Hot Cakes - the new The Darkness Album.
Discussion
Ignoring any artistic criticism, but is it just me or is the mix a mess? It all sounds a fuzzy mess to me - really hard to listen to, and it's not just me but my dad thought the same too.
I'm not listening to it on any high end kit, just my half decent home CD set-up and also the crappy system in my old Merc (which is going to get an upgrade asap), but obviously I listen to lots of other music on these systems, so I have a reference.
Critically? Well, I took a chance as it was only £8 and I was hoping that it would be as good as the first Darkness Album. I didn't really enjoy the second one they did, and this appears to be on the same level as that one.
I'll try and give it a few more listens, but the mix is really making it difficult!
I'm not listening to it on any high end kit, just my half decent home CD set-up and also the crappy system in my old Merc (which is going to get an upgrade asap), but obviously I listen to lots of other music on these systems, so I have a reference.
Critically? Well, I took a chance as it was only £8 and I was hoping that it would be as good as the first Darkness Album. I didn't really enjoy the second one they did, and this appears to be on the same level as that one.
I'll try and give it a few more listens, but the mix is really making it difficult!
I've only given it one listen and I didn't notice any clipping kind of sound especially. Though now you mention it I think you have a point. In comparison with an Alter Bridge album I've been listening to recently the sound levels are similar, but the Alter Bridge album doesn't seem to have those maxed out levels kind of sounds that the Darkness album has.
Musically, I don't think One Way Ticket To Hell And Back was nearly as good as Permission To Land. That first album was full of fantastic riffs and solos and just gelled.
As for the new one, I'll have to listen more to decide.
Musically, I don't think One Way Ticket To Hell And Back was nearly as good as Permission To Land. That first album was full of fantastic riffs and solos and just gelled.
As for the new one, I'll have to listen more to decide.
From a production perspective it does sound like a victim of the 'loudness' wars; there's clear compression and the drums especially sound horrible and the higher frequencies sound like they're almost missing completely (cymbals are lost in the mix) and it has no real bottom end to speak of. Look at the difference in the spectral analysis between this and a randomly-selected Alter Bridge track (as they were mentioned earlier):
[Click for large versions]
The intensity of the colour shows how hard the levels are being pushed and the height of the bars on the graph show the frequency range.
The Darkness' track is being pushed much harder and for some reason seems to have no frequencies above 20kHz. The Alter Bridge track has greater dynamic range and punch, with much greater clarity. That said, it's not the best-produced 'rock' album I've heard. Compare with Poets Of The Fall's 'Temple of Thought' which sounds absolutely fantastic:
Whoever mixed The Darkness smashed the granny out of the gain.
[Click for large versions]
The intensity of the colour shows how hard the levels are being pushed and the height of the bars on the graph show the frequency range.
The Darkness' track is being pushed much harder and for some reason seems to have no frequencies above 20kHz. The Alter Bridge track has greater dynamic range and punch, with much greater clarity. That said, it's not the best-produced 'rock' album I've heard. Compare with Poets Of The Fall's 'Temple of Thought' which sounds absolutely fantastic:
Whoever mixed The Darkness smashed the granny out of the gain.
A couple of the later tracks were OK, suspect they may have been mixed and produced by someone else. Would be interesting to know if that's the case.
Heh, here we go - this explains the rubbish sound:
Just to compare with what a 'quality' recording looks like, here's a spectral of Dire Straits' 'Money For Nothing' taken from a vinyl rip with 24-bit 96kHz resolution:
Predictably, it sounds phenomenal.
Heh, here we go - this explains the rubbish sound:
Wiki Entry said:
Recording
The majority of the album was recorded at guitarist Dan Hawkins' home, Leeders Farm, in Norfolk.
Discussing the album in comparison to the band's previous two studio albums, Permission to Land (2003) and One Way Ticket to Hell... and Back (2005), drummer Ed Graham noted, "I think that we all feel that the second Darkness album is a bit over produced and maybe lost its way in places, a bit. I think we wanted to return to the form we were in; we wanted to make something that was more like Permission to Land than the second album."
My bold. Not recorded in a proper studio and they felt the last one was 'over-produced'. Well that's where the quality went out the window then.The majority of the album was recorded at guitarist Dan Hawkins' home, Leeders Farm, in Norfolk.
Discussing the album in comparison to the band's previous two studio albums, Permission to Land (2003) and One Way Ticket to Hell... and Back (2005), drummer Ed Graham noted, "I think that we all feel that the second Darkness album is a bit over produced and maybe lost its way in places, a bit. I think we wanted to return to the form we were in; we wanted to make something that was more like Permission to Land than the second album."
Just to compare with what a 'quality' recording looks like, here's a spectral of Dire Straits' 'Money For Nothing' taken from a vinyl rip with 24-bit 96kHz resolution:
Predictably, it sounds phenomenal.
Edited by Funk on Saturday 25th August 11:04
This thread caused me to do some thinking about bad remasters I've heard and wanted to show how something can be taken and made to sound worse under the pretence of being made to sound 'better'. Below are two more versions of 'Money For Nothing'. The top one is from the 1985 CD, ripped to FLAC in 16bit/44kHz - nothing flashy. The bottom one is the same song from the 'Sultans of Swing - Best of Dire Straits' which was released in 1998. Again, this is 16/44. Both tracks have the same peak volume (the maximum 'loudness' that can be encoded into the track) but look at the difference between them - the quieter sounds have been boosted, lowering the overall dynamic range and making the song seem initially 'louder' and superficially more 'punchy' on the 'Best of' version.
However, on switching directly between the two tracks (muting one, then the other) and adjusting the volume to suit shows that the earlier original recording is by far the more superior.
Beware the 'remastering' hype - it often has a detrimental effect!
However, on switching directly between the two tracks (muting one, then the other) and adjusting the volume to suit shows that the earlier original recording is by far the more superior.
Beware the 'remastering' hype - it often has a detrimental effect!
I only downloaded it this morning (£3.99 on Amazon), and have only listened to it once on my iMac but i didn't notice anything awful. Will give it a proper listen in the car later though, hopefully i don't hear the roughness because that would somewhat ruin the album for me.
...just like St Anger, some good songs on there but the piss poor recording means i only listen to it very occasionally.
...just like St Anger, some good songs on there but the piss poor recording means i only listen to it very occasionally.
Funk, I know exactly what you are saying. I've always found remastered albums appear to be trying too hard and slightly artificial sounding. I have never been a believer in high-end audiophile kit, but half decent value for money gear, yet even with my modest setups you can really hear the difference. When I had a decent vinyl setup, the CD just didn't compare and I found myself listening to music I wouldn't usually be interested just to enjoy the quality of the production!
Edited by Emeye on Saturday 25th August 20:30
I can understand what they were trying to achieve but I don't think they have got the balance right, in that it's tipped over too far into "rough" for a recording.
It sounds to me like a gig in a particularly poor acoustic environment.
Vocals not always forward enough and, as has been said, all the drum kit not fully evident.
Then, perhaps that was the intention?
Eta, all that said, I like it, touch of "garage band".
It sounds to me like a gig in a particularly poor acoustic environment.
Vocals not always forward enough and, as has been said, all the drum kit not fully evident.
Then, perhaps that was the intention?
Eta, all that said, I like it, touch of "garage band".
Edited by WhoseGeneration on Thursday 30th August 19:57
Gassing Station | Music | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff