DAT-heads Digest #472

Contents:
  ISO-New Order tour USA 2005 (Spyro)
  Re: mastering vs. remastering ("Gary Davis")
  Re: Remastering help (Clark Guy)
  Remastering? ("Martin Klingmeyer")
  FS: Tascam DA 20 MK II Mint (Keith Bode)
  ISO: The Necks (Mike Vescovo)
  Re: Re: Remastering help (Maria Aguirre)
  "DSBD" (Jeff Lester)
  Millencolin taping policy? ("Gary Davis")


From: Spyro <spyro@senet.com.au>
Subject: ISO-New Order tour USA 2005
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 00:05:43 +0930

After some of these shows if anyone is taping.
Please get in touch
Spyro





From: "Gary Davis" <g@hoxnet.com>
Subject: Re: mastering vs. remastering
Reply-to: g@hoxnet.com
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 07:40:35 -0700

I agree in part that editing/sweetening a show rather than sending 
out a "clone" of the original tape is better called "Mastering" than 
"Remastering."  Remastering implies that you are doing it for the 
second time.  But, as the term "remastering" has seem to stick, I 
think it adequately describes the process.

The DAT-heads term that annoys me is to call a "Matrix 
Recording" a mix of soundboard and mics.  A "Matrix recording," if 
anything, would mean a special mix set up on the "matrix" on a 
soundboard, ie, a mix different than the recording sent to the 
house.  The correct term for a sbd/aud mix is just that: a sbd/aud 
mix.

--Gary



From: Clark Guy <guy.clark@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: Remastering help
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 11:08:56 -0500 

HI, Keith!

I suppose we are discussing semantics here, but to me "mastering" means
creating a "Master" something, in this case recording.   ie, when I record
one of my orchestra or brass band concerts, I transfer the DAT recording to
my computer, and do various things to the raw .WAV file, like fade in and
out at beginning and end, respectively, cut out excessive silences between
numbers, split it into two halves if too long for a single CD, etc.  For
that master .WAV file, I create a cue sheet for CD track numbers.  I then
have a set of master files from which I can burn CD copies.

In the event that I found that I needed to go back and do something to the
existing master, like normalize it, or remove the conductor's talking
between numbers, I go through a second iteration of the process to create a
new master, thus, I am REmastering the recording.

If I were to take one of my old open reel recordings of a performance (of
which I'd made cassettes at one time), rather than burn a CD from the
cassette master (assuming I can still FIND the cassette master ;-) ) I'll
play the "master" reel tape(s) into my computer, and go through the above
process, and REmaster the concert.

In short, if one is creating a new "master" recording from which duplicates
will be made, then "Remastered" is an appropriate adjective to describe the
recording.

That's my take on the semantics, anyway!

Guy Clark

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


From: Keith Bode <tunakebo@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Remastering help
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 12:00:04 -0700

A few years ago the word "remastering" became popular to use.  Frankly, 
the way I've seen it used is pretty abusive of the people who do master, 
or transfer shows.  To me the word means "Master again".  I don't 
believe I've ever seen the word used in that context.  To use Wavelab, 
CEP, Sound Forge and perform edits, is just that editing.   There is 
nothing wrong with editing, when needed or wanted, but I understand 
Mastering as transferring music from one format to another.  
<snip>

Keith
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



From: "Martin Klingmeyer" <martinwk@ptd.net>
Subject: Remastering?
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 12:50:05 -0400

I think Bob Ludwig says it best: "Mastering is the technical and creative
act of balancing, equalizing and enhancing, analog or digital tapes so that
the finished product will have attained the maximum musicality and
competitiveness in the open market."

There is also an element that Bob leaves out -the prepping for replication;
perhaps it's too obvious.  Mastering involves sequencing and making sure
that 12 tracks theat may have been recorded at 12 different places by 12
different people have an "appearance" of uniformity.  The tracks are in the
right order, appropriately loud and balanced, and in a format ready for
replication.

To some degree I think it is unfortunate that the wonders of modern software
have created a blur in this art-form, and it often goes unappreciated.

Personally I think editing can take place at any step in the process;
recording, mixing or mastering.

Insofar as "remastering" is concerned it seems to be a nonsense word.  My
spell checker even flags it.

-M

> A few years ago the word "remastering" became popular to use.  Frankly,
> the way I've seen it used is pretty abusive of the people who do master,
> or transfer shows.  To me the word means "Master again".




From: Keith Bode <tunakebo@verizon.net>
Subject: FS: Tascam DA 20 MK II Mint
Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 11:29:43 -0700

With 2 DAT decks in a rack mount cabinet, I need cash more than I need 
the deck.  The deck is absolutely mint.  I bought it from someone who 
said they bought it and never used it.  That seemed a little tough to 
believe, but when I got it, it appeared brand new, as it does now.  I 
haven't had 20 tapes in it, and it works perfectly.  I have the remote 
and the owners manual here someplace, and will include it.  This is the 
Second DAT deck I have currently, and it is mint as ypu can find.  
Unfortunately a need for cash forces sale.  I am firm, and pretty low on 
the selling price, at $200.  If you are interested please contact me off 
list, shipping will be $25, as I will pack the deck in a new box and us 
new styrofoam board to cushion it, so the box will be bullet proof.  Yhe 
other deck I have is a Sony PCM R-500, so I'm letting the DA 20 MkII 
go.  I will include some tapes of some LP's I love, like an assortment 
of some Blues, about 4 tapes.  I can dub a few more to close the deal, 
and include 2 DG15CL head cleaning tapes.

Keith



From: Mike Vescovo <shackaholic@gmail.com>
Subject: ISO: The Necks
Reply-To: Mike Vescovo <shackaholic@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 16:28:24 -0500

Would love to set up a trade for this beautiful band from Australia. I
have these shows of theirs on CDR or FLAC to offer: 11/21/01,
11/20/02, 5/18/02, and  2/24/04 plus gobs of MMW and other bands. Will
send list on request. I can accept CDR, FLAC, SHN or DAT.

Thanks,
Mike



From: Maria Aguirre <toriphilemaria@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Remastering help
Reply-To: Maria Aguirre <toriphilemaria@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 16:33:07 -0500

While I'm not going to address the minutiae of mastering vs editing as
those are just picky-ass differences... I am curious as to your
problem with listing source info as "DSBD>DAT" ...  you say to just
list it as DSBD  (or SBD I'm assuming), but how is the person to know
what was used to record the show?
ex: DSBD > D100 or DSBD > NMJIII ... to list a show as DSBD >
soundcard  looks pretty silly to me.

~Maria


On 5/4/05, Keith Bode  wrote:

> From: Keith Bode <tunakebo@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Remastering help
> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 12:00:04 -0700
>=20
> A few years ago the word "remastering" became popular to use.  Frankly,
> the way I've seen it used is pretty abusive of the people who do master,
> or transfer shows.  To me the word means "Master again".  I don't
> believe I've ever seen the word used in that context.  To use Wavelab,
> CEP, Sound Forge and perform edits, is just that editing.   There is
> nothing wrong with editing, when needed or wanted, but I understand
> Mastering as transferring music from one format to another.  If you are
> doing that, say DAT>WAV>CD, that;s nastering, if there is no transfer
> from one media to a different media, then calling editing remastering is
> an act that strikes me as self promoting gerandiosity.  There's shows I
> soent a lot of time working on cleaning up a show that had been
> transferred to CD by someone else.  I described my work as editing.  If
> someone wants to do the recording of the show, they mastered t he show.
> If someone else transfers the show from DAT to CD, they mastered the
> CD's.  If someone ran EAC on a CD, and then edited with one of many
> recording/editing shows, IMO calling that "Remastering" is about the
> same as claiming they carried a Tandberg reel to reel deck to the
> balcony of Winterland, set up microphones, found AC supply, and recorded
> the show.
>=20
> It's just one of those little thorns in my ass that is like writing a
> lineage of a live show DSBD>DAT, when until 18 months ago there were no
> SBD's for F"OH use that were digital.  Someone tried to say DXBD meant
> the show was recorded to DAT, from the SBD.  If that is the case, why
> did they put >DAT after DSBD?
>=20
> Keith



From: Jeff Lester <tdcrjeff@yahoo.com>
Subject: "DSBD"
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 15:47:39 -0700 (PDT)

Keith Bode <tunakebo@verizon.net> wrote:

> It's just one of those little thorns in my ass that
> is like writing a 
> lineage of a live show DSBD>DAT, when until 18
> months ago there were no 
> SBD's for F"OH use that were digital.  Someone tried
> to say DXBD meant 
> the show was recorded to DAT, from the SBD.  If that
> is the case, why 
> did they put >DAT after DSBD?

Because the original source is a digitally recorded
SBD of unknown exact provence and the current copy is
a DAT, that's what I always interpreted it to mean. If
the exact source history is known, it could be SBD>PCM
master>2 DAT clones>your DAT, it could be SBD>DAT
master>1 DAT clone, etc. etc. By saying "DSB" or
"DSBD," one is saying it was a digitally recorded
master (could be PCM, could be DAT) that has been
cloned through some indeterminate number of
generations of PCM and/or DAT and now resides on DAT
media.

-Jeff Lester



                
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 



From: "Gary Davis" <g@hoxnet.com>
Subject: Millencolin taping policy?
Reply-to: g@hoxnet.com
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 18:37:37 -0700

This pop/punk band from Europe is touring America this month.
Does anyone have recent information on their taping policy?
thanks
--G


** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

To unsubscribe from this digest, please send email to
dat-heads-unsubscribe@datheads.phish.net 

If your email address has changed, you may (optionally) 
send the message to

dat-heads-unsubscribe-oldaddress=olddomain@datheads.phish.net

and the old address will be removed.

Problems or questions about a subscription should be addressed 
via these avenues and then if needed to

dat-heads-owner@datheads.phish.net
or 
postmaster@datheads.phish.net

never the list itself

You can submit a message for inclusion in the next digest via this address:

    Internet: dat-heads@datheads.phish.net

Archives of DAT-Heads digests and related files are available on
the DAT-Heads home page:

http://www.solorb.com/dat-heads/


End of DAT-Heads Digest
******************************