Print

Print


Thanks, Corey.  All interesting but I think you have to keep in mind that
the guys talking are all working in the vinyl vineyard.  An awful lot of
what they are talking about seems fairly irrelevant to today's world at
large and apparently the future, if indeed the vinyl trend has peaked.

Best,
John
.

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>  Hi All,
>
> I thought that the group might find this interesting:
>
> Last night, the local AES chapter (AES L.A.) had a panel discussion that
> consisted of *Bernie Grundman, Pete Lyman **and Kevin Gray. Some of the
> takeaways were:*
>
> *Vinyl currently comprises about 85% of the business for all three **of
> the **mastering engineers studios.*
>
> *The quality of the vinyl being used is as good as ever **which **was
> based on the listening of test pressings. One of the **mastering engineers
> **noted that it takes about 5 test pressings to get an average **of
> quality**. Although there have been some issues causing the re-formulating
> of the vinyl being used (the oil embargoes of the 1970's, the recent
> removal of lead from the formula, etc.), all three felt that the current
> formulation is as good as **it **ever **was**. *
>
> *All three **mastering engineers **agreed **that there is no benefit of
> making records any heaver than 180 grams. Heaver records are difficult to
> press and the real concern is evenness.*
>
> *There was quite a bit of discussion about the difference in fidelity
> between the center of the record and the inside groves which led to a
> discussion of how to make the best sounding record. All agreed that the
> maximum time for overall best fidelity was between 17 and 18 minutes per
> side.*
>
> *Virtually all of the source material **in today's world **is digital.
> Usually hi-res files that are 24/96 or 24/192. 32 bit files are as common
> as 24 bit files. *
>
> *For re-release, the record companies are shipping hi-res files because
> they don't want to ship the original masters anymore. As often as not, the
> original tapes are in poor shape and the hi-res files are the result of
> restoration. *
>
> *For CD release, more often than not, the mastering **studio** is shipped
> the same file used to make the CD because most people, who are doing a
> vinyl release as well as CD, don't understand what is best for record
> cutting. All three noted that when they are mastering both the CD and vinyl
> release, they will go back to the unprocessed file for cutting the record.*
>
> *A**l**l three agreed t**h**at the**y **do **n**ot like th**e **sound of
> D**i**rect Met**al M**astering (**D**MM) and **o**n**e **of th**e
> **mastering engineers* noted that the vertical cuts are stepped (He
> described the microscope view as being chiseled) and noted that this
> probably contributes to the harsh sound of DMM. None of the three
> *mastering engineers **that were present offer**s** DMM.*
>
> *No one appears to be making new lathes which is apparently no big deal
> because the existing equipment was so well built that rebuilding and
> upgrades are apparently forever possible.*
>
> *EQ copies are still made of the mastering sessions (My question from the
> audience) however, they are digital data files that are taken from the
> automation. FWIW: Bernie Grundman noted that the data files are generally
> not transferable to another facility because of the uniqueness of each
> facility.*
>
> *The article form the WSJ (the one that started this thread) was brought
> up by the moderator and the response from all three was that they will
> continue making hay while the sun is shinning.
> *
>
> *Cheers!
> *
>
> *Corey
> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
> www.baileyzone.net
> *
>