Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
On Wednesday, December 10, 2014 3:15:30 PM UTC-5, Tom McCreadie wrote:
On 10 Dec 2014 wrote: Also Scott I threw a few known early/original release CDs of mine into Exact Audio Copy and they all returned a NO in the Emphasis column. That leaves over 400 more to check, something I don't think is worth wasting time on. LOLOL They exist, you will find one. I released a bunch of them. But they are very much a drop in the bucket. --scott http://www.studio-nibble.com/cd/inde..._(release_list) That list was mainly pop/rock music. I think you'll find a lot more lurking out there in classical genre. For instance, doing a quick dip into a pile of classical cd's before me that were made between 1980 and 1990, I found this one at only my 6th try :-): Musica Svecia MSCD 626 (1990): "Serenad, Midvinter, Chitra";composer Wilhelm Stenhammar; performed by The Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra and Choir. -- Tom McCreadie Cool. I checked "Beethoven: Symphonies No. 5 & No. 7" Telarc CD-80163 (1988) and Bach "Brandenburg" Concertos Philips 420 345-2 No on both of them in EAC, even though the Bach one was released on CD in West(!!!) Germany but recorded in the '70s. No year of CD release info is available anywhere for that one. |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
wrote:
Cool. I checked "Beethoven: Symphonies No. 5 & No. 7" Telarc CD-80163 (1988) and Bach "Brandenburg" Concertos Philips 420 345-2 No on both of them in EAC, even though the Bach one was released on CD in West(!!!) Germany but recorded in the '70s. No year of CD release info is available anywhere for that one. Renner was very much against emphasis as well, in part because he'd invested highly into the Stockham system. This was a matter of serious debates back in the eighties and you could hear people in the bars around the AES show weighing the various advantages and disadvantages with Renner being a loud voice. Smaller labels that were doing live to 2-track stuff with the likes of the SV-3700 were more likely to be using emphasis. It was very much a creature of its time, and that time was a rather short one considering the age of digital recording today. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Seems to be a list for everything nowadays... Couple things
I noticed about this list: #1. Most of the items on it were made outside of the U.S. for distribution outside of the U.S. Guess sound quality wasn't as much of an issue on early CDs & players inside of the U.S. as it was in other countries. #2. Of the 3 catalog #s I own that are on this list, Exact Audio Copy returned a "no" in the pre-emphasis column. Preemphasis applied or not and preemphasis flag set or not are two different questions. Errors will have happened, it should have been compulsory or not at all, letting it be optional was a concept that was remote from the real world. Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
"Scott Dorsey" skrev i en meddelelse ... wrote: Smaller labels that were doing live to 2-track stuff with the likes of the SV-3700 were more likely to be using emphasis. My Sony ES2000 or so DAT offers it, it improves violins so I like it. It is a setting and I come from a roadie background where we unsoldered switches in microphones, so I don't like it. It was hideously costly and is impressively well built, even second hand, and now I haven't even turned it on for a couple of years ... guess it is the White Steamer of the household by now ... It was very much a creature of its time, and that time was a rather short one considering the age of digital recording today. --scott Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
Peter Larsen wrote: "Preemphasis applied or not and preemphasis flag set or not are two different
questions." That is essentially what I just said(apologies if it was vaguely worded). PE may have been applied, but a flag not set, in a lot of cases. That is why my software is returning a negative on potentially PE'd discs. |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Chuck wrote:
Some higher end CD players with Burr Brown DACs, in the mid 80s, had a potentiometer that could be adjusted for minimum distortion on a low level tone. Many times they were adjusted incorrectly out of the box. As a courtesy to our customers, we would adjust the pots for minimum distortion before the customer took the players home. AARGH! LSB trims! You can set 'em, but they don't stay that way.... Thank God for the Bitstream Revolution! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
In article ,
wrote: Also Scott I threw a few known early/original release CDs of mine into Exact Audio Copy and they all returned a NO in the Emphasis column. That leaves over 400 more to check, something I don't think is worth wasting time on. LOLOL They exist, you will find one. I released a bunch of them. But they are very much a drop in the bucket. http://www.studio-nibble.com/cd/inde..._(release_list) I think this is a small fraction of the pressings out there, but even on this short list there are a disturbing number of "missing PE flag" entries. Although I am guessing "Brothers in Arms" is supposed to be that insanely bright, because the LP was bright too. Not very many dates either. I'd be very interested in seeing a plot of year vs. number of emphasized releases. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Peter Larsen wrote:
