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  November 2014

ARSCLIST November 2014

Subject:

Re: Recording technology

From:

Carl Pultz <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Wed, 19 Nov 2014 07:35:41 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (110 lines)

It's like trying to rebuild Pennsylvania Station - one shot was all we had.
Once it's gone, it's gone, though at least we can still experience the
recordings.

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 8:17 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Recording technology

Hi Carl:

Per Paul Stamler's posting, I think you'd get enough "vintage" sound using
the old mics and something akin to the Pultec preamps. I and most other
modern audiences do not like things "over-tubey," which really should be
stated as "over-ironed." Connect the vintage chain to a nice modern
high-resolution rig and it should work. My goal would be to get the
coherent, detailed, rock-solid stereo image of yore but with modern clarity
and no distortion. With a cleaner signal path, mic placement choices may be
slightly different -- same theories but the focal point of the presence peak
may be a little different due to less dulling from harmonic distortion and
tape smear.

My big caveat about the modern chains is, I know how different they each
sound vs. each other. There are all kinds of stuff that don't show up in the
specs but make audible differences. I think the biggest design problem out
there is not enough voltage swing on the analog stages, resulting in
non-perfect handling of peaks and bass-heavy attacks. This is where you get
the hit of mallet on tympani head but not the fast-rising boom. It's even
worse for bass drums. Very few ADCs that I've heard do that well. There's
also something that happens in the very upper midrange on some ADC's, and of
course some loss of "air and space" no matter the sampling rate or bit depth
(the best ADCs should have very little to almost no audible loss compared to
monitoring directly off the mics). 
And, all the high-ends DACs I've heard sound slightly different from each
other, comparing apples-to-apples files played back from the same computer.
I suspect part of it is USB interface execution, descisions on up-sampling
and reclocking, the low-pass filter design and the analog stage after
conversion. So, just like when my mother started out on the CD project, it
would take lots of listening and trying different equipment and signal
chains.

Find a top-rate orchestra in a good acoustic space, get some serious funding
to restore the vintage equipment (last I checked, Schoeps wants several
thousand dollars per mic to factory-restore M201's, and they can't guarantee
results since they have no original parts on hand; Steve Jackson at Pulse
Techniques can make near-clones of the Pultec preamps for several thousand
dollars per channel), gather up a whole bunch of digital gear to test, and
we're ready to roll, just for the feasibility-testing stage though! I won't
hold my breath. ;) Seriously, I thought about this at one point and came up
with a $25k budget just to get started, just for gear and gear restoration
(figure several multiples of that to pay a producer/editor, recording
engineer and mastering engineer). 
Maybe 10-15 albums per year, at a cost of about $15k per album factoring in
travel costs, and then add more for manufacturing of the end product (which
is what? single CDs? they're supposedly toxic to profits in the classical
business. SACDs? can't live on sales of a few thousand units. downloads? 
what format? how will you market them?), marketing, etc.  There is no
classical recording business plan except a crazy rich patron that works for
that kind of craftsmanship today.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Pultz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Recording technology


> "I've often wondered about applying the Mercury technique, including using
> the real-deal Schoeps M201 microphones (they need restoration, but they're
> still alive), with a modern high-resolution digital recording rig."
>
> I'm ready when you are!
>
> Would be a great experiment, but there are caveats. Recording systems are
> systems; every part plays a role that needs to be complimentary to the
> whole. Without the slight homogenization of tape, those treble peaks might
> reveal themselves as rough terrain. Without the masking of noise, the
> harmonic distortion may be grating. So much of recording, then as now, was
> the overcoming of limitations, but different challenges for different
eras.
>
> Some of the challenge today is to find the magic when the tools are so
> perfect. This does happen, without any particular emulation of golden-era
> techniques. It's not all the technology, either. ("It's the guy, not the
> gear.") I tell performers that when they sound good, I sound good. Of
> course, the opposite is true, too, but that has to remain unsaid!
>
> Speaking of orchestras, so much of the culture is different now from 50
> years ago, it's not simple to point a finger at any one aspect. Generally
> speaking, the players and directors are primarily concerned with clean
> execution. This is understandable when most concerts are under-rehearsed
and
> the players often overworked with bazaar schedules - Bernstein one day,
> Bruckner the next. Some of the finer points of sound and interpretation
get
> neglected, particularly to my perception dynamics, which is something that
> recordings really need in order to overcome the limited sensory info.
>
> Personally, I can enjoy less than perfect ensembles of the second or third
> rank. In the US, these are budgetary differences as much as anything. The
> majors are so routinized in their virtuosity, it is refreshing to hear
> others rise to a challenge. That's when music gets made, and even limited
> recording technique is adequate to convey that difference.
>
> 

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

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