Well Joe I really don't know what to make of that. Because the subject we're dealing with is so subjective it's really hard for me to agree or disagree. I will tell you that from a personal standpoint most of the tracks that we did for Memorex were somewhat of an embarrassment. These were actually low budget recordings due to the selling price in the mass merchant market.

Having said that, there are a number of factors which may influence one's opinion of the recordings. I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with your ears, but one of the factors that immediately comes to mind is the fact that not a lot of expense went into the mastering of the Memorex line. The reason I suspect this could be the reason is because over the years in listening to a number of comments praising certain lines and trashing others I noticed somewhat of a pattern. It seemed to me that the preferred lines were more project studio quality rather than radio ready quality. As it turns out there could be a logical explanation for this. Getting deep into studio production techniques would be beyond the scope of this particular discussion, but in the spirit of answering your question I'll offer the Reader's Digest version.

Mastering is a very complicated process and as they say, is what usually separates the men from the boys in the final product. It's glaringly obvious in distinguishing a "project studio" project from a professional "radio ready" project. So why does it seem that the average KJ prefers the project studio recording over the radio ready recording? I think the reason may be in part due to the fact that these recordings are being played over a sound reinforcement system as opposed to a home stereo system. One of the telltale signs of a project studio recording is the runaway dynamics in the recording. Played on a sound reinforcement system in a noisy environment this would simulate more of a live sound and possibly what you referred to as deeper and richer.

Several years ago we actually had a production meeting regarding this issue and discussed some possible solutions to this. One of the problems is that many of our recordings go into products that are not played in live venues so the bottom line here is that we would have to create two separate mixes for each track which would be a royal pain in the butt. We were going to call it Pop Hits Monthly Live to offer our customers a choice, but as we all know the market dropped due to a number of factors and it just wouldn't be profitable to do so.

There could be a number of other factors as well, but I just wanted to illustrate one issue in particular. There are so many variables that accounts for someone's preferences that it would be impractical to address them here in this forum, but suffice it to say that ultimately you're the judge and you must choose what's best for you and your business. In any event, thanks for asking and giving me an opportunity to address a problem which seems at times to be a subject of deep controversy amongst individual preferences toward certain brands. I guess the bottom line here is that you like what you like and it's not really worth arguing over who has the best product as opposed to who has the best product for you.

Did my post get removed?????

Nice to see you back, Jer.......

One of my biggest problems with karaoke is the senseless over production of karaoke tracks.
Compressed for radio but they don't get played on radio.

It seemed to me that the preferred lines were more project studio quality rather than radio ready quality.

Ok. You worked out what people wanted but over produced anyway?

Mastering is a very complicated process.

wasn't when I did it. How things have changed.

It's glaringly obvious in distinguishing a "project studio" project from a professional "radio ready" project. So why does it seem that the average KJ prefers the project studio recording over the radio ready recording?

Like you say. It is glaringly obvious. The project studio has dynamics that you mindlessly remove.

One of the telltale signs of a project studio recording is the runaway dynamics in the recording.

Ahhh. Yes, that would be live dynamics.
Yes. You stole it.
It is however perfect for constant volume sheeple.
Live dynamics is only good for people who feel what they sing.

I work with people that sing live but have to sing to midi tracks because the karaoke tracks are unusable.
They are compressed to hell and light and shade is not possible.
You do appear to lack imagination.
Such a shame you have the job you have.

I hate to say it but not having heard the tracks Joe mentioned.
I call you an embarassment to karaoke.