Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 3, 2013 2:35:11 GMT
Hi everyone, Unusually, I think we can start the technical thread on Hushabye well before the album release date. This is because there are some high quality and lengthy samples of all tracks available on iTunes UK - they appear to have been recorded at iTunes highest quality of 256kbps AAC and VBR (which is better than .mp3 at the same bit rate). Of course, our final conclusions will have to wait until we've heard the CD. Some members will naturally prefer to reserve judgement until they've heard the actual CD a few times, so I don't expect this thread to gain much mileage until then. Like the Paradiso Technical thread, here we are concerned with the quality of the recording as a whole, the vocals, instrumentation and mixing for example, rather than the theme or the song choices. I recommend that for now, judgement is based on the iTunes UK samples if possible, otherwise the "All Preview Tracks" stream that I have posted on the following HWI page: www.hayley-westenra-international.com/content/hushabye-uk-all-track-samples-now-available which is of the highest quality I can produce (320kBps AAC VBR but cannot beat the original iTunes previews, obviously). As with all Hayley recordings, it is important to use the highest quality equipment that you have - a good pair of headphones can work wonders, even on a computer. If the samples are anything to go by, I think we are in for a real treat. The dynamic range (loudest to quietest) is similar to Paradiso, less than Pure and Odyssey 1, but higher than Treasure, most classical crossover albums that I've measured, and much higher than HSJS and most pop and rock albums. There is ZERO peak limiting that I can detect - which is brilliant and is more than can be said for Paradiso. The vocals are often delicate and intimate and there is at times some exquisite background instrumental and other effects that you can hear if you listen carefully, the better the equipment, the more you can hear! Triangles and/or other high pitched percussion for example, a nice ambience too, that kind of thing. The production values seem to be very much in tune with the theme and song choices, to my ear. My overall impression is of a good balance of vocals and instruments thoughout what we have so far heard, Hushabye from what we know has been well produced and is technically excellent. And that's just from the iTunes previews, the CD may be even better. I did notice one very slight 'glitch' among the 16 track samples, which didn't diminish my enjoyment and may have been caused by the iTunes encoding. Is it technically the equal of Pure, overall? Probably not, but that was an exceptional album and had millions thrown at it. Is it technically better than Paradiso? As far as I'm concerned, overall, yes it is! Can't wait to get my hands on a copy of the actual CD! Cheers, Dave |
|
|
|
Post by Simba on Jun 4, 2013 9:06:42 GMT
Yes absolutely, the better the equipment the more you can hear is very true. This just proved you don't need a 120 piece orchestra for the best backing. I like the background instrumentation on this album more than any other hayley album so far. Wonders have been done with the 4 or so instruments. My favourites too  I like the production more than pure too, this sounds more natural to my ears With much lesser reverb than all her albums together. While reverb is awesome, it makes me think of a huge auditorium. And like someone said this is like hayley's singing just to you, in a room, and some songs in your ear. I think most of these songs, have a fair bit of interludes which are as good as the vocals. The lead violin in Baby mine, just brings me to tears. The track couldn't get any better, the violin's melody just drives the emotion perfectly. And hayley's singing just fits so perfectly in it, either that or they've perfectly arranged the music around her voice. If this can include technical aspects of singing, I think I should mention that she's doing small riffs and triplets that she usually doesn't do in almost songs. It really adds something. And most words are ending with a vibrato that's in her whisper or breath (after the end of the note), which I haven't heard any singer do. It's not something difficult to do, but then I think it fades perfectly into silence that way. All I have to do is dream is another song, where the backing just takes me to dreamland. haha. The consistency in instruments also makes us observe the amazing strumming patterns and arpeggios that are unique to each song, used in this album. Especially the guitar, I'm sure it'd have been difficult to come up with all of that with the theme being lullabies. People would think there'd be a stereotypical way of playing these instruments. (bao bei, pretty little horses...) Can't wait to listen to all of it! |
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 6, 2013 19:26:18 GMT
Hi Dave,
I'm surprised that there is much dynamic range on Hushabye, at least not on Hayley's vocals. It certainly sound a lot less than songs like Amalia Por Amor.
The only Hushabye song I can imagine that has a lot of Range is Bridge Over Troubled Water. Would be interesting to see what they have done to that when we get to hear it.
Martin D
|
|
|
|
Post by Simba on Jun 6, 2013 20:09:07 GMT
Are you talking about vocal range in terms of notes? Because dynamic range of hayley's vocals in hushabye is large noticeably. There are really faint whispers to 0% and also loud bits. I can imagine, "So Close your eyes" from hushabye mountain, the last "Lay thee down" from Brahm's lullaby to be very loud. It was with a lot of power.
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 6, 2013 20:56:36 GMT
Hi Martin D and Simba,
Yes, the dynamic range I mentioned is the difference in volume between the loudest notes and the average for the complete song or album. Wide dynamic range implies a lot of variability between the loudest bits and the quietest bits, which is generally accepted to sound more like a live performance. On a recording, it has nothing to do with the absolute loudness or power or the original performance.
The theory goes (and for many people and all audiophiles it's the reality) that the more of the original dynamic range of a live performance that can be preserved on a recording, the closer it will be to reality. So in general, wide dynamic range is good - unless you like to play music loudly with no quiet bits, or in noisy cars, and many people do.
So to hear a recording close to how it was performed, and probably as the producer intended, go for a CD with a high dynamic range (all other things being equal) - but it won't sound consistently loud, quite the opposite in fact (TV ads and many pop records do the opposite, lower the dynamic range to make them sound loud - they do this by boosting all the quiet bits!)
Quality Classical music recordings - very high dynamic range.
Pure - high dynamic range
Other Hayley recordings - fairly high dynamic range.
