[HN Gopher] No patches for digital audio releases
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       No patches for digital audio releases
        
       Author : mcraiha
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2022-04-17 13:22 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mcraiha.github.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mcraiha.github.io)
        
       | aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
       | GAS's (Wolfgang Voigt) latest album [1] was criticised by many
       | (including Pitchfork [2]) for having a very high pitched (~12khz)
       | tone throughout the album. Pitchfork was speculating in their
       | review that the artist suffers from hearing loss, after decades
       | spent in the Cologne techno scene. In response they removed the
       | 12khz tone, and uploaded the new versions to all digital
       | platforms, and even sent repressed CDs to customers.
       | 
       | [1] https://kompakt-gas.bandcamp.com/album/der-lange-marsch
       | 
       | [2] https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/gas-der-lange-marsch/
        
       | sueders101 wrote:
       | Kanye West 'patched' multiple songs on his album The Life of
       | Pablo.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_of_Pablo#Post-release...
        
       | rectang wrote:
       | > _I assume someone joined the invidual tracks manually in their
       | digital audio workstation (DAW) software and botched the thing at
       | that point. And I can safely assume that person didn't even to
       | bother to listen it (it is over 50 minutes long so...). Nor did
       | anyone else working there with that release._
       | 
       | > _I get that people make mistakes. That is natural. But
       | WaterTower Music should have some sort of QA team in the building
       | to prevent something like that from happening._
       | 
       | Former audio mastering engineer here. Audio QA is hard. You need
       | very high attention to detail to work in a mastering role.
       | 
       | Many customers do not have serious QA skills and even if you get
       | everything "right", if they miscommunicated their instructions
       | and you faithfully fulfilled them, unfortunate things can happen.
       | 
       | I once had a guy screaming at me over his assistant's phone
       | (because he'd thrown his own through the window) "I JUST THREW
       | AWAY A HUNDRED... THOUSAND... DOLLARS!" It was their fault,
       | though. 300,000 CDs had to be destroyed. We got paid to make a
       | new master, with rush fees. Not how I like to make my money, but
       | the people who mattered were thrilled with the service we
       | provided and our ability to turn around perfectly executed
       | masters repeatedly under intense time pressure.
       | 
       | With regards to the Batman Begins error, if I was the mastering
       | engineer AND the one who did the edit, I would _definitely_ have
       | caught that. I listened all the way through to at least one copy
       | of every master I ever prepared -- you couldn 't decline that
       | service. That's not uncommon for mastering houses, and so I
       | speculate that the error happened earlier in the chain, with a
       | DAW operator who could have been an engineer or perhaps an artist
       | with DAW skills. Somebody was tired and overbudget and couldn't
       | muster the energy to listen to the damn thing for the ten
       | thousandth time.
       | 
       | Regrettably, although it seems clear that the overlap is not what
       | the artist intended, it would get by most listeners -- it's not
       | like it's some nasty digital glitch, the overall mood and flow
       | isn't killed dead. At the mastering stage, there's not a
       | guarantee that somebody would point it out, even though we'd
       | really like to have done so and earned the gratitude of the
       | customer. Between the mastering preparation stage and the
       | publishing stage, probably only someone highly familiar with the
       | piece would have picked that error out, and sometimes those
       | people don't bring their A game for QA.
        
         | HidyBush wrote:
         | Unrelated question: it seems to me that the majority of music
         | is recorded/mastered in a bad way. This is especially painful
         | when I'm trying to judge a new pair of headphones. What do you
         | think are some music albums that really hit the nail in terms
         | of mastering?
        
         | kingcharles wrote:
         | The Batman thing is just the CD tracks bashed together into a
         | single file. My guess is that task was dropped on some minimum
         | wage intern, and that no-one with the title "engineer" or any
         | serious experience with audio was involved.
         | 
         | Source: used to work for Peter Gabriel
        
       | k_sze wrote:
       | My hypothesis about no-patch is that there is no incentive. You
       | can't report an audio problem like you report a software bug. I
       | can't imagine a situation where the kind of audio problem
       | described by the author is show-stopping.
       | 
       | Audio problems are also subject to subjective judgement. What one
       | considers a problem might go completely unnoticed by other
       | people. Heck, the content creator may even argue that it's part
       | of their creative output.
       | 
       | In some cases, there is less ambiguity. e.g. you really shouldn't
       | hear any voice when the track says "instrumental", but does any
       | consumer protection law care about that? Like, in Hong Kong, we
       | have "Trade Description" laws that protect consumers against
       | merchandises or services that don't match the advertised
       | descriptions, although I have no idea if those laws would help
       | here. What judge would not roll their eyes and tell you to just
       | settle out of court? But if you settle out of court, I'd bet
       | their laywer would try to add gag terms to the settlement. Are
       | you really gonna allow yourself to be silenced in order to get a
       | 10.99 USD refund?
       | 
       | Maybe we could create incentives if 1) audio hosting platforms
       | actually allow listeners to report audio problems in a
       | _systematic_, _publicly visible_ way, like you would file bug
       | issues on GitHub, 2) leaving the problems unfixed will lead to
       | demonetization of the content.
       | 
       | Also note that the performance of art seems to become perversed
       | when (big) money becomes the incentive. If you know where to look
       | on the web, there are groups who fansub anime and who will go out
       | of their way to re-encode original bluray releases because they
       | think the audio is out-of-sync, or because they think the picture
       | of the original looks like shit in terms of colour
       | temperature/lightness/saturation/gamma. And they seem to do it
       | out of the passion of sharing the joy of watching anime.
       | 
       | While fansubbers have total freedom to decide when to do a patch
       | or re-release, your professional audio engineer working for
       | Warner Bros (again, hypothetical) doesn't have that freedom. If
       | they report a problem about something already released, the first
       | question they get asked by their boss would be "does this hurt
       | our bottomline?" And probably overwhelmingly often, the answer is
       | "no" because we don't have a system that builds the right
       | incentives.
        
         | Kwpolska wrote:
         | > You can't report an audio problem like you report a software
         | bug.
         | 
         | Well, that depends on who you're reporting to. How do you
         | report a bug to MAMAA? Sure, you can click "Send feedback" all
         | you want, but how likely is it to reach a person (as opposed to
         | /dev/null), and then fixed? At the same time, if you tell a
         | small artist or label about an audio problem, they might be
         | able to do something about it.
        
           | k_sze wrote:
           | Exactly. Part of the problem is that the media hosting
           | platforms don't make these reports public. And there are also
           | multiple platforms where Warner Bros (just as an example) can
           | get their soundtracks hosted. And then such reports would get
           | fragmented across the platforms.
        
       | timmattison wrote:
       | I used to report broken tracks to Google when I had Google Music.
       | I gave up. I'd get a form letter that said to reset my cookies,
       | uninstall and reinstall the app, etc. every time.
       | 
       | I'd write and explain the problem was with the same song, on
       | different machines (Windows, Linux, and Max) and both Android and
       | iOS. Still got the same form letter back.
       | 
       | I'll almost guarantee that if I search my email for the broken
       | tracks they'd still be broken. One was Saddam-a-Go-Go by GWAR. A
       | few seconds in it just skips ahead a few seconds from one lyric
       | to another.
        
