It's the source that drives the industry.

Interesting. Hooda thunk !!!

Gregadd said:

Records are being made. I suggested a 200gram one sided 45 rpm. What would be the method of recording the ultimate LP? What form would it take.? Certainly cost would be o object.

Click to expand...

Off the top of my head:

A 180 gram pressing will be better because current presses have trouble with 200 gm and Q/C suffers eg. otherwise MM would have done their BN at 200 grams.

80% of the sound is the choice of recording venue eg. finding something like Kingsway Hall in London for classical recordings would be nice. In other words, getting the sound right before the recording rather than today's correct it after the fact attitude (in large part driven by orchestral costs). For jazz, a small intimate club-preferably a live recording.

Find the optimal miking pattern for that hall. Overall, I prefer Wilkinson's Decca tree configuration (http://mixonline.com/recording/applications/audio_decca_tree/) for classical. RVG's technique for studio jazz -- but overall prefer live jazz recordings because of the ambience.

D2D might give the best sound but there is the artistic and length of sides consideration.

2 track, one inch tape, 20 ips, Tim's EQ curve. Alternatively, KOJ's special focussed gap machine.

Minimal number of tape generations.

Released on 15 ips reel to reel tape.

180 gram single sided (you know that EMI's test pressings used to be single sided--and they definitely sounded better than the regular double sided issue).

45 rpm (though one might want to experiment with 78 rpm stereo--not such a wild idea)

Limited number of pressings/stamper.

80% of the sound is the choice of recording venue eg. finding something like Kingsway Hall in London for classical recordings would be nice. For jazz, a small intimate club-preferably a live recording.

Click to expand...

If you want that live ambiance, yes, and I do love that ambiance. But size and placement and noise from the audience is going effect the outcome, and there's little doubt that the right studio environment is much easier to control. For ultimate fidelity, as opposed to concert realism, the studio, not the hall would be the better choice. The best recordings in my collection (mostly jazz) are devoid of multi-tracking, use simple mic and isolation techniques and are recorded in studios.

D2D might give the best sound but there is the artistic and length of sides consideration.

Click to expand...

I'd avoid that disc altogether (surprise! )

2 track, one inch tape, 20 ips

Click to expand...

Sure, though I think you could capture it digitally as well...

Minimal number of tape generations.

Click to expand...

Yep, if you're gonna use tape....

Released on 15 ips reel to reel tape.

Click to expand...

...that would be lovely. Now here's the issue, and it's the ultimate problem with ultimate analog audiophilery...All of that would spend so much for a market so small that you may as well put on a special concert for the lucky few. Still, if you can afford the equipment required to get the most out of all of that and are satisfied with the vanishingly small bit of software available to play upon it, enjoy the music.

P

I am hoping any disagreement on digital vs analog is taken to the other threads .

Edit: clarifying a bit. The topic is about LPs and it should remain that way. Thank you.

Back to the topic, how is he sweetening the sound? Using analog console? If so, why is he mentioning the dCS converter?

Other record mastering videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUGRRUecBik

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IReDh9ec_rk&feature=related

amirm said:

I am hoping any disagreement on digital vs analog is taken to the other threads .

Edit: clarifying a bit. The topic is about LPs and it should remain that way. Thank you.

Click to expand...

Point well-taken. You might want to make it over in the Digital forum as well.

P

Phelonious Ponk said:

For ultimate fidelity, as opposed to concert realism

Click to expand...

You lost me here P. Would you clarify please?

JackD201 said:

You lost me here P. Would you clarify please?

Click to expand...

Sorry Jack, didn't mean to be obtuse, and this is, of course, MHO, but the live venue with the acoustics of a really well-designed recording space would be rare enough. Add the background noise of the crowd, and the variable, uncontrolled damping that crowd creates...well, it's all pretty unpredictable and uncontrollable. I can tell you from experience that a small acoustic ensemble sounds "better," if better means clarity, instrument separation, the ability to hear detail, etc., in the right living room, the right rehearsal space, the right studio space, than it does in almost any live venue. And some of the best recordings I've heard, easily, are those jazz records made "live in studio," where the techniques are very similar to live recordings, but the environment is controlled.

But there is no substitute for the ambience of a live venue. It takes you there. When done well it can be pretty wonderful. And the performance is 99% of what matters anyway. Often a live audience inspires.

P