In ancient days two aviators procured to themselves wings. Daedalus flew safely through the middle air, and was duly honoured in his landing. Icarus soared upwards to the sun till the wax melted which bound his wings, and his flight ended in a fiasco. In weighing their achievements perhaps there is something to be said for Icarus. The classic authorities tell us, of course, that he was only ‘doing a stunt’; but I prefer to think of him as the man who certainly brought to light a serious constructional defect in the flying-machines of his day [and] we may at least hope to learn from his journey some hints to build a better machine.
My Thoughts on Washington’s I-522
I would vote for this initiative if not for Section 1, Paragraphs 4 and 5, which would make untrue statements about the scientific literature into law. If it was just a straight labelling initiative without the opinion tacked on at the beginning, I wouldn’t be so opposed—I personally would like to see more information on labels, not less—but when they start talking about the science, that’s when they step onto my turf. I strongly believe that evidence-based policy is the only sane kind of policy, and those paragraphs make untrue statements about the evidence. They want to make those statements into law, and I can’t in good conscience abide that. You might as well ask me to vote on an initiative containing a declaration that US government scientists have stated that the world was created in 6 days. Those kinds of misrepresentations-of-science-turned-law have kept the world embroiled in a massive drug war with devastating consequences for over 40 years, and I will not support them. You want to label foods based on what’s in them? Fine. But don’t make untrue statements about the scientific literature a part of it.
In this short documentary, linguist David Crystal and his son, actor Ben Crystal look at the differences between English pronunciation now and how it was spoken 400 years ago. They answer the most basic question you probably have right now — How do you know what it sounded like back then? — and they discuss the value of performing Shakespeare’s plays in the original accent.
Hesitation Marks was mastered in two different ways - the standard, “loud” mastering (which is what you’ll find on the CD, on iTunes, and everywhere else), and also an alternate “audiophile” mastering, which we’re offering as a free download option for anyone who purchases the album through nin.com. For the majority of people, the standard version will be preferable and differences will be difficult to detect. Audiophiles with high-end equipment and an understanding of the mastering process might prefer the alternate version.
Alan Moulder, who mixed the album, offers a more detailed explanation:
When we were mixing Hesitation Marks we decided to treat the mastering process in a slightly different way to the usual. Since we had tried to treat every other aspect of making this record differently to how we were used to, it seemed to make sense. We were mixing as we went along with the production of each song rather than at the end, so we thought that once we had a song pretty close we would send it off to Tom Baker, our long time serving mastering engineer, to give it some mastering treatment. Normally you wait until the record is finished being recorded and mixed, then take all the mixes to mastering. But we thought doing it again, as we went along, might make us push the process further and spend more time on mastering rather than rush through it at the end. Whilst doing this we became aware of how much low bass information there was on the record. Since that can define how loud of a level the mastering can be, we were faced with a dilemma: do we keep the bass and and have a significantly lower level record, or do we sacrifice the bass for a more competitive level of volume? The biggest issue in mastering these days tends to be how loud can you make your record. It is a fact that when listening back-to-back, loud records will come across more impressively, although in the long run what you sacrifice for that level can be quality and fidelity. So after much discussion we decided to go with two versions. On the main release Tom did exceptional work to maintain the integrity of our mixes and reproduce the low end as much as possible and still get a decent level, although it’s still nowhere as loud as a lot of modern records. The Audiophile Mastered Version is more true to how the mixes sounded to us in the studio when we were working on the songs. Have a listen, turn up the volume and enjoy the experience!Mastering Engineer Tom Baker adds:I believe it was Trent’s idea to master the album two different ways, and to my knowledge it has never been done before.The standard version is “loud” and more aggressive and has more of a bite or edge to the sound with a tighter low end.The Audiophile Mastered Version highlights the mixes as they are without compromising the dynamics and low end, and not being concerned about how “loud” the album would be. The goal was to simply allow the mixes to retain the spatial relationship between instruments and the robust, grandiose sound.NOTE: The standard mastered version is in no way inferior to the Audiophile Version - we wouldn’t release something inferior as the default. And vinyl purists rest assured, the vinyl edition was mastered to sound the very best for that format. The Audiophile Version is merely an alternate take on the mastering, which some people will appreciate. It’s meant to give a slightly different experience, not denigrate the standard version. Listen to each and come to your own conclusions.If you ordered any format of Hesitation Marks from nin.com, you’ll be able to download one or both mastering versions, in whichever formats you prefer (MP3, FLAC, Apple Lossless, and WAV), beginning September 3rd.
At least there’s Metroid.