On Wednesday, January 29, 2014 9:57:54 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:06:43 AM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
=20
On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 10:13:37 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
=20
=20
=20
On Tuesday, January 28, 2014 4:41:48 AM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
I have no idea why a brick walled master would not be able to be =
cut on vinyl.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It's harder because everything is maxed out from top to bottom.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Maxed out in the digital domain. The analog level is easily set with=
in cutters limits. It's probably actually easier to get an optimal level w=
ith such a low dynamic range signal.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
The very FAQ you cited seems to disagree with this assertion
=20
=20
=20
Please be specific as I don't see what you're referring to.
No need to be specific since it is pretty much everything you quoted.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It will just have to be at a level that is trackable with such na=
sty high frequency hash created by clipping.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
That is one way of dealing with it but a clipped digital signal is =
not something you want to try to cut into a lacquer at any level.=20
=20
=20
=20
Of course, garbage in =3D garbage out. I'm trying to focus on what o=
ne can technically do without more harm.
=20
=20
=20
It's not just garbage it's a hard angle in the wave. Clearly this is go=
ing to be an issue in cutting.
=20
=20
=20
Yes, it will be filtered again at the cutter...even after reconstruction =
filtering in the DAC. You do realize that this filter limits DAC HF output=
of even digitally clipped signals?
How does the cutter filter clipped signals?=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Unlike digital, vinyls peak levels are a function of frequency du=
e to print through and trackability. If one wants to cut an album with fla=
t frequency response they will simply sacrifice dynamic range having to ke=
ep peak levels at the limits reasonable. Few recording engineers choose to=
do this instead tweaking the low and high ends. Bass is often made mono (n=
o big deal as very low bass in a room lacks direction) to improve tracking =
and reduce amplitude.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
this does happen. How regularly it happens is debatable. It also de=
pends on=20
=20
what records you are buying.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Seems to be discussed as std practice on vinyl mastering tutorials a=
nd FAQs.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It may seem to be discussed as such on mastering tutorials and FAQs (al=
though not on the one *you* cited) but in my many conversations with actual=
mastering engineers they tend to write this stuff off as extremely uncommo=
n to the point of being urban legend.=20
=20
=20
=20
I'm going to have to defer to RTI's website.
Well let's see what they say.
"The phonograph record is a marvelous medium for storing and reproducing so=
und. With frequency response from 7 Hz to 25kHz and over 75 dB dynamic rang=
e possible, it is capable of startling realism. Its ability to convey a sen=
se of space, that is width and depth of sound stage, with a degree of openn=
ess and airiness, is unrivaled by anything but the most esoteric digital sy=
stems."
No mention anywhere I could find about folding the bass to mono. And only s=
ome basic advice of avoiding excessive treble boost "Watch excessive treble=
boost in the 8 to 16 kHz range in mixing" Nowhere at the RTI website does =
it support any of your assertions about how records have been cut.=20
http://www.recordtech.com/prodsounds.htm
=20
=20
=20
I'm also dropping this as neither google nor any of my readers can cope w=
ith your post formatting. It either lacks indents on response or adds dozen=
s of blank lines I've been trying to tediously delete.
=20
I think the references I've provided define quite clearly the limitations=
of vinyl cutting and how they are typically addressed to provide the best =
results possible.
=20
I think your references and your assertions are at odds with each other. I =
have no problem with your references and what they actually state. Sorry yo=
u are having trouble with the google groups formatting