Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar, was: Aren't recordings original sources?

[Clark Johnsen <clarkjohnsen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Given the current state of the music business, I would say consumers are
> voting with their wallets. I definitely believe that part of the business
> cratering is due to putting out an overpriced, bad quality product in a
> format that has been antiquated.


You're speaking of course about MP3...

clark

>
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clark Johnsen" <clarkjohnsen@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 1:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar, was: Aren't recordings original sources?
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >wrote:
>>
>> Well, I'm certainly not vain enough to speak for anyone else on this list,
>>> but ...
>>>
>>> Then we apparently don't have on this list the majority of reissue
>>> producers and remastering engineers out there. Their lousy work speaks
>>> for
>>> itself.
>>>
>>
>>
>> And there you have it!
>>
>> But one must wonder whether joining this list would serve the cause.
>>
>> Perhaps an outreach effort should be made?
>>
>> clark
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Parker Dinkins" <
>>> parker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 6:20 PM
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar, was: Aren't recordings original sources?
>>>
>>>
>>> I think most people here are aware of all that.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Parker Dinkins
>>>> CD Mastering + Audio Restoration
>>>> http://masterdigital.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> on 10/23/08 3:53 PM US/Central, Tom Fine wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not when it's overused and sucks what little life is left out of the
>>>>
>>>>> sound.
>>>>> With all digital NR, it's a very fine line between slightly improving
>>>>> clarity
>>>>> and sucking the air, space and depth out of the sound. My own bias is
>>>>> always
>>>>> toward less but I've made and heard others' examples of judicious use
>>>>> of
>>>>> digi-tools where audibility and clarity are improved. Rare with
>>>>> well-recorded
>>>>> full-range music; the trained ear seems to prefer some hiss or surface
>>>>> noise
>>>>> with the entire pallet of music as opposed to a quieter background with
>>>>> some
>>>>> colors muted.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Parker Dinkins" <parker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 3:52 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Cedar, was: Aren't recordings original sources?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Fine wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, many 78 transfers made for CD sets are awful. People do seem to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> lop
>>>>>>> off the bass -- these records had plenty of low end, it was the TOP
>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>> where they had no musical content. Yet people roll off the bass
>>>>>>> (maybe
>>>>>>> because they have rumble-plagued playback systems) and crank up the
>>>>>>> EQ
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>> the upper midrange, which just accentuates the surface noise and
>>>>>>> unnatural
>>>>>>> resonances from the original recording devices. Then you apply an
>>>>>>> overly
>>>>>>> aggressive treatment with CEDAR or whatever else and you get ...
>>>>>>> crap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems like CEDAR would be just what is required after all that
>>>>>> torture.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Parker Dinkins
>>>>>> CD Mastering + Audio Restoration
>>>>>> http://masterdigital.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>