Last update: 2007-03-18

 

 

Topics:
The public remastering
Chapter 2 - The Quality of the source
Chapter 3 - Flat transfer or clever treatment?
Chapter 4 - Pros and cons concerning NR
Chapter 5 - Towards home stretch...

 

 

The public remastering

 

  

April 2007 - the public remastering of...

 

Grobschnitt „Rockpommel’s Land“

 

A worldwide unique platform for everyone to attend and discuss the final sound enhancement of a legendary German "Kraut" production from 1977


Here are the rules: Eroc is posting sound-examples and facts directly from his workspace here. You can download the sounds and listen and compare them to each other and to everything else you like. If you have any ideas or suggestions or just want to express yourself, you’re invited to join the discussion in the Steve Hoffman Forum.

Eroc will trace the discussion permanently and join in whenever necessary, but please avoid to contact him via e-mail because he’s loaded with tons of work for this project and others.

So off we go with the first step...

 

CHAPTER 1 – The overall loudness of a CD

"Loudness is relative because everyone has got a knob for it on his equipment". This statement is often herad among audiophiles, who dispise modern digital brickwall compression. "Why souch a horrible amount of compression?" Well, there have been always hardcore competitions concerning the sound of music in a tin-can. We already had it in the 60’s with the old analog compressors and the stereo-spread, we had it in the 70’s with the Aphex Aural Exciter and the multi-playback, then we had it in the 80’s with digital reverb, effects and sampling technology and we still have it today with the overall-loudness sanity of the CD.

But as long as record companies don’t stop yelling "this production is the best of all because it really bursts the speakers", bands will never stop to run for "the loudest CD ever". That’s a basic demand at least for genres like Metal, Hardrock and Punk. For remasterings of older material it is not essential necessary and depends on what was done with compression to the mixes in the studios back then. In spite of that, some companies join the loudness-competition with their back-catalogue material advising the remasterers to "blow up" the stuff to match today’s listening-habits (or at least to sell more of the old stuff to youngsters).

On the other hand: clever digital compression alters and enhances the sound, especially of old muddy material by letting it sound more transparent and open. This encreases the loudness, too, and therefore a lot of reissues come over quite loud but also are sounding better than others. The possible enhancement in the remastering process depends in first row on the quality of the source and the quality of the given mixes, but last but not least also on the music itself. It’s obvious that a track from Nazareth or Led Zeppelin can stand more and different kinds of digital compression than e.g. a tune from Gentle Giant or Fairfield Parlour.

In the early 80's a huge pile of music was transfered 1:1 from the o-tapes to CD, without any care of loudness and without any further digital treatment. These CDs are mostly very low in overall-level and sometimes have other mistakes. But we all remember the first marketing arguments like "the CD offers the ultimate sound and dynamics, no noise any more, no wow and flutter, no crackling" etc., so many people still believe today that 16 bit digital is the best they can get. And many audiophiles, especially the older ones still believe the "best CDs ever" were made in the early years, because they are not this loud and not treated or butchered. Okay, a good 1:1 transfer from the original tape cannot be denied to be very close to the original mix, but this argument lacks as well as so many old mixes themselves, as well as the eternal call  for "the original sound". Fact is: there is no original sound existing on the market, because no customer ever has heard the original tapes. Everyone got just used more or less to the "sound" of different kinds of copies, either on vinyl or on CD with their mistakes. So why cling to those good old habits? Does crackling and noise of shellac really has something to do with the character and intentions of the music of e.g. Charley Patton? Is the tape-hiss at the end of Grobschnitt's RPL ,where you can hear the musicians joking, really neccessary and "authentic"?

C'mon boys - we’re not in the middle of an archeologic excursion when enjoying music, we are right in the middle of a permanent developing high technology where nobody wants to run WIN 95 any more, except Mr. Gumby. Every audiophile is proud of his expensive highly developed gear, so why put it down by listening to techincal failure of the records?

