Songs In The Key Of Life question

[rovereab]

I think I read an article some years ago that suggested that the first CD pressings of this album were created with something like "the master tapes were used with Dolby decoding switched on although the master tapes were not encoded with Dolby".

My SITKOL 2 CD set does sound rather flat so I wonder if I have a copy that was created with this problem. If indeed I recall the situation correctly.

Is there any way of finding out from the code on the CD? I have the "UK 2 CD jewel case edition within a cardboard sleeve with a code of "ZD072131[[2)".

Thanks

[soulster]

I emailed one of the original engineers a couple of years ago about this. He said that the original two-track master tapes were mixed with Dolby. So, the original vinyl LPs, 8-track tape cartridges, and cassettes are correct, as are the first CDs.

FF to the year 2000. Harry Weinger, in an ICE magazine about his remasters, said that the tapes were not Dolby, and turned it off. But, here's the thing: all Motown/Universal has are tape copies of the original masters because Stevie Wonder will not allow them to get out. Period. Stevie owns and physically possesses the master tapes from 1972 onward. So, Weinger had second-generation non-Dolby copies. He even stated that he had copies in the article. Then, on top of that, he EQ'ed them and added some compression to get them to sound like he thought they should. Dolby is often not used on 30 i.p.s. copies, even if the mixdown masters are.

In the 90s, one master tape did get out. Mobile Fidelity was to remaster Wonder's catalog. They received all of the tapes. All of them were Stevie's official copies except for one: "Innervisions". Somehow, that tape was accidentally sent to Mobile Fidelity, so, they mastered it and released it. It sounds wonderful, and I have it. But, Stevie's camp found out and Stevie ensured that the first generation masters getting out would never happen again.

So, when Motown/Universal did their remastering project, that also included "At The Close Of the Century", they used those non-Dolby copies.

When Speakers Corner in Germany reissued "Songs In the key Of Life" three years ago on vinyl, they also used those copies Universal sent them.

Last year, Kevin Gray remastered "Talking Book" for Audio Fidelity. He was forced to use the copy. Why does his sound radically different than the Motown remaster? Weinger used lots of EQ and compression on his. AF is supposedly working on "Songs In The Key Of Life". That is also from the infamous copies.

Until Stevie Wonder has a change of heart, or he dies, that's all anyone is getting...copies!

So, the original CDs use copies, but sound closer to the tapes. The remasters were EQ'ed and compressed to death, and the audiophile versions sound great because of, or in spite of their source tapes because of the engineer's preferences.

What you currently have, the first CD pressings, are the correct ones. I hope this clears it all up.

[tamla617]

i cant see what stevie wonder gets out of all this "control".his music doesnt sound as good doing it the way soulster just described."new" people listening to it for the 1st time are going to get the wrong impression of one of stevies best albums

[soulster]

Exactly.

Now, there are a lot of people who like that jacked-up, compressed sound, and think it sounds "right", but it isn't. As a matter of fact, the vast majority of mixdown tapes sound warm, or what many others would describe as "dull". And, nowadays, people hear so many compressed CDs that they think it's normal and "correct". So, that's why people continue to accept the remasters.

[soulster]

I should add that the only Universal/Motown remaster that sounds correct is "Hotter Than July". Even though it is a digital recording, the tape Universal used was an analog tape copy. Good thing they didn't screw up the sound.

[wichmanne]

soulster,

Thanks for that interesting note. I will have to seek out the Mobile Fidelity Innervisions now.

I have all the original CDs from the 1980s so I guess I'm sorted but I always thought that Fulfullingness' First Finale sounded a bit dodgy and that the tracks from that album on At The Close Of A Century were better.

What is your opinion on the FFF masters and releases? Is it worth getting the 2000 remaster of FFF?

Ed

[soulster]

I'd stick with the older CD.

[tomato tom]

I wondered why my C.D. re-issues sounded crap over the vinyl originals. Thanks for the info. Reminds me never to by another Wonder C.D. again. I have no objection to someone controlling their carreer, and Im no phsyciatrist, but this sort of POWER control does seem a bit extreme. Guess, we will never see the last two volumes of Complete Motown Singles without HIS tunes. Hey, it will be like the ones with all those Rare Earth label singles we couldnt have as Motown didnt own them. What a way to go out.FAAAB. On another note, how come you never see any of his sixties albums on CD in the stores, does he dictate this as well? Oh, sorry, I ONCE did see the My Cherie Amor CD. ONCE. And it was a U.S. import. ...Power Freak?,,.....Paulo XZXXX

[soulster]

Paulo...not quite. Again: there are good SW CDs of his post 1972 albums.

Hotter Than July - Motown Remaster [[available)

Innervisions - Mobile Fidelity CD [[out of print)

Talking Book - Audio Fidelity [[available)

Music Of My Mind - Audio Fidelity [[when it's released)

Songs In The key Of Life - Audio Fidelity [[when it's released)

Motown/Universal can reissue any Stevie Wonder material they like. However, all they have are 1:1 30 i.p.s. two-track copies of the mixdown master tapes. Stevie owns and controls them, and keeps them in a private vault in his studio/home.

The sound you hear from any Stevie Wonder product depends on the quality of the tape source and the producer/mastering engineer. A 1:1 30 i.p.s. copy of a first generation tape can sound very good, almost indistinguishable from the original if done well.

[robbert]

Fulfullingness' First Finale sounded VERY dodgy to my ears, when it was released. I couldn't believe Stevie had let an inferior master come out of his studio [[after the crispy sounding Innervisions), so I put the blame on stupid Motown employee[[s) or even on the pressing plant.
FFF had the infamous "woolen blanket" thrown all over the whole album. I never could figure out "why?"...

[marxthespot_]

It is widely accepted that Harry Weinger's reissues of the Stevie Wonder 70s albums were botched.....

The Mobile Fidelity Innervisions does sound fantastic....

Fulfullingness' First Finale sounded VERY dodgy to my ears, when it was released. I couldn't believe Stevie had let an inferior master come out of his studio [[after the crispy sounding Innervisions), so I put the blame on stupid Motown employee[[s) or even on the pressing plant.
FFF had the infamous "woolen blanket" thrown all over the whole album. I never could figure out "why?"...

Robbert, I agree....the original FFF LP did sound muffled - lacking in highs..... I believe the original LP was mastered at Kendun Recorders [[Kent Duncan). It may not have been his fault, because usual procedure is that test pressings are made and sent to the artist [[Stevie) for approval and maybe he wanted the highs reduced and asked for a new disc master to be cut.

[soulster]

Robbert, I agree....the original FFF LP did sound muffled - lacking in highs..... I believe the original LP was mastered at Kendun Recorders [[Kent Duncan). It may not have been his fault, because usual procedure is that test pressings are made and sent to the artist [[Stevie) for approval and maybe he wanted the highs reduced and asked for a new disc master to be cut.

One thing that could make an album sound dull isn't bad mastering, it's that if the mixing studio had very bright monitors, the mix would sound great on those, but dull or muffled on more balanced monitors. In the days of the vinyl record, it was not standard procedure to boost frequencies. If anything, bass was cut to avoid mistracking. On the opposite side, in the CD age, it is very common to boost the highs.

Most people would be surprised to know that the average master mix does not sound bright. Again, it's only in the CD age where mastering engineers decided they liked to boost the highs, and that's because it can be done cleanly in the digital realm.

There is one thing to consider: many people have high frequency loss in their hearing, so many people like the built-in treble boost.

[jtf1972]

Thank you for all this Wonderful info.

[marxthespot_]

..............Most people would be surprised to know that the average master mix does not sound bright. Again, it's only in the CD age where mastering engineers decided they liked to boost the highs, and that's because it can be done cleanly in the digital realm............

.

Soulster, I agree with the first sentence - master mixes are probably not overly bright being that they are usually mixed on full range - high quality studio monitors.

Regarding mastering engineers and the boosting of highs....In the days before CDs, mastering engineers had to EQ for vinyl disc pressings. One of the most noticeable effects of the entire process from disc cutting to final pressed copy was the rolling off the highs by several decibels. To compensate, the "album master tape" used to cut the disc had the highs boosted so that the final pressing would sound as close to the album master as possible...When CDs were first issued, it was very often that the EQ'd album master was used [[as opposed to the original two-track mixdown masters) and that extra EQ need for vinyl pressings was left in. Since the CD mastering/pressing process doesn't roll off the highs like the vinyl does, a lot of these early CDs sounded harsh.

Then again in today's age, CD are mastered at such a high overall level so that when played, they get noticed against a not-so-loud CD [[i.e., "The Loudness Wars"), boosting the highs could be part of that, but usually everything is boosted to be loud, not just the highs...

[soulster]

Soulster, I agree with the first sentence - master mixes are probably not overly bright being that they are usually mixed on full range - high quality studio monitors.

