This a question for someone who is actually involved in the mastering process of today’s analog pressings of LPs.
First, I encountered many months ago a newsgroup article (not on DIYA) about the CBS Discomputer. The guy was saying that the CBS Great Performances classical remaster series were actually digital. I found this hard to believe since I had listened to them for years and was sure they were pure analog. The ambience is intact in these recordings. Digital cannot do this.
After an extended period on the web I evidently encountered the patent number for the Discomputer and downloaded it. The patent is from 1979 and is probably for the Discomputer, although it doesn’t say it. It is a CBS patent for a computerized cutting control.
The CBS diagram shows that there is no digital component in the path to the cutting head. The guy on the newsgroup was saying that many companies starting using digital delay lines between the master tape and the cutting head. I suppose that they did this at the end of the analog era, probably to avoid replacing the preview heads on a pure analog tape machine. Most LPs made after 1980 sound digital.
When the heads wore out on the pure analog machines they would use a standard tape machine with one head. The pure analog signal fed the cutting control computer and a digital delay line fed the cutter head.
My question is this: Do the original master issues that are sold today use a digital delay line for the cutting head? Or do they have tape machines with preview heads? I was told years ago that they actually obtain the original analog master from the vault. They put up a million dollar bond before they can take it with them.
The few analog remasters that I have heard were not obviously analog. Acoustic Sounds sells a lot of them, about $30 each. There must be at least 10 companies that make them. Best Regards, Mark
First, I encountered many months ago a newsgroup article (not on DIYA) about the CBS Discomputer. The guy was saying that the CBS Great Performances classical remaster series were actually digital. I found this hard to believe since I had listened to them for years and was sure they were pure analog. The ambience is intact in these recordings. Digital cannot do this.
After an extended period on the web I evidently encountered the patent number for the Discomputer and downloaded it. The patent is from 1979 and is probably for the Discomputer, although it doesn’t say it. It is a CBS patent for a computerized cutting control.
The CBS diagram shows that there is no digital component in the path to the cutting head. The guy on the newsgroup was saying that many companies starting using digital delay lines between the master tape and the cutting head. I suppose that they did this at the end of the analog era, probably to avoid replacing the preview heads on a pure analog tape machine. Most LPs made after 1980 sound digital.
When the heads wore out on the pure analog machines they would use a standard tape machine with one head. The pure analog signal fed the cutting control computer and a digital delay line fed the cutter head.
My question is this: Do the original master issues that are sold today use a digital delay line for the cutting head? Or do they have tape machines with preview heads? I was told years ago that they actually obtain the original analog master from the vault. They put up a million dollar bond before they can take it with them.
The few analog remasters that I have heard were not obviously analog. Acoustic Sounds sells a lot of them, about $30 each. There must be at least 10 companies that make them. Best Regards, Mark
Thankfully not all of them.... Well as you go thru the 80s it became more and more,its really quite sad...... (just gotta trust your ears if it doesnt say specifically on the jacket,etc (If ya wanna avoid that stuff))hailteflon said:
I love the pure naturalness of analogue and I think its very sad what started happening to people in the 80s.... They became brainwashed and blindly listenend to the crap about "Ahhhhhh digital sounds better" w/o looking into it themselves and they let thier beautiful analogue music be compromised (EVEN ON RECORDS WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE ANALOG)
Bryan Adams 1st and 2nd albums are 100% analog but the 3rd album on were digitally altered and its disgusting!!! -- I wish Bryan had listenend to his 3rd RECORD and saw it did not sound as good as his 2nd record and demand it be redone!! ('BOB CLEARMOUNTAIN' STARTED RUINING RECORDS IN 1982 (Producer))
I think ultimately they didnt want to have to MIX IT TWICE!! (Lazy,not getting paid enough,etc) so they mixed it 1 time DIGITALLY which then could be used both on the record and CD....
There are SOME Musicians whose team DID SO IT SEPERATE (for some albums) -- Madonna's 1986 record (True blue) IS 100% ANALOGUE (On the record and cassette) -- They mixed it seperatly for digital but not many did that and its sad.........
Last edited:
But the question is not about the mix from the master tape. It is about how is maximum groove density achieved.
Almost all music today is recorded digital. Tape recorders are not made anymore, just like tape reels itself get rare (some batches are still made). There are studio's that still have old but good maintained tape machines and a backstock of tape reels, but they charge a lot and they get rare.
Digital can be as high in resolution as tape, but not with the pcm formats we use. Formats like Direct-Stream Digital (DSD) can be so high in resolution that it sounds the same. It's harder to work with as you can't use plugins with it so you still need to mix analog.
But in hifi digital seems still not done by the snobs... And i need to say, i also prefer vinyl over digital formats.
Digital can be as high in resolution as tape, but not with the pcm formats we use. Formats like Direct-Stream Digital (DSD) can be so high in resolution that it sounds the same. It's harder to work with as you can't use plugins with it so you still need to mix analog.
But in hifi digital seems still not done by the snobs... And i need to say, i also prefer vinyl over digital formats.
There is always the option of listening to them and simply picking the ones that sound good to you and are the type of music you enjoy. Getting bogged down with detail can sometimes spoil the simple enjoyment of music.
There are special tape machines that have preview heads, eliminating the need for a preview delay, but this requires an analog tape master. Systems that used a digital delay employed a specially built delay that has little to do with the 44.1KHz / 16 bit coding used for CDs. It's a fixed delay designed for this purpose only, so it was designed to sound good, not to make a CD. So, while many vinyl records have been cut from an A/D -> D/A signal, it doesn't mean they have to sound bad. It's just another one of audio's many preconceptions.
There's also the possibility that the lacquer was cut by an engineer who manually altered the groove pitch, using no preview delay or computer at all. Not likely with a 33.33 rpm side over 30 minutes, but that's not so common either.
There's also the possibility that the lacquer was cut by an engineer who manually altered the groove pitch, using no preview delay or computer at all. Not likely with a 33.33 rpm side over 30 minutes, but that's not so common either.
you can lie to yourselves - but please don't post contra factual drivel about digital audio in "authoritative voice"
we really know you're wrong - likely you do too
"The ambience is intact in these recordings. Digital cannot do this." - please don't, this is simply trolling at this late date
studio engineers who grew up working in analog tape, mastering for vinyl overwhelmingly have gone digital
20 bits effective, 96k sample rate blows away the bulk of studio tape used in the 70s in S/N, frequency flatness, timing accuracy...
only a single digit number of extreme analog tape machines have been custom made for big budget movie sound production that even get close to 120 dB dynamic range
and its really unlikely you have access to them
we can compare the literature of the day, the spec sheets, measurements for preview delays against a $200 PCI sound card - guess who loses by a country mile
we really know you're wrong - likely you do too
"The ambience is intact in these recordings. Digital cannot do this." - please don't, this is simply trolling at this late date
studio engineers who grew up working in analog tape, mastering for vinyl overwhelmingly have gone digital
20 bits effective, 96k sample rate blows away the bulk of studio tape used in the 70s in S/N, frequency flatness, timing accuracy...
only a single digit number of extreme analog tape machines have been custom made for big budget movie sound production that even get close to 120 dB dynamic range
and its really unlikely you have access to them
we can compare the literature of the day, the spec sheets, measurements for preview delays against a $200 PCI sound card - guess who loses by a country mile
Last edited:
I just purchased the new Strypes album on vinyl and within a few seconds I could tell it was mastered from a digital source, maybe a straight vinyl copy of the CD or just perhaps another reason?
How can I tell this? The sound stage or should I say ambiance is so contracted it is just slightly better than listening to a mono recording, no width at all to the replay. I get a similar effect with most digital play back here but there could be another reason. I am told that modern studio's tend to mix in the near field rather than the far field of days gone by. This probably accounts for this loss in sound stage dimension which is great for those who wear head phones but for those of us with a home set-up, then the overall results can be disappointing, as I find with this latest acquisition. So in many cases, it may not be down to Analogue v Digital but the way the final mix is made nowadays.
How can I tell this? The sound stage or should I say ambiance is so contracted it is just slightly better than listening to a mono recording, no width at all to the replay. I get a similar effect with most digital play back here but there could be another reason. I am told that modern studio's tend to mix in the near field rather than the far field of days gone by. This probably accounts for this loss in sound stage dimension which is great for those who wear head phones but for those of us with a home set-up, then the overall results can be disappointing, as I find with this latest acquisition. So in many cases, it may not be down to Analogue v Digital but the way the final mix is made nowadays.
yes any "ambience" is going to be in mic choice, positioning and physical environment
when it is at all "real" - even the dictionary now recognizes it is often faked, "painted on" in the mastering process with artificial effects - and that was the case long before digital mastering became the norm:
https://www.google.com/#q=ambience+definition
good digital will capture the voltage signal coming from the mic pre and whatever other analog processing boxes the recording engineer has in the signal chain more accurately than classic mag tape
classic studio mag tape will be limited in S/N, frequency response flatness and will have reverb tail killing FM modulation from mechanical bearing noise, scrape-flutter
go hear a Plangent Process demo - cleaning up the timing of analog mag tape gives a much deeper look into the sound:
http://www.plangentprocesses.com/
when it is at all "real" - even the dictionary now recognizes it is often faked, "painted on" in the mastering process with artificial effects - and that was the case long before digital mastering became the norm:
https://www.google.com/#q=ambience+definition
good digital will capture the voltage signal coming from the mic pre and whatever other analog processing boxes the recording engineer has in the signal chain more accurately than classic mag tape
classic studio mag tape will be limited in S/N, frequency response flatness and will have reverb tail killing FM modulation from mechanical bearing noise, scrape-flutter
go hear a Plangent Process demo - cleaning up the timing of analog mag tape gives a much deeper look into the sound:
http://www.plangentprocesses.com/
Here's a Rega Planar3 + a Paravincini preamp with a Benz Micro riding on a 1kHz track on a test LP vs a Tascam CDP playing a 1kHz test track. Chose the first if you in for listening to extra harmonics. Now a record player doesn't have to be that bad, but this never gonna happen to a CD player. 🙂
Attachments
Don't forget the variation in bass frequency response known as head bump (okay, you did say limited in frequency response flatness).
Decades ago tape a recording medium, but now it's an "analog processing" effect. You can read on the recording forums that a track is often recorded to tape to "warm it up." There are DAW plug-ins that emulate (some of) the effects of tape, so that one doesn't need a physical recorder with its needed maintenance and whatnot.
Now here is a nice conundrum
la Spagna One of Stan Ricker's Final Cuts is a Gift to Audiophiles | Analog Planet
I have always loved BIS recordings and have a few on vinyl. But here we have a AAA cut done by Stan Ricker. Off the master tape, recorded on a revox A77 and cut to lovely virgin vinyl. £49.99
Or the CD for £12 which one assumes was produced off same said master tape.
la Spagna One of Stan Ricker's Final Cuts is a Gift to Audiophiles | Analog Planet
I have always loved BIS recordings and have a few on vinyl. But here we have a AAA cut done by Stan Ricker. Off the master tape, recorded on a revox A77 and cut to lovely virgin vinyl. £49.99
Or the CD for £12 which one assumes was produced off same said master tape.
Hi,
If you like that kind of music (I do) then check out the albums recorded by Jean-Francois Pontefract for Harmonia Mundi.
For instance this one which was rather overused during hifi shows in the late Eighties:
http://www.discogs.com/Gregorio-Paniagua-La-Folia-De-La-Spagna/release/5178031
Cheers, 😉
PS: Bis records, Astree are also excellently crafted and there are more labels like that. There was/is a british one as well. The name of which escapes me now....
If you like that kind of music (I do) then check out the albums recorded by Jean-Francois Pontefract for Harmonia Mundi.
For instance this one which was rather overused during hifi shows in the late Eighties:
http://www.discogs.com/Gregorio-Paniagua-La-Folia-De-La-Spagna/release/5178031
Cheers, 😉
PS: Bis records, Astree are also excellently crafted and there are more labels like that. There was/is a british one as well. The name of which escapes me now....
Last edited:
I have a goodly collection of Harmonia Mundi recordings, but not that one, so thank you.
when vinyl was still widely available I tended to collect baroque and earlier on labels such as HM, BIS, caliope, CRD and Nimbus. Still to this day If I see a BIS CD in the shop I generally just buy it as I know the recording will be exemplary.
Also now dipping a toe into the turgid waters of ECM, which has some really wierd stuff, but great.
when vinyl was still widely available I tended to collect baroque and earlier on labels such as HM, BIS, caliope, CRD and Nimbus. Still to this day If I see a BIS CD in the shop I generally just buy it as I know the recording will be exemplary.
Also now dipping a toe into the turgid waters of ECM, which has some really wierd stuff, but great.
Hi,
ECM is not my cupper. Too spectacular to my taste.
The name of the British label I was looking for is Hyperion Records btw.
There are also excellent Jazz-labels as well.
All of the above are labels run by people who just love music and you can hear it all the way.
Cheers, 😉
ECM is not my cupper. Too spectacular to my taste.
The name of the British label I was looking for is Hyperion Records btw.
There are also excellent Jazz-labels as well.
All of the above are labels run by people who just love music and you can hear it all the way.
Cheers, 😉
I am on the Hyperion mailing list. It's very very very dangerous.
John Potter | Tenor | Dowland Project is to me ECM at its best.
You have encouraged me to have a dig into my harmonia mundi collection
http://www.discogs.com/Various-Deutsche-Harmonia-Mundi-50th-Anniversary-Edition/release/4425393 is IMO worth every penny if you like early stuff.
John Potter | Tenor | Dowland Project is to me ECM at its best.
You have encouraged me to have a dig into my harmonia mundi collection
http://www.discogs.com/Various-Deutsche-Harmonia-Mundi-50th-Anniversary-Edition/release/4425393 is IMO worth every penny if you like early stuff.
Hi,
Great music, thanks.
As for the HM France recordings, the ones recorded by Pontefract always stand out.
With a decent system you're really in the room with the musicians.
His work is much better than any other recording engineer's at HM really.
Cheers, 😉
Great music, thanks.
As for the HM France recordings, the ones recorded by Pontefract always stand out.
With a decent system you're really in the room with the musicians.
His work is much better than any other recording engineer's at HM really.
Cheers, 😉
I love all HM recordings, so will seek those out. Already ordered the Paniagua CD.
Quick rummage shows I have at least one Pontefract recording, although being from 1988 and with a CD booklet inside I would surmise its a digital recording. Will spin that tomorrow.
Quick rummage shows I have at least one Pontefract recording, although being from 1988 and with a CD booklet inside I would surmise its a digital recording. Will spin that tomorrow.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.