Seems to be a list for everything nowadays... Couple things I noticed about this list: #1. Most of the items on it were made outside of the U.S. for distribution outside of the U.S. Guess sound quality wasn't as much of an issue on early CDs & players inside of the U.S. as it was in other countries. #2. Of the 3 catalog #s I own that are on this list, Exact Audio Copy returned a "no" in the pre-emphasis column. Preemphasis applied or not and preemphasis flag set or not are two different questions. Errors will have happened, it should have been compulsory or not at all, letting it be optional was a concept that was remote from the real world. If it's applied and the bit isn't set, it's painfully obvious on an acoustic recording. But in the days when people were sending 1610 tapes or DDP files off to the pressing plant, it was often not possible for them to properly audition the final product until it came back from the plant and sometimes things went wrong with subcode bits. If something went wrong like that, some labels would notice it in the spot check before shipping and destroy all the bad pressings. Some labels would never notice it at all. And some labels would notice it but ship it anyway. I'm not mentioning any names here. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Peter Larsen wrote:
My Sony ES2000 or so DAT offers it, it improves violins so I like it. It is a setting and I come from a roadie background where we unsoldered switches in microphones, so I don't like it. It was hideously costly and is impressively well built, even second hand, and now I haven't even turned it on for a couple of years ... guess it is the White Steamer of the household by now ... It improves violins because it's eliminating a lot of the high frequency hash from the ladder not being linear and the anti-aliasing filters still letting a tiny bit of out-of-band stuff through. The Tascam DA P-20 portadat made emphasis undefeatable, so there was no switch to fail! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 7/12/2014 7:06 a.m., Roy W. Rising wrote:
Let's not forget the Cat. No. 43A controller that separately managed the Type A's four bands of dynamic expans Dunno about the 43A, but I have a coup[le of 361s with Cat22 cards in about 5 feet behind my left shoulder ! geoff |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 7/12/2014 4:27 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
Early converters had a lot of linearity problems, and the end result was somewhat unpleasant high end. Remember this was the age of very long ladder converters; if you recorded a 1kc tone at -60dBFS and played it back, it sounded audibly buzzy (implying more than 2% distortion) on the 1610. Pre-emphasis did a lot to reduce some of the high end distortion products at the expense of a little dynamic range. The difference in sound on the 1610 (or even worse the SV3700) was quite audible. Thank God those days are over. Bop Till You Drop would have been even better without the q.noise - but that was on the recording side of things rather than playback .... geoff |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
geoff wrote:
On 7/12/2014 4:27 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote: Early converters had a lot of linearity problems, and the end result was somewhat unpleasant high end. Remember this was the age of very long ladder converters; if you recorded a 1kc tone at -60dBFS and played it back, it sounded audibly buzzy (implying more than 2% distortion) on the 1610. Pre-emphasis did a lot to reduce some of the high end distortion products at the expense of a little dynamic range. The difference in sound on the 1610 (or even worse the SV3700) was quite audible. Thank God those days are over. Bop Till You Drop would have been even better without the q.noise - but that was on the recording side of things rather than playback .... That's the point of pre-emphasis... the higher frequency distortion components are reduced compared to the signal because you have increased the amount of high frequency signal before conversion and then decreased it on playback. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
Scott Dorsey wrote: "- show quoted text -
That's the point of pre-emphasis... the higher frequency distortion components are reduced compared to the signal because you have increased the amount of high frequency signal before conversion and then decreased it on playback. - show quoted text -" I know you won't agree, but that matches precisely the description of what Dolby NR did for cassette tapes. Only for the cassettes it actually dynamically compressed the highs overemphasized upon transfer to tape. |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: "- show quoted text - That's the point of pre-emphasis... the higher frequency distortion components are reduced compared to the signal because you have increased the amount of high frequency signal before conversion and then decreased it on playback. I know you won't agree, but that matches precisely the description of what Dolby NR did for cassette tapes. Only for the cassettes it actually dynamically compressed the highs overemphasized upon transfer to tape. Compression and equalization are not the same thing. The cassette recorder already DOES have 70mS or 100mS (depending on whether you have selected normal or chrome tape) emphasis before Dolby is even turned on. In the case of the cassette, it's done both to make the noise floor somewhat flatter and to increase the amount of low end headroom, though. Not for distortion reduction (although that can be a happy benefit). --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Scott Dorsey wrote:
The cassette recorder already DOES have 70mS or 100mS (depending on whether you have selected normal or chrome tape) emphasis before Dolby is even turned on. Typo police here - 'mS' normally denotes milliseconds...instead of the required microseconds. |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Typo police here -- 'mS' normally denotes milliseconds...
instead of the required microseconds. Actually, it means millisiemens. Seconds isn't a proper name, and is abbreviated as a lower-case letter: ms. |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 22/12/2014 6:35 a.m., William Sommerwerck wrote:
Typo police here -- 'mS' normally denotes milliseconds... instead of the required microseconds. Actually, it means millisiemens. Seconds isn't a proper name, and is abbreviated as a lower-case letter: ms. So " µs ". geoff |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
Scott Dorsey wrote: "Compression and equalization are not the same thing. "
I'm aware of that. But it is in the B-NR, C-NR that compression is applied during playback to level the noise floor. The digital pre-emph and Dolby are both using the PRINCIPLE of emph-de-emph to lower the level of something relative to something else. |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
Les Cargill:
Your's(the first reply to this thread) remains the best and most relevant answer. But as opposed to zilch, I think engineering plays a significant role in conveying the meaning of a piece of music into a playable form. And over engineering is an issue. |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: "Compression and equalization are not the same thing. " I'm aware of that. But it is in the B-NR, C-NR that compression is applied during playback to level the noise floor. Sort of, but not really. The Dolby B compression means that _loud_ signals are reduced in level to tape without soft signals being reduced in level. So you're gaining more headroom at high frequencies, without affecting the noise level. (The end result being better S/N if you did it right.) It's not like emphasis, which affects loud and soft signals equally. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
William Sommerwerck wrote:
Typo police here -- 'mS' normally denotes milliseconds... instead of the required microseconds. Actually, it means millisiemens. Seconds isn't a proper name, and is abbreviated as a lower-case letter: ms. Sorry, William, but you've got things confused here. In this present context, it really is microseconds (µs). The named unit "Siemens" does admittedly take the abbreviation "s", but that pertains to measurement of electrical conductance. Scott was referring to the IEC standardized Time Constants to define the (high frequency side) of the record/playback equalization curve for cassette formulations, viz. 120µs (not 100µs) for Type I and 70µs for Type II. -- Tom McCreadie |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Tom McCreadie wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote: Typo police here -- 'mS' normally denotes milliseconds... instead of the required microseconds. Actually, it means millisiemens. Seconds isn't a proper name, and is abbreviated as a lower-case letter: ms. Sorry, William, but you've got things confused here. In this present context, it really is microseconds (µs). The named unit "Siemens" does admittedly take the abbreviation "s", but that pertains to measurement of electrical conductance. Scott was referring to the IEC standardized Time Constants to define the (high frequency side) of the record/playback equalization curve for cassette formulations, viz. 120µs (not 100µs) for Type I and 70µs for Type II. Oops, apologies, William, I realize only now that you were simply makng the case for grammatical precision: 'mS' (with upper case 'S') when referring to Siemens units, and 'ms' (with lower case 's ') for seconds. The last thing, of course, that you needed from me was an 'Equalization 101' tutorial. As penance, I shall offer up to the wide Internet community the correct spelling of "lose" and ''cardioid" :-) My point in the first post was just the milli vs micro thing. |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
This potential confusion between mS and ms is why I wish the Powers that Are had stuck with mho.
Peace, Paul PS Not to mention the fact that undergraduates giggle when you say millisiemens". |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 12/22/2014 6:34 AM, PStamler wrote:
This potential confusion between mS and ms is why I wish the Powers that Are had stuck with mho. But isn't that transconductance? -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 12/22/2014 12:29 AM, Tom McCreadie wrote:
Oops, apologies, William, I realize only now that you were simply makng the case for grammatical precision: 'mS' (with upper case 'S') when referring to Siemens units, and 'ms' (with lower case 's ') for seconds. There's a standard, I think from IEEE, that's pretty straightforward. If the unit is, or is derived from a person's name, then it's capitalized, such as mA (milliamperes for Ampere) or uF (microfarads for Faraday). If it's a physical unit, it's not capitalized, such as ms (milliseconds) or mm (millimeters). There's also a standard for capitalization of multipliers, too, but I can't remember what it is, like kHz (which I use because it's easier to read than KHz). km (kilometers) seems to be common, but so is KM, but only on highway signs. William the Gramarian will have an answer. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 12/21/2014 9:53 PM, wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: "Compression and equalization are not the same thing. " I'm aware of that. But it is in the B-NR, C-NR that compression is applied during playback to level the noise floor. Compression is applied during recording, not playback. Expansion is applied during playback to un-do the compression. De-emphasis (equalization) is applied during playback to undo the emphasis applied during recording. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
On Monday, December 22, 2014 8:03:46 AM UTC-5, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 12/21/2014 9:53 PM, theom wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: "Compression and equalization are not the same thing. " I'm aware of that. But it is in the B-NR, C-NR that compression is applied during playback to level the noise floor. Compression is applied during recording, not playback. Expansion is applied during playback to un-do the compression. De-emphasis (equalization) is applied during playback to undo the emphasis applied during recording. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com Thanks Mike R, excuse my dyslexia. So the expansion during Dolby NR in playback of cassette 'pushes down' the noise floor? |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 12/22/2014 6:34 AM, PStamler wrote: This potential confusion between mS and ms is why I wish the Powers that Are had stuck with mho. But isn't that transconductance? It could be any kind of conductance. But now we use siemens instead of mho and hertz instead of cycles. And really, it doesn't make any difference except for confusing people. It's bad enough that I have to explain MFD instead of uF... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ...
And some people say "Dolby dulls the high end" because they can hear the de-emphasis taking place when they switch in in when the music is playing. I tested this over 30 years ago. Dolby B does dull the top end. dbx II doesn't. |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
William Sommerwerck: Consumer playback alignment at the factories was probably out by so much either way that dullness was the result.
|
#72
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 23/12/2014 2:01 a.m., Mike Rivers wrote:
On 12/22/2014 12:29 AM, Tom McCreadie wrote: Oops, apologies, William, I realize only now that you were simply makng the case for grammatical precision: 'mS' (with upper case 'S') when referring to Siemens units, and 'ms' (with lower case 's ') for seconds. There's a standard, I think from IEEE, that's pretty straightforward. If the unit is, or is derived from a person's name, then it's capitalized, such as mA (milliamperes for Ampere) or uF (microfarads for Faraday). If it's a physical unit, it's not capitalized, such as ms (milliseconds) or mm (millimeters). There's also a standard for capitalization of multipliers, too, but I can't remember what it is, like kHz (which I use because it's easier to read than KHz). km (kilometers) seems to be common, but so is KM, but only on highway signs. William the Gramarian will have an answer. Small for less than a single unit, capital for more than a single unit. So 'mF 'is milli-Farads and 'MF' is mega-Farads. geoff |
#73
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ... And some people say "Dolby dulls the high end" because they can hear the de-emphasis taking place when they switch in in when the music is playing. I tested this over 30 years ago. Dolby B does dull the top end. dbx II doesn't. Back in the late '70's and early '80's, Nakamichi was under fire from many people who'd observed that Dolby B cassettes made on a Nakamichi deck generally sounded dull when played back on the decks of other manufacturers. An explanation for this apparent dullness, gaining rapid traction in audio circles, was that all Nak decks employed an equalization deviating from standard. Nakamichi vigorously protested that 'bum rap', insisting that they - and not the other manufacturers - were the guys who were diligently interpreting and adhering to the standard. To underpin their case and re-educate the misguided :-), they had their research dept. punp out some 'White Papers ' and Technical Bulletins, for example: - "Nakamichi Cassette Equalization: The Standard View" - Nakamichi Technical Bulletin 2. "Playback Equalization" -- Tom McCreadie |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
Tom McCreadie wrote:
Back in the late '70's and early '80's, Nakamichi was under fire from many people who'd observed that Dolby B cassettes made on a Nakamichi deck generally sounded dull when played back on the decks of other manufacturers. An explanation for this apparent dullness, gaining rapid traction in audio circles, was that all Nak decks employed an equalization deviating from standard. These problems were due to the head configuration, not the equalization. It was a matter of edge effect. Nakamichi vigorously protested that 'bum rap', insisting that they - and not the other manufacturers - were the guys who were diligently interpreting and adhering to the standard. To underpin their case and re-educate the misguided :-), they had their research dept. punp out some 'White Papers ' and Technical Bulletins, for example: - "Nakamichi Cassette Equalization: The Standard View" - Nakamichi Technical Bulletin 2. "Playback Equalization" Nak did in fact meet the head configuration and EQ standards better than anyone else, but a standard that nobody follows is no standard. The cassette world was just so horrible in so many ways.... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating a Great Record
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
... In article , Mike Rivers wrote: On 12/22/2014 6:34 AM, PStamler wrote: This potential confusion between mS and ms is why I wish the Powers that Are had stuck with mho. But isn't that transconductance? It could be any kind of conductance. But now we use siemens instead of mho and hertz instead of cycles. And really, it doesn't make any difference except for confusing people. It's bad enough that I have to explain MFD instead of uF... --scott Sloppy use of long-obsolete terminology is probably more confusing than using hertz, which shouldn't be confusing to any professional or academic or technician. |
#76
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creating aGreat Record
Yeah, but using Hz won't get you very far if you're talking about conductance, which is what Siemens is the unit for.
Peace, Paul PS Another annoyance: what's the plural of Siemens? Siemenses? Siemensen? |
#77
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 23/12/2014 2:24 p.m., PStamler wrote:
Yeah, but using Hz won't get you very far if you're talking about conductance, which is what Siemens is the unit for. Peace, Paul PS Another annoyance: what's the plural of Siemens? Siemenses? Siemensen? Dunno, but 'semen' is inherently plural ;-) geoff PS Common usage would seem to support 'Siemens' being used for both the singular and plural. |
#78
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) inCreating a Great Record
|
#79
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 23/12/2014 4:39 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ... And some people say "Dolby dulls the high end" because they can hear the de-emphasis taking place when they switch in in when the music is playing. I tested this over 30 years ago. Dolby B does dull the top end. dbx II doesn't. Simply proves the tape deck you "tested" had the usual Dolby misalignment problems. DBX of course suffered more from the noise pumping problems that Dolby was designed to reduce. Both were simply partial attempts to reduce the inherent problems of analog tape. Thankfully something we can now forget, except for those who prefer nostalgia to music. Trevor. |
#80
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Role of Production(Recording, Mixing, & Mastering) in Creatinga Great Record
On 23/12/2014 1:57 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
It's bad enough that I have to explain MFD instead of uF... Why would you have to explain Metro Fire Department Vs micro Farad? Trevor. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
music production, audio production, sequencing, mixing, beat,DJ, mixing consoles, Steinberg, Sony, virtual instruments VSTi and samplelibraries, groove, synth, bass, strings, guitar, piano, hip-hop ( hiphop), RnB, trance, jazz | Pro Audio | |||
Recording, Mixing or Mastering Reference Books & Reviews? | Pro Audio | |||
Creating Dimension in Mixing | Pro Audio | |||
RAM's role in recording? | Pro Audio | |||
Role Of The Mixing Desk | Pro Audio |