Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[Carlos269]

Speaking of learning from others and experimenting, when I developed the Remastering Process’ “Wood Edition” settings for the Perlman violin track, I also used the same settings to re-record the Shostakovich movement. Perhaps to audiophiles everything sounds better with that wood frequency emphasis. Will re-record Karma Police with the “Wood Edition” settings and hear how that sounds. I did listen to some of my music with the “Wood Edition” settings and it was too much for me as the sound on my music became more congested and it lost some of the ethereal feel.I will experiment with developing a setting that provides the wood for jazz, classical and pop recordings while maintaining the airy dimensionality and instrument separation that I currently enjoy. Will play around during my listening session and see what I come up with. The beauty of the mastering equipment that I use it that everything is stepped and recallable. It is fun to play around and experiment but lately with the Remastering process and my developed playlists in Roon it is just nice to hit shuffle on a playlist and let the server surprise you with an unexpected track instead of actively playing DJ.

My Friday night listening session went on for 7 hours, lasting until the early hours of the morning. Just didn’t want to stop listening as the big WAAR system sounded great and so enjoyable.

But I started the night by listening to my newest SET amplifier and that was a delight to listen to also. My new 26 drives 46 with Mercury Vapor rectifiers SET amplifier’s sound is extremely detailed and refined. I will post some videos to give you a taste of what it sounds like.

When I began listening to the WAAR system last night, I still had a the “Wood Edition” settings engaged. Again I listen and can appreciate the emphasis of the sound of the Wood cavity and tone with acoustic and popular music. I also confirmed what I had heard previously, that this setting did not work to the benefit of the music that I listen to for enjoyment. The presentation lost some space, dimensionality, and instrument separation on the music that I listen to the most.

I have to tell you, with the Remastering process is so simple and quick to make changes to the overall “system” sound presentation. This time it took me two (2) minutes to develop and dial in new settings that retain the Wood frequency emphasis but also provide that ethereal “live” sound that I very much crave and love to hear.

Going forward, video recordings made with this new set of settings will be tagged “Carlos269 Edition”. This new tag should also make it clear that my goal is not to reproduce the “stale” sound of the original recording, but to achieve MUSIC with an enhanced sound that is more exciting, enjoyable and believable.

 

[Carlos269]

1st, I highly admire your effort, skill, and achievement in a sound process. In your own way of analysis of audio sound, your video sounds more complete than almost any other systems.

2nd, don't take my words too hard in 3rd. People who comment on your works are very valuable your friends. I think people like you can make the perfect reproduction audio and change the audio/sound industry. I root (and will to support if I have ability) for you. So, let merry-go-round upgrade path audiophiles (and their wives) have and enjoy the perfect sound in this life time.

3rd, there are many to talk about hi-end audio and your sound but I'll try to make short.
----- a) You can improve more on delicate sounds. In below video, sounds of musical instrument are basic and given. We (hi-end audio people) pass those. I try to delineate the moisture (and soft flesh) of lips and the texture of skin condition of fingers (and pressure of) hitting drums of artists. *Something like feeling the moisture of tongue and softness of lips of a singer.

------ b) You can improve the texture (timber?) of sound. The same music notes can be played by tearing papers (or a Stradivarius), hitting rocks (or great drums), me (or Pavarotti), etc. I don't like to listen below video. I won't talk about its sound. You figure
------ c) You can improve the naturalness of sound. To find naturalness of your video, say repeat "hello" while your video is playing. If your voice and your video sound are blending well and hear your voice and music together normally, you have a great natural sound audio system. Say "hello" and listen with below videos playing. *The original music must match with your voice (means your ears are in natural mode).

Alex, you asked for a better version of this track. I submit three that are better than the previous ones:

I know which version I like the best. Let me know what you think.

 

[PeterA]

My Friday night listening session went on for 7 hours, lasting until the early hours of the morning. Just didn’t want to stop listening as the big WAAR system sounded great and so enjoyable.

But I started the night by listening to my newest SET amplifier and that was a delight to listen to also. My new 26 drives 46 with Mercury Vapor rectifiers SET amplifier’s sound is extremely detailed and refined. I will post some videos to give you a taste of what it sounds like.

When I began listening to the WAAR system last night, I still had a the “Wood Edition” settings engaged. Again I listen and can appreciate the emphasis of the sound of the Wood cavity and tone with acoustic and popular music. I also confirmed what I had heard previously, that this setting did not work to the benefit of the music that I listen to for enjoyment. The presentation lost some space, dimensionality, and instrument separation on the music that I listen to the most.

I have to tell you, with the Remastering process is so simple and quick to make changes to the overall “system” sound presentation. This time it took me two (2) minutes to develop and dial in new settings that retain the Wood frequency emphasis but also provide that ethereal “live” sound that I very much crave and love to hear.

Going forward, video recordings made with this new set of settings will be tagged “Carlos269 Edition”. This new tag should also make it clear that my goal is not to reproduce the “stale” sound of the original recording, but to achieve MUSIC with an enhanced sound that is more exciting, enjoyable and believable.

Carlos, I assume your WAAR system is adaptable to any of your systems. Do you use it with your other systems also? If it is so flexible, does it even matter what the original system is? I suspect that you are changing parameters of the sound, but a more resolving system will come through the WAAR system enhancement as more resolving. Could you talk a bit about this, perhaps in your "Smarter Way" system thread. Thank you.

 

[Wavetouch]

my goal is not to reproduce the “stale” sound of the original recording, but to achieve MUSIC with an enhanced sound that is more exciting, enjoyable and believable.

The original recording should be a reference, richest in resolution and musical nuances, etc. In reproduction audio, the original music is the better almost every ways to the copies of it. You can make a certain music more exciting and enjoyable (to your ears only?) by making them sharper or stronger (equalizer?), but it will result losing purity ( and adding noise/distortions) of the orig music. Most of times, I will prefer the orig music than processed music.

If you hear the original music sounds "stale", your ears might be in unnatural sound mode. The natural sound music is superior to unnatural sound ones since people who believe their sound is excellent (Jay's audio in YT, Agon thread "The most natural sound in the world" music only in YT) associated/close to the natural sound.

The original music is the cleanest and the most musical.

 

[Carlos269]

Carlos, I assume your WAAR system is adaptable to any of your systems. Do you use it with your other systems also? If it is so flexible, does it even matter what the original system is? I suspect that you are changing parameters of the sound, but a more resolving system will come through the WAAR system enhancement as more resolving. Could you talk a bit about this, perhaps in your "Smarter Way" system thread. Thank you.

The short answer is yes, the Remastering process is adaptable to any system, but care must be taken to avoid equipment damage, when you ask of a system to do something that it is not capable of doing.

I will elaborate on this answer the rest of your questions on the “There is a smarter way” thread later today.

 

[Carlos269]

The original recording should be a reference, richest in resolution and musical nuances, etc. In reproduction audio, the original music is the better almost every ways to the copies of it. You can make a certain music more exciting and enjoyable (to your ears only?) by making them sharper or stronger (equalizer?), but it will result losing purity ( and adding noise/distortions) of the orig music. Most of times, I will prefer the orig music than processed music.

If you hear the original music sounds "stale", your ears might be in unnatural sound mode. The natural sound music is superior to unnatural sound ones since people who believe their sound is excellent (Jay's audio in YT, Agon thread "The most natural sound in the world" music only in YT) associated/close to the natural sound.

The original music is the cleanest and the most musical.

Alex, you need to get up to speed. There are techniques like the ones used by HQPLAYER and my Remastering process to extract more information from the files than was presented in the original recordings.

You need to read up and learn about low level detail extraction and inner detail enhancement techniques.

I think that the evidence that I presented with these videos speak for themselves.

If you want to stay beholden to the original mastering engineer’s interpretation, rendition and vision of the recording then that is fine. I don’t get constrained by conventions and think, know and have proof that I can do a better job, to my ears, with my systems!

It would benefit you to try to find a way to distinguish your products. Falling inline with everyone else is not the recipe for success in life.

 

[Wavetouch]

Alex, you asked for a better version of this track. I submit three that are better than the previous ones:

I know which version I like the best. Let me know what you think.

I like warmer sound 1st video which I can listen for 30 seconds max. My ears (biased) are different from your ears. I listen my WT audio which sound close to the original natural music. All your videos sound (mid-range) very recessed (far far away) and dry without musical nuances to my ears. Your videos sound just like a car audio with a equalizer set to V shape (I did it to my car audio when I was in college, my ears were strong then).

 

[Carlos269]

I like warmer sound 1st video which I can listen for 30 seconds max. My ears (biased) are different from your ears. I listen my WT audio which sound close to the original natural music. All your videos sound (mid-range) very recessed (far far away) and dry without musical nuances to my ears. Your videos sound just like a car audio with a equalizer set to V shape (I did it to my car audio when I was in college, my ears were strong then).

How ironic. Well this is very telling. All I will say is keep reading this thread and listening as it will soon become very apparent which one of us is correct.

 

[Carlos269]

Here's another reference vid for me, anyone care to try and beat it ?(starts 3min in)

Since neither Wavetouch or anyone else is stepping up to the challenge, here are my two versions for evaluation:

 

[wil]

Which just goes to highlight that Room / System are often more important fundamentals that Vinyl Vs Digital source when considering ones preference , if any , of YouTune presentations of the same recording … For example and for my part I consider the presentation from @RCanelas to be the pre-eminent of the two that you mention.

I just listened to the Tima and RCnelas vids of the Shostakovich. They both exhibit excellent in room/system sound! For me, Tima's has some more energy, clarity and presence without any apparent room distractions.

 

[Carlos269]

I just listened to the Tima and RCnelas vids of the Shostakovich. They both exhibit excellent in room/system sound! For me, Tima's has some more energy, clarity and presence without any apparent room distractions.

Wil, and others, give this video of the Shostakovich movement a listen and tell me what you think:

 

[wil]

Alex, you need to get up to speed. There are techniques like the ones used by HQPLAYER and my Remastering process to extract more information from the files than was presented in the original recordings.

You need to read up and learn about low level detail extraction and inner detail enhancement techniques.

I think that the evidence that I presented with these videos speak for themselves.

If you want to stay beholden to the original mastering engineer’s interpretation, rendition and vision of the recording then that is fine. I don’t get constrained by conventions and think, know and have proof that I can do a better job, to my ears, with my systems!

It would benefit you to try to find a way to distinguish your products. Falling inline with everyone else is not the recipe for success in life.

To me, the YouTube remastered version below is best:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwialJqNqoyBAxW8lGoFHbZVB1sQtwJ6BAgTEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnbCOAPR33ME&usg=AOvVaw09-ZFPK4EMkDE2PlGxWXh4&opi=89978449

 

[Wavetouch]

There are techniques like the ones used by HQPLAYER and my Remastering process to extract more information from the files than was presented in the original recordings.

How can any technique extract an information that the original don't have? It is made up information and is not always wanted. In below video, one speaker has more sound info. Do you like left or right?

 

[Carlos269]

To me, the YouTube remastered version below is best:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwialJqNqoyBAxW8lGoFHbZVB1sQtwJ6BAgTEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnbCOAPR33ME&usg=AOvVaw09-ZFPK4EMkDE2PlGxWXh4&opi=89978449

It sounds pretty good and surprisingly very similar to mine. But it doesn’t posses the dimensionality. The vocals are 2 dimensional in the mix.

 

[Carlos269]

How can any technique extract an information that the original don't have? It is made up information and is not always wanted. In below video, one speaker has more sound info. Do you like left or right?

Alex, what is your take on the sound of this remastered version?

Karma Police (Remastered)

You really need to take a look at HQPLAYER. It will change your life. You no longer have to be limited by the original recording.

 

[wil]

Wil, and others, give this video of the Shostakovich movement a listen and tell me what you think:

I'm only listening to the first 3 min, but I think is sounds really good. The tympani on the latest WAAR version is more dramatic (heavier bass) than the Tima vid, but the Tima has more clarity. All three of the vids sound very good to me. I can imagine great sound in person! The YouTube version has it's advantages, but there is some life coming through the in-room vids that it doesn't have.

 

[Wavetouch]

Alex, what is your take on the sound of this remastered version?
Karma Police (Remastered)

I listened few of KP versions and this is the best (as Wil mentioned). I see every ears are almost same toward a good sound. I downloaded it and live recorded below.

You really need to take a look at HQPLAYER. It will change your life. You no longer have to be limited by the original recording.

I try to save every data/info in the orig music and my recordings. I don't process music files. I don't edit my videos. Every edit/process degrades the sound. I even hear the difference in methods to upload my music files to Youtube. I mean YT videos directly uloaded from my SD card sound better than copy files to a HDD and upload to YT. It don't matter to your processed music (converted), but it makes much difference to my music.

 

[Carlos269]

I'm only listening to the first 3 min, but I think is sounds really good. The tympani on the latest WAAR version is more dramatic (heavier bass) than the Tima vid, but the Tima has more clarity. All three of the vids sound very good to me. I can imagine great sound in person! The YouTube version has its advantages, but there is some life coming through the in-room vids that it doesn't have.

Did you, or anyone else, hear the sound of the baton striking the conductor’s podium on my video? Is that heard on any of the other videos?

As I was telling Alex from Wavetouch, it’s time to forge ahead and demand more from our expensive toys.

 

[hopkins]

One thing is clear from the three Shostakovich videos (Carlos, Tima, RCanelas) - but to different degrees- is how difficult it is to make a recording that conveys the presence of the sound in the room. That is probably due to the mic/phone placement, and perhaps the mic itself. Irrespective of each systems' qualities, a phone recording from the listening position may end up sounding like you are too distant from the music and you lose depth (or the layering of the instruments is wrong). The listening position may not be the most representative because we don't hear like a microphone.

I would suggest that people experiment with mic placement.

 

[Wavetouch]

One thing is clear from the three Shostakovich videos (Carlos, Tima, RCanelas) - but to different degrees- is how difficult it is to make a recording that conveys the presence of the sound in the room. That is probably due to the mic/phone placement~~~~~~ because we don't hear like a microphone.

From my experience, mics and recorded video sounds are always correct. Your ears/brain are biased and customize your unnatural audio sounds the way you like. This explains why other people (wives, non-audiophiles) don't like your trusty audio music. Simply, video sounds are what regular people hear from your audio systems.

Which speaker sounds better? Left (unnatural sound) or right (natural)?