Digital mastering v Analogue mastering

[Dominic Harper]

Hi I'm Natalie Dominic's partner. I've not done a thread on here before. I am unable to register and have explained this to Marco.

Dom and I were having a conversation today about digital mastering and analogue mastering. I wasn't aware that there are 2 types of vinyl recording. Dom played 2 different vinyl recording one digital and one analogue and I could hear the difference. I am slightly deaf but I tend to hear more from the analogue recording. I was a bit perturbed by this because now I am aware of this the vinyl sounds different. The digital master sounds a little flat and the analogue sounds clear and very audible. I just wondered what your thoughts are on digital masters and analogue masters? It's quite important to me this because I'm getting a bit frustrated about this :( as I don't feel I am getting the full vinyl potential from some digital master vinyl. I know that most recording are digital and it's expensive and rare to get analogue. But like I said I just wondered what you thoughts were?

Cheers Natalie

[Welder]

I think you’ll find it depends on how either/both were mastered rather than the process itself.
It may be erroneous to assume that even with identical tracks that the mastering has been the same for analogue and digital end copies.
I’ve heard excellent results from both.

[hifi_dave]

I don't know much about this subject but digital has come on a long way over the years. Early digital recordings are often, truly horrid - screechy, hard, two dimensional but some later ones are very good.

Having said that, well recoded 'vintage' records are far, far better than anything modern by a huge margin, even mono recordings. I have some Doris Day, Julie London, Frank Sinatra etc in mono and the Singer is right there in the room. I've not heard many modern recordings which can do the same.

[fiddlemaker]

Dave (I'm assuming you meant "modern" in your last sentence) I totally agree. Sad to think that technology has made backward progress in creating the "illusion of music" in our homes.

[hifi_dave]

Don't get me started..:eyebrows:

If you read the mags, you'd think that each month we are moving forwards in huge leaps but ain't so. IMO. Very few new products are a genuine improvement and when you listen to some ancient recordings you can hear how far back we've gone.

I've even got some customers who assure me that 78's are the best recordings we've ever had. Not tried that myself but I can say that some of my mono recordings are better than good direct cuts.

Yes, you are correct, I meant 'modern' not 'mono' and I'm off to correct it now. Thanks.

[Dominic Harper]

It's funny you should mention the 78s. Dom and I have some 78s in the garage which I am going to go through and have listen.

Natalie

[hifi_dave]

Do you have the appropriate mono cartridge ?

[Dominic Harper]

Iv'e just asked Dom and he said no, but he also said we can look at buying one. I don't want to spend anything yet, because I am not sure of the condition of the vinyl. There are quite a few to go through and they will need a good clean.

Natalie

[Lodgesound]

Hi Natalie;

True analogue mastering (ie absolutely NO digital in the chain at all) is becoming very scarce indeed as almost all recordings are procesed at some point in the digital domain now.

The problem is with the mastering itself. There is nothing wrong with a well mastered digital recording - it sounds truly wonderful IF it is done right by an engineer who knows about proper mastering.

Mastering now almost exclusively seems to mean compressing the life out of the recording and limiting it to within an inch of 0.5 dB dynamic range so that you can hear it on an ipod. When this is done the result is harsh, fatiguing and un-listenable on a high resolution system within minutes.

Very often the same masters are used for both CD and vinyl the only difference being that when a master acetate is cut the RIAA curve is applied post the relevant compression (which must be applied prior to a cutting lathe to avoid over-modulation of the grooves).

I have been to mastering facilities in London which still exist and still have all analogue signal chains feeding their Neumann lathes however I can tell you that 98% of vinyl is cut from the replay of the digital master in Wavelab via a Prism interface or equivalent.

Recording companies will simply not spend the money now on open reel analogue cutting masters and high end anaogue studio machines along with the tape to feed them are becomong increasingly scarce.

[twelvebears]

Agree that it's not the technology as such but the way they have been used - i.e. the care and attention for the folks involved in the process.

So I *generally* find that older recordings are better (unfortunately). The days before low-res downloads and the 'loudness wars' usually have much greater dynamics and preservation of acoustics.

Earlier today I went 'Old Skool' and listened to Word Up by Cameo. This is a DDD recording from the mid-80s and it sounded excellent, so it really isn't down to the tech.

The best all-digital recordings are able to preserve all the best qualities of analogue but with the added bonus of being wonderfully quiet. And let's not forget that there have been countless bad analogue masters....

[twelvebears]

Mastering now almost exclusively seems to mean compressing the life out of the recording and limiting it to within an inch of 0.5 dB dynamic range so that you can hear it on an ipod. When this is done the result is harsh, fatiguing and un-listenable on a high resolution system within minutes.

Absolutely right Stewart. It's the OTT boosting of levels and killing the available dynamic range that makes recordings sound flat.

Classic demo of what can be achieved must still be Brothers In Arms. It seems so quiet by comparison to modern recordings that you either can't hear it (coming from a newer track) or totally shit yourself if a newer track starts after one of the BIA tracks finishes before you get to the volume...

BUT.... the build up and dynamics on the drum and guitar crescendo on Money For Nothing shows what can be achieved.

[Tea24]

Natalie, Nagaoka make all the correct styli for their cartridges for 78 playing. Start with a 3mil & VTF of about 4.5 grams. Don't use alcohol when cleaning 78s, just distilled water with a few drops of washing up liquid. I'm sure you & Dom have a RCM. You could do with a re-equalising phono stage too if you really get into it.

Hifi Dave, I quite agree with you about early Mono Lps. I recently bought a 1953 recording of a concert Yves Montand gave in Paris, recorded live. Fabulous! You could be in the theatre:)

[Stratmangler]

Iv'e just asked Dom and he said no, but he also said we can look at buying one. I don't want to spend anything yet, because I am not sure of the condition of the vinyl. There are quite a few to go through and they will need a good clean.

Natalie

They're made of shellac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellac), not vinyl, so if you need to clean them do not use alcohol.

[Audioman]

Natalie. To clean shellac 78's I would suggest L'Art du Son which is non alcahol enzyme cleaner. If you get an RCM you will need an additional 10" arm. 78's are a pain. As a boy I spent many hours playing my fathers 78 Jazz collection and they were prone to breaking and warping at the slightest hint of sun. Unfortunately he had a mad moment and chucked the lot in the late 60's. Can't help thinking there might have been a few valuable ones in that lot as many dated pre WW2.

As for mastering. All analogue is confined to a few specialist Studios now who produce for the Audiophile labels. In any case any new release will be 99% recorded or mixed to digital. It's still the quality of the final mastering that counts.

I have just been listening to two albums that almost certainly would be digitaly sourced. The new Peter Gabriel and Mary Black's Speaking to the Angel on Pure Pleasure. Both are fine sounding. However you can't beat all analogue sources from back in the day. The Marino mastered QRP pressing of Tea for the Tillerman is fantastic sounding but of course the recording was great in the first place.

As for current CD mastering the less said the better. The norm is added compression and you can't turn up due to the high level without ear damage. Often the LP version of current releases is mastered much better and may explain the growing popularity of vinyl releases. There are exceptions. Try any of Steve Wilson's remasterings. I found the CD and DVDA versions in the dual disc King Crimson Series to be top notch. The new vinyl of the first 2 albums still sounds better though.