[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
arsclist Reformatting Philosophy (was: Tubes will not die)
At 11:14 AM 11/14/2002 -0600, Karl Miller wrote:
That having been stated...
>From the perspective of preservation/restoration...it would seem to me that
there are many related issues.
Like...
An disc recorded acoustically might sound "better" when transferred with
a magnetic pickup, but is that preservation re recording? Similarly, is it
preservation when one uses solid state electronics to transfer a recording
done with tube electronics?
This (and the following questions) raise the issue:
Should we attempt to reproduce the original exactly how it was reproduced
at the time?
I would like to suggest that we can almost always reproduce the sound in
the original way IF we capture as much of the information as possible.
For example, if we capture all of the nuances of the sound on a recording
and then make another original-format recording from that and use vintage
equipment to play back the new copy, it should sound very much like the
original. I've actually done that with tape.
I don't think we should purposely NOT grab information off decaying
originals for the sake of reproducing them exactly as they sounded when
made. I think we SHOULD grab as MUCH information from the original as possible.
We'll NEVER have it sounding exactly as it sounded when made. Speakers are
different, rooms are different. If we have vintage speakers, they've aged.
A practical example...I often think of this when I am working with an
aircheck...and wonder...now did that recording engineer really use this
particular equalization curve. It just doesn't "sound" right.
I say, trust your ears to some extent, but document what you do. For
example, I've had reels of tape with "Dolby A" stickers on them. They
CLEARLY were not Dolby A encoded. When decoded with Dolby A you could hear
pumping and loss of brightness, clarity. I've made a note that I did the
final transfer without Dolby A despite the stickers.
When one gets to splitting hairs...I wonder if there is a "right."
Perhaps one perspective might have more "right" about it than another?
For those of you who do preservation/restoration, what is "right?"
Capturing as much as possible of the original while introducing as little
as possible further degradation.
Is reformatting preservation?
Considering the alternative: DEFINITELY
The alternative being that the original just fades away into a heap of dust.
Karl (who finds the notion of "Absolute Sound" to me a more of a marketing
tool than a reality, akin to the notion of a "definitive performance.")
There are performances that are "definitive" to me. I'm not sure they are
to you. For example, I much prefer Solti's early/mid 70s Beethoven 9th to
Von Karajan's of the same era. I also think I prefer Solti's early-70s one
to his later one.
I think if you don't adjust tape azimuth to match the recording you're
doing a BAD THING. I think if you ignore tones (when they exist) at the
head of a tape you're doing a BAD THING.
So there are many things you can do to get as good a transfer as possible.
Cheers,
Richard
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.