home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   rec.audio.tech      Theoretical, factual, and DIY topics in      41,683 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 40,269 of 41,683   
   AtTheEndofMyRope to All   
   Re: 24-bit on tap at Apple?   
   25 Feb 11 05:17:08   
   
   XPost: rec.music.gdead, sci.electronics.design   
   From: AtTheEndofMyRope@AtTheEndofMyRope.org   
      
   On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 07:57:26 -0500, "Arny Krueger"    
   wrote:   
      
   >"DGDevin"  wrote in message   
   >news:_qWdndS3TMVmTvvQnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@earthlink.com   
   >> "Mark-T"  wrote in message   
   >> news:5868a97f-e148-44a5-9034-406a8fdc2e26@f36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...   
   >>   
   >>> If the master is the original, then what does   
   >>> "re-mastered" mean, as commonly used?   
   >>> A genuine original copy?   
   >>   
   >> The original raw multi-track tape (or these days data   
   >> file) rarely does anything but sit in a vault.   
   >   
   >If it still exists.   
   >   
   >> Re-mastering at least in theory means they started with   
   >> the original raw tracks and did the mixing and EQ all   
   >> over again and carefully produced a new mixed master   
   >> recording with better quality than the old one.   
   >   
   >Not at all. That would be called "re-mixing".   
   >   
   >> But sometimes   
   >   
   >No, always.   
   >   
   >> they start with the old final mix and just are   
   >> more careful in making a digital transer that will be   
   >> used to make CDs.   
   >   
   >No, not necessarily more careful, just different.   
   >   
   >> A lot of early CDs made from analog   
   >> tapes were not done very well, the analog to digital   
   >> transfers were poor, they benefited from more careful   
   >> work later.   
   >   
   >No, what happened is that a goodly number of CDs released in the early-mid   
   >1980s were made from what are known as "cutting masters". This means that   
   >the recordings  intentionally had the inverse of the losses in LP disc   
   >cutting and playback incorperated into them. This usually results in a   
   >shrill-sounding, thin-sounding recording. These were mistakes, but   
   >management said: "Ship it!".  Most of these were redone in the 1990s.   
   >   
   >   
      
     Genesis: The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway   
      
     So bad you can hear the tape hiss.   
      
     Genesis had many "remasters" on their disc library and the problem is   
   that they used OTHER masters, so what got put on the "Remastered discs"   
   were really re-mixed.   
      
    They suck too, because the original cuts are what we want, not some lame   
   fuck's choice of what to put down out of the pile of tape he has in front   
   of him.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca