Rufus Wainwright

I think Neil Tennant, who to be honest i am not a fan of in any respect personally, had a lot to do with the mix on RTS. Whatever my views are on Neil Tennant however I think the quality/mix is really quite good, and I think Rufus' voice sounds better production-wise, is mixed better, on most tracks here than on say Want One where I believed his voice was often harshly treated and sounded rather raw and not as full as it should. However I seem to have an issue with the levels on Nobodys Off The Hook despite it being one of my favourite tracks. I think mix-wise/production-wise it sounds much more like a 'pop' album .. dont really know how else to phrase what im trying to say, so hope that makes some sense...

I appreciate your comments and it's interesting to hear others perceptions on sound.

I'm not a NT fan at all but I've not based my view on that. I find the clarity lacking and the sound a bit unstable.

It's like I suddenly need to reach out and turn it up - then it suddenly blasts out the horn section but the voice becomes lost.

I've had a few people touch on this at the old forum, so it's not just my dodgy ears it seems.

Funny, I loved the quality of all four previous CDs.

Hi Laura. I found it.

Here's what I said originally.

Does anyone have a view on the recording balance quality? I'm not sure 'quality' is the right word ... it's hard to explain. I have a very old, old-fashioned system, but I guess things don't change that much: most 'improvement' tends to be more shinier buttons, in my experience ... or dials that go up to 11. Whatever ... I usually listen through my amp on 'direct' or plug my headphones direct into the CD player, bypassing the amp altogether, as I prefer to listen to things 'cold', or as I suppose they are meant to be heard.

But there's too much bass on RTS, on all the tracks, for me to do this comfortably.

I've discovered a whole new album that I'm much more comfortable with if I switch to playing through the equaliser and adjust the 100~Hz down and the 10k~Hz up (my hearing's not so acute these days that messing with the buttons inbetween makes much difference .) That way I don't feel so overwhelmed by the background and I can actually hear the voice better in the foreground.

A lot of thought and expertise goes into mixing and whatnot, but I think I may have discovered why, on first couple of hearings, I wasn't that struck. It was uncomfortable to listen too and the orchestration/arrangements were drowning the vocals. Anyone else experience that? Or do I need to get a new system?

You know anyone listening to new music on old system is bound to fail. Unless you have a record or a tape. You cant listen to modern music on speakers that cant handle a down fall in tone. This recording is making so much noise and harmony of course its gonna sound misproduced.
You have never heard anything like it before there is nothing you can compare it to. Get an Mp3 player

Of course, just my opinion - but I've always felt that a fantastic mix/recording should sound good on whatever system you play it on. In fact, whenever I've done a mixdown, a good "check" after hearing the near final mix through an audiophile system and then mixdown studio speakers is to switch the entire output through a crappy portable boombox. If it also sounds good that way, then success! We've also taken the preliminary mix into the car to hear on a car system. It's amazing how great it sounds on the studio system, and then you play it through other outputs and you realize that the vocals are mixed too low, or the bass is too thin, etc.

Just my opinion of course......anyway, I only just picked up RTS this past Tuesday (being a RTS Virgin) :o) but my first impression is that the bass frequencies are a bit too hot. I think Rufus' voice is eq'd better - I think on the WANT projects it was a bit too "searing" in the mid-range. And I think the seperate instrument tracks are more distinct this time around - you can pick out the different instruments a bit better.

Just my first impression...... and that of Mr. Navybean. He has a better ear than me. :o)

I agree in part about the comments of a few people regarding the bass. It really is a little much.
Although from what I understand from the liner notes, Marius de Vries and Andy Bradfield mixed the album. Of course Marius produced the 'want' albums so the way RTS has been eq'd is strange to me. Although my opinion could have something to do with my current feeling of disappointment in regard to the album overall.

His voice does sound probably the best it ever has, although everything else is too loud at the same time.

And I agree with one of the above posters, this record does sound much more like a pop album, which i don't like

I'm no expert at mixing but for him mixing it himself for the first time it sounds ok to me!

I've noticed some of the things you guys are talking about, but it's mostly noticable when I'm listening to it in my car. I thought with a few songs, the accompaniment was a little overpowering, but not enough to bother me. The bass does seem louder, but I like bass. One thing that struck me on my first listen was that DIDY and GTAT have different sounds and being right next to each other, it's more pronounced. Does anyone notice that?

Rufus' voice does sound amazing in this album! He just gets better and better.

I think the sound quality is great ! I think it is pretty even throughout ! I know I have a couple recordings of Low Grade Happiness and one seems almost perfect, while the other seems to go from being quite loud to quite soft... But all of the tracks on the album sounds great to me !

It is surely taste of course but I'm tuned to commercialism and dislike it's taint. I feel this CD has been touched by the wrong paintbrush.

I’m having a funny turn with the timing of this forum change and the fact that we’ve been asked to join a place which is far from complete. I think this, along with the fact I’m observing Rufus going through the industry quite heavily right now, is making me somewhat edgy and annoyed. Annoyed – yes – I feel I’m losing the ‘art teacher’ and gaining Elton John’s lost years. I’m annoyed that people who don’t know Rufus as a past genius, now compare him to the sad old rocker and that Neil Tennant, of all people, edged into my art gallery.

This thread I started of course and I really do have some issues with the sound. The comments about getting an MP3 player don’t staunch my feelings as I’ve tried the CD on an old system, a new system, a computer and on a car player AND headphones with the GEq being turned up, down and sideways. Neither can it be my hearing problems as when I pop Poses or Wants back on – all is healed and soothed.

If I listen to “Going to a Town” from Radio 2 the sound is mellow and pleasant as it goes through the ‘industry’. Direct from my home equipment, the music has a quality like being on board an unstable ship – it rolls and turns – then you feel sick trying to hear through the soup. In the car, I actually braked once to let an ambulance go by – it was just all the bells and whistles drowning out Rufus. Some of the horns actually sound like someone farting in my yoga class – as obtrusive and out of context as that is - it's like "paaaaaaaaaaappppppp" where the hell did that come from?

This CD has been made for TV and Radio – I’ll lay a million bet on that – if this current CD comes down the airwaves, you’ll notice the sound becomes smoother, as it goes through the system – the farts and splutters you’ll hear direct from CD to car system will mellow once through Radio 2’s mixer to transmitter. The music was not made for fans at home, it was made to attract new fans via the radio and out into TV land. It’s a commercial enterprise and not long from now we’ll have a Rufus Wainwright advertisement for the new Honda Civic.

This is the Zandra Rhodes of music – beautiful design and materials, so overly embellished with tat that the original beauty is hard to perceive. The gay messiah has new clothes – designer ones at that – so it MUST be good?

{q a=[[Joelrs71]]}You know anyone listening to new music on old system is bound to fail. Unless you have a record or a tape. You cant listen to modern music on speakers that cant handle a down fall in tone. This recording is making so much noise and harmony of course its gonna sound misproduced.
You have never heard anything like it before there is nothing you can compare it to. Get an Mp3 player{/q}
LOL! Sorry, but the 'get an MP3 player' thing!? Had one for several years now, and bought a new iPod only a couple of months ago. (Crap quality and quite inferior in my opinion, compared to sitting back on the sofa with 150W speakers in an appropriately proportioned space for listening!)

I maybe an oldie, but I'm not completely left behind.

And, despite my £5000 sound system (price back then) is nearly ten years old, my Wharfedale speakers are only three years old. (Accident with the old ones when I moved home necessitated ...)

I was talking 'old', not 'cheap'! :-)

And, as others have also said, my comments were directed at RTS, not other albums, all of which sound absolutely fine either direct through the CD, through the amp on 'bypass', or through the speakers.

It's only RTS I have a problem with.

