I think copying ANYTHING "on autopilot" is a bad idea. We're paid to be the ultimate quality control
regulator. The work is actually done by the machines. So our only really important job is NOT to hit
play and go get a cup of coffee or pick up the phone. Throughout the history of recorded sound,
nearly or every bit of great-sounding material was done very much hands-on.
One man's opinion.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cassette obsolescence - digitizing standards
> Another cassete copying-on-autopilot problem.
>
> Levels are often all over the place. Typically, I pull out or reduce the volume on mike clicks,
> kids yelling, etc., then normalize to something closer to maximum available level before making
> the cd. This is hand-eye-ear work, not automatable (ible?) I've had to do this hundreds of
> times.
>
> Steve Smolian
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lou Judson" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 10:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cassette obsolescence - digitizing standards
>
>
> Interesting perspective. When I transfer cassettes for clients, I use
> 16 bit, and if they want it processed in any way, I import it to 24 bit
> Protools sessions for the added range... Best of both worlds, I like to
> think.
>
> <L>
>
> Lou Judson • Intuitive Audio
> 415-883-2689
>
> On Feb 20, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Mike Richter wrote:
>
>> Lou Judson wrote:
>>> What about using 24 bit at 44.1 so that any noise reduction or processing done later is higher
>>> definition?
>>
>> Given that the best dynamic range on standard cassettes - assuming Dolby B in proper calibration
>> which is highly questionable - is unlikely to exceed 60 db, one might suspect that 16 bits is
>> sufficient. Of course, processing could consume several bits and one only has half a dozen to
>> spare (~30 db).
>>
>> For that potential, infinitesimal advantage, one is likely to spend four to ten times as much to
>> make the transfers counting both equipment and time. Given infinite resources, a case can be
>> made; with a budget less than that of a typical multinational corporation, such overkill is hard
>> to justify even on theoretical grounds.
>>
>> Mike
>> --
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.mrichter.com/
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.11/264 - Release Date: 2/17/2006
|