"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

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.

--
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 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

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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Don Pearce wrote:

Now this, perhaps, really is something for people to bitch about.
And so we have been, for ages. This just isn't news.

Well I haven't seen it. Probably cos until recently my news access was a
little sporadic, to put it mildly.

--
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 19:33:24 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Now this, perhaps, really is something for people to bitch about.
And so we have been, for ages. This just isn't news.

Well I haven't seen it. Probably cos until recently my news access was a
little sporadic, to put it mildly.

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

d

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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

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.

--
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 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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"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.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

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.

Is your copy of "Brothers in Arms" HDCD?

--
Eiron

There's something scary about stupidity made coherent - Tom Stoppard.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

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.

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...

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"Glenn Richards" wrote in
message


Anyway... what is it with "remasters" destroying the
music like that?

Makes them play *better* in noisy cars, offices, and elevators.

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

Might be a remix.

Ditto with Paul Simon's "Graceland". But they're the exceptions.

Buying remasters is at best a crap shoot.

"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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Glenn Richards 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.

Not really. Think of Spector's 'Wall of Sound'. You could use most of his
stuff as line up tone. ;-)

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...

Yes. But it seems to be what the 'public' wants. Look at the number of
those who complain about ads in TV sounding louder than the progs. The
only practical way round that is to process the whole lot to within an
inch of its life. And make it sound like Talk Radio.

--
*If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Glenn Richards 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.

DAB offers this facility.

--


Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
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.

We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.

--
*Xerox and Wurlitzer will merge to market reproductive organs.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Yes. But it seems to be what the 'public' wants. Look at the number of
those who complain about ads in TV sounding louder than the progs. The
only practical way round that is to process the whole lot to within an
inch of its life. And make it sound like Talk Radio.

That's nothing to do with dynamics, merely balance. The ads industry demands
impact so that's what the TV companies gives them. I certainly don't approve
of having my ears blasted when the ads come on, so as soon as they start,
the mute button is hit (if I can find the remote in the cushions of course).
It's a shame really, there are some quite good ads - better than a lot of
the other output.

Roy.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
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.

We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.



;-)

And not one in a hundred cars had a radio - I remember stickers in
secondhand cars proudly proclaiming *Heater* back in the 50s.....

(I think Pinky was Googling American sites..... ;-)

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Glenn Richards wrote:


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?

You would have to be a dumb stupid prick like pinkerton and his
suck-puppets to be able to do so.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Roy roy wrote:
Yes. But it seems to be what the 'public' wants. Look at the number of
those who complain about ads in TV sounding louder than the progs. The
only practical way round that is to process the whole lot to within an
inch of its life. And make it sound like Talk Radio.

That's nothing to do with dynamics, merely balance.

Eh?

The ads industry demands impact so that's what the TV companies gives
them.

The TV companies don't make the ads - and the 'rules' say they must peak
to a maximum of 4dB below the maximum progs may peak to, on ITV 1 at
least, which they do.

I certainly don't approve of having my ears blasted when the ads
come on, so as soon as they start, the mute button is hit (if I can
find the remote in the cushions of course). It's a shame really, there
are some quite good ads - better than a lot of the other output.

Do you find that all DVDs, CDs, etc sound as loud as one another?

--
*How much deeper would the oceans be without sponges? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.

;-)

And not one in a hundred cars had a radio - I remember stickers in
secondhand cars proudly proclaiming *Heater* back in the 50s.....

Remember my father getting an HMV Radiomobile for his new Morris Oxford in
'56. And that was valve. ;-)

I wonder what it cost in today's money?

--
*When companies ship Styrofoam, what do they pack it in? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"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.

Implementing a proper compressor is still not trivial, certainly not
something that would be added as a feature to a dirt-cheap radio or player.

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.

There you go!

Favorite consumer complaint - "Why do I have to adjust the volume when I
change from FM to the CD"

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.

OK, its a remaster and the mastering engineer got things more to your liking
the second time around. Stuff happens.

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

It's a methodology for obtaining bragging rights from some people who think
they are technically sophisticated. It does have a positive technical
effect, but the benefit gets washed out in just about any practical use.

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.

Most of what I have the time to listen to (still over a dozen hours a week)
is either live performances or recordings (both stereo and multitrack) of
the same. That means that I'm the recording engineer, I'm the mixdown
engineer and I'm the mastering engineer. It's nice to know who to blame and
have his ear for any and all complaints.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:17:55 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

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

FFS... I do *IT* consultancy, not audio.

Oh c'mon, you're a one-man band installing boxes and cables to
standard setups, using the supplied manuals.

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.

More to the point, do you? So far, you have shown little sign of any
ability to tie your own shoelaces....

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?

This is an audio forum, into which you blew making lots of wild
assertions with no substance to them. Turns out you know sod all about
audio, but you're such an arrogant prick that you won't admit it. In
my experience, that tends to translate right back to whatever field
people claim as their 'speciality'.

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.

Neither do I, but since I'm an engineer and audio is my hobby, I've
made a point of finding out these things.

(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.)

Doesn't seem to have had any bearing on how much you've chosen to
learn about it, either......

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

**** off, asshole. What libel is there in pointing out that an
ignorant arrogant clown in one field, is likely to be an ignorant
arrogant clown in another field? My ISP will tell you just what
'Squirrel Solutions' can do with its resident nuts.

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.

Opinions are fine, but when an ignorant clown like you makes absolute
claims and then ducks out of picking up an easy grand for proving his
claims in an independent test, my bull**** detector pegs the stop....

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 11:37:10 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
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.

We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.

I'm talking about the US, not the UK. We in the UK didn't have
national network*s* in the '50s, either.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Oh c'mon, you're a one-man band installing boxes and cables to
standard setups, using the supplied manuals.

In your own words, BULL****.

I do build-to-order servers with RAID, database-driven dynamic web
sites, a lot of seriously ****ed up SQL code, custom software systems,
custom hardware, as well as PCs built to order.

No off-the-shelf stuff here. Although I must admit, assembling a PC from
components, plugging it into a monitor, network port and power, then
power up, PXE boot from the network, wander off, come back 40 minutes
later to a fully installed WinXP box with all the security updates,
ready to box up and deliver to the client... it almost seems too easy.

But then, it's my job to understand this stuff.

As the old saying goes, there are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.

So far, you have shown little sign of any ability to tie your own
shoelaces....

I blame that on the medication. And the fact that I'm still only allowed
velcro fastenings, as I have a tendency to use shoelaces to garotte
unsuspecting people who **** me off too much...

Well, it would be such a waste to use pure silver speaker cable to
strangle someone, wouldn't it?

/sarcasm

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?
[usual rantings snipped]

So I take it you don't know what any of those examples were?

Thought not.

This is the point at which I could do with some "Preparation H
bullets"... for dealing with irritating arseholes. :-P

but since I'm an engineer and audio is my hobby

Engineer? Really? I thought you worked as the post monkey in a bank
somewhere...

Opinions are fine,

Really? I thought it was "opinions are like arseholes - everyone's got
one, but nobody wants to look at the other guy's".

but when an ignorant clown like you makes absolute claims and then
ducks out of picking up an easy grand for proving his claims in an
independent test, my bull**** detector pegs the stop....

Right...

You recompense me for my lost earnings, *regardless* of the test
results, and I'll quite happily take part. Then chuck an extra £1k on
the table when I do prove that I'm right.

For the record, I just took an order today that's going to make me about
5-6 times as much in profit as your "easy grand". And is probably going
to take me about as long. But then, it's already been mentioned on here
that someone's already risen to your challenge, proved themselves right,
and you've failed to pay up.

I'd be very interested to see what a psychiatrist would make of you
actually.

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.

;-)

And not one in a hundred cars had a radio - I remember stickers in
secondhand cars proudly proclaiming *Heater* back in the 50s.....