I've recently bought Scissor Sisters, Bright Eyes, Rodrigo y gabriela, and Ludovicio Einaudi ... so I hope no one can accuse me of not having breadth of taste to test my system.

It's only with RTS that I have a problem with regards the excessive bass and washing out of vocals. All Rufus's other albums still sound fine - crisp and clear and 'well balanced'.

I know we all have different taste, and some sounds appeal more to some than others, and it was only my personal take. But it seems I'm not entirely alone.

Hey! There's not a technically minded person out there, is there, who could tell me how to 'remaster' my CD through the equaliser to get that cleaner, sharper sound that my brain is craving for?

I haven't detected any problems with this album in terms of the mix. There are occasions where the bass may be a tad heavy or the vocals are a little subdued by the music. Overall, I think it is a really well produced album.

From what I have read, Neil Tennant acted as an advisor of sorts who helped Rufus enhance the pop sensibilities of some of the songs. I don't think that Neil had a lot to do with the overall sound and mix of the album. I am a massive Pet Shop Boys fan so maybe I am just unwilling to admit Neil can do any wrong. :^)

I love the new album and think it sounds great on all of my stereos and my iPod. I have many CD's that have the volume shifting issue and Rufus albums usually seem to have songs that start soft and become louder towards the end. Beautiful Child is an example of this. I don't think these sound issues are limited to this one particular release and are probably intentional.

I'm glad this thread is here. I feel strongly about this. The balance of voices to backing does jerk about. the sound is overall NOT bass heavy - quite the contrary, I thought. I find it at times tinny and over trebly. But it varies so you can't pin it sdown to a best setting on the system. The thing about the pther albums was that thier tone was consistent through the set. You couls adjust your system, if you wanted and know that that would apply to the whole album. Not this one, alas. And there is so much going on on some of the tracks. I'm sure I heard the sound of a kitchen sink in there.
And I hate this new board.

For me, there is something deeply wrong with the production on “Release the Stars”. It is by far my least favourite of Rufus’ albums so far and I’m sure that at least part of the reason is due to its feel and the atmosphere, which at times feels so overwrought and saccharine that it actually produces a physical effect in me. The words that keep occurring in reaction to the sound are “laboured” and “cloying”. I’m a big admirer of Rufus, but for me, the production values of his albums have slowly deteriorated in quality with each release. In one of my few posts on the old site I had a bit of a moan about the production of Marius De Vries, who’s work for some reason seems to totally disagree with me. I also suspect that he exerts some influence over Rufus’ arrangements, which to me sound more treacly and insipid when De Vries is at the helm. It’s a personal opinion obviously, but for me the sweeping magical string arrangements of “Foolish Love” or “Millbrook” are a league apart from the insipid MOR dirge of “Rules and Regulations”. And the subtle perfection of the arrangement on “Poses” seems to be from a different world to the sickly “Not Ready to Love”, complete with its rather horrible dripping-in-reverb backing vocals. In fact, I had to revisit "Grey Gardens" and "Rebel Prince" today to remind myself of how good Rufus really could be. I think there’s plenty of great material on Want One, Two and RTS, but I’m convinced that old Marius is getting his hands on it and spoiling it all, by layering it up like a big wedding cake and then sprinkling a large bag of icing sugar all over the top, just to make sure.

EDIT: in fact, just to agree with myself a bit more, straight after writing that post, I watched a fantastic live rendition of "Going to a Town" on 4Music: Transmission, which sparkled in a way that the album doesn't even begin to capture. Fire Marius!

