Finding the Rhythm

Are you people deaf? (OK, not you, them…)

October 2, 2007 at 9:03 pm 1 comment

I don’t often go off on a rant, but brace yourselves, because I’m about to…

I continue to be amazed at what producers and masterers can (and will) do to murder a perfectly good piece of music. With all due respect to the hearing impaired, I have to ask with a fair amount of incredulity, “Are you people deaf?”

There are three major complaints I have here, which are as follows:

Overuse of compression.

I won’t go into a technical explanation of what it is (you can get that at Wikipedia), but while the proper use of compression is critical to any dance or electronica, there’s a lot of producers who grossly overuse it. They tend to get thrown in the waste bin on receipt, so I’m sorry I’m unable to come-up with an example off the top of my head, but I’m referring to a level of compression that causes the audio to have a “pumping” sound. Now, apparently, some people find that pumping to be a plus. I find it as dull, overdone, overused, and tiresome as that Vocoder effect Cher made so trendy in the 90′s. Once is cool. Twice is OK. Three or more times? You’re just a tiresome copycat. Turn the damned compression down already. Or better yet, learn how to use it properly so use can use it for good—rather than evil.

Overdriving the audio to clipping.

I’m no longer that surprised when DJ’s do it at clubs, though I’m still painfully (literally) annoyed. I’m shocked when so-called “professional” sound engineers do it during a concert. But when a producer or CD mastering professional does it ahead of shipping a CD off to the pressing plant, I’m appalled. What am I talking about? Overdriving. Overdriving is the mark of a rank amateur, and yet—surprise!—about 1 in 40 dance promos I receive are overdriven to the point of clipping (i.e., distortion). I’m flabbergasted that any idiot would release a CD with audio so hot (and not in a good way) that it’s effectively ruined.

Once a CD is recorded in this state (or an MP3 track, for that matter), no amount of processing or fixing on the playback side is going to repair the damage or magically make it sound good. Please, people… Learn to use a freakin’ VU meter and actually watch your levels. Even consumer grade audio software shows when the signal is clipping! You guys ought to be able to figure it out with your multi-thousand-dollar gear! *slap*

Overusing or misusing filters and effects.

Dance and electronica wouldn’t be dance or electronica without skillful and effective use of filters and effects, and the use of such things on every loop, track, other tidbit of the composition. I totally “get” that. The specific type of overuse or misuse I’m talking about is when it’s so overused that it gets dull and tiresome. I already mentioned Cher’s use of Vocoder-like effects in her 90′s hits (like Believe) that’s pretty hard to miss. And occasionally (as I also said above), when you’re the first person to come-up with something innovative, it can be fresh and exciting. But overused, whether by other artists or producers being copycats, or even within a single song, it can rapidly become tiresome in the extreme.

Case in point: Tiffany’s song, released earlier this year, titled Higher. Now I admit I’ve heard but one mix of this song, and so acknowledge that this may apply only to the one mix I have (a mix by Matt Johnson, a producer I’m not familiar with). But whether it’s Johnson who’s responsible, or someone else, they took a perfectly good vocalist—Tiffany (yes, the Tiffany from the 80′s)—and ruined her vocal track.

Whether it was a bandpass filter, or EQ tweaking, or some other misused villain, she sounds like she’s singing over an ordinary lo-fi telephone connection. The high-end has been dutifully trimmed back, and the low-end is completely missing. Without the full range of Tiffany’s vocal, the track lacks impact, is tiresome to listen to, and just generally dull. Which is a shame, because otherwise, the production work on the track is pretty decent, and the song has a great groove. Now, if this was during a small part of the song, for the purposes of effect, and if perhaps the effect was enveloped, I’d understand. It would be cool, interesting, and add to the mix. But no, it was applied uniformly throughout the entire track!

Why on earth would a producer allow the track to get released sounding that way? I was asking that rhetorically, but the answer is that some producers intentionally do this sort of manipulation to get the vocal out of the way of other instruments or sounds in the mix, which would otherwise sound muddied-up. I “get” that, fine, blah blah blah. But in my opinion, if the vocal is in your way, then move the other stuff, not the vocal! Or, if you must, then minimize the net effect through other engineering work. In the case of Tiffany’s otherwise great track, the production people ruined a perfectly good song. Tiffany has a great voice; that’s been apparent since she was an 80′s teen idol. Why mute it so audibly? Stupid, stupid, stupid.

As I said when I started out this post, are you people deaf? (Not you, my readers, of course, but the amateurs who commit the listed sins.) I hope not, but if you’re not, then you should perhaps walk away from the mixing desk for awhile, go for a long walk, come back in, and actually listen to the song you’re working on. It might actually cause you to make a change or two.

Crank up the volume. Just not to the point of distortion, please. Wes.

Entry filed under: Dance Music. Tags: audio compression, audio engineering, Believe, Cher, EQ, Matt Johnson, Production, Tiffany, Vocoder.