Regarding mastering engineers and the boosting of highs....In the days before CDs, mastering engineers had to EQ for vinyl disc pressings. One of the most noticeable effects of the entire process from disc cutting to final pressed copy was the rolling off the highs by several decibels. To compensate, the "album master tape" used to cut the disc had the highs boosted so that the final pressing would sound as close to the album master as possible...When CDs were first issued, it was very often that the EQ'd album master was used [[as opposed to the original two-track mixdown masters) and that extra EQ need for vinyl pressings was left in. Since the CD mastering/pressing process doesn't roll off the highs like the vinyl does, a lot of these early CDs sounded harsh.

Then again in today's age, CD are mastered at such a high overall level so that when played, they get noticed against a not-so-loud CD [[i.e., "The Loudness Wars"), boosting the highs could be part of that, but usually everything is boosted to be loud, not just the highs...

Not exactly. The highs you describe was the RIAA curve. That was needed to counter the cartridge's inverse rolloff. That way, things should balance out. What i'm talking about is altogether different.

In vinyl cutting in the old days, a certain amount of compression or slight treble rolloff was applied to the songs that resided on the inner grooves to reduce mistracking, but in the CD age, ME's often went wild with the EQ just because they could. The rolloff on vinyl wasn't as severe as some may think it was. In fact, lowering the overall volume and applying light compression/limiting did the job just fine. If you have the means to record some vinyl records to your computer, do several samples of album sides and study them in an audio editor. Sometimes you can visually see where the changes were made. These days, these tricks are not needed in vinyl disk mastering, and they certainly are not needed in digital mastering. The only real reason it's done to CDs today is because the consumer has gotten so used to hearing bright recordings.

The use of EQ'ed vinyl masters in the early days of CD mastering wasn't as prevailant as one might think. There are other factors that contributed to the brightness/harshness of CDs, like players that improperly applied the inverse treble pre-emphasis, and the brickwall filters used in early players.

[tamla617]

soulster
i remember a lot of cd's i bought in the late 90's were terrible.either the backing was louder than the vocals or too basey.i had to sit on the eq for every nearly track to adjust it to something listenable.i bought led zeps hits comp.i couldnt get any of it sounding right so i took it back.i've since bought [[more or less) the same led zep remastered cd and no problems,in fact i dont have any problems with any of the early cds'.
so i guess this backs up what you've said previously about early players.

[uptight]

I never liked the original vinyl mastering of Songs In The Key of Life. But I guess they did all they could do on the recent CD reissues -- not the greatest either but a bit more listenable. I also wonder what the difference between the other country's reissues of Stevie's CD are. That can be a costly test to find out. I did enjoy the Mobile Fidelity Innervisions, though.

[tomato tom]

Soulster..Thanks for that. NOW I understand...Paulo XXX

[soulster]

soulster
i remember a lot of cd's i bought in the late 90's were terrible.either the backing was louder than the vocals or too basey.i had to sit on the eq for every nearly track to adjust it to something listenable.i bought led zeps hits comp.i couldnt get any of it sounding right so i took it back.i've since bought [[more or less) the same led zep remastered cd and no problems,in fact i dont have any problems with any of the early cds'.
so i guess this backs up what you've said previously about early players.

That had nothing to do with the mastering. That was the mix you were hearing. And, remember that in the 70s, the mixing philosophy was not to have the vocals stand out over everything else like today. In fact, I hate the vocals riding over the instrumental backing. It's done today so modern audiences can concentrate on the lyrics, something people didn't worry that much about in the 70s.

These days, what they do to CDs is use compression to make everything louder. It has the effect of unnaturally bringing up low-level sounds. That helps for listening in noisy environments or on $8 earbuds for your iPod, but sucks for quality sound reproduction. And, non-musicians tend to focus more on the vocals/lyrics than the music itself.

[soulster]

I never liked the original vinyl mastering of Songs In The Key of Life. But I guess they did all they could do on the recent CD reissues -- not the greatest either but a bit more listenable. I also wonder what the difference between the other country's reissues of Stevie's CD are. That can be a costly test to find out. I did enjoy the Mobile Fidelity Innervisions, though.

To each his own, but the original CD sounds closer to the master tapes. People have just gotten used to bright sound, or have worsened hearing...or something. But, the remaster is horrible! It even elevates the tape hiss. Just wait until the Audio Fidelity audiophile remaster comes out!