Readers' Letters: The final proof that vinyl is clinically, rigidly, TOTALLY DEAD!, and more...
In response to The final proof that vinyl is clinically, rigidly, TOTALLY DEAD!, G-T-ELECTRONICS.COM writes...
I own a Vrx-2000 and have done for some time, I have been pressing custom made scratch records and white lables for my customers, All work I get given first gets mastered by either my plugins or My Finalizer, The vrx-2000 takes a long time to learn to use and is very costly at around £8500 the diamond cutting tips cost £150 each and last about 60 hours the blank vinyls cost about £10 each.
I press vinyl for £30 a record because I love vinyl and want to keep it alive.
Anyway must go got to press some vinyl.
Glenn, Owner of G-T-Electronics.com
In response to Should your loudspeakers have digital inputs?, Glyn Wainwright writes...
Class D amps simply use a PCM audio data stream to switch (on and off) a super high frequency 'power gate' and then filters the high frequency leaving a modulated power signal for the speakers.
Very efficient with no quiescent current. It's electrically simple and fast so no delay in this final Class D stage.
RP response: The issue we have with Class D is that when practically the entire world admires Class A but accepts Class AB as a workable compromise, Class D still doesn't have the same amount of respect. Almost certainly it will one day, and perhaps there are products as good as Class A already on the market. Here's what Yamaha (where they know a thing or two about power amplifiers) has to say... "... to convert the audio signal to a rectangular wave PWM signal, a high power consuming low-pass filter must be used at the output stage to eliminate pulse, or the original audio signal cannot be recovered. The audio signal's frequency response, distortion, and damping factor are worsened in this low-pass filter environment. Also, PWM signals at high power also have the side effect of emitting harmonic electromagnetic waves within radio frequency range. Class D audio power amplifiers may be convenient on the efficiency side, but they could never be considered an optimum choice for sound quality."
In response to A million-selling producer who DOESN'T do his own mastering!, Peter Moore writes...
Like Steve Lyons, I also outsource my mastering. Although it's not because I'd rather give that process to someone else. I just don't fully understand the process. I know that EQ, compression, and limiting all play a function in the process; but unlike mixing where you use those and other tools to isolate the individual musical elements, find the best sound, and blend them in to the musical whole that is hopefully greater than the sum of its parts, mastering seems to take that whole and finds ways to make it better. I don't quite understand how to use my tools toward that end. I guess I'm just not quite sure what specifically to listen for in mastering. I do know when it sounds good. Maybe that's all there is, and I'm complicating things more than I should.
In response to "No Me Paltique Ya" by Kevin Wicker, Victor Ochoa writes...
Wow! I've been playing romantic bolero guitar for 45 years and Requinto for 30 plus years. This is great.
In response to Super-sized EQ - your fattest EQ technique ever!, Dan Lewis writes...
God, I love short, powerful articles like this! The writer for President!
RP response: If we thought there was any risk of that we would definitely turn the power down a notch :-)
In response to How can one become a premium quality rap artist in this hectic modern age?, Eyetel writes...
I thought your article on "premium rap artist" was bullshit & just trying to make a mockery of the hip hop culture. It didn't really say anything about how to improve your skill level as a rap artist but more so just make fun of the culture with cliche' stereotypes like blingy thugs who have sex all day with big booty girls. I don't know if the writer was trying to be funny but the shit didn't tickle me one bit.
In response to Production Review - Bryan Adams at Abbey Road, Ben Karlstrom writes...
That bad and "irritating" habit of dropping pitch at the end of a line is a trademark of rock 'n' roll. No doubt producer Mutt Lange drilled this QUALITY into Adams when they made "Waking Up The Neighbors". Every Def Leppard song produced by Mutt does the same thing.
Mutt's productions have sold well over 100 million copies. So by comparison, you simply aren't qualified to school Mutt -- or Adams. Or Ray Charles either, who slid up to notes and off of them on every track he did. To some of us, the bad habit you refer to is called "soul".
In response to Why do small PA loudspeakers sound so bad?, Thaddeus Moore writes...
I totally disagree with this supposition.
Have you ever heard Meyer Sounds "UP-" series?
They SMOKE anything else I've heard in the small PA market.
And yes, most do Suck.
But size doesn't Equate "good" Either.
RP response: Trust us... small speakers 'suck', as you call it. They really do. It's just a fashion that audio is going through. We'll get out of it. Eventually...
In response to A million-selling producer who DOESN'T do his own mastering!, Tom Ghent writes...
Needless to say, a multi-million selling producer more than likely has a mastering engineer who not only knows his or her sonic likes and dislikes,but is also willing at little or no cost to re-do any product which does not meet with said producer's approval.
Let it also be said that many "big time" producers bring their raw tracks to professional mix specialists and,more than likely the monetary arrangement is somewhat simular.
All this being said,and if money IS an object:and you have a mix with no observable flaws that you have listened to over a number of different systems and it still meets your expectations, then more than likely it will please other listeners as well. In that case leave it well enough alone."If it ain't broke,don't fix it!"
One the other hand, if your mix has problems that you can't correct, you definetly need to seek the help of a professional whose work you respect.
Finally, if money is NOT an object, it might be worth giving a prfessional mastering person a copy of the "final mix" to work on. Of course you are going to keep a safety copy of the original in your own hot little hands just in case you don't like what they give you back,Then again, the mastering person,whoever he or she may be,might take your product to new hieghts and really make you happy. Wouldn't that be worth a shot? After all,it's only money! Right?......T.G.
In response to Super-sized EQ - your fattest EQ technique ever!, Kane writes...
Thin = Clean mix with all instruments clear and defined.
Fat = Mud
In response to The ancient myths and legends of soundproofing, Jon Baz writes...
I have found that one of the most effective soundproofing techniques is "dead air space". Sound absorption helps this, but is most useful for killing rogue sound waves within a space not outside of it. "Dead Air Space" basically provides a "buffer" zone between the "live" room and other rooms or buildings. Most studios use double plated glass and insulated hollow walls to take advantage of this technique. Insulation and/or sound absorption material slow down and muffle sound waves, but do not block them. Once they pass through the wall, they keep on going until diffused. A "buffer" zone helps to trap the sound waves, thus diffusing them before traveling onward. Completely eliminating sound is virtually impossible, especially low frequencies which travel through the ground, but "Dead Air Space" can diffuse the db level significantly enough as to not be annoying to neighbors, or a factor while recording. "Dead Air Space" can be achieved by using other rooms in your building as buffers, or building a room within a room.
Either way, you must sacrifice space for the "buffer" zone.
In response to "No Me Paltique Ya" by Kevin Wicker, Carlos Camarena writes...
I agree with you about the mood of a song and it' direct relation with the atmosphere where the recording took place.
I just want to point a little misspell in "No me platique ya" it is written as "paltique".
One more thing, the meaning of that phrase could be translated as "Don't talk to me" or "Stop talking to me"
In response to Super-sized EQ - your fattest EQ technique ever!, Tandra Jhagroo writes...
AH HA!! this is a wonderful additive to the toolbox! However, with the SSL plugin, can you not accomplish all this in one thing?
Admittedly I have limited exposure to a full range SSL board, but if memory serves me correct there are 4 buttons on the SSL plug-in, BYP, DYN SC, BYP, CH OUT. Can I press the DYN SC and accomplish the same thing... a compressor with an EQ in the sidechain?
RP response: What we're looking for is a compressor where the sidechain EQ controls are given just as much prominence as the theshold, ratio etc, so that EQing the sidechain is seen as being as important as everything else. When you see one, send us a photo or screen shot.
In response to Architects slam illegal photography, C.Loner writes...
I really enjoyed this article - if you transfer the accepted practices of one industry to another then it certainly puts them in a new (and humorous) light. However, the analogy is not wholly accurate since a photograph (even if digital) is not a copy in the fullest sense of the word. Imagine if you could do a real life copy of buildings (or anything else) for free in the same way that a CD can be copied. Then the lawyers would be really busy!!
RP response: And then there is the fashion industry where copying other people's work seems to be many designers' stock in trade!