{q a=[[Gerald Hamble]]}For me, there is something deeply wrong with the production on “Release the Stars”. It is by far my least favourite of Rufus’ albums so far and I’m sure that at least part of the reason is due to its feel and the atmosphere, which at times feels so overwrought and saccharine that it actually produces a physical effect in me. The words that keep occurring in reaction to the sound are “laboured” and “cloying”. I’m a big admirer of Rufus, but for me, the production values of his albums have slowly deteriorated in quality with each release. In one of my few posts on the old site I had a bit of a moan about the production of Marius De Vries, who’s work for some reason seems to totally disagree with me. I also suspect that he exerts some influence over Rufus’ arrangements, which to me sound more treacly and insipid when De Vries is at the helm. It’s a personal opinion obviously, but for me the sweeping magical string arrangements of “Foolish Love” or “Millbrook” are a league apart from the insipid MOR dirge of “Rules and Regulations”. And the subtle perfection of the arrangement on “Poses” seems to be from a different world to the sickly “Not Ready to Love”, complete with its rather horrible dripping-in-reverb backing vocals. In fact, I had to revisit "Grey Gardens" and "Rebel Prince" today to remind myself of how good Rufus really could be. I think there’s plenty of great material on Want One, Two and RTS, but I’m convinced that old Marius is getting his hands on it and spoiling it all, by layering it up like a big wedding cake and then sprinkling a large bag of icing sugar all over the top, just to make sure.

EDIT: in fact, just to agree with myself a bit more, straight after writing that post, I watched a fantastic live rendition of "Going to a Town" on 4Music: Transmission, which sparkled in a way that the album doesn't even begin to capture. Fire Marius!{/q}

No sorry. I agree with you in terms of the way it sounds, but your views on the production side of things I think is incorrect.
Sure, Marius produced the Want albums and had a hand in most of the songs on RTS, however, Marius has stated several times - most prominently on the 'All I Want' DVD that the songs from want one etc came totally from Rufus. The vocal layering, orchestration etc were ALL Rufus' ideas.
I think perhaps what you are unknowingly against is Rufus himself, who has developed from the simple arrangements of things like 'Poses' and 'Foolish Love' to producing complex pieces like 'I Don't Know What It Is' and 'Do I Dissapoint You'.

No probs here. Art

{q a=[[coredog]]}Neil Tennant acted as an advisor of sorts who helped Rufus enhance the pop sensibilities of some of the songs. {/q}

Yeah, he had nothing to do with mixing the cd, but a lot to do with telling Rufus to stop lengthening the bloody tracks! *smile* Art

Somewhat of an audiophile here who does alot of critical listening to classical. The first time I popped the RTS cd in my system I knew something was odd when I had to adjust the volume down a tad in the middle of several tracks. Never had to do this on any of the other Rufus albums.

{q a=[[JohnS33]]} I knew something was odd when I had to adjust the volume down a tad in the middle of several tracks. Never had to do this on any of the other Rufus albums. {/q}

So that indicates that this cd could use a bit more compression then, and is too dynamic?

We'll be listening to it this weekend on a wonderful audiophile system at a recording studio. Up until now, I've been mostly hearing it on very old car speakers, with an occasional listen on my bose bookshelf speakers, which are okay, but certainly not the best.

I still feel that a great mix/production can and should sound great no matter what system you play it through, whether an MP3 player, old outdated system, or top of the line audiophile eqpt.

So perhaps this thread proves that Rufus and whoever else is responsible still have room for improvement the next time around. When you're dealing with such a complicated, extensive mix....well, it's got to be a monumental task. Much more difficult to mix and produce than "Poses", for example, which is still the most pleasing mix to my ears.

In addition to the boominess that is too much for both of my systems, I also am not crazy about the too slick production on the multiple girl backup vocals. Yich. I've never been a fan of that type of sound to begin with. Gives things a more commercial and/or "middle of the road" feel that I don't care for. I was actually glad to see Rufus' "all men" band and back up singers on his tour. ((please give me a head start before you start throwing all the rocks)) :o) They're sounding pretty darn good so far from the clips I've heard.

Anyhow, this thread is great! It's been very interesting to read everyone's take on all this - thanks for all the posts.

