• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Finally, music we can buy in 768 khz sampling rates.

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,415
Likes
9,733
Location
Hampshire
According to this article, the Studer A80RC recorder uses a 150kHz bias frequency, so if this is the model of machine used in the original recording, then that could well be the residual bias signal seen in the file.
What would be causing the drift of the frequency seen in the digital recording?
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,415
Likes
9,733
Location
Hampshire
Little known fact - the bias residual is how the examiners determined that the Watergate 18 second gap tape was repeatedly erased. Of course politicians aren't nearly so sophisticated so they get caught. If I were in charge of this conspiracy, the authorities would have been confounded to this day. Goes to show you they didn't hire the right person to do their dirty deeds. :cool:
But will you get them done dirt cheap?
 

KSTR

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Messages
2,075
Likes
4,589
Location
Berlin, Germany
What would be causing the drift of the frequency seen in the digital recording?
It is most likely not derived from a Quartz and therefore prone to typical analog drifts (warm-up).
 

MakeMineVinyl

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
3,337
Likes
5,242
Location
Santa Fe, NM
What would be causing the drift of the frequency seen in the digital recording?
If the 150kHz is coming from the residual bias on the tape, any inaccuracies in the playback of the tape would cause the frequency to drift. Even Studer tape machines aren't absolutely steady with their speed, although they're very, very good because they have tape tension servos on the takeup and supply reel motors.
 

mhardy6647

Master Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2019
Messages
5,573
Likes
11,173
Lots of mentions of both AC and DC on these forums -- dirty deeds notwithstanding.
You listen to Spotify. Spotify listens to you.
 

Tom C

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
907
Likes
777
Location
USA
Hi radix
we will look into it you might have a point.
we have had problems in the past with the fire detector and various alarm systems. We and the Metrople orchestra engineers, who also records here in the MCO studios, are constantly busy trying to reduce any outside disturbence. The studio was build in 1929 and together with Abbey Road is the oldest studio in Europe it's part of the charm but unfortunately maybe also a course for problems.
Here is the metropole orchestra in studio 5;
Thank you for providing beautifully arranged and performed music, carefully and thoughtfully recorded. Thsee are new recordings of music I actually want to listen to. Plan to download soon.
 
D

Deleted member 39414

Guest
Entirely confused as to the value of this sampling rate for listening applications. Is this for backup? If so, the mastering matters a lot more than the sample rate. High sample rate for a poor mastering will still sound poorly. Totally bizarre post for this forum unless I’m missing something. Sorry to OP if that’s the case.
 
OP
Blumlein 88

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
14,652
Likes
23,732
Entirely confused as to the value of this sampling rate for listening applications. Is this for backup? If so, the mastering matters a lot more than the sample rate. High sample rate for a poor mastering will still sound poorly. Totally bizarre post for this forum unless I’m missing something. Sorry to OP if that’s the case.
Okay as the OP, yes I wanted to poke the bear so to speak about the ridiculously high sample rate. I also wanted to see if there was something substantive behind why they thought it worth doing. It appears so far there isn't though they may think so.

Why would I do this? For one I have purchased some of their recordings. They do excellent high quality recordings. And while it might seem disrespectful, hey, as Mr. Barnum said, no publicity is bad publicity as long as they spell your name right. So I expected it might bring notice of them to people who hadn't heard of them before and get them a few sales. It seems it has done that so i don't feel too bad. I would think maybe they don't either.

I do applaud and respect that someone from Sound Liason's was willing to venture into these forums to take part. Kudos to them for that.

Was I dirty trickster for doing that? Tell me what you think.
 

Robin L

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
4,400
Likes
6,195
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
Okay as the OP, yes I wanted to poke the bear so to speak about the ridiculously high sample rate. I also wanted to see if there was something substantive behind why they thought it worth doing. It appears so far there isn't though they may think so.

Why would I do this? For one I have purchased some of their recordings. They do excellent high quality recordings. And while it might seem disrespectful, hey, as Mr. Barnum said, no publicity is bad publicity as long as they spell your name right. So I expected it might bring notice of them to people who hadn't heard of them before and get them a few sales. It seems it has done that so i don't feel too bad. I would think maybe they don't either.

I do applaud and respect that someone from Sound Liason's was willing to venture into these forums to take part. Kudos to them for that.

Was I dirty trickster for doing that? Tell me what you think.
On the one hand, if you can't hear it, you can't hear it.

On the other hand, they're doing good work otherwise.

Thing is, I don't buy recordings based on audio qualities. The issue is musical interest, first and foremost. So, it's nice to know about this company, but it's very likely that I won't be buying their products. No fault of theirs, I'd just rather to listen to musicians based more on musical considerations than audio considerations. I'm more into Billie Holiday sourced from 78 than someone attempting to do the same thing now, unless she's Madeleine Peyroux and I'm not always into her anyway.
 

dc655321

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2018
Messages
1,443
Likes
1,863
Was I dirty trickster for doing that? Tell me what you think.

Not at all.

Maybe I'm naive to have thought otherwise, but I was surprised that the rep was so, um, ill-versed (?) in digital signal lore. In hindsight, I suppose I shouldn't have been...
 

Sound Liaison

Member
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
52
Likes
102
Thank you for providing beautifully arranged and performed music, carefully and thoughtfully recorded. Thsee are new recordings of music I actually want to listen to. Plan to download soon.
Thanks Tom! Very much appreciated.
 

Holmz

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 3, 2021
Messages
972
Likes
575
Location
Australia
Oddly, on the website where this 768 kHz music offered, the background image is a photograph of the Grimm LS1 - digital active loudspeakers that convert everything to 93 kHz (if I recall correctly).

One could say it eight it?
 

Sound Liaison

Member
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
52
Likes
102
Okay as the OP, yes I wanted to poke the bear so to speak about the ridiculously high sample rate. I also wanted to see if there was something substantive behind why they thought it worth doing. It appears so far there isn't though they may think so.

Why would I do this? For one I have purchased some of their recordings. They do excellent high quality recordings. And while it might seem disrespectful, hey, as Mr. Barnum said, no publicity is bad publicity as long as they spell your name right. So I expected it might bring notice of them to people who hadn't heard of them before and get them a few sales. It seems it has done that so i don't feel too bad. I would think maybe they don't either.

I do applaud and respect that someone from Sound Liason's was willing to venture into these forums to take part. Kudos to them for that.

Was I dirty trickster for doing that? Tell me what you think.
Hi Blumlein
We are happy to have this discussion going, we get insights from people who have a whole different perspective, real feedback, and we learn from it, so thanks a lot for starting this thread.
 

Sound Liaison

Member
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
52
Likes
102
On the one hand, if you can't hear it, you can't hear it.

On the other hand, they're doing good work otherwise.

Thing is, I don't buy recordings based on audio qualities. The issue is musical interest, first and foremost. So, it's nice to know about this company, but it's very likely that I won't be buying their products. No fault of theirs, I'd just rather to listen to musicians based more on musical considerations than audio considerations. I'm more into Billie Holiday sourced from 78 than someone attempting to do the same thing now, unless she's Madeleine Peyroux and I'm not always into her anyway.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread; most of our music is instrumental. Some very modern and some more traditional.
We simply record music we like, using techniques we find fit the project at hand. So our catalogue is as diverse as our musical taste;
 

Robin L

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
4,400
Likes
6,195
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
As I mentioned earlier in the thread; most of our music is instrumental. Some very modern and some more traditional.
We simply record music we like, using techniques we find fit the project at hand. So our catalogue is as diverse as our musical taste;
Playing the first track. Very nice. What's the single microphone? I'm guessing near-coincident, large diaphragm condenser but haven't seen that particular model before.

Edit: I see that info is in the end credits, it 's a Josephson c700s:

Josephson_C700S-Tilted_Web.jpg


 
Last edited:

Sound Liaison

Member
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
52
Likes
102
Playing the first track. Very nice. What's the single microphone? I'm guessing near-coincident, large diaphragm condenser but haven't seen that particular model before.

Edit: I see that info is in the end credits, it 's a Joesephson c700s:

View attachment 179206

The above 3 are all single mic recordings.

"
"I think our ears are much more sensitive to phase errors than we are aware of.
The obvious solution to avoid phase errors is to record the whole band from one point.
But until recently I have not experienced a microphone that was up to the task. Drums and piano sounded too distant and the sound stage did not reflect what I heard standing in front of the band.
The first thing that impressed me about the Josephson C700S was the natural sound of the mic and the sound off axis. This is what makes the difference between a good microphone and an average microphone. Secondly the microphone is quite unique, it has three capsules instead of the more common two.
So when recording with Josephson C700S, instead of placing microphones at the instruments we now place the instruments around the microphone.
Mixing is no longer possible. We have to create the complete sound stage at the spot by carefully moving each instrument closer or further away as well as left and right in relationship to the microphone.
The benefits of this way of working is that the result is completely free of phase errors and that the sound is very natural with a wide soundstage with a lot of depth.
So far all musicians have been struck by the incredible authenticity of the recordings and that they never heard their instrument sound so real and lively."

Frans de Rond
 

Robin L

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
4,400
Likes
6,195
Location
1 mile east of Sleater Kinney Rd
The above 3 are all single mic recordings.

"
"I think our ears are much more sensitive to phase errors than we are aware of.
The obvious solution to avoid phase errors is to record the whole band from one point.
But until recently I have not experienced a microphone that was up to the task. Drums and piano sounded too distant and the sound stage did not reflect what I heard standing in front of the band.
The first thing that impressed me about the Josephson C700S was the natural sound of the mic and the sound off axis. This is what makes the difference between a good microphone and an average microphone. Secondly the microphone is quite unique, it has three capsules instead of the more common two.
So when recording with Josephson C700S, instead of placing microphones at the instruments we now place the instruments around the microphone.
Mixing is no longer possible. We have to create the complete sound stage at the spot by carefully moving each instrument closer or further away as well as left and right in relationship to the microphone.
The benefits of this way of working is that the result is completely free of phase errors and that the sound is very natural with a wide soundstage with a lot of depth.
So far all musicians have been struck by the incredible authenticity of the recordings and that they never heard their instrument sound so real and lively."

Frans de Rond
Ever since I started recording around 30 years ago, I've noticed that the biggest single factor in sound quality is/are the microphones used. Of course, the room is nearly as big a factor. Most of the time I used ORTF with small diaphragm Neumanns, now wish I got KM 84s when I started instead of their updated small capsule Neumanns with op-amps. The recordings I made with ORTF seemed to image best. I managed to use coincident large diaphragm microphones for middle side recordings, understand the utility of being able to adjust the sound stage in post-production but didn't like the sound [forgot the model #, but it was a Neumann, older and a bit out of adjustment]. The addition of that third capsule in the Josephson is one of the first original ideas in microphones I've heard of in a long time. You're right about the soundstaging of your recordings.

Keep at it, you just might become the new ECM.
 

fastfreddy666

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2021
Messages
48
Likes
74
Double blind listening test? Most people can't even hear the difference between high bitrate AAC and lossless (including myself) but my listening environment is not ideal. 24/96 is handy in the studio because of the extra headroom it provides. This will also come in handy when you apply effects with software-plugins during the mixing phase. After the production is mastered. You can just down sample it to 44.1/16 and add some dither. This will not decrease fidelity in any way.

Well-respected recording and mastering engineers claim to hear differences in an ideal listening environment but controlled double-blind listening tests have failed so far provide conclusive evidence that listeners can hear any difference between 44.1 and 96khz.

My listening environment is far from ideal. I live in an apartment near a city. The background noise is about 40 dB and at rush hour this can easily go to 45 dB Background noise levels at a recording or broadcast studio should be 25-30 dB. So even if your listening room is very quiet and you are a trained listener the differences will be very subtle.

Until there's conclusive evidence I'm not willing to waste space on my HDD/SSD/Cloud Space with these enormous files.
It's all marketing people. They want to sell you the same product at higher price point. This is of course understandable but I won't fall for it.
 
Last edited:

MakeMineVinyl

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
3,337
Likes
5,242
Location
Santa Fe, NM
The above 3 are all single mic recordings.

"
"I think our ears are much more sensitive to phase errors than we are aware of.
The obvious solution to avoid phase errors is to record the whole band from one point.
But until recently I have not experienced a microphone that was up to the task. Drums and piano sounded too distant and the sound stage did not reflect what I heard standing in front of the band.
The first thing that impressed me about the Josephson C700S was the natural sound of the mic and the sound off axis. This is what makes the difference between a good microphone and an average microphone. Secondly the microphone is quite unique, it has three capsules instead of the more common two.
So when recording with Josephson C700S, instead of placing microphones at the instruments we now place the instruments around the microphone.
Mixing is no longer possible. We have to create the complete sound stage at the spot by carefully moving each instrument closer or further away as well as left and right in relationship to the microphone.
The benefits of this way of working is that the result is completely free of phase errors and that the sound is very natural with a wide soundstage with a lot of depth.
So far all musicians have been struck by the incredible authenticity of the recordings and that they never heard their instrument sound so real and lively."

Frans de Rond
Can you tell us what the polar pattern was for the mike i.e. X-Y, Blumlein, M-S?
 
Top Bottom