Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [regsaudioforum] SACD and CD

Expand Messages
  • Uli Brueggemann
    I always dream of a direct comparison test between a digital source and a turntable where the listeners would see either running the CD player by the remote
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I always dream of a direct comparison test between a digital source and a turntable where the listeners would see either running the CD player by the remote control or the turntable by manual positioning of the pickup on the LP.
      But in fact in both cases simply the digital music should be played, maybe in case of the turntable the digital playback fooled by a software like http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/vinyl/

      I'm always wondering how many people would praise the advantages of analog playback as a result of such a test :)

      Uli

      On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Robert Greene <regonaudio@...> wrote:


      One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
      do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
      has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
      for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
      where you have only one take, perhaps.
      When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
      the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
      you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to be.

      Re: formats in general

      Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the record"
      columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
      seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come from
      digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or anything.
      I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
      either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
      route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
      would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
      interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I would
      say it was from digital sources.

      I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
      reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
      digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or whatever,
      review such items without noticing that the recording was in fact
      digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced items as
      prime examples of the wonders of analogue.

      This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part of my
      education in the ways of audio.

      REG


    • ofer_r.geo
      Recording today is done in 96Khz/24bit, 88.2Khz/24bit, and even 192Khz/24bit 176.4/24bit all the processing and mixing is also done this way, just in the end
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Recording today is done in 96Khz/24bit, 88.2Khz/24bit, and even
        192Khz/24bit 176.4/24bit
        all the processing and mixing is also done this way, just in the end
        process, the data is downsampled to 44.1khz/16bit
        The recording at 88.2Khz/24bit or 176.4/24bit are more easy to
        downsample, because there is a factor of 2 or 4

        Ofer



        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Greene"
        <regonaudio@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
        > do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
        > has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
        > for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
        > where you have only one take, perhaps.
        > When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
        > the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
        > you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to be.
        >
        >
        > Re: formats in general
        >
        > Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the record"
        > columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
        > seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come from
        > digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or anything.
        > I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
        > either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
        > route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
        > would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
        > interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I would
        > say it was from digital sources.
        >
        > I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
        > reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
        > digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or whatever,
        > review such items without noticing that the recording was in fact
        > digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced items as
        > prime examples of the wonders of analogue.
        >
        > This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part of my
        > education in the ways of audio.
        >
        > REG
        >
      • Robert Greene
        Absolutely, and a very nice thing it is, as noted. The 96 or so dB of CD is enough for music but not really quite enough for maximum convenience in recording,
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Absolutely, and a very nice thing it is, as noted.
          The 96 or so dB of CD is enough for music but not
          really quite enough for maximum convenience in recording, on account
          of the "headroom" issue already noted.
          But it makes sense to distinguish between recording and playback
          ends of the chain, as noted.

          REG

          --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "ofer_r.geo" <oferab@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Recording today is done in 96Khz/24bit, 88.2Khz/24bit, and even
          > 192Khz/24bit 176.4/24bit
          > all the processing and mixing is also done this way, just in the
          end
          > process, the data is downsampled to 44.1khz/16bit
          > The recording at 88.2Khz/24bit or 176.4/24bit are more easy to
          > downsample, because there is a factor of 2 or 4
          >
          > Ofer
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Greene"
          > <regonaudio@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
          > > do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
          > > has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
          > > for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
          > > where you have only one take, perhaps.
          > > When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
          > > the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
          > > you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to
          be.
          > >
          > >
          > > Re: formats in general
          > >
          > > Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the
          record"
          > > columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
          > > seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come
          from
          > > digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or
          anything.
          > > I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
          > > either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
          > > route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
          > > would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
          > > interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I
          would
          > > say it was from digital sources.
          > >
          > > I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
          > > reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
          > > digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or
          whatever,
          > > review such items without noticing that the recording was in
          fact
          > > digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced
          items as
          > > prime examples of the wonders of analogue.
          > >
          > > This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part
          of my
          > > education in the ways of audio.
          > >
          > > REG
          > >
          >
        • Goran Finnberg
          ... While some may do this then 99.5 percent of what I get is firmly at 48/24. The unofficial standard for classical is also at 48/24 if I am to believe the
          Message 4 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Ofer:

            > Recording today is done in 96Khz/24bit, 88.2Khz/24bit,
            > and even 192Khz/24bit 176.4/24bit

            While some may do this then 99.5 percent of what I get is firmly at
            48/24.

