Check out the first batch of releases from the half-speed series here, including albums from The Rolling Stones, Cream, John Martyn, The Police, Simple Minds and Free: po.st/mKaMQh
@@Disburseterse I think your snobometer needs recalibrating. XKSS complimented the communication skills of someone who is a master of his craft. Nothing snobbish about that. Do you prefer the vulgar, mean-spirited comments which dominate much of RU-vid?
I was so interested in what he had to say but you are right, his vocal is not good considering his knowledge of audio. I still appreciate what he had to say......
Reminds me of when dvd was new, they put adverts for how good dvd looked and sounded onto vhs tapes.... and 10 years later they repeated this with blu ray on dvd..... *facepalm* *double facepalm*
His voice has pretty clear artifacts from what I presume is a low bit-rate (could be something else, I'm no expert), but the music clips played all sound as crisp as RU-vid allows.
Back in the late 1970's, when I was part of a working band, we had ALL of our records cut half-speed by Stan Ricker at Mobility Fidelity Sound Lab and then pressed by JVC in Japan. The cost was double for everything, but the finished records sounded just like the original ½ inch master tape.
A hint to all those who wonder why de-essing is essential to vinyl records: The vinyl record uses a "pre-emphasis" on the medium and the opposite "de-emphasis" in the amplifier. At pre-emphasis, 20kHz sound is boosted at 20dB compared to 1kHz, 20Hz is attenuated at 20 dB compared to 1kHz. So it is 40 dB difference between 20Hz and 20kHz. Thus, high frequencies mean high level *and* high velocity on the record. This results in the need to de-ess it. And that's why half speed cutting is so essential to a mechanical medium because the velocity is only half at cutting. BTW, the RIAA equalization curve can be found on wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_equalization
Oh, another BTW: With half speed cuttting they have to move this curve to half frequencies, so the 20 dB boost is at 10kHz. That's why they have to modify the filters (the RIAA filters).
Yes but luckily, playback isn’t affected at full speed and pre-emphasis and deemphasis (hf &lf) are presented to hifi as if it’s a standard RIAA LP so can be played back at normal speeds.
Lovely to hear some snippets of John Martyn songs from his greatest period, the early seventies, when he recorded Bless the Weather (November 1971) , Solid Air (February 1973), Inside Out (October 1973) and Sunday's Child (January 1975), without a shadow of a doubt four of the finest albums ever released on vinyl.
My early 80's band got back together in 2008 to record our 1st Lp, and we did at Abbey Road Studio(studio 2). We didn't master the tracks at Abbey Road, we used Jerry Tubb at Terra Nova in South Austin(Tx.), came out real nice.
Great little interview my man ... And, so nice to hear such enthusiasm for, not just vinyl, but pushing the last ounce of quality out of it. Even more so when you consider how compromised the whole system is ... dangerously close to "not possible" but engineered (mainly by the Germans I'd imagine) to the point of being "really quite good". I didn't know about Decca's 1/2 speed era though ... who'd have thought it !!
Loved how they played 3 Free tracks, All Right Now, Oh I Wept & Don't say You Love Me. I'm pretty sure they never recorded at Abbey Road but nice see some recordings got the Abbey Road treatment
Hmmm... I watched this again, and now I like it a lot. Would still have been great to see and hear some of this, but I understand most of the interview now. Thanks!
If the high frequencies benefit from this recording method, what happens to the low frequencies? The information that was recorded on the tape at 30-40Hz will almost completely disappear when the recording is lowered in two? The lower the frequency, the narrower the stereo range. Also you will get a different stereo image when you play the record at normal speed. It's right?
Shouldn’t a video like this open by defining the principle of the central subject? The word mastering is ambiguous here. Does he mean ‘1/2 speed engraving’? Love these kind videos but this one could benefit from a slightly clearer narrative arc imho.
I'm with you. Thought I was gonna learn about some novel mastering technique, but was treated to a messy explanation of what I presume is vinyl mastering IE pressing the master. Doesn't help that the video is peppered with very short descriptions of other mastering and mixing techniques, and doesn't show any of it in practice.
I would suppose that the master is the negative copy of the performance that is created for the purpose of stamping out (creating) the positives, which are the end products we buy.
Fitting an audio signal to a storage medium IS what mastering is about. There’s actual physical (mechanical) limitations with certain formats, e.g., you really can’t have wide stereo bass with vinyl, so the audio has to be altered to fit. The kicker being that a signal can be processed to fit inside those limitations a number of different ways depending on what the overall goal is. This is why it’s done on an album level vs song level. Things like amplitude can effect the over all run length per side with vinyl. Good mastering finds a compromise between signal, format, and client. Nowadays we typically master audio into a 96khz+ 24 bit wav format before digital distribution with the goal of sounding as nice as possible on a wide range of speakers.
Dear @Miles, I can see the Nautilus 801 on the corner... I know they're still there in mastering room 5 after so much time... how do they compare to newer ones? Still competitive? Regards!
This guy did the Police re-issue. Ran it through the digital cheese grader. Absolutely blew it. MoFi is so far ahead of this guy. No one wants a 35 dollar digital file.
Got Free - Fire & Water which is an amazing improvement over the Island original - makes you realise what a power house group they were Fraser's bass lines especially. The Cream release is in mono and is also excellent as the video makes clear - hope they do other releases by both groups!!
Ive heard a lot of mixed info on half speed. Got the newest Kid Amnesiac at half speed but turntable is down so my verdict is still out. Thanks for giving a birds eye view. I’ve been tempted to get Exile but heard they used a digital transfer. Apologies…..I hear a lot of half truths. It’s tough to hear that some of our great masters haven’t been revered as they should have. Hopefully they are righting some of those wrongs and making some back-ups.
When I worked in the Hi Fi trade in central London I had a rep approach me with something called "Sheffield Labs Direct cut discs" They cost twice the price of conventional records and I never knew what they meant by direct cut. Do you know the answer please ?
I felt a lot of the stuff people came up with to say "spend more" a bit far fetched which is why I never stocked a lot of it. The best I did was better and more rigid headships which you could buy for £5. If one of my customers wanted to spend £70 on a pair of speaker cables I would say that really they we're a waste of money.
As a blue collar employee machine operator, yes run your machine at 80.. 90% all day long. Smiles all round. Spank it at 100% good luck, do you drive your car at top speed? With the engine at the limiter?
No it is not....and the recent Rolling Stones reissues are worse....this process is a gimmick...they are digitally sourced with a "fancy" name....stick with original analog recordings and stay away from these pricey reissues 👍
Vinyl mastering is (soon to be "was") king. Vinyl as a format doesn't have any technical superiority over digital. Add to that the very recent shift away from "loud as all fucking hell" digital mastering, spearheaded by streaming companies (I guess that shift did happen after your comment) and vinyl's superiority in dynamics is gonna be a thing of the past soon. I get that we all want more dynamic masters, and that the loudness wars royally fucked up music, but that wasn't the fault of digital audio. Separate the shitty masters associated with digital audio from the medium itself, and the higher resolution (effective 20kHz vs. true 96kHz) as well as the higher dynamic range (effective 70dB SNR vs true 144dB SNR) really are undisputed. If only we'd learned not to compress everything to shit at the very beginning of digital audio, no one would doubt its superiority as a music format.
I provided concrete evidence and explained why vinyl has been misunderstood as the superior format. Is anything I said wrong? Is there something I've missed?
@@TheNinetySecond Yes high resolution digital is much more accurate than vinyl, but due to current mixing, mastering, and remastering practices a good clean LP release still ends up sounding much better than any digital version.
(This is gonna be a long comment, but I'm pretty tired of ignorant vinyl snobs clinging to their misconceptions. I know this stuff, and I even read up on a handful of articles to make sure that what I'm saying is absolutely factual. Not directed at you, AceTech, but definitely directed at anyone who still believes vinyl is inherently superior) Yeah this has definitely been true for the last few decades of digital, as I explained in my comment. As I also mentioned, but didn't elaborate on, 2018 is the year in which *all* the major streaming platforms now have volume normalization at right around -14 LUFS. Almost any digital release with an integrated loudness of -14 LUFS will have the same integrated dynamic range as it's vinyl counterpart, while having roughly equal SNR and resolution, and that's just for a high quality stream on Spotify. A CD or a hi-res MP3 will *absolutely* blow the fidelity and dynamics of a vinyl out of the water. Now, why is this -14 LUFS normalization important? Because as anyone even remotely aware of music production knows, higher volumes and higher dynamics are two things that humans just intuitively enjoy, the former more so than the latter. It used to be, that when you did a sausage master around -3 LUFS, you'd have completely crushed the dynamics, but you'd also have a song that played up to four times louder than a highly dynamic song, which the general public seems to like. Now, that same song will be turned down by 11 LUFS, and all that loudness you gained will be lost, *AS WELL AS THE DYNAMICS.* No one wants to lose loudness AND dynamics, and by making the choice on the former, the streaming companies have effectively made the choice on the latter as well. With -14 LUFS, the only thing my limiter EVER limits, is Inter-Sample Peaks, and even then, I'm not entirely convinced there's actually anything to limit. I hardly even compress my master (still do a bit for the coloring, but it's miniscule) and I have no need what so ever for maximizers and strategic distortion anymore. Now, I really don't like overt compression, and I didn't really do it before 2018 either, but this is across the board. No one is gonna squash a master now that the need just isn't there anymore. It will take some time to unlearn, but within very few years, practically all digital releases will have an integrated loudness of -14 LUFS, and that will naturally lead to much more dynamic mixing and mastering for digital distribution.
I bought the Disraeli Gears album, keeps skipping on the opening track. Very disappointed since I held the standard and the more expensive half speed mastered side by side and I bought the second one as I thought I was going to have a better experience. How wrong was I!
Is half speed mastering a magic number or is it possible to cut at any speed .I ask this because if this " mastering" are speed indipendent - then you can do a lot more of the recordings .If there are a bassheavy drumnrecording ,what do you do ,master at half or lower 2/5 or higher at 2/3 speeds .Which leeds to halfmastering might be a gimmick and the new common 180 grams are just gimicks and old vinyl is much better
the ubiquitous NS10's, but i notice the B&W . 800's are crammed right up against the wall..I would have thought they'd be placed about 1m away to prevent bass problems..then again, the desk is in the way.
Shame it can’t be done with direct cut to vinyl for the master. Some of the best albums I’ve heard were direct cut to vinyl from Aire Studios and digitally MFSL still make some superb albums. As for best sq from a £50 deck, no way. Tonearm and cart quality make a heck of a difference to playback. A £200 deck, yes but with a £700 arm and £700 cart and I guarantee you’d hear a difference.
No, you play them back at normal speed. Half speed is used so that a more accurate track can be recorded onto the master disk. The principle is 'Do a job slowly, so that you can do it more carefully and accurately.
I bought one of these and the opening track skipped about 7 times in a 3 minute number. The opening track come on! The rest were fine but the opening track was the highlight I anticipated the most ( Strange Brew ).
Seeing MILES in the runout matrix is invariably the mark of excellence & a sure sign you’re bound for some beautiful stereophonic joy emanating from his records!
er no...... cd has a much more compressed frequency range, plus the steep filtering in digital sampling causes time smearing....from a purely technical point of view cd falls way short of vinyl
Why half-speed? Seems like a somewhat arbitrary figure. Why not master even slower? Is there any sort of way to technically measure the improvement by half-speed mastering?
How do they not lose low end info even at half speed? Most audio equipment don't respond to anything below 20 hz, so anything that is 40hz or lower becomes 20hz or lower at half speed
DMM is awesome! I've had some bad experiences with half speed, the tendency to be too bright, the pre-emphasis curve (RIAA) not just right. The half speed master is a fine art, contingent on the skill and care of the engineer.,
7:56 That's just what I was wondering about! Finally I know that cartridge sibilance is not due to my turntable or my system, it's because of the high frequencies of the human voice which are difficult for the stylus to reproduce during playback. And the Ss get distorted as a result. Didn't know 1/2 speed recording could resolve or at least minimize this. I think I'm going to get one of these pressings very soon!
It's not the half speed recording which improves the esses. As he says, it's the ability to use digital methods to zoom in to the sibilants and to apply filtering at those points only, that allows him to produce a disk which can be played back more easily, without the esses becoming overbearing to the listener.
RWBHere I know, he mentioned a limiter if I'm not wrong, to control and cut those ultra high frequencies produced when the S sound is being pronounced. Btw the regular-speed recording process doesn't allow to do this or doesn't allow to do it so precisely. So it's the half-speed recording technique that gives them more precision. I thought it was a problem with my cartridge or something like that but, it's the way most records are being made that causes those distorted Ss to be there.
the distortion is most likely from the loss of sound,,, the highs are the first to distort, somewhere around 7k or so, so the gtrs and some cymbals will too as they fall n that Freq range
the front shot/handheld shot thing has been done in the most ineffective and obvious way, just makes it jerky and annoying. I'm also not listening to a tutorial on audio mastering that sounds like it's being played through an old pipe into a bathroom and mastered on audacity
Granted, half speed tape isn't the same, but back in the 70's we used half-speed ITC cart machines (1-7/8 IPS) for our FM side to improve the sound on air. Granted, we were only getting as good as the vinyl original, but it was much better than the 3-3/4 IPS dubs we used on the AM side of the same source. Smart mastering CAN make up for mediocre recording sessions.
its just sad that the last good thing they did was the beatles mono box .. and thats why it goes up and up in price because its the last good sounding abbey road work ever made :-( what a freeking shame
Every time I see a pair of those Yammy monitors I get bummed because a dick I considered a friend cost me a pair of these, MX series, in mint condition for only $150. 😖
Confusing that the title mentions mastering and refers to mastering throughout but the guy is talking about cutting records, they are not the same thing 🤔
@@jbforce10 in 2018, mastering i s mastering, which is finalizing the mix. The guy is talking about printing the record, and all the "1/2 speed" part of the video is just about printing it.
@@ChristianIce what I'm trying to say is, when dealing with cutting vinyl, mastering does not mean the same thing as when you send your "printed" 2 bus mixdown off to be mastered.
@@andmoreagain Yeah, that's the point. BTw when I export my 2 tracks from the mixing session I call it "mixdown", 'cause it's digital, I don't feel like I'm printing anything :)
4:27 "nothing's getting pushed to its limits". Sure if you play your record at 16 2/3rpm. If you play it at 33 1/3 (like "regular" people do, I hope I didn't use a curse word here) then your stylus/cell/arm maybe pushed to its limits, having a hard time reproducing high frequency. Vinyl is a rather simple audio reproduction system if you think about it, every process has its own limitation, vinyl has a cutoff in high frequency, always had. Instead of half speed master, why don't you cut the groove on a longer lenght. It would need to turn faster, like 45rpm or something. Oh wait, that's called a maxi!