Remember my father getting an HMV Radiomobile for his new Morris Oxford in
'56. And that was valve. ;-)


Sidevalve?

;-)

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:31:02 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Keith G" wrote in message
...


And not one in a hundred cars had a radio - I remember stickers in
secondhand cars proudly proclaiming *Heater* back in the 50s.....



Gosh. I remember those stickers in windscreens of second hand cars.
That takes me back:-))


Mater had an Austin A35 with push up windows.
She later traded it for an A70 with "wind up windows" duly
proclaimed by the sticker you have mentioned.

That's progress:-)

Iain



But that was really just cosmetic. Labelling didn't get serious until
we started seeing cars with a "Disc Brakes" sticker to let you know
that it could actually stop.

d

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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 23:35:33 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
We didn't have local radio stations in the '50s.

;-)

And not one in a hundred cars had a radio - I remember stickers in
secondhand cars proudly proclaiming *Heater* back in the 50s.....

Remember my father getting an HMV Radiomobile for his new Morris Oxford in
'56. And that was valve. ;-)


Sidevalve?

Back in the '50s my Dad had a Ford Popular, the old 'sit up and beg'
style, which definitely had a sidevalve engine. No radio, but it did
have a heater!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 22:38:30 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Oh c'mon, you're a one-man band installing boxes and cables to
standard setups, using the supplied manuals.

In your own words, BULL****.

I do build-to-order servers with RAID, database-driven dynamic web
sites, a lot of seriously ****ed up SQL code, custom software systems,
custom hardware, as well as PCs built to order.

No off-the-shelf stuff here. Although I must admit, assembling a PC from
components, plugging it into a monitor, network port and power, then
power up, PXE boot from the network, wander off, come back 40 minutes
later to a fully installed WinXP box with all the security updates,
ready to box up and deliver to the client... it almost seems too easy.

But then, it's my job to understand this stuff.

As the old saying goes, there are only 10 types of people in the world -
those who understand binary, and those who don't.

I was brought up in the valve era, so for me there are 8 kinds of
people in the world.........

You recompense me for my lost earnings, *regardless* of the test
results, and I'll quite happily take part. Then chuck an extra £1k on
the table when I do prove that I'm right.

OK, £1000 and 20p it is!

For the record, I just took an order today that's going to make me about
5-6 times as much in profit as your "easy grand". And is probably going
to take me about as long. But then, it's already been mentioned on here
that someone's already risen to your challenge, proved themselves right,
and you've failed to pay up.

That is just another of your fairy tales, Richards. Actually, that's
*two* of your fairy tales................

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Glenn Richards wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Oh c'mon, you're a one-man band installing boxes and cables to
standard setups, using the supplied manuals.


In your own words, BULL****.

I do build-to-order servers with RAID, database-driven dynamic web
sites, a lot of seriously ****ed up SQL code, custom software systems,
custom hardware, as well as PCs built to order.


What, you are proud about writing "seriously ****ed up SQL code",
whatever "SQL code" is.

--
Nick

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
But that was really just cosmetic. Labelling didn't get serious until
we started seeing cars with a "Disc Brakes" sticker to let you know
that it could actually stop.

Small red triangle on the back bumper?

--
*To steal ideas from *one* person is plagiarism; from many, research*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:49:59 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
But that was really just cosmetic. Labelling didn't get serious until
we started seeing cars with a "Disc Brakes" sticker to let you know
that it could actually stop.

Small red triangle on the back bumper?

No - an actual oval sticker with the words on.

d

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

"Remastered" CDs - the truth
 

Don Pearce wrote:

But that was really just cosmetic. Labelling didn't get serious until
we started seeing cars with a "Disc Brakes" sticker to let you know
that it could actually stop.
Small red triangle on the back bumper?
No - an actual oval sticker with the words on.

This I take it pre-dated the bumper stickers that read "if you can read
this YOU'RE TOO DAMNED CLOSE!"

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

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation