Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Thom Halvorsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

Here are some posts from mastering engineer Steve Hoffman, who did all of
the DCC titles, relating to SOTA vinyl mastering. Have to admire the guys
who want to go through this torture when all they would have to do in the
case of CD mastering is push the "burn" button. So if you still prefer the
sound of vinyl here is some interesting reading:

QUOTE

There is something about Rudy Van Gelder master tapes from the late 1950's
and early 1960's that Neumann cutting lathes HATE! There is a very high
frequency oscillation in those tapes that loves to burn up cutter heads and
cutting amps.

I was cutting LUSH LIFE today with Kevin and I couldn't believe how crazy
the equipment was getting. We slowed down the master tape to about 5 inches
per second and FOUND IT! A pesky tone, embedded in the Van Gelder tapes that
is around 20,000 cycles. ONLY on the cymbals, or when the cymbals hit. I
have no idea why this happens, but we speculate that it is some kind of RCA
limiter reaction to the crash sound; much worse than limiter splatter.

As Kevin and I were pulling out (just his) hair over this, we were talking
about the Neumann cutting system he has. Get a load of this:

It is a Neumann SX-74, built in West Berlin, Germany in very late 1973. It
was shipped new to Whitney Recording Studios in Glendale in 1974 and was
sold to LRS (Location Recording Service) in 1976 where it stayed until 1999
when Kevin Gray bought it For AcousTech Mastering in Camarillo.

Kevin estimates that (conservatively) he has cut 40,000 sides with this unit
since 1978. An amazing amount of vinyl!

Now, here is the blow-mind part: The unit cuts flat from 2 hz to 27,000
cycles! Imagine that.

So, in the 1950's and '60's, the Van Gelder stuff was cut with
Scully/Westrex systems that started rolling off around 12k. No one had any
problem cutting these tapes. With the advent of the Neumann system (which
had to be able to cut an RCA CD-4 quadraphonic carrier tone on the disc with
no problem) things got bad, quickly.

I remember when I cut the original DCC LUSH LIFE LP with Stan Ricker we were
both dumbfounded at the wacky things the tape was doing to the machinery.
Today brought it all back.

Oh, we finally "got it", but it was tough!

Love that Neumann SX-74 though!

UNQUOTE


and


QUOTE

I've been spending this week trying to successfully master Sonny Rollins
"Way Out West" and The Bill Evans Trio "Waltz For Debby" onto 45 RPM discs.
"Tis a struggle folks! These recordings are VERY dynamic and very left/right
heavy; doom for the mastering engineer.

Kevin Gray, who I feel is the best damn record cutter in the world today,
has been tearing his hair out. And let me tell you, that's not a good
idea...

However, we have nailed 'em! Thank goodness. I wouldn't be able to sleep at
night otherwise.

The trick of making a good record, is to, well, make a good record. This
means following certain "rules". Among them are the two most basic:

Rule one: The sound has to be louder than the noise of the vinyl.

Rule two: The sound can't be too loud or the groove will break.

End of old rules. New rules:

STEVE'S RULES:

I will not add ANY limiting or compression to our discs while cutting, even
if the dynamic range on the master tapes is greater than the range of our VU
meters (amazing, but true!)

I will not tamper in any way with the pure tonality of the original master
recordings, even if one drum "thwack" is 10db hotter than the rest of the
music floor.

Kevin and I will not cut too far into the record center at 45 RPM so that
even an average stylus can track the groove with ease.

UNQUOTE


and


QUOTE

If I cut a straight transfer lacquer, you wouldn't be able to tell the
difference between the cutting and the master. If I add some extra "magic" I
do it because it needs to be done! But, I control it, it is not built in to
our cutting system.

UNQUOTE

Also this from Speakers Corner on their latest From Elvis In Memphis vinyl
release:

QUOTE

The lacquers are cut in Hannover at Emil-Berliner-Studios on Neumann VMS 80.
According to my knowledge, no (analogue) equalizer is available there. The
cutting console of VMS 80 does contain an equalizer, but this is so bad that
even if you just connect it into the signal-line the sound becomes worse.
This unit is disabled therefore. So, the answer to your question is: no kind
of equalization, filtering or limiting what-so-ever on this release.

UNQUOTE


________
Thom
  #2   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

Here are some posts from mastering engineer Steve Hoffman, who did all of
the DCC titles, relating to SOTA vinyl mastering. Have to admire the guys
who want to go through this torture when all they would have to do in the
case of CD mastering is push the "burn" button. So if you still prefer the
sound of vinyl here is some interesting reading:

QUOTE

There is something about Rudy Van Gelder master tapes from the late 1950's
and early 1960's that Neumann cutting lathes HATE! There is a very high
frequency oscillation in those tapes that loves to burn up cutter heads and
cutting amps.

I was cutting LUSH LIFE today with Kevin and I couldn't believe how crazy
the equipment was getting. We slowed down the master tape to about 5 inches
per second and FOUND IT! A pesky tone, embedded in the Van Gelder tapes that
is around 20,000 cycles. ONLY on the cymbals, or when the cymbals hit. I
have no idea why this happens, but we speculate that it is some kind of RCA
limiter reaction to the crash sound; much worse than limiter splatter.

As Kevin and I were pulling out (just his) hair over this, we were talking
about the Neumann cutting system he has. Get a load of this:

It is a Neumann SX-74, built in West Berlin, Germany in very late 1973. It
was shipped new to Whitney Recording Studios in Glendale in 1974 and was
sold to LRS (Location Recording Service) in 1976 where it stayed until 1999
when Kevin Gray bought it For AcousTech Mastering in Camarillo.