       | peterkelly wrote:
       | I think there's something to be said for the inability to issue
       | patches. It's created a culture in the software industry,
       | especially in games, of rushing to get the first version out in
       | basic working form and then have a "day one patch" followed by
       | many subsequent fixes. Quality suffers because there's an
       | attitude that problems can always be fixed later, so it's not a
       | disaster if the initial release is below standard.
       | 
       | 30 years ago this wasn't an option. Whatever the development team
       | designated as the golden master would be written to physical
       | cartridges, floppy disks, or CDs. Any bugs that were there would
       | stay there, so you _had_ to get it as close to perfect as
       | possible because there were no second chances. This pressure
       | meant that people were, by necessity, more careful. How many
       | times have you installed a patch for a Super NES or Playstation 2
       | game? Compare that to today 's releases.
       | 
       | For developers and other creators, the idea of being able to
       | repeatedly update things is attractive. It's also necessary in
       | certain spheres, particularly in fixing security vulnerabilities.
       | But I know the sense of finality and relief can be immense once
       | you publish something that _can 't_ be changed (as was the case
       | with my thesis) and that something is finally "done" and I know
       | I'll never have to worry about it again. The requirement to get
       | something right the first time has a significant impact on
       | quality.
        
         | kingcharles wrote:
         | The first time I came across patched _video games_ was the late
         | 80s. You 'd regularly get updates to PC games on magazine cover
         | disks.
        
         | tialaramex wrote:
         | While "Day One Patch" is basically a curse (and a reminder that
         | pre-ordering games is a sucker bet since even people who buy it
         | when it's released aren't sure yet what they'll actually get)
         | it's worth remembering that even when things were "written to
         | physical cartridges, floppy disks or CDs" there actually were
         | version changes.
         | 
         | If you get into speed running you'll find that on some of these
         | very old games it's specified the _exact_ version you must run,
         | e.g. the Japanese original CD release with no version on the
         | title screen, not the English or German versions, and not a
         | later Japanese version showing 1.0 on the title screen. Because
         | even if a casual player doesn 't care that there was a glitch
         | where you can phase through walls by pressing PAUSE once per
         | frame ten times in a row on the other versions, the speed
         | runners absolutely do care.
         | 
         | There are musicians who clearly don't see the recording as the
         | primary outlet, and so aren't bothered if the CD goes out with
         | a mediocre attempt at a song because for them the live
         | performance is what matters. That's not something that really
         | exists for video games.
        
         | _moof wrote:
         | I've noticed this too. Combine the constant patching with auto-
         | updates and my whole system starts to feel like it's made of
         | sand, constantly shifting under my feet. It almost feels
         | disrespectful. Like, I use my computers to _work._ The most
         | important thing is that it work for me, reliably and
         | predictably, not that it serve as a showcase for whatever the
         | product manager du jour needs in their promotion packet. There
         | 's just a total failure to prioritize the needs of the user.
         | 
         | Needless to say I keep auto-updates off. What a world we've
         | made where updating your software has become something to be
         | avoided.
        
         | kmeisthax wrote:
         | Believe it or not, games regularly did get updated even back in
         | the NES era. There's many games out there that had a long
         | enough shelf life to get a PRG1/CHR1 revision and reprint.
         | Furthermore, almost no games were sim-ship[0] back then, so
         | even if games didn't get a re-release in the same territory you
         | still had the opportunity to patch a game for the next
         | country's release. e.g. US v1.0 might be equivalent to JP v1.2
         | even if Japan never got that version.
         | 
         | This is also why a lot of Europeans get really confused at old
         | AVGN videos: some of the games he trashes were _dramatically_
         | improved for Europe and only sucked in the US. (e.g. Fester 's
         | Quest)
         | 
         | Furthermore, developers back then were very much not "more
         | careful"; in fact, there's plenty of examples of games that
         | were shipped back then with little or no playtesting or QA work
         | done. And likewise, being able to patch a game later doesn't
         | really fix the reputational harm from shipping broken software.
         | If the game is not playable day-one[1], nobody will care when
         | it's playable on day 255.
         | 
         | [0] Industry jargon for SIMultaneous SHIP - as in, release in
         | all territories
         | 
         | [1] Day-one patch inclusive. I know people hate them, but they
         | let developers eke out an extra month of QA and bug-fixing time
         | because of how cert works.
        
