Vinyl Mastering Guidelines

[7 Hz]

Originally Posted by Paul Gold

The sound of the lathe would have more to do with the Westrex part of the system than the Scully mechanics. Can you be more specific about what types of Westrex amps and what series cutterhead you like?

There were three generations of Neumann amplifier racks and two basic types of HF limiters. Which types are you talking about?

Hey Paul, I understand that the electronics are Westrex on the Scully.

I do not know any of the part numbers used apart from the Neumann cutterheads that I tried (is it SX-64 and SX-74? The 74 was better anyway.). I think the Westrex head may be the 3A, but you would have to ask the National Sound Company in Detroit to be sure. Not a clue about the other components, I could find out but not today!

Originally Posted by Paul Gold

Anything that is stereo was designed for microgroove. Westrex invented the stereo format that is used in disk cutting today.

Yeh I understand that, what I am saying is the Neuman was designed to cut a long program material on each side (than the older Scullys) - this was the drive for the design of the Neumann, and limits it a bit compared to the Scully for cutting really loud bassy stuff.

Originally Posted by Fat larry

You are right nobody knows everything.But i try to speak only facts that can be backed up. How can you compare the two systems if you have not done test cuts on both systems based on the same track/engineer/signal path(Procesors)/ batch of lacquers.
Sorry if my tone is offish but there are too many inaccuracies and myths floating around about vinyl.
Jason

Well point me to a cutting house that has both lathes set up in the same room, and pay for the hours spent testing it, and I will give you a more accurate statement about it.

I don't believe any of my statements thus far have been either inaccurate or myths. They have been derived from many hours cutting records, checking cuts, listening to others experiences, things I have seen with my own two eyes looking down the scope, and my own two ears listening to records. As with a lot of these things, it is a mixture of opinion and fact. I would love to operate solely on fact, but time, economics, and practicality always get in the way (thus far).

[PMDUBS]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

. The HF limiter on the Neuman just kicks in too fast on extra loud stuff, and also introduces some of that nasty distortion I beleive.

You could always turn it off, or nearly off (not that I would ever recommend risking your valuable cutterhead for the sake of loud..). The Neumann HF limiters are brutes that have to be kept in their place, it is true, and it is quite common to use other means of hf limiting / de-essing to supplement them.

Most well setup pro disk cutting systems can cleanly cut a groove that is untrackable by the consumer on any, or nearly any, playback system. So the distortion limit is when the playback system distorts what is cut, not the cutting electronics. I'm sure you know this, but it seemed like a point worth making in this discussion.

Also, I will make a guess that the Scully cuts may often be straight-pitch. All of my experience is with a VMS70 running a pitch computer, which was nice to work with imo, but some engineers like one or the other.

Maybe the westrex transfers sound louder because they are distorting?!? OK, no flaming please, I am joking, but we do love distortion after all when it comes to perceiving loudness

My two bits.

Erik

[Fat larry]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

Well point me to a cutting house that has both lathes set up in the same room, and pay for the hours spent testing it, and I will give you a more accurate statement about it.

Either your original statement was accurate or it was not

I don't believe any of my statements thus far have been either inaccurate or myths. They have been derived from many hours cutting records, checking cuts, listening to others experiences, things I have seen with my own two eyes looking down the scope, and my own two ears listening to records. As with a lot of these things, it is a mixture of opinion and fact. I would love to operate solely on fact, but time, economics, and practicality always get in the way (thus far)..

I disagree.

It also depends what lathe is used to cut the record. IMHO the Neuman lathes are a bit crap for cutting loud dance stuff, the HF limiter kicks in too quick..

If you did not do the tests or have experience with both systems then your original statement is your opinion and not a fact.You are entitled to your opinion but that's all it is.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

The HF limiter on the Neuman just kicks in too fast on extra loud stuff, and also introduces some of that nasty distortion I beleive.

Based on my direct experiences this is compeletely incorrect information. The Neumann BTT-74 Accleleration Limiter I got to use in the SAL-84 cutting rack at Europadisk had a knob right on the front panel to control its threshold, along with a meter to show the amount of its reduction - so it was fairly easy to prevent it from "kicking in too fast." It was also easy to prevent it from working that hard by simply using an LPF or a de-esser on the track prior to the signal being sent to the cutter rack.

and also introduces some of that nasty distortion I beleive.

Based on numerous test cuts on numerous different tracks with various settings for the Neumann AL I found its effect when its threshold was set too low is NOT "nasty distortion" - but instead a muted high end (i.e. things like high hats would start to disappear if it was hit too hard), and if it was really really overworked, slight pumping. In fact what the Neumann AL did nicely was not only protect the cutting head - but it PREVENTED "nasty distortion" during playback - especially on sibilants.

Further, I feel the Neuman was designed for cutting microgroove LP's, not loud 12".

For achieving loud cuts on a system that it was supposedly impossible to do so (i.e. +6 to +7 dBVU using a VMS-82/SX-84 DMM system with an SAL-84 rack) - I usually found the best sounding result was had by finding the right combination of the LPF, de-esser, and possibly a smidge of an upper mid boost to compensate for the cut in the ultrahighs, and maybe a tiny bit of compression to smooth out sharp transients - and then having things ride in a "sweet spot" area on the Acceleration Limiter, where it would kick in only gently and occasionally. Of course whether a track could be cut to the maximum possible was really dependent on the mix - some things it would require almost no manipulation in order to get a really clean hot cut, and other things (usually digital sources with tons of clipping or heavy handed peak limiting applied to the pre-master) would sound distorted at the higher levels regardless of the settings used.

