Play Classics final calibration: TRT sound 2.4a …no more R&D

[Mario Martinez]

Over the span of this last 8 years we have managed to develop a completely transparent recording system. We have eliminated the intervention of the "sound engineer or technician". There is no post production process in our albums; just two mics with no mixing and no mastering. You can read all about it here: http://www.playclassics.com/trtsound

 

You cannot do this if you are using regular recording techniques. When you record an instrument with any of these techniques the tone quality or timbre of the instrument gets thrown off. It does not matter if you try to record that instrument with many mics or just one mic, the color of the instrument across its range gets transformed into something else.

 

That is where the technician’s and engineer’s work comes in. They are supposed to correct these deformations during the post production process. The quality of the resulting sound is therefore a consequence of the psychoacoustic ability of the technician or engineer (I say psychoacoustic because there are no tools to empirically check whether the result of the process is correct or not).

 

Now, how true is this process to the sound of the artist? I used to be a pianist myself. I studied with the great American pianist Earl Wild who literally made hundreds of recordings. I can tell you most professional musicians do not "recognize" the sound of their instrument on the recordings they make because of these subtle changes on timbre quality.

 

To me as a musician this is not fair. You do not spend your whole live working your instrument's sound to have it randomly altered when you finally have the chance to make a recording to show the world how good your musicianship is. This is something that has been going on ever since the beginning of recording history just because there was no technical way to avoid the problem.

 

Well, this is what our project is all about. We have developed a recording methodology (named Truthful Recording Technology) that does not alter timbre quality therefore eliminating the need for "fixing" anything on the sound. What you hear in our recordings is solely and purely the result of what the musicians did on the stage (just as if you had been there live).

 

I will be happy to share the results of our project with you all. Just pick an album of your choice (they have all been updated to this final calibration) and I will send you a Gift Code to download the TRT sound master file (24bit 96kHz). You can see all our albums here: http://www.playclassics.com/albums

 

All we want in exchange is for you to post your impressions on this thread. We will be using your feedback to try to get the attention of the industry. Strange as it may seem, quality by itself does not open any doors and this industry is no exception. You opinion about our recordings might be a good enough endorsement for them to pay attention to us.

 

P.D. It has been 6 years since we first started sharing our developments with you all. Our quest to achieve transparency has not always been a straight path. We have had to go back and forward (and sometimes get lost in between) to get to this point. We would like to thank you all for having the patience to help us during this very long process. Your feedback has been a great help throughout the entire journey.

[fas42]

Thanks very much for your generosity, Mario! ... And very pleasing that you've reached an end to the journey, 👍.

 

If I may, I would be very pleased to be able to access the Modern Times, by the Harmonie du soir, ensemble, recording - thanks!

 

Cheers,

[Rugby]

Congratulations and thanks.  I would love to hear Stories The Romantic Spanish Guitar.

[Mario Martinez]

Thank you both, I just sent you the codes. I hope you like them. Enjoy! 👍

[firedog]

Hi Mario-

I'd love to get an updated version of the Albeniz Iberia.

 

Thanks

[Skip Pack]

I also would love to hear " Stories The Romantic Spanish Guitar".  Thanks for the offer.

 

Skip

[semente]

Hi Mario,

 

Many thanks for the generous offer, and good to know that you've finally nailed the calibration.

Could I please have the final version of the Cabrera plays Debussy?

 

Best wishes,

Ricardo

[Rexp]

On 10/4/2021 at 4:01 PM, Mario Martinez said:

Thank you both, I just sent you the codes. I hope you like them. Enjoy! 👍

"Stories The Romantic Spanish Guitar" please Mario.Thanks so much!

[Rexp]

21 hours ago, Rexp said:

"Stories The Romantic Spanish Guitar" please Mario.Thanks so much!

@Mario MartinezWhat a great recording! Seems quite a bit better than your earlier stuff, or am I hearing things?

[Mario Martinez]

27 minutes ago, Rexp said:

@Mario MartinezWhat a great recording! Seems quite a bit better than your earlier stuff, or am I hearing things?

No, you are not "hearing things" ...It does come out very differently. 

 

It seems that previous calibrations have always been very close to that transparency point but not quite right on it. The correction we made for this new calibration is just as slight as all the previous ones, but the resulting sound is something else.

We came up with this new 2.4a calibration last July and hearing those results I thought we may have achieved our goal but I did not want to post it so quickly because I wanted to make sure.

 

That is why we are posting it now that we are sure this is it. It's our final calibration because we are convince we have hit the bullseye 😀

 

 

[Guidof]

Thanks Mario. The Albeniz Iberia please!

[firedog]

Hi Mario-

Just had a chance to start to compare the Iberia - 2.4a to version 2.

The new one sounds great, but it's hard to compare as the dynamic range of the two versions is different.

Both subjectively and objectively. 

I used the DR meter in foobar and see a noticeable difference: DR 13 (v2.4) vs DR 15(v2) overall average, with an even bigger difference on some individual tracks.

 

How do you account for this?

[satbox]

Thanks Mario. The Albeniz Iberia please! Thank you.

[John Dyson]

I am not a potential customer, so haven't requested a download,  But if the last phase of 'mastering' is indeed totally eliminated, then the result should absolutely be superior.   This would be what I have fought against since 2011, and what had damaged my interest in 'high fidelity' since the post-mastering process was started in approx the middle 1980s.   The creeping crud has been in most consumer recordings for a long time, and I have found very few truly 'undamaged' recordings from the original mix, or from even the normally perceived mastering process.

 

If the recording is indeed 'pure', that is a great thing for audiophiles who enjoy the genre being talked about here...

It is a wonderful day...

 

 

 

[Mario Martinez]

6 hours ago, firedog said:

Hi Mario-

Just had a chance to start to compare the Iberia - 2.4a to version 2.

The new one sounds great, but it's hard to compare as the dynamic range of the two versions is different.

Both subjectively and objectively. 

I used the DR meter in foobar and see a noticeable difference: DR 13 (v2.4) vs DR 15(v2) overall average, with an even bigger difference on some individual tracks.

 

How do you account for this?

 

The calibration is mainly an equalisation. The purpose of that equalisation is to correct the timbre deformations that the recording chain (Hall acoustics at pickup point, mics, etc…) may have introduced into the recorded sound.

 

Since the recording setup (Hall, pickup point, etc) is always the same we use the same calibration in all the albums.

 

But this calibration has been changing over time because we have been working at it to try to improve it.

 

Over the years we have gone through many versions of this calibration. Calibration 2.0 was developed in 2016. Every new calibration has been slightly different from its predecesor but there are quite a few calibrations between 2.0 and 2.4a.

 

The differences in the equalisation of 2.0 and 2.4a may therefore be big enough to not just produce a different timbre (which is the main purpose of the calibration) but to also affect the level of the peaks of the different recordings.

 

This is important, because those peaks across all our recordings, are the ones that determine the final volume level of the all set (except for the guitar album which is raised 6dB above that).

 

The resulting volume level of calibration 2.4a may well be 2 to 3 dB above the volume level of 2.0, but it is hard to determine exactly how much because that difference might not be evenly distributed across the frequency spectrum.

[Mario Martinez]

1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

I am not a potential customer, so haven't requested a download,  But if the last phase of 'mastering' is indeed totally eliminated, then the result should absolutely be superior.   This would be what I have fought against since 2011, and what had damaged my interest in 'high fidelity' since the post-mastering process was started in approx the middle 1980s.   The creeping crud has been in most consumer recordings for a long time, and I have found very few truly 'undamaged' recordings from the original mix, or from even the normally perceived mastering process.

 

If the recording is indeed 'pure', that is a great thing for audiophiles who enjoy the genre being talked about here...

It is a wonderful day...

 

 

 

 

Hello John,

 

these giveaways do not have a comercial purpose. You do not have to be a customer to enjoy the offer. We are just interested in getting your feedback.😃

 

If you are curious about the result please let me know and I will be happy to send you a gift code so you can try the master in your system.

 

If you are not a classical music listener, I would still recommend getting the wind sextet (Modern times) or the piano trios (Fanny & Felix Mendelssohn chamber music), I am sure you will enjoy them. 👍

[Mike Rubin]

While I love piano music, I have no idea how to use it to evaluate a recording, honestly.  I think it might be easier for me to listen to an ensemble, so I would love a code for Harmonie du Soir chamber music album. Thank you. 

[Juan Triana]

Hi Mario, would love to listen the Tosti songs.

[Archimago]

Sounds interesting Mario!

 

Would love to give the violin and piano work in "Around The World" a listen.

[klassikmann]

Hi Mario,

 

Albéniz Iberia performed by Luis Grané, please. Thank you in advance.

 

[CJH]

Would like to hear the piano trios (Felix and Fanny). Thanks.

CJH

[Mario Martinez]

15 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

While I love piano music, I have no idea how to use it to evaluate a recording, honestly.  I think it might be easier for me to listen to an ensemble, so I would love a code for Harmonie du Soir chamber music album. Thank you. 

 

Maybe we should look at this from a different point of view. My statement is that our system's sound is transparent. But it would be impossible for you to evaluate its transparency by just listening to one instrument. Yes, it may sound good to you but how can you really know how "true" to the physical instrument that sound is if you really have not had the chance to listen to the real one?

 

I think a better way to evaluate the transparency of the system would be to listen to a playlist of one track of each album. Then you will be hearing all different kinds of instruments one after the other and also some of the same instruments used in different places of the stage.

 

Now, you know there is no mastering or mixing involved, so all instruments are portrayed just the way the system captured them (we did not make any corrections to any particular instrument or range of an instrument) so, if what you are hearing in the playlist sounds natural to you then my theory is that that can only be the result of a transparent recording system.

 

Here is a playlist I made with one example from each album so you can try this approach: http://www.playclassics.com/streaming?g=2898-2887-2870-2852-2839-176-2820-140-130-115-87-16-2796-27-48-75-7-2910&ps=1&pt=1&p=a-135-136&i=a&c=a&o=s&gf=m

 

[John Dyson]

Just a heads up, and I'll be listening in more detail soon, but wanted to give a status report.

 

Most definitely, no question or equivocation about it:

 

The Mozart - Beethoven Wind Quartets is a clean, pure recording without the common industry stealth post-processing.

 

(I'll do a more complete listen after my SW release -- but this IS good news that there is 'real, good quality stuff' available.)

 

Frankly, the quality sounds better than the best master tape in my possession.  Of course, the master tapes NEEDED NR, but Mario's stuff appears clean.   It will probably take real reviewer with better hearing than myself to make accurate observations in other facets of the recording, but thank goodness that the true recording is available for listening. 

 

Also, read Mario's document on what TRT means.  The TRT document appears to focus on the micing and collection of the sound.  Along with proper micing (which is often a matter of opinion & debate), it is also mentioned that maintaining truthful and accurate reproduction of the mix is also important.    In this forum topic, the well thought out TRT technique is the most relevant aspect of the recording.  But also critical, since his company is distributing a pure recording, then the consumer to realize the full benefits of the TRT technique.

 

http://www.playclassics.com/trtsound

 

Personal comment:  I really want to sit down soon, enjoy and also carefully listen to the truly clean TRT recording.  I seldom encounter actually clean recordings, so there is something to be learned by listening.   Even my so-called 'clean' test sources are 'DolbyA' or something like that, which by definition means that my test recordings had dynamics processing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rexp]

9 hours ago, Mario Martinez said:

 

Maybe we should look at this from a different point of view. My statement is that our system's sound is transparent. But it would be impossible for you to evaluate its transparency by just listening to one instrument. Yes, it may sound good to you but how can you really know how "true" to the physical instrument that sound is if you really have not had the chance to listen to the real one?

 

I think a better way to evaluate the transparency of the system would be to listen to a playlist of one track of each album. Then you will be hearing all different kinds of instruments one after the other and also some of the same instruments used in different places of the stage.

 

Now, you know there is no mastering or mixing involved, so all instruments are portrayed just the way the system captured them (we did not make any corrections to any particular instrument or range of an instrument) so, if what you are hearing in the playlist sounds natural to you then my theory is that that can only be the result of a transparent recording system.

 

Here is a playlist I made with one example from each album so you can try this approach: http://www.playclassics.com/streaming?g=2898-2887-2870-2852-2839-176-2820-140-130-115-87-16-2796-27-48-75-7-2910&ps=1&pt=1&p=a-135-136&i=a&c=a&o=s&gf=m

 

Is the playlist audio mp3?

[rando]

On 10/3/2021 at 2:05 PM, Mario Martinez said:

Just pick an album of your choice (they have all been updated to this final calibration)

 

This is highly interesting as I consider "Polish Songs" one of my favorite vocal albums.  My interest seemed to be in the overwhelming minority compared to other instrumental releases.  Where some very fine listeners keyed in on elements your team had captured with a great polarity.  Most notably on piano where tunings and falling out of tune from playing to concert levels provoked an immense range of responses.  Will be interesting to read what longer term participants discover in this calibration. 

 

I certainly hope your persistence allows getting a steady number of high caliber working artists into making recordings with you.