This is only half the story because, if you put on Lateralus and 10,000 Days next to each other, you hear 10,000 Days as 'generally' (read: on average) louder. The Replygain tells us that Lateralus is only half a decibel quieter at it's loudest than 10K Days. Is it this that has led you concluded that '10,000 Days is as compressed as all the other Tool albums save Undertow'? Because ReplayGain doesn't tell the whole story. You mentioned the Replaygain values here and imagine you got that from the HA forums. Just like every other Tool album besides Undertow, and just like pretty much every album coming out these days. Aenima was still better mastered (subjectively). This is also a major, major factor on your appreciation of 10,000 Days richness of sound compared to Aenima. In Lateralus and 10,000 Days, they embraced the studio more, doing alot more double tracking, and producing a generally 'fuller' sound. There might be the odd occassion where it happens, but for the most part, there's only ever one guitar playing. That means there is VERY LITTLE doubling up of the guitars. Also, in Aenima and all the albums prior, they made an effort to keep the recordings close to what they could achieve live. Alot has gone on production wise in 10 years. Your appreciation of 10,000 Days 'fullness of sound' comes from recording techniques, Adams set up, the overall treatment of the guitars. (Badly mastered in the sense we're talking here - clipped and squashed ). The fullness of sound has to do with better recording and production techniques, and not so much to do with overcompressing the whole thing.Īenima is a (relatively) badly recorded album, but a superbly mastered album (Well mastered in the sense it contains alot of dynamics and transients, whilst still being fairly loud, and maintaining it's quality as the gain is pushed up on home systems).Ĭonversely, 10,000 Days, is a well recorded album that is badly mastered. Anyone who tells you otherwise has no idea what they are talking about. What I do know, for 100% sure, is that lossless audio files in their compressed state sound exactly the same as their uncompressed WAV buddies. I had a hard time passing Algebra 2 in high school, I still can't wrap my head around things like psychoacoustic shaping and the different encoding algorithms. How does it work? Well, I have no goddamn idea, it's all way beyond my head.
Both lossy and lossless compression schemes are tuned for music, it's just that lossy compresses and throws stuff out, whereas lossless just compresses. In fact, they are exactly the same thing, except those formats are specifically tuned for music (and some allow extra goodies such as tagging and such).Īs for the whole sentence before "what bits to be kept"-you're missing one crucial thing: in any lossless file, ALL the bits are kept.
Imagine FLAC, APE, Wavpack, Shorten, and all those other Lossless formats as the same thing as a RAR or a Zip file. Track 8b on the CD is a hidden track that follows after 25 seconds of silence and is not listed in the liner notes.Yeah, you're a bit off the mark. King Buzzo is incorrectly credited as performing on "No Quarter".Tracks 5 and 6 on the CD are switched around on in the liner notes (they are correct in the list below)."Message To Harry Manback II" is spelled with Messege.Paul D'Amour is spelled either Paul Damour or Paul D'Mour.Subsequent pressings corrected the errors. Original pressing with typographical errors and a red VHS tape. Australian version which has the US version of the CD but a PAL VHS with Australia-specific labels, and a small MA15+ classification label stuck to the transparent sleeve.