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

[Tom Fine <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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.

-- 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