"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article , Serge Auckland
writes

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:47:49 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

I mean the phenomenon, not the news propagation. To see the comments
you need to frequent the pro sound groups.

Well, until the government passes a law that there's now 36 hours in a
day rather than 24, I don't have time to frequent every newsgroup I'd
like to.

Anyway... what is it with "remasters" destroying the music like that? I
have a remaster of Dire Straits "Brothers In Arms", and it does actually
sound better than the original release. Ditto with Paul Simon's
"Graceland". But they're the exceptions.

There you have two bands/artists who not only have a lot of artistic
integrity, but the sheer muscle to tell the studio where to get off.

For the rest, the conception is that if reasonably loud is good, then
very loud must be better. So much of the development work in DAW
software in the past few years has concentrated on maximizing the
dynamic squash on the signal while still leaving the music
recognizable. The result is what you have highlighted, and it isn't
pretty.

Radio is the problem - the record producers figure that as you are
hopping through the channels, you will stop on the one that is the
loudest. A ridiculous concept, but it is what drives the music
industry right now.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Even more ridiculous when you think that the processor will squash the
dynamic range anyway. However, I have heard it expressed by one record
company exec I was talking to that record companies now have to squash the
CDs as kids want them to sound like they heard them on the radio. Sadly, it
is not limited to the sort of music aimed at teenagers. I have one CD-
Robert Plant, Dreamland, which has full-scale output in several places
throughout the CD, and even in the same track. Looking at it on a 'scope and
using my bit-stream analyser, it is clearly clipped several times. Clipping
for very short periods isn't particularly audible, but you get an extra few
dBs of loudness that way.

Lunacy, sheer lunacy........

S.



Yes.. a local station has gone loud round this way and I mean REALLY
LOUD!!! Taking this up with the programme controller of a station we
look after I said what do you think of that he replith thus.

"Yes like it sounding like that, can we have the same"?. Over my dead
body quoth I..

Buggers just don't know what dynamic range means anymo((((

And the above station has a new "digital" feed at 128 K/Bits.....
--
Tony Sayer

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Don Pearce wrote:

Radio is the problem - the record producers figure that as you are
hopping through the channels, you will stop on the one that is the
loudest. A ridiculous concept, but it is what drives the music
industry right now.

Except the track that I posted the visualisations of was recorded in
1981, before such nonsense existed.

Looks like the rot started in the early 90s (the first remaster was
1994), and by last year any sense of dynamics were lost in brick-wall
limiting...

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 20:41:01 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Radio is the problem - the record producers figure that as you are
hopping through the channels, you will stop on the one that is the
loudest. A ridiculous concept, but it is what drives the music
industry right now.

Except the track that I posted the visualisations of was recorded in
1981, before such nonsense existed.

Looks like the rot started in the early 90s (the first remaster was
1994), and by last year any sense of dynamics were lost in brick-wall
limiting...

Errr..... exactly.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Arny Krueger wrote:

Anyway... what is it with "remasters" destroying the music like
that?
Makes them play *better* in noisy cars, offices, and elevators.

So why not have the compressor built into the playback device? Like
with, say, DRC on Dolby Digital? Where you can choose what dynamic range
to have.

When I'm in the car, at a volume setting of -36dB on the head unit, the
1994 remaster sounds better than the 1981 original. But turn the volume
up to -30dB (same perceived loudness) and the original version sounds
much better.

Although my car isn't terribly noisy (it's a 2003 Audi A4 Quattro 1.9TDI
130), so perhaps not a fair comparison. 80mph in it feels more like
you're doing 40.

I have a remaster of Dire Straits "Brothers In Arms", and it does
actually sound better than the original release.
Might be a remix.

No, because I borrowed the original CD off someone to compare. The mixes
are identical.

The remaster is Super Bit Mapping, whatever that's supposed to represent.

Ditto with Paul Simon's "Graceland". But they're the exceptions.
Buying remasters is at best a crap shoot.

These two sound good. Others... less so. For ABBA's earlier recordings
go for the remasters, they were "wall of sound" anyway, and the
remasters have quite effective noise reduction. For their later
recordings (certainly 1979 onwards) go for the Polydor/Polar originals.

If the recording was fully digital, generally don't touch the remaster.
Dire Straits and Paul Simon are the exceptions. My copy of Genesis
"Invisible Touch" and Fleetwood Mac's "Tango In The Night" are the
non-remastered versions.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Hi,

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Anyway... what is it with "remasters" destroying the music like
that?
Makes them play *better* in noisy cars, offices, and elevators.

So why not have the compressor built into the playback device? Like
with, say, DRC on Dolby Digital? Where you can choose what dynamic
range to have.

That's an option with DAB, I believe. I don't know if it's actually been
implemented by anyone, though, as I no longer have a DAB receiver.

Regards,

Glenn (a different one)

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:14:54 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Ok, a break from arguing about cables!

Have been having a discussion on a forum about which CDs sound better,
originals or other sets of remasters. So I did a few experiments.

Take one CD. Rip, encode to MP3 (at high quality), then run MP3Gain to
set the perceived volume to 89dB. Repeat for remasters.

Open MP3s using Nero Wave Editor, or some other piece of software that
will give you a visual representation of the track.

See what "remastering" really involves.

Check this out for butchery. This is the original track, from the 1981
CD release:

http://intranet.squirrel-net.co.uk/s...hevisitors.png

This is an earlier remaster from a 1994 box set:

http://intranet.squirrel-net.co.uk/s.../oou-tyftm.png

And this is a remaster from a 2005 box set:

http://intranet.squirrel-net.co.uk/s...ts/oou-csr.png

Note that these tracks have had ReplayGain applied. Pre-ReplayGain
they'd have been set to peak at 100%.

