From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V6 #261 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Thursday, September 4 2003 Volume 06 : Number 261 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [idealcopy] Heaven sent extinction event [MarkBursa@aol.com] [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes ["Jason Rogers" ] [Off Topic] Euro CDs (was Re: [idealcopy] disc rot) [Paul Pietromonaco ] Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes ["dan bailey" ] Re: [idealcopy] Jason wrote.. ["Keith Astbury" >Asteroid Collision Warning for 2014 SCIENTISTS are to monitor an asteroid that could hit Earth in eleven years. The UK Government's Near Earth Object Centre says American astronomers have discovered a large, fast-approaching asteroid that could impact on 21 March, 2014. But they add the chances of it doing so are just 1 in 909,000. What is more, any risk of an impact is likely to decrease as further data is gathered. Although the chances this asteroid will hit the Earth are slim, it is considered worth monitoring due to its sheer size and velocity. The rock is said to measure approximately two-thirds of a mile across - only one-tenth of the size of the meteor thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. It is travelling at a speed of about 20 miles per second. In theory such an asteroid could cause devastation across an entire continent. It has been labelled '2003 QQ 47' and astronomers will be monitoring it closely for the next two months.<< ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:33:30 +0000 From: "Jason Rogers" Subject: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes That'll work. This must be why everyone and their grandmother has been releasing remastered CD editions of their albums. Echo And The Bunnymen are re-releasing their first five albums in October, The Cure will be re-releasing their catalogue (plus bonus tracks) through 2004/2005, etc. etc. I recently purchased two Simple Minds remasters, Empires And Dance and Sons And Fascination/Sister Feelings Call, and think that they both sound exceptionally good. There is a noticable difference between many of the remasters and with the original releases, depending on the source, etc. The first batch of Led Zepplin CD's, for example, sounded like they were recorded the next room over from an old record player. I compared my mid-90's remaster of Physical Graffiti with a friend's copy of the original CD release of the same album; the improvement in sound quality was amazing. Judging from CD's in my collection that I've listened to over the past few months, I've noted a few older CD's that are in dire need of remastering: The Cure - Seventeen Seconds INXS - Shabooh Shoobah The Psychedelic Furs - Mirror Moves Talking Heads - Remain In Light New Order - Substance The Cure album shall be re-released soon and I expect that the others will be re-released over the next few years. I'm surprised that the Psychedelic Furs didn't re-release Mirror Moves along with their first three a year or so ago. All of this and the fact that my EMI copy of Wire's Pink Flag sounds much better than the Restless Retro release. Jason Now Playing: Roxy Music - "More Than This" >Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 15:26:51 -0700 >From: Paul Pietromonaco >Subject: [idealcopy] [Off Topic] Modern CD Volumes (was Re: Disc rot) > >Nope - CDs are louder today than they were back then. > >Yet - the digital format hasn't changed any. It's still the same >specification - the same "bits" if you will. > >So - why are CDs louder? > >Compression is the answer. In the old days, you would leave the CD >audio mixes relatively uncompressed. Also, they had a fear of >distortion that would occur if you dare went over 0 dB on the Digital >Record Level Meters. So, only the highest peaks were at 0 dB and the >average signal level was around -12 dB or so. > >A few years ago, Apogee and some other companies rediscovered an >interesting aural phenomenon which they used in their external A/D >converters (the boxes that create the digital signal for CD). Your >ears hear the average of sound as volume, not necessarily the peaks. >For example, if you have two waveforms, one that has loud peaks with a >low average volume, and one that's heavily compressed to have no loud >peaks, but a large average volume, you'll hear the compressed one as >louder. These A/D converters invented a mode called "Soft Over" where >you could pump the signal into the converters, and they would apply >large amounts of compression to the audio signal as it started to get >near the 0 dB limit of Digital Audio. Basically, an evolved "Peak >Limiter", if you're familiar with that term. So, yes, the signals are >compressed, but chances are you won't miss the peak at all, and it will >sound louder. Also, there is slightly less distortion - as long as you >don't go beyond the 0 dB threshold!!! > >I first noticed this with some Columbia CDs - especially those by Alice >In Chains. The Digital Meter on my DAT deck - which lets you see the >exact digital signal level when you connect it optically - was no >longer moving along like the cassette levels of yore. Instead, it went >right to zero and pegged there. However - I could hear no overload >distortion - which is what you'd expect. That's when I started looking >through my Mix magazines at the Apogee ads, and figured out what they >were doing. > >Now, most CDs are mastered this way. > >Cheers, >Paul > _________________________________________________________________ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 09:47:38 -0700 (PDT) From: fernando Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes Hmmm... I thought that Paul's explanation helped to show why some CDs sound better despite *not* being remastered. Remastered meaning that the original analog sources were re-digitized with new techniques. The remastering boom, I thought, was mostly due to the advances in analog to digital conversion in that came through in the early 90s. So, the LedZep remasters were also improved by using good sources, if not the actual masters. I presume that the Cure and Echo have gone to the masters, re-convert them, and do a good placement of "bits." Otherwise, *sigh* it is not worth the wait. The sound from the Echo box set is pretty good, and much improved from the originals. I sold my Echo and Cure CDs a while back in anticipation of remasters. BTW, it would be cool if they did it like PSB and Elvis Costello... throw the extra stuff on a second CD. That should be the way to re-issue those albums! I remember Tony Wilson saying that they had problems locating masters when Substance came out (at least for Joy Division). It would be cool if they found them and remaster the suckers, more so for New Order. the main motivation for releasing remastered CDs is that the original sound is lousy (in many cases), people noticed, and the dearth of sales from back catalog motivates the record companies to please. if they did not have the sales drop, they would have left us without the remastering boom despite the demand. cheers, - -fernando - --- Jason Rogers wrote: > That'll work. This must be why everyone and their grandmother has been > releasing remastered CD editions of their albums. Echo And The Bunnymen > are re-releasing their first five albums in October, The Cure will be > re-releasing their catalogue (plus bonus tracks) through 2004/2005, etc. > etc. I recently purchased two Simple Minds remasters, Empires And Dance > and Sons And Fascination/Sister Feelings Call, and think that they both > sound exceptionally good. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:04:17 -0700 From: Paul Pietromonaco Subject: [Off Topic] Euro CDs (was Re: [idealcopy] disc rot) Hi everyone, This was the other post I tried to send yesterday that never made it. I'm trying to send it again. Miles - if this gets "hung up", go ahead and delete it, and just process the first one. Cheers, Paul - ---------------------------------------- > I purchased mt first c.d back in '87,none suffer from any ailment which is > suprising given that most audiophiles believe that those manufactered in > the us of a are somehow inferior to those manufactered in europe. > I forget the reason/details............anyone know? Why yes! (^_^) Actually, it was only the original batches of CDs pressed in the late 1980s to early 1990s. If you picked up certain CDs - mostly Virgin titles released by Warner Bros. - the U.S. versions were clearly inferior to the European versions. Why? The U.S. companies refused to allow their master tapes to be sent to the CD mastering houses. Remember, at that time, no record label - except for PolyGram, because of their ties to Philips - could master CDs in-house. You had to send your master tapes out to have it done. So, the big U.S. companies, figuring CDs might be a flash in the pan, sent out safety copies of their master tapes instead. The European labels generally sent out their master tapes to these mastering houses, since they were probably all in London anyway. (^_^) As a result, Peter Gabriel, Kate Bush (EMI, not Warner, oddly enough), Propaganda (remember them?), PiL, Scritti Politti, etc. had amazing sounding European CDs, and rather thin and noisy U.S. CDs. To compound matters further, Warner Bros. had seriously underestimated the public's interest in CDs, and hadn't booked enough time at PolyGram's CD plant. Virgin had booked a lot of time at France's MPO plant, correcty predicting the demand. Tower Records, realizing that domestic Warner/Virgin titles were coming out late and sounded terrible, responded by releasing the import titles earlier and undercutting the U.S. sales. So, did Warner Bros. clean up their act, and start mastering their CDs correctly, with well planned out release schedules? Nope - they sued Tower and Virgin Records. Almost out of existence. That's why there's a Virgin American, boys and girls. (^_^) This has been lesson number 101 in the continuing history of the compact disc. Tune in next week for an in-depth discussion about EMI's decision to violate Philips specifications and use silver in their CD mix, causing all of their discs to tarnish as the years go by. (^_^) Cheers, Paul - --------------------- End forwarded message --------------------- *********************************************************** Brain: "Pinky, Are You Pondering What I'm Pondering?" Pinky: "I think so Brain, but can the gummy worms really live in peace with the marshmallow chips?" Paul Pietromonaco Test Engineer - Reflection X WRQ, Inc. E-Mail: paulp@wrq.com *********************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:15:33 -0700 From: Paul Pietromonaco Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes >All of this and the fact that my EMI copy of Wire's Pink Flag sounds much >better than the Restless Retro release. > I'd agree with you... ...except... there is a downside to this "soft over" volume limiting. That is - if you crank the input signal too high, you will overload the A/D converters. This happens every once in a while - and I'm pretty sure I hear it on a track on the remaster of 154. I can't remember which track it is - but I've mentioned it before. (It's in the IdealCopy smoe.org archives somewhere - do we have a search facility yet?) In this case, the Restless Retro 154, although quieter, has a little less distortion. Except for that one track, the EMI 154 is better! (^_^) Cheers, Paul ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 14:39:58 -0500 From: "dan bailey" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes regardless, i feel compelled to note that as of yesterday afternoon i own my first cd ever (the restless, as it happens) of my choice of best lp ever, pink flag, having unexpectedly espied it at the recently opened best buy here in darkest alabama. i've owned the vinyl since mid-'78 & have had chairs missing & pink flag on disc for years, but i'm funny (not to mention cheap &, at least recently, poor) about buying cd releases of things i've already got on vinyl -- i pretty much draw the line at paying more than used (which is how i purchased 154) or cutout (chairs missing) prices, absent signficant bonus tracks. none of those conditions applied with pink flag, but the dizzying idea of being able to play any track i wanted without going to the trouble of rewinding the dub or dragging out my prized vinyl won me over. (besides, i was in a money-spending mood already, what with the new black rebel motorcyle club, raveonettes & morrissey under the influence comp -- not to mention the first donnas lp [had the vinyl for years, but the disc adds the early singles, most notably to parlor-terrorist me "i wanna be a unabomber"] -- clutched in my shaking hands.) i guess that leaves me with only the ideal copy/snakedrill & a bell is a cup to go ... dan >>All of this and the fact that my EMI copy of Wire's Pink Flag sounds >much >>better than the Restless Retro release. >> > >I'd agree with you... > >...except... > >there is a downside to this "soft over" volume limiting. That is - if >you crank the input signal too high, you will overload the A/D >converters. This happens every once in a while - and I'm pretty sure I >hear it on a track on the remaster of 154. I can't remember which >track it is - but I've mentioned it before. (It's in the IdealCopy >smoe.org archives somewhere - do we have a search facility yet?) > >In this case, the Restless Retro 154, although quieter, has a little >less distortion. Except for that one track, the EMI 154 is better! >(^_^) > >Cheers, >Paul ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:50:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Ari Britt Subject: [idealcopy] Jason wrote.. >........There is a noticable difference between many of the remasters and with the original releases, depending on the source, etc. The first batch of Led Zepplin CD's, for example, sounded like they were recorded the next room over from an old record player. I compared my mid-90's remaster of Physical Graffiti with a friend's copy of the original CD release of the same album; the improvement in sound quality was amazing.< ............................................................................... One of the reasons the original c.d releases didn't sound too good was the fact that,instead of remixing an album for a new medium (digital) they took the 'L.P' mix,and all the compression that that entailed,and applied it to c.d,in fact some studio's didn't even realize that musicians needed to be 'miked' differently for the new medium for a long long time. some didn't even use the master tapes when transcribing to c.d.............Ari Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:34:30 +0100 From: "Keith Astbury" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Jason wrote.. > some didn't even use the master tapes when transcribing to c.d.............Ari The story is that Bill Drummond couldn't find the masters for the early Teardrops Explodes / Zoo stuff, so he just used a vinyl copy for the cd release Piano. I seem to recall people complaining that you could hear the needle playing the vinyl on the cd, though I can't recall if this is actually true. I do know that the very lo-fi feel of Piano suits the likes of Sleeping Gas. Keith ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:46:14 +0100 From: "Keith Astbury" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes > was in a money-spending mood already, what with the new black rebel > motorcyle club, raveonettes & morrissey under the influence comp I love the new Raveonettes LP! I was slightly disappointed at first - not as good as the mini-LP Whip It On, and unlike that one - which could never be accused of over-staying it's welcome! - too long, I wondered? BUT... I've had it on solid in my car for the past week, and I would now like to declare my love... For anyone who loves classic pop songs with a bit of energy, it's the bees knees as they say. It's the Brill Building on fire. The Beach Boys as a garage band. The Velvets meet Abba. The JAMC with The Shirelles on backing vocs. In fact, it's all of these things, and possibly for one week only, I want to to marry it. Keith NP Goldfrapp - Black Cherry (Don't get me started on this one. Another one I love!) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:54:04 +0100 From: "Keith Astbury" Subject: [idealcopy] Re: "BACK TO SKOOL" radio collage > > From midnight to 6 am *E.S.T., STUDIO STUPID will air the annual > > SPECIAL ED "BACK TO SKOOL" radio collage live on 88.3 WCBN FM Ann > > Arbor http://www.wcbn.org/listen.html I will reply to Ed off list to apologise for not being able to listen to more of this than I did, but what I heard was really enjoyable. Hope a few other IC-ers managed to make it. K. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 17:06:32 EDT From: Eardrumbuz@aol.com Subject: Re: [idealcopy] Re: Modern CD Volumes In a message dated 9/3/03 3:41:11 PM, dpbailey@worldnet.att.net writes: >that leaves me with only the ideal copy/snakedrill & a bell is a cup > >to go ... > > me too. so which versions are THE ones to get? :o) paul c.d. www.mp3.com/winteracademy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 14:32:10 -0700 From: Paul Pietromonaco Subject: [Off Topic] Mastering 101 (was Re: [idealcopy] Jason wrote..) Sorry - another long post. Delete now if not interested. (^_^) Also - this is based on what I learned in audio school, and what little audio engineering I've done. If anyone on the list (i.e. Wire, Mike Thorne, etc.) thinks I'm full of it, feel free to correct me. (^_^) > One of the reasons the original c.d releases didn't sound too good > was the fact that,instead of remixing an album for a new medium (digital) > they took the 'L.P' mix, and all the compression that that entailed, and > applied it to c.d, Hmm - that's not exactly true. (^_^) Generally, there is no separate "LP" versus "CD" mix - there's only one master tape, which is the stereo mixdown from the original multi-track session tapes. During the mixdown from the multi-track session tapes, you add a little bit of volume compression and equalization to the master tape - but only to make a good master tape. You generally don't worry about vinyl or CD at this point. Your only concern is making sure the mix sounds good on the speakers that your target audience is using. I've generally used a combination of studio monitors, home bookshelf speakers, and single cone car speakers when doing studio mixdowns. LP mastering required extra volume compression and equalization - but this was added dynamically during the playback of the master tape that was driving the LP cutting lathe. There was no separate tape generated during this stage because that would have added another layer of noise. In fact, some of the last major label vinyl albums sounded terrible because they were just taking the master tapes and cutting vinyl straight - without adding extra compression or equalization. This sounded fine on CD, but terrible on vinyl. There's only a couple of guys - Bob Ludwig at Gateway Studios, for example - who really knew how to take a master tape, and make the resultant vinyl record sound remotely like it. The main reason the early CDs sounded terrible was the studio practice of sending "safety" masters to their outsoucred CD mastering houses - as referred to in my previous post. Also - many master tapes have leftover sonic characteristics from the original recording and mixing studios that are "fixed" during the mastering stage. Every time a new vinyl stamper was created, these "fixes" were reapplied. Since the original CDs were made "out of house", many times these "corrections" were not applied, or applied incorrectly. Finally, in the case of older master tapes, modern playback equipment reveals details that were covered up by the noisy electronics used in old mixers, or mistakes that were left in knowing that the surface noise of vinyl would "cover it up". These kinds of issues need to be dealt with for master tape transfers to the quieter CD medium. > in fact some studio's didn't even realize that musicians > needed to be 'miked' differently for the new medium for a long long time. > some didn't even use the master tapes when transcribing to > c.d. There was definitely a learning curve when the studios switched from Analog multi-track to Digital multi-track. (^_^) Mostly, that had to do with the amount of overload a digital multi-track could take. Actually, none is the correct answer. (^_^) You could overload a analog deck, and that would just get you a nice, warm sound as your treble dropped. Overload a digital deck, and that would get you all sorts of distortions. Also, cable runs had to be a lot quieter for digital - no nice analog hiss to cover up the noise of your local TV transmitter! There's not so much difference in miking techniques for analog versus digital - there's much more difference between using dynamic mics and condenser mics, in my opinion. (Take that with whatever grain of salt you wish. (^_^)) Certain miking tricks - like recording a kick drum uncompressed, and letting the natural compression of analog tape serve as the volume compression - had to be abandoned with digital. But, there's also many things you can do with digital multi-tracks that would be no-no's with analog. So, it's 6 of one, half dozen of the other, as far as I can tell. The thing that I find very cool is that I can record something on my analog multi-track at home, spend a lot of time getting the sound the way I like it during mixdown, and then record that mix to DAT, which then creates a CD that sounds virtually identical to the mixdown I had just heard. So many of my great mixes were lost on the uncalibrated equipment we had in Audio School. (^_^) Cheers, Paul P.S. Now playing - Tim Buckley "Happy Time" ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V6 #261 *******************************