Dear Mr G,
Again, I’m not in the business. I can only tell you about what I have read. It is my understanding that the reason the 16 bit format was chosen was that the (consumer?) hardware was readily available, and that the size of the disk and length of play dictated that choice further. You surely know more than I do, but it is my understanding that higher bit formats were available at the time but would have meant larger disks or limited playing time and more time for retooling for consumer hardware, and Philips/SONY wanted to get the format going, figuring the frequency range with this format was adequate.
Am I mistaken here?
DrG
> On Jan 22, 2022, at 3:07 PM, Gary A. Galo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> As I indicated in my first post today, on the subject of pre-/de-emphasis, the early converters were not very good, and pre-emphasis was one attempt to minimize some of the limitations. But, the decision to make the CD a 44.1 kHz/16-bit format was not a deliberate attempt to limit its performance. The CD standard introduced in 1982 pushed signal processing and storage technology of the day to its limits. If the CD had been introduced a year before, we would have been stuck with 14 bits. And, if better performance had been possible, the industry would probably have had better standards for studio recording and mastering, offering the consumer watered-down versions of the studio masters. But, they didn't. The sampling and bit rates of the CD were pretty much the best that the technology of the day could offer. Thomas Stockham's Soundstream recorder had been 50 kHz since 1978, but that was an exception.
>
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Stewart Gooderman
> Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 5:15 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] [EXTERNAL] Re: [ARSCLIST] Rolling Stone says CDs are back
>
> Not being in the business, it’s my understanding (and I may be wrong about this mind you) that this issue was multifactorial. For one, the majors often used a compressed Lp production master to generate the digital master, not the first generation tape. Second, there was the issue of DA and AD converters during the early days of the CD. I was under the impression that they weren’t very good and often induced their own distortions. Then there was the deliberate decision to limit sampling rates, etc., etc.
>
> And then there is the physical reality that sound is analog. It is created in the analog world, and ultimately listened to in the analog world. So the best sound is probably listening to the sound as it’s being created.
>
> DrG
>
>> On Jan 21, 2022, at 8:28 PM, Paul Jackson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> I was going to stay out of this. Initially most CDs sounded a bit tiny, as in tin pan. There also was less dynamic. That issue may have been solved on some but not others.
>>
>> On 1/21/2022 7:22 PM, Tim Gillett wrote:
>>>
>>> An irony is the introduction of digital recording and the CD made it
>>> possible for consumers to hear effectively for the first time
>>> directly from "the original analog master tape", without intervening
>>> tape or vinyl bottlenecks. Especially classical music lovers embraced
>>> the truer sound, and freedom from disc wear etc.
>>>
>>> Many people embrace something new because it's new - for them -
>>> however limited a perspective that is.
>>>
>>> Tim Gillett
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From:[log in to unmask]
>>> To:<[log in to unmask]>
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent:Fri, 21 Jan 2022 22:25:24 +0000
>>> Subject:Re: [ARSCLIST] [EXTERNAL] Re: [ARSCLIST] Rolling Stone says
>>> CDs are back
>>>
>>> For some of the projects that I work on I get to transfer all the
>>> tapes involved in making an album including the multitracks, the
>>> original masters and the production masters. It was standard
>>> practice for major label vinyl masters to be cut from a second or
>>> third generation production master back in the day and, while the
>>> original master may have been recorded at 30ips, the production
>>> master would often run at 15ips as a full side of an album wouldn't
>>> fit on a 10.5" reel at 30ips. Nowadays I wouldn't be that confident
>>> about cutting an album from the original tapes as there can be
>>> defects on some tapes which require a little editing. For the
>>> projects that I work on, everything is digitised in the 96kHz 24 bit
>>> format which gives an accurate representation of what is on the tape
>>> in my experience.
>>>
>>> James.
>>>
>>> On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 at 20:18, Gary A. Galo <
>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The other reason for using digital masters - from what I've been
>>> told by > people in the industry - is that the major record
>>> companies are very > concerned about the fragile and deteriorating
>>> condition of the classic > analog tapes that are so prized by
>>> audiophiles. A disc cutting engineer > usually needs to spot check
>>> several sections of a master tape in order to > get everything ready
>>> to go, and the record companies are concerned about > the wear and
>>> tear on those tapes if multiple attempts are needed.
>>> So, they
>>>> make a one-shot digital transfer, which requires playing the old
>>> tapes only > one time.
>>>>
>>>> A few years ago, a well-known audiophile reissue company embarked
>>> on > reissuing a major series of recordings from the early days of
>>> stereo on > both SACD and vinyl. They claim an "all-analog" signal
>>> path. From what I > was told by reliable sources, their claim is
>>> true, but their SACDs and LPs > were not cut directly from the
>>> original tapes. The fragile, original tapes > were carefully copied
>>> to new, 30-ips analog tapes. Those copy tapes were > used as the
>>> masters for the SACDs and vinyl releases, minimizing any > further
>>> wear on the originals.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's now pretty rare that an audiophile reissue, licensed
>>> by a > third-party vendor, is made directly from the original tape,
>>> and most new > LPs of vintage material do, indeed, seem to be
>>> sourced from digital copies.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of John Haley > Sent:
>>> Thursday, January 20, 2022 10:44 PM > To:[log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] [EXTERNAL] Re: [ARSCLIST] Rolling Stone
>>> says CDs > are back > > I think Gary is absolutely right. I am
>>> sure that every vinyl record > pressed by a major record company
>>> today is coming from a digital master.
>>>> For one thing, no one "in the business" is going to give up
>>> digital > editing. With all the great digital editing and
>>> restoration tools > available, we are never going back to the world
>>> of editing by means of tape > splicing with a razor blade, scraping
>>> oxide off a tape to remove noises, > etc. And the last time I
>>> looked, there is no analog audio restoration > program for your
>>> computer!
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> John Haley
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022, 5:59 PM Gary A. Galo <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Steve is right - a lot of audiophile LPs are mastered from
>>> digital files.
>>>>> These included many classic analog master tapes that have been
>>>>> digitized and then cut to vinyl from the new digital masters. To
>>> me, > that's P.T.
>>>>> Barnum at work. If you hate digital and love analog, you are
>>> entitled > > to your view. But be careful about drawing conclusions
>>> about how much > > better vinyl is than digital when the vinyl
>>> records you're buying are > > cut from digital masters. One of the
>>> problems, of course, is that a > > lot of vinyl collectors have no
>>> way of knowing how their records were > > made, because many
>>> manufacturers of vinyl releases keep the details to > themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary Galo
>>>>> Audio Engineer Emeritus
>>>>> The Crane School of Music
>>>>> SUNY at Potsdam, NY 13676
>>>>>
>>>>> "Great art presupposes the alert mind of the educated listener."
>>>>> Arnold Schoenberg
>>>>>
>>>>> "A true artist doesn't want to be admired, he wants to be
>>> believed."
>>>>> Igor Markevitch
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List < >
>>>> [log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Steve Smolian > > Sent:
>>> Thursday, January 20, 2022 12:14 AM > > To:[log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ARSCLIST] Rolling Stone says CDs are
>>> back > > > > This message did not originate from SUNY Potsdam or
>>> one of its trusted > > senders. Do not open attachments, click on
>>> links, or provide your > > credentials if the source is suspicious.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My current favorite piano sound "bath" is Simone Dinnerstein's
>>> playing > > with Zuill Bailey on Telarc's Beethoven Cello Sonatas.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other side of the same hand, there is also the absurdity
>>> of > > copying born digital recordings to LP which brings back good
>>> old wow > > and flutter, limits the dynamic range, and reintroduces
>>> accumulated > > low level hums disguised as "warmth."
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve Smolian
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List < >
>>>> [log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Giovanni Punto > > Sent:
>>> Wednesday, January 19, 2022 10:00 PM > >
>>> To:[log in to unmask] > > Subject: [ARSCLIST] Rolling Stone
>>> says CDs are back > > > > I was expecting the usual "The
>>> Millennials Discover Their Parent's > > ____ and Think it's Way
>>> Cool" article written by some reporter > > unfamiliar with the item
>>> and who just didn't get it.
>>> Surprisingly,
>>>>> this guy is not just talking
>>>>> (writing) through his hat and puts into words some of the vague
>>>>> thoughts and feelings I have about CDs and other hard copy media
>>> vs.
>>>>> disembodied downloads and streams. He also comes up some
>>> interesting > > points concerning box sets that I hadn't thought of.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe some of the rest of you share his and my attachment to the
>>>>> concrete object, too (I know that this is a ridiculous
>>> understatement > > to make to this crowd). Or you may disagree with
>>> everything he writes.
>>>>> In either case, I think the article is worth reading through. I
>>> hope > > this link works for you. I linked to the article from a
>>> blog, there > > may have been something in the link to get past a
>>> pay wall.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/cd-revival-compact-
>>> d
>>>>> iscs-rob-sheffield-1284487/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *********************************************************************
>>> *
>>> * James Perrett
>>> * JRP Music Services, Hampshire, U.K.
>>> * Audio Mastering, Restoration, Recording and Consultancy
>>> * Phone +44 (0) 777 600 6107
>>> * [log in to unmask]
>>> *http://www.jrpmusic.net
>>>
>>> *********************************************************************
>>> *
>>>
>>> -------------------------
>>> Email sent using Optus Webmail
|