Kevin estimates that (conservatively) he has cut 40,000 sides with this unit
since 1978. An amazing amount of vinyl!

Now, here is the blow-mind part: The unit cuts flat from 2 hz to 27,000
cycles! Imagine that.

So, in the 1950's and '60's, the Van Gelder stuff was cut with
Scully/Westrex systems that started rolling off around 12k. No one had any
problem cutting these tapes. With the advent of the Neumann system (which
had to be able to cut an RCA CD-4 quadraphonic carrier tone on the disc with
no problem) things got bad, quickly.

I remember when I cut the original DCC LUSH LIFE LP with Stan Ricker we were
both dumbfounded at the wacky things the tape was doing to the machinery.
Today brought it all back.

Oh, we finally "got it", but it was tough!

Love that Neumann SX-74 though!

UNQUOTE


and


QUOTE

I've been spending this week trying to successfully master Sonny Rollins
"Way Out West" and The Bill Evans Trio "Waltz For Debby" onto 45 RPM discs.
"Tis a struggle folks! These recordings are VERY dynamic and very left/right
heavy; doom for the mastering engineer.

Kevin Gray, who I feel is the best damn record cutter in the world today,
has been tearing his hair out. And let me tell you, that's not a good
idea...

However, we have nailed 'em! Thank goodness. I wouldn't be able to sleep at
night otherwise.

The trick of making a good record, is to, well, make a good record. This
means following certain "rules". Among them are the two most basic:

Rule one: The sound has to be louder than the noise of the vinyl.

Rule two: The sound can't be too loud or the groove will break.

End of old rules. New rules:

STEVE'S RULES:

I will not add ANY limiting or compression to our discs while cutting, even
if the dynamic range on the master tapes is greater than the range of our VU
meters (amazing, but true!)

I will not tamper in any way with the pure tonality of the original master
recordings, even if one drum "thwack" is 10db hotter than the rest of the
music floor.

Kevin and I will not cut too far into the record center at 45 RPM so that
even an average stylus can track the groove with ease.

UNQUOTE


and


QUOTE

If I cut a straight transfer lacquer, you wouldn't be able to tell the
difference between the cutting and the master. If I add some extra "magic" I
do it because it needs to be done! But, I control it, it is not built in to
our cutting system.

UNQUOTE

Also this from Speakers Corner on their latest From Elvis In Memphis vinyl
release:

QUOTE

The lacquers are cut in Hannover at Emil-Berliner-Studios on Neumann VMS 80.
According to my knowledge, no (analogue) equalizer is available there. The
cutting console of VMS 80 does contain an equalizer, but this is so bad that
even if you just connect it into the signal-line the sound becomes worse.
This unit is disabled therefore. So, the answer to your question is: no kind
of equalization, filtering or limiting what-so-ever on this release.

UNQUOTE



You may not need to do anything other than press a button to master a CD but
mastering is an art and IMO Steve Hoffman is one of the best. I have purchased
every one of the new Jazz reissues he talks about above and to my ears they are
far and away the best version of each title I have ever heard. Interstingly
enough Steve Hoffman is a major advocate of one particular SET amplifier. I
have not had the oppurtunity to hear that particular amp, The WAVAC 833, but I
think it would make for interesting listening.
  #5   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

Steven said


and then there's this...

http://www.shakti-innovations.com/hallograph.htm


They are marketed as diffusion. Are you claiming that diffusion as a means of
better sound is a dubious claim or are you saying that these particular devices
don't work?


  #6   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

I said


You may not need to do anything other than press a button to master a CD but
mastering is an art and IMO Steve Hoffman is one of the best. I have

purchased
every one of the new Jazz reissues he talks about above and to my ears they

are
far and away the best version of each title I have ever heard.



Stewart said


Up to this point, your argument is plausible.


I didn't know I was making an argument. I was just offering my opinion of the
quality of Hoffman's work as a mastering engineer compared to other efforts
with the same recordings.

I said


Interstingly
enough Steve Hoffman is a major advocate of one particular SET amplifier. I
have not had the oppurtunity to hear that particular amp, The WAVAC 833, but

I
think it would make for interesting listening.



Stewart said


Unfortunately, this one comment tends to destroy Hoffman's
credibiity.....


With you certainly. I would want to listen to this amp with Hoffman's reference
speakers and compare before rushing to judgement about hsi choice on amps much
less rushing to judgement on his credability. I have not listened to this amp
with his choice of speakers so I withhold any such judgement. have you heard
this amp with Steve Hoffman's choices for reference speakers? have you compared
it to other amps using those speakers? If not, I would say your judgement of
Mr. Hoffman's credibility is a bit hasty.
  #8   Report Post  
Thom Halvorsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

"S888Wheel" wrote in message
...
You may not need to do anything other than press a button to master a CD

but
mastering is an art and IMO Steve Hoffman is one of the best. I have

purchased
every one of the new Jazz reissues he talks about above and to my ears

they are
far and away the best version of each title I have ever heard.

Interstingly
enough Steve Hoffman is a major advocate of one particular SET amplifier.

I
have not had the oppurtunity to hear that particular amp, The WAVAC 833,

but I
think it would make for interesting listening.


Steve Hoffman is an excellent mastering engineer. No doubt. I got some CDs
of his from the mid 80s that still are the best I've heard and his work with
DCC brought forth some great releases.

However, I have some credibility problems with him.

Here are a couple of interesting quotes from Steve taken from this interview
in 1997 when he was heavily into mastering CDs:

[quote]

DMG - Maybe, though with higher resolution formats there might be more
detail...

