PlayClassics test files to compare file formats

[semente]

I have registered at BCR website but have yet to receive the confirmation link email...

 

R

[semente]

I very much enjoy Cookie's production as well as Mario's, though I recognize other people will have their own likes and dislikes. Each emphasizes different aspects of production: Mario would not mike or set up a room as Cookie does; Cookie would not (normally) record to PCM as Mario does.

 

 

As Barry Diament has posted on more than one occasion, mike setup is an artistic decision made by the producer and there is no 'right' or 'wrong' setup. Choice of recording format is also an artistic decision. Barry and Mario record in PCM. Cookie's preferred format is DSD. Again,

 

 

"The proof is in the pudding".

 

 

Allan, while I don't disagree with your last sentence, I (and many other audiophiles, music lovers, engineers/producers) am convinced that close mic'ing produces an artificial "presence", "brightness" and "detail" which distorts the sound of instruments and vocals.

Some people might "like" (taste/subjectiveness) the resulting "airiness" and of hearing the mechanical noises that result from handling the instruments and of breathing or lip and tongue movements but it just doesn’t sound "natural”.

One of the reasons is obvious: in real life with most live performances there are hardly ever occasions when a listener would sit closer than 1.5m from the musicians.

 

It’s the correct positioning of the microphones and the acoustics of the studio that are responsible for the "naturalness" or "realism" of Mario’s recordings, which in turn makes them so adequate do subjectively evaluate equipment and system performance.

 

 

I think you will agree that microphones are the first link in the chain and that from then onwards the signal can only deteriorate in different levels of magnitude.

But the pick-up stage does not depend solely on the technical performance of the microphones but also on the way they are positioned in relation to the sound sources and to the venue surfaces.

If my understanding is correct, the acoustic qualities of the recording venue play a major role in the final result if or when the microphones are adequately distanced from the sources.

 

Jud seems to be implying that Cookie’s decision to record to DSD has the potential to produce better results (from a technical standpoint) to Mario’s and Barry’s choice of PCM.

If I am not mistaken, DSD doesn’t allow any mixing and this is why Cookie is forced to do this prior to the A/D conversion.

But unlike Mario or Barry who use only a couple of microphones and could make the most out of DSD, Cookie is multi-mic’ing which requires mixing/editing before A/DC to DSD.

 

I think it is fair to conclude that whilst DSD can be a better option, Cookie’s use of close- and multi-mic’ing in a less than adequate room is compromising those results, further “crippling” the signal that is reaching the A/D converter by mixing in analogue.

As for Barry's recordings, I am not certain if the "liveliness" or "sparkling" quality of the top end I am listening (and can see in spectrograms) is a characteristic of his mics, the result of excessive proximity or a mixture of both; and yet most people "like" (taste/subjectiveness) the way they sound.

 

R, unable to download, still waiting for the confirmation link email…

[Jud]

Hi Ricardo. While you may wind up not liking the results of what Cookie does (at this point it could hardly be otherwise, as you've already convinced yourself what you will hear, and indeed she does do close miking), using words like "crippling" without ever having heard a note damage your credibility as a fair and reliable reporter more than they do Cookie's as a producer.

[semente]

Hi Ricardo. While you may wind up not liking the results of what Cookie does (at this point it could hardly be otherwise, as you've already convinced yourself what you will hear, and indeed she does do close miking), using words like "crippling" without ever having heard a note damage your credibility as a fair and reliable reporter more than they do Cookie's as a producer.

 

Hi Jud,

 

Wouldn't you agree that if or because different microphone techniques produce different results we can more or less anticipate the result prior to listening?

Couldn't the same be said of the acoustics of a recording venue? We all know that a church will produce a different and recognizable sonic signature from a listening hall, a basement or a large studio like the one in Abbey Road.

Or that anyone who's familiar with the performance potential of different loudspeaker topologies can anticipate the qualities and limitations of a small two-way stand mount from a photo or even the specs sheet, even if we can't describe how it sounds unless one listens to it?

 

I used the word "crippling" between quotation marks for a reason, explained earlier in the same post: from the mic onwards the signal can only deteriorate in different levels of magnitude..."crippling" refers to this deterioration.

At this point I can only comment on some of the technical decisions.

Hopefully I will receive the email that will allow me to download the samples and then I will "report" on the result of my listening as well as my "tasting" impressions.

 

I have also mentioned in a previous post that such recording setup might sound "nice" for rock/pop standards and at present I am keeping my mind open.

After all, BCR recordings are of "audiophile grade" quality.

 

R

[Jud]

I like to hear things before commenting about how they sound, but that's just me.

 

(Teasing a little, Ricardo.)

[PopPop]

I have registered at BCR website but have yet to receive the confirmation link email...