I think NavyBean has got it spot on. The dynamic range is just too wide for comfortable listening ! It's funny because the trend in making radio-friendly music is to flatten out the dynamic to make everything the same level. This goes in the opposite direction. However, when you do hear tracks on the radio it'll sound flatter because of the compressors and limiters which are applied across the whole radio station's output.

I think the peaks are too loud. Slideshow is ridiculous ! Nobody's Off The Hook starts very quietly so you turn it up to hear the voice, only to be deafened by the end.

It's still a great album though, but they should have had it on smaller reference speakers like someone already suggested. It would have sounded like the second coming on the `big' speakers in the studio, but pity us mere mortals who are more challenged in the woofer and tweeter department !

{q a=[[Beeb Fader]]}... but pity us mere mortals who are more challenged in the woofer and tweeter department !

{/q}That's probably not a hysterically funny comment is it? *feels guilty*

Thanks for that info, Beeb Fader. I had a very rough listening experience the first time through this album. Now I know why.

{q a=[[Rhapsody]]}{q a=[[Beeb Fader]]}... but pity us mere mortals who are more challenged in the woofer and tweeter department !

{/q}That's probably not a hysterically funny comment is it? *feels guilty*

Not the funniest thing I've ever said no ! It just refers to the components of a loudspeaker...one does one's best...

Oh..so, woofer and tweeter...oh. Okay. ;)

{q a=[[Beeb Fader]]}

It's still a great album though, but they should have had it on smaller reference speakers like someone already suggested. {/q}

Yes, exactly what I said earlier in the thread. :o) I think sometimes these big $$$ studios and producers (Rufus) forget that everyone does not have a $5,000 system. I can't wait to hear it in my friend's studio on Sunday though, where the system will do it more justice.

And the lack of compression DOES kind of go against the popular commercial sound these days, which compresses the hell out of everything, you're right Beeb.

Weird.

Funnily enough, it's coincidental that I'm just on a musical journey myself that has seen me spend quite a bit of money on computer orientated sound production.
The common reference to computer stuff like this is Digital Audio Workstation, and basically I can recognise effects that have been used,and times in the album that it's noticeable.
I detect a really high pitched bleep in Do I Dissappoint You, that I still, haven't fathomed, but I do know that the audio range of computer sound production is far wider than any instrument.
If you imagine the difference between an ordinary paper photo, which can only reproduce a range of different tones in the high hundreds, and a colour slide which is almost limitless, and the human eye which is even greater, it's easier to understand the differences between a studio recording that is biased towards faithfull reproduction of voice and instrument, and one that is intentionally exploring the computer related area of sound technology.
You only have to listen to the 'white grainy synthesiser noise' at the very start of the album, to realise that this is an album, in conjunction with Neil Tennants influence, that is breaking even more Rufus ground, with technology as a medium!

I have four different sound set -ups at home and in the car, from Bose to Akai, and there is nothing wrong with the sound I don't think, it's just new ground broken in the recording studio. I even believe they've chosen to leave in, computer influences, that many producers would heave out!
This smacks of the Rufus influence to me and until I read a reliable source that tells me I'm wrong, I'm running with the belief that everything is intentional.
I processed some violin work myself at home, and found that some notes were so thin and high in pitch, they were beyond the instrument. They were part of 'cooking' the sound and I think that's what I'm hearing in Do I Disappoint You.

I am one hundred per cent sure that tweaking the songs via production has taken place, and is meant to be noticeable, as it's meant to give a different feel to the sound and objective being pursued. This view is way opposite to saying that they have tried to faithfully reproduce the sound of the instruments and vocals. I also think they've done exactly that with the voice of Rufus himself this time.
The bottom line then, is I accept this album at face value, but wonder if enough people comment, that they will release a digitally enhanced version in the future, basically undigitising and desynthesising some areas to please the discerning ear who prefers a more faithfull reproduction.

I think Rufus has forged ahead yet again. He loves pushing the boundaries and the musical envelope, and this is also displayed in his operatic leanings.

I might shove it all through my home Computer set-up and take off some of the high and low ends, but you could do that easily enough with a graphic equaliser. Somehow though, I don't think I'll be listening to what was intended.

Neili.

oops, sorry for a double post, but the intro to Do I Disappoint You is preceeded by a hum (deliberate) and some tracks are faithful to the instruments, (following an extensive re-listen) Mmmmmm?

Neili

Saw this article i the sun June 4th:

By THOMAS WHITAKER
June 04, 2007
MUSIC chiefs were blasted last night for using computer wizardry to make new albums louder than ever.

Bosses are artificially enhancing sound levels as they believe the noisier a record is, the more copies it will sell.

But music lovers say some tracks are now so distorted they can make listeners feel nauseous.

And Britain’s leading studio engineers have launched a campaign to make records range in levels to avoid one loud blur.

Among records blasted by engineers is the Red Hot Chili Peppers’ Californication which some branded “unlistenable”. An online petition has even been launched to have it “remastered”.

Other albums slated by studio experts are works by Oasis, the Arctic Monkeys and Lily Allen.

Peter Mew, senior mastering engineer at London’s Abbey Road Studios — where The Beatles made many of their hits — said: “Record companies are competing in an arms race to make their album the loudest. The quieter parts are becoming louder and the loudest parts are just becoming a buzz. This could be the reason CD sales are in a slump.”

Geoff Emerick, an engineer on the Beatles’ Sgt Pepper’s album, said: “A lot of what is released today is basically a scrunched up mess.





“Whole layers of sound are missing. It’s because record companies don’t trust listeners to decide themselves if they want to turn the volume up.”

Singing legend Bob Dylan, 66, said: “Modern records are atrocious. There’s no definition of anything — just static.”

Val Weedon of the UK Noise Association called for a ceasefire in the “loudness war”.

And one record boss admitted: “New techniques are causing our listeners fatigue.”

The article is true to some extent.

I received the following approximate lecture from my Studio friend a few weekends ago: :o) He's very wise.....

"Studio science advanced to the point of perfection, and with not much room to improve upwards, something had to change (like anything else, companies that manufacture studio equipment, effects, etc. have to continue to offer something new to keep their sales intact).

So noisy, retro mixes are back in vogue, and new equipment is being sold to get that effect. Back when noisy retro mixes were current, the studios were on the quest for an improved, clarified sound, and pushed equipment that gave those results."

Rough translation: Money makes the world go round. :o)

{q a=[[Navybean]]}The article is true to some extent.

I received the following approximate lecture from my Studio friend a few weekends ago: :o) He's very wise.....

"Studio science advanced to the point of perfection, and with not much room to improve upwards, something had to change (like anything else, companies that manufacture studio equipment, effects, etc. have to continue to offer something new to keep their sales intact).

So noisy, retro mixes are back in vogue, and new equipment is being sold to get that effect. Back when noisy retro mixes were current, the studios were on the quest for an improved, clarified sound, and pushed equipment that gave those results."

Rough translation: Money makes the world go round. :o) {/q}



Oh, what Gus Dudgeon (Elton's longtime producer) would say to that!

What I've noticed about RTS, having a huge interest in production, is many things members here have said. It could have been reined in in some areas.

And how, tell me, do you rein in Rufus? *grins*

*ponders extensively*

First. I'm a boy from Denmark. 16 years old, so my english is'nt good.

But listen. Every single second on this album "Release The Stars" have been find mixet in micro details. It's long time ago since I have heard a so good mixed album.

The only song I feel might have some mixing/production issues is Do I Disappoint You. It sounds a little muddled - particularly noticeable once Going to a Town begins.

Another humble opinion...

When I play Do I Disappoint You in the car (Bose system) there is a persistent high ptched bleep, like the kind of bleep you get from a watch alarm. On my personal Cd player and computer it's ok.
It occurs on the instrumental track of DIDY too. Any one else had this? Weird.

Neili