Steve - You know, when you say higher resolution, I get scared. To me,
higher resolution means Krell. It's like, how much is there anyway? Lets say
the Lourve museum loans you the Mona Lisa for a couple of days. Ok, so
here's the Mona Lisa. Where do you show it? Do you hang it up in the house
with a nice, soft light? Or do you take it outside with the sun shining on
it, where all you're going to see are the scratches and cracks. How much
resolution is there? The less resolution there is on that, the better its
going to look. That's my only fear. When you look at a piece of color
printing, and all you see are colored dots all over the page, you wonder how
much resolution was there to begin with. When you listen to the Beatles' I
Want To Hold Your Hand on a really good system, it's disappointing. It's not
a sonic masterpiece. It's a good song, but not a great recording. So, words
like 'higher resolution' to me, scare me a little bit.

DMG - Most of the audio bandwith can be handled very well by 16bit CD.

Steve - Yes.

[UNQUOTE]

and

[quote]

DMG - So, is 20 or 24 bit going to get to a level where the emotion is
completely gone through more imperfections being brought out?

Steve - That's exactly why higher resolution scares me. With higher res on
that recording, you're going to hear more high end that shouldn't be there.
People would be surprised if they had a meter hooked up to their system and
could see that on 90% of their records and discs, above 9500K, there's
nothing there. What you're hearing up there is tape hiss, or some other
thing that isn't part of the music. When you extend everything up to that
range, there's nothing up there but noise. DMG - Well, it seems people don't
want to admit that their hearing basically falls off dramatically around 13
or 14k.

Steve - Not only that, but the famous Neumann mikes have a giant peak around
6k, and from there it's all downhill. You know, you have to examine what it
is you want from music, and if you're one of those people that relies on
charts or instrument readings, and you say, 'Well, my system reproduces from
5 cycles to 9 million cycles'. Well, that's great, but you sure aren't
hearing it. Numbers aren't everything. You have to trust your ears, and I
always tell people that.

[UNQUOTE]

And here is what he had to say WRT to vinyl:

[quote]

DMG - And all because they've made the American components so expensive,
it's so
much easier for people to put their money on Japanese products. What else
do you use at
home?

Steve - I use a pre-amp, it's called a Joule Electra, it's made by Jud
Barber in South
Carolina. I also have a pair of Australian speakers called Whatmough 202's,
and a lot of
other things that come in and out all the time. I use a Well-Tempered
turntable, though I
haven't been playing all that many records. I've been really spoiled. Once
you hear the
master of some great album, it's you know, really hard to play the record
and go, 'yeah,
that sounds really good'. So, I'm really spoiled that way. I don't want to
spend a lot of
money on a turntable that runs with a piece of dental floss.

[UNQUOTE]

The whole interview is here
http://home.earthlink.net/~mercmoon/hoffmanint.htm

And something he told me when I asked him about his mastering of Elvis' In
The Ghetto:

[quote]

I transferred IN THE GHETTO flat from the two-track master mix. The DCC
version is how the actual tape sounds.

[UNQUOTE]

Now though, he is heavily into SACD mastering, and the master tapes which he
has spent close to 20 years listening to and digitizing has suddenly seen a
*sharp* rise in dynamic range.

[quote]

GoldenGuy,

The boundaries of Digital PCM have already been pushed to their limit if I
play back a master tape vs. the PCM copy and hear things like echo fall off
on the digital. If they sounded the same in an A/B all our problems would be
over and my job would be so much easier.

[UNQUOTE]

The whole thread is he
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...2530&highlight
=Whats+the+Worst+thing+about+SACDs

And in this thread
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...9886&highlight
=sacd
he snaps at somebody nicknamed Pepzhez for really just putting forth some of
the same thoughts that Steve had in the 1997 interview:

[quote]

Do SACD's and CD's sound different? Sure.

Does the sound of the CD layer and the DSD layer sound different on an SH
mastered SACD Hybrid?

Well, tonally they should sound the same. The resolution factor kicks in on
the DSD layer and you can hear "in" to the mix better; in other words, much
better ambiance retrieval.

[UNQUOTE]

Read into it what you will.

________
Thom
  #9   Report Post  
Dick Pierce
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

(S888Wheel) wrote in message ...
Steven said


and then there's this...

http://www.shakti-innovations.com/hallograph.htm


They are marketed as diffusion. Are you claiming that diffusion as
a means of better sound is a dubious claim or are you saying that
these particular devices don't work?


While I am not the one raising the point, Shakti makes no claims about
diffusion. Rather there "claims" are of the natu

"The Hallograph contours the frequency, amplitude and time
coefficients of the first reflections you hear, which produces
a stunning increase in realism."

Anyone who IS engaged in the research of the behavior of acoustics in
rooms quickly realizes that this statement is so much nonsensical
gobbledygook.

They further claim:

"Activated panels generate a musically complimentary reflective
energy that transforms your listening room by overshadowing
typical room distortions which muddy the bass, overbrighten
the presentation and blur the soundstage."

They appeal to scientific "sounding" terminology like "frequency,
amplitude and time coefficients" without, apparently, having the
faintest clue of what they are talking about. Beyond that, their
claims regarding bas frequencies are rather dubious and overstretched,
considering the wavelengths of bass frequencies and the physical
size of these devices. In their claim that they "overshadow typical
room distortions," this constitutes a truly extraordinary claim,
in essence because they are claiming that these devices, having,
at most, a total frontal area of a couple of square feet, must be
re-radiating more energy than they receive, to account for their
extraordinary ability to "overshadow" the entire combined surface
area of the rest of the room.

Frankly, it's not up to anyone to show that these devices DON'T work,
it's up to Shakti to demonstrate that they do, and that their claims
are supportable. And, to date, Shakti has fallen way short of the
mark in deomstrating that their other products do as they claim, the
ringing endorsements of customers notwithstanding. Frankly, the
recording industry is populate with more than its fair share of
cranks and kooks. Yeah, some of them make GREAT recordings, but an
unfortunately large number of those that do have NO idea HOW they do
it. And a lot of those who have made GREAT recordings have made perfectly
horrible recordings as well.

No, it's not about whether diffusion does or does not work, because
Shakti's thingy has NOTHING to do with diffusion. It's about magic
wands.
  #10   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

Frankly, it's not up to anyone to show that these devices DON'T work,
it's up to Shakti to demonstrate that they do,


It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried them.
Just because you don't like their literature doesn't mean they don't improve
room sound. Personally I would want to try them before endorsing them or
condemning them. At that price they had better exceed my expectations though.



Frankly, the
recording industry is populate with more than its fair share of
cranks and kooks. Yeah, some of them make GREAT recordings, but an
unfortunately large number of those that do have NO idea HOW they do
it. And a lot of those who have made GREAT recordings have made perfectly
horrible recordings as well.


I'm guessing this in reference to Steve Hoffman. He is primarily a mastering
engineer. He has done very little recording. IME his work has been consistantly
excellent. I doubt that he is just getting lucky.


No, it's not about whether diffusion does or does not work, because
Shakti's thingy has NOTHING to do with diffusion. It's about magic
wands.


Based on the sales pitch or actual experience with the product? Listerine used
to say that their product prevented colds. It was a lie. Thier product did work
as a mouth wash though which what it was sold as.


  #11   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

S888Wheel wrote:
Frankly, it's not up to anyone to show that these devices DON'T work,
it's up to Shakti to demonstrate that they do,


It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried them.


Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.


Just because you don't like their literature doesn't mean they don't improve
room sound. Personally I would want to try them before endorsing them or
condemning them. At that price they had better exceed my expectations though.





Frankly, the
recording industry is populate with more than its fair share of
cranks and kooks. Yeah, some of them make GREAT recordings, but an
unfortunately large number of those that do have NO idea HOW they do
it. And a lot of those who have made GREAT recordings have made perfectly
horrible recordings as well.


I'm guessing this in reference to Steve Hoffman. He is primarily a mastering
engineer. He has done very little recording. IME his work has been consistantly
excellent. I doubt that he is just getting lucky.



Mr. Hoffman is probably very good at makign the sorts of mastering decisions
that almost certainly will affect sound of the product. That does not make his
beliefs about stuff that almost certainly will not affect the sound, any
more believable. Because he could be UTTERLY WRONG about such things, and
it wouldn't make ANY DIFFERENCE. In other words, suppose he swears
that adjusting certain midrange frequencies is key to mastering; and suppose
he also swears that a hallograph in the mastering room makes things sound
better. If the Hallograph in fact does nothing whatever to the sound,
his adjustments to midrange, which are indeed likely to be audible, will still
be in effect.

No, it's not about whether diffusion does or does not work, because
Shakti's thingy has NOTHING to do with diffusion. It's about magic
wands.


Based on the sales pitch or actual experience with the product? Listerine used
to say that their product prevented colds. It was a lie. Thier product did work
as a mouth wash though which what it was sold as.



*You* asked about diffusion and the Hallograph. Mr. Pierce has adequately answered
your question.



--
-S.
______
"You're an abuser Sullivan....a base beast with
intellect but little intelligence to show for it" -- KENNEH!

  #13   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

There is no speaker which can compensate for the *innate* nonlinearity
and compression of a SET amp. If he is using speakers which can
repoduce the required maximum SPLs cleanly while not exceeding say 1/3
power on the WAVAC, then those speakers are large horns, and willhave
their own severe problems. In short, there is *no* combination which
can provide a *neutral* sound with adequate SPL capability. If you
like recordings mastered on such a system, then that's your choice.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering




Have you ever compared his work to the work of others on the same recordings?
Do you know whether or not you like recordings mastered on such a system or
not? or do you think listening simply isn't the proper way to judge mastering
skills?
  #14   Report Post  
Thom Halvorsen
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 19 Oct 2003 16:02:45 GMT, (S888Wheel) wrote:

Interstingly
enough Steve Hoffman is a major advocate of one particular SET

amplifier. I
have not had the oppurtunity to hear that particular amp, The WAVAC

833, but
I
think it would make for interesting listening.

Stewart said

Unfortunately, this one comment tends to destroy Hoffman's
credibiity.....


With you certainly. I would want to listen to this amp with Hoffman's

reference
speakers and compare before rushing to judgement about hsi choice on amps

much
less rushing to judgement on his credability. I have not listened to this

amp
with his choice of speakers so I withhold any such judgement. have you

heard
this amp with Steve Hoffman's choices for reference speakers? have you

compared
it to other amps using those speakers? If not, I would say your judgement

of
Mr. Hoffman's credibility is a bit hasty.


There is no speaker which can compensate for the *innate* nonlinearity
and compression of a SET amp. If he is using speakers which can
repoduce the required maximum SPLs cleanly while not exceeding say 1/3
power on the WAVAC, then those speakers are large horns, and willhave
their own severe problems. In short, there is *no* combination which
can provide a *neutral* sound with adequate SPL capability. If you
like recordings mastered on such a system, then that's your choice.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


In his own words he masters with tubes for that "yummy" sound, which pretty
much leaves neutrality on the sidelines.

______
Thom

  #15   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

I said


It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried

them.


Steven said


Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.


Listened to a system with and without them.

I said


I'm guessing this in reference to Steve Hoffman. He is primarily a

mastering
engineer. He has done very little recording. IME his work has been

consistantly
excellent. I doubt that he is just getting lucky.


Steven said


Mr. Hoffman is probably very good at makign the sorts of mastering decisions
that almost certainly will affect sound of the product. That does not make
his
beliefs about stuff that almost certainly will not affect the sound, any
more believable.


How do you know the product in question will not affect the sound?

Steven said

In other words, suppose he swears
that adjusting certain midrange frequencies is key to mastering; and suppose
he also swears that a hallograph in the mastering room makes things sound
better. If the Hallograph in fact does nothing whatever to the sound,
his adjustments to midrange, which are indeed likely to be audible, will
still
be in effect.


You are assuming that the product does nothing. you simply don't know that. It
claims to be an acoustic room treament. Acoustic roomtreatments in general are
known to have an affect on the sound. This product may or may not. But you
can't judge that by looking at their advertising.

Steven said



*You* asked about diffusion and the Hallograph. Mr. Pierce has adequately
answered
your question.


No, he simply took issue with their advertising. It does not tell us anything
about what this product may or may not actually do. i still hold my position
that I would have to try them before having an opinion about their merits. Ans,
as I said before, they had better exceed my expectations at their asking price.



  #16   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

S888Wheel wrote:
I said



It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried

them.


Steven said



Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.


Listened to a system with and without them.


That may be sufficient for you or Mr. Hoffman, but in this case,
it's not, for me.

I said



I'm guessing this in reference to Steve Hoffman. He is primarily a

mastering
engineer. He has done very little recording. IME his work has been

consistantly
excellent. I doubt that he is just getting lucky.


Steven said



Mr. Hoffman is probably very good at makign the sorts of mastering decisions
that almost certainly will affect sound of the product. That does not make
his
beliefs about stuff that almost certainly will not affect the sound, any
more believable.


How do you know the product in question will not affect the sound?


I was speaking hypothetically. But in the case of the Hallograph -- what makes
you think it *would*? I see nothing in the pseudoscientific stuff posted
to the site that indicates it would; I see nothing obvious in its construction
that would make it do anything like what it's claimed to do; and I don't
accept Mr. Hoffman's authority on this particukar matter, for the reason cited. So,
why do YOU think it is likely to affect the sound?

Steven said


In other words, suppose he swears
that adjusting certain midrange frequencies is key to mastering; and suppose
he also swears that a hallograph in the mastering room makes things sound
better. If the Hallograph in fact does nothing whatever to the sound,
his adjustments to midrange, which are indeed likely to be audible, will
still
be in effect.


You are assuming that the product does nothing. you simply don't know that.


I don't *know* that paint the walls red instead of white has no effect
on sound either. I don't *know* that shakti stones placed on top of your
speakers make them sound better. But I can make a pretty good guess
that they don't.

It
claims to be an acoustic room treament. Acoustic roomtreatments in general are
known to have an affect on the sound. This product may or may not. But you
can't judge that by looking at their advertising.


So far, ALL I HAVE is the advertising, and some testimonials. Neither is
in the least convincing. Nor can I come up with a way for this thing
to work anything like it says it does, based on what I do know
of sound.

Do you believe everything you read, Scott? Do you *ever* classify any
claims as unlikely, based on what you DO know?

*You* asked about diffusion and the Hallograph. Mr. Pierce has adequately
answered
your question.


No, he simply took issue with their advertising. It does not tell us anything
about what this product may or may not actually do. i still hold my position
that I would have to try them before having an opinion about their merits. Ans,
as I said before, they had better exceed my expectations at their asking price.


Would you hold off judgement on a perpetual motion device, until
you'd actually seen it work?

--
-S.

  #20   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

Tom said

Indeed. I find it utterly indefensible for people to suggest that we must TRY
any crackpot scheme that comes along before remaining skeptical if the
proponent hasn't provided reasonable evidence that the "fix" actually fixes
anything.


I see you thing room treatments are nothing but crackpot schemes. We are
talking about a specific product that is a room treatment. Maybe it makes a
difference maybe it doesn't. Ho would you know?

Tom said


Have you tried the "miracle carburator" or the "magic sex potion" or "miracle
hair"? Or the "Call Me Now forYour Furture"? Why not? Won't you at least TRY
them before being skeptical?


No. Have you tried any room treatments?



  #21   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

I said


It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried
them.



Steven said



Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.


I said


Listened to a system with and without them.


Steven said


That may be sufficient for you or Mr. Hoffman, but in this case,
it's not, for me.


How on earth would you ever consider room treatments if you don't listen to the
effect with and without it? How do you position your loudspeakers? It seems
that if you don't use your ears you are really limmiting your possibilities.
Gee, isn't what you hear the issue?

I said



I'm guessing this in reference to Steve Hoffman. He is primarily a
mastering
engineer. He has done very little recording. IME his work has been
consistantly
excellent. I doubt that he is just getting lucky.


Steven said



Mr. Hoffman is probably very good at makign the sorts of mastering

decisions
that almost certainly will affect sound of the product. That does not

make
his
beliefs about stuff that almost certainly will not affect the sound, any
more believable.



I said


How do you know the product in question will not affect the sound?



Steven said


I was speaking hypothetically.


I see no point in hypotheticals when talking about a real product.

Steven said

But in the case of the Hallograph -- what makes
you think it *would*?


Testimony. But make no mistake about it, testimony is good enough for an
audition at best. If I were to audition these things they would have to make an
improvement that I thought was worth the money. My expectations are that they
would not. I could be wrong.

Steven said

I see nothing in the pseudoscientific stuff posted
to the site that indicates it would;


Do you see anything in any of the known laws of physics that says it definitely
won't make a difference?

Steven said

I see nothing obvious in its construction
that would make it do anything like what it's claimed to do;


The real questions though would be...1. does it make any difference 2. Does it
make a positive difference 3. Is it worth the money.

Steven said

and I don't
accept Mr. Hoffman's authority on this particukar matter, for the reason
cited. So,
why do YOU think it is likely to affect the sound?


Testimony is the only thing that would give me cause to think it *may* affect
the sound. Like I said before, I choose to refrain from passing judgement
without trying it out.

Steven said


In other words, suppose he swears
that adjusting certain midrange frequencies is key to mastering; and

suppose
he also swears that a hallograph in the mastering room makes things sound
better. If the Hallograph in fact does nothing whatever to the sound,
his adjustments to midrange, which are indeed likely to be audible, will
still
be in effect.


I said


You are assuming that the product does nothing. you simply don't know that.


Steven said

I don't *know* that paint the walls red instead of white has no effect
on sound either.


If the paint is the same type you actually do know that. Of course you don't
know how that will affect peoples' perception of the sound without testing. It
may turn out that certain colors make for a more pleasurable listening
experience. Some may blow this off since it has nothing to do with waht happens
in the ear. Some may take advantage of it and make a more enjoyable listening
envirement.

Steven said

I don't *know* that shakti stones placed on top of your
speakers make them sound better. But I can make a pretty good guess
that they don't.


I thought we were talking about the hallograph? It, unlike different paint may
affect the sound of the room. As I said, my expectations would be very low but
that doesn't affect what they actually do or do not do.


It
claims to be an acoustic room treament. Acoustic roomtreatments in general

are
known to have an affect on the sound. This product may or may not. But you
can't judge that by looking at their advertising.


Steven said


So far, ALL I HAVE is the advertising, and some testimonials.


Exactly. you have little to go on and it seems you are ready to brand the
product as snake oil. I think you may be jumping the gun.

Steven said

Neither is
in the least convincing. Nor can I come up with a way for this thing
to work anything like it says it does, based on what I do know
of sound.


I see. If you don't know how something works you think it doesn't work. That is
what it sounds like.

Steven said


Do you believe everything you read, Scott? Do you *ever* classify any
claims as unlikely, based on what you DO know?


Sure. But I know the difference between "unlikely" and "definitely not true."

Steven said


*You* asked about diffusion and the Hallograph. Mr. Pierce has adequately
answered
your question.


I said

No, he simply took issue with their advertising. It does not tell us

anything
about what this product may or may not actually do. i still hold my

position
that I would have to try them before having an opinion about their merits.

Ans,
as I said before, they had better exceed my expectations at their asking

price.


Steven said


Would you hold off judgement on a perpetual motion device, until
you'd actually seen it work?


Nope. But I wouldn't compare any room treatment with a claim of a perpetual
motion machine. We know that some room treatments make a substantial
difference. Based on that fact I am holding of on any judgement of the
Hallograph.
  #22   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

I said

Have you ever compared his work to the work of others on the same

recordings?
Do you know whether or not you like recordings mastered on such a system or
not? or do you think listening simply isn't the proper way to judge

mastering
skills?


Stewart said


As ever, you are trying to deflect attention away from the key point.


No I am asking you if you are familiar with Steve Hoffmans work and if so I am
asking you your opinion of it.

Stewart said

Hoffman has certainly produced some good-sounding recordings.


I wouldn't know that. I have never heard any of his recordings. I am very
familiar with his work as a mastering engineer though.

Stewart said


This has
*nothing* to do with his preference for SET amplification,


It has everything to do with it. The quality of his work is dependent on his
preferences. His choice of amplifier is also dependent on those same
preferences. You said " If you
like recordings mastered on such a system, then that's your choice." So I
simply asked what you thought of his work. I'm trying to find out if perhaps
you also like recordings mastered on such a system.

Stewart said

indeed, his
self-contradictory comments regarding 'resolution' seem to indicate
that he is a pretty non-technical guy. It's rather like taking a car
mechanic's opinion about how to design a Formula 1 engine.


But do you or don't you like his work? If you do you like his work you like
preferences. If you don't like his work you don't like his preferences. At
least compared to the other engineers who have mastered the same recordings.

Stewart said


Frankly, when you look at his comments about why he uses tubes, I'd
expect his recordings to be pretty thin and bright to compensate for
that 'yummy' tube sound. Interesting that they're not. You don't
suppose that he actually masters on a completely different monitoring
system, do you? :-)


He does. But he takes his work home and evaluates it there as well. I disagree
with your opinion on the quality of some of the original recordings Steve
remasters. Some of the stuff Steve has remastered did sound rather thin and
bright in every other incarnation. Just listen to his remaster of the Jim Croce
collection compared to any other release of the same material. I guess I need
to remind you that we are not talking about "his" recordings.
  #23   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

S888Wheel wrote:
I said



It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually tried
them.



Steven said



Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.


I said



Listened to a system with and without them.


Steven said



That may be sufficient for you or Mr. Hoffman, but in this case,
it's not, for me.


How on earth would you ever consider room treatments if you don't listen to the
effect with and without it?


Some room treatments can be reasonably expected to affect the sound of the room.

Others cannot.

How do you position your loudspeakers? It seems
that if you don't use your ears you are really limmiting your possibilities.
Gee, isn't what you hear the issue?


Yes, but that doesn't mean that *anything* is possible. No matter what
Shakti ads, or Steve Hoffman, says.

There's that old saying about the danger of keeping a mind *too* open....


Steven said


But in the case of the Hallograph -- what makes
you think it *would*?


Testimony.


Well, that's where we differ, as I said.

But make no mistake about it, testimony is good enough for an
audition at best.



Not the testimony I've seen.

If I were to audition these things they would have to make an
improvement that I thought was worth the money. My expectations are that they
would not. I could be wrong.


But you're probably right.

I see nothing in the pseudoscientific stuff posted
to the site that indicates it would;


Do you see anything in any of the known laws of physics that says it definitely
won't make a difference?



I wonder if anything is ever *definite* by your standards.

The claim is that it *does* make a certain kind of difference.
I don't see how it could do what it claims--
and someone who knows more than me about the physics involved, doesn't see it either.


I'm sure if you loaded enough of the things into a room, they'd make an
audible difference-- jsut as loading enough of any solid object will do so.
I doubt it would be the difference claimed.



Steven said


I see nothing obvious in its construction
that would make it do anything like what it's claimed to do;


The real questions though would be...1. does it make any difference 2. Does it
make a positive difference 3. Is it worth the money.


So, the specific claims of the manufacturer simply don't matter to you?

Steven said


and I don't
accept Mr. Hoffman's authority on this particukar matter, for the reason
cited. So,
why do YOU think it is likely to affect the sound?


Testimony is the only thing that would give me cause to think it *may* affect
the sound. Like I said before, I choose to refrain from passing judgement
without trying it out.


I choose to make an educated guess, as I would for claims of, say,
the health benefits of copper bracelets or avoiding walking under
ladders, despite glowing testimony from scientifically underinformed
users/practitioners.


You are assuming that the product does nothing. you simply don't know that.


Steven said

I don't *know* that paint the walls red instead of white has no effect
on sound either.


If the paint is the same type you actually do know that. Of course you don't
know how that will affect peoples' perception of the sound without testing. It
may turn out that certain colors make for a more pleasurable listening
experience. Some may blow this off since it has nothing to do with waht happens
in the ear. Some may take advantage of it and make a more enjoyable listening
envirement.


It may turn out the the effect is entirely psychological, akin to a placebo.
In that case, there is NO effect on the SOUND itself. And if so, perhaps
it's naughty to advertise red paint as really changing the SOUND of a room.

I don't *know* that shakti stones placed on top of your
speakers make them sound better. But I can make a pretty good guess
that they don't.


I thought we were talking about the hallograph?


Made by the same company....coincidence? I think not.

It, unlike different paint may
affect the sound of the room.


According to what principle?

As I said, my expectations would be very low but
that doesn't affect what they actually do or do not do.


But the possibilities are not endless.


So far, ALL I HAVE is the advertising, and some testimonials.


Exactly. you have little to go on and it seems you are ready to brand the
product as snake oil. I think you may be jumping the gun.


Let's just say I am skeptical.


Neither is
in the least convincing. Nor can I come up with a way for this thing
to work anything like it says it does, based on what I do know
of sound.


I see. If you don't know how something works you think it doesn't work. That is
what it sounds like.


I suppose there really *might* be something to those perpetual motion machines
and copper bracelets....nah.


Do you believe everything you read, Scott? Do you *ever* classify any
claims as unlikely, based on what you DO know?


Sure. But I know the difference between "unlikely" and "definitely not true."


Again, do you require firsthand experience in every case, to make the call?


Steven said



*You* asked about diffusion and the Hallograph. Mr. Pierce has adequately
answered
your question.


I said


No, he simply took issue with their advertising. It does not tell us

anything
about what this product may or may not actually do. i still hold my

position
that I would have to try them before having an opinion about their merits.

Ans,
as I said before, they had better exceed my expectations at their asking

price.


Steven said



Would you hold off judgement on a perpetual motion device, until
you'd actually seen it work?


Nope. But I wouldn't compare any room treatment with a claim of a perpetual
motion machine. We know that some room treatments make a substantial
difference. Based on that fact I am holding of on any judgement of the
Hallograph.


Simply bexcause it advertises itself as a 'room treatment'?


--
-S.
  #25   Report Post  
S888Wheel
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

I said


It seems they have sufficiently done so for some who have actually

tried
them.




Steven said


Depends on what you mean by 'tried'.



I said



Listened to a system with and without them.



Steven said



That may be sufficient for you or Mr. Hoffman, but in this case,
it's not, for me.


I said


How on earth would you ever consider room treatments if you don't listen to

the
effect with and without it?


Steven said


Some room treatments can be reasonably expected to affect the sound of the
room.

Others cannot.


But this does not answer my question. How would you consider room treatments if
you don't audition them in your listening room?

I said


How do you position your loudspeakers? It seems
that if you don't use your ears you are really limmiting your

possibilities.
Gee, isn't what you hear the issue?


Steven said


Yes, but that doesn't mean that *anything* is possible. No matter what
Shakti ads, or Steve Hoffman, says.


I'm not asserting that anything is possible. I am asserting that it is possible
that these devices may affect the acoustics of the room. Maybe they don't. They
are a bit small but then so are tube traps, so is an RPG diffusion panel. They
work.

Steven said


There's that old saying about the danger of keeping a mind *too* open....


There is also a saying that you can't teach an old dog new tricks. I think that
would be due to closed mindedness. Healthy skepticism is not closed mindedness.
If you have made up you mind about a room treatment with nothing more than a
bias you may have leaped without really looking.


Steven said


But in the case of the Hallograph -- what makes
you think it *would*?



I said


Testimony.



Steven said


Well, that's where we differ, as I said.


Let me clarify. It is testimony that would make me think it might work. I hope
i have been clear in saying I would want to hear it for myself and I doubt I
would find the sort of effect that would cause me to buy them.

I said


But make no mistake about it, testimony is good enough for an
audition at best.


Steven said


Not the testimony I've seen.


There is where we differ. Maybe. I haven't looked into auditioning them.

I said


If I were to audition these things they would have to make an
improvement that I thought was worth the money. My expectations are that

they
would not. I could be wrong.


Steven said


But you're probably right.


Could be. I've been wrong enough though to reserve judgement.

Steven said


I see nothing in the pseudoscientific stuff posted
to the site that indicates it would;



I said


Do you see anything in any of the known laws of physics that says it

definitely
won't make a difference?


Steven said


I wonder if anything is ever *definite* by your standards.


No. It is all a matter of degree. You are a scientist don't you see things that
way as well? There are some things that are pretty darned closed to definite. I
don't think this is one of them for me as things stand.

Steven said


The claim is that it *does* make a certain kind of difference.
I don't see how it could do what it claims--


It seems that you are once again saying that you don't believe it works because
you don't know how it would work.

Steven said

and someone who knows more than me about the physics involved, doesn't see it
either.


He clearly doesn't like their advertising. He may not think they would make any
diffeence at all but I haven't seen him say that. I certianly haven't seen him
or you or anyone else explain why they can't make a difference.

Steven said


I'm sure if you loaded enough of the things into a room, they'd make an
audible difference-- jsut as loading enough of any solid object will do so.
I doubt it would be the difference claimed.


I guess I'm not so hung up on advertising prose as some others. I have played
around with a lot of acoustic treatment. Most of the devices I have tried make
a difference. They certainly didn't all make an improvement in my room. Bottom
line is I had to listen and I was often surprised by what did work well and
what didn't work well.


Steven said


I see nothing obvious in its construction
that would make it do anything like what it's claimed to do;


I said


The real questions though would be...1. does it make any difference 2. Does

it
make a positive difference 3. Is it worth the money.


Steven said


So, the specific claims of the manufacturer simply don't matter to you?


Of course not. If I got bent out of shape over every overstated claim in
advertising I wouldn't be buying much. Did the claim perfect sound forever give
you cause to not buy CDs? No, I don't get worked up over a sales pitch. An
overstated sales pitch should not cause one to not consider a product that may
be an improvement IMO. Think about it, would any of us buy speakers at all if
we demanded that they be as good as the manufacturer claimed them to be?

Steven said


and I don't
accept Mr. Hoffman's authority on this particukar matter, for the reason
cited. So,
why do YOU think it is likely to affect the sound?


I said


Testimony is the only thing that would give me cause to think it *may*

affect
the sound. Like I said before, I choose to refrain from passing judgement
without trying it out.


Steven said


I choose to make an educated guess,


What, in your education, causes you to guess these things can't improve the
sound of a room?

Steven said

as I would for claims of, say,
the health benefits of copper bracelets or avoiding walking under
ladders, despite glowing testimony from scientifically underinformed
users/practitioners.


You don't have to be a scientist to know it is a bad idea to walk under a
ladder. You see, it's this rabbid skepticism that can cause one to throw the
proverbial baby out with the bath water. Walk under enough ladders and you will
get hurt. It won't be magic either.

I said


You are assuming that the product does nothing. you simply don't know

that.


Steven said


Steven said

I don't *know* that paint the walls red instead of white has no effect
on sound either.



I said

If the paint is the same type you actually do know that. Of course you

don't
know how that will affect peoples' perception of the sound without testing.

It
may turn out that certain colors make for a more pleasurable listening
experience. Some may blow this off since it has nothing to do with waht

happens
in the ear. Some may take advantage of it and make a more enjoyable

listening
envirement.



Steven said


It may turn out the the effect is entirely psychological, akin to a placebo.
In that case, there is NO effect on the SOUND itself. And if so, perhaps
it's naughty to advertise red paint as really changing the SOUND of a room.


And it may turn out that it's physical properties may affect the sound in the
room in a favorable way. We know that different colors of the same paint on the
wall wont do that. That was the main point.

Steven said


I don't *know* that shakti stones placed on top of your
speakers make them sound better. But I can make a pretty good guess
that they don't.


I said


I thought we were talking about the hallograph?


Steven said


Made by the same company....coincidence? I think not.


Naturally. Guilt by association. This is not good speticism IMO it is simply
prejudice. Do you assume that cartridges from audioquest don't work because
they sell expensive cables? Hey didn't Dunlavy make expensive cables too?

I said


It, unlike different paint may
affect the sound of the room.



Steven said


According to what principle?


There is no doubt that it will reflect sound and absorb sound in a way that is
different than nothing at all. I'm pretty sure the hue of paint will not change
the reflective,and absobtive properties of the wall it sits on.

At this point I give up. Believe what you want. I really don't care. There
comes a point where one realizes why this is a small club.



  #27   Report Post  
---MIKE---
 
Posts: n/a
Default SOTA vinyl mastering

It has been proven that different colors of paint in a room can effect a
person's mood. This mood change could also effect how they perceive
sound. In the case of the hallograph, properly placing it COULD make
it necessary to move the speakers or some furniture. This could result
in a change in sound which would mistakenly be attributed to the device.

-MIKE

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Simply Vinyl S888Wheel Audio Opinions 24 November 25th 03 03:29 AM
Vinyl Recording MK High End Audio 1 October 13th 03 12:30 AM
Ripping From Vinyl Jimbo General 0 August 29th 03 05:47 PM
The Death of Vinyl? Marc Phillips Audio Opinions 1 August 11th 03 11:38 PM
People that have or do listen to both Vinyl and Cd: Basic survey/poll S888Wheel Audio Opinions 57 August 11th 03 06:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:24 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"