Date:         Sat, 6 Jan 2007 22:44:23 -0500
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         David Lennick <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Audio compression on radio,
              was Re: [ARSCLIST] Libraries disposing of records
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

I've mentioned this before, but it still happens..FM radio stations such as 
WXXI in Rochester will play CDs reissued from analog tapes and quite often the 
hiss and BG noise are 5 times as loud as the music. And the recordings aren't 
always immortal performances. I once heard Mordecai play tracks from an old 
Vanguard recording of the Nutcracker Suite that should never have been reissued 
..no artistic merit, nothing historical about it, just "product" that likely 
filled a niche in a budget catalog at one point.

dl

Scott Phillips wrote:
> Thank you..!
> 
> I have been in the recording industry in one way or another for years,
> but I also possess an FCC license that started out as a first class
> license for radio, when they were 'hard to get'. Put bluntly, there are
> legal restrictions that AM/FM broadcasters need to adhere to, and they
> limit such things as dynamic range. They MUST have gear that
> restrains/maintains things in those areas. They are NOT going away, they
> can't. With that in mind, at the very least record
> companies/producers/engineers/mastering engineers should understand
> this. Radio CAN'T change this, it is the law. Sure, they have some
> latitude as to how the gear is adjusted, but less than you might
> imagine. Once it seemed like this was just common recording engineering
> knowledge, I must be getting old...
> 
> As a result, they have to be pretty inflexible as to their processing.
> Sure, they also want to be the loudest station as you tune across the
> dial in most cases... But that WILL happen, HAS happened for more years
> than I've been alive. Still, they have more restrictions actually placed
> on them that the rest of the recording chain. This was not true when
> vinyl was king, it was different but 'similar' in discipline. If the
> industry was in fact recording and mastering to fit the needs of radio,
> it wouldn't sound like it does right now.
> 
> A good deal of yesteryear's best broadcast compression/limiting chain is
> to be now found in the possession of the best recording engineers doing
> fine mixes. Fairchild, anyone ? Tubes, don't ya know... Still, one
> should NEVER overdo a good thing... But a old broadcast tube limiter set
> to small settings is very nice indeed. Again, just IMHO..
> 
> ..and yes, I'm not a 'tube guy'. My eyes are well and truly open...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Richter
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:23 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Libraries disposing of records
> 
> Scott Phillips wrote:
>> I just have to respond to this, even though I agree with 90% of it...
>>
>> Use sound forge or similar and look at a remastered LP at the least, 
>> or a current recording... The results are a LOT of square waves that 
>> result from the misuse of plugin compressors or 'mastering' software.
> 
> There is a page on the subject at one of my WWW sites:
>    http://www.mindspring.com/~mrichter/
> 
> While it has little that will be new to those on this list, it may be
> useful in communicating with others.
> 
> Mike
> --
> [log in to unmask]
> http://www.mrichter.com/
>                                                                                                                                                 
>