By Common (209.2.55.139) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:04 am:| By Common (209.2.55.139) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:04 am: |
Hello everyone,
Can someone please tell me what is an 'acetate'? Thank you kindly.
Peace!
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:24 am: |
Hello Common,
An acetate (slang term) is the raw disc that the grooves containing the audio are recorded onto. It has come to mean a disc copy of a mix of a song usually made for the producer after a session in the early 60's. The base material for these discs was aluminum with acetate carefully layered on top. The material (chip) from the cutterhead after recording is highly flamable and was carefully burned in a safe place behind most studios. You will find numerous black spots behind United Sound where we "burned the chip."
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:25 am: |
Check out this site:
http://www.moremusic.co.uk/links/features/acetate.htm
The gist of it is that it is a disc that is cut to preview how a finished cut vinyl record will sound. It is materially very different than a vinyl record since it is a metal disc covered by a layer of acetone.
there are folks around here who can offer a better description than myself or the linked website, but that's the general idea.
Regards,
Ken
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:46 am: |
...and one of those folks is Ed who beat me to the post. 
Regards,
Ken
| By Common (209.2.55.139) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 11:46 am: |
Ed & Livonia,
Thanks a lot! That's pretty interesting! I didn't even know that this was the way records were done before the final product. It says in the link that you can't use any alcohol based solution to clean it. How do you care it then?
And for vinyl: is it true you can use soap & water to clean a vinyl record?
Again, thanks! I just learned something new today. :o)
Peace!
| By skeptic (63.85.105.20) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 12:24 pm: |
Are you the same Common who posted the negative Salon review of SITSOM over on the Temptations' board? It's hard to find negative reviews, I've only seen two.
| By Common (209.2.55.138) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 12:49 pm: |
Skeptic or who ever you maybe,
Yes, I did but I don't consider it a "negative" review. This is someone or a critic mind you, offering their own opinion of what they thought of the movie. BTW, check out Vibe Magazine as well. They have a review too. I got the review off of Soul Patrol, if you are interested. Are you saying that there are only one type of opinion that are allowed to be posted. Now, please explain what is the point you are trying to make? Also, very interesting that you only saw that particular post & not the other posts that are on there. So are you a poster from Imusic whose only purpose is to literally pick on me from every other person on here? I don't appreciate it so leave me alone!
| By Common (209.2.55.138) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 01:30 pm: |
BTW, "skeptic" for someone who is supposedly an accomplished writer, your post to me wasn't very nice. At least, have some guts & put your name to the post. Have a good day!
Peace!
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 01:36 pm: |
Hey, Common:
Don't let folks who don't agree with you get under your skin like this. Itisn't worth your time or intelligence.
Peace,
KevGo
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 01:50 pm: |
OK gang, lets not make this an issue. Perhaps just a little misunderstanding.
| By Common (209.2.55.137) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 03:21 pm: |
It's cool. I would like to get to back to the topic at hand if we could. I would like that very much.
Peace!
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 03:54 pm: |
Only slightly to the left of the topic, there is a cool film on how shellac records were manufactured available at the internet moving images archive. It was produced in 1942 and runs for 19 minutes. I first saw reference to it at mastering engineer Steve Hoffman's website.
It's kind of amazing how long that basic technology held sway for producing pre-recorded music and how relatively little it changed over the years.
The link for that site is:
http://webdev.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=prelinger&collectionid=00132
If you look around the site, they also have a couple of films producerd circa 1957-1958 by RCA about the "new technology" of stereophonic phonograph records.
Regards,
Ken
| By Common (209.2.55.137) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 04:04 pm: |
Hello Livonia,
This is interesting. I can't download the film but from the pics I was looking at, I was wondering if the disc in pic # 6 is what a acetate looks like? Also, I don't know if I'm one of those music "purists" but I, too, prefer vinyl over the CD any day. Even though CD is very convienent, sometimes, the sound quality is a little flat. Does this make sense?
Peace!
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 04:06 pm: |
Oops! I should have posted this first.
Check out the following web site:
http://www.care-and-feeding-of-vinyl.com/
For cleaning of normal vinyl, a 20% isopropyl alcohol solution is fine, but do not try this with an acetate disc or an old-fashioned shellac record.
Regards,
Ken
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 04:08 pm: |
Good Question Common. This could spark a rather lively debate from the likes of Bob O,or Mike Mc.
| By Ritchie (62.254.0.8) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 04:11 pm: |
- in that case, permit me to keep my head down out of the line of fire ;o)
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 05:07 pm: |
On the vinyl vs. CD front, here's my two cents. All things being equal, there's no reason a CD could not capture 99% of the analog warmth that people associate with vinyl along with overcoming many of vinyl's limitations. Unfortunately, a lot of folks mastering CDs these days are not really trying to achieve the analog sound of the original so much as the digital sound of the future. 
I think the Hitsville USA box set is a good example of a very "analog" sounding CD. They apparently used vintage tube gear in the mastering stage which is not all that common anymore. Among recent Motown CD releases, I also think the Marvin & Tammi Complete Duets compilation had a nice warm sound, too.
I think another factor can be that one's turntable/cartridge can sometimes provide a slight but pleasing coloration to the sound that one gets used to after a while that will not be produced by the analog to digital converter in one's CD player.
Of course, I know lots of people who will strongly disagree with most of what I just typed, so don't be afraid to join them.
Regards,
Ken
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 05:14 pm: |
On the contrary Ken. I totally agree with you. I have always held the notion that what goes in comes out in the digital world. So if you want a " warm " mix, then mix " warm ".
| By Vickie (64.236.243.31) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 05:16 pm: |
Common,
I dig you...if you live in Detroit, NY or Philly.
I must meet you when I copme that way..
Vickie
| By M.McLeanTech (66.218.59.43) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 05:54 pm: |
On the subject of cleaning records:
I was forced to deal with this problem as I became involved in transfering old vinyl LP's to CD, during the past couple of years. Cleaning is mandatory because of tiny particles that wedge in the groove and cause skipping in the case a high performance arm equipped with an anti-scating bias device. Even discs that appear to be in very good condition must be cleaned if reliable playback is to be expected.
To make a long story short: After considerable effort, I can report that the record cleaning system (Miracle Record Cleaner) offered by "The Disc Doctor" works very well. It is not cheap, but I am very pleased with the results. Here is the websight:
http://www.discdoc.com/p1.html
I have not tried it on an acetate, but I am going to do so shortly, and if it is successful, I will use it on the Graystone Acetate, since it needs cleaning.
Regarding: "What is an acetate:"
Before the invention of "instantanious recording" in the late 1930's, phonograph record masters were cut in soft wax. The resulting recording could not be played back until it had been plated with metal and a pressing made from the metal part.
The new process used a disc made of aluminum or glass that was coated with nitrocellulous lacquer (I wish that the forum had a spelling corrector.)
In other words, a special kind of paint coating. This coating was soft enough that a groove could be cut in it, but hard enough so that you could play back the resulting disc without metal plating. Hence the term "instantanious recording."
Between the wax era, and the copper era (Direct Metal Mastering, or "DMM," which appeared about 1975, and provided fantastic results until the CD ran the record out of town.), all records were cut with the same basic type of recording blank: a disc made of aluminum or glass that was coated with nitrocellulous lacquer.
As Ed has correctly stated, the chip cut from these blanks burned with great fury.
Some nomenclature usage developed in regard to such instantanious records. They were cut for two distinct purposes:
REFERANCE: Such a disc was intended to be played back for listening purposes.
MASTER: Such a disc was intended to be plated with metal so that a pressing plant could press records for sale to the public.
Other then the degree of precision of the blank, there was no difference between the two types other then the fact that the referance disc would have a label attached to it, while the master would be totally nude.
In order to make it easy to describe the one or the other, the referance type of disc came to be called a "referance acetate" or simply an "acetate," and the master type of disc came to be known as a "master lacquer" or simply a "lacquer."
Thus, an old pro might say: "Now that you have approved the acetate, shall I order lacquers for the plant?" Berry Gordy Jr. might reply: "Dats Cool!"
One thing is for sure, that websight that said that that an acetate is an aluminum blank coated with acetone is out to lunch big time. Acetone is a very thin, clear liquid that is highly volitle. It resembles isopropal alcohol. There is no way that one could make a coating out of acetone! And there is no way that I can spell without a word processor! !@#$%^&*!!!
I hope that this provides a decent answer to the question that opened this thread.
Mike McLean
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 06:06 pm: |
Thank you, Dr. McLean, for the analysis.
KevGo
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 10:03 pm: |
Very nice post Mike. Very informitive to many here I'm sure.
| By Damo (217.39.201.160) on Tuesday, November 19, 2002 - 10:52 pm: |
I still get acetates of my recordings cut before final press. They smell lovely! *a accquired taste!*
They play well for up to 30...possibly 40 plays (max). Then, they sound terrible. But, it's enough for you to get the idea of how it will sound like on vinyl. This enables the producer to make any modifications to the final mix before it is pressed to vinyl.
Also, they are quite expensive to cut...
Expect to pay around $70-80 per disc
| By MEL&THEN SOME (195.219.7.80) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 12:13 am: |
Damo,
I agree,all the acetates that I have,
have a certain smell to them.
Which certainly isnt a bad smell,
Some acetates that I have, that I have had
For years,still have that distinctive aroma about them.
And even after god knows how many plays,
the majority of them still play okeh today.
Best,
Mel.
| By M.McLeanTech (66.218.60.31) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 01:16 am: |
Damo,
Thank you for bringing up the subject of the odor of an instantainious recording blank. This is a subject which reachs right down to rock bottom in the caverns of my soul.
My Dad had a pal (Uncle El: George Elwood Dostie) who used to have a portable disc recorder. It was not very fancy, but it worked. He used to bring it over and he made recordings on little eight inch paper base lacquer coated blanks, which were the standard issue for "home use" in 1942.
Uncle El made several recordings of me when I was 2, 3 , 4, 5, and various other ages. One of his greatest masterpieces was the time he recorded my appearance on WDTR FM, the Detroit Public Schools radio station, when I was eight years old.
At that time, I was in full flower with the syndrome that Ralph Seltzer once described when he told me: "Mike, your head is so full of bullshit that I can't even begin to comprehend where to start the process of establishing a common ground with you."
I still have the "acetate" that Uncle El cut, off the air, in which I claimed (the broadcast took place in 1948) to have built a television reciever. How I ever was able to fight my way out of the fantasy horror pit that my Mom created for me by reading to me from age one all the classics of literature, I will never know.
Talk about a Nerd! On my first day of school, I walked past my Dad, who was sitting in our living room, which looked like an art museum, with 400 year old oil paintings all over the place, and oriental rugs up the wazoo, playing Artur Schnabel recordings of Beethoven Piano Sonatas, and out to walk to school with my school mates.
I said: "Any of you guys ever listened to any Schnabel?"
Trying to be polite, they answered: "I got a Joe DiMaggio card, wanna trade for a Ted Williams?"
I was very confident that I knew what I was talking about: "Oh...., Baseball! (with a withering sneer) I don't lower myself to such meaningless activites."
Of course, they at once beat the shit out of me.
I worked myself up from there.
At any rate, I fell in love with that fantastic aroma of a recording blank when I was two years old. And you know what? Those little beauties still give off that heavenly smell fifty years later. I have some Presto glass base transcriptions here that were cut in 1946, and if you hold it up to your nose, you still can detect that wonderful sweet, utterly exquisite aroma.
A child is very impressionable. I remember going down to my best friends house. Don was one of eight children. His Mother was nuts about Gene Autry.
My Dad had pumped me full of the most strict attitudes about phonograph record care that one could possibly imagine. Don's Mom was kicking back in a broken down chair, relaxing with a glass full of ice, which she like to chew. My folks had muttered about how they felt that it was sloppy for a woman to have such a large family.
I wanted to please her, so I ran over to the phonograph and pulled out the one that I knew was her favorite: "Back In The Saddle Again" sung by Gene Autry. I looked at the 10 inch 78: It was in horrible condition. I wretched in horror as I realized that I was in a place where people treated phonograph records in the same way that a harlot treats her body.
I put the record on, and turned to look at her and see if she was pleased and approving. She slouched back in the "Lazy Boy" type chair, and indicated, by a sensious look on her face, that she was delighted. She was wearing tight slacks. My eyes drifted, and alighted on the fabric covering her lower abdominal area.
Just then, the aroma of dirty diapers (after all, she had more babies then Carters got pills) hit my nose. Suddenly, the horror of all this fused in an impression of contempt for woman that has haunted me all my life.
Of course, this emotional scar is totally irrational. Don's Mom was doing the right thing: She provided many Sons for the Vietnam war. Just the same, I have never been able to rid myself of that feeling that the aroma of dirty diapers, cheap music, and scratched up phonograph records is the very essence of what a woman is all about.
I am thankful that I have been able to build a counterbalance, over the years, that holds a woman in very high esteem.
When I contimplate the late Doris Holland, I get a feeling of utter respect and worship, that is the very antitithis of that ammonia aroma horror with the horrible record scratch.
And yet, I honor Don's Mom as well: I love to chew on ice.
Mike McLean
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 08:47 am: |
Mike,
I liked your youthful recording story. It reminded me of an open reel tape my grandfather played for me about ten years ago of myself when I was three years old (circa 1972). 3-year old me keeps repeating over and over. "I want to make one thing perfectly clear. I'm Nixon. I'm Nixon!". It is perhaps the scariest thing I have ever heard on tape. Even scarier, my grandfather has since passed on and I have no idea of the whereabouts of the tape.
Regards,
Ken
| By g wiz (68.43.160.189) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 09:35 am: |
hello
i have a friend that has a acetate of sam the sham's "wolly bully" and a few others are they worth much to collectors (it can be had) he doesnt know what its worth ,
thanks
glenn
| By frankj (212.159.70.184) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 10:11 am: |
I own quite a few acetates and if they are in good condition they can sound wonderful. I suppose this is just a result of being a step closer to the original source material than the 45. One in particular, Doris Troys fabulous "I'll Do Anything" is particularly good as it removes a trace of glassy top end distortion from the 45 and really opens things up. I have noticed very good effects with a few others too. I use quite an expensive rig but believe it is obvious enough that the average set up would show it just as well. I suppose the major problem is longevity or the lack of it, particularly with unissued material or alternate cuts. These days though you can simply commit them to your favourite digital format although for me, you still can't beat the joy of spinning the real item.
| By Ritchie (62.254.0.8) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 10:56 am: |
Confession time - I own just one (single-sided) acetate, which has a "Bell Sound, New York" label. I acquired the disc several years ago by chance. I honestly never play it, as I'm not a fan of Jimi Hendrix!
| By Common (209.2.55.139) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 12:46 pm: |
Hello everyone,
I just printed out this post because it is chockful of information. Wow! Thanks so much for responding to this thread. I'll admit it's kind of hard to digest it all, but I'm trying.
M.McClean: Thanks alot for offering your expertise, especially on how to clean records. I'm trying to figure out a way to save my mom's old records, which she, unfortunately, didn't take good care of. (Sorry mom! lol). Thanks for the link as well.
Vicki: Hey, I'm diggin you too & would love to meet you if you ever swing by the NYC area. :o)
Another question for the forum: Is it true that the material to produce vinyl in other countries is not as good as the ones produced here?
Peace!
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 09:19 pm: |
Regarding vinal quality...It is most probably the other way around. Vinal, in the U.S. is, and has been.in a sad state of affairs because of EPA regulations on the use of plastic additives, believed to cause cancer. For this reason formulation changed in the U.S in the late 70's, causing noise problems. Most of the good European pressing I have are of much better quality than US pressings. (Mind you, most are classical product.)
Vinal is pretty much a lost cause today because a well mastered CD (not the PROCESSED, HIGH LEVEL, DISTORTED POP CRAP MOST OF THE MAJORS ARE DOING), has it hands down over any vinal product. There are simply less things to go wrong in the manufacturing process.
The majority of complaints I hear regarding poor CD audio quality can be related directly to misuse of the digital recording medium by knob-jockeys who call themselves engineers, usually by over equalization and dynamics processing and outright clipping.
Ralph is 100% correct, the digital media, if used properly, is probably the most pristine audio media delivery system we have ever had. People complain about the "cold" sound are simply misusing the media. Ralph hit it on the head. If you want warm sound, mix it warm, that is what you will get. Talk to any technically knowledgeable audio engineer,(not a knob jockey), and you will get the same answer. Sadily, there are very few of us left The problem today is great tools are being misused.
Sadly, this is the state of the industry today.
Pax,
Ed Wolfrum
| By Vickie (152.163.188.68) on Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - 10:07 pm: |
This has been a most interesting thread - I am glad that I too know all the right lingo and terms...It was the forum that taught me what an acetate was too Common...
There's so much knowledge here - goes far beyond
just loving the music..you begin to admire and respect it in a whole new way because some of the key players are real and they are here on the forum...You don't realize when you are little and you like a song what went into it..It's so cool to find things out about music I have loved for at least 25-30 years.
Vickie
| By Frankj (212.159.70.184) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 07:03 am: |
Ed is right. Vinyl quality in the UK, particularly on 45s has always been of a very high standard across the industry generally and I admit myself to a preference for a uk copy where available right back to 50s material.
As a confirmed vinyl collector I'd have to argue that there was still mileage in the medium. However you have to say from a convenience point of view digital wins hands down. I think the points Ed and Ralph make about great tools misused is probably right. The growth in home recording via digital seems to have produced a generation of instant experts who feel they have little to learn other than mechanical processes. Using insight into music itself sadly sometimes seems low on the list of priorities where often the latest gee whiz effects rate highest.
Frankj
| By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 07:20 am: |
Frankj - I agree. Use the 'home studio' for rough demo purposes and then go to the professionals to play instruments and master/mix the product. I know my limitations, but I must say, trying to obtain professional musicians and singers is not easy, when you are an unknown with a mission! I use my sequencer at home to experiment and make something that will hopefully lead me to the correct environment, to help my compositions sound like I want them to, when presenting them to who ever. This year, I have rediscovered so much about Motown and Philly from the forum, that I simply want my songs to have a live feel and without midi timing and plug ins. If you listen to that instrumental version of 'You keep me hanging on' on the SITSOM CD, as it is, I feel it is a number one now, never mind a hit 30 years ago. I am about to cease my subscription to the music computer magazines, which keep telling me, my equipment is out of date, or that Emagic have jumped ship to the AppleMac and left us PC goers in the learch. I now favour old school and respect our professional friends here on the forum for their advice, after all that is their business and they know it well enough to have made an impact all those years ago and indeed still am today.
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 09:35 am: |
Carl and Frank,
As my brother has always maintained....the toys are there for the engineer to use. Not to use the engineer.
| By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 10:36 am: |
Too true Ralph. I visited a studio here in Chiswick this year to checkout the equipment. It appears to be well kitted out, but I had no idea what I was looking at. I took a home made cd of some of my stuff to show him what I was up to and the last few tracks skipped a bit on his player. He asked me what speed did I burn them on? There was the answer - x 8! He said it is better to burn at a lower speed/bit rate for a good copy. I thought I knew about computers and that he would not. Not only does he operate a nice studio, but knows his stuff. He was telling me at one stage in the early seventies, when all the glam rock hits were charting, him and his wife were on holiday and saw 'Top of the Pops' on BBC 1. He reckoned he had engineered nearly all the tracks played on that programme! He was a young engineer on the Isle of Wight concert where Jimmy Hendrix appeared. He was very encouraging and at one stage his eyebrows went up when he heard some of my stuff. He maybe thought it was crap, but he said interesting comments which made it well worh the visit. All I need now is some keen youngsters who love old school and are prepared to work hard and off we go - grunt grunt grunt, was that a flying pig??
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 11:14 am: |
Let's not knock the technical capabilities of today's gear. The tools today are far better than anything that Russ, Ralph, Clay, Bob, Mike or I EVER had years ago. Used properly, anyone can, at reasonable prices, buy the tools to make far better product than we ever had. Kooster, Paul, the Record Plant crew and I worked hard on the SISOM film using those tools. The west coast post production people with Paul and Alan did a wonderful job, again with todays tools, and the fine results can be heard in the SISOM film. However, as may be pragmatically observed in most of the current products, this is seldom the case. Today's product stinks, technically and musically.
Russ, Ralph, Mike and the rest of us "nerds" have written at length about the problem. Part of the problem is now Schools, Universities and Colleges are teaching IMPROPER TECHNIQUE. I've seen the textbooks. This CRAP is what students are learning. Part of the reason is that those teaching and writing have never really worked in the real world making real records. And it is being driven by those selling the equipment and making big money by creating misuse and NEED. Today's mixers have little technical knowledge. Many have never done a straight ahead session, direct to stereo with a real orchestra, band or rhythm section all at one time. They have never experienced the synergy of great players working together. They have never really learned how to MIX; they have no concept of what a real orchestra or band sound like in a fine hall and therefore cannot duplicate its feel or sound, and they additionally have become too dependent on the equipment and lack real technical knowledge and musical mixing skills. Russ said it, "The gear runs them, they don't run the gear"
Right on RUSS & RALPH!!!
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 11:22 am: |
Just before I saw this last post I was thinking how fortunate we are at SD to have the technical expertise of three industry GIANTS. Ed Wolfrum, Bob Ohlsson and Mike McLean. When they speak, we all should listen.
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 11:28 am: |
Ed,
To validte your point: Russ tells the story of a young promising engineer working for him at Motown L.A. Russ is planning on taking the upcoming Saturday off. A string session is booked for that day and the young engineer assures Russ that he can handle it.
Come Saturday morning Russ gets an emergency phone call at home. The Young engineer is in a state of panic. Musicians are showing up with violin shaped cases and such. He was expecting a synth player that would use a string patch for the session. Naturally Russ beat it down to the studio to do the actual string date.
| By MEL&THEN SOME (195.219.7.7) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 12:52 pm: |
Ralph,
when you said the guy saw violin shaped cases and started to panic,I started to think of something completly different(ho,ho).
Mel.
| By Common (209.2.55.139) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 01:14 pm: |
Hello everyone,
Ralph: There is a wealth of info here that is really amazing. I had no idea, as Vicki stated, just how much goes into just creating a record. I know I wouldn't see it the same way again.
Carl: You mentioned something interesting in your post. You said:
"...I took a home made cd of some of my stuff to show him what I was up to and the last few tracks skipped a bit on his player. He asked me what speed did I burn them on? There was the answer - x 8! He said it is better to burn at a lower speed/bit rate for a good copy"
There are CD's that burn at different speeds, so is your friend saying that it is better that the CD R/RW that you purchase should be at a lower speed? Or a burner itself?
Vicki: I totally agree with you. You'll never see records the same way again. This is very insightful how the whole recording process works.
Peace!
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 01:25 pm: |
Mel:
I had to catch myself from falling over my chair in hysterics (rat-a-tat-tat!)....
Ralph, Ed, Russ & Mike:
My nephew is graduating from Brown University in 2003 and his degree is in Computer Music. He wants to work as an audio engineer in a recording studio or production house. While he may be versed in Pro Tools, Peak, Cubase, Finale and has used audio boards from SSL'S to Neve & Mackie, I feel that he needs more experience in the older techologies as well (he says he's recorded on a Studer multi-track reel to reel but not for a long period of time). For example, when I quizzed him on "tape baking" he asked me what that meant.
Is there any advice you can give that I could pass on to him? I really want him to succeed but I feel that his education may have been somewhat limited and I may have to bring him up to speed on things.
Thank you so much,
KevGo
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:01 pm: |
Mel,
Maybe that explains it. The young engineer needed my Sicilian brother there because he was more than likely familiar with " violin shaped cases ".
| By MEL&THEN SOME (195.219.7.85) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:07 pm: |
Hey Ralph,Kev,
As in the lyrics of those magical
Robin's/Coaster's,
pass the dynamite over,
cos'the f.f.f.fuse is lit.
and if ever I had the great pleasure of meeting
either of you,
then I know,
there would be a riot goin' on.
Mel.
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:09 pm: |
There we go again Ralph, putting the hammer down on Russ. Russ simply knew how to use those cases to store "tools."
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:20 pm: |
Hello Kev,
If you want give me a call sometime at 248.544-1793 and I will be happy to discuss analog v. digital and the tools of today.
There are some interesting post on the recording equipment thread from Mike and myself on this subject as well.
Has your young nephew ever done a direct, straight ahead session, with real players, in a good room...without processing? If not, he will NEVER understand what it is all about. Russ, Bob, Bob DeOleans, Mike and the rest of the "OLD FARTS" on the forum cut out teeth on these real time sessions. With 3 and 4 tracks you learned how to mix. This is where the synergy come out between the players and the mixer. This is where the excitement come to play. I still do most jazz and classical sessions direct to stereo.
| By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:30 pm: |
Ralph/Ed - yep, I do my best and understand what you guys talk about technically and it is appreciated, but there is no way I can �mix� on my pc, if I have never done it the old fashioned way. I agree, the hardware and software is excellent, but to be honest, I would rather not tinker about with it when I could be writing my songs. I am not saying I should not investigate and understand which I do of course, but when I see these TV capture cards for example, talking about Chroma and luma keying to the man in the street who has no idea why it is there, it tickles me. Yes, they can learn, but I have just noticed the Microsoft spell checker does not even know what the terms mean!!
There was a time when I wanted to work in a studio, but just took the TV route instead. Infact, 2 years ago I walked into the Powerhouse studios, here in Chiswick, off the street, in my shorts, unshaven and having just eaten a great Italian ice cream from Fouberts down the road in about 75 deg. I wanted to go in and pester them to let me sweep the floor, make the teas and do general trainee duties to see what they got up to. I was prepared, on my days off, to give my time free of charge and learn studio techniques and etiquette! In the confusion, as I gave them my history, I was asked do I know what 'QC' was? I said, yes, quality control as in the movies context. Then I was asked do I know what a 'sync pulse' was? I said yes and explained blanking, sync pulses and the like. They offered me a job there and then in the television department dubbing Digi Betacam to various formats and also DVD authoring. I said thank you, but I was not interested in TV, unless it was a musical issue. I went home, wrote and thanked them for their time. Maybe I should pluck up courage and go again, but this time be a little more persuasive about the studio stuff. You never know, I might Tina Turner who has recorded there!
Common - re the CD burning. I have heard of this before. In the past, with older software and PC's, it was suggested to burn the CD's as slow as possible to avoid digital splats and glitching. I know I have many commercial CD's with splats on at home. Maybe these days� things are not so bad. I have only ever had one vinyl with a glitch on in my whole life.
This is such a good thread. Well done Common for asking help from the guys here that do know. Talking of which, does anybody know where the group Run DMC got their name from?
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 02:41 pm: |
Ed:
Thank you. I will definitely give you a call soon. I would also like my nephew to contact you as well (either phone or email).
I remember recording a live to two-track concert with the Ithaca College Orchestra in 1987 (direct to reel-to-reel) using two Neumann mics (may have been U87's - I have to check the tape box)suspended in the air. The sound was unbelieveable (the concert was in an auditorium). That's something I hope my nephew had an opportunity to learn & appreciate.
Thanks again, Ed.
KevGo
| By Livonia Ken (136.2.1.153) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 03:10 pm: |
Carl,
A Run-DMC question? Okay. I believe the group was named by combining the nicknames of the two lead rappers. Joseph Simmons was "Run" and Darryl McDaniel was "DMC".
