Date:         Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:29:38 -0400
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Cedar, was: Aren't recordings original sources?
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
              reply-type=original

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.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Parker Dinkins" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
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" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> 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
>