DAT-heads Digest #473

Contents:
  ISO: Shows!! ("Schofield, William")
  Re: mastering (Karl Rehn)
  Sunn0))) ok to tape! (TRANEHEAD@aol.com)
  WeddingPresent taper friendly! (TRANEHEAD@aol.com)
  ISO: Neumann AK40 caps or SKM140 set ("Boogie Shafer")
  Re: mastering vs. remastering ("Gary Davis") (Ian Stoy)
  iso New Deal opening for Trey (Icculus17@aol.com)


From: "Schofield, William" <WSchofield@banknorth.com>
Subject: ISO: Shows!!
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 10:21:17 -0400 

Did anyone tape the following?

Mudhoney: 04-23-2005 Middle East Club, Boston, MA
The Bravery: 04-15-2005 Axis Boston, MA
Interpol: 10-11-2004 Avalon Ballroom, Boston, MA
Audioslave: 04-28-2005 Avalon Ballroom, Boston, MA 

BS





From: Karl Rehn <rehn@arlut.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: mastering
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:52:32 -0500

There are several businesses here in town that are in the 'mastering' 
business. I used one when I was putting the final touches on my band's new 
CD.  Prior to mastering we made 2 track mixes from the multitrack 
recordings.  In the mastering session the engineer played the CD back 
through an analog chain and applied EQ and compression, resampled the 
analog signal with a much higher resolution (24 bit/96 kHz), and we did a 
lot of editing: endings, starts, levels - to turn the tracks into a 
consistent sounding collection. The final step was to downsample back to CD 
format and create a CD master for the duplication house.  In this case the 
mastering process involved both format conversion and changes to the levels 
and tonality of the recordings.

In the old days it was necessary to go through an additional step to create 
duplication masters for vinyl or cassette to compensate for limitations of 
those media: reduced dynamic range and frequency response, for 
example.  That's why a lot of older albums were "digitally re-mastered" 
when they were first released on CD.  In some cases the record companies 
took the duplication masters for the vinyl LPs and sent them to the CD 
duplication houses. In other cases they went back one generation to the 2 
track masters from which the duplication masters were made, and made _new_ 
duplication masters using modern equipment and techniques for CD 
duplication.  Typically the only changes reduce tape hiss and improve 
fidelity. Sometimes the artists take advantage of this process to make 
bigger changes.

I think the worst example of this is when ZZ Top went back to the multi 
track tapes and re-recorded all the drum parts for their 70's LPs for their 
CD box set re-release.  The overprocessed 80's drum sounds they used sound 
out of place on those 1970's sounding recordings. It was as wrong as Lucas 
changing Star Wars for re-release but I digress...

The tape or CD that comes from using a couple of mics or a soundboard feed 
at a live show produces what I'd call an "original recording" or a 'source 
tape'.  It's typical for those recordings to be distributed with no editing 
or other manipulation, so they become 'masters' even though no tasks 
typically associated with "mastering" have been performed.  Breaking 
something up into tracks doesn't affect the way the recording sounds so it 
really doesn't quality as 'mastering'.  IMHO the first time the source tape 
is processed, the output should be considered a 'master'.  If someone goes 
back to the original source tape and processes it differently, or takes the 
master and alters its sound, then the output of either process is 
re-mastering that generates a new master different from the earlier master.

Just my $0.02.

Karl




From: TRANEHEAD@aol.com
Subject: Sunn0))) ok to tape!
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 13:03:41 EDT

sunn0))) will let you set up next to the soundbaord. they only put a few 
instuments into the board because of volume, so they dont allow board patches 
based on bad sound.
they are playing this week in SF....
sludge-on!
GG



From: TRANEHEAD@aol.com
Subject: WeddingPresent taper friendly!
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 13:05:35 EDT

they will let you make audience tapes AND VIDEO's!
the show is REALLY rocking...and lasts an astonishing 90 mins!
check out this great band...!
GG



From: "Boogie Shafer" <boogie@dubious.com>
Subject: ISO: Neumann AK40 caps or SKM140 set
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 16:09:47 -0700

=20
if anybody has a set of Neumann AK40 caps or a SKM140 set they are =
looking to get rid of, i'm in the market
=20
thanks
=20
boogie@dubious.com



From: Ian Stoy <ianstoy@isdesign.org>
Subject: Re: mastering vs. remastering ("Gary Davis")
Reply-To: ianstoy@isdesign.org
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 21:16:56 -0700

Gary,
good points I agree,
though I prefer to use the term "ambient mix" instead of what most folks 
call a "matrix", though most I put my ORTF array on-stage, and much of 
the "ambiance" I am getting in my mics is stage sound I do also pick up 
crowd and venue "ambiance" so this is the term I use.... most folks say 
"oh you mean a matrix?"
 I use to use my makckie 1402vlz to set up my mix then direct to 2-track 
DAT via some A-D converters etc....
now am playing with my new Presonus Firebox and recording all 4-tracks, 
and mastering it back down to 2.... well almost it still a very new toy.
that's my 2¢
thanx
-- Ian

>
>------------------------------
>
>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: Icculus17@aol.com
Subject: iso New Deal opening for Trey
Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 00:34:41 -0400

desperately need these two opening sets, much to trade

Ross Minott


** 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
******************************