To qualify, I have spent many hours on a Neuman, but I haven't used or been in the same room as a Scully. I am basing my opinion on trying to get a Neuman lathe to match cuts done on a Scully.

I don't know what particular releases you are speaking of, but as recently as a year and a half ago I was mainly using sides cut by Heathmans and The Exchange as references of loud dance cuts to try and "beat." AFAIK both places were/are using Neumann lathes and cutting amps (albeit modded ones) and not Scullys.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[7 Hz]

PMDUBS - it could well be the distortion that makes it 'better', yes.

Originally Posted by Fat larry

If you did not do the tests or have experience with both systems then your original statement is your opinion and not a fact.You are entitled to your opinion but that's all it is.

Thats why I wrote IMHO at the end of the sentince.

Originally Posted by Cellotron

Based on my direct experiences this is compeletely incorrect information. The Neumann BTT-74 Accleleration Limiter I got to use in the SAL-84 cutting rack at Europadisk had a knob right on the front panel to control its threshold, along with a meter to show the amount of its reduction - so it was fairly easy to prevent it from "kicking in too fast." It was also easy to prevent it from working that hard by simply using an LPF or a de-esser on the track prior to the signal being sent to the cutter rack.

Based on numerous test cuts on numerous different tracks with various settings for the Neumann AL I found its effect when its threshold was set too low is NOT "nasty distortion" - but instead a muted high end

I don't know what particular releases you are speaking of, but as recently as a year and a half ago I was mainly using sides cut by Heathmans and The Exchange as references of loud dance cuts to try and "beat." AFAIK both places were/are using Neumann lathes and cutting amps (albeit modded ones) and not Scullys.

It could well be that the systems were set up differently. What people choose to use as reference of course depends on the music etc, I think I generaly prefer the 'American sound' over cuts from the UK.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

What people choose to use as reference of course depends on the music etc, I think I generaly prefer the 'American sound' over cuts from the UK.

OK - but specifically what cuts / mastering houses are you talking about here??

Anyway - I was using cuts by Nilz at The Exchange and Shane McEnhill at Heathmans that had been initially brought in by clients as reference not for a "style" of sound but as a way of gauging peak and average level on the cut vs. cleaness and amount of upper midrange that the client desired on their own cuts. Both of these guys are very very good at getting very high levels for dance cuts while still maintaining presence and a decently clean and trackable record. To me these are factors that much more have to do with the experience of the cutting engineer (and the quality of the gear they get to use) than the nation the cutting facility is located in!!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[7 Hz]

I am refering to specificaly Detroit cuts made at NSC compared to any UK cut I have heard so far. At this point though, I accept this is my personal opinion, and I have to say am not interested in making anyone else agree with me about it. It's a big world lots of room for everyone and we need as many cutting rooms as possible UK USA or anywhere else for that matter.

[Paul Gold]

I don't have experience cutting on a Scully although there is one parked outside my door that I don't wish to see inside my door.

A common phrase used by people who have used both is that a Scully is a GTO and a Neumann is a Porche. You can beat the crap out of a Scully and it will still go, but if you want performance...I think National uses solid state Westrex amps. I know there were two generations of them. The first were seriously underpowered. Current limiting may be beneficial in some cases.

The HT66 limiters in the older Neumann VG66 are sloppy, but sound better then the Westrex HF limiter. I have used both of these. For the HT66's to really protect the cutterhead they do have to kick in pretty early. I've been told that the Westrex heads can take more of a beating. They are certainly much easier to rebuild.

[PMDUBS]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

I am refering to specificaly Detroit cuts made at NSC compared to any UK cut I have heard so far.

First let me say I am not trying to win a point, so please understand its all in good fun....on to the nsc tip:

In my experience with nsc cuts they are not low-bass heavy. Ron has spent many years cutting techno and has cut some very very loud sides using the common sense approach to keeping impact without the frequency extremes. He does a great job of it! I think in this case its practice makes perfect..well better at least. Not too mention the personal relationship he has developed with a lot of the producers, thus getting the mixes in how he wants them (at least I suppose this is the case..)

EP

[Bob Olhsson]

I've always thought of a Westrex/Haeco vs. a Neumann cutter being a lot like comparing a really great dynamic mike to a top quality condenser. In general the Neumann is a step up but the Westrex/Haeco is very forgiving which can help some mixes out a lot.

If you follow Neumann's instructions to the letter, it is hard to cut competitive levels however a Neumann system can be tweaked into cutting just as hot as anything. I cut some of the hottest 45 singles in history using a Neumann at Motown.

[Paul Gold]

Originally Posted by 7 Hz

what I am saying is the Neuman was designed to cut a long program material on each side (than the older Scullys) - this was the drive for the design of the Neumann, and limits it a bit compared to the Scully for cutting really loud bassy stuff.

As has been pointed out there is no reason you can't cut fixed pitch on a Neumann. I think the differences you hear have more to do with operator than equipment. But there is something that has crossed my mind about the Neumann SAL/VG74 rack.

In the circuit breaker there are two ways to open (trip) it while the head is dropped. The obvious one is by excessive heat in the drive coils. The other one which is not well known is a diode clamp that will trip when it senses more low end than the cutter head can produce. The phyiscal limitation (extention) of the torsion tubes that vibrate the stylus. It's possible that the mechanism in the Westrex head has a longer throw. Thereby allowing for larger low frequency velocity. Could also be BS.