            The unofficial standard for classical is also at 48/24 if I am to
            believe the very few doing this.

            --
            Best,

            Goran Finnberg
            The Mastering Room AB
            Goteborg
            Sweden

            E-mail: mastering@...

            Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
            make them all yourself. - John Luther
          • ofer_r.geo
            Hi Goren This is interesting I am working at Waves, and the PlugIns that we made are intended to run up to sample rate 96khz, and very few of them are running
            Message 5 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Goren

              This is interesting

              I am working at Waves, and the PlugIns that we made are intended to
              run up to sample rate 96khz, and very few of them are running up to 192khz

              Still the recording are done in 24bits, which give a lot of headroom,
              and in the end process they are converted to 16bits, for me, and today
              ADC and DAC, number of bits is more impotent then sample rate

              For people who don't know, PlugIns are effect on the sound track, like
              EQ, Compressors, and other interesting effects, we have a PlugIn, that
              if a singer has mistakes in the notes, we can fix them after the
              recoding with the PlugIn

              Also an interesting point is that SACD is very hard to work with in
              the mastering and mixing, I don't know of any PlugIn that is working
              on SACD

              Ofer

              --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Goran Finnberg <mastering@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Ofer:
              >
              > > Recording today is done in 96Khz/24bit, 88.2Khz/24bit,
              > > and even 192Khz/24bit 176.4/24bit
              >
              > While some may do this then 99.5 percent of what I get is firmly at
              > 48/24.
              >
              > The unofficial standard for classical is also at 48/24 if I am to
              > believe the very few doing this.
              >
              > --
              > Best,
              >
              > Goran Finnberg
              > The Mastering Room AB
              > Goteborg
              > Sweden
              >
              > E-mail: mastering@...
              >
              > Learn from the mistakes of others, you can never live long enough to
              > make them all yourself. - John Luther
              >
            • Tom Mallin
              On recordings with quiet moments, it would take a darn good turntable and a very clean, quiet LP to not be able to instantly hear the LP source s greater and
              Message 6 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                On recordings with quiet moments, it would take a darn good turntable and a very clean, quiet LP to not be able to instantly hear the LP source's greater and different noise.  LP noise is totally obvious on even my bedroom system playing WFMT-FM radio (they use Shure V15 cartridges and SME arms) through a 1980s Sony receiver and 1970s AR-5 speakers at levels which are just above background levels.  Pops and clicks are dead giveaways even at that level and turn the level up and the LP noise exceeds the background hiss of the station and has a periodic quality to it that is another dead giveaway.  Even old analog material such as 1950s open reel tape recordings of the Mercury Living Presence catalog are instantly recognizable when played on WFMT as either the CD version or LP version since the CD's hiss is so much more constant and unwavering, while LPs have a periodic swish added plus clicks and pops.
                 
                Just today, WFMT is playing old interview recordings in memory of Chicago fixture Studs Terkel who died yesterday.  The difference between the LP recordings from the Smithsonian label and others and the WFMT tapes is instantly obvious.

                >>> uli.brueggemann@... 11/1/2008 4:52 AM >>>
                I always dream of a direct comparison test between a digital source and a turntable where the listeners would see either running the CD player by the remote control or the turntable by manual positioning of the pickup on the LP.
                But in fact in both cases simply the digital music should be played, maybe in case of the turntable the digital playback fooled by a software like http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/vinyl/

                I'm always wondering how many people would praise the advantages of analog playback as a result of such a test :)

                Uli

                On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Robert Greene <regonaudio@...> wrote:


                One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
                do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
                has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
                for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
                where you have only one take, perhaps.
                When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
                the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
                you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to be.

                Re: formats in general

                Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the record"
                columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
                seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come from
                digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or anything.
                I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
                either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
                route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
                would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
                interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I would
                say it was from digital sources.

                I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
                reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
                digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or whatever,
                review such items without noticing that the recording was in fact
                digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced items as
                prime examples of the wonders of analogue.

                This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part of my
                education in the ways of audio.

