PlayClassics Truthful Recording Technology v1.1

[francisleung]

We are giving out full albums in 24bit 96kHz format. That means you would be downloading files up to 1.5GB

 

Mario, I am a bit late on this thread. Codes for downloading the iberia, tenor and soprano tracks please. Thanks.

I will see if I am able to tell the difference between the new and old tracks.

[odelay]

We are giving out full albums in 24bit 96kHz format. That means you would be downloading files up to 1.5GB

http://www.cmpcp.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PSN2013_Blier-Carruthers.pdf

I hope that explains everything. I would be happy to send you a code to download any album. Would you like to try?

 

Interesting - the tension between perfection and free experimentation in particular. Finding production methods that reduce that pressure can only be a good thing. I commend your efforts to move in that direction.

 

Having been following the Kind of Blue thread of late, I compared a few 'So What' versions I have while reading. Now I wonder what this would sound like if Mario produced it!

[goldsdad]

Whether you got a gift code or you directly purchased the album please say so and I will be happy to send you a gift code to download this new version.

 

Hi Mario, please send codes for updated releases of Iberia and the Flamenco samples. Thanks again.

[francisleung]

I first compared the Iberia piano track.

I was unable to do it by “blind” listening, with the old and new tracks put in auto playlist because the gain of the two is different.

The version 1.1 requires a lower gain of -6. I tried not to fall into the trap of perceiving “louder” being apparently better sounding.

I was unable to discern any hall or acoustic difference, cleaner fast passages or rounder treble as mentioned by Odelay.

I was able to tell:

1. the right channel has slightly more gain than the left;

2. the older track has the keyboard in a straight row, with higher notes closer to the listener and lower ones, further away; the new one has got the two more or less mixed, hence the keyboard is wider.

I PREFER THE OLD TRACK.

The higher gain of the new track does not benefit me because my the multiple speaker units and amps in my system provide enough power. But for those whose systems have only marginal gain, this version 1.1 will enhance the signal to noise. To illustrate, I am able to play loud enough some of Professor Johnson’s HRx recordings at -7 whereas I have come across a system that sounded like my -12 to -15 gain even when it was turned full up at maxi.

[esldude]

Thanks Mario. Beyond generous.

 

You sent me a gift code for Cabrera plays Debussy. I would like to get the updated version of that fine recording.

[pipis2010]

Could I have the code for the Iberia album again?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile mobile app

[odelay]

I first compared the Iberia piano track.

I PREFER THE OLD TRACK..

 

Interesting. I am curious to listen again for the imaging. I didn't notice any differences in that... Besides the gain, I could really only discern a little more clarity - but only during the faster passages.

 

Mario seemed to confirm that he removed some room artefacts (and boosted the gain by 6bdB as you note). That seemed to explain what I was hearing.

 

Mario - was there anything you did that may have altered the stereo imaging?

[semente]

I have yet to do a listening comparison of the two versions (I'll have to get into the mood somehow) but after reading Mario's description I added 6dB of gain to the original file and then ran both through Audacity's analyser.

The blue bit is what's been filtered out of the current version v1.1:

 

 

R

[Mario Martinez]

Interesting. I am curious to listen again for the imaging. I didn't notice any differences in that... Besides the gain, I could really only discern a little more clarity - but only during the faster passages.

 

Mario seemed to confirm that he removed some room artefacts (and boosted the gain by 6bdB as you note). That seemed to explain what I was hearing.

 

Mario - was there anything you did that may have altered the stereo imaging?

 

No. The only thing I have done is what Ricardo has pointed out on his illustration.

 

That blue area represents the artificial boost caused by this uncontrolled room resonance. That boost alters the tone on the very low end notes of the instrument. Correcting that boost corrects the tone. The only difference between v1 and v1.1 should be on the very low end notes of the piano.

 

Once we corrected that problem we had a lot headroom, so we raised the volume by 6dB. The main purpose of the correction is to fix the tone problem on the very low end notes, the volume thing is just a side effect.

[odelay]

Thanks for the image Semente.

 

Nice to get insights into the process, Mario [emoji846]

[semente]

No. The only thing I have done is what Ricardo has pointed out on his illustration.

 

That blue area represents the artificial boost caused by this uncontrolled room resonance. That boost alters the tone on the very low end notes of the instrument. Correcting that boost corrects the tone. The only difference between v1 and v1.1 should be on the very low end notes of the piano.

 

Once we corrected that problem we had a lot headroom, so we raised the volume by 6dB. The main purpose of the correction is to fix the tone problem on the very low end notes, the volume thing is just a side effect.

 

Hi Mario,

 

I remember mentioning some sort of resonance when commenting my first impressions on Iberia by PM.

I am looking forward to learning if my impressions were right.

 

Cheers,

Ricardo

[DMM]

Hello Mario!

Could I have the new code for Iberia?

I do not quite understand:

-they re-recorded the works (with the "new" room)? or

-or the original recordings are improved (what process)?

[odelay]

I do not quite understand:

-they re-recorded the works (with the "new" room)? or

-or the original recordings are improved (what process)?

 

See Maria's last few comments.

 

Same recording. As Ricardo showed in his image, some room resonances in the lower frequencies were removed.

[francisleung]

Let me elaborate on what I heard.

Mario provided the stage layout previously in another thread; the piano was skewed to the left.

My system is not good enough to portray that true image. It only has the keyboard or perhaps the hammers in a straight row, in the centre and slightly off to the left.