Listening to all 3 tracks direct from the CD (no ReplayGain) the 1994
version seems to sound better. But if you apply ReplayGain and listen to
all 3 back to back, the original sounds far better. Look at the visuals,
it isn't hard to see why.

Now this, perhaps, really is something for people to bitch about.

And so we have been, for ages. This just isn't news.

d


Glenn. I am frequently involved in CD mastering sessions,
both as a consultant, and as a recoring engineer.
The whole concept of mastering, as opposed to vinyl
mastering is totally different.

Originally, mastering was the process of transferring the
master recording to the commercial medium/format,
and the art was to make the end result as close as
possible to the original. In the case of lacquer masters
for vinyl production this was incredibly skilled work.
Any fool could make it sound different:-)

The CD mastering session, is regarded as an
extension of the recording process, so that,
with the exception of classical music there is
rarely an attempt to make the CD match the
production master. "Improvements"are usually
made. There are significant pressures to make
tracks as loud as possible, for the "benefit"
of radio and in-car listeners.

"Smiley EQ" (a rough equivalent of the old
"loudness" contour) is frequently used, plus
heavy compression and brick wall limiting.

Those who listen to the product on high end
systems have to suffer the consequencies.

Despite the fact that this matter is often discussed,
record companies receive very few complaints
about the mastering quality of their products-
far less than in the vinyl days. Most people
these days are happy with the mediocre.
This is regrettable, now that finally we
have the chance to take advantage of wide
FR, extended SNR, low distortion which
vinyl struggled so valiantly to offer.

A comparison of a recording issued on
vinyl and then re-issued on CD is often quite
an eye opener.

The only way this will be resolved, is if the
record buying public make their dissatisfaction
known to the record companies,and audio mags.
But while the majority are happy to sit on their
backsides eating their pizzas and tapping
their feet to Shania Twain on their mid-fi
systems, nothing will be done.

Iain

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 20:41:01 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Radio is the problem - the record producers figure that as you are
hopping through the channels, you will stop on the one that is the
loudest. A ridiculous concept, but it is what drives the music
industry right now.

Except the track that I posted the visualisations of was recorded in
1981, before such nonsense existed.

Looks like the rot started in the early 90s (the first remaster was
1994), and by last year any sense of dynamics were lost in brick-wall
limiting...

Actually, it started *way* back in the '50s, when radio stations
discovered compression, and a little ten kilowatt local radio station
could sound like the national networks on passing car radios, just by
cranking up the modulation.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 20:34:49 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Eiron wrote:

Is your copy of "Brothers in Arms" HDCD?

Don't think so, at least it doesn't have the HDCD logo on it.

It does say "SBM Super Bit Mapping" on the back, which if memory serves
me correctly was a forerunner of HDCD. But then again I could be wrong
on that.

Good grief, your comprehensive ignorance of things technical remains
quite staggering. HDCD was around before Super Bit Mapping, and the
two have absolutely nothing in common.

Never figured out exactly what HDCD is supposed to do though. Apparently
my CD/DVD player supports it (Arcam DV-79) although it doesn't have the
HDCD logo on it...

Sigh......

HDCD uses the top 15 bits in conventional fashion, but the LSB is used
as a decoding flag for the HDCD decoder. This increases the dynamic
range of the recording (in theory). Basically, HDCD is a form of
compansion, but it doesn't work that well in practice since CD doesn't
*need* additional dynamic range, so it never really took off
commercially. By a weird coincidence, the company stayed afloat
largely because the Pacific Microsonics PMD100 digital filter and HDCD
decoder, was one of the very best digital filters avaialable in the
'90s, and found its way into many high-class players.


Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE if you need *technical* advice!!!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:30:51 -0000, "Glenn Booth"
wrote:

Hi,

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Anyway... what is it with "remasters" destroying the music like
that?
Makes them play *better* in noisy cars, offices, and elevators.

So why not have the compressor built into the playback device? Like
with, say, DRC on Dolby Digital? Where you can choose what dynamic
range to have.

That's an option with DAB, I believe. I don't know if it's actually been
implemented by anyone, though, as I no longer have a DAB receiver.

Regards,

Glenn (a different one)

My Arcam DAB receiver has it. I believe it has four different options
of compression level.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE if you need *technical* advice!!!

FFS... I do *IT* consultancy, not audio. Do you know what a "working
set" is? Do you know the optimum size of a swap partition on a BSD based
unix system? Do you know the difference between UFS, FFS and ext2fs? Or
the difference between zip, gzip and bzip2? Do you know how to configure
BIND, or squid, or samba? Just to give you a few examples.

And if you don't know the difference, does that mean I get to call *you*
an "ignorant ****wit", simply because you have gaps in your knowledge
OUTSIDE YOUR SPECIALIST FIELD?

I do not design amplifiers, or CD players. I install and support IT
systems. The closest my work brings me to audio is plugging the audio
cable between the PC base unit and TFT monitor. Audio and hi-fi is an
interest, not a profession. I don't make a living from it, therefore I
don't *need* to know all the ins and outs of how various technologies
like HDCD work. (For the record, I'm actually very interested as to how
they work, but it doesn't have any bearing on what I do for a living.)

And if you continue to libel me and my company, I *will* be making a
complaint to your ISP.

Now GROW UP, get back on your medication, and stop picking a fight with
everyone you come into contact with online that dares to have a
differing opinion to yours.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation