2. misc-audio
  3. 167295-139155

Does Steely Dan sound bright to you?

This is going to sound like a somewhat random question but I’m wondering how many of you find Steely Dan’s recordings to sound a bit bright. I’m particularly thinking of Gaucho, and Aja but some other recent recordings, too, such as Fagen’s Nightfly.

My typical media include streaming (CD and HD quality) and CD’s. I have not played my old vinyl because I’m presently without a turntable.

At first I thought it was my system and it was driving me a little bit mental; eventually, I decided it wasn't my stuff, it was their stuff. Because most other recordings on the same system with no other changes don’t typically have the brightness of Steely Dan.

Whether or not you’re a fan (I am) Steely Dan has often been a go-to for testing out equipment, so I imagine there will be experiences people have had about this.

P.S. Any other recordings which, for you are unnaturally bright?


hilde45
decooney
2,358 posts
 
@hilde45 CHECK THIS.
Which master version are you really listening to while streaming the Steely Dan "Aja" track? Audiophilestyle wrote an article about this, and "seven" different digital masterings. Try the CD remaster and compare to your streamed version, you might hear a difference. This might explain part of it.

Quote: @Audiophilesyle:

"The digital mastering history of Aja is complex, the differences between the masterings are notable, and debate on the interwebs about which is the best has been particularly heated.


But the basic story is that there have been (at least) seven digital masterings of Aja: 1) a 1984 CD mastered by Steve Hoffman, 2) a 1984 CD mastered by Nichols, 3) a 1984 Japanese CD with uncertain mastering credits, 4) a 1988 Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab CD remaster, 5) a 1993 remaster by Glenn Meadows found on the Citizen Steely Dan CD box set, 6) a 1999 CD remaster by Nichols, and 7) a 2010 “flat transfe[r] from Japan[ese] original analogue master tapes” by Hitoshi Takiguchi at Tokyo’s Universal Music Studios, used for both a 2010 SACD and severalsubsequent CDs."



hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
5,445 posts
 
Thanks, all. The tragedy is that with all the information which could be conveyed with the music we stream, there's precious little that you get along with it. CDs and of course vinyl albums gave us all we needed to nerd out about the details of a recording. I don't know which Aja I'm listening to when it's on Amazon.

If one looks at the link I posted earlier, there was not only a preference for analogue for playback but also for recording.

"Scheiner adds that he 'seldom' uses EQ during the mix, and that Morph The Cat was recorded via Clinton's Neve 8078 directly to analogue 24-track. Straightforward recording to analogue without much processing is now Fagen's favoured approach, says he. "It's the sound I like. It's not necessary to have the latest equipment."
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,638 posts
 
Per Donald Fagen:

"But frankly I don’t hear that much of a difference between the two media."
decooney
2,358 posts
 
Landslide by Fleetwood Mac in the very last Remastered version sounds nothing like the prior three versions from prior decades; Early version, 2004 version, 2017 remaster, 2018 remastered version. The 2018 remaster at times sounds like a totally different recording, even with streamed content. The last remaster is more vibrant and engaging.  

I played the four different mastered and remastered versions of Landslide for my wife. She was shocked how much different the last remaster sounds, compared to priors. It depends on which track version you are actually listening to with some of these timeless songs regardless of media types.
hilde45's avatar
hilde45 OP
5,445 posts
 
@decooney  Thanks, and I should probably know better to ask such a vague question. Given the variety of media and masterings out there, my question almost doesn't deserve asking because it merely leads to differences based not on hearing (though that is possible) but on a variety of factors which are either unknown or in conflict.
More to discover