       | ovao wrote:
       | There's one example I know of in which a 'patch' was released for
       | an album: in 2008, Trent Reznor released a corrected version of
       | the 24/96 version of _The Slip_ (the album he had released for
       | free through nin.com, and at the time, their own torrent tracker)
       | due to a mastering error. The re-release replaced the existing
       | release on nin.com.
       | 
       | It obviously wasn't _technically_ a patch, and was easy enough to
       | do since it was self-distributed, but it's not entirely unheard
       | of for a major digital music release to have seen corrections.
        
         | david_allison wrote:
         | Kanye[0] and Drake[1] have done the same:
         | 
         | > The changes feature a few new alternate vocal takes and
         | lyrics, but mainly comprise mix and production tweaks.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/kanye-west-
         | mak...
         | 
         | > These weren't overhauls that significantly altered the length
         | or content of songs--just tweaks to the mixes of select songs
         | 
         | [1] https://kotaku.com/albums-are-getting-patches-
         | now-1827376874
        
         | k_sze wrote:
         | I also remember that Kahvi Collective re-released one of their
         | netlabel albums, "Tangents", to fix a mastering error, although
         | they decided to actually charge for the new version due to
         | mastering effort - their albums are usually pay-what-you-want
         | on Bandcamp (including 0 dollar if you just want to download
         | the FLAC version).
        
       | tialaramex wrote:
       | It would be nice to patch metadata somehow formally.
       | 
       | I have the version of "Furious Angels" on which a track on the
       | second disc is incorrectly labelled "Clubbed To Death
       | (Instrumental Version)" but er, no, it's just an instrumental
       | unrelated to "Clubbed To Death". I know that, but it does say
       | right on the label that it's Clubbed To Death and so I'm torn
       | about how to record it in the metadata for the album.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | The CD that came with the original World of Warcraft collectors
         | edition mislabeled the ironforge theme as stormwind. Is
         | annoying.
        
       | bscphil wrote:
       | A related issue: in some cases the industry has allowed _anyone_
       | to upload a copy of a song, and so you run into the issue that
       | you 're at the mercy of whoever the uploader was when it comes to
       | the quality of your upload.
       | 
       | I ran into a case where there were reports that a specific
       | release of a CD has a much better mastering than other versions,
       | it was a Super Audio CD (SACD) as I recall. I looked up the
       | release on YouTube, since differences in mastering are clearly
       | audible even in a lossy encode. The one upload was by a random
       | person who had put it up in an HD video, but the volume of the
       | release had inexplicably been boosted to the point that the sound
       | was _heavily_ distorted!
       | 
       | Another case: the most popular version of the Eminem "Lose
       | Yourself" music video (over a billion views) is uploaded by some
       | random person, with one of those ludicrous "no copyright
       | infringement intended" messages in the description. It's
       | seemingly the one that the industry approved as the legitimate
       | version of the music video on YouTube, however. I actually tried
       | tracking down the official version on the artist's page, and (at
       | the time) it had actually been taken down by the studio with one
       | of the standard DMCA takedown messages YouTube shows!
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Is there some deep-learning tool to reconstruct songs that got
         | distorted in various ways?
        
           | lozenge wrote:
           | "Content aware fill" works on the basis that you just want
           | "some grass" or "some rocks" and don't know or care whether
           | it matches the exact grass that was in the original picture.
           | 
           | If people have already heard the original song, then the
           | computer isn't going to be able to fill in the lost
           | information in a way that matches their memory.. even with
           | deep learning
        
         | 323 wrote:
         | Regarding the Eminem song, I found this on Reddit, don't know
         | if it's true:
         | 
         | > _YouTube allows copyright owners to choose to leave videos
         | /channels up when they report them and simply divert all
         | monetization from the videos to the copyright owner. That is
         | likely what is happening here._
         | 
         | Could be some sort of authenticity play from Eminem, him
         | wanting to look less "corporate".
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-17 23:02 UTC)