 

R

 

I think you will be pleasantly surprised, and the spam is actually minimal. I'm not a huge fan of the genre they promote but I do very much enjoy the sound of the recordings and I am growing fond of a number of their artists.

[Allan F]

Hi Ricardo. While you may wind up not liking the results of what Cookie does (at this point it could hardly be otherwise, as you've already convinced yourself what you will hear, and indeed she does do close miking), using words like "crippling" without ever having heard a note damage your credibility as a fair and reliable reporter more than they do Cookie's as a producer.

+1

Wouldn't you agree that if or because different microphone techniques produce different results we can more or less anticipate the result prior to listening?

 

Couldn't the same be said of the acoustics of a recording venue? We all know that a church will produce a different and recognizable sonic signature from a listening hall, a basement or a large studio like the one in Abbey Road.

In a word, "No". IMO, you are over generalizing. But, approaching Cookie's music with such a strong preconceived notion of how it will sound will likely satisfy your 'expectation bias'.

[livelistenlearn]

hi mario,

 

appreciate it if you could kindly pm the download link.

 

TQVM.

[PopPop]

I think you will be pleasantly surprised, and the spam is actually minimal. I'm not a huge fan of the genre they promote but I do very much enjoy the sound of the recordings and I am growing fond of a number of their artists.

 

Too late to edit that comment. What I meant to say was that is that BCR promotes a variety of artists and styles. Some I like more than others. I find all of the recordings to be quite excellent, technically.

[Sal1950]

If these tasteless "yapping" comments are directed at me, they're completely off mark for I was the first to comment on the differences I have or have not heard between the files.

 

I didn't download the sample files from Blue Coast though because you're obliged to register to do so and I am getting enough spam as it is.

I had never heard of Blue Coast before and after seeing it mentioned here I surfed a bit around their website.

 

To finalise, I don't think that comparing Mario's work with that of others is out of the scope of this topic.

 

R

 

Not only you by far. But Mario did politely request people refrain from these posts and keep this thread on track. But many have just continued to ignore that request and just go off on any issue they please.

 

EVERYONE PLEASE READ

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/playclassics-test-files-compare-file-formats-26703/index3.html#post489771

[徐中銳]

Sal1950, simply, your dotings on Mario are arresting the development of all concerned.

 

Imagine, if the dinosaurs kept « on track » you wouldn't have your Jurassic World...

 

As I linked yesterday, the photos semente Posted correspond to those released sessions that you can purchase (in 4 Hi-Res options) to review.

 

But if you'd like to hear/sample it through their Downloads NOW! YouTube offerings :

 

For example, choose HD to get 320 kbps sound :

[Sal1950]

Sal1950' date=' simply, your dotings on [b']Mario[/b] are arresting the development of all concerned.

 

It's called not being rude. But I guess there's little to be done with a person who's family raised him without manners. Have your fun running this thread as far off the tracks as pleases you.

Sorry Mario, I tried.

[semente]

Not only you by far. But Mario did politely request people refrain from these posts and keep this thread on track. But many have just continued to ignore that request and just go off on any issue they please.

 

EVERYONE PLEASE READ

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/playclassics-test-files-compare-file-formats-26703/index3.html#post489771

 

You are right.

Comparing mic setups, etc. would be better done in the other thread about PlayClassics.

 

R

[The Computer Audiophile]

HI guys - Remember you can put users on your ignore lists, blocking their comments from your view.

[livelistenlearn]

hi mario,

 

appreciate it if you could kindly pm the download link.

 

TQVM.

 

hi mario,

thank you.

it was a privilege to listen to the recordings in the test file you provided.

some sighted listening impressions of playback, without any volume adjustments:

1) 16/44 vs 24/96 tracks on two-channel ‘hi-fi’ system:

the 16/44 file sounds good enough. until one hears the 24/96 file. enhanced attack + decay adds vivacity and vividness. practically ‘forces’ one to listen to the artistes + their skill... as well as the music. in tracks 2 + 4, vocal attacks hit hard enough to make one sit up and pay attention. on first play, the dynamicism of the first ‘sting’ in the flamenco vocals (12:33-ish) startled one of my dogs.

24/96 is preferable but if such offerings did not exist, one could, easily, live with the 16/44 version.

2) 16/44 vs 24/96 on head-fi system:

again, the ‘colour' of the instruments and the skills of the players come through more vividly in 24/96... piano and guitar. mixed feelings, though, about listening to tracks 2 + 4 (that feature the female vocals) more ‘intimately'. in 16/44, the music has more flow and ‘oneness'. in 24/96, the female vocal hits seemed to (over?) dominate the recordings. which is good if this is an 'artistic touch’ or if one wishes to ‘spotlight' the vocalist. maybe less so if one wishes to enjoy the overall music direction. 16/44 blunts the edginess just enough for one to focus on the flow of the music.

the 24/96 is preferable for the piano recital and the tenor + piano performance. however, may choose 16/44 for the tracks with female vocals... this is a personal preference, based on one’s individual viewpoint and specific system.

3) favourite track was the piano recital, followed by the soprano + piano performance.

4) do not think you need to offer a ‘buffet’ of formats. just two main courses = 16/44 and 24/96 should cater for almost all audiophiles.

 

5) the difference between the 16/44 and 24/96 versions pale in comparison to your company’s concept, technique + production values. which is a good thing, one thinks.

cheers.

[John Mason]

Mario

 

I'd love to listen to these tracks and so would appreciate a download link when you have a moment.

 

many tx

 

john

[Mario Martinez]

We have given out 42 test codes so far.

 

Just to keep track of things I have made a list with all your reports:

 

semente #2

 

Sal1950 #10

 

esldude #16

 

skolis #18

 

Jud #28

 

JSWolf #62

 

Le Concombre Masqué #63

 

PopPop #79

 

kumakuma #81

 

livelistenlearn #140

[cookiemarenco]

Hi Jud,

 

Wouldn't you agree that if or because different microphone techniques produce different results we can more or less anticipate the result prior to listening?

Couldn't the same be said of the acoustics of a recording venue? We all know that a church will produce a different and recognizable sonic signature from a listening hall, a basement or a large studio like the one in Abbey Road.

Or that anyone who's familiar with the performance potential of different loudspeaker topologies can anticipate the qualities and limitations of a small two-way stand mount from a photo or even the specs sheet, even if we can't describe how it sounds unless one listens to it?

 

I used the word "crippling" between quotation marks for a reason, explained earlier in the same post: from the mic onwards the signal can only deteriorate in different levels of magnitude..."crippling" refers to this deterioration.

At this point I can only comment on some of the technical decisions.

Hopefully I will receive the email that will allow me to download the samples and then I will "report" on the result of my listening as well as my "tasting" impressions.

 

I have also mentioned in a previous post that such recording setup might sound "nice" for rock/pop standards and at present I am keeping my mind open.

After all, BCR recordings are of "audiophile grade" quality.

 

R

 

Dear Semente, I'd like to respond directly to you.

The photos that you posted earlier on this thread were photos from my home studio. I have 2200 square feet of space (the lower two levels of my house) allocated for studio use. The picture you've shown are from one room (the Piano Room) which is about 400 sq feet and also holds my 1885 Steinway B. It's a 'cozy' room that people fly from around the world to record in. Also, it's affordable because I'm the landlord. After 2008, we became the oldest owner operated commercial studio within 100 miles of San Francisco. The recession caused many studios to fail or be bought out and in danger of becoming condos. The music industry can really suck at times.

 

The rest of the studio has 2 additional rooms (isolated) for placing musicians in separate areas for performance (a technique commonly used in most studios and one that I still use when hired as an independent engineer (not for Blue Coast Records). We also have a very large control room (about 500 sq ft and very high ceilings) and a separate tape/computer room which houses the 2" tape machine, 1/2" tape machine and all the computers drives. My studio is not the place to record a symphony, though, we have had up to 15 musicians performing at once.

 

There are plenty of recording techniques engineers employ. I prefer a mic technique that is not too close (as is done in most commercial studios and especially in the Nashville studios I've been too) and not too distant. There is a depth of bass frequency that I enjoy when the mic is placed closer. In the E.S.E. technique for Blue Coast Records, there are no overdubs or headphones used. That said, all the mics are picking up sound from everything.

 

I don't do this for the sound, but rather for the performance of the musicians. They play better dynamics, hear better and performances are enhanced when musicians hear real sound rather than through headphones. (I use headphone in other sessions, just not Blue Coast Records... correct headphone balance is essential for a great mix).

 

The free downloads are out takes and music. It's not a great place to judge our music. I'd prefer that you ask me for a song or two that in exchange you'll write a review on.... something from our catalog.. and post a link. I'll sign you up for our newsletter anyway and you can unsubscribe as you like.

 

I lean towards a great performance taking place over optimizing for sound. Musicians enjoy coming to my home studio because they feel comfortable. I live on a hill, it's relaxing and I don't have to worry about large trucks driving by and ruining the sound (which happened to me at Chick Corea's studio in Los Angeles many years ago -- I was hired to record a solo piano record and he had the best pianos, sadly not the quietest spot).

 

I would agree with you that the room, the path from mic to recording format (which includes cables -- ours we build ourselves), preamps, etc.. all make a difference. It also makes a difference having more people in a room, weather and what food is at the session. I optimize for musical performance, though my recording chain can be as much as $30,000 per channel (mic, cable, preamp). Whether I mix to DSD or Tape, I prefer to mix through an analog console and do not use plug ins. I'm sometimes hired to mix from PCM and choose to run through the same analog console to get a bigger sound.

 

Something to note... not all my recordings are from my home studio. As a hired gun engineer, I've recorded in Grace Cathedral, Capitol Studios, a cabin at 9000 feet in the Rockies, the Monterey Jazz Festival (and several others), several studios in NYC and an estate near London in a library room (which was up for a Grammy long ago). One of my most recent successes was recording at the Newport Beach Audio Show in the hotel room with guests present and a cell phone going off. These have been some of the most popular of our recordings. Quiles & Cloud - Special Event 39 Newport | Blue Coast Records

 

The first Blue Coast Records album cost over $150,000 to have the top studio on the west coast "room". A place called The Site (which sadly no longer exists). I mixed it there and at Skywalker so that no one could say it wasn't a great room. I believe several of the songs available for free download are from that session. At the time the idea wasn't to start a label, but to create a new stereo and surround sound recording technique. Those sessions are a series of experiments placing the musicians in the large room and also in the echo chamber (to mimic a cave for the Flamenco guitar recordings).

Blue Coast Records | Exceptional Acoustic Recordings

 

After that, and to make financial sense, we chose to record most of the sessions at my studio. This allows for musicians come through town to jump in the studio quickly and affordably.

 

My recording chains are as clean as they come. The venues I choose to record in are where the musicians play their best. I love remote recording and capturing sound live. If I could travel the world and record in caves, homes, boats, where ever, I would do it.

 

If you have any additional questions, please feel free to ask. Email is best.

 

Happy Holidays,

Cookie Marenco

Blue Coast Records

[semente]

Dear Cookie,

 

Thank you for providing such a detailed description of your studios, equipment and recording technique.

 

It was suggested, and quite rightly, that the discussion about recordings methods be moved to it's own thread, which can be found here:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/recording-methods-and-fidelity-26878/

 

As such, I do not feel comfortable developing this theme here any further.

 

I wish to praise your efforts to record all the musicians playing together in a single musical event, as I feel that their interaction is bound to produce better results from an artistic and emotional perspective.

Also note that my comments regarding both techniques, both here and in the aforementioned thread, are to be read in absolute terms and that I am aware that some techniques are more adequate for certain genres than others.

 

Warm Season Greetings,

Ricardo

[cookiemarenco]

 

If I am not mistaken, DSD doesn’t allow any mixing and this is why Cookie is forced to do this prior to the A/D conversion.

But unlike Mario or Barry who use only a couple of microphones and could make the most out of DSD, Cookie is multi-mic’ing which requires mixing/editing before A/DC to DSD.

 

I think it is fair to conclude that whilst DSD can be a better option, Cookie’s use of close- and multi-mic’ing in a less than adequate room is compromising those results, further “crippling” the signal that is reaching the A/D converter by mixing in analogue.

As for Barry's recordings, I am not certain if the "liveliness" or "sparkling" quality of the top end I am listening (and can see in spectrograms) is a characteristic of his mics, the result of excessive proximity or a mixture of both; and yet most people "like" (taste/subjectiveness) the way they sound.

 

R, unable to download, still waiting for the confirmation link email…

 

Semente, have you looked in your spam filter for the confirmation? Send your email address and we will make sure you can get in. By the way, not all of those free samples were recorded in my studio. In fact, many were recorded in live rooms at Audio Conventions. Some were recorded at other studios.

 

BTW, I prefer the sound of tape and the analog console, as well as analog EQ and other effects. I feel that all sound, whether PCM or DSD, is compromised when mixed 'in the box' or in the computer. It's my preference for sound, I'm not forced to work that way.

 

The room has a lot less to do with the sound in the way I prefer to hear it than does the mic position. I would mic the same way at Grace Cathedral as I would in my own room. As you pull a microphone farther away, you'll get less bass response and more room noise (and extraneous noise). Also, I do like the sound of breathing.

 

I suspect we won't agree on musical choices as well as how I choose to record, but I do find it odd that you can judge a sound by looking at a room. Perhaps you'd like me to point out some distortion on a recording made in an orchestra hall? I'm sure the photos looked great at the time

 

Wishing you a happy holiday filled with sound.

 

Cookie Marenco

Blue Coast Records

[semente]

Cookie, please read my reply here: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/recording-methods-and-fidelity-26878/#post492820

 

Sorry Mario.

 

R

[徐中銳]

I guess there's little to be done with a person who's family raised him without manners.

 

Fallacious rhetoric.

[Jamesroy]

...I just sent them to you, Thanks!

I would love to try them especially the guitar. I just received my new Parasound preamp and very pleased with it.

[Sal1950]

Fallacious rhetoric.

My father told me he found the people of New Zealand to be a gracious and friendly peoples during WWII.

You must be from one of the Aboriginal tribes he also described.

[Jamesroy]

I would love to try them especially the guitar. I just received my new Parasound preamp and very pleased with it.

Haven't received the files yet to be tested. Thank You