Steven Wilson Non-Donna Summer Requests

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There's a few issues that come into play with RUSH and some of those classic albums you have mentioned.

The reason why we don't have 5.1 mixes for albums like "Hemispheres" and "Permanent Waves" is because either some or all of the multitrack tapes are missing. (PW in particular I have heard is really a lost cause…)
Plus, RUSH are not likely to go outside of Rich Chycki for their surround mixing work as they have worked with him on all of these classic surround mixes and live DVDs for the past 10 years. Many people on here don't like Chycki's mixing, but as long as the band does, they will continue to work with him, and that's just the way it is.

Chycki :(
 
I still believe it is the band that is dictating to Chycki as to how the mixes should be. I've said it before but you only have to listen to Trapeze: The Collection Tom Cochrane to hear what nice 5.1 mixing Chycki is capable of.

Why is the ONLY Blu Ray he did not mix MUCH less compressed then? Coincidence? I think not. Some engineers like to compress the hell out of music, they get a kick out of it, it is fun for them. I mean literally. I have spoke to mastering engineers who LAUGH about it.
 
Why is the ONLY Blu Ray he did not mix MUCH less compressed then? Coincidence? I think not. Some engineers like to compress the hell out of music, they get a kick out of it, it is fun for them. I mean literally. I have spoke to mastering engineers who LAUGH about it.

I'm not an audio tech guy so I have to ask - is compression done in the mixing stage or the mastering stage? The conversation to this point has been about the Rush 5.1 mixes.
 
I'm not an audio tech guy so I have to ask - is compression done in the mixing stage or the mastering stage? The conversation to this point has been about the Rush 5.1 mixes.

Yeah folks, we're getting SERIOUSLY OT here as this is a thread about "Non-Donna Summer Requests", which is ironic in that not only was this thread started because the Donna Summer thread was going OT, but Steven Wilson is not here to take requests for 5.1 remixes as he mixes what he wants to from what he's offered.

But, I absolutely must disagree with Keenly on the point that Engineers "love" to compress the hell out of mixes and masters purely for their own enjoyment.
No, that's not why it's done. It's done because many artists like their music to compete at the same or higher volume than their competitors on CD, radio, and online.
Engineers are beholden to whoever's got the money and is commissioning their services. Sure they might be able to persuade their clients that more compression/limiting is not always what's best, but at the end of the day, what the artist wants, the artist gets.

And to answer wavelength's question, the answer is both. I'll use compression at the mixing stage to shape the sound of individual instruments and the overall mix, but when mastering, I use compression mostly to limit the dynamic range and get it louder than it was in its purely mixed form.

It's absolutely true that compression & limiting on top of compression & limiting can sometimes do damage to the sound of a mix or master, but compression in itself is NEVER a bad thing when used correctly IMO.
 
Yeah folks, we're getting SERIOUSLY OT here as this is a thread about "Non-Donna Summer Requests", which is ironic in that not only was this thread started because the Donna Summer thread was going OT, but Steven Wilson is not here to take requests for 5.1 remixes as he mixes what he wants to from what he's offered.

But, I absolutely must disagree with Keenly on the point that Engineers "love" to compress the hell out of mixes and masters purely for their own enjoyment.
No, that's not why it's done. It's done because many artists like their music to compete at the same or higher volume than their competitors on CD, radio, and online.
Engineers are beholden to whoever's got the money and is commissioning their services. Sure they might be able to persuade their clients that more compression/limiting is not always what's best, but at the end of the day, what the artist wants, the artist gets.

And to answer wavelength's question, the answer is both. I'll use compression at the mixing stage to shape the sound of individual instruments and the overall mix, but when mastering, I use compression mostly to limit the dynamic range and get it louder than it was in its purely mixed form.

It's absolutely true that compression & limiting on top of compression & limiting can sometimes do damage to the sound of a mix or master, but compression in itself is NEVER a bad thing when used correctly IMO.

(In a friendly manner!)
Limiting and the loudness wars is a lot of BULLSHIT...Why? cause ALL BROADCAST , radio, TV, etc. COMPRESS AND LIMIT the signal, so , yes, if you LIMIT the SHIT out of a mix , it'll sound a BIT louder but NOT MUCH LOUDER...
Anyway...compression is a very finnicky thing, and it should be INVISIBLE...BARELY touching the signal...use it as a "sonic" glue
 
Back
Top