interesting debate fletcher/albini

[TapeOpLarry]

Me thinks Fletcher is more excited about the poker game at the end. It keep coming up for some reason. Fletcher, should Tape Op send a correspondent over?

I'm curious what a group of opinionated folks say about the sound issues here. I know it's subjective, but why not. It's not like this sort of stuff happens at AES shows unfortunately...

[joel hamilton]

Sounds like it will be a cool experiment.

[soundguy]

In order for any kind of comparison like that to be worth the time doing, the analog system would really need to be %100 transformerless (including the tape decks), just like the digital system is. If the analog system has transformers present anywhere in the signal path, it makes an already apples and oranges comparison really apples and oranges. A transformer balanced system and a transformerless system can measure identically and sound totally different, on the scope and out the speakers are two different universes. A smart engineer with a goal in mind can make a digital system sound ok, its just a question of putting a ton of effort into setting up the platform for the particular users quirks. Go take a look at just about every frequency response chart for every microphone you can find. Yes, they'll all be slightly different, but predominantly, they all look quite similar. You can pull up two frequency response charts that can lay right on top of each other, yet the mics they correspond to can sound totally different. If it turns out that someone can actually measure 6dB down on a digital system, its hardly the reason the shit has no balls. If anything, most digital systems should far far far exceed the high and low frequency response of just about any tape machine. Wide frequency response is not where you get balls. Geesh, if you stop to think about all this stuff objectively it really is quite simple to figure...

dave

[joelpatterson]

It's coming down to: which system is ballsier?

So how then do you measure balls? (You Creot guys stay outta this.)

[Fletcher]

In order for any kind of comparison like that to be worth the time doing, the analog system would really need to be %100 transformerless (including the tape decks), just like the digital system is.

blah, blah, blah... waka, waka, waka...

Dude, I'm starting to think that if you had half a brain your ass would be lopsided.

This is not an "analog v. digital" debate... the analog deck is the source material so it is therefore immaterial whether or not the analog deck has transformers or not... it's the source material.

We talked about having a band in and recording the band to a bazillion different platforms but in order to do that there are too many variables... not to mention the mayhem of mic'ing up a session and getting sounds [which would be a time and concentration suck from the point of the exercise].

The current methodology stands as: Mr. Albini brings in a tape, aligns the deck to his satisfaction, puts a rough mix on a console, that rough mix is recorded [sampling rate to be determined, I'm pushing for 24/96 as well as 16/44.1 but it has yet to be confirmed] through a set of Prism converters owned by the studio.

The output of the machine is then connected [via hardwire, not the patchbay] to the input of Pro Tools [headroom standard(s) still in debate]. The output of the P-T system goes through the same analog console [direct wiring like with the analog deck; again, no patchbay involved], with the same rough mix as the analog deck [we have even talked about running a "TR" if one is available so we can confirm that nothing moved on the desk... Mr. Albini thinks that if nobody touches the desk that will be sufficient, but I wouldn't mind seeing a confirmation].

The results [rough mix] are again recorded through the same converters as were used on the pass directly from the analog deck.

This process will then be repeated with an iZ Technologies "RADAR V" unit... and any other platform anyone wants to run through the gauntlet. There has been a discussion of using outboard master clocks in addition to the onboard clocking in each specific digital system.

Through all of this, the 2" analog machine will be the source material... ergo it doesn't fucking matter if the analog machine has a transformer balanced output or a differential output because it's the source material; the constant from which the digital platforms will be judged

Capise?

[heylow]

BTW, Roscoe is great and I LOVE that quote from him you have as your signature.
My Partner, Tony Maimone has made a bunch of records with him, and that is really funny....

Heh....why is it that I am sensing more to this story as it pertains to the quote? It's like I can hear Joel saying it....



heylow

[heylow]

Ok....

Just a couple of things.

I guess we are talking about a different thread than some of us thought we were. I personally missed the "sticky" reference because the only Albini/Fletcher debate that I can see is the one under "I Miss Analog". I don't even see much of a debate between the 2 guys under the sticky and I have not read anything pertaining to this experiment. Good luck with that.

Secondly...

Fletcher.....why is it you have to insult everyone and anyone to make a point? No matter how simple the point, there has to be some personal barb attached to it like you're the only one that knows what's going on. You know your shit, you have opinions....great. I'm not even trying to be a dick but the whole "fuck you, but what do I know" routine is kinda old. Why can't you just come here and participate like a normal person? It's cool....no one will think any less of you, I promise.

Before you fill me fulla holes with your machine gun-like wit, let me just save you trouble by saying, in advance, "Good one, dude".


heylow

[Fletcher]

"Heylow"... there are 4 threads from which this sprouted:

The first was in the Marsh forums... it was called: Remembering Mixerman ~ or~ Was he right about the PT mix buss??

Which spawned the subsequent threads in PSW's R/E/P forums

Does P-T lose bottom when you transfer from tape?

Comments about the upcoming test in Chicago

The Methodology Thread

So... if I seem to lack patience; sorry... I thought y'all had been playing along.

I was just pointed to this thead earlier today. I've been dealing with this nonsense for a couple of weeks now so yeah, I'm a dick that don't suffer fools gladly... character flaw I suppose.

However; whenever an experiment is conducted you do require a presupposition on which to base the experiment, and the analog deck is going to be source material so if I'm being a complete ass by reiterating these facts, my somewhat sincere apologies.

On the other hand... this really ain't rocket surgery and much of the bally hoo raised here today has been covered about 9 or 10 times on the fore mentioned threads... which I incorrectly assumed had been read.

My bad

I'll be more than happy to go back to being irrelevant as quickly as possible.

I wish to offer you, "Soundguy", and this forum in general a truly sincere apology for treading on the brother's turf. You are correct; one toolbox per forum is really more than sufficient... accept that I have been adequately admonished; and shall endeavor to live up to your standards for the remainder of this thread.

[jrsgodfrey]

RE: "Roscoe Ambel once said: Pro-Tools is to audio what fluorescent is to light"

Completely OT, but my favorite Roscoe-ism is:

Waste of a wall socket.

[soundguy]

Capise?

yes.

dave

[thunderboy]

Capise? No.
Capice? Yes.
Capisce? That too.

jt

[lobstman]

I'm intersted in the results of this dust-up, but unfortunately, I think a gigantic can of worms has been opened. I think we're seeing the birth of an internet legend that will be argued and debated for years, often incorrectly. As seen in this thread, the interweb is like a gigantic game of "telephone"- you know, where one kid whispers something into the next kid's ear, and so on. So in six months, we're going to start seeing posts like this:

"OMG! The guy who recorded 'Nevermind' tested analog vs digital by recording some balls at 24196db onto an old PT boat through a prison in Charlotte. He thought it would loose all the balls, but they were still on the tape! (Analog/Digital) roolz!"

I'm not saying this as an argument against the test, just a warning to Fletcher to be prepared to deal with misconceptions and misunderstandings about this "shoot out" for a long time to come.

[numberthirty]

Fletcher: In one post you point out that you think there will be a severe lack of balls on playback from the digital system. Then, you go on to say the test will not be an analog vs. digital debate. Taking both of those things into account, it takes a lot of nerve to take call someone else's logic into question.

[soundguy]

it doesnt take any nerve to sit in a chair and post to the internet.

this took nerve, especially after russia three years eariler.



dave

[nacho459]

Fletcher: In one post you point out that you think there will be a severe lack of balls on playback from the digital system. Then, you go on to say the test will not be an analog vs. digital debate. Taking both of those things into account, it takes a lot of nerve to take call someone else's logic into question.

I think my "Balls" he really means "Mojo"...

It's kinda silly to debate what looses what when you only can use vague terms to describe it. The frequency response of two pieces of gear can both be the same, but they still sound different. The truth is that two pieces of gear that speck the same can sound very different from each other. I can do a 20-20k sweep across my JH24 and my 001 and they will both have a flat line. However when you put real music on them they sound way different! The fact is that all pieces of gear loose something, it comes down to the listener to decide if this loss is negative. Theoretically if digital is digital, and the same converters, clocks, etc are used the Radar and HD system should sound the same.

The bad thing about this test is that there is no real way to measure someone's opinion of what they are hearing. However if all parties involved agree that PT is lacking something, and they want to call that something "balls" and they can't really measure it how else can they express it?

However I think the real purpose of this test it to see if there actually is a 6 dB loss of low end or not.