Hi Richard:
I'm hoping Jamie jumps in here eventually. Here's what I don't understand about your statement about
a separate bias-recovery head -- if you're doing this in DSP, why can't you just write the software
to understand the off-set and correct the audio tracks in sync with where that bias was (I hope I
said that in an understandable way)? It's sort like lining up a beat in any DAW editor, or
correcting staggered head recording. The bias was recovered from the same physical spot as the
audio, just at a different time as the tape was moving through the headblock. So whatever speed
corrections you're doing in DSP should still be linear, no?
Anyway, the Plangent audio electronics are very clean and have plenty of headroom, so one could
theoretically impart whatever is required in the remastering market by running the high-rez audio
back through an analog chain after the Plangent process has been done and a speed-corrected file has
been provided. What you run into in the reissue market is that you can't make the sound so radically
different from the original beloved recording that it p.o's the hardcore fans and critics. This
invariably leads to failure in the real-world marketplace.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard L. Hess" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The Tape Project -- what happened?
> Hi, Tom,
>
> Even though Jamie uses a dedicated machine, as I understand it, his process is all in DSP, not in
> a servo loop. Most tape servo systems would be too slow, and I think the medium is too elastic, to
> correct the flutter frequencies that Jamie is addressing.
>
> The big trick in Jamie's custom preamps/heads is the recovery of the audio and the bias from the
> same gap. Others have attempted to archive bias from a second head and, in my opinion, that is not
> as good. Based on my experience with a few staggered-head recordings, the distance does matter.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
> On 2013-05-28 8:10 PM, Tom Fine wrote:
>> I know Jamie monitors this list and I can say from a first-hand demo
>> that his process works and can greatly improve the punch and crispness
>> of dynamic attacks, as well as smooth out audible flutter in such things
>> as string sections.
>>
>> What I would like to see as the next development as a way to use the
>> bias-recovery to drive the playback speed in the analog realm, in other
>> words use it in a servo loop. The reason is, I'd like the option to use
>> whatever audio playback electronics and heads I want. Right now, you're
>> locked into using the Plangent-custom machine, which does sound good but
>> may not be ideal for all reissue/remastering situations.
>>
>> I don't know if this is possible at a reasonable cost level. One thing
>> Jamie's system proves is that having your playback machine spot-on
>> DC-servo accurate at a given tape speed is irrelevant unless the tape
>> you're playing was recorded on an equally accurate system and the tape
>> is physically un-altered from when it was recorded. Otherwise, there
>> will be "baked in" wow and flutter that cannot be corrected by accurate
>> playback speed. It can, however, be corrected by recovering and sync'ing
>> to the bias that was also baked in.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gray, Mike" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 5:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The Tape Project -- what happened?
>>
>>
>>> The idea of tracking the bias signal has been around a while - what's
>>> made it a reality is the DSP necessary to track variations in the bias
>>> frequency and use them improve the 'timing' of the 'locked in'
>>> associated analog track(s)
>>>
>>>
>>> Now .... how about a plug-in for us civilians .....?
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Gray
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada 647 479 2800
> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
>
|