Was ARTPOP mastered poorly? (DJ's comment)

[Kermit 15,807]

4 minutes ago, DrewStevens said:

The problem is that an engineering team can't do a lot with an instrumental after being compressed and the most noticeable flaws were in the production.

But Brooklyn Nights and DWUW didn't have these flaws, as much as I hate saying this, I think DJWS and Gaga need a co-producer in the studio when working because Applause sounds fresh but i'm not sure if it's the stereo width or what it just sjonfjnvjfsn.

[Bebe 17,093]

This is a great article on the mixing of ARTPOP:
http://gagajournal.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/gagalacan-artpop-and-discourse-of.html

"In these seemingly menial tautological iterations, Gaga is quilting herself and the entirety of her pop-culture, fantasmatic, and ideological project to the world of Art. She, in part, accomplishes this by calling-forth desire through her refusal to satiate meaning; or, to say it differently, through the hardcore polyvalence of her signifiers. The way in which she sings certain lyrics leaves their manifest meaning (i.e. what she is “actually” saying) largely ambiguous and up for interpretation, suspended in a hermeneutics of difference. This led some to label “Applause” as the victim of a “bad mix.” That is, the volume levels of the vocals and music seemed off: it was hard to hear what Gaga was saying because her voice was so similar to the production. RuPaul’s producer Lucian Piane was one such critic, what these critics fail to realize, though, is that it is the polyvalence of signifiers as such that titillates and gets desire flowing. For example, when Gaga spells out A-P-P-L-A-U-S-E in the backing track, I first heard this as “it is the end of you.” It was not until the lyric video came out that I recognized there was a discord between what I heard and what the “official” lyrics were. Realizing this, I could not help but smirk because, in a sense, I felt as though I had been duped – of course she is spelling applause, I thought; that is the very name of the song! There are also other parts that tricked me. In the chorus the official lyrics are “make it real loud,” but it can also be heard as “make it real love.” Certainly, too, the utterance “Koons” is highly ambiguous (Koons ≈ coon ≈ cunt). This is not to say that there is some hidden or sinister meaning that Gaga is trying to sneak by us à la the alleged backmasking in Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven.” Rather, it is the exact opposite.There is no one secret meaning that Gaga wants us to hear; she wants us to hear legion meanings, meanings without enervation in order to arouse our desire."

The song also builds, similar to how in the music video it starts as B&W and bursts into colour.  Just compare the start, the middle and the end of the song.

[8847759385 160]

It was mixed and mastered fine.

 

Much better than Born This Way, at least.

[Benji 20,113]

4 minutes ago, Bebe said:

This is a great article on the mixing of ARTPOP:
http://gagajournal.blogspot.com.au/2013/10/gagalacan-ARTPOP-and-discourse-of.html

"In these seemingly menial tautological iterations, Gaga is quilting herself and the entirety of her pop-culture, fantasmatic, and ideological project to the world of Art. She, in part, accomplishes this by calling-forth desire through her refusal to satiate meaning; or, to say it differently, through the hardcore polyvalence of her signifiers. The way in which she sings certain lyrics leaves their manifest meaning (i.e. what she is “actually” saying) largely ambiguous and up for interpretation, suspended in a hermeneutics of difference. This led some to label “Applause” as the victim of a “bad mix.” That is, the volume levels of the vocals and music seemed off: it was hard to hear what Gaga was saying because her voice was so similar to the production. RuPaul’s producer Lucian Piane was one such critic, what these critics fail to realize, though, is that it is the polyvalence of signifiers as such that titillates and gets desire flowing. For example, when Gaga spells out A-P-P-L-A-U-S-E in the backing track, I first heard this as “it is the end of you.” It was not until the lyric video came out that I recognized there was a discord between what I heard and what the “official” lyrics were. Realizing this, I could not help but smirk because, in a sense, I felt as though I had been duped – of course she is spelling applause, I thought; that is the very name of the song! There are also other parts that tricked me. In the chorus the official lyrics are “make it real loud,” but it can also be heard as “make it real love.” Certainly, too, the utterance “Koons” is highly ambiguous (Koons ≈ coon ≈ ****). This is not to say that there is some hidden or sinister meaning that Gaga is trying to sneak by us à la the alleged backmasking in Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven.” Rather, it is the exact opposite.There is no one secret meaning that Gaga wants us to hear; she wants us to hear legion meanings, meanings without enervation in order to arouse our desire."
 

I'm slightly more inclined to believe experts in the field over a Gaga fan who writes for a Gaga blog though 

[Supersonic 49,376]

4 minutes ago, Benji said:

I'm slightly more inclined to believe experts in the field over a Gaga fan who writes for a Gaga blog though 

So people on an online forum with no visible and verified qualifications except from taking part in a forum about music is what makes an expert?

On the internet, anyone can be a doctor.

[HANZ 4,380]

yes, kinda annoying too

[Benji 20,113]

2 minutes ago, amenvodka said:

So people on an online forum with no visible and verified qualifications except from taking part in a forum about music is what makes an expert?

On the internet, anyone can be a doctor.

True, seems odd that an entire forum dedicated to DJs and audio wouldn't be full of DJs though! Plus, that article it's self reads - "RuPaul’s producer Lucian Piane was one such critic"

I mean I could write a massive post about how Born This Way was badly mastered to make the point that we're not all "perfect" but that's just BS

[Bebe 17,093]

1 minute ago, Benji said:

I'm slightly more inclined to believe experts in the field over a Gaga fan who writes for a Gaga blog though 

It isn't just a blog though the author of that piece is Jacob W. Glazier, a Ph.D student in philosophy and psychology. His research tends to "deploy Lacanian psychoanalysis and schizoanalysis to explore the catalytic potential of popular culture, the construction and fidelity of personology, the analytics of surfaces, and the ontogenesis of asignifying semiotics."

The editor and creator of the blog Kate Durbin is an author who has written pieces featured in "Poets and Writers, Salon.com, Huffington Post, The New Yorker, Spex, NPR, Hyperallergic.com, poets.org, Lana Turner: A Journal of Poetry and Opinion, Yale's The American Scholar, The Rumpus, and others. She is the winner of an &Now Innovative Writing Award, and she teaches literature and writing at Whittier College."

Co-editor Meghan Vicks holds a Ph.D. in Comparative Literature. 

Most of the articles written there are by Ph.D recepients and it has been recognised by Yale university who have said "Since March 2010, [Gaga Stigmata] has churned out the most intense ongoing critical conversation on [Lady Gaga]."

This isn't just some random fanblog, it's full of people that are experts in their fields and are probably far more recognised and professional than a bunch of people on a forum 

[Supersonic 49,376]

Just now, Bebe said:

It isn't just a blog though the author of that piece is Jacob W. Glazier, a Ph.D student in philosophy and psychology. His research tends to "deploy Lacanian psychoanalysis and schizoanalysis to explore the catalytic potential of popular culture, the construction and fidelity of personology, the analytics of surfaces, and the ontogenesis of asignifying semiotics."

The editor and creator of the blog Kate Durbin is an author who has written pieces featured in "Poets and Writers, Salon.com, Huffington Post, The New Yorker, Spex, NPR, Hyperallergic.com, poets.org, Lana Turner: A Journal of Poetry and Opinion, Yale's The American Scholar, The Rumpus, and others. She is the winner of an &Now Innovative Writing Award, and she teaches literature and writing at Whittier College."

Co-editor Meghan Vicks holds a Ph.D. in Comparative Literature. 

Most of the articles written there are by Ph.D recepients and it has been recognised by Yale university who have said "Since March 2010, [Gaga Stigmata] has churned out the most intense ongoing critical conversation on [Lady Gaga]."

This isn't just some random fanblog, it's full of people that are experts in their fields and are probably far more recognised and professional than a bunch of people on a forum 

Let it be, there no use arguing. It's not us who try to justify ARTPOP bashing in 2015 by pulling up posts from an obscure DJ forum where anonymous people try to remaster music in f*cking Audacity.  

[Benji 20,113]

12 minutes ago, Bebe said:

It isn't just a blog though the author of that piece is Jacob W. Glazier, a Ph.D student in philosophy and psychology. His research tends to "deploy Lacanian psychoanalysis and schizoanalysis to explore the catalytic potential of popular culture, the construction and fidelity of personology, the analytics of surfaces, and the ontogenesis of asignifying semiotics."

The editor and creator of the blog Kate Durbin is an author who has written pieces featured in "Poets and Writers, Salon.com, Huffington Post, The New Yorker, Spex, NPR, Hyperallergic.com, poets.org, Lana Turner: A Journal of Poetry and Opinion, Yale's The American Scholar, The Rumpus, and others. She is the winner of an &Now Innovative Writing Award, and she teaches literature and writing at Whittier College."

Co-editor Meghan Vicks holds a Ph.D. in Comparative Literature. 

Most of the articles written there are by Ph.D recepients and it has been recognised by Yale university who have said "Since March 2010, [Gaga Stigmata] has churned out the most intense ongoing critical conversation on [Lady Gaga]."

This isn't just some random fanblog, it's full of people that are experts in their fields and are probably far more recognised and professional than a bunch of people on a forum 

It's interesting though, despite how qualified these people are that the entire post doesn't contain a single shred of actual evidence though, it's all hypothetical. Their supporting evidence summarised is "Someone else done this", "Gaga is working with an unrelated artist" and "Gaga likes weird things"  Even if this was an accepted theory, does this explain the rest of the bad mastering? It's more of a massive excuse rather than actual evidence of her intentions to purposely have a song badly mastered.

[Benji 20,113]

1 minute ago, amenvodka said:

Let it be, there no use arguing. It's not us who try to justify ARTPOP bashing in 2015 by pulling up posts from an obscure DJ forum where anonymous people try to remaster music in f*cking Audacity.  

Oh please. If I wanted to bash ARTPOP, I wouldn't have even bothered making a thread discussing such an intricate part of it. Hell, if I wanted to bash ARTPOP I would have gone for an easier to see fault in it, but I won't.

I've always thought the mastering was off, then when I was looking for some fan remixes earlier I stumbled across this forum discussing Applause. I found it interesting because I've thought the same thing about it just becoming a battle of loudness.

[Bebe 17,093]

Just now, Benji said:

It's interesting thought, despite how qualified these people are that the entire post doesn't contain a single shred of actual evidence though, it's all hypothetical. Their supporting evidence summarised is "Someone else done this", "Gaga is working with an unrelated artist" and "Gaga likes weird things"  Even if this was an accepted theory, does this explain the rest of the bad mastering? It's more of a massive excuse rather than actual evidence of her intentions to purposely have a song badly mastered.

I'm not saying this is gospel fact, of course it isn't. It's a theory that's all you really can have unless Gaga or DJWS come out and explain why it was mixed like that.

What is true is that it was mixed and mastered like that for some reason. Applause is the only song on ARTPOP that I have heard that can be legitimately criticised for what seems like poor mastering, so I'm not sure about this whole "does this explain the rest of the bad mastering?". The only song I have ever seen you criticise on this site for it's "poor mixing" is Applause and then you try to apply that to the rest of the album.

I'm not sure exactly why it was mixed the way it was, I think it was done intentionally though. Applause starts out kind of flat and builds throughout the song, like the music video starts B&W and then bursts into colour. Those sort of parallels don't seem to be coincidence imo, I'm sure it was the intention whether it payed off or not is another matter.

[Benji 20,113]

1 minute ago, Bebe said:

The only song I have ever seen you criticise on this site for it's "poor mixing" is Applause and then you try to apply that to the rest of the album.

Look at the title of the thread?

[Bebe 17,093]

7 minutes ago, Benji said:

Look at the title of the thread?

re-read what you just quoted?

"The only song I have ever seen you criticise on this site for it's "poor mixing" is Applause and then you try to apply that to the rest of the album."

It's basically identical to the sort of threads you have been making since ARTPOP's release (http://gagadaily.com/forums/topic/159305-do-you-dislike-the-mastering-of-artpop/)

You say that ARTPOP is mixed poorly, or ask if it is mixed poorly and the only example you ever use is Applause. You use the example of Applause which did criticised for how it was mixed and then apply it to the entire album...

Let me also be clear that I'm not saying I like the choices made in how Applause was mixed, it's one of my least favourite Gaga songs. I'm just saying the choices made where deliberate and not really a reflection of the skills or understanding of Gaga, DJWS or Dave Russell.

[Benji 20,113]

5 minutes ago, Bebe said:

re-read what you just quoted?

"The only song I have ever seen you criticise on this site for it's "poor mixing" is Applause and then you try to apply that to the rest of the album."

It's basically identical to the sort of threads you have been making since ARTPOP's release (http://gagadaily.com/forums/topic/159305-do-you-dislike-the-mastering-of-ARTPOP/)

You say that ARTPOP is mixed poorly, or ask if it is mixed poorly and the only example you ever use is Applause. You use the example of Applause which did criticised for how it was mixed and then apply it to the entire album...

I've criticised practically the whole album for bad mastering, so to say I've only criticised one song is false? That's my point.

It's easy to show people that shoddy mastering because we have a demo where the mastering is different, making Applause an easy example of my point?

The only excuse people have for the bad mastering is "oh, it must be on purpose" but even if it was, is that even a good thing? I purposely made this song sound off because it was my vision? ... Sounds pretty crap to me!