The new 1.1 has the high and low keys somewhat mixed as I described and they are off to the right now.

Whether the filter? used by Mario to remove the boost was applied to the whole track, I don’t know. Would that have affected the rest of the track? Or only the boosted area of track was spliced and singled out for the removal operation?

[odelay]

Looking again at Ricardo's Audacity image, Mario's filter reduced the bass energy ever so slightly (between 35-140Hz - but primarily between 80-100Hz. My small room seems to resonate through 40-60Hz range). Looks pretty small. I'll leave it Mario to explain how that might have contributed to the change in soundstage you heard.

[goldsdad]

Anybody able to connect to www.playclassics.com today? I've been unable to view the site or complete an interrupted download for about the last 15 hours.

[francisleung]

The soprano track, 12 Polish songs.

I listened to the 1.1, reducing gain by -6 in comparison with the older version.

The image of the soprano is now more forward, with she standing in the centre at the plane of the speakers. The older version has her some two feet behind this plane.

I do not have the capability of discerning tonal or timbre difference, if any.

I like the new version better and have removed the older one from the playlist.

Even though Mario recorded the albums with a fixed gain, I set them at different levels to suit my preference. The louder setting may well be a reason for bringing the image forward. The gain for this one in my system is -21, whereas the Iberia 1.1 is -23; the flamenco -17 and the drum solo -5.

[Mario Martinez]

Hello Mario!

Could I have the new code for Iberia?

I do not quite understand:

-they re-recorded the works (with the "new" room)? or

-or the original recordings are improved (what process)?

 

 

It is the same recording with a new calibration.

 

Ours is a research project. The main goal of the project is to develop a recording setup that would allow the artist to take full control of every aspect of the recording.

 

Why would we want to do this? Here is a paper by Amy Blier Carruthers (Royal College of Music, London) that explains the problems performers face when recording their work: "The performer's place in the process and product of recording"

http://www.cmpcp.ac.uk/wp-content/up...Carruthers.pdf

 

Our Technology solves these problems:

About - PlayClassics, the art of true music

 

Our solution is based on a fixed setup. Two microphones always placed on the same spot outside of the stage. Left mic is left speaker and right mic is right speaker. There is no mixing or mastering involved. No engineer or producer tweaks the sound for any "aesthetic reason".

 

The hall and the recording chain have been carefully calibrated to be fully transparent. This calibration (v1.1) allows us to obtain recordings with a pure sound faithful to the true sound of the instruments. This is what gives full control to the artist. The recorded sound is controlled by the artist on the stage.

 

We started working on this project on 2009. The first thing we did was work on the room. We finished the room on April 2, 2013. Then we started working on the calibration. We worked on developing measurement systems that would allow us to calibrate correctly. During that time we ran many different calibrations. With each calibration we were getting closer and closer to transparency. On October 1 2015 we published our work with the best calibration we had then.

 

This is an ongoing project. We keep developing ways to measure the room and improve the calibration. We knew we had a very small problem on the lower part of the spectrum, but we did not have a way to measure and correct it. Now we did come up with a way to measure it and we were able to solve the problem. Now that the problem is solved we would like everyone to have the updated version.

[goldsdad]

Anybody able to connect to www.playclassics.com today? I've been unable to view the site or complete an interrupted download for about the last 15 hours.

 

I'm getting through now.

[francisleung]

The tenor track, Ideale.

He comes forward more conspicuously than the soprano in the Polish songs.

[kschac]

I have Iberia as well and would like to receive a code for the updated version.

 

Many thanks!

[goldsdad]

Sorry to say, but there are brief episodes of a quite low level static-like distortion in the recalibrated tracks of Iberia, which are definitely not in the original files. This noise is clearly audible in quieter moments of the music. Some of the more distinct examples are:

track 1: 3m 51s

track 2: 2m 02s

track 6: 3m 54s

 

The distortion events sometimes also make the piano sound rather like a tremelo effect is being applied. A distinct example is track 1 at 3m 58s. Again, this definitely does not afflict the original files, but is in the new 96 kHz files and the derived 48 kHz and 44.1 kHz files.

 

Below are screenshots (click them to enlarge) of spectrograms of the clean original (with +6 dB gain to approximate the level of the recalibrated version) and distorted recalibrated track 1, and their difference, at 3m 58s.

 

[Mario Martinez]

Sorry to say, but there are brief episodes of a quite low level static-like distortion in the recalibrated tracks of Iberia, which are definitely not in the original files. This noise is clearly audible in quieter moments of the music. Some of the more distinct examples are:

track 1: 3m 51s

track 2: 2m 02s

track 6: 3m 54s

 

The distortion events sometimes also make the piano sound rather like a tremelo effect is being applied. A distinct example is track 1 at 3m 58s. Again, this definitely does not afflict the original files, but is in the new 96 kHz files and the derived 48 kHz and 44.1 kHz files.

 

Below are screenshots (click them to enlarge) of spectrograms of the clean original (with +6 dB gain to approximate the level of the recalibrated version) and distorted recalibrated track 1, and their difference, at 3m 58s.

 

Thank you, this is great feedback

I will look into this and report back when I know what is going on.

[Skip Pack]

Mario,

 

Could you send me the code for the Debussey Preludes. Thank you for your efforts as well as these offers.

 

Skip

[Mario Martinez]

Thank you, this is great feedback

I will look into this and report back when I know what is going on.

 

I have confirmed it and yes, the files are "broken".

 

I am already reprocessing them. I will be uploading them as soon as possible.