What does this mean for today’s contemporary remastering? Just use everything available to first whip it all (!) out of the original source and then try carefully to correct the mistakes and failures. And then, if neccessary, try to enhance the sound-picture to point out the charisma and character of the material. Who prefers it "as original as possible" should refer to old nyl or shellac. But everybody else should be convinced by the results of how great  music can sound if treated clever with today’s best technique and methods.

 
Right below you can download sound-examples for loudness comparison. Each example was taken 1:1 digital from normal CDs and then converted to MP-3 at 256 kb/s by using Fraunhofer encoding. These examples range from "quiet" vintage CDs up to the brickwall loudness of today's productions. They were posted only to show you, how "far" we have come with the loudness on CD.

Grobschnitt’s "Rockpommel’s Land" should be settled somewhere in between. But where exactly...? Don’t hesitate to let yourself off right here:

 
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 

 

001 – Low volume: early CD reissue by Metronome

"Ernie’s Reise", from the first CD-reissue 1989 by Metronome, cat.-no. 837985-2, a typical low-level transfer of the early days, probably done by Wim Makkee at PolyGram Center, Hannover

 

           Sound 001 A

 

"Rockpommel's Land", from the first CD-reissue 1989 by Metronome, cat.-no. 837985-2, a typical low-level transfer of the early days, probably done by Wim Makkee at PolyGram Center, Hannover

 

           Sound 001 B

 

 

002 – Normal volume: CD reissue by Repertoire Records

"Ernie’s Reise", taken 1:1 from the second CD-reissue 1998 by Repertoire Records, cat.-no. PMS 7095-WR, remastered by Eroc

 

          Sound 002 A 


 

"Rockpommel's Land", taken 1:1 from the second CD-reissue 1998 by Repertoire Records, cat.-no. PMS 7095-WR, remastered by Eroc

 

          Sound 002 B

 

 


003 – Normal volume: CD reissue by Repertoire Records

"The House, The Street, The Room" from the album Acquiring The Taste by Gentle Giant, released by Repertoire Records in 2006, remastered by Eroc

 

          Sound 003 A

 


"Think Of Me With Kindness" from the album Octopus by Gentle Giant, released by Repertoire Records in 2006, remastered by Eroc

 

          Sound 003 B

 

 


004 – High volume: typical contemporary Gothic production

"Darkness" from the abum India by German Gothic act Xandria, released on Drakkar Records, cat.-no.  , mastered by Eroc (by demand of the band)

 

          Sound 004

 

 

005 – Extreme volume: Die! - the loudest mastering ever

"Lass' es regnen" (let it rain) from the album Stigmata by German act Die! - released on Black Bards Entertainment in 2006, mastered by Eroc (by command of the band). This CD beats all releases worldwide in loudness, even such acts like Slipknot, Machine Head or Linkin' Park

          
          
Sound 005

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 2 - The Quality of the source

 

 

CHAPTER 2 - The quality of the source

Essential for remastering is the sonic quality of the source. Therefore the original master-tapes are the only acceptable basis. Only if the tapes may be rotten or show decreasing magnetism a mint vinyl pressing or a safety tape-copy can offer better results. In case of RPL everything is perfect with the original tapes from 1977.

 

Each copy from o-tape to another media like tape, vinyl or digital shows some loss of sound-quality, either audible to everyone (like in case of vinyl) or just measurable and audible only to trained ears. Therefore all discussions about “the original sound” from the past are absurd. There was no original sound available for decades on the consumer market, because no consumer ever had the chance to listen to an original mastertape on his home-equipment. Everyone just got used to certian "coloured" sound-pictures from vinyls over the years, more or less close to the original, but always containing more or less technical mistakes and garbage.

 

And that situation didn't change when the CD entered the field, because for many more years the digital technology remained in it's childhood boots.

 

Spoken for RPL nobody out there has ever heard the real sound of the o-tapes up to this day. Who claims the vinyls of this production always “sounded great” will nail them to the next wall after listening to the sound-examples below. For three decades the original sound of the RPL mixes was covered under a vinyl blanket and even the CD reissues didn’t show the real details and transparency. Therefore now it’s overdue to finally transfer this album once more from the o-tapes into the market with the greatest care and best equipment, to show the world what kind of outstanding prduction was laid down by Grobschnitt, Eroc and Conny Plank back in the 70’s.