Regards,
Ken
| By Carl Dixon London (62.31.32.130) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 03:50 pm: |
Livonia Ken - well, you could be right in that case, but I heard that one of them used to work for a TV company and on a Betcam SP VTR there is a facilty called DMC ( direct motion control) for slo mo's, before the days of 'controllers'. When a studio director would call for the action replay he would say: run dmc, then 'freeze' if he wanted to animate out of a still. But, my source could be wrong.
| By M.McLeanTech (66.218.59.120) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 04:51 pm: |
Regarding (on this thread):
By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 01:25 am:
My comments:
The lack in your nephew's education that you are so concerned about will not be helped by experience using antique (and obsolete) recording equipment. That would be like saying that it would help General Norman Schwartzkoff (SP?) to have him fire a WW1 bolt action infantry rifle.
What is needed is activity that will redirect his focus, so as to round him out.
To me, one of the most powerful phrases is "The recording and reproduction of sound." There is a wonderful implication in these words that brings to mind the image of a recording engineer who goes out from his laboratory, into the world, and finds some wonderful sound to capture with his recording apparatus.
When he returns to his laboratory, he reproduces the sound recording in his special laboratory quality reproduction system and makes critical judgments as to the fidelity of the reproduction.
The implication is that the process has made possible the transportation of the listener back to the scene where the original wonderful sound existed.
The late Emory Cook went out in the late 1940's and recorded the sounds of steam locomotives. The resulting Cook Laboratories "Sounds Of Our Times" 10 inch red vinyl LP "Rail Dynamics" was an absolute sensation at the 1949 audio fair, and the era of "high fidelity" was born.
I remember those days with great fondness. I was right there on the scene, thanks to my Dad, who loved to hang around audio equipment dealers in search of a better phonograph.
I met Emory Cook several times at AES shows over the years. I felt like I was meeting a God. He died just a few months ago. I was astonished to learn that he was born in 1915, the same year as my dear wife Helen, who died last February. I was born in 1940. Soon I will become emotionally mature enough to pass for over 21.
A person with that old spirit of Emory Cook thinks in terms of finding a good sound and capturing it, as is, for reproduction later. He takes his equipment to a symphony hall and records a great concert. Or to a jazz club and records a great gig. Or to a railroad bridge on a foggy night and records a great steam engine.
He is not trying to modify the sound. On the contrary, he is trying to capture it without modification. This is the essence of what is missing from the spirit of todays recording folks.
Not that this is the answer to all problems. We still need some of the modern techniques. However, if one is so lacking in understand of this classic perspective that he has no clue, it can result in an effect which might be called "Mixer's scurvy," to draw an analogy with lack of vitamin C.
If one is bringing back rare animals to a zoo, it is well and good to give the ardvark a shot to protect it from viral ardvarkitis, but it is going too far to assemble a Frankenstein's Monster out of an ardvark, a howler monkey, an anteater, and a three towed sloath, and show up proudly at the zoo with this abortion.
When I listen to some of todays recordings, this is what comes to mind. The problem is that recording people today need to round out their perspective by grasping the spirit of Emory Cook.
It only costs a few thousand dollars to purchase everything needed to do a state of the art adventure into this kind of sound recording and reproduction. The most expensive part is the time and effort required to go out and make the recordings.
Such time and effort is very well spent if one is going to be a great Doctor, instead of a Dr. Frankenstein.
Mike McLean
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 05:45 pm: |
Mike:
Thank you for your words of wisodom as always. I'll make sure he reads your posting.
Regards,
KevGo
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 06:17 pm: |
Again, Right on Mike!!!
However, there can be some nice "sounding" records that do not reflect the total purist phylosophy.
I'm sorry if this offends anyone but I must me honest.
The perfect example of this "Mixer's scurvy," disease can be found on the SISOM CD which I just purchased today. The FILM mix is wonderfully and naturally balanced with good dynamics and a wonderfully accurate feel. It captures, as much as can be done with multi-track technology, the feel of the performance. The CD, I will assume done from the same multi-track master tape, is overly EQed, grossly processed, exhibits the typical clipped CD level game that has become popular. It is harsh and "in your face" and exhibits all of the characteristics of overprocessed digital audio. It is rather uncomfortable to listen to.
Normally, I take CD's like this back and demand my money back. In this case, I will keep it because I want the work of the guys to be successful and because of my respect for Alan Slutsky and the sacrifices he and all have made to make this project successful. Not only that, it is a wonderful example to use.
The music is wonderful, like always, but the mix results do not reflect the feel or perspective of the original.
In the recent issue of Audio Media Magazine (November 2002, Pg. 46) This issue was addressed head on. I will quote it directly:
"The whole audio economy is going to go down the drain because of stagnation," says label owner David Chesky (Chesky Records), "There's no excitement anymore" Ludwig astutely blames some of the disinterest on the oft-discussed (and oft-ignored) technical pheomenon of the digital age: "About 8 years ago digital domain compressor/limiters with "look ahead" abilities that allowed 'zero' attack time became available. The general levels of CDs have subsequently increased increased by an alarming amount, sucking the life and longevity out of almost all commercially competing recordings."
Thank goodness these didn't exist when the Beatles and Stones (and may I add my comment "THE FUNK BROTHERS") were first recording or no one would ever want to go back and hear them again! I personally feel the compression mania is somewhat responsible for the record industry losing a hold on the music buying public, as 'loudness for loudness sake' has replaced musicality. Never in the history of the human race have people heard music in such a highly compressed state."
These engineers quoted in the article are concerned as well.
Are you listening Harry?
Russ, Ralph, Mike, Bob, nerd gang ... have you seen the film and auditioned the CD? What are your thoughts?
Sorry, I got so long winded. This project hit a nerve as I was part of it.
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 08:20 pm: |
Ed,
I haven't seen the movie yet nor have I heard the CD. A couple of weeks ago Fred Saxon was up for a visit and he brought a tape of various clips of the movie. ( I should mention at this point that Fred does an entertainment type TV show where he reviews movies and interviews movie stars.Fred is so knocked out with the movie that his show is giving away 100 tickets for SITSOM ) One of the days Fred was here Russ came in. The three of us watched the clips together and commented favorably on the mixes in the movie.Joan Osborn's rendition of What Becomes Of The Lonely Hearted just blows me away. The sound of the track is sensational.
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 08:23 pm: |
OOOPS! I meant What Becomes Of The� BROKEN Hearted!!!
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 08:36 pm: |
Hello Ralph,
I have seen the film and was most impressed with the audio production and quality. This is what prompted me to by the CD. The CD is a complete disappointment.
Sue, who is certainly not a professional but has been around me enough to know good audio, heard the film and, umprompted by me walked in while I was auditioning it on an accurate monitoring system and said "What did they do to sound?"
Sadly, this affects the wonderful performance by many of the artists.
See the film, its great!!! I cannot describe how happy I was. The CD... it hurts. Yours, and the rest of the "nerd brothers" comments are solicited.
Ed
| By Livonia Ken (66.2.148.64) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 08:54 pm: |
Speaking of limiting/compression,I made a mini web-page illustrating waveforms from various CD masterings of the Supremes/Temptations Duet "I'm Gonna Make You Love Me". I was trying to illustrate what I thought was a very limited/compressed sounding 2001 Supremes Anthology, and that track was a good one to compare because it appeared on several different CDs I owned.
The link is:
http://www.geocities.com/nwca_48152//compression_illustration.htm
For the record, my favorite CD mastering of that track was on the Tempations box set. Your mileage (and eq preference) may vary.
Regards,
Ken
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 09:46 pm: |
Ed,
Is it possible to pull the thing back in for a re-mix? If it is as bad as you are saying, this could be a real problem. This is too important for any slip-ups. I'd like to hear additional comments on this. Rather disturbing.
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 10:50 pm: |
Ralph,
I don't know what can be done. Perhaps a remix is the answer.
Pick up a copy and bounce it off Russ too. I'm concerned for the same reason you are. This is too important a project to have it sound like the rest of the garbage out there.
Ed
| By Frankj (212.159.70.184) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 01:40 am: |
Yikes Ken. Surely even the most ham fisted home recorder would not have tolerated a waveform that looked remotely as bad as that from the anthology in your website illustration. You mean someone did that on purpose and even got paid for it???
| By Livonia Ken (216.203.223.108) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 02:18 am: |
Frank,
The thing I don't get is that the same mastering engineer has done some excellent work with no such problems before and after this release. Perhaps a client or executive was demanding that it be "louder".
Regards,
Ken
| By M.McLeanTech (66.218.59.190) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 04:14 am: |
Refering to (on this thread):
By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Thursday, November 21, 2002 - 11:14 pm:
and
Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 06:17 am:
My comments:
Ed, you have written beautifully, and with passion, about many things that we feel about the "soul" of high quality sound recording. I wish that I had the time to be able to gush all over you with the praise that you have coming for 99.9 % of your remarks.
However, there is one thing that "sticks in my craw" just a bit:
One thing that I can't stand is the tendency for reality to get flushed down the old poop chute because of the tendency for people to put a "spin" on it.
My all time pet peeve is the evolution of the application of the word "topology" to electronics: From a perfectly reasonable word usage that filled a need, "topology" has become a horrendous abortion that everyone throws around as a "sales hype cure all" buzz word. Even the all mighty Dolby Laboratorys has put into print the ghastly mis-use of this word.
The only other word that even approachs the same level of horror is "Turbo." For a while it seemed like we had turbo-burgers, turbo panty liners, and turbo bibles.
"Topography" is defined as follows (check the dictionary):
The science of drawing on maps and charts or otherwise representing the surface features of a region, including hills, valleys, rivers, lakes, canals, bridges, roads, cities, Etc.
"Topology" is defined:
The topography of a place or entity.
From the very beginning of electricity, back when Samuel F. B. Morse was setting up the telegraph to signal to Clint Eastwood that the bad guys were coming, there has been such a thing as a "CIRCUIT CONFIGURATION."
The CIRCUIT CONFIGURATION of the telegraph consisted of a series connected circuit consisting of an open circuit switch (the telegraph key, which the sender used to tap out the message, using Morse code,) an electromagnet coil which induced magnetic flux which pulled an iron armature until it struck an anvil to make a "click," and a power source, the electro-chemical cell (known as a "battery" today) which provided the power required to move the anvil.
Today, thanks to the spin, this would be explained as follows: Revolutionary topology permits the sender of the message to communicate with the listener, even though he is hundreds of miles distant!
How about this one: The Ray-O-Vac flashlight makes use of the new "series" topology, in which two cells, a switch, and a light bulb permit limitless control of the operation of the light by the user.
It's enough to make one puke, to see the misuse of the word topology in today's electronics scene.
How did this sewage spill come to be? Very simple.
In the mid 1960's when the first integrated circuits were being designed and built, some engineers, who spent a lot of time designing the many photo masks that were used to build up the many layers required to connect up a complex electronic circuit on a tiny substrate of silicon, found themselves at a loss for words regarding the subject with which they were trying to deal.
The very complex CIRCUIT CONFIGURATION that they were trying to achieve in a silicon integrated circuit chip involved vast interconnections between layers, up and down, to complete all the circuit paths. This special problem, of working out the problems of how to interconnect all the circuit connections, from the top to the bottom of the stack of photo deposited layers, needed a word to quickly define the subject, just as "acetate" and "lacquer" had helped people in the record business. "Topology" was an exactly precise word (check carefully the dictionary definitions above: the fact is that even though an IC is very tiny, the definition of "topology" is entirely correct: The tiny little chip has ups and downs, just like the topography of the planet earth, and this is the essence of how the word was originally applied by the scientists at the early semiconductor companys.
The 1972 edition of the Howard W. Sams "Dictionary of Electronics" defines topology as follows:
Topology - The surface layout of the elements comprising an IC.
The integrated circuit, was, and has continued to be, an absolute sensation in the world of electronics. The hype, and "spin" that was pumped into promoting this technology took hold of the imagination of the public. The word "topology" had an exotic atmosphere which made great ad copy.
Before long, the proper term "circuit configuration" had been replaced with "topology" simply because it sounded high tech and hip, after Madison Avenue had finished putting the "spin" on it. Basically, the word got raped in just the same way that the automoble got raped by putting fins on the fenders and music got raped by....... Never mind! That is beside the point!
Today, virtually anything that you read about an electronic circuit configuration will use the word "topology" as a substitute for "circuit configuration." It is tragedy, and a magnificent demonstration of the wisdom of P.T. Barnum's immortal words: "There is a sucker born every minute!"
Ed, in the first of the above postings that I refered to, you said, and I quote (paste):
START PASTE IN
Russ, Ralph, Mike and the rest of us "nerds" have written at length about the problem.
END PASTE IN
In the second of the above postings that I refered to, you said:
START PASTE IN
Russ, Ralph, Mike, Bob, nerd gang ... have you seen the film and auditioned the CD?
END PASTE IN
Ed, the term "NERD BROTHERS" was originated by me to suggest, to make a humorous point, that the Technical Engineering Department at Motown was a bunch of technical nerds who worked to provide what was needed, but were mostly forgotten.
BY DEFINITION (!!): A Nerd Brother would need to be someone who worked with a soldering iron, soldering wires inside a piece of electronic equipment, or used test equipment such a voltmeters, distortion analizers, signal generators, and oscilloscopes, or who repaired machines and equipment.
Yet you have included Russ, Ralph, Mike, and the nerd gang, in your referances to this "Nerd" referance. While it is possible that Russ and Ralph may have soldered a wire at one time or another, I would hardly define them as electronics people. Further, as far as I know, no members of the "Nerd Brothers," as I originally defined them, are followers of the forum.
It is clear that you are, by following your own emotional drift, putting on pressure to put a "spin" on the meaning of Nerd, in the context of this forum.
Back off! The Nerd Brothers are the soldering iron jockys, just as topology was about up and down connections. Don't try to spin the Nerds around to suit your fantasies by implying that the Nerds are your latest pals on the forum.
Nomenclature is important, just as is natural sound quality in recording. To put a spin on the meaning of a word is to have word scurvy, just as to make a hyped up ghastly mix with too much Eq. and compression is mixer scurvy.
I am sure that you will recognize my point, and that there will be no hard feelings.
Sincerely,
Mike McLean
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 09:53 am: |
Hey Mike,
Are you having a slow day pal???
| By Ed Wolfrum (165.247.228.73) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 09:55 am: |
Hello Mike,
My reference was just that...I want the input of Ralph, Clay...the mixers, plus those of us old school engineers who had technical background and mixed as well, such as Ken Sands, Russ Terrana, Bob Dennis, and myself, as well as the "nerd brother." We all need to provide input on these matters. I may have not made that clear but my intent in that sentence was that. Clay called me and understood it as that, but I should have perhaps been more precise to suit you. Sorry.
I also might make a correction Mike. When Bob and I brought Russ in at Golden World, his first job in audio, it was because of his training at Electronics Institute of Technology. Russ has technical background and he was instrumental in the install of the new Terra Shirma console when Bill Beltz, Milan, Ralph, and I put it in. He also helped me at United when Jimmy and I put in the new 35MM film recorder and set up the Scully Lathe.
It appears Motown, probably because of Lawrence Horn's perspective that Russ was a mixer, never took advantage of those skills.
Ed
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 10:02 am: |
I think the situation with the SITSOM CD needs to be addressed. I have not heard it yet so my comments are not valid at this time. Ed Wolfrum is concerned and that alone is enough to make me wonder what might be wrong. I would like to hear additional comments from any who have the CD. If Alan or Harry are around, are you guys aware of a possible problem? This thread is getting rather long and I will soon add an additional thread but I am holding for moment.
| By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 01:42 pm: |
Ralph:
I've seen the film and heard the CD.
Is there a difference? You bet.
At the Apollo, they played the CD through the sound system prior to the screening and it sounded alright, not dynamic but good.
The film audio was dynamite! Full, rich and explosive - it caught every nuance of the Funks' musicianship.
While I'm for advancement of technology, I'm also a stickler for consistancy. If I hear music in a movie sounding full, rich & well engineered, I'm gonna expect the CD to sound the same. For example, when Touchstone Films used Ike & Tina's "River Deep Mountain High" for the film "What's Love Got To Do With It," they used a remastered mono mix Phil Spector created for his boxed set and Tina Turner's "Simply The Best" anthology.
The bottom line is that the music should match all around. Maybe HW & company can explain their side of the coin before we go further in the debate.
Regards,
KevGo
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 01:51 pm: |
Thanks Kev,
I talked at length on the phone last night with Ed Wolfrum about this. What I don't understand is why the movie soundtrack was not used for the CD. I also am waiting to get input from others before determining what the problem may be and how serious it is.
| By Ralph (209.240.198.62) on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 01:54 pm: |
This thread is a little long. Lets continue this on a new thread...HELP 2.....THIS THREAD IS CLOSED.....000000000000000000CLOSED...GO TO HELP 2............