                REG


              • Richard Tuck
                Hi Uli Much as I admire other Izotrope products, I think this is one for gallery of useless inventions. Richard _____ From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                Message 7 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Uli
                   
                  Much as I admire other Izotrope products, I think this is one for gallery of useless inventions.
                   
                  Richard


                  From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Uli Brueggemann
                  Sent: 01 November 2008 09:52
                  To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] SACD and CD

                  I always dream of a direct comparison test between a digital source and a turntable where the listeners would see either running the CD player by the remote control or the turntable by manual positioning of the pickup on the LP.
                  But in fact in both cases simply the digital music should be played, maybe in case of the turntable the digital playback fooled by a software like http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/vinyl/

                  I'm always wondering how many people would praise the advantages of analog playback as a result of such a test :)

                  Uli

                  On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Robert Greene <regonaudio@...> wrote:


                  One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
                  do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
                  has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
                  for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
                  where you have only one take, perhaps.
                  When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
                  the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
                  you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to be.

                  Re: formats in general

                  Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the record"
                  columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
                  seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come from
                  digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or anything.
                  I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
                  either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
                  route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
                  would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
                  interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I would
                  say it was from digital sources.

                  I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
                  reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
                  digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or whatever,
                  review such items without noticing that the recording was in fact
                  digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced items as
                  prime examples of the wonders of analogue.

                  This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part of my
                  education in the ways of audio.

                  REG


                • Fred
                  Anybody try that Winamp upsampling plugin I mentioned? ________________________________ From: Richard Tuck To:
                  Message 8 of 12 , Nov 1, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Anybody try that Winamp upsampling plugin I mentioned?


                    From: Richard Tuck <rtuck@...>
                    To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Saturday, 1 November, 2008 20:46:07
                    Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] SACD and CD

                    Hi Uli
                     
                    Much as I admire other Izotrope products, I think this is one for gallery of useless inventions.
                     
                    Richard


                    From: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:regsaudiofo rum@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Uli Brueggemann
                    Sent: 01 November 2008 09:52
                    To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
                    Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] SACD and CD

                    I always dream of a direct comparison test between a digital source and a turntable where the listeners would see either running the CD player by the remote control or the turntable by manual positioning of the pickup on the LP.
                    But in fact in both cases simply the digital music should be played, maybe in case of the turntable the digital playback fooled by a software like http://www.izotope. com/products/ audio/vinyl/

                    I'm always wondering how many people would praise the advantages of analog playback as a result of such a test :)

                    Uli

                    On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:19 AM, Robert Greene <regonaudio@aol. com> wrote:


                    One of the main points of higher bit rate digital has to
                    do with ease of recording, rather than playback. If a medium
                    has a high dynamic range, one can leave more headroom
                    for unexpectedly loud moments in, e.g., live recordings
                    where you have only one take, perhaps.
                    When you go to make the finished product, you can "peak bit"
                    the result but when recording you cannot a priori, since
                    you have no really exact idea of what the peak level is going to be.

                    Re: formats in general

                    Back when I was reviewing vinyl in my "On the record/For the record"
                    columns in TAS, I used to get occasionally vinyl for review that
                    seemed to me on sonic grounds more or less obviously to come from
                    digital tapes, without anyone saying so on the cover or anything.
                    I would then ask the manufacturer to confirm that the tape was
                    either digital to begin with or had gone through digitization en
                    route to the LP, which in practice always was confirmed. Then I
                    would not review the recording or, if it was sufficiently
                    interesting musically and sonically, I would review it but I would
                    say it was from digital sources.

                    I found it interesting in this context to watch other vinyl
                    reviewers for other organizations ,often people who claimed that
                    digital was unlistenable and made your hair fall out or whatever,
                    review such items without noticing that the recording was in fact
                    digitally sourced. Often they praised the digitally-sourced items as
                    prime examples of the wonders of analogue.

                    This sort of thing makes one think. Anyway, it was surely part of my
                    education in the ways of audio.

                    REG



                  • charles452003
                    RE: WFMT Chicago and radio in general. While the noise levels reproduced are different, most of the programing that is prerecorded is all digiitized via a PC D
                    Message 9 of 12 , Nov 2, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      RE: WFMT Chicago and radio in general.
                      While the noise levels reproduced are different, most of the programing
                      that is prerecorded is all digiitized via a PC D to A converter card.
                      And then all of that is sent via microwave to the downtown transmitter.
                      So, the analogue days of prominent stations in major markets having an
                      analogue line to there transmitter (spec. WFMT) are bascially gone.
                      And they have been using Technics direct drive turntables with as I
                      remember a single post arm (perhaps an Audio Technica) for many years,
                      no longer an SME. And as I remember, the arm was not mounted
                      correctly. And by now they may have the entire library digitized,
                      since all the program host would do is use a touch screen
                      to select the next number from the program directors list.
                      Analogue is dead at all major stations. At the Clear Channels studio,
                      the audio boards are all more like digital workstations. No real audio
                      in them. That is all at the equipment rack.

                      Norm
                    • Tom Mallin
                      What you are saying about radio stations these days may generally be true, but WFMT is not that automated. You can frequently hear the announcers fiddling
                      Message 10 of 12 , Nov 3, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        What you are saying about radio stations these days may generally be true, but WFMT is not that automated.  You can frequently hear the announcers fiddling with CD cases.  There are occasional battles with CD players which get hung up on a particular balky CD and refuse to play past a certain point.  Sometimes the announcer will interject an apology and attempt to fix the problem with that machine or try playing the CD in another machine, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.  There are also occasional mistakes where the host announces what he is playing next and the music starts, then stops again because the announcer or machine made a  mistake in programming the track and what started to play was not what was intended.  If the station were as automated as you say, this stuff would all be edited out.  Also, members of the WFMT Fine Arts Circle (who provided nearly half of the station's financial support) often have an opportunity to tour the studios and meet the hosts and sit in the control rooms with the hosts while they are live on the air. 

                        >>> ncrelich@... 11/2/2008 2:04 PM >>>
                        RE: WFMT Chicago and radio in general.
                        While the noise levels reproduced are different, most of the programing
                        that is prerecorded is all digiitized via a PC D to A converter card.
                        And then all of that is sent via microwave to the downtown transmitter.
                        So, the analogue days of prominent stations in major markets having an
                        analogue line to there transmitter (spec. WFMT) are bascially gone.
                        And they have been using Technics direct drive turntables with as I
                        remember a single post arm (perhaps an Audio Technica) for many years,
                        no longer an SME.  And as I remember, the arm was not mounted
                        correctly.  And by now they may have the entire library digitized,
                        since all the program host would do is use a touch screen
                        to select the next number from the program directors list.
                        Analogue is dead at all major stations.  At the Clear Channels studio,
                        the audio boards are all more like digital workstations. No real audio
                        in them.  That is all at the equipment rack.

                        Norm



                        ------------------------------------

                        Yahoo! Groups Links

                        <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/regsaudioforum/

                        <*> Your email settings:
                            Individual Email | Traditional

                        <*> To change settings online go to:
                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/regsaudioforum/join
                            (Yahoo! ID required)

                        <*> To change settings via email:
                            mailto:regsaudioforum-digest@yahoogroups.com
                            mailto:regsaudioforum-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            regsaudioforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

                      • charles452003
                        WFMT autiomation. while its been 2 or 3 years since my last visit, I don t think they have dropped all the automation. The chief engineers long term goal at
                        Message 11 of 12 , Nov 9, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          WFMT autiomation.
                          while its been 2 or 3 years since my last visit, I don't think
                          they have dropped all the automation. The chief engineers long term
                          goal at that time was to have there entire library avaialble on the
                          touch screen. And the program director really has the say so for
                          regular programming, excluding the syndicated Midnight show which is
                          taped live in the daytime and rebroadcast, or the Midnight Special
                          Program which is also generally pretaped and programmed by the host.
                          So, the host just hits the item on the touch screen that is already
                          in the computer as programmed by the program director. A friend of
                          mine who is the chief engineer at WLS AM and FM, our local ABC
                          station, has told me several years ago that all the songs that are
                          played at their station , are also played from the computer. Once
                          they are in the computer, he does not have to worry about errant CD
                          players. And this is the standard in the
                          industry these days for major stations. Though WXRT,a CBS Disney
                          station as is WLS, has been an exception for many years, who knows
                          if they won't also begin to put the songs on the computer with the
                          moving of their studio from the original location at 4949 w. Belmont.
                          Norm
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.