 

The famous SH-Forum is the best place to discuss this topic, because here we find a majority of audiophiles who claim to have “golden ears”. Okay - let’s check out if they have cleaned ‘em perfectly this morning...

 

Right below you find examples from all existing releases of RPL, plus a part taken 1:1 from the o-tape from 1977. All were adjusted exactly to the same level so that an objective comparison of sound and stereo-spread is feasible. Just compare these ones very carefully on your best equipment e.g. by opening the files with a wave-editor on your screen and skipping from one into another at the same spot. Then please tell us your impressions at:

 

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 

 

 

 

 

006 – The first vinyl issue from 1977

This album was released in 1977 by Metronome/Brain, Hamburg, cat.-no. 60.041. The vinyl-cut was done by Christa Brüggemann at SST in Frankfurt with Eroc and Conny Plank attending.

 

            Sound 006


This one was “reference” for more than 22 years before RPL was re-released on CD. But compared to the o-tape this vinyl LP is crap. It lacks of an azimuth failure of @ 1.80 samples (see picture below) which is quite audible in mono (concerning sound example will follow soon) and offers harsh distortion, especially in the end of the last track on side 2. This occurs because both sides exceed the limit of @ 18:45, which marks the “border” for clean and loud cuttings on vinyl. Side 2 is with it’s 24 minutes (!) far too long for a normal LP level cut, but of course Conny Plank and Eroc  wanted to have “the loudest finale ever on a record”, so they pushed the buttons up and drove the whole thing above the limit.

 

007 – The second vinyl issue from 1979

This album was released in 1979 by Bomb Records, Ontario, Canada, cat.-no. bomb 110. The vinyl-cut must have been done by Mr. Badger and Mr. Owl somewhere in the Canadian outback.

 

            Sound 007



That one sounds even more worse than the original LP. Although it’s cut not so loud and the azimuth failure is relatively small @ 0.48 samples, which is audible only for trained ears by direct comparison in mono to a azimuth-corrected version, there must have been somebody rather stoned at the controls in the cutting session. The overall sound is a lot muddier than the Brain LP, the right channel differs more than 5.5 dB to the left one and in the end there are harsh cracks (!) audible in some drum-beats @ 1 minute, but only on the right channel (see picture below). So this vinyl-issue deserves NOT to be played loud, it deserves to serve as a toilet cover.

 


008 – The first CD release from 1989

This CD was released as a simple 1:1 transfer from the o-tapes in 1989 by Metronome, Hamburg, cat.-no. 837985-2. You already find it in spot 001 above, but here it’s adjusted correctly to the level of the other samples to enable a correct sound-comparison.


             Sound 008



This release was the first one to get rather close to the original mastertape’s sound, but didn’t reach it. It doesn’t offer the full transparency and details of the original mixes because of these reasons:
a) there still is an azimuth failure of @ 0.47 samples, b) the playback machine (Studer A 820) was not internally modified, c) the audio signal was digitized on one of the first A/D’s available (probably a SONY PCM 16 Bit) which were lightyears away from the sonic quality of today’s units like Apogee, Pacific Microsonics or Daniel Weiss and d) the leads from the machine to the A/D were of normal wire-quality and many feet (too) long. Each of these steps decreases the clarity of the sound by damping and covering up the attack signals.

 

009 – The second CD release from 1998

This CD was released in 1998 by Repertoire, Hamburg, cat.-no. PWS 7095-WP. You already find it in spot #002 above, but here it’s adjusted correctly to the level of the other samples to enable a correct sound-comparison.

 

                 Sound 009

 

This release was the first one being remastered. It’s louder than the Metronome CD and matches contemporary levels on CD, because it was treated with EQ and compression. Eroc had in mind to settle somewhere into the direction of the first vinyl LP with it’s bursting, heavy compressed character especially in the finale. RPL was intended to be loud and powerful, so this CD pointed it out and therefore was praised by the majority of the fans and the press during the passed years.

 

010 – The original master-tape from 1977

The original tapes were recorded during the mix in summer of 1977 at Conny’s Studio, Neunkirchen, Germany, at 30 i/ps AES on a Scully recorder using BASF SPR 56 LH, a tape offering the lowest noise at that time and now proves to be one of the best in longtime-stability besides Scotch tapes.

           
             
Sound 010


At that time Conny and Eroc were hardcore nuts in heavy magnetizing their tapes. The normal magnetic reference flow of 320 nWB can be increased to 514 nWB if you have a machine with stereo-heads and 0.75 mm separation track. Conny had machines like this and so it was the normal reference level at that time in his studio, but it was always exceeded widely driving the recordings into tape saturation, which gave them that “special” sound of that decade. Today the tapes sound exactly the same and because they were stored dry and cool and “tails out” they even don't show copy-effects. Compared to the first CD-reissue by Metronome this example shows more details and clarity, in first row audible on the attacks of the cymbals and the "breathing" of the ambience signals.

By far this one is the best source for a great new remastering...

 

To enable true comparison of the sound each example must have the same exact reference level. This was done by adjusting all left channels to -15.06 dB RMS, which leaves enough headroom for the peaks. In this case it’s also possible to judge the stereo-balances exactly. Here are the RMS levels:


006 – Vinyl Brain:         L -15.06 dB  /  R -18.11 dB

007 – Vinyl Bomb:        L -15.06 dB  /  R -19.99 dB

008 – CD Metronome:  L -15.06 dB  /  R -16.99 dB

009 – CD Repertoire:   L -15.06 dB  /  R -17.09 dB

010 – Original Tape:    L -15.06 dB  /  R -16.86 dB

 


This is the azimuth failure (1.8 smp) of the Brain vinyl from 1977:


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




This is how the channel's level difference of the Bomb vinyl looks like:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And here are the cracks at the end on the right channel of the Bomb vinyl:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 3 - Flat transfer or clever treatment?

 

 

CHAPTER 3 – Flat transfer or clever treatment? 


To put a mix 1:1 flat on CD you have to follow one important rule: at least it has to be “normalized”. This means level of the whole file is checked precisely by a software to search for the highest peak. Then the complete file is increased in level until this absolute highest peak reaches digital zero. Now you’ve got the highest loudness available without damaging or changing the original dynamics. The whole given sound-picture just is put up until it’s maximum reaches the digital limit of the CD.

Okay, we have normalized the final and by far loudest (!) part of the whole RPL album and then set up an A/B comparison with one of today’s “normal” tracks you can hear each day on the radio, in every supermarket and yelling out of each car's stereo hundreds of times a day. It’s from Nickelback, a band who in fact sells a damn lot of their stuff these days, even over here in Germany. And Nickelback is no exception. Most of today’s productions come over like this. And now imagine, what will happen, if anyone who never has heard of GS so far puts on our “normalized” CD in any record shop on headphones, in some show at KLPX on the air or right between other contemporary stuff on his car stereo. RPL will go down the drain, because our clever “normalizing” only took as reference one single peak in the whole thing.

Audiophiles and old GS-fans may vote for 1:1 transfer, but the majority of today's kids who crave for some really good music never will give that weak sounding stuff a chance, because the loudness-image doesn't catch them in first place.

If we would ignore those few loud peaks and just cut them by let’s say -3 dB, our whole CD would come up 3 dB which then sounds almost twice as loud. And here digital compressions enters the field. In the beginning it’s just shaving away only the loudest peaks, which in fact nobody will notice. But the deeper we go, the more peaks are affected. Cutting 1 to 2 peaks per second becomes audible, and when it comes up to brickwall limiting not only the peaks, also the normal parts will be affected.

It’s obvious that remastering has to consider the compression of the original mix, the structure of the peaks, tape-saturation and a lot more things. So a remasterer has to check and analyze what he can do to the stuff and how it reacts, changes and differs from the original into a wanted or unwanted directions. It's only fair to say that in case of older material from analog tapes the peaks normally are "shaved" a lot already due to tape-saturation and analog limiting. Really harsh and dangerous peaks requiring heavier "shavement"  only occur in today's digital productions...

To say the least: the Repertoire CD is too loud for a beautiful piece like RPL. The Metronome CD is too low for today’s listening habits. The original tape transferred 1:1 and then normalized won’t match today’s expectations of the market. So one reasonable solution may be to “shave” some of the peaks very carefully and correct the frequency response if neccessary into the direction of “flat”. Beyond you’ll find the mentioned A/B, a normalized file from the o-tape without any further treatment and some different kinds of careful enhancement. Take your time, listen again and then do tell us, what you think at:

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 


And here we go...


011 – RPL Finale, normalized – A/B to Nickelback    Sound 011

This would happen if we put RPL flat and only normalized to 0 dB on CD: all customers outside the audiophile’s camp could be dissapointed when they put on the album between their daily stuff. The majority of them won’t recognize that it’s only a level-problem to be solved by increasing their equipment’s loudness. Also most of the record companies and radio-people will act like this, too.

 

012 – RPL Finale, normalized     Sound 012

Same file like #011 but in full length for easy comparison to the treated versions below. That’s how a 1:1 transfer from the o-tapes would sound on CD without any changes of the internal dynamics and no correction of the frequency response.

 

Now here are some (careful) mastering-treatments:

 

013 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd    Sound 013

Same file like #012 plus slight EQ treatment, to get more details out of it. EQ'ing done at 384 kHz sampling-rate with the following settings:

+ 6.5 dB / 50   -  Q = 4.8

+ 3.0 dB / 630  -  Q = 4.8

+ 1.5 dB / 1 k   -  Q = 1.0

+ 3.5 dB / 10 k -  shelving 12 dB/oct.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

014 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #01    Sound 014

File #013 with added compression in a very slow mode @ 1dB

 


015 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #02     Sound 015

File #013 with added compression in a very slow mode @ 1.5 dB + slight stereo-spread 

 

016 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #03     Sound 016

File #013 with added compression in a very slow mode @ 2 dB + medium stereo-spread

 

017 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #04     Sound 017

File #013 with added compression in a very slow mode, but different tool than on #014,
#015 and #016, @ 2.5 dB + medium stereo-spread

 



By respect to some qulaified suggestions of SH-forum members we now introduce two more listening-examples with different teratments, basing on treatment #017...


018 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #05     Sound 018

File #013 with slightly changed EQ like shown below, plus added compression in a very
slow mode, same tool like in #017 but using only 1 db of overall compression.
 

 

019 – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #06     Sound 019

File #013 with slightly changed EQ like shown below, plus added compression with a completely
different tool to all others used above. Overall compression @ 1 dB.
 

 

New EQ settings for #018 and #019:

+ 3.0 dB / 50   -  Q = 2.0

+ 3.0 dB / 630  -  Q = 4.8

+ 1.5 dB / 1 k   -  Q = 1.0

+ 3.0 dB / 10 k -  shelving 12 dB/oct.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOTE: The difference between #018 and #019 is very small. Maybe it's not audible for everybody in first try.
But there is a difference and it would be great if you check it out and tell us your thoughts right here:

 

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 

Due to the comments at the SH-Forum here's finally something closely related to #018 and #019, but with a softer compression tool:

 

019 a – RPL Finale – normalized, EQ'd, compr. #07     Sound 19 a

File #012 with slightly different EQ than all others, plus compression with another
different tool to all others used above. Overall compression @ 1 dB. Just listen and let it speak from your hearts...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 4 - Pros and cons concerning NR

 

 

CHAPTER 4 - Pros and cons concerning NR 


What are those guys joking about at the very end of RPL? Three decades this was a secret only to the musicians themselves, but now the curtain shall be lifted:

The bassplayer of Grobschnitt by the name of Wolfgang Jäger had a nickname like all the other members. Precisely said, he had three nicknames. The first and ever lasting was Hunter, because that’s the exact translation of his German surname “Jäger”. But the boys soon called him “Popo”, which means something like “Butty”, just because of some his habits, not to be explained here in further details. In the very early days “Popo” Hunter also was called “Barrabass” which has phonetically something to do with his instrument – the bass...

In the ending part of RPL Hunter “Popo” Barrabass had to play a rather fast  tremolo on one string for nearly two minutes, which is quite an exercise for the fingers. But he was tough enough, gave his best and made it until the bitter end. It was so strenuous for him that he ended up standing on one leg on tip of his toes, hugging his instrument and being not able to move any more for a few seconds. His face was telling the whole experience he had just gone through. When the finale was over it was a blessed relief for him and everyone else and suddenly all of the musicians realized “Barrabass” standing there like a statue with his bass and that indiscribable expression on his face.

First you hear Wildschwein laughing, then Lupo is yelling from the left: “Der Barrabass macht ’ne Figur, so was hab’ ich überhaupt noch nicht gesehen“ (Barrabass is showing a figure, I never have seen something like this before), and drummer Eroc (from the right) shouts: „Scheiße, das sieht aus…“ (Shit, this looks...).

The whole file is jammed by heavy AC hum occuring from some micro-cable of the recording equipment lying too close to an amp or electric lead and by an audible amount of tape hiss. To call this “original” and leave it like it is would probably please only some audiophiles. The original scene didn’t sound like this. In the studio there was no hum and absolutely no hiss to be heard when the musicians chatted. So these two disturbing noises by reason of technical failure have nothing in common with the authentic thing itself, the best argument to get rid of them...

It’s not possible to get rid of hiss and tape-noise completely, even in the digital age. Each type of NR will harm the original signal more or less and can cause unwanted modulatiing effects, even with the best gear available and especially when tried to remove hiss completely. But it’s feasible to lower noise and hiss to a pleasant amount to get more attractivity out of a soundscape. That’s what we present in the following examples. First the hum was removed enabling the scene to sound much more “airy” and authentic. And then the hiss was decreased to a pleasant level with three different methods, which have very small effects on the audio material. The last example is at least for our humble opinion “de-noised-to-death” with clearly audible influences on the original material. We’re looking forward to your comments at:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 

 

020 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape      Sound 020

The very end after the RPL final was over, "accidentally" recorded with open mikes,
very low in level, for better listening purpose here normalized to -0.1 dB. 

021 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape, de-buzz       Sound 021

Same example like #020, aditional treatment with de-buzz tool.



022 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape, de-buzz, NR 1
      Sound 022

Same example like #021, additional treatment with NR tool #01



023 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape, de-buzz, NR 2      Sound 023

Same example like #021, additional treatment with NR tool #02



024 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape, de-buzz, NR 3
      Sound 024  

Same example like #021, additional treatment with NR tool #03

 

025 – End of RPL – 1:1 transfer from the o-tape, de-buzz, NR 4      Sound 025

Same example like #021, additional treatment with NR tool #04, somehow de-noised "to death"
just to show what's possible and often done wrong by so many others...

 

 

 

Chapter 5 - Towards home stretch...

 


CHAPTER 5 – Towards home stretch...

The main demand of most comments in the Steve Hoffman Forum are tending to a flat 1:1 transfer or a very slight compressed EQ treatment. That's no surprise because a) in the SH Forum we have mainly audiophiles with great knowledge and good taste concerning sound, and b) Rockpommel's Land is a real great production which was mixed nearly perfectly back then and therefore on the original tape sounds years ahead of it's time.

So why squeeze it into a "modern" shape fitting in today's "loudness war"? On the other hand: slight improvements with today's digital tools show that the listening attractivity can be encreased for both, the audiophiles and the common listener with a normal stereo set.

Concerning the listening examples above it seems that #018 and #019 are sounding best to most of the "golden" ears around. So it seems wise to keep the compression settings of #019, the medium stereo-spread of #016 - #019, but change the EQ settings. The high boost @ 10 k seems necessary and pleasant to most listeners, while the low boost @ 50 Hz always was a topic of contrary discussions. It was tried out in first place because the original mastertape was recorded on 30 i/ps AES which always causes problems in the lower parts of the spectrum. Frequencies @ 40 Hz downwards can't be recorded