I stumbled upon another way to compare remasters last night. "Stumbled' is the word since what really happened is, I clicked a button in Cool Edit (Audition) that I hadn't clicked before -- the 'Copy Data' button on the frequency analysis graph. (CE/Audition lets you do three kinds of analysis on a file -- frequency , phase, and 'statistics', the latter giving info on peak and average levels, the sort of table posted here several times).
I hadn't realized before that 'copy data' on the frequency analysis graph actually lets you dump the *numbers* that generate the graph, into another page , e.g. an Excel worksheet. (I thought it basically did a screen capture of the graph). Duh. I should have realized it, since 'copy data' for the 'statistics' function does exactly the same thing. So for a frequency analysis you get a list of frequencies and a list of left and right channel levels at each frequency, in dB below 0 dB FS. You can get this for a given point in a tune, or do 'scan' to get a sort of average for each channel, over the whole track . THis as you might imagine is hecka cool for comparing remasters. In Excel it's easy to set up a sheet that will graph the 'EQ' differences between tracks at each frequency point (I length-match and normalize the tracks to 0 dB first). I'll put some up from the Eno and recent Bill bruford remasters later this week to demonstrate. It was actually pretty interesting to see what was different and what wasn't, for some remasters.
It occurs to me that this is also a way for you guys to try to 'match' frequency profiles when you are remastering tracks yourself (like Luke and 'Sparrow'). I thought you'd have to match graphics (tedious), but you can actually match 'numbers' instead (tedious, but more do-able).
Does anyone else play with frequency analysis? thomh? I'd like to know more about what 'scan' is actually outputting.
Remasters and remastering: fun with Audition
Remasters and remastering: fun with Audition
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant
Long story short, based on analysing a track or two from each disc: FGtM on CD always sounded a bit 'toppy' to me -- quite bright -- and sure enough, when I compare the old to the new, the old one has a constantly rising EQ level from around 2 kHz up to 20 compared to the new one . Meaning, in other words that the new one has been made less 'trebly'. Which one accurately represents the master tapes, I can't say.
However, for One of a Kind, once a 0.4 dB overall average level difference has been accounted for, there is NO difference between the old and new -- I mean , the level difference are * 0.0 dB* all across the frequency spectrum. (Contrast this with 'Hell's Bell's' from the 'Jazz Fusion volume 2' anthology CD from some years back, which by the same meausre, has clearly been re-EQ'd). For Earthworks, you don't even have to adjust the levels -- it seems to be essentially the same as the old one right 'out of the box', even though it's got a remastering credit. WHich is Ok in the case of Earthworks, since I think that sounded fine already, but it's curious for OoaK, which I think could benefit from re-EQ.
Also, the cover art reproduction is screwy -- someone used the wrong color values and Bill Bruford's skin tone on 'FgtM' is now a scary sunburned shade of red, and the green 'E' on Earthworks is now a sickly
aquamarine.
Bonus tracks on the two 70's albums are audience-quality bootlegs of live 'Bruford' tracks -- cleaned up probably as best they could be, but still sounding like bootlegs.
However, for One of a Kind, once a 0.4 dB overall average level difference has been accounted for, there is NO difference between the old and new -- I mean , the level difference are * 0.0 dB* all across the frequency spectrum. (Contrast this with 'Hell's Bell's' from the 'Jazz Fusion volume 2' anthology CD from some years back, which by the same meausre, has clearly been re-EQ'd). For Earthworks, you don't even have to adjust the levels -- it seems to be essentially the same as the old one right 'out of the box', even though it's got a remastering credit. WHich is Ok in the case of Earthworks, since I think that sounded fine already, but it's curious for OoaK, which I think could benefit from re-EQ.
Also, the cover art reproduction is screwy -- someone used the wrong color values and Bill Bruford's skin tone on 'FgtM' is now a scary sunburned shade of red, and the green 'E' on Earthworks is now a sickly
aquamarine.
Bonus tracks on the two 70's albums are audience-quality bootlegs of live 'Bruford' tracks -- cleaned up probably as best they could be, but still sounding like bootlegs.
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant
So, on the whole, you recommend FGtM over the old CD, but One of a Kind is essentially identical?
I have both on vinyl, neither on CD. I do have "Master Strokes" on CD.
I have both on vinyl, neither on CD. I do have "Master Strokes" on CD.
Chuck thinks that I look to good to be a computer geek. I think that I know too much about interface design, css, xhtml, php, asp, perl, and ia (too name a few things) to not be one.
Patrick M wrote:So, on the whole, you recommend FGtM over the old CD, but One of a Kind is essentially identical?
So far, yes. NB that I have only comapred one track from each disc. It's *conceivable* that indvidual tracks were EQd differently...
Also, there's the issue of bonus tracks -- if you want them, they're only on the new remasters.
I have both on vinyl, neither on CD. I do have "Master Strokes" on CD.
I used to have that too...wish I still did, if only to compare some of the masterings. Any chance you could send me a rip of tracks from the first two Bruford albums?
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant
krabapple wrote:I used to have that too...wish I still did, if only to compare some of the masterings. Any chance you could send me a rip of tracks from the first two Bruford albums?
Yup.
Chuck thinks that I look to good to be a computer geek. I think that I know too much about interface design, css, xhtml, php, asp, perl, and ia (too name a few things) to not be one.
Maybe you'd seen it already, but I just found this-
http://shoko.calarts.edu/~bcassidy/hog/
It's a little stand-alone app (appears to be free, haven't really read all of the site yet) which does a couple tricks on WAV files, one of them being EQ matching.
I've tried it with 10-second clips of the Kinks' Afternoon Tea from the Reprise CD and the awfully-EQed 1998 disc and, while it isn't perfect, it looks promising.
My current re-EQ project: making something listenable out of the 'what the f**k were they thinking' mono disc of The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn.
http://shoko.calarts.edu/~bcassidy/hog/
It's a little stand-alone app (appears to be free, haven't really read all of the site yet) which does a couple tricks on WAV files, one of them being EQ matching.
I've tried it with 10-second clips of the Kinks' Afternoon Tea from the Reprise CD and the awfully-EQed 1998 disc and, while it isn't perfect, it looks promising.
My current re-EQ project: making something listenable out of the 'what the f**k were they thinking' mono disc of The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn.
Here's another 'EQ mapping' app -- though apparently discontinued
http://www.arbitermt.co.uk/steinberg/pr ... filter.htm
download demo at
http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/programs/FreeFilter_win/
and here's another
http://www.har-bal.com
http://www.arbitermt.co.uk/steinberg/pr ... filter.htm
download demo at
http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/programs/FreeFilter_win/
and here's another
http://www.har-bal.com
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant
damianm wrote:My current re-EQ project: making something listenable out of the 'what the f**k were they thinking' mono disc of The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn.
Forget it. I made a needle-drop that blows it away. I waited years for someone to do it, and I finally said "fuck it" and just bought the LP myself.
I took a gamble and bought a copy for $100 from someone who couldn't describe the condition properly. It turned out to be VG++. The UK "Are You Experienced" was the same story. Both of those usually go for a lot more on eBay, along with adjectives like "STUNNING".
The mono "Safe As Milk" with bumper sticker & inner sleeve also cost about $100. That was totally mis-listed on eBay too....simply as "BEEFHEART LP 1970". I fought with only one other person for it. That LP easily could have gone for $300-$400 if it was listed properly.
I'm not too big into LP's unless the digital version is totally insufficient (or non-existant).
The mono "Safe As Milk" with bumper sticker & inner sleeve also cost about $100. That was totally mis-listed on eBay too....simply as "BEEFHEART LP 1970". I fought with only one other person for it. That LP easily could have gone for $300-$400 if it was listed properly.
I'm not too big into LP's unless the digital version is totally insufficient (or non-existant).
JWB wrote:Forget it. I made a needle-drop that blows it away.
And you will be making this available to dues-paying FLO members, yes?
Chuck thinks that I look to good to be a computer geek. I think that I know too much about interface design, css, xhtml, php, asp, perl, and ia (too name a few things) to not be one.