion effects but simply cut-off wave forms. It's appalling to hear (and see) such a thing in a puportedly professional production! This wouldn't even happen to amateurs. Whoever in their team is responsible for this should immediately be fired – no, wait, what if it was Mick himself … LOL

Here's a screenshot from WaveLab, shortly after three seconds into the song. No matter where you look into the file you find such clippings. The file is the official .wav file I bought from qobuz.com. They charged me 2 EUR for this. I should ask my money back.

At least you got true .wav file. That 'new' Honk album that was distributed by highresaudio.com contains mqa files that were converted improperly. I.e. they offer you something that is not 'high resolution' at all. Although, who cares about HD sound if Dynamic Range is 5 or 6 .

Quote
northof49
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Blah, blah,blah. You techno-nerds sure know how to suck the life out of what is a pretty good Stones song. By the time you get to page 100 of this thread all you'll be hearing are 0's and 1's. You really need to get a hobby other than hanging around here, virus or no. Wake up and smell the #%&*%# roses!

+1

I just listen to a song as a whole if it swings then that’s good enough for me.

Can’t see the point in dissecting a song as I find that all abit strange.

Ghost town is a good song and I’m pleased with the outcome.

Look how Keith said he played around with his acoustic guitar to distort the sound
for street fighting man.

Most artist tinker about in the studio with all sort of gizmo’s to get the sound they want.

It's quite a good tune. And of course I'm happy they released something at all.

But I have problems with the drumming/sound/mix.

All later Stones stuff with similar drum grooves/mixes - there are a few - I just don't like.
It even ruins the song to me.

Quote
doitywoik
As for Mick's voice, I don't really hear a vocoder. His lead vocals are often doubled unisono an octave down. Whether by himself or someone else I can't tell (and I'm not eager to find out).

It's a vocoder. Or whatever the brand name of it is that they used, which has been pointed out as a possibility (flying boat, float plane - all fall under seaplane).

Doubling a vocal does not make it sound like it's going in and out of a bubble - otherwise that sound would be on A LOT of Stones albums and it's not. That "observation" does not and will not fly. It's bunk.

U2 used one on their last LP. The problem some people may have with comprehending that it is one is that it's not all whacked out like how T-Pain uses one - with U2 and the Stones it's way more subtle.

Keith says he “ain’t no pop star anymore”, but as long as he works with Mick he has no choice...lol get over it you can balance even at your age. ><

Interesting take by doitywork. I am blessed by a bad equipment, bad ears and a sheer ignorance, so I just enjoy the outcome...

But from the base of little I know, and taken what doitywork says, the problem seems to be the over-use of compression: overdoing that for such a track that is a pretty under-produced in many places, that is, there is a lot of empty space and room, the landcape is not all filled all kind of 'loud' things. The song has 'ups' and 'downs', the hills and alleys, so to speak. However, as the idea of compression is to put all loud front, every damn nuance hitting your face, the cost seems to be the "crackling" and "clicking" in places, especially in moments when there is more happening on the track. In the past, that all would have been settled with right balance, depth and dynamics.

I think the track is over-all well produced but the final touch of putting it all through compression is the one to put blame here (but for me, that's just a theoretical issue, since I can only see it with my eyes in that screenshot of WaveLab, but it doesn't bother my ears). But, however, that seem to be the norm nowadays: sonical landscape is created to work best in the mediums it is thought to be played most (radio, streaming and not so great speakers/headphones). This makes it violete some ears and eyes. The days of records were made to please the ears of audiophiles are long one...

So downgrade your system if you want to enjoy most current music...

- Doxa

If there are such vast differences in volume, how can compression be the main problem?

To me, the dynamics seem fine on Living In A Ghost Town. Compared with lots of other new singles our boys have done well with the production. It takes us on a sonic journey, with highs and lows, and sterility and general, monotonous loudness is NOT a problem.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 20:20 by DandelionPowderman.

Wondering if the Ghost Town vinyl will have a different mix - that was the case for Roger Waters' recent solo album, and the audiophiles praised it over the cd and digital mix's.
Not that it really matters too much to me either way as I enjoy the mix I'm hearing right now whether on laptop speakers, proper quality headphones, etc., but my hearing's probably not what it used to be.
I think in general terms, vinyl will most always have a better quality sound, but alot of that's down to personal preference.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 20:29 by Hairball.

It will have a different mastering and most likely the same mix.

I guess I meant to say different mastering...I think...admittedly not an audiophile/expert on such detailed matters.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

So I might learn and understand a little better...
In the case of the Roger Waters solo album - there were people saying the cd and digital were WAY overcompressed, whereas the vinyl was much better in almost every way.
That was due to the mastering vs. the mixing?

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

"Living In A Ghost Town" top charting positions as of 5.10.2020:

Swiss Singles Top 100 (#17)
Germany Singles Top 100 (#22)
Portugal Singles Top 50 (#37)
Austria Singles Top 75 (#53)
UK Singles Top 75 (#63)
Canada Singles Top 100 (#74)
US Bubbling Under Hot 100 (#6)

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If there are such vast differences in volume, how can compression be the main problem?

To me, the dynamics seem fine on Living In A Ghost Town. Compared with lots of other new singles our boys have done well with the production. It takes us on a sonic journey, with highs and lows, and sterility and general, monotonous loudness is NOT a problem.

I don't know, man... Like I said this this is totally theoretical problem for me, since all my ears say is exactly the same as yours do. Generally when I have a 'hearing issue' with compression that is that bloody monotoneus loudness that has no sonical dynamics and depth. This track has not that problem at all. The way I interpret what doitywoik says with 'cracklings' and 'clicks', supported by the graphics, is that the track constantly hits those 'over-the-top' or distorted moments, probably when there is there is more 'thicker' musical flow or peak going on. Those moments 'suffer' by over-compression because the rest of the stuff is emphasizied by 'normal-sounding' compression. I guess the effect is similar like what you said of the acoustic guitar of "Wild Horses", or like terry said of the odd sound of Keith's acoustic guitar in "Street Fighting Man" based on, if we are to be honest, nothing but a technical shortage of cassette recorder (bloody hell, the whole idea electric guitars sounding 'distorted' derives from the guys playing the shit out of the amps...)

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-05-10 21:44 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If there are such vast differences in volume, how can compression be the main problem?

To me, the dynamics seem fine on Living In A Ghost Town. Compared with lots of other new singles our boys have done well with the production. It takes us on a sonic journey, with highs and lows, and sterility and general, monotonous loudness is NOT a problem.

I don't know, man... Like I said this this is totally theoretical problem for me, since all my ears say is exactly the same as yours do. Generally when I have a 'hearing issue' with compression that it that bloody monotoneus loudness that has no sonical dynamics and depth. This track has not that problem at all. The way I interpret what doitywoik says with 'cracklings' and 'clicks', supported by the graphics, is that the track constantly hits those 'over-the-top' or distorted moments, probably when there is there is more 'thicker' musical flow or peak going on. Those moments 'suffer' by over-compression because the rest of the stuff is emphasizied by 'normal-sounding' compression. I guess the effect is similar like what you said of the acoustic guitar of "Wild Horses", or like terry said of the odd sound of Keith's acoustic guitar in "Street Fighting Man" based on, if we are to be honest, nothing but a technical shortage of cassette recorder (bloody hell, the whole idea electric guitars sounding 'distorted' derives from the guys playing the shit out of the amps...)

- Doxa

Yeah, it could be as easy as one instrument/the vocals is recorded too loudly at one or two spots in the song, and the band and the co-producer thought it sounded good anyway.

Can't say I'm hearing it myself on Spotify, with the "very high quality"-settings.

Has anyone seen the edit version for sale? I'll probably convert it from YouTube at some point so I can have both versions.

Would've figured the version on HONK would be the edit considering how many songs are edit versions but it's the LP version.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If there are such vast differences in volume, how can compression be the main problem?

To me, the dynamics seem fine on Living In A Ghost Town. Compared with lots of other new singles our boys have done well with the production. It takes us on a sonic journey, with highs and lows, and sterility and general, monotonous loudness is NOT a problem.

What fine dynamics are you talking about for LIAGT?
Dynamic Range is 6 for this track.
Here are the values for file from qobuz.com (I have HR flac 24/88,2 for analysis).

Left Right

Peak Value: -0.30 dB --- -0.30 dB
Avg RMS: -8.45 dB --- -8.58 dB
DR channel: 5.97 dB --- 6.03 dB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Official DR Value: DR6

It is compressed in digital domain to death. There is no breath and space between the instruments. Every second you got a couple of distorted 'shaved' peaks that 'hit the flat roof'. Surely, you will not hear those on cheap computer audio or gadget. But even on medium class stereo it is very unpleasant.

There are parts of a song that are a bit lower in volume, than the others, but it is no dynamics.

These values are not any better than for Doom and Gloom or Blue and Lonesome songs. BTW, most of the songs on B&L original CD came with 'shaved' peaks too. DAG is mastered a notch better, it does not have 'shaved' peaks. Even all those Vault releases are mastered better, although compressed to DR6-DR7.

PS. Songs with the best Dynamic Range on the CDs of The Rolling Stones are
DR18 07-Back To Zero
DR17 05-Too Rude
DR16 10-Sleep Tonight
DR15 01-One Hit (To The Body)
DR15 02-Fight
DR15 04-Hold Back
DR15 09-Had It With You
DR14 03-Harlem Shuffle
DR14 08-Dirty Work
All came from old good originally mastered CBS CD from 1986 (no matter what country of origin). Some old CBS CDs like Black And Blue, Some Girls, Emotional Rescue and Tattoo You are among the best in terms of dynamics. Some songs on those also hit DR14-DR15 range.

PPS I hate 2009 remasters too.

Quote
GasLightStreet
Has anyone seen the edit version for sale? I'll probably convert it from YouTube at some point so I can have both versions.

Would've figured the version on HONK would be the edit considering how many songs are edit versions but it's the LP version.

New version of HONK (2020) came with regular LIAGT - 4.07. At least the one that is distributed by highresaudio.com

[en.wikipedia.org]