Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Mark-T Mark-T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Feb 22, band beyond description
wrote:
some in the music
industry are rethinking their reliance on 16-bit quality for music
downloads, and Apple's reportedly looking into upgrading their
entire sales stream to 24-bit
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web.../24.bit.music/
As a result, online music stores could eventually offer songs
that sound truer to their original recordings, perhaps at a
premium price.


Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?

"Waiter, I'll have the jumbo shrimp."

Mark

  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Warren[_2_] Warren[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

Mark-T expounded in

oups.com:
...
Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?
Mark


It just means that it is "re-mixed". There's a lot you can do
in between the original recording tracks and the final
resulting media (CD). The "master" recording normally includes
multiple tracks.

Something really ancient will be 1-track (mono) and an
entirely different process: more of an audio processing
challenge to remove pops and clicks etc. without killing the
original performance.

Warren
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
John Larkin John Larkin is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 151
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:59:14 -0800 (PST), Mark-T
wrote:

On Feb 22, band beyond description
wrote:
some in the music
industry are rethinking their reliance on 16-bit quality for music
downloads, and Apple's reportedly looking into upgrading their
entire sales stream to 24-bit
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web.../24.bit.music/
As a result, online music stores could eventually offer songs
that sound truer to their original recordings, perhaps at a
premium price.


Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?

"Waiter, I'll have the jumbo shrimp."

Mark


Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.

John

  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
DGDevin DGDevin is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?



"Mark-T" wrote in message
...

If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


The original raw multi-track tape (or these days data file) rarely does
anything but sit in a vault. A copy of that original is usually used to
produce a mixed master which contains the final (usually stereo) version
that will be released to the public, and that goes into the vault too while
copies or it are distributed to pressing plants to physically make LPs or
CDs, or presumably downloads today (sometimes with interim production copies
along the way). In the old days there could be different final versions for
singles and albums, or the U.S. or UK market and so on.

Re-mastering at least in theory means they started with the original raw
tracks and did the mixing and EQ all over again and carefully produced a new
mixed master recording with better quality than the old one. But sometimes
they start with the old final mix and just are more careful in making a
digital transer that will be used to make CDs. A lot of early CDs made from
analog tapes were not done very well, the analog to digital transfers were
poor, they benefited from more careful work later.

Unfortunately some re-mastered recordings have relied on too much noise
reduction software or compression and actually sound worse than previous
versions. There have also been re-mastered albums with questionable
choices, where somebody decided to edit tracks (I think I'll lose that
piano) or added reverb to the drums or whatever (to the outrage of fans who
loved the old version).

Of course since people will buy "re-mastered" versions there is a temptation
to use that label even if little or anything has been done to improve the
quality, and some supposedly re-mastered releases sound just like they did
the last time they were re-mastered with intense marketing before the band
switched labels.

"Waiter, I'll have the jumbo shrimp."


Stereo or 5.1 mix sir?

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Tim Wescott Tim Wescott is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On 02/24/2011 12:59 PM, Mark-T wrote:
On Feb 22, band beyond
wrote:
some in the music
industry are rethinking their reliance on 16-bit quality for music
downloads, and Apple's reportedly looking into upgrading their
entire sales stream to 24-bit
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web.../24.bit.music/
As a result, online music stores could eventually offer songs
that sound truer to their original recordings, perhaps at a
premium price.


Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


Back in the days of vinyl, the "master disk" was a record made of metal
(aluminum? steel?), mixed from the original tapes. From this, the
record company would make molds for the actual disks that were sold.

If the tapes were saved, then you could digitize and clean up each track
individually, then re-mix a new, digital master.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remaster

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Dave Platt Dave Platt is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 169
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

In article ,
Warren wrote:

Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?
Mark


It just means that it is "re-mixed". There's a lot you can do
in between the original recording tracks and the final
resulting media (CD). The "master" recording normally includes
multiple tracks.


Or, in some cases (for recordings originally mixed down to analog
master tapes) it means "re-digitized". Run the original 2-track album
master tape through a good tape deck, and convert it to digital format
(16 or 24-bit), ideally using a better mastering deck and better
A-to-D converters than were used the first time around.

In most cases, these days, it means "re-mixed, and/or processed
differently", as Warren said.

To my mind, this "24-bit" effort on Apple's part is missing the point.
24-bit isn't really the issue. A well-mastered 16-bit PCM recording
can sound truly wonderful... as a delivery mechanism, 16-bit linear
PCM seems entirely adequate to me.

The real problem is how the albums are handled prior to that. Most
commercial recordings today are released in a form which is far less
than "16-bit" in quality - they have been deliberately compressed
during the mastering process to sound "louder". They've been quashed,
pummeled, clipped, gain-ridden, smelched, and squeezed down into a
tiny dynamic range. The actual quality of the sound on many
commercial CDs is barely of what we would have called
"cassette-quality" back in the 1970s... in fact, some of it is
arguably worse than what you could get out of an 8-track player in a
beat-up old Chevy :-(

16-bit PCM can deliver better than 90 dB of dynamic range, with
extremely low distortion. A lot of music today is released with less
than 10 dB of effective dynamic range.

Things are made somewhat worse by lossy digital encoding (e.g. MP3 or
AAC or whatever) at too low a bit-rate.

I do think that the effort to release digitally-delivered music tracks
in a form which sounds better is a good one... but it isn't really
about "24-bit" vs "16-bit". It's about treating the music with
respect... letting it "live", with real dynamics and subtlety, rather
than giving in to the constant pressure to "make it sound louder on
the air" by squashing it into a thin paste.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
dizzy dizzy is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 652
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

Dave Platt wrote:

To my mind, this "24-bit" effort on Apple's part is missing the point.
24-bit isn't really the issue. A well-mastered 16-bit PCM recording
can sound truly wonderful... as a delivery mechanism, 16-bit linear
PCM seems entirely adequate to me.


You're right, of course. 24 bits in the "deliver mechanism" is
****ing stupid. Period.

Are people stupid enough to fall for it as "better"?

  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Les Cargill[_2_] Les Cargill[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

dizzy wrote:
Dave Platt wrote:

To my mind, this "24-bit" effort on Apple's part is missing the point.
24-bit isn't really the issue. A well-mastered 16-bit PCM recording
can sound truly wonderful... as a delivery mechanism, 16-bit linear
PCM seems entirely adequate to me.


You're right, of course. 24 bits in the "deliver mechanism" is
****ing stupid. Period.

Are people stupid enough to fall for it as "better"?



They haven't been so far.

--
Les Cargill
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"John Larkin" wrote in message
...
Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.


You mean real Audiophools :-)
However at least better DAC's still work well with 16 bit files, even if
NONE can deliver better than true 24 bit resolution in our universe, and I
know of no normal home that can really use more than true 16 bit (96dB) DNR,
or anybody that normally listens to music in a sound proof isolation booth
on a regular basis. And lets not even consider how many actual recordings
even *remotely* approach 16 bit DNR to begin with!

Trevor.


  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
Re-mastering at least in theory means they started with the original raw
tracks


Nope, the term is widely used regardless of what the original source
material was. It simply means some process (anything at all) has been
performed between the source material and what is on the final product.


and did the mixing and EQ all over again and carefully produced a new mixed
master recording with better quality than the old one.


That's what they'd like you to believe of course, and *sometimes* it might
even actually be true.


But sometimes they start with the old final mix and just are more careful
in making a digital transer that will be used to make CDs.


Or not.


A lot of early CDs made from analog tapes were not done very well, the
analog to digital transfers were poor, they benefited from more careful
work later.


Or not, depending on your preference for heavy compression.


Unfortunately some re-mastered recordings have relied on too much noise
reduction software or compression and actually sound worse than previous
versions. There have also been re-mastered albums with questionable
choices, where somebody decided to edit tracks (I think I'll lose that
piano) or added reverb to the drums or whatever (to the outrage of fans
who loved the old version).


Right.

Trevor.




  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in message
. fr...
If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


It means a new master is made from the original tapes.


Remastering of digital source files can still take place. The original need
not ever have been on tape.

Trevor.


  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
marcman marcman is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Feb 24, 11:17*pm, "Trevor" wrote:
"John Larkin" wrote in message

...

Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.


You mean real Audiophools :-)
However at least better DAC's still work well with 16 bit files, even if
NONE can deliver better than true 24 bit resolution in our universe, and I
know of no normal home that can really use more than true 16 bit (96dB) DNR,
or anybody that normally listens to music in a sound proof isolation booth
on a regular basis.


I've spent half my life in a sound proof isolation booth.

Don't knock it 'till you've tried it . . .

And lets not even consider how many actual recordings
even *remotely* approach 16 bit DNR to begin with!


Huh? What?


Trevor.


  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"marcman" wrote in message
...
Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.


You mean real Audiophools :-)
However at least better DAC's still work well with 16 bit files, even if
NONE can deliver better than true 24 bit resolution in our universe, and I
know of no normal home that can really use more than true 16 bit (96dB)
DNR,
or anybody that normally listens to music in a sound proof isolation booth
on a regular basis.


}I've spent half my life in a sound proof isolation booth.
}Don't knock it 'till you've tried it . . .

I'm not knocking it, just staing that despite yourself, it is extremely rare
for normal listening.


And lets not even consider how many actual recordings
even *remotely* approach 16 bit DNR to begin with!


}Huh? What?

Ignoring fades, most modern pop recordings have about 20-30dB real DNR, and
NO recording ever made on tape comes remotely close to needing 16 bits, even
those that used Dolby SR, (and direct to disc recodings were even worse)
Only modern classical digital recordings approach true 16 bit DNR, but who
really wants to listen in a sound proof booth so they can hear the pages
turning anyway? Not too many I'm willing to bet!

Trevor.





  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Michael A. Terrell Michael A. Terrell is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 318
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


marcman wrote:

On Feb 24, 11:17 pm, "Trevor" wrote:
"John Larkin" wrote in message

...

Real audiophiles insist on 32-bit DACs.


You mean real Audiophools :-)
However at least better DAC's still work well with 16 bit files, even if
NONE can deliver better than true 24 bit resolution in our universe, and I
know of no normal home that can really use more than true 16 bit (96dB) DNR,
or anybody that normally listens to music in a sound proof isolation booth
on a regular basis.


I've spent half my life in a sound proof isolation booth.



A straightjacket & ducktape is cheaper. ;-)


--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Rich Grise[_3_] Rich Grise[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

Warren wrote:

Something really ancient will be 1-track (mono) and an
entirely different process: more of an audio processing
challenge to remove pops and clicks etc. without killing the
original performance.

http://www.chenyang-ism.com/Filtering.htm
-- first hit on
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...oise+reduction

Cheers!
Rich



  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
[email protected] colin_toogood@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Feb 24, 8:59*pm, Mark-T wrote:
On Feb 22, band beyond description
wrote:

some in the music
industry are rethinking their reliance on 16-bit quality for music
downloads, and Apple's reportedly looking into upgrading their
entire sales stream to 24-bit
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web.../24.bit.music/
As a result, online music stores could eventually offer songs
that sound truer to their original recordings, perhaps at a
premium price.
Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?

"Waiter, I'll have the jumbo shrimp."

Mark


I read somewhere that HD video is only perceived as better if the
audio is also of higher quality. Perhaps "the market" is wising up to
the fact that the audio out of their IPOD is crap compared to their
TV. If apple up the quality of the silly white earphones then great.
As others have said there are better ways of doing great audio but we
can assume that this is marketing led.

Colin
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

"Warren" wrote in message
. 210
Mark-T expounded in

oups.com:
..
Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


It means that simple EFX like equalization and dynamics processing were done
or redone prior to preparing the distributed form of the recording.

Doing something as simple as increasing the level of the entire track by 1
dB can be called remastering. Just changing the order of the tracks on the
distributed media is remastering.

It just means that it is "re-mixed".


No. Re-mixing would require access to the origional tracks which is
called something else besides remastering - usually "re-mixing".

There's a lot you
can do in between the original recording tracks and the
final resulting media (CD). The "master" recording
normally includes multiple tracks.


Mastering is not mixing and remastering is not remixing.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/AudioFAQ/pro-audio-faq/

Please read section VI.





  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

"Les Cargill" wrote in message

dizzy wrote:
Dave Platt wrote:

To my mind, this "24-bit" effort on Apple's part is
missing the point. 24-bit isn't really the issue. A
well-mastered 16-bit PCM recording can sound truly
wonderful... as a delivery mechanism, 16-bit linear PCM
seems entirely adequate to me.


You're right, of course. 24 bits in the "deliver
mechanism" is ****ing stupid. Period.

Are people stupid enough to fall for it as "better"?


They haven't been so far.


Right - notice the smoldering ashes of DVD-A and SACD.


  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Copacetic Copacetic is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:59:14 -0800 (PST), Mark-T
wrote:

On Feb 22, band beyond description
wrote:
some in the music
industry are rethinking their reliance on 16-bit quality for music
downloads, and Apple's reportedly looking into upgrading their
entire sales stream to 24-bit
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web.../24.bit.music/
As a result, online music stores could eventually offer songs
that sound truer to their original recordings, perhaps at a
premium price.


Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?

"Waiter, I'll have the jumbo shrimp."

Mark



Not only that, but FLAC already beats any bit level lame MP3s ever had.
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m
"Mark-T" wrote in message
...

If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


The original raw multi-track tape (or these days data
file) rarely does anything but sit in a vault.


If it still exists.

Re-mastering at least in theory means they started with
the original raw tracks and did the mixing and EQ all
over again and carefully produced a new mixed master
recording with better quality than the old one.


Not at all. That would be called "re-mixing".

But sometimes


No, always.

they start with the old final mix and just are
more careful in making a digital transer that will be
used to make CDs.


No, not necessarily more careful, just different.

A lot of early CDs made from analog
tapes were not done very well, the analog to digital
transfers were poor, they benefited from more careful
work later.


No, what happened is that a goodly number of CDs released in the early-mid
1980s were made from what are known as "cutting masters". This means that
the recordings intentionally had the inverse of the losses in LP disc
cutting and playback incorperated into them. This usually results in a
shrill-sounding, thin-sounding recording. These were mistakes, but
management said: "Ship it!". Most of these were redone in the 1990s.





  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message


Back in the days of vinyl, the "master disk" was a record
made of metal (aluminum? steel?), mixed from the
original tapes. From this, the record company would make
molds for the actual disks that were sold.


Master discs were cut from cutting masters that included compensation for
the losses that are inherent in the process of producing and playing LPs.

Cutting masters were always tapes, either digital or analog.

Remember that digital recording was applied to the production of LPs up to
nearly a decade before the release of the first CDs. This was done so that
when the CD format was finalized, it would be possible to exploit its sonic
and practical advantages from the start.



  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
AtTheEndofMyRope AtTheEndofMyRope is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 07:57:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"DGDevin" wrote in message
om
"Mark-T" wrote in message
...

If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?


The original raw multi-track tape (or these days data
file) rarely does anything but sit in a vault.


If it still exists.

Re-mastering at least in theory means they started with
the original raw tracks and did the mixing and EQ all
over again and carefully produced a new mixed master
recording with better quality than the old one.


Not at all. That would be called "re-mixing".

But sometimes


No, always.

they start with the old final mix and just are
more careful in making a digital transer that will be
used to make CDs.


No, not necessarily more careful, just different.

A lot of early CDs made from analog
tapes were not done very well, the analog to digital
transfers were poor, they benefited from more careful
work later.


No, what happened is that a goodly number of CDs released in the early-mid
1980s were made from what are known as "cutting masters". This means that
the recordings intentionally had the inverse of the losses in LP disc
cutting and playback incorperated into them. This usually results in a
shrill-sounding, thin-sounding recording. These were mistakes, but
management said: "Ship it!". Most of these were redone in the 1990s.



Genesis: The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway

So bad you can hear the tape hiss.

Genesis had many "remasters" on their disc library and the problem is
that they used OTHER masters, so what got put on the "Remastered discs"
were really re-mixed.

They suck too, because the original cuts are what we want, not some lame
****'s choice of what to put down out of the pile of tape he has in front
of him.
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in
message
. fr
On 2011-02-25 13:52:06 +0100, "Arny Krueger"
said:
Are people stupid enough to fall for it as "better"?


They haven't been so far.


Right - notice the smoldering ashes of DVD-A and SACD.


That's not true. In classical music, SACDs are selling
fairly well.


The last sales fibures I can find date back to 2008 when SACD & DVD were
still on local shelves. They're not on local shelves here any more.

In 2008 DVD+SACD sales were $6.4 million which is 426,000 units presuming
$15 each.

Physical media sales which are overwhelmingly CDs were $8 Billion in 2008.
No matter how you look at it, that's over 1,000 times more units putting
SACD+DVD at less than 0.1% of sales of physical media.

A 0.1% or less market share isn't even a good sized niche. 1% would be a
niche.

Not as much as the manufacturers and patent holders would like, but
they're still holding on.


In 2008 SACD+DVD sales were less than 25% of LP sales. LP's are holding on,
but just barely. 25% of just barely is not "even a good sized niche". That
was 3 years ago and things have only gotten worse for the SACD and DVD-A.
Lots worse.



  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
MadManMoon MadManMoon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 10:35:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in
message
.fr
On 2011-02-25 13:52:06 +0100, "Arny Krueger"
said:
Are people stupid enough to fall for it as "better"?

They haven't been so far.

Right - notice the smoldering ashes of DVD-A and SACD.


That's not true. In classical music, SACDs are selling
fairly well.


The last sales fibures I can find date back to 2008 when SACD & DVD were
still on local shelves. They're not on local shelves here any more.

In 2008 DVD+SACD sales were $6.4 million which is 426,000 units presuming
$15 each.

Physical media sales which are overwhelmingly CDs were $8 Billion in 2008.
No matter how you look at it, that's over 1,000 times more units putting
SACD+DVD at less than 0.1% of sales of physical media.

A 0.1% or less market share isn't even a good sized niche. 1% would be a
niche.

Not as much as the manufacturers and patent holders would like, but
they're still holding on.


In 2008 SACD+DVD sales were less than 25% of LP sales. LP's are holding on,
but just barely. 25% of just barely is not "even a good sized niche". That
was 3 years ago and things have only gotten worse for the SACD and DVD-A.
Lots worse.



One of the few good DVD-A releases was the Beatles' "Love" project.


  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
MadManMoon MadManMoon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:44:34 +0000 (UTC), Warren
wrote:

expounded in

oups.com:

..
I read somewhere that HD video is only perceived as better
if the audio is also of higher quality. ..

Colin


I dunno about that.

The superbowl HD was just as good with the mute button on as it
was when it was off.

The only detraction was the word "Mute" at the top of the
screen. ;-)

Warren


Only because you "muted" the wrong device. You should have muted your
Audio Receiver.
  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in message
. fr...
It means a new master is made from the original tapes.


Remastering of digital source files can still take place. The original
need
not ever have been on tape.


I was using "tapes" as a metaphor. In most cases, though, when we see
remasters it is from tape, not from digital.


Not always these days. And even the term "original tapes" can have a vast
number of meanings. You could even include early digital recordings made to
video tape I guess. Certainly most CD's fail to mention the exact source of
the material used for "remastering". And some albums have been "remastered"
so many times even the fans can't keep track. Pink Floyd's "DSotM" being one
example.

Trevor.


  #28   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
MadManMoon MadManMoon is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 15:29:45 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:


"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in message
.fr...
It means a new master is made from the original tapes.

Remastering of digital source files can still take place. The original
need
not ever have been on tape.


I was using "tapes" as a metaphor. In most cases, though, when we see
remasters it is from tape, not from digital.


Not always these days. And even the term "original tapes" can have a vast
number of meanings. You could even include early digital recordings made to
video tape I guess. Certainly most CD's fail to mention the exact source of
the material used for "remastering". And some albums have been "remastered"
so many times even the fans can't keep track. Pink Floyd's "DSotM" being one
example.

Trevor.


With the Gold Master release (CBS?) of that being the best I have.
Haven't been out looking though either. Haven't seen it in a while
either...
  #29   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in message
. fr...
Back in the days of vinyl, the "master disk" was a record made of metal
(aluminum? steel?), mixed from the original tapes. From this, the
record company would make molds for the actual disks that were sold.


Yes, but that's not the "master" in "re-master;"


Right, you don't want to use a master tape equalised for vinyl to cut a CD
anyway, and certainly not a disc copy, unless nothing else remains!

it's the master tape, the final mix-down.


Depends what you call the "final" mixdown, and the best remasters go back to
the original multi-track and remix anyway.

Trevor.






  #30   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Warren" wrote in message
. 213...
The superbowl HD was just as good with the mute button on as it
was when it was off.


Better surely? :-)

The only detraction was the word "Mute" at the top of the
screen. ;-)


So just reduce the volume to zero instead, and there is no "Mute" overlay to
annoy you.

Trevor.




  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Mastering is not mixing and remastering is not remixing.


True, BUT the terms ARE unfortunately used interchangebly by those who write
the cover details for CD's. Such people are RARELY technical personel, they
are marketing types wishing to promote the CD in the best light within the
scope of their limited knowlege. Even if it's the crappiest transfer
possible from a worn out vinyl record, it can still legitamately be called
"remastered", and usually is :-(
Old worn out vinyl can now be transferred to 24 bit digital files, and that
is happening too! :-( :-(

Trevor.




  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
In 2008 SACD+DVD sales were less than 25% of LP sales. LP's are holding
on, but just barely. 25% of just barely is not "even a good sized niche".
That was 3 years ago and things have only gotten worse for the SACD and
DVD-A. Lots worse.


Yep, but music video DVD's and Blu-ray accounts for a good size market now.
Most people simply see no point in paying more for a DVD without video. And
the better Music video DVD's have a PCM soundtrack as well as surround sound
and video. All for less than the cost of the equivalent CD in some cases.
Less than the cost of SACD and DVDA in nearly all cases, here at least.

Trevor.


  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Remember that digital recording was applied to the production of LPs up to
nearly a decade before the release of the first CDs. This was done so that
when the CD format was finalized, it would be possible to exploit its
sonic and practical advantages from the start.


Actually it was mostly done as a pont of difference from other techniques
being used at the time to try to improve the sound quality of vinyl. Half
speed mastering, Direct metal mastering, and Direct to disc recording were
all being tried to improve sound quality, as were those early digital
recorders (and video interfaces). That the digital recordings could be more
easily transferred to CD when it was released was only a minor benefit IMO,
since ANY transfer was still relatively easy compared with the problem of
actually making a CD master disc and pressing consumer discs in the very
early days.

Trevor.


  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?


"Kirk McElhearn" kirkmc (at) mac (dot) com wrote in message
. fr...
Depends what you call the "final" mixdown, and the best remasters go back
to
the original multi-track and remix anyway.


Yes, it's making a new master tape, hence it generally always involves a
remix, right?


Nope, it *sometimes* involves a remix from multi-track tapes. But *FAR* from
"generally always". More often it's simply A-D, EQ'd and compressed (and
usually some noise reduction) from one of the existing two track masters.
And it NEVER involves "making a new master tape" these days, since it stays
digital after the initial A-D (if the original is analog), and nobody I know
uses digtal tape as a backup any more.

Trevor.


  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Andrew Haley Andrew Haley is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

In rec.audio.tech Warren wrote:
Mark-T expounded in

oups.com:
..
Professional music producers generally capture studio
recordings in a 24-bit, high-fidelity audio format.
Before the originals, or "masters" in industry parlance,
are pressed onto CDs or distributed to digital sellers
like Apple's iTunes, they're downgraded to 16-bit files.


If the master is the original, then what does
"re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?
A genuine original copy?
Mark


It just means that it is "re-mixed".


No, that's not right. Mastering is usually done from stereo masters,
post-mixdown. The Wikipedia page at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_mastering explains the process.

Andrew.


  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Randy Yates Randy Yates is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 839
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On 02/25/2011 08:00 AM, Arny Krueger wrote:
[...]
This was done so that when the CD format was finalized, it would be
possible to exploit its sonic and practical advantages from the
start.


Even if the source material was marginal, you'd still have sonic
advantages with a CD. For example, the elimination of ticks and pops,
wow-and-flutter, and rumble. But I miss my anti-static gun, dirt
brush, and Yamaha direct-drive turntable nonetheless...
--
Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs
919-577-9882 http://www.digitalsignallabs.com


  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
MalcolmO MalcolmO is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

Hear, hear!

Today people get recording contracts based on how photogenic they are.
Machines sing them into tune. AND THEN

Most
commercial recordings today are released in a form which is far less
than "16-bit" in quality - they have been deliberately compressed
during the mastering process to sound "louder". They've been quashed,
pummeled, clipped, gain-ridden, smelched, and squeezed down into a
tiny dynamic range.


And they wonder why we don't buy records!
--
Malcolm
"They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Randy Yates Randy Yates is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 839
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On 02/27/2011 12:04 AM, MalcolmO wrote:
Hear, hear!

Today people get recording contracts based on how photogenic they are. Machines sing them into tune. AND THEN

Most
commercial recordings today are released in a form which is far less
than "16-bit" in quality - they have been deliberately compressed
during the mastering process to sound "louder". They've been quashed,
pummeled, clipped, gain-ridden, smelched, and squeezed down into a
tiny dynamic range.


And they wonder why we don't buy records!


I thought it may be interesting to suggest some pre-digital era albums that
were of better source quality than much of what gets put into 1's and 0's
these days.

How about, "Year of the Cat", by Al Stewart?
--
Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs
919-577-9882 http://www.digitalsignallabs.com


  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Gladys Gladys is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

On 2/27/2011 10:10 AM, Randy Yates wrote:
On 02/27/2011 12:04 AM, MalcolmO wrote:
Hear, hear!

Today people get recording contracts based on how photogenic they are.
Machines sing them into tune. AND THEN

Most
commercial recordings today are released in a form which is far less
than "16-bit" in quality - they have been deliberately compressed
during the mastering process to sound "louder". They've been quashed,
pummeled, clipped, gain-ridden, smelched, and squeezed down into a
tiny dynamic range.


And they wonder why we don't buy records!


I thought it may be interesting to suggest some pre-digital era albums that
were of better source quality than much of what gets put into 1's and 0's
these days.

How about, "Year of the Cat", by Al Stewart?


Or ones that were recorded perfectly digitally - like Mark Knopfler's
"Sailing To Philadelphia".

It can be done.

Gladys.



  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.music.gdead,rec.audio.tech,sci.electronics.design
Edwin Hurwitz Edwin Hurwitz is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 105
Default 24-bit on tap at Apple?

In article ,
"Trevor" wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Remember that digital recording was applied to the production of LPs up to
nearly a decade before the release of the first CDs. This was done so that
when the CD format was finalized, it would be possible to exploit its
sonic and practical advantages from the start.


Actually it was mostly done as a pont of difference from other techniques
being used at the time to try to improve the sound quality of vinyl. Half
speed mastering, Direct metal mastering, and Direct to disc recording were
all being tried to improve sound quality, as were those early digital
recorders (and video interfaces). That the digital recordings could be more
easily transferred to CD when it was released was only a minor benefit IMO,
since ANY transfer was still relatively easy compared with the problem of
actually making a CD master disc and pressing consumer discs in the very
early days.

Trevor.


Digital multitrack recording was also used for it's improved signal to
noise ratio, lack of wow and flutter, lack of hiss buildup, ability to
play the tape over and over without losing highs as you overdubbed other
tracks, ability to get off the tape what you put on it (subject to the
vagaries of early converters.), although that's a mixed bag because the
euphonic compression that tape has is something we now miss as is head
bump artifacts on the low end, etc.

Editing was also seen as potentially easier, as you could calculate
crossfades and create edit decision lists that would allow you to edit
in ways that a razor blade can't. Of course, a good engineer with a
blade could do some awesome ****. I worked at it a lot and got good at
it, but not like some of the masters I saw at work. It's all pretty easy
on a computer now, so it's largely a lost skill.

Punching in and out was also something that some saw as an improvement,
what with the ability to set very precise ins and outs which included
crossfades. However, I miss the days that my clients called my Mike
Tyson due to my ability to quickly and accurately punch in and out,
sometimes even punching parts of words. Ah, the good old days, I don't
miss them a bit! Pro Tools, Logic, etc. rock!
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
apple ipod nano mp3 player new in box apple 2gb nano ipod playerapple ipod nano video apple ipod nano player new in us apple ipod nano 2 gbwhite mp3 player new apple ipod nano mp3 player2 black apple ipod nano 4gb mp3player new smallest new nano appl [email protected] Pro Audio 0 March 14th 08 08:58 AM
hey, go wipe a apple T. U. Brunson Car Audio 0 December 29th 07 10:19 PM
FS: Apple G4 Dual 1.25 Ghz [email protected] Marketplace 0 August 9th 05 06:43 AM
If Apple .... Geoff Wood Pro Audio 41 September 23rd 03 05:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:09 AM.

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"