Gaffaweb > Love & Anger > 1992-35 > [ Date Index | Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]


Re: Sound quality / Peter Gabriel's "Us"

From: fester@parnasus.dell.com (George Ludwig)
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1992 18:53:46 GMT
Subject: Re: Sound quality / Peter Gabriel's "Us"
Content-Length: 2737
Content-Type: text
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Organization: Dell Computer Co
References: <1992Dec6.063412.18189@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@raid.dell.com (Net News Admin)

uribe@xenon.stanford.edu (Tomas Uribe) writes:

>There's been some discussion here about the quality of
>the recording of "The Sensual World", and I'm now wondering
>if anybody has any comments concerning that of Peter Gabriel's
>"Us"...

>Apparently "Us" was recorded using some novel technique or another,
>but IMHO the sound is noticeably inferior to that of, say, "So" or
>"Security" (which came out 10 years before!) --- just as that of
>TSW compared to HOL or TD ...

>Am I going deaf, or is this true???

>NOTE: I certainly believe that good music trascends technical limitations
>(as is the case with the above-mentioned albums), but still,
>it strikes me as strange that musicians such as these would
>allow a decrease in the quality of their recordings..

While I'm still not sure about my position on TSW, I must agree that
my first reaction on listening to US was that the sound quality was
very muffled. There's like no high end to be found on the record. I'm
not sure what "novel technique" you're referring to, but I recall
reading on the liner notes that many of the rythm tracks were
originally recorded on location in the early 80's. God only knows what
Peter was using for a deck...nagra? 14-bit Casio DAT? Walkman
Professional? But I suspect that he used a lot of these ryhtms
(recorded under less-than-ideal circumstances) and didn't want to make
them stand out for their lack of quality. Thus, (and this is merely a
theory) the "subdued" mix of most of the other tracks. 

Another thing I noticed (I'll have to listen to it again to find
exactly the cut/time) I'm pretty convinced I hear a bad vocal edit. It
sounds like Peter didn't like the first part of the phrase he sang and
wiped it until this high note. Well, when you do that there tends to
be a pretty obvious artifact left over, i.e. the attack of the note is
unnatural sounding. In this particular case, if fairly leapt out at me
and I had to wonder why Peter, who is a d*mn good singer, would not
just re-take it. There is of course the possibility that the edit was
done during mix-down, and Peter wasn't available to redo it. (I have a
small studio myself, and have tried to similar edits, and wound up
re-doing the whole thing 'cause the edit was too obvious).

All in all, I agree with you. It really sounds like a throwback to
before STM. I still haven't heard any problems with TSW, though <G>.

George Ludwig
fester@parnasus.dell.com
-- 
******************************************************************************
George Ludwig                   | "The flame that burns twice as bright 
fester@parnasus.dell.com        | burns half as long...revel in your time!"
Austin, TX                      | The Opions expressed are mine blah blah blah