Most classical crossover and some pop/rock recordings - moderate to fairly high dynamic range (Russell Watson for example)
Most pop music (Crazy love by Buble for example)- low to moderate dynamic range.
Some TV ads - very low!
Cheers, Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 6, 2013 22:54:24 GMT
Hi Dave,
Yes, I understand the reasons for compressing dynamic range. And I also know that the lack of such compression is one reason why Hayley sounds so much better live than on record.
I take Simba's point that there is some whispering on Hushabye that would increase its range, but subjectively, that sounds less than the contrast between the quiet and loud bits of Amalia for example. Perhaps in reality it isn't, and because Hayley never really uses the power of her voice on any bit of Hushabye I have heard, it is easy to conclude that there isn't much dynamic range. And because of that, it wasn't thought necessary to compress it.
I agree that Hushabye seems to be a very natural sounding recording. The lack of "mucking about" with it is I'm sure the reason, and I applaud that. When Hayley sang live at the end of that Radio Kent interview, it sounded very like the samples we have heard. In fact I though it was amazing, being done off the cuff like that. Whatever anyone else says, I think this album could be a masterpiece. But and understated one, as Hayley's best work often is.
Martin D
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 6, 2013 23:07:16 GMT
Hi Martin, Sorry if I was teaching you how to suck eggs, I do get carried away sometimes!   Forgot to mention though, that the dynamic range on for example Twinkle Twinkle (from iTunes) is slightly greater than on Amalia, even though Amalia was clearly sung far louder in the climaxes. Twinkle is sung quietly but when recorded the engineer will raise the loudest bits to the same peak level as any other CD (0dB). It's the quiet bits where they generally tweak them a bit less for Hayley than for many other singers. Cheers, Dave |
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 7, 2013 17:53:33 GMT
Hi Dave,
Don't worry, I'm sure there are people who are reading this thread that would find your explanation helpful.
Of course, if you are comparing the dynamic range of the final record, then I can understand that. But I very much doubt if the same would be said of the originals as performed in the studio. It may just be that a song like twinkle as performed has a low enough dynamic range to be acceptable on a CD, but a song like Amalia doesn't. Of course Twinkle does have that quiet sound at the beginning and end that you mentioned, what was it -57Db?
But whatever the reasons, it is very nice to hear such a natural sounding recording of Hayley's voice. For all that you say about the lack of compression on Pure, I don't consider it to be very natural sounding because I suspect of the reverb.
Martin D
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 7, 2013 21:17:38 GMT
Of course Twinkle does have that quiet sound at the beginning and end that you mentioned, what was it -57Db? -43dBA at the beginning, -39dBA after 49 seconds. We probably wouldn't be able to hear -57dB except with headphones, that's pretty close to tape hiss level on a high speed reel-to-reel tape recorder (remember them?  ) For all that you say about the lack of compression on Pure, I don't consider it to be very natural sounding because I suspect of the reverb. Absolutely, dynamic range is only one of several things that contribute to a recording of high technical quality and if any one of them is off, it can spoil things a bit. Cheers, Dave |
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 7, 2013 21:51:30 GMT
Of course Twinkle does have that quiet sound at the beginning and end that you mentioned, what was it -57Db? -43dBA at the beginning, -39dBA after 49 seconds. We probably wouldn't be able to hear -57dB except with headphones, that's pretty close to tape hiss level on a high speed reel-to-reel tape recorder (remember them? ) Cheers, Dave Yes I had that figure in mind and was surprised I could hear it on my laptop. At getting on for a million times below the loudest, that would take some doing without top class kit. Martin D |
|
|
|
Post by comet on Jun 9, 2013 13:49:30 GMT
Of course Twinkle does have that quiet sound at the beginning and end that you mentioned, what was it -57Db? -43dBA at the beginning, -39dBA after 49 seconds. We probably wouldn't be able to hear -57dB except with headphones, that's pretty close to tape hiss level on a high speed reel-to-reel tape recorder (remember them? ) For all that you say about the lack of compression on Pure, I don't consider it to be very natural sounding because I suspect of the reverb. Absolutely, dynamic range is only one of several things that contribute to a recording of high technical quality and if any one of them is off, it can spoil things a bit. Cheers, Dave I remember tape hiss very well, even on chrome tape at high speeds, When the word MEMOREX meant something, Trying to keep sound levels up but not distorted to keep the tape hiss as far below as possible. Only very recently, I reluctantly gave away my beloved Revox A77 to someone who would get some "reel" use out of it, It was rather heavy an very difficult to smuggle in to a concert, not to mention it needed 220 volts supply to run it  I do appreciate the convenience and the quality of modern, tiny, lightweight digital recorders like the Zoom or the Tascam with almost indefinite recording time and superior quality, unlike a 10" spool of tape running at 15 inches per second. |
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 9, 2013 21:36:13 GMT
Yes, Paul, I remember that too!
Martin D
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Jun 18, 2013 23:49:31 GMT
I have now analysed the Hushabye CD and as expected its dynamic range is slightly higher than iTunes, but not by much, less than 1dB so well done to iTunes. It now matches Paradiso and exceeds Treasure.
The inter-track silence is, well, silent. Track-to-track fades are impressively smooth right down to -90dB, which for those who know, is really good and even that could be caused by my sound card converter and measuring program. Silence, in fact - but it only lasts for half a second before the next track starts to fade up!
I've discovered that in Go To Sleep, the quiet bits in between Hayley's verses - immediately after Hayley takes a breath are at -57 dB, which is astonishing. Hayley's breaths are at -50dB and *that's* quiet enough!
Cheers, Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by martindn on Jun 19, 2013 14:03:50 GMT
Hi Dave, Well, we don't want any extraneous noise that might wake the baby do we? Martin D |
|
)