As I've stated in print, the basic differences in sound between analog and
The "warmth" of analog is hum. Remove the hum and a good recording will
sound like weak digital.
Digital offers greater dynamic range an, most notably, the absence of wow
Enter the various methods of reducing and removing wow and flutter.
We built he best with the bricks we had. Better bricks became available so
we use those. There are some who prefer the recordings built with older
bricks. There are those who use various properties of the new bricks to to
enhance the sound of the older recordings. And those who believe they are
doing so but are not, in particular, introducing the loss of ambience that
occurs using uninformed use of some of the declicking and other "clean-up"
From: Aaron Levinson
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Recording technology
My old tech Jeremy used to say "Iron is the sound of analog..."
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 17, 2014, at 10:47 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
> Hi Paul:
> You could be onto something with transformers. Consider all the
> transformers in the signal path on a Mercury recording (and there were
> more with RCA and Decca because they used mixing console with input and
> output transformers during recording):
> 1. transformers on the microphones' electronics, outputting nominally
> 150ohms impedence
> 2. transformers in and out on the Pultec MB1 preamps/distribution amps
> 3. transformers matching the line level from the Pultec to the grid of the
> second stage on the Ampex 350-type electronics (this was common, most pros
> feeding those things line level bypassed the mic preamp and the
> attenuate-boost network used for stock line-level balanced inputs)
> On cutting the records:
> 1. transformer ouputs on the 3-track Ampex tape recorders
> 2. transformer inputs and outputs on the Westrex 3-2 mixing board, also
> transformer split of the center channel and transformer combine of the
> center with the left and right channels.
> 3. transformer inputs and outputs on the cutting amplifiers, and likely
> transformers internally on the cutting lathe's RIAA emphasis circuitry
> For Decca, the number of transformers would have been about the same.
> For RCA, they dubbed their 3-tracks to a 2-track cutting master, so add in
> a generation of tape and also transformers in the dubbing circuit. Same
> with Columbia.
> Lots of iron in those old records.
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 10:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Recording technology