On Tuesday, February 4, 2014 3:34:23 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2014 12:38:55 PM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
=20
On Monday, February 3, 2014 10:12:47 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
=20
=20
=20
Then one final reference which I'm sure you will reject with all the =
others.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Scott, please, it's bad enough that you are misrepresenting the meaning=
of your references. Please don't misrepresent my actions. I have not *rej=
ected* any of your references. I have merely pointed out their complete la=
ck of relevance to the argument about how real records were actually cut.=
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
I don't know how repeated and consistent references indicating these are =
industry standard practices mandated for a good result on vinyl media is no=
t relevant.
Your references in no way state that folding the bass to mono and rolling t=
he highs and lows are industry standard practices.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Though I do begin to wonder why I'm the only one providing evidence
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
to support my position.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
But you aren't providing evidence to support *your* position. I wonder =
why I am the only one who bothers to get relevant information from actual =
experts on the subject?=20
=20
=20
=20
Provide a reference. I haven't seen one.
You actually have seen two and I'll add a third. but just to be absolutely =
clear I will hand it to you on a proverbial silver plate.
Contact info for Kevin Gray at Cohearant
http://www.cohearent.com/contact/
Contact info for Bernie Grundman=20
http://www.berniegrundmanmastering.com/contact.html
And for a third reference let me introduce you to mastering engineer Doug S=
ax
Contact info for Doug Sax at The Mastering Lab
http://themasteringlab.com/contact/
Please include the cutting engineers list of equipment in the chain as w=
ell.
I just gave you contact info on three cutting engineers. I suggest you get =
the answers from them, the most accurate and reliable source. They will kno=
w better than anyone else what equipment they used.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Do you really want to know how records are and have been actually made o=
r do you just want to argue in favor of your prejudices? If you really wan=
t to know then do yourself a favor, stop arguing with me about it and ask =
the real experts. I have given you all the contact info you need to do so.=
=20
=20
=20
=20
These references are from experts.
They certainly are not experts on how Kevin Gray, Bernie Grundman and Doug =
Sax cut their lacquers without folding the bass to mono, using limiters or =
rolling the highs and lows. The experts on that subject would be Kevin Gray=
, Bernie Grundman and Doug Sax.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
http://productionadvice.co.uk/vinyl-mastering/
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It directly supports my comment that highly compressed sources (which=
includes=20
=20
brickwalled material) are easily cut as the avg level is easily set w=
ithin=20
=20
range.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Well no...it doesn't really. Here are the key elements you need to pay =
attention to.=20
=20
=20
=20
"A great master for CD can be a great master for vinyl, too." I don't m=
ean to speak for Ian on the subject but i am pretty sure he will tell you =
that a "great master" is not one that is brick walled.=20
=20
=20
=20
Of course not. But a great master for vinyl must be Dess'd, have centere=
d bass, and limited HF energy
That is your assertion not Ian's and it is an overly broad assertion that d=
oes not take the actual source material into consideration. Fortunately the=
top mastering engineers know better and make decisions based on the source=
material they have in their hands rather than relying on such broad assump=
tions about what will make a great master.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Now he does go on to say this...
=20
=20
=20
"I often read people saying that you can't cut super-hot "loudness war"=
audio to vinyl, for fear of the needle skipping and jumping off the record=
..
=20
But that's wrong. In fact, the exact opposite is true !
=20
There's no technical reason that you can't put "loudness war" style mus=
ic on vinyl - to use a well-known example, the vinyl and CD releases of Met=
allica's "Death Magnetic" sound very similar indeed."
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Which is an opinion he offers that does support your specific position =
that "loud" source material can in fact easily be cut to vinyl. However Ian=
goes on to say this...
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
""If your CD master has what I consider optimal dynamics - DR8 or more =
overall - then it's perfectly suitable for a flat transfer to vinyl."
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Seems to me those two statements by the same guy are at odds with each =
other.=20
=20
=20
=20
Not really. DR, avg level, FR, and the resulting final product S/N ratio=
are all interrelated. He's just saying with not too high a DR, you can ha=
ve an acceptable level cut to vinyl with this caveat, "At least, assuming y=
ou don't have any wild sibilance, hugely out-of-phase content, or all the b=
ass panned to one channel !
No he said exactly the opposite. "If your CD master has what I consider opt=
imal dynamics - DR8 or more overall - then it's perfectly suitable for a fl=
at transfer to vinyl." He said DR of 8 or MORE not less. But if you want to=
continue to argue with your own references that's up to you. Once you sett=
le that argument then maybe we can go from there. ;-)
=20
=20
=20
OR he simply thinks dynamic range simply isn't an issue either way. Eith=
er way what you have managed to do is give us references that offer confli=
cting opinions about the ill effects on brickwalling a signal before cutti=
ng it to a lacquer.=20
=20
=20
=20
He doesn't address the poor fidelity of brickwalling in digital...just th=
at that resulting compressed signal can be cut. Your idea of a square wave=
never makes it out of the DAC.
Yes he does address it. That is his quest these days, to address the ill ef=
fects of brick walling.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Well hey, maybe Ian is right about it. Maybe I am not giving the medium =
due credit for it's ability to deal with extreme compression and digital c=
lipping.
=20
=20
=20
The media actually likes extreme compression. Makes it easy to set correc=
t level for max S/N....but the media has no concern for digital clipping as=
all the real nasty stuff doesn't get past the filter.
It would seem that some mastering engineers have expressed the opposite opi=
nion.
=20
=20
=20
I suppose it's not something of major interest to me since I try to sta=
y away from anything that is brickwalled be it on CD or vinyl.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Lastly NONE of this supports your assertions that the vast majority of =
LPs were cut with rolled highs and rolled lows and bass folded to mono. Th=
is is my major point of contention. This is an urban myth and you have off=
ered nothing to support it.=20
=20
=20
=20
Every cutting house site that provides guidance for mastering to custome=
rs speaks of each of these issues. This final reference is clear indicatio=
n that if the master doesn't properly address these limitations, the cuttin=
g engineer will.
You are making a lot of assumptions here. Sorry but I am not willing to mak=
e the same assumptions.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It also clearly states that if mastering engineers don't take steps t=
o control=20
=20
HF content content, sybilance, or out of phase bass....then the cutti=
ng engineer=20
=20
=20
=20
will to produce a playable result.
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
It's a far too overly broad claim to have much meaning. The fact still =
remains that I personally have a massive body of LPs of some of the best so=
unding recordings in the history of recorded music that have been cut witho=
ut the use of limiters,
=20
=20
=20
There is almost no way for you to know that on the vast majority of your =
collection. But let's start with just one reference.=20
1. Who said anything about the vast majority of my collection? I said sever=
al hundred records. It's a lot easier to have a meaningful conversation if =
you can keep the facts straight. You keep asking for references and I keep =
giving them to you. It actually is quite easy for me to know how those hund=
reds of LPs were cut since I know who cut them and how it was claimed they =
were cut. it's not rocket science. All you have to do is ask. See above for=
the specific names and contact info.=20
=20
Please name the album and provide proof that in the complete mixing, mast=
ering, and cutting process there was no EQ, limiting, phase adjustment, cha=
nnel balancing, or compression to deal with the limitations of vinyl.
Name of "album?" we are talking about entire series of albums
AP Top 100 Jazz Cut by Kevin Gray
http://www.analogueproductions.com/i...LabelID=3D4085
AP Bluenote series cut by Kevin Gray
http://www.analogueproductions.com/i...LabelID=3D4082
AP Impulse series cut by Bernie Grundman
http://www.analogueproductions.com/i...ch&group=3D219
AP Verve series cut by Bernie Grundman
http://www.analogueproductions.com/i...LabelID=3D4084
Music Matters Bluenote series cut bt Kevin Gray
http://www.musicmattersjazz.com/category_s/83.htm
The Classic 45rpm series of RCA and Mercury Living Presence Classical LPs c=
ut by Bernie Grundman
The ORG series of Verve LPs cut by Bernie Grundman
http://www.elusivedisc.com/ORG_Origi...-180g-45rpm/p=
roducts/1946/
The ORG Impulse series and London Blue Back series all cut by Bernie Grundm=
an
http://www.originalrecordingsgroup.com/htm/catalog.htm
The entire Sheffield Labs D2D series cut by Doug Sax
You know how to contact Kevin Gray, Bernie Grundman and Doug Sax.=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
without rolling the highs or lows for the sake of the cut and without =
folding the bass to mono. So clearly the *need* to tweak the source materi=
al in order to get it to cut properly is something that has to be decided =
on a case by case basis. And one can not make any assumptions about how an=
y given record was cut based on these very broad rules of thumb.=20
=20
=20
=20
Obviously not...and you keep claiming "rolled to mono" while I keep telli=
ng you that low bass can be centered (or phase adjusted) and you won't noti=
ce it.
I have never made any claims about "rolled to mono" which in audio terms is=
gibberish. I have talked about "folding" the bass to mono or as it is ofte=
n called summing the bass to mono. Both describe a specific action that a m=
astering engineer may take in cutting a lacquer. You keep talking about thi=
ngs that are different than that specific act. If you don't understand the =
difference then it is hard to talk about the subject.
=20
=20
"At least, assuming you don't have any wild sibilance, hugely out-of-=
phase=20
=20
content, or all the bass panned to one channel !
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
And even if you do, the cutting engineer will take account of that as=
a matter=20
=20
of course during the cut - it doesn't require a separate mastering se=
ssion."
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
Ian is again making some pretty broad generalizations here and he reall=
y can't speak for all the other mastering engineers out there. I'd love to=
see him discuss this with guys like Kevin Gray or Bernie Grundman who hav=
e in fact cut hundreds of LPs without the use of limiters and without roll=
ing the highs or lows or folding the bass to mono for the purpose of makin=
g the cut work properly.=20
=20
=20
=20
Well there is an interesting and pertinent interview with Bernie reprinte=
d in the Mastering Engineers Handbook, page 193.
=20
=20
You can read it here.
=20
=20
=20
http://books.google.com/books?id=3Dz...pg=3DPA193&dq=
=3DBernie+grundman+on+vinyl+mastering&source=3Dbl& ots=3DgIxM_nl8Fa&sig=3Dom=
BhB4IkgfwAVFEH5UBGOb61ih8&hl=3Den&sa=3DX&ei=3DI1fw Uo6jIMrCyQHggIHwAQ&ved=3D=
0CGkQ6AEwCQ#v=3Donepage&q=3DBernie%20grundman%20on %20vinyl%20mastering&f=3D=
false
=20
You might find it interesting. That is a moot point. But it certainly is no=
t pertinent. It says nothing one way or another about your assertions that =
the vast majority of LP have been cut with the bass folded to mono and the =
highs and lows rolled so as to be able to cut the lacquer. =20
=20
I'll only bother to retype this one line but you should read it in it's e=
ntirety.
=20
=20
=20
"Whereas if you listen to old vinyl discs, you notice that they don't hav=
e anywhere near the bass or high end that CDs have nowadays because there w=
as a cutting limitation."
=20
=20
Do you thin that Bernie is talking about his records when he talks about "o=
ld vinyl?"
=20
The physics of vinyl haven't changed....unless you want to argue that ev=
eryone should have nothing but 8 min a side long 45s in their collections.
=20
Who said the physics have changed? The physics of aero engineering hasn't c=
hanged either. But I'm pretty sure there was some substantial technological=
advancements somewhere between Kittyhawk and today.=20
Why would I "want to argue that everyone should have nothing but 8 min a si=
de long 45s in their collections?" I have made no comments on what everyone=
*should or should not* have. I am talking about *what actually exists*. I =
suggest you take a good close look at the hundreds of records I cited for y=
ou that I also own. They are real. They do exist and that is what we seem t=
o disagree on.