looking for *pure analog* mastering house

[themagicmanmdt]

so, one project that recently came to me is very die-hard on staying completely analog onto vinyl. so, we're needing a place that can do a direct to acetate mastering asthetic, and that also help edit the mix tapes neatly for the production master. nothing major - just sequencing and fades and mid-track silence, if any.

but it's gotta be straight analog! no touching any converters or digital compressors.

i'm excited to see if any places exist -

anyone?

[Cellotron]

The places I can think of that can definitely do all analog vinyl mastering are:
http://www.saltmastering.com
http://www.sterlingsound.com
http://www.abbeyroad.com
http://www.masterdisk.com

I believe Acoustech at RTI in California, and The Exchange at London can also do it. I'm sure there's a few others I'm missing as well.

A really nice video of the recent all analog remastering at Sterling Sound of the classic Mission of Burma albums is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPj7KZQhqo4

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[djimbe]

hey MT,

how about Bob Weston's place?

http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/

[Dr Rubberfunk]

Another UK place I'd recommend would be Metropolis
Miles Showell can do you half speed vinyl mastering too if you wanna get really deep
http://www.metropolis-group.co.uk/mastering.html

[Cellotron]

hey MT,

how about Bob Weston's place?

http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/

I'm pretty sure that Bob and Jason don't have a tape deck equipped with preview/program paths so they would have to do the side as fixed pitch/depth (which would greatly limit the length and level that could be cut).

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[djimbe]

hey MT,

how about Bob Weston's place?

http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/

I'm pretty sure that Bob and Jason don't have a tape deck equipped with preview/program paths so they would have to do the side as fixed pitch/depth (which would greatly limit the length and level that could be cut).

Best regards,
Steve Berson

You'd know better than me what is needed for the job. I know they have the ability to do some vinyl cutting, but the process is mostly dark to me. Thanks for the update!

[Teacher's Pet]

I think this guy can do all-analog:

http://www.rickermaster.com/

[MoreSpaceEcho]

john golden?

[themagicmanmdt]

yes - CMS can't do all-analog - they lack the look ahead -

thanks for the links!!!!

[Bob Weston]

hey MT,

how about Bob Weston's place?

http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/

As you found, we cannot do an all-analog cut. Not only do we lack the advance head tape machine, but you also need to have 2 matched sets of all outboard gear you will use (eq, compression, etc), 2 matched signal paths or a special mastering console, faders, etc. It's a huge and quite expensive infrastructure undertaking. It only makes sense to build your entire mastering studio systems and signal flow in this way if:

- the majority of your work is all analog vinyl cutting
or
- it's 1975

Along with those others mentioned previously, maybe Carl Rowatti at Trutone can do this too?

We playback from our mastering DAW at 24-bit directly into the lathe system and are very happy with the audio quality and the sound of our lacquers.

bob weston
chicago mastering service

[themagicmanmdt]

bob -

i'm totally with you. if it was up to me, i'd be perfectly fine with doing digital through your converters then hitting the lathe. there's no gigantic improvement at all by skipping the A/D, especially at the level that the crane song you have is -



but it ain't my gig...so they're not my shots to call...of course.

besides the look ahead function, why do you need two identical sets of things? couldn't you just record straight off of the send of the cutting lathe as you were making the acetate?

[Bob Weston]

bob - i'm totally with you. if it was up to me, i'd be perfectly fine with doing digital through your converters then hitting the lathe. there's no gigantic improvement at all by skipping the A/D, especially at the level that the crane song you have is -

besides the look ahead function, why do you need two identical sets of things? couldn't you just record straight off of the send of the cutting lathe as you were making the acetate?

We don't have a Crane Song converter. We use Lavry or Sonic Studios converters for both A/D and D/A.

The lathe requires 2 identical signals, one set delayed by around a second. The first set feeds the lathe's preview computer which decides on the variable pitch and depth of the cut. The delayed stereo feed goes to the cutter-amps and cutting head.

For an all analog cut, the special advance-head ATR provides these 2 stereo signals with the appropriate delay between them. But the signals hitting the lathe need to be identical, so any changes (level, eq, compression, etc) made to one need to be made to the other. That means a 4 channel path with identical processing on both pairs (with either specialized 4-channel gear, or 2 sets of matching stereo gear).

best,
bw

[themagicmanmdt]

sorry for the mis info -

besides the advance head -

what's the problem with taking the final signal from the mastering chain (eq, comp, MS, etc) and building a circuit which accurately feeds two identical output signals?

i understand the argument that the less inserted in the chain, the better, but would doing so be unexcusable for mastered audio?

[daved]

When I started at QCA they still had an analog chain for cutting intact, and as Bob describes you need _at least_ 2 of everything to get the job done. Not just for the look-ahead but for processing. The paradigm comes from the film world (where I worked as an optical printer in the 80s - the film equivalent of an ME): aside from lookahead, you need a full set of processors to store settings for the next song, since you can't stop the cut!

You work A/B roll style: work out all your settings, write them down on paper, set up the first and second songs on each chain, roll tape/drop the lathe with the signal sourced by A-Chain. When you get to the runout for Track 1, you switch to B-Chain, and while Track 2 is playing, you check your paper and set up the A chain for track 3... repeat through the end of the record.

This is the price of an "pure analog" cut. No way around it. As you noted, one could do lookahead sufficiently with a digital split, ahead of the converters OR more conventionally, using both headstacks of an ATR.

I work out of QCA's room a lot now - they still have the old Sontec EQ, which is equipped with a program/preview paths (basically it's TWO Sontec's in one box!) that were modified in a way that let you set up the A chain on the left controls, and the B chain on the right. I think we removed that mod, and now it's paths have different era Sontec line amps but you get the idea...

[Bob Weston]

besides the advance head -

what's the problem with taking the final signal from the mastering chain (eq, comp, MS, etc) and building a circuit which accurately feeds two identical output signals?

They're not identical. One has been delayed. That circuit you want built is called a digital delay.

If you want to feed the lathe after using one set of analog mastering processing you can. Many people do it this way. You feed the analog signal to the preview computer. Then you run that same signal through a digital delay and feed the cutting amps. Uh-oh...there goes the all analog signal path. Do you know of a 1.08 second stereo analog delay?

As I understand it, most lacquer cutting in the 70's-90's used this method. Many still do. You didn't need to have an special advance head ATR or 2 sets of processing (4 really if you want to do the preset for the next song, as mentioned in the last post). But you did feed the cutter head with a signal that went through a digital delay. At maybe 12-bit for those first delays in the 70's? Ouch.

best,
bw