[Gengy]

Originally Posted by bob humid

okay, I am going to fu*ck up some ppl who hold "secret" knowledge for eternity .. but I am soooo bored of vinyl cutters not talking to clients about freaking technical details..

here are some important issues when vinyl cutting... (simple and ruff.. there is much more to the topic but I am in a hurry):

1)
cut off the infrasub below 15Hz.. tone arms resonate around 5-10Hz and the needle will jump when played back on turntables...

2)
check the phase alignment of everything below 500Hz .. should be very mono. how do you check? with a phase meter (keep it green) OR simply press MONO on your mixer / amp and listen if the bass is diminuished.. if so take out that cathedral reverb from the subsonics! ;-) .. kepp the stereo-wideners up of 500Hz!

3)
carefull with hihats around 8.4 KHz .. or "S"-tones in vocals... DE-ESS the shit out of it, really do... they will sound MUCH more aggressive on vinyl - you are going to regret it... the SHURE SM58 sounds like crap when recorded on vinyl.

for dance music I place a "safety" sharp butterworth 5 or 6 LO-PASS filter at around 18.5 or 19 KHz to avoid intermodulation of highs to lower frequencies (happens sometimes) ..

and the most important rule:

4)
keep it very, very slick and fat. weak mixes will sound terrible on vinyl.. good mixes will translate good even if the cutter is lazy or has a bad day.

5)
dont exagerate with loudness... that especially applies to vinyl. -12dB RMS is really hot enough.. the cutter should decide how hot he can print the whole plate...

6)
for 33 1/3 RPM (dance): keep the side under 15 mintes IN ANY CASE or it will sound like garbage. under 12 minutes will shine.

for 45 RPM (dance): keep the side under 9 minutes IN ANY CASE or it will sound worse then 33 1/3 (good 33 1/3 is superior to bad 45er cuts). for very loud an d crips records stay under 6 minutes for a 45er cut. these ones are my favourites..

7)
if you dont do much bass and you have a more "hifi-ish" recording try DMM (direct metal mastering) .. it sounds pretty close to heaven if done properly

just my few lazy answers...

I wish you phat tracks.

robert

I am totally in agreement!thumbsup

[ak23]

Originally Posted by bob humid

yes, you are absolutely right to say this if you cut in UK or US and the cutter is working properly. simon from the exchange in london does a great job most of the time and I am pretty sure you do to... but the situation in germany is very different. often there is no real sonic quality control, cuts are made on-the-fly with presets (even they claim they have quality control, I know most of them cant afford to actually perform it) so the client has to be very carefully with checking the cut for distortions.

also, over here if you are heading a certain impact on the dancefloor youll have to do a good part of the leveling yourself since the vinyl masterings here in germany dont have a very good sweetening / compression sound in my ears. some of them do cut good - but then, hey! they all sound the same! they carry a sonic signature that you have to pay for even if you want your material to translate as 1:1 as possible and you dont want to sound like all the others who go 2 the same cutter... its hopeless.

i dont want to generalise, I am sure there is someone who can cut a good plate ON THE FIRST TAKE in germany - but I didnt met her or him yet...

my recomendations have been made upon having to accept the fact that if I want a good vinyl cut Ill have to master it myself and try to avoid the possible traps and physical limitations from scratch... the first cut is ALWAYS bad over here, its after that 1st or 2nd reclamation cut that you start doing corrections, tweakings and then things get better... way better.

I wish I could trust the cutters over here but there has been too many messed up cuts in my life ;-)

and then simon is always louder and brighter... ha!

robert

hi,

i just signed up to gearslutz and was looking for vinyl related topics
and found this older post and could not resist post my thoughts about it:

The thread is allright but then I read the answer of Bob. His first one was abolutely right, the basic things you should take care of when producing for vinyl.

but Bob you won´t get a good cut in whole Germany ??
this is just not true. i think we haven´t worked together so far.

It seems that no german disk cutting/mastering studios are listening here
or are they don´t care ...??

Protest Protest Protest

Indeed all studios sound different, because they all have a slightly different
signal chain.
But basicly they all use (98%) a VG or SAL74b + SX74 cutterhead.
Big difference makes also the desk you use, most british studios (when i was there) were not using a Neumann desk or only a part of it, and had a short signalpath which leeds
to a good sound or if they use a Neumann desk it is modified or the latest Neumann which is quite ok. Some studios prefer a vintage sound so they use
their old SP-72 desk without much mods. It´s up to them.

Before i purchased my lathe i was running with the same production from studio to studio (in germany & UK) and let all make a 1:1 cut on a transco dubplate with a very very similar level.
So i could check the lathe´s i wanted to buy and compare if ithey sounding great enough or better then others.

Years ago i worked in a studio with a Neumann lathe which just don´t wanted to sound as great as others, so we compared to other studios, let them cut a dub and listened in our studio and tried to get the same or similar quality without success also after optimising a lot of things. It was exactly the same one like in the other studios got. When the studio closed down i did NOT buy this lathe for sure

So back to the dubplate test:

i was able to get an overview how some studios sound like and there were differences for sure.
(OK now some people might say: every studio using different convertes, cables etc, but i did not cut a high end recording just a well produced dynamic dance track)

This is the only way to find it out. It will cost some bucks but this is the ONLY way
to get a feeling of the studio and have a good reference for you final pressing.

I really freak out when people compare their production A cut done at studio X and pressed at plant Y
Then go with a different production named B to studio Z and press at plant Y and

say: Studio X does a better cut then studio Z !!!

This is not gonna work beause none of the productions are sounding the same, nor the pressing.

With a testpressing you cannot really be sure if there is something not right because it could be a quality problem of the pressing plant too, if you have more ore less distortions as well as lost of highs, surface noise rumble harsh sound etc. etc.

Especially with some plant´s they produce a very different quality. I always inspect the records here with the microscope so you can see a lot
and compared how it sounds like after my cut i also compare it with my partial testcuts here. Sometimes it is a horror to listen to them and sometime i can
understand custumers who are not happy with there record quality.

Worst thing is, that most Artists or Labels think :

If the record sounds bad

The guilty guy can only be the "Disk Cutting/Mastering Studio"

never the Artist himself with his low budget production done on a laptop from Aldi
with pirate music software (That is the worst case indeed


So they judge before they switched on their brains and give us a call.
Good thing is that with only 1-2% of all or cuts/masterings people are not happy with so we have possibly one or two calles a month.

But of course i know that it is difficult to talk to a pressing plant about the sound quality because they don´t know how it sounded on the lacquer disk.
And usually ansers: "We did not the sound, we are just pressing"
But often i convince them to work on the metallworks again and do new testpressings.

Talking about distortions:
The productions which we cut are mostly dance, some audiphile, some rock and jazz.

But basicly 95% dance, which is now all made digital except of some guys who are
working more old school with much better results.

In most cases analog productions of electronic music translates much better onto Vinyl the digital ones.

We indeed have some good and a few very good digital
productions but
most stuff is really crap and a hell to cut, especially that sharp minimal techno hihats. they can sound ok here on the lacquer after some treatment but the pressing is distorting like hell.
Not to mention the thin cold sound...

If you inspect the hihats under the microscope you can really see that this
sharp transient shaped impulses are very difficult to track with a DJ Cartridge.
Much better with a HiFi Cartridge but you cannot use them in a Club.

So you got loads of distortions and different results with every Cartridge.

MY Standart question is when a client complains : What cartridge are you using?,
how old is your Stylus?, is your TT adjusted properly? What Preamp/Mixer are u using? When i compare my High End Setup with a Pioneer DJM Mixer + Ortofon Concorde i could run out of the studio and cry but this is the situation in most clubs at the moment.


So the limitation of sound quality on vinyl is the popular digital electronic music itself!

An very important Part of good sound is the right choice of the right cutting/mastering people who possibly like or understand you music.

And most important is the motivation of the ME.

I got very very much complaints from artists who cut outside germany at
a well known facilitiy they were popular some years ago where like 50% of all dance an techno cuts were done.

Then i analysed and checked the sound and the grooves and found
out that they did some special prices for their cuts and worked with like
presets you thought the german are working with. But my experience was exactely the opposite. But this was just one particular studio in the UK.

In germany you can find a as in most countries a lot of different & good studios, all have different ME´s and sound. If no studio fit´s or you thing all are bad to be very true :

Then this is probably not the fault of the studios

I mean i would not cut at a pressing plant´s room because here in germany there is afaik no ME into dance music, so forget about it.

Pressing Plants:

i recommend always Pallas then Optimal as the best constant sounding plant´s here in germany.
They do have a good quality control, especially Pallas listening to the mother and do corrections if there is a crackle or overcut etc.. Great. Most audiophile Jazz and Classical music is pressed there.
Very good and constant quality are delivered also by Record Industry in Holland.
But there are some plant´s too (which name i will not post) they produce bad pressings and have a bad galvanik, so if a record sounds good it is just good luck.

Music:

Some music just translates fine on lacquer some not.

With some music my neck hairs are standing up in the air while other sounds like my lathe is broken.

In most cases i can say it
sounds better on my lacquer disk then from the digital source. If that would
not be the case i probably would not do this job i love and live every day.

this was my first post, maybe a bit critical but i hope to made some things more
clear to people whenever they read this post

best regards

Andreas @ Schnittstelle

Schnittstelle
Mastering & Vinylschnitt
Frankfurt - Germany

http://www.myspace.com/schnittstelle_mastering

[orson]

Originally Posted by bob humid

can we please clone you and let those clones infiltrate some of the german vinyl cutting places? ;-)

I like what you said about loving what you do...

respex for your attitude

robert

indeed .. big up jason and transition!!


bob ... you should ask for rashad @ http://www.dubplates-mastering.com/

[807Recordings]

I have cut two records with Nilz at The Exchange. Both files where sent in at 24bit 96Khz though the next 12" might come off 1/2 " tape. Either way, on the mix-down (master files) I did not use a limiter. I made sure to leave some head room to about -6dBs and an average of about -10dBs RMS. We cut both side of the release at 45RPM and understood the 6min guide line for time. This is analog so you have to respect the laws of mixdowns. Also because a large part of my audience and especially the people who will buy the records will play it on extreme club systems and PA's there was no need to make the release louder but rather let the dynamics flow. Countless times I have proven this theory with test pressings and dub-plates of the music we do. Every-time one of our tracks came on against the squashed stuff by most producers who listen far too much to pop radio guys our stuff just got deeper, louder, and fuller sounding. Know your audience!!!!

Other things I kept in mind when producing the music was to keep things like low drum kicks in mono, not make the mix too bright but also not over eq stuff. Many good mix engineers already know this who worked in the analog domain though this art is getting lost a bit. Either way even if going digital for home theatre markets or whatever with mono subs its still a good idea.

Also who you do your final pressings with will make a huge difference in the final product. We chose Pallas in Germany and by far its the best vinyl I have made to date. 180g dead silent stuff. And yes the bass at 45RPM is just insane so that whole cutting at 33 1/3 is not always a rule. On a side note the mastering engineer did a slight eq on the bass so the RMS became closer to -14dBs and the vinyl is louder than most other records I play it against but with lost of space between it. It is funny when we took it to stores watching the look on buyers an dj's faces when they heard how much more bass and volume there was against the other crap out there. Often they had to turn the mixer down and flatten the EQs. Each time though everyone had a smile on their face. ;-)



Edit:
Know the rules, choose the right engineer, shit in shit out. Keep in mind that vinyl and most analog music is a labour or passion of love. You get what you put in but in some ways it like painting. If you do not know your brushes, paints, and textures when you go to your canvas you won't create anything great or even decent that you can snap together in photoshop. If you do your homework and search your steps and products then a great work of art can be created.

[Paul Gold]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings;1067786/

but also not over eq stuff. Many good mix engineers already know this who worked in the analog domain though this art is getting lost a bit.

Vinyl is particularly sensitive to heavy EQ. Things that have been "corrected" with heavy EQ and sound fine on CD sound very distorted on vinyl.

[maxcherry]

ive been applying your knowledge already on my music like keeping things mono sub500,and switching to mono and hearing no audiable difference.but my software(logic only allows eq down to 20 hertz but i suppose cutting that is better than not?? would you suggest a graphic over the master know any great one's also and ive checked out the butterworth you get the feeling that it sounds as good as it looks...anyway your info is adawned and applicated......


1)
cut off the infrasub below 15Hz.. tone arms resonate around 5-10Hz and the needle will jump when played back on turntables...

2)
check the phase alignment of everything below 500Hz .. should be very mono. how do you check? with a phase meter (keep it green) OR simply press MONO on your mixer / amp and listen if the bass is diminuished.. if so take out that cathedral reverb from the subsonics! ;-) .. kepp the stereo-wideners up of 500Hz!

3)
carefull with hihats around 8.4 KHz .. or "S"-tones in vocals... DE-ESS the shit out of it, really do... they will sound MUCH more aggressive on vinyl - you are going to regret it... the SHURE SM58 sounds like crap when recorded on vinyl.

for dance music I place a "safety" sharp butterworth 5 or 6 LO-PASS filter at around 18.5 or 19 KHz to avoid intermodulation of highs to lower frequencies (happens sometimes) ..

and the most important rule:

4)
keep it very, very slick and fat. weak mixes will sound terrible on vinyl.. good mixes will translate good even if the cutter is lazy or has a bad day.

5)
dont exagerate with loudness... that especially applies to vinyl. -12dB RMS is really hot enough.. the cutter should decide how hot he can print the whole plate...

6)
for 33 1/3 RPM (dance): keep the side under 15 mintes IN ANY CASE or it will sound like garbage. under 12 minutes will shine.

for 45 RPM (dance): keep the side under 9 minutes IN ANY CASE or it will sound worse then 33 1/3 (good 33 1/3 is superior to bad 45er cuts). for very loud an d crips records stay under 6 minutes for a 45er cut. these ones are my favourites..

7)
if you dont do much bass and you have a more "hifi-ish" recording try DMM (direct metal mastering) .. it sounds pretty close to heaven if done properly

just my few lazy answers...

I wish you phat tracks.

robert[/QUOTE]

[bob humid]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

I have cut two records with Nilz at The Exchange. Both files where sent in at 24bit 96Khz though the next 12" might come off 1/2 " tape. Either way, on the mix-down (master files) I did not use a limiter. I made sure to leave some head room to about -6dBs and an average of about -10dBs RMS. We cut both side of the release at 45RPM and understood the 6min guide line for time. This is analog so you have to respect the laws of mixdowns. Also because a large part of my audience and especially the people who will buy the records will play it on extreme club systems and PA's there was no need to make the release louder but rather let the dynamics flow. Countless times I have proven this theory with test pressings and dub-plates of the music we do. Every-time one of our tracks came on against the squashed stuff by most producers who listen far too much to pop radio guys our stuff just got deeper, louder, and fuller sounding. Know your audience!!!!

Other things I kept in mind when producing the music was to keep things like low drum kicks in mono, not make the mix too bright but also not over eq stuff. Many good mix engineers already know this who worked in the analog domain though this art is getting lost a bit. Either way even if going digital for home theatre markets or whatever with mono subs its still a good idea.

Also who you do your final pressings with will make a huge difference in the final product. We chose Pallas in Germany and by far its the best vinyl I have made to date. 180g dead silent stuff. And yes the bass at 45RPM is just insane so that whole cutting at 33 1/3 is not always a rule. On a side note the mastering engineer did a slight eq on the bass so the RMS became closer to -14dBs and the vinyl is louder than most other records I play it against but with lost of space between it. It is funny when we took it to stores watching the look on buyers an dj's faces when they heard how much more bass and volume there was against the other crap out there. Often they had to turn the mixer down and flatten the EQs. Each time though everyone had a smile on their face. ;-)



Edit:
Know the rules, choose the right engineer, shit in shit out. Keep in mind that vinyl and most analog music is a labour or passion of love. You get what you put in but in some ways it like painting. If you do not know your brushes, paints, and textures when you go to your canvas you won't create anything great or even decent that you can snap together in photoshop. If you do your homework and search your steps and products then a great work of art can be created.

nice post. ...

just that "180gramm" thing .. its a myth that thick vinyl sounds better then thin.

no difference.

but there is a feeling of "heavyness" that translates to your emotional world, regarding that "weight" of the record and such.

considering postage costs I would always choose the lighter vinyls ;-)

robert

[807Recordings]

Originally Posted by Paul Gold

Vinyl is particularly sensitive to heavy EQ. Things that have been "corrected" with heavy EQ and sound fine on CD sound very distorted on vinyl.

Yes and that is why I keep close contact with my ME. Sometimes I say this is what I am looking for or do a mix down with the eq in the range I like it but then send the raw mix to them. Like most things analog (e,g. Film) you sort of need to see the end product in your mind first.

I don't have Mastering Level EQ or the cutter to test. They do and can adjust it just right.


The Myth that vinyl has rolled off high-end also has a lot to do with the actual cutter, playing speed that the vinyl was cut at, and playing time.

6 min 45RPM for me. 180 Gram I can't say sound better cuz it is heavier but the quality has to do with the virgin process, who I use for their actual vinyl production, etc.


The other reason I use Pallas if I have never mentioned for my plating and pressing is because they actually go through the mothers with a special tool and microscope and look for bits of material that might have been left from the plating process. They are crazy Germans who do a lot of classical music of the highest standards. No point having a good master if you have a noisy plating.


Vinyl is High-resolution

[bob humid]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

The Myth that vinyl has rolled off high-end also has a lot to do with the actual cutter, playing speed that the vinyl was cut at, and playing time.

yes, time (length) and sound. its very important to know that a well-balanced mix will translate perfect to vinyl but as soon as you hit against the limits of vinyl cutting physics you get artefacts. I dont want artefacts in my music. if there is artefacts in my music its because I want it so... I am all for transparency.

all the cutters have a dynamic HF limiter in the mastering process. its there for exagerated peaks in the high range... and in my experience most vinyls that ppl claim to sound "better then the CD" just do so because the diminuished high freqs just give you a more relaxed, warmer und less "stressing" hearing experience. together with the fact that hot (loud cuts) vinyl always introduc distortion it leads to the fact that a lot of ppl love that "FAT" sound of vinyl. you can pretty much fake that sound with a good EQ and a high-end saturation tool...

so, what I want to say is: if you want a pristine clean, transparent vinyl that can compete with high resolution digital recording of today you should definetly head for 6 minutes as 807 said...

6 to 8.30 minutes on 45ers for 12" dance stuff and it might sound better then any CD ..

or

DMM (Direct Metal Mastering) for very long albums if you want to compete with a well mastered CD...

otherwise there is NO way to cut a 45 minutes album to vinyl on 33 1/3 and make it compete with even a 16 bit CD... I own a LOT of records, with cuts from The Exchange to Teldec DMM and I have seen no such thing. this is why the CD won the temporary media race back in the late 80ies...

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

6 min 45RPM for me. 180 Gram I can't say sound better cuz it is heavier but the quality has to do with the virgin process, who I use for their actual vinyl production, etc.
Vinyl is High-resolution

don't generalise that please.. ppl might think it wrong.

truth is:
Vinyl CAN be High-Resolution

the weight has no impact on the sound. but, yes the length does have .. 6 minutes is the perfect length! but there are VERY good 12"es mastered up to 9 minutes length... so that gives some room for experimentation.

I have been pre-mastering a lot of records for mathias schaffhäuser's WARE records and the cuts made a huge quality jump after I could convince the label manager not to exceed the 15 minutes length per side... no bass and transparency with a 20 minutes cut ...

[807Recordings]

^^
Funny thing about vinyl vs CD....
I have an Audio Research PH3 and Reference Preamp vs 2.
Various other systems also that ended up before I left Canada including Classe and B&W speakers, Wilson, etc.

I have SACD of some living Stereo recording, shaded dog, etc
and 50cent LP found in a bin. Often the Vinyl I could extract more and here more. The CD in comparison of many things even on the TEAC Esoteric player was not as good.
On more modern stuff that comes through some sort of digital master that often seemed to sort of go the other way.

Analog has a quality when done well. My best cuts always came from tape to vinyl. I guess they work similar in that you can't give too much to tape or you get distortions, etc. But this should be known by a good mixer.

However back to the SACD vs the shaded dog..... It is different. Vinyl does colour sound and especially towards the center. However I never heard a CD on a good system top a decent vinyl playback.

I do have vinyl though that totally sux and is mastered totally wrong.

Is and apple better than a steak? Same diff

[bob humid]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

^^
Funny thing about vinyl vs CD....
I have an Audio Research PH3 and Reference Preamp vs 2.
Various other systems also that ended up before I left Canada including Classe and B&W speakers, Wilson, etc.

I have SACD of some living Stereo recording, shaded dog, etc
and 50cent LP found in a bin. Often the Vinyl I could extract more and here more. The CD in comparison of many things even on the TEAC Esoteric player was not as good.
On more modern stuff that comes through some sort of digital master that often seemed to sort of go the other way.

Analog has a quality when done well. My best cuts always came from tape to vinyl. I guess they work similar in that you can't give too much to tape or you get distortions, etc. But this should be known by a good mixer.

However back to the SACD vs the shaded dog..... It is different. Vinyl does colour sound and especially towards the center. However I never heard a CD on a good system top a decent vinyl playback.

I do have vinyl though that totally sux and is mastered totally wrong.

Is and apple better than a steak? Same diff

mate, don't hate me for saying that...

"Analog" does not have a quality. It IS the objective quality. It is the way nature would like to represent sound.

But "Digital" has been able to reproduce the very same quality because a good AD-converter will put back this bits into a natural waveform and then its just a question of linear amplification and linear reproduction within a fairly good room acoustic environment (which I rarely witness).

no one on earth will be able to distinguish a 24 bit / 192 KHz recording from a high-end analogue tape... its not possible because it sounds pretty much the same. you can only distinguish the LIMITS of the medium when the medium was not used right (by purpose or by accident) = distortion, underrunning sample rate etc...

for example:
recording +5dB on high-end analogue tape is a misusage of that analog medium. it does colour non-aggressive mixes in a way that is pleasing to the ear, because it adds energy and edgyness in form of harmonic distortion and reduced peaks and transient attack.

usally "recording" was invented to CAPTURE nature, not to enhance, or falsifcate it... but sometimes we need to enhance a music production to make it MORE prominent.

however: I don't want to sound boring, but most "great" sounding vinyls are just great because they play back that complexity we expect from them:

noise, crackle, harmonic distortion and the momentum that a big black plate of plastic with a nice printed label evokes on us when we take it out of the sleeve: its sexy... it feels good. and sometimes it sounds very good. I would say that from most my vinyl recordings in the shelf.. only 20% sound really good. this is because half of them are albums and albums dont translate well on vinyl due to physical limitations...

I love vinyl. I just negate to accept that its soooo much better then digital. I accept that CD is a weak medium (16 bit is a joke, as is MP3) and I would love to see 24 Bit / 96 KHz audio-CDs as a standard...

again: the thing that vinyl addicts usally miss is the fact that digital is TOTALLY HONEST when done right. all that brilliance and clarity and transparency. it scares some of us...

another problem: digital 0, absolut silence (between tracks) is something a mastering engineer tries to avoid if he is making the PQ-editing for an album. digital silence, the absence of anything, just sounds very, very lonely. with a vinyl you will have some really nice -50 dB of hiss going on all the time... talk about dynamic range here... what dynamic range? ;-)

ah, yes. that leads me to another point of what ppl like in vinyl sound: hiss.

its all well documented.. we have dithering and such things, u know..

[807Recordings]

Just my opinion on this:
Vinyl sounds right when done right. As a DJ there is nothing digital that touches it. Believe me I had ran Mastering quality convertors out our CDJ's on the Alpha dynacord system we had in toronto. Even the Berghain here in Germany the vinyl sound better.
""Sounds Better""
Yes that is subjective. If I was in the business to make boring but technically good records I would do something different than use tape, vinyl, etc.
Digital's biggest weakness to me is the actual convertors and the media types.

YES I finally heard Pink Floyd Dark Side of the moon in SACD and forgetaboutit. No vinyl I have topped it. I have heard also on some SACD the limitations even of tape. I can't remember what SACD it is as it is trapped in a box in Canada right now but the Symphony recording on the SACD is just scary awesome.

Point is at this period of time for me as a DJ and Producer there is just nothing as tactile, immediate, and better designed than vinyl.

As a music lover, whatever does the job the best I say.

Steak or apple, like I said. What is better? None if used right they all have their places where they outshine each other. It comes down to taste and situation.

[bob humid]

Originally Posted by 807Recordings

Just my opinion on this:
Vinyl sounds right when done right. As a DJ there is nothing digital that touches it. Believe me I had ran Mastering quality convertors out our CDJ's on the Alpha dynacord system we had in toronto. Even the Berghain here in Germany the vinyl sound better.
""Sounds Better""
Yes that is subjective. If I was in the business to make boring but technically good records I would do something different than use tape, vinyl, etc.
Digital's biggest weakness to me is the actual convertors and the media types.

YES I finally heard Pink Floyd Dark Side of the moon in SACD and forgetaboutit. No vinyl I have topped it. I have heard also on some SACD the limitations even of tape. I can't remember what SACD it is as it is trapped in a box in Canada right now but the Symphony recording on the SACD is just scary awesome.

Point is at this period of time for me as a DJ and Producer there is just nothing as tactile, immediate, and better designed than vinyl.

As a music lover, whatever does the job the best I say.

Steak or apple, like I said. What is better? None if used right they all have their places where they outshine each other. It comes down to taste and situation.

that is exactly what I said: Vinyl DOES sound better then CD when done right:

- between 6-9 minutes per side
- 45 RPM
- excellent mix and mastering
- good cutting
- good pressing

if you reduce hat specs vinyl always sounds worse then an excellently produced and mastered CD ....

tons of proof out there.

I have been comparing CDs and vinyl in clubs for ages. I have witnessed the same thing as you: as soon as I put a record on, things get alive. but just in comparison and ONLY if I was using 45ers. NONE of the 33 1/3 cuts I have can compete with a good CD master...

also: MP3s suck galore in the club. its like someone is putting a curtain before the music. ..

it is the missing treble on the vinyl cuts plus the harmonic distortion that ppl like. did you read what I wrote up there?

sorry to tell you by demistifing it, but I dont know why I should go on supporting that mythology. I dont believe in gods either.. ;-) - just in soulful music.b

the whole topic is WAY to complex to reduce it to "vinyl sounds better then CD" ... the problem is that noone brings 24 bit / 96 KHz WAVs into the club that have been EQed and saturated in order to compete with the coloured vinyl-sound.. also, I dont think very good of the converters in modern CD-players... but generally spoken everybody in digital domain knows that today we have really good DA converters (in sound-cards)... so that is not the problem.

and about Berghain... of course minimal tech(house) that was produced in a very slick way, with loads of space inbetween the notes, sounds great when cut on vinyl. it just gets the missing harmonic distortion that should have been added in the first place ...



EDIT:
the reason why the vinyl version of "dark side..." is probably more sexy then CD and SACD might be the fact that you miss all the hiss and crackle and saturation ;-) ...

its funny. remastering engineers should treat some old masters with artefacts to really reproduce the way this music has been listened to back then ... ;-)

EDIT2:
I think you consider another guy at the UAD-forum. I am not a big fan of Pink Floyd after Ummagumma and The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn ... Syd Barret was such a loss... ;-)

[JCC]

hey robert,
I have great respect from your knowledge, and I'm hungry for knowledge about sound quality. That's why I want to ask if you could answer me two questions.

Originally Posted by bob humid

also: MP3s suck galore in the club. its like someone is putting a curtain before the music. ..

I agree that there are some parts where you can hear small differences between a wav and a 320 kbit mp3 at loud volume (this is important) on a a really good monitor system or good headphones. I did some A/B blind tests.

I think you can hear it best at transients, which seems to smear a little bit (and when you look at the technical limitations from mp3 that transients make sense too) . BUT - do you really think that you can't play 320 mp3 at a club? Do you really think that the difference to a wav/cd is so obvious on a quality club system?

I don't have access to really good PAs or club systems (like funktion one) to test it myself. But I know a lot of clubs and most of the time I think that the sound system is too bad to hear such subtle differences.

I really would love to get a qualified opinion, like yours, on that topic.

Originally Posted by bob humid

I have been comparing CDs and vinyl in clubs for ages. I have witnessed the same thing as you: as soon as I put a record on, things get alive. but just in comparison and ONLY if I was using 45ers. NONE of the 33 1/3 cuts I have can compete with a good CD master...

I wonder what is better from a good vinyl cut (45... and the stuff you said) to a 44 khz 16 bit wav. As you said, I can only think of the ear pleasing distortion. Can you describe it a bit more detailed, what is exactly better from a good vinyl aside from that ?


best regards

[bob humid]

Originally Posted by JCC

hey robert,
I have great respect from your knowledge, and I'm hungry for knowledge about sound quality. That's why I want to ask if you could answer me two questions.

I think you can hear it best at transients, which seems to smear a little bit (and when you look at the technical limitations from mp3 that transients make sense too) . BUT - do you really think that you can't play 320 mp3 at a club? Do you really think that the difference to a wav/cd is so obvious on a quality club system?

I wonder what is better from a good vinyl cut (45... and the stuff you said) to a 44 khz 16 bit wav. As you said, I can only think of the ear pleasing distortion. Can you describe it a bit more detailed, what is exactly better from a good vinyl aside from that ?


best regards

hey JCC,

don't worry. you can play 320 Kb/s MP3s in the club. an MP3 can sound better (=less worse) then a bad vinyl cut. but if you have the choice between a CD and its MP3 choose the CD, it will have better depth resolution.

the transients are definitely the most obvious thing that suffers from MP3-translation. the problem is: we need the transients from the pre-delays (look up Haaz-effect ) in the mix in order to recognize the depth.-stage of the music. if the transients are unnaturally shaped, then the depth perception is corrupted in comparison to the digital version, which is 1:1 (except for its bitrate resolution) .. lets sum up the negative sides (artefacts) of the 3 mediums. maybe it gets clearer then:

Vinyl:
tends to get distorted and saturated when the playtime is too long. S and F consonants in vocals or hi-hats can get severly transformed into some unpleasant sounds. the top end above 12KHz gets HF-limited.

MP3:
the frequencies are all there in nowadays algorithms, but the transients get corrupted, even at 320 Kb/s. hence the space and dimension of a record will suffer. always. just compare, standing in the middle of a GOOD stereo triangle and do the A/B (CD vs. MP3).

CD:
bad for dynamic music as jazz and classical music. 0dB full scale = 16 bit, -6dB are 15 bit, -12dB are only 14 bit and so on. ... no problem with dance music since it will be play only in the range of -10dB to 0dB, can sound terrific.

so. why do ppl dance in clubs even if they are listening to MP3s or bad vinyl cuts? because at high volume levels we loose objectivity easily...

loudness triggers attention proportionally!

also the DJ will instinctively add some trebble or volume to a bad MP3 in order to compensate for any lack of momentum produced by the inferior media or master. a good DJ always equalizes and is very sensitive with the gain-stage.

also, it has to be considered that a certain media can fit better or worse with a certain club-pa set-up and its acoustics. for example: vinyl will sound better in bad acoustics due to the missing top end. CDs (having the full frequency range and intact top end) will sound less stressing (probably better in the ear of some) in a very smooth, reflection-poor (damped) acoustical environment...

hope I could clearify a bit



cheers,

robert

[JCC]

Thanks robert, that makes perfect sense to me and confirmed my estimation regarding different media. Even if feelings are the most important part of music, I'm just as interested in the 'science of sound'. I don't know if it's the academic person in me, but I really like to know what's going on and not just rely on half knowledge and fairy tales.

ah... and frohe weihnachten