The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Scott Hull thread! Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 4th January 2017
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Jerry Tubb's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Scott Hull thread!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
Jerry - Thanks so much for your feedback and camaraderie. ! Class act
I hope you have an excellent new year!

I'm up for a Scott Hull Thread.. but if it gets half the traffic of Brian's I am going to have to upgrade my Nespresso ! lol

I find it funny how easily mixers can simplify mastering to a couple settings on a plug in. Maybe something like if i thought that recording was about choosing the right Mike modelling plugin.... I wish they all could spend a few hours in a mastering session in a purpose built mastering room before they state their opinions.
But really as long as our clients "Get it" and enjoy the process and leave feeling better about their music and feel like they got at least their money's worth of good information and great conversation, then I'll keep turning on my amps and tape machines

2016 was the first year in the last 6 for me that I could actually discuss the phrase Profit with my tax account Cheers !
So here it is Scott, a thread about you! Anything you want to talk about?

As a fan of your work, what can you tell us about mastering Steely Dan's Grammy winning "Two Against Nature" CD & DVD-A?

The record is so clean and has so much depth!

Thanks, JT
Old 4th January 2017
  #2
Now this should be interesting! looking forward to Mr. Hull chiming in.
In fact I had a short stint at Classic Sound around 2004 learning from Joe Lambert and he certainly had a few interesting stories about those sessions on the amount of care and attention to detail that went into preparing those masters so of course I'd be trilled, as I'm sure others here will, if we could hear it first hand from Mr. Hull.
this is more like what gearslutz is (or should be) for instead of another "what's your favorite limiter" thread ...

C.

Last edited by mastervargas; 4th January 2017 at 12:53 PM.. Reason: typo
Old 4th January 2017
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Silvertone's Avatar
Hey Scott,

Not to hijack Jerrys question (of which I'm curious about as well) but...

I agree with what you were talking about in the other thread about mixers slapping a limiter on the end and everybody getting use to the mix with that on it. It is the true recipe for disaster IMHO.

In fact I just got a project in yesterday (from a long term client of mine) that was sent to you a couple months ago. Small world. I told the client basically the same thing you told them. There was little to do with these already limited mixes.

The artist ended up getting me a couple of the songs with no limiting on them and I showed them what was lost with the limiter that the mix engineer slapped on at the end. I could show them how much more natural the vocals could sound, how you could still feel the kick and bass, how much bigger the image was.

If every artist got to hear these differences I don't think any of them would just want a limiter slapped on the end. It amazes me that no one seems to do an A/B comparison after they do this.

Here people will spend weeks, months sometimes years recording and mixing and in the last 5 minutes mess all of that up by trying to slap on a limiter to give the client a pseudo mastered mix.

Lastly I informed the artist that the mixes with the limiter were peaking at 0dBfs at 88.2. I explained what would happen with the aggregates and MP3 conversion after the 88.2 gets SRC down. This is the other grey area that exists and again if artists knew what might happen to their project in the end they might not choose to allow such nonsense at the mix stage.

So Jerry, thanks for inviting Scott to share war stories... I just love to hear me them there war stories...
Old 4th January 2017
  #4
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
So here it is Scott, a thread about you! Anything you want to talk about?

Thanks, JT

"Thanks " Jerry. I hope it will be entertaining !

Any and all questions are welcome.. Jerry you may be old enough to rember the :Shell Answer man " It was a marketing campaign by Shell Gas 40 some years ago.. ... Their mechanics had the answers .. well consider me the Shell answer man and i will do my best to answer questions within my range of knowledge.

Topics may include.. Mastering, Vinyl cutting and manufacture, Direct to Disk, amateur sports car racing, bee-keeping and Geology ( specifically rock hounding )
Old 4th January 2017
  #5
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
Now this should be interesting! looking forward to Mr. Hull chiming in.
In fact I had a short stint at Classic Sound around 2004 learning from Joe Lambert and he certainly had a few interesting stories about those sessions on the amount of care and attention to detail that went into preparing those masters so of course I'd be trilled, as I'm sure others here will, if we could hear it first hand from Mr. Hull.
this is more like what gearslutz is (or should be) for instead of another "what's your favorite limiter" thread ...

C.
Hi..
and it's Scott ... I probably won't even answer to Mr Hull. L
Old 4th January 2017
  #6
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silvertone View Post
Hey Scott,

Not to hijack Jerrys question (of which I'm curious about as well) but...

I agree with what you were talking about in the other thread about mixers slapping a limiter on the end and everybody getting use to the mix with that on it. It is the true recipe for disaster IMHO.

In fact I just got a project in yesterday (from a long term client of mine) that was sent to you a couple months ago. Small world. I told the client basically the same thing you told them. There was little to do with these already limited mixes.

The artist ended up getting me a couple of the songs with no limiting on them and I showed them what was lost with the limiter that the mix engineer slapped on at the end. I could show them how much more natural the vocals could sound, how you could still feel the kick and bass, how much bigger the image was.

If every artist got to hear these differences I don't think any of them would just want a limiter slapped on the end. It amazes me that no one seems to do an A/B comparison after they do this.

Here people will spend weeks, months sometimes years recording and mixing and in the last 5 minutes mess all of that up by trying to slap on a limiter to give the client a pseudo mastered mix.

Lastly I informed the artist that the mixes with the limiter were peaking at 0dBfs at 88.2. I explained what would happen with the aggregates and MP3 conversion after the 88.2 gets SRC down. This is the other grey area that exists and again if artists knew what might happen to their project in the end they might not choose to allow such nonsense at the mix stage.

So Jerry, thanks for inviting Scott to share war stories... I just love to hear me them there war stories...

Thanks - I Second all of that !
Another twist is Mixing through the limiter and making final mix decisions based on the the "dynamics" of the limiter. When you take that limiter off to facilitate the High res versions - the mix changes so much the artist typically wont approve the mastering. in this case there is no " unlimited " mix . and the record has no hope for future HD distribution. Sure you can keep the bits.. but you keep all the limiting and distortion too.

It has't really sunk in yet.. That streaming services are LOWERING the levels of hyper compressed music with Loudness normalization. I'm waiting for these mixers to wake up to that fact ...
Old 4th January 2017
  #7
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
Hi..
and it's Scott ... I probably won't even answer to Mr Hull. L
OK Scott .. and thanks for being here. classes up the place, for sure.

C.
Old 4th January 2017
  #8
Lives for gear
 
JP__'s Avatar
 

Verified Member
First thanks to Jerry and Scott for this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silvertone View Post
Hey Scott,

Not to hijack Jerrys question (of which I'm curious about as well) but...

I agree with what you were talking about in the other thread about mixers slapping a limiter on the end and everybody getting use to the mix with that on it. It is the true recipe for disaster IMHO.

In fact I just got a project in yesterday (from a long term client of mine) that was sent to you a couple months ago. Small world. I told the client basically the same thing you told them. There was little to do with these already limited mixes.

The artist ended up getting me a couple of the songs with no limiting on them and I showed them what was lost with the limiter that the mix engineer slapped on at the end. I could show them how much more natural the vocals could sound, how you could still feel the kick and bass, how much bigger the image was.

If every artist got to hear these differences I don't think any of them would just want a limiter slapped on the end. It amazes me that no one seems to do an A/B comparison after they do this.

Here people will spend weeks, months sometimes years recording and mixing and in the last 5 minutes mess all of that up by trying to slap on a limiter to give the client a pseudo mastered mix.

Lastly I informed the artist that the mixes with the limiter were peaking at 0dBfs at 88.2. I explained what would happen with the aggregates and MP3 conversion after the 88.2 gets SRC down. This is the other grey area that exists and again if artists knew what might happen to their project in the end they might not choose to allow such nonsense at the mix stage.

So Jerry, thanks for inviting Scott to share war stories... I just love to hear me them there war stories...
I wanted to chime in as Im yet finished an interesting album today of carefully mixed acoustic music where two tracks were the same , but with just a different language version. One of the mixes was an older version which was slammend into a limiter (no redo possible) while the other was "clean". Beside that they were really similar. As expected the limited version lacks a bit depth and fine hi freg details after the mastering while the unlimited version shows more front to depth and just sounds more natural after all.
But I can see why some people will like the version from the limited mix as it just sounds somewhat more "mastered" (or processed) in an obvious way. More upfront, less dynamic, more like typicall "broadcast processed". I heard quite some masters from other MEs that fits this aesthetic. So its maybe just taste depended what mixes work better to get a certain result. My analog chain handles both mixes nearly equally good. This wasnt always the case in the past... It was an intetesting experience for me.
Old 4th January 2017
  #9
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
As a fan of your work, what can you tell us about mastering Steely Dan's Grammy winning "Two Against Nature" CD & DVD-A?
The record is so clean and has so much depth!
Thanks, JT
Two against Nature ..
There are many stories to tell.. None where i have to change the names to protect anyone :( sorry.. it wasn't That kind of exciting.

What was different from the run of the mill jazzy pop record .. was Donald's determination to make the record precisely as he wanted it - precisely as he heard it.
He didn't take control of the hardware - we listened carefully to his music, didn't reference any other recordings. He communicated his concerns - he made suggestions - asked for my input and then using his ears he evaluated the effectiveness of the modification we were working on.

Some EQ stayed - some time the compromises were distracting.
But there was No Dynamic processing - OF ANY KIND in my mastering session. !

Understand of course that Donald and his team had spent months - maybe even years - getting these tracks and mixes to this place. So while he was intimately familiar with each millisecond he also had small mix issues that he wanted to address in mastering.

After much debate and trials and revisions on one song.. one which DF wanted to change his vocal sound a little.. If i recall correctly - it was just a little hollow as in a little too much vocal energy around 4-500... we tried several eq options.. he would take multiple eq options home with him and listen in his known environment. We were getting close most of the record was approved .. we had just one song that was bothering him. ( we were about 6- or 7 revisions in ) but the taking it home and listening process was taking too long .. so he brought in his own speakers and i set them up. ( sorry - i can not be 100% certain the make and model ) but they were his studio and home near-field reference.
At this point - we weren't using the speakers so much as a reference for the rest of the world.. but they were how Donald heard music - they were his reference.. and the reason this was so critical - he explained to me that even the slightest eq change in the mid range sounded to him like we were change the balances of the rhythm instruments. Even a .2 or .4 dbd change of eq changed the relative volumes of one shaker to the other swinging eight note shaker part. These balances were Critical to him. in the end - he opted for the slightly boxy vocal sound as it was originally mixed - that maintained his rhythm track's mix perspective. How could anyone argue with that ?

Prior to Two Agianst Nature - I had the pleasure of Mastering Kamakiriad with Donald attending the mastering.. using a similar process and Also - I spent some time mastering and un-mastering Steely Dan - Alive... ( another story for later. )

Last edited by ScottHull; 4th January 2017 at 06:57 PM..
Old 4th January 2017
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Greg Reierson's Avatar
 

Verified Member
This topic is 7 hours old and no one has mentioned the word Volvo? Well, I'll fix that...

Hi Scott
Old 4th January 2017
  #11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
But there was No Dynamic processing - OF ANY KIND in my mastering session. !
huh, that's very interesting ... but the next paragraph explains it.
Old 4th January 2017
  #12
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Reierson View Post
This topic is 7 hours old and no one has mentioned the word Volvo? Well, I'll fix that...

Hi Scott
HA ! now we're talking !
I'm trying to find some phots of my Red racing brick..

it's a 1971 Volvo sedan. And in class racing it's actually pretty competitive against other 2 liter normal breathers. WAY before "tuners" this is like a really heavy Go Cart. Here is a photo of one just like mine..
i;ll post some photos or links later

https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds...e/1796785.html

if you get me started talking about racing volvos - we may never get back to audio
Old 4th January 2017
  #13
Lives for gear
 
dietrich10's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
Another twist is Mixing through the limiter and making final mix decisions based on the the "dynamics" of the limiter. When you take that limiter off to facilitate the High res versions - the mix changes so much the artist typically wont approve the mastering. in this case there is no " unlimited " mix . and the record has no hope for future HD distribution. Sure you can keep the bits.. but you keep all the limiting and distortion too.
Nice wording on a consistent issue for many of us.
Old 5th January 2017
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Jerry Tubb's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
Two against Nature ..
There are many stories to tell.. None where i have to change the names to protect anyone :( sorry.. it wasn't That kind of exciting.

What was different from the run of the mill jazzy pop record .. was Donald's determination to make the record precisely as he wanted it - precisely as he heard it.
He didn't take control of the hardware - we listened carefully to his music, didn't reference any other recordings. He communicated his concerns - he made suggestions - asked for my input and then using his ears he evaluated the effectiveness of the modification we were working on.

Some EQ stayed - some time the compromises were distracting.
But there was No Dynamic processing - OF ANY KIND in my mastering session. !

Understand of course that Donald and his team had spent months - maybe even years - getting these tracks and mixes to this place. So while he was intimately familiar with each millisecond he also had small mix issues that he wanted to address in mastering.

After much debate and trials and revisions on one song.. one which DF wanted to change his vocal sound a little.. If i recall correctly - it was just a little hollow as in a little too much vocal energy around 4-500... we tried several eq options.. he would take multiple eq options home with him and listen in his known environment. We were getting close most of the record was approved .. we had just one song that was bothering him. ( we were about 6- or 7 revisions in ) but the taking it home and listening process was taking too long .. so he brought in his own speakers and i set them up. ( sorry - i can not be 100% certain the make and model ) but they were his studio and home near-field reference.
At this point - we weren't using the speakers so much as a reference for the rest of the world.. but they were how Donald heard music - they were his reference.. and the reason this was so critical - he explained to me that even the slightest eq change in the mid range sounded to him like we were change the balances of the rhythm instruments. Even a .2 or .4 dbd change of eq changed the relative volumes of one shaker to the other swinging eight note shaker part. These balances were Critical to him. in the end - he opted for the slightly boxy vocal sound as it was originally mixed - that maintained his rhythm track's mix perspective. How could anyone argue with that ?

Prior to Two Agianst Nature - I had the pleasure of Mastering Kamakiriad with Donald attending the mastering.. using a similar process and Also - I spent some time mastering and un-mastering Steely Dan - Alive... ( another story for later. )
Thanks Scott, fascinating! sounds like it was definitely a "do no harm" session :~)>
Two questions:
1. Was it an all digital mastering? Or did you do anything in the analog domain?
2. Were the same masters used for the DVD-A and CD, or did you do separate passes? and what did you use for the SRC to 16-bit 44.1k for the CD?

Best, JT
Old 5th January 2017
  #15
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silvertone View Post
Lastly I informed the artist that the mixes with the limiter were peaking at 0dBfs at 88.2. I explained what would happen with the aggregates and MP3 conversion after the 88.2 gets SRC down. This is the other grey area that exists and again if artists knew what might happen to their project in the end they might not choose to allow such nonsense at the mix stage.
You'd be surprised how many people don't get this..
Old 5th January 2017
  #16
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
Thanks Scott, fascinating! sounds like it was definitely a "do no harm" session :~)>
Two questions:
1. Was it an all digital mastering? Or did you do anything in the analog domain?
2. Were the same masters used for the DVD-A and CD, or did you do separate passes? and what did you use for the SRC to 16-bit 44.1k for the CD?

Best, JT
Two against nature was all Digital - with Weiss and Z-sys eqs.. Master mixes were delivered to me at 96k . Ultimate SRC was done with the DB 3000s - we A-B compared three different methods to get to 16bit 44.1 and this was the most hi-fi option we tried.
CD master was 1630 and the initial plant made cd tests that were rejected.

another plant was chosen that could make a Real time glass master from the 1630 - sorry - i'd have to guess - it's been that long - i dont remember who the first plant was .. at that time we'd sometimes get cd tests that just didn't sound right.. And then the process would be repeated and they would sound correct. Sometimes we'd never know why.

Roger Nichols called me - from River sound.. he had everyone there and they were listening to the first CD tests .. He said it wasn't right - he asked me a bunch of questions to make sure i used the same process to make the Sony 1630 master as i did to make his cd refs. I had.. because of this very issue.. I had made a 1630 and loaded it back to make his CD refs... Knowing that if there was ANYTHING going on int he transfer to sony - he would want to hear that.
and remember this was before the cd was released... He said to me - When I listen to the CD ref you sent me - all i can think is "Grammy" and when i listen to this Production CD all i can think is " Not Grammy " - Prophetic and so true.
The issue as i can best describe it was the first production cd had a jitter issue.. When it was played on a Really high end cd player with re-clocking.. they sounded really close.. but when played back on a typical cd player you could notice a substantial difference in image and definition. ( not grammy )

This wasn't the first or only time this happened .. But i had to be 100% sure of my rig and my process - since on my recommendation they ordered another 1630 tape be sent to a different plant to press. That cd test pressing came back and was immediately approved



DVD-a came much later.. I did deliver 97k 24 bit masters -so i presumed that was the master used for HD.. That was done without my supervision.
Old 5th January 2017
  #17
DAH
Lives for gear
 
DAH's Avatar
At what stage was the jitter introduced in the CD? AFAIK the CD itself cannot induce jitter on a playback chain?
Old 5th January 2017
  #18
Lives for gear
 
Jerry Tubb's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
Two against nature was all Digital - with Weiss and Z-sys eqs.. Master mixes were delivered to me at 96k . Ultimate SRC was done with the DB 3000s - we A-B compared three different methods to get to 16bit 44.1 and this was the most hi-fi option we tried.
CD master was 1630 and the initial plant made cd tests that were rejected.

another plant was chosen that could make a Real time glass master from the 1630 - sorry - i'd have to guess - it's been that long - i dont remember who the first plant was .. at that time we'd sometimes get cd tests that just didn't sound right.. And then the process would be repeated and they would sound correct. Sometimes we'd never know why.

Roger Nichols called me - from River sound.. he had everyone there and they were listening to the first CD tests .. He said it wasn't right - he asked me a bunch of questions to make sure i used the same process to make the Sony 1630 master as i did to make his cd refs. I had.. because of this very issue.. I had made a 1630 and loaded it back to make his CD refs... Knowing that if there was ANYTHING going on int he transfer to sony - he would want to hear that.
and remember this was before the cd was released... He said to me - When I listen to the CD ref you sent me - all i can think is "Grammy" and when i listen to this Production CD all i can think is " Not Grammy " - Prophetic and so true.
The issue as i can best describe it was the first production cd had a jitter issue.. When it was played on a Really high end cd player with re-clocking.. they sounded really close.. but when played back on a typical cd player you could notice a substantial difference in image and definition. ( not grammy )

This wasn't the first or only time this happened .. But i had to be 100% sure of my rig and my process - since on my recommendation they ordered another 1630 tape be sent to a different plant to press. That cd test pressing came back and was immediately approved

DVD-a came much later.. I did deliver 97k 24 bit masters -so i presumed that was the master used for HD.. That was done without my supervision.
Great tales of the unexpected Scott!
True bravery, with DF attending the session.
I would've loved to have been a fly on the wall in that session.
I'll have to get my copies of the CD and DVD-A and compare, for fun.
The CD won Record of the Year at the Feb 2001 Grammy awards.
I've probably listened to this record, both version a thousand times, as it was one of the refs we used when tuning my room in 2003.

So you did the mastering on the 5.1 surround on the DVD as well, I assume, not just the 2.0, I also assume the digital EQ path on all six channels.

What was your room and facility at the time?

Btw, I had a similar issue with 2 otherwise identical CD Refs about the same time 2000, one sounded big and open, the other sounded less robust, surprisingly the client noticed it and called me from Florida, so there had to be something to this pit jitter issue, as I've also heard it, but fortunately not lately.

Another question, were you using Sonic HD as your DAW, or a different one?

Best, JT
Old 5th January 2017
  #19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
What was your room and facility at the time?



Best, JT
It was a t Classic Sound NY, right Scott? when I was there for a brief period in 2004 Scott has already left and Joe (Lambert) has taken over. was "Two Against Nature" done in that room that Joe "inherited"? the on the right with the Eglesston Savoys powered by Krell amps? beautiful acoustics, I remember my jaw dropping when I first heard that combo - who made those rooms? I remember Joe or Tom telling me but I forgot and it bugs me ever since ... some famous acoustician if I'm not wrong, room within a room and all that ...
Old 5th January 2017
  #20
Scott,

Thanks for doing this. If you're working on an album where all the tracks were recorded at a single studio and all the tracks were mixed at a single studio, do you work on the first song and apply those broad settings across the album with small tweaks per track as necessary, or do you work on each song from scratch?
Old 6th January 2017
  #21
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastervargas View Post
It was a t Classic Sound NY, right Scott? when I was there for a brief period in 2004 Scott has already left and Joe (Lambert) has taken over. was "Two Against Nature" done in that room that Joe "inherited"? the on the right with the Eglesston Savoys powered by Krell amps? beautiful acoustics, I remember my jaw dropping when I first heard that combo - who made those rooms? I remember Joe or Tom telling me but I forgot and it bugs me ever since ... some famous acoustician if I'm not wrong, room within a room and all that ...
Yes classic sound same room - but but with my Duntech Sovereign 2001 and Cello performance amps ( x4 ) Those were early John Storyk rooms. he was just getting know for his designs when those rooms were built.
Old 6th January 2017
  #22
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb View Post
Great tales of the unexpected Scott!
True bravery, with DF attending the session.
I would've loved to have been a fly on the wall in that session.
I'll have to get my copies of the CD and DVD-A and compare, for fun.
The CD won Record of the Year at the Feb 2001 Grammy awards.
I've probably listened to this record, both version a thousand times, as it was one of the refs we used when tuning my room in 2003.

So you did the mastering on the 5.1 surround on the DVD as well, I assume, not just the 2.0, I also assume the digital EQ path on all six channels.

What was your room and facility at the time?

Btw, I had a similar issue with 2 otherwise identical CD Refs about the same time 2000, one sounded big and open, the other sounded less robust, surprisingly the client noticed it and called me from Florida, so there had to be something to this pit jitter issue, as I've also heard it, but fortunately not lately.

Another question, were you using Sonic HD as your DAW, or a different one?

Best, JT

ha- i've heard it a few times too lol

Neat bottom end on that record. - So tight you can hear if your room has too much decay (RT) in the low mids and bottom.. there is so much "Bass space:"

I was Using Sonic HD - The HD rig was just happening at that point.. 1999..
I went to classic sound because they wanted to put in a Sonic Solutions DVD authoring rig.. But after a few weeks - it because obvious that i was going to make more money for them with a full time mastering room..

won a Grammy for best pop vocal, and best perfo by a duo or group, and song and Best engineered - non classical ! A 4-fer for a jazz band.. lol
Old 6th January 2017
  #23
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by mozumbo View Post
Scott,

Thanks for doing this. If you're working on an album where all the tracks were recorded at a single studio and all the tracks were mixed at a single studio, do you work on the first song and apply those broad settings across the album with small tweaks per track as necessary, or do you work on each song from scratch?
your welcome !

no .. while i do look for similarities.. i don't often apply the same settings ..

My process is to quickly roll thru the whole record - sequenced if possible.. and turn knobs in real time ( hardware mastering ) I keep the record playing only backing up if i find something odd.. taking notes in short hand ...

then i take a break - usually lunch.. then i go thru each song one at a time referring to my notes and this time looking for a center.. Looking for things that help connect the songs together.. and making the more delicate 1/2 db adjustments ..

1. I often find i initially over eq a little.. but i don't worry about it -I'm running on instinct. i just keep an eye out for it and check my settings against flat before i print. that's also why i take a break.
2. The first song is often NOT a great song to set up as the standard for the record.
3. I don't touch the volume control - once i set it. Ever !
My volume control is a rotary switch not an volume pot - so i have a precise listening level reference
Old 6th January 2017
  #24
Gear Nut
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAH View Post
At what stage was the jitter introduced in the CD? AFAIK the CD itself cannot induce jitter on a playback chain?
That's not what we learned in the 90's

David Smith of Sony and Many others document that the was a jitter component that could be traced back to the creating of the pits.. in fact they isolated the jitter component and found that it was being Modulated by the audio it'self !!!! OMG - top of head explodes.. !!


lead to JVC making the K2- process and sony demanding single speed glass masters.

later, technology changed and new glass master makers were configured to perform better at the higher transfer rates. This problem isn't talked about much now.. since - well - few are listening to cd very closely.
Old 6th January 2017
  #25
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
your welcome !

2. The first song is often NOT a great song to set up as the standard for the record.
I guess I wasn't clear when I wrote 'first song' - I meant not necessarily first track in sequence but the first song you choose to work on.

Your overall explanation was very informative.

Thank you.
Old 6th January 2017
  #26
Craneslut
 
Brad Blackwood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Always been a fan of your work, Scott, nice to see you here.

Last edited by Brad Blackwood; 7th January 2017 at 09:35 PM..
Old 6th January 2017
  #27
Lives for gear
 
bcgood's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
This problem isn't talked about much now.. since - well - few are listening to cd very closely.
I still buy CDs and I listen very closely
Old 6th January 2017
  #28
Moderator
 
jayfrigo's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Thanks for taking the time to do this Scott, and thanks Jerry for starting the thread!
Old 6th January 2017
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Jerry Tubb's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottHull View Post
ha- i've heard it a few times too lol

Neat bottom end on that record. - So tight you can hear if your room has too much decay (RT) in the low mids and bottom.. there is so much "Bass space:"

I was Using Sonic HD - The HD rig was just happening at that point.. 1999..
I went to classic sound because they wanted to put in a Sonic Solutions DVD authoring rig.. But after a few weeks - it because obvious that i was going to make more money for them with a full time mastering room..

won a Grammy for best pop vocal, and best perfo by a duo or group, and song and Best engineered - non classical ! A 4-fer for a jazz band.. lol
Yes, other than the music in general which is very entertaining, and the high level of production and musicianship, the bottom end is what we were listening to while arranging our bass traps.

As it's too cold to do my Friday hike here in Austin today, I think I'll go to the studio and pop on this record for yet another listen on my Dunlavy speaks, and formulate more questions. Maybe even fire up the DVD 2.0!

Thanks for the details about the record!

Did you shape the lows with EQ, or was it pretty much set? In my mind I can picture the Fender bass line in Gaslighting Abbie or Janie Runaway :~)>

Best, JT
Old 6th January 2017
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Silvertone's Avatar
How valuable is your Weiss gear still to you?

Even though I have the latest and greatest plug ins for EQ and limiting (as well as great analog of course), I still find my Weiss DS1MkIII and my Weiss EQ1 MkII get used the most everyday. I like turning knobs and hearing the results in real time. I still find boxes way quicker than software. What are your thoughts when it comes to this?

I will also master analog only, digital only and a combo of the two. Once I decide on the correct "path" I rarely switch off of it. At times I will still drop back to see if I can "better" my results but usually I find the first impression is the correct one. Any thoughts regarding this as well?

Lastly, blame Jerry when the questions become too much... it's all his fault. Ha ha
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump