Thoughts on Walter Sear Tape Op interview?

[NathanEldred]

This has to be one of the best mag interviews from an engineer I've read, especially from Tape Op. Walter tells it like it is, no bullshit, no ego. I would go so far as to say it's essential reading for Gearslutz everywhere.

[avare]

Thanks Nathan!

Andre

[Ckevperry]

Definitely a great article...but I have to say I believe high end digital is bit better sounding than Mr. Sear feels.

[genericperson]

can you give us a quick summary of his main thoughts?

[djui5]

Yeah Nathan..I don't subscribe to tape op...at least not untill today...is there a PDF of the interview we could read or something?..

I tried to find it on the tape op site but to no avail..unless I missed something.

[NathanEldred]

I'm not sure if they print their articles online, if they do I don't think it will be from the current issue (I just received mine today). I'll ask John and Larry if they could do a PDF or at least a text reprint on the Tape Op site in the near future, maybe when the next issue comes out.

[chessparov]

Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.

4) Digital is years behind analog in sound quality.

5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.

Feel free to discuss any other points in this provocative interview in addition.

Chris

[toolstudio]

[quote]Originally posted by chessparov
Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

Yes, definatly, but depending on the music genre. CDs doesn't sound that good (brilliant compared to the new "standart" (MP3)



2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

Yes, you hear it every day on the radio.
And I don't only mean that guy who waiting so long to do everything at home, these guys only exist because of some record company guys who are even simpler built. But I see it coming back on them in a hard way.
But, sometimes I'm pretty happy I don't need to work with them anymore. You all know these guys who think if they have the gear you use, they could make it at home.
Bought back much of the nice gear from them,.. used,... for great prices...



3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.


Don't know about that, I let my ear proove and I hear a big difference when I track (Studer A800) and mix (1/2" A820) to analog or to digital.
Don't know if that is Mr. Nyquists fault, or simply digital faults.



4) Digital is about five years behind analog.


I don't know if these are 5 years. I think that both could work.
What is the plan behind that, trying to get digital sound as good as analog ?????? Why the hell not use analog ???
It would only make sense if it will be superior, or am I getting something wrong



5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.


I'm not sure we could hear it, but we definatly could feel it and it makes a big difference how we feel/hear the music
as an complete picture.


My 2 EuroCent

wolfgang

toolhouse studios, germany

[djui5]

Originally posted by chessparov
Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

They're different. Sonically cd's are better...but I like the sound of vinyl better.

2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

I wouldn't say that....the games changed for sure but there is still plenty of professional engineers around. There are more unprofessional engineers versus professional ones....so I guess the ratio of bad engineers is greater.

3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.

Has anyone proved this yet?

4) Digital is about five years behind analog.

This is a broad statement with no scientific backing....and by what do you mean "5 years behind analog"?..in what fashion...

5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.

As said earlier..we can't actually hear them..but feel them. And there's been many studies and arguments about this....I believe we feel them quite high into the freq range..

Feel free to discuss any other points in this provocative nterview in addition.

Chris

I haven't read the article yet....

[NYC Drew]

Originally posted by chessparov
Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.

4) Digital is about five years behind analog.

5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.

Feel free to discuss any other points in this provocative nterview in addition.

Chris

1. LP's sound better than CD's if you were exposed to LP's prior to CD's. As a former DJ, and now engineer, I find that CD's are sonically more advanced and superior to LPs.

2. This is called change. If he said this in an interview, he should remember he (nor anyone else alive today) did not sit and draft the standards for the "industry". It always changes. A lot of those dimwits that "we" look down on keep a lot of companies profitable by buying their gear and software.

3. Why does Nyquist's theories matter if you're getting your job not done? What does that have to do with anything under the sun?

4. So let's see...that would make digital the equivalent to where analog was in 1999? WRONG! Maybe if we'd said 20 years behind, and that too would be wrong. The course that analog and digital chart are very different. There may never be "timeline" comparisions that work, they may never be equal. Why can't they be complimentary?

5. I can't hear SHIT above 14.8kHz. How do you prove something like this? More than likely, I can FEEL things above/below the audible thresholds.

Hopefully, I'll get my copy in the mail today.

[robdarling]

When Walter says that analog is far superior to digital, he is speaking of analog that most people never hear. He is not talking about 9k's and VR's, not even your average 8068, and he isn't talking about your basic 827. He is talking about perfectly maintained, well-modified engineering excellence. He is talking about equipment that has been made as good as it can be through rigorous examination and experimentation. His equipment sounds fantastic and without hearing it, you can't really know just what a different bar he is measuring from.

[Jim Williams]

Reading it reminded me of an old Sci-Fi movie I saw a while back.

Someone asks, "why do you keep the old guy around?"

Then the other guy answers, "he knows how to fix the machines".

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by NathanEldred
This has to be one of the best mag interviews from an engineer I've read, especially from Tape Op. Walter tells it like it is, no bullshit, no ego. I would go so far as to say it's essential reading for Gearslutz everywhere.

Walter and no ego?

Those are two sentences that probably don't go together.

[Musiclab]

Originally posted by chessparov
Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.

4) Digital is about five years behind analog.

5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.

Feel free to discuss any other points in this provocative interview in addition.

Chris

LP's can sound better with an amazing turntable and a clean pressing of the record. But if its a $100 turntable vs a 100 cd player, I think I'll go with the CD player.
I think this is an accurate description of the music business in general.
RAP has basically made it OK to know nothing about music. A&R guys who actually used to know and be arrangers and producers now know nothing with rare exception. Many kids graduate from audio schools without really knowing or caring about recording real instruments, and now there are tons of "engineers and producers". Personally I prefer analog recording and mixing

[Frost]

I really liked the article and think that the work Ive heard comming out of sear sound is amazing. I do disagree with him when he compares analog and digital, but hes old skool so Ill give him a break .

He talks a bit about how higher sampling means less stair step such as dot matrix printing. In basic concept this seems true. We learn in calculus I that you can find the area under a wave using a bunch of boxes, as these boxes get smaller, the approximation becomes closer. At first glance it looks like thats how digital audio works, but it isnt. Its calculus and we find the exact area under the curve to a precision dictated by the nyquist thrm.
Digital isnt perfect tho, hes right there.

It was still a neat interview and I agree with him that not enough people know both electronics and music in our profession.

Frost

[chessparov]

Thanks for all the responses.
I edited the "5 years" comment on digital vs. analog to put it better context with the interview.

[Hiwatt]

What issue of tape op is this interview in?

[Hiwatt]

Is this in issue #41?

[atticus]

Originally posted by Hiwatt
What issue of tape op is this interview in?

The current issue. I think it's #41?

[Curve Dominant]

Do you agree that...(?)

1) LP's sound better than CD's.
(other things being equal)

Which LP sounds "better" than which CD?? I'm well aquainted with some of the top DJs in Philly, and I NEVER hear this sort of comparison come up in conversation.

2) "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals".

That is the jealous sentiment of someone who fails to appreciate the artistic spirit.

3) Nyquist's theory is wrong.

The entire telecommunications industry is founded on Nyquist's findings. For someone who states "The industry is no longer an industry of
professionals" to say Nyquist was wrong demonstrates a most fundamental ignorance.

4) Digital is years behind analog in sound quality.

This goes in the "Opinions Are Like *ssholes" catagory.

5) We can hear "harmonics" above 20 kHz.

The last time I heard an audio engineer tell me this in person, I threatened to break out a tone generator to test his hearing, and he proceeded to backtrack with the quickness. I suggest you do the same if anybody you know makes a similar claim.

[Frost]

yes, the new one.

Its cool that so many people here read the whole articles in tapeop instead of just flipping through.

Frost

[Logan]

I own alot of LP's and if I really like a recording I always try to find it on vinyl (assuming of course the tracking, or mix down was analogue). I've done many listening tests with musicians in the studio and no one ever feels the CD sounds better. My turntable is only a modest Dual with a mid grade cartridge and stylus. I stand in another room and switch an amp back and forth between a CD and an LP already playing the same track. The depth and stereo field and overall gelling of the LP is always evident. Honestly I have never had a single person say that the LP sounds worse, and I've been doing this for years. Now most of this stuff is roots based and I've never tried it with Rap or Dance based stuff, 'cause I don't own any. Take care Logan

[chessparov]

Nathan, how were you able to respond AFTER I started this thread originally, and bump me forward? Must have been "cut and paste". Boy these analog guys with their cyber-razors
and digitally(!) opposed thumbs.

Seriously, if I ever were to start a small "pro"
studio without interning like Walter pointed out, it would be unfair to any clients. Then his perspective would certainly be applicable, as it is to many studios that don't have competent AE's. To much focus on the hourly rate vs. professionalism, amongst other things.

Keeping my limited understanding in mind, I think that high level digital exceeds the minimum standards in making excellent sounding professional recordings.
And that mix automation is cool.

However...

Having been exposed to listening to 2" on studio monitors, let alone hearing LP's on audiophile systems, leads me to the conclusion
that Walter is dead on right.

His comment that the "clock" is the heart of the matter makes sense to me, and that "good" is never cheap.
Unless it's a SM57 .

Curve, if you get a chance to read the article,
you'll see that Walter's talking about A/Bing
like what Rupert Neve has done to demonstrate we CAN hear the difference when
overtones are there vs. when eliminated.

Must admit that I still enjoy listening to commercial cassette (gasp!) recordings so not that picky when it's for home entertainment purposes personally.

Chris

P.S. Thanks Nathan for your comments, and
starting a similar thread earlier
independently. (guess it was moved here)
Funny how Walter and other AE's like
Al Schmitt prefer analog tape and
tube mic pre's isn't it?

[NathanEldred]

Man, that's strange. They must have consolidated the two threads. Like on Tron when the evil guy blends with the computer at the end.

[chessparov]

Or a Vulcan mind meld.

Also agree that it's the best interview I've read in a while, along with a few like Bob Ohlssons' and
ones with Tony Visconti.

Suppose a major concern nowadays is the sound quality of the studio's "room" compared to the classic places like Capitol, RCA, et al, over the engineering/gear differences too.

Chris

[Jay Kahrs]

Originally posted by Curve Dominant
The last time I heard an audio engineer tell me this in person, I threatened to break out a tone generator to test his hearing, and he proceeded to backtrack with the quickness. I suggest you do the same if anybody you know makes a similar claim.

Even if a given person can't hear a 20khz or 30khz tone it's well proven that people respond to and can 'sense' things going on. Kinda like when you walk into a room and know that a TV is on even if the screen is black.

As for point #4 I don't get it. Analog tape recording is a mature technology and has most likely ceased to make any great advances since about 1978 other then the machines being better built. At the same time digital is always advancing and will probably always continue to advance and mature. Can anyone honestly say that see anything digital hitting a plateau and not improving at all? From where I sit, good analog and good digital both cost good amounts of money and both are fairly different. Now this brings up the question, do I want my digital to sound like my analog all the time? Hmmmm...no. I want the option.

[ttauri]

Originally posted by Curve Dominant
Which LP sounds "better" than which CD?? I'm well aquainted with some of the top DJs in Philly, and I NEVER hear this sort of comparison come up in conversation.

Really? I've heard it frequently.

Still go with the wax, personally (but there are other reasons besides audio that are hard for me to untangle in my preference).

Peece,
T. Tauri

[Musiclab]

Originally posted by Curve Dominant
Which LP sounds "better" than which CD?? I'm well