Print

Print


I've avoided contributing to this thread as I do not feel qualified to
discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the cited digital techniques under
discussion. However, Tim Gillett's post re YouTube audio reminds all of us
that if you get it wrong initially, your legacy of incompetence survives
indefinitely. That Sony provided poor quality for the Whitney Houston
material they provided YouTube certainly doesn't surprise me. The
commercial record industry (to call it by a virtually obsolete name) is
filled with practitioners who cannot hear. The early CD era is replete with
examples of their work. There is simply no substitute for careful use of
original source, and the taste and skill to produce for intended use.

DDR

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Tim Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Gary Galo wrote: "I would never judge sound quality based on what you hear
> on YouTube - it's invariably awful."
>
> I suspect much of YT audio is poor because uploaded by ordinary people with
> no claim to audio production skills.
> On the other hand,  many YT programs are  very listenable,  such as
> apparently uploaded by record companies as samplers, or by people who also
> know what they're doing.
>
> But here's an interesting exception: Whitney Houston's first live TV
> appearance. Note: "Provided to YouTube by Sony Music Entertainment"
>
> https://youtu.be/uF5E0w2h6wM  The sound is dreadful. Heavy handed Noise
> Reduction plus serious clipping on loud passages especially Whitney's
> voice.
>
> I have listened to the same track on the official Sony DVD. The sound is
> also dreadful
> with the same production errors.
>
> But here on this sampler segment from another professional source, also on
> YT,
> the sound is vastly superior to even the official Sony DVD.
> https://youtu.be/S_ONzzP3JYo
> (Whitney sample starts at 6:19)
>
> This is to illustrate that the poor audio of the official release cannot be
> due to the quality drop that either Youtube or DVD imposes, but rather to
> poor work by some audio engineer somewhere in the Sony Music production
> chain.
> It's that poor work that needs to be undone, I'd suggest, rather than
> remastering to a higher sample/bit rate and/or uncompressed audio format.
>
> Obviously I'm trying to make general points here about audio playback
> formats.
>
> Best wishes,
> Tim
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary A. Galo" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2017 5:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>
>
> The sound on that YouTube link is hideous. I have that set and, while the
> CDs are not in the same league with the Universal Mexico remasterings,
> They're a whole lot better than what's on YouTube. I would never judge
> sound
> quality based on what you hear on YouTube - it's invariably awful.
>
> 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
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Gillett
> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 9:44 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>
> Here is the Mario Del Monaco YT link referred to. Certainly hope the
> remastered edition -regardless of consumer  format - doesnt sound anything
> as bad this.
> https://youtu.be/WwhBjUOBzv0
>
> Rgds
> Tim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Gillett" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 6:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>
>
> No,  a few YT samples. Unfortunately the Amazon page has no audio file
>> examples. I have just noticed  the uploader's notes speak of "Audio
>> rimasterizzato in HQ". Whether that means it derives from the PABY release
>> or that the uploader has done his own  "HQ remastering" seems  unclear.
>> Even so, lower resolution formats such as 44/16 or even a good
>> professionally made mp3 do not need to add dynamics compression  and even
>> for YouTube that level of dynamics compression is quite unnecessary IMO.
>> At least not for the format's sake.
>>
>> Rgds
>> Tim
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Nagamine" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 6:23 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>>
>>
>> Are you talking specifically about the Pure Audio Blu-Ray issue?
>>>
>>> --------------------------
>>> Eric Nagamine
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Gillett
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 12:15 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>>>
>>> I've listened to a few of the early Del Monaco Decca tracks and to my
>>> ears
>>> they are dreadfully presented. A big trebly peak around 8kHz, but  worse,
>>> huge dynamics compression/limiting making everything "loud". Tiring to
>>> listen to.  Amateurish job IMO  regardless of the end user format.
>>>
>>> Rgds
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "BURNHAM" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 5:39 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>>>
>>>
>>> I've always felt that increasing the bit depth adds so much more quality
>>> to
>>> the sound than increasing the sample rate. Going from 16 bit to 24 bit
>>> eliminates any audible quantization distortion and allows one to leave a
>>> few
>>>
>>> dB of headroom without losing anything.
>>>
>>> db
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Dec 9, 2017, at 2:48 AM, Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Gary,
>>>>
>>>> We may have been talking apples & oranges. When I referred to some of
>>>> the
>>>> major studios re-purposing Std. Def audio for Blu-Ray, I was referring
>>>> to
>>>> movies & TV series. Basically, audio for picture. I know that the 24/48K
>>>> standard hasn't changed, even for current titles so the audio for
>>>> picture
>>>> should be 24/48K. The DVD departments that I worked in did not produce
>>>> any
>>>>
>>>
>>> DVD-A or Blu-Ray audio only discs. BTW, the 24/48K standard was adopted
>>>> by
>>>>
>>>
>>> the industry after listening tests were conducted by the major studios
>>>> that participated in the study. One interesting discovery was that a
>>>> change in bit depth was more noticeable to the test subjects than an
>>>> increase in sample rate. It's also worth noting that today's music score
>>>> that is delivered to the dub stage has often been recorded at a higher
>>>> sample rate. I'm guessing that the original music stem is what is used
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>
>>> today's audio only DVD's.
>>>>
>>>> That's my story and I'm sticking to it!  ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Corey
>>>>
>>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>>> www.baileyzone.net
>>>>
>>>> On 12/8/2017 3:04 PM, Gary A. Galo wrote:
>>>>> Hi Corey,
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that it specifically says, on the covers, that they're
>>>>> Pure Audio Blu-ray at 24-bit/192 kHz. Here's the link to the series on
>>>>> the Almaraz web site (they're the Mexican dealer that ships to the US):
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.almarazrecords.com/collections/theanaloggoldenage
>>>>>
>>>>> Scroll down to the 5th row to find the Blu-ray discs. Discs that follow
>>>>> the Pure Audio specifications must be PCM, so they will play on any
>>>>> Blu-ray player. Those discs may also contain Dolby or DTS programs, but
>>>>> the Pure Audio portion is high-res PCM. If there really isn't any
>>>>> high-res PCM program on these discs, then calling them Pure Audio
>>>>> 24/192
>>>>> is false advertising. If transfer, restoration and editing is done at
>>>>> 192/24, and the finished product is converted to DTS HD at 48 kHz, a
>>>>> manufacturer can't call it Pure Audio Blu-ray. More info on the Pure
>>>>> Audio format can be found here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.pureaudio-bluray.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> None of the color buttons, which Pure Audio uses to change formats,
>>>>> function on these discs, and the Audio format button on my Oppo remote
>>>>> controls only brings up "1/1 DTS HD" on my TV screen. The "1/1" means 1
>>>>> of 1 - there are no other choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've emailed the Pure Audio folks about this to see what they have to
>>>>> say.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Corey Bailey
>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 5:13 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Universal Mexico Decca Remasterings
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Gary,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not surprised. 48K/24Bit is the film industry standard. As one who
>>>>> edited and mastered DVDs for a few of the major film studios, I can
>>>>> tell
>>>>> you that while the video was generally remastered to a Hi-Def format,
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> audio (at least, for the couple of hundred feature film titles and TV
>>>>> shows that I worked on) was re-purposed from Std. Def DVD files. I
>>>>> would
>>>>> expect that DVD-A is no different, weather it is mastered with DTS
>>>>> encoding or Dolby AC3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Corey
>>>>>
>>>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>>>> www.baileyzone.net
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/8/2017 11:22 AM, Gary A. Galo wrote:
>>>>>> Does anyone know anything about the Decca Analog Golden Era recordings
>>>>>> that are being issued by Universal Mexico? I just got the four Blu-ray
>>>>>> discs of the Del Monaco operas. Despite the claim that these are
>>>>>> PureAudio Blu-ray discs at 192 kHz/24-bit, the only program I can find
>>>>>> on my Oppo UDP-205 or my wife's BDP-93 is DTS HD at 48 kHz/24-bit.
>>>>>> Have
>>>>>> you heard anything about these? I'm wondering if I am the only one who
>>>>>> noticed. The reviewers in Fanfare all seem to have only the CD
>>>>>> versions
>>>>>> of these remasterings, not the Blu-rays.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems very strange that these are coming out of Mexico only. The
>>>>>> booklets say that the actual tape-to digital transfers were done at
>>>>>> Abbey Road Studios, which I also find strange. I thought all the Decca
>>>>>> tapes were in Hanover.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Based on sampling these last night, I will say that even at 48 kHz,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> sound is superb - better than anything Decca has issued here of this
>>>>>> material. Strangely, I have found a lot of the Decca Originals
>>>>>> remasterings to be very bright on top, including the Karajan Otello
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> the Solti Salome and Elektra. Regarding Salome and Elektra, the
>>>>>> Blu-ray
>>>>>> editions are just as bright as the two previous CD releases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>
>>


-- 
1006 Langer Way
Delray Beach, FL 33483
561.265.2976