LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  April 2010

ARSCLIST April 2010

Subject:

Re: Airshow Mastering & Plangent Processes

From:

Shai Drori <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:31:31 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (119 lines)

Hi Andrew
I meant  that the recorded signal is so high that it is not present on 
tape, I think that is the magic of it. It still biases the heads but 
it's just too high for the tape itself. Don't forget that at 15ips 
you're describing a theoretical 56kHz at 1 7/8 ips. It's just not there. 
I love it. I like the way it sounds much better than the reocridngs I 
made on otari or Studer, dare I mention tascam. I can see the benefits 
of this system for film, but for nice audio tape in good condition, an 
ATR recording will be hard to lock to. Did they transfer any command 
recordings? I would love to hear the Borelo!!! What a recording (I know 
I will now ge tons of emails about my taste in music. In my defense, my 
wife would be on your side and add her thoghts about my clothes as well).
Shai

On 4/29/2010 1:52 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
> Dear Shai,
>      As I wrote in your quoted response, below, there are other 
> signals besides bias that the PP can lock to.   They mention "logic 
> control" signals.   I suspect there are other ghosts they could bust.
>      The ATR is only bias-free while reproducing.   But when 
> recording, it should be present, at 432 kHz - almost as high as the 
> Dave Hill Aria bias.  Even if you recorded at 30 ips and then, on 
> playback, select 3.75 ips and then also  vari-speed the oscillator to 
> 50% of that, the 432 kHz bias signal would still be at 27 kHz.  Did 
> you remember to digitize at 2x F/s?  Otherwise, it would have been 
> filtered out by the ADC.
>
> Please audition the samples on the PP website.  They made a believer 
> out of me.   There's a Waves plugin to inject wow and flutter into a 
> digital recording.   The PP would not be able to undo this since it is 
> simulated and does not contain a veiled clock.
>
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 29, 2010, at 5:53 AM, Shai Drori wrote:
>
>> I can see that working with 160 or even 200 (you can hear it if you 
>> slow down the tape enough), but the ATR is bias free, at least on 
>> tapes I made so far. The system is interesting though. How does it 
>> monitor to see that the original bias did not drift while recording? 
>> This would make you track the wrong frequency..
>> Shai
>>
>> On 4/29/2010 10:24 AM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
>>> There are other forensic time stamp signals besides bias which would 
>>> allow for an ATR-100-recorded tape to be de-fluttered by the PP 
>>> DSP.   However, even though a tape may be played back by the Airshow 
>>> ATR-100, it's entirely possible that the tape was recorded elsewhere 
>>> by a different machine (having a much lower bias f).  I believe that 
>>> Airshow are offering this service with PP for already-existing 
>>> analog tapes, rather than for creative layback transfers.
>>>
>>> David Glasser is chief engineer at Airshow and he has mastered a 
>>> huge amount of audiophile CDs, DVDs, and SACDs.   Great ear; great 
>>> rooms; great gear.
>>>
>>>  From the PP website:
>>>
>>> "software algorithm, developed with researchers at Cambridge 
>>> University in England, which identifies a steady-state ultrasonic 
>>> reference tone (such as tape bias or logic control) embedded within 
>>> the original analog signal and then performs continuous 
>>> high-resolution pitch correction in order to keep the reference tone 
>>> at a fixed frequency..."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2010, at 4:15 AM, Shai Drori wrote:
>>>
>>>> My experience with the ATR is just the opposite. I have tested 
>>>> various transport and some tapes were handled only by the ATR. Does 
>>>> the system figure out bias frequency automatically. What does it do 
>>>> with tapes recorded on the atr where the frequency is so high it 
>>>> doesn't show up on playback (400kHz+)?
>>>> Shai
>>>>
>>>> On 4/29/2010 8:54 AM, Paul G Turney wrote:
>>>>> Well they only use ATR 102 machines which are notoriously rough 
>>>>> tape handlers....
>>>>>
>>>>> They use software to track and maintain a bias frequency so that 
>>>>> any speed anomolies are and wow and flutter are reduced by 
>>>>> maintaining perfect pitch with this tone.
>>>>> Not worked with Airshow mastering.
>>>>>
>>>>> It appears to be a monopoly on the software so Airshow would be 
>>>>> subbing the work out to PP.
>>>>>
>>>>> PT
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Chandra Lynn [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 02:12 AM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Airshow Mastering&  Plangent Processes
>>>>>
>>>>> I noticed some earlier postings about Plangent Processes. It 
>>>>> eliminates wow,flutter and speed aberrations from analog masters. 
>>>>> They are now working withAirshow Mastering to offer optimized tape 
>>>>> transfers. The announcement is onAirshow¹s site at 
>>>>> http://www.airshowmastering.com/plangent.htmlHave any of you 
>>>>> worked with Airshow or Plangent? If so, what has been yourexperience?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager