This tell us what we need to know..,
The King Super Analogue records are indeed 1/2 speed mastered according to the same liner notes. here is what those notes say on the subject "By reducing both the tape and cutting speed by half. groove cutting accuracy has been considerably enhanced, yielding a wider frequency range and maximum recording density. This technology requires especially high level of expertise. Specifically, groove width on the "Super Analogue Disc" is between 30 and 280 microns maximum. (Normally, the approximate width is btween 30 and 80 microns.) This attests to how high the maximum level really is."
There’s some specialist guy making esoteric vinyl records, clearly not representative of the vast majority of vinyl production.
I’m genuinely bemused as to why such a big deal has been made of this, it’s frankly dumbfounding.
It seems that this issue really is 3 issues and I think it's worth using the proverbial crowbar and seperating them from here on out
1. Is it possible to cut a record without any processing and has it ever been done.
I think this one can be put to bed. The answer is yes.
2. With what percentage of actual commercial recordings is it actually *possible* to cut records without any additional processing.
I think if one looks at the nature of the recordings already cited, The Decca classical recordings on King Super Analogue, the Analog Productions top 100 Jazz series and James Boyk's high quality audiophile recordings of classical music on a concert grand piano the answer is a great deal of them. An exact percentage number is impossible to extrapolate but it is not impossible to extrapolate that a great many recordings are less dynamic than the ones already cited.
So at this point I may as well add to that list.
1. Reference Recordings Mastyercut reissue series of great symphonic classical recordings. From the back liner notes: "No equalization, gain riding or dynamic compression was used at any time."
2. Crystal Clear Records. Direct to disc recordings. "No transformers were used anywhere in the signal path to the lathes. Absolutely no equaliztion, artificial reverberation, compression or limiting employed"
I am checking with James Boyk on the Sheffield Lab recording he co engineered with Doug Sax of the L.A. Phil. I am betting the answer will be no additional processing but let's wait and see. That was also a direct to disc recording.
If one takes a careful look at the recordings by Crystal Clear, many of which are organ recordings and also look atht ese efforts from Reference recordings and Sgeffield Labs it ought to further reinforce the extraploation that it is *possible* to cut a great deal of the commercial recordings out there to record without any additional processing. Not a "teeny tiny percentage" as has been asserted by others.
And this leads us to issue #3
3. How many actual records have been cut without any processing?
I don't know. I'm pretty sure nobody here or anywhere for that matter does know. And really the same question can be asked about music on digital media as well. The presumption that such records are an extreme outlier is just that, a presumption. We lack the hard evidence to make any sort of estimate. We have two confirmed cutting engineers who *have* cut records without any additional processing with Doug Sax and Kevin Gray. and this is not a trivial point. They have both cut a lot more records than the ones so far specifically cited.
"Some guy" who cut the records for James Boyk without any additional processing and engineered most recordings for Sheffield Labs was Doug Sax. But to refer to him as "some guy" kind of undermines just who he really was. He and his brother opened the very first independent cutting lab in the world back in 1967. Doug Sax cut numerous records at The Mastering Lab for numerous labels over several decades.
https://www.discogs.com/artist/365860-Doug-Sax
And I think this quote from Doug Sax should tell you a lot about how he cut those records not just the records for Shefield Lab and Performance Recordings.
"
Do you have a philosophy about mastering?
Doug Sax: Yes. If it needs nothing, don’t do anything. I think that you’re not doing a service by adding something it doesn’t need. I don’t make the stew, I season it. If the stew needs no seasoning, then that’s what you have to do, because if you add salt when it doesn’t need any, you’ve ruined it. I try to maintain what the engineer did. A lot of times they’re not really in the ballpark due to their monitoring, so I EQ for clarity more than anything."
This is from a guy who cut records of very dynamic music for Performance Recordings and Sheffield Labs without **any** additional processing. We can't say for sure that he did the same for the 1,000+ other records cut at The Mastering Lab over it's long existance. But we sure can't say that those two labels were THE sole exception given his stated philosophy on mastering.
Also this topic really isn't just as simple as "cut with no additional processing" or not. Not all additional processing is done because it is necessary to allow the record to be cut. A lot of additional processing is simply doen to make the master tape sound better. Over and above the records cut without *any* additional processing there is a vast number of records that are clearly claimed by the producers to have no compression. And I think this is the real issue here. EQ and other similar tweeks are optional. Compression is the big question. Do records need compression? How many and what records have been cut without any added compression? This broader catagory of records is not some obscure subset of records in general. The list of audiophile reissue and original issue labels that I have direct knowledge of producing such records is very long. And ya know what, I'm going to offer up a list of labels I know to have claimed to cut records without the use of compression.
Altus
Analog Productions
Analogphonic
Athena
Audite
Belle Ame
Cisco
Classic Records
Clear Audio
Coup d' Archet
DCC
Electric Recording Company
Impex
King Super Analogue
Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab
ORG
Pure Pleasure Records
Speaker's Corner
Berlin Classics
Chasing the Dragon records
Crystal Clear
Fone
Performance Recordings
Reference Recordings
There are other labels that I strongly suspect have done the same but I have not seen confirmation of it. If you look at the catalogs from Analog Productions and Mobile Fidelity alone you will see that this is not some small outlier phenomenon. The reissue labels above have taken on a great deal of the most note worthy recordings in the history of recorded music. Most of these labels do not just exclusively do vinyl either. These labels and a few others are the oasis of excellent sound when it comes to the great heritage of recorded music. What they do is not just as simple as either mastering with no additioanl processing or not mastering with no additional processing. What they do is master with the utmost care for sound quality for the various media. And they all have their own specific approaches and philosophies. But they are the oasis. they deserve acknowledgement for what they have accomplished in licencing and producing high qaulity records, CDs SACDs etc and they warrent the attention of anyone who is actually interested in better sound quality.
I get the feeling a lot of folks here aren't giving this issue or these labels the attention they ought to be giving them. If you work so hard and spend so much time and money on the home audio system souldn't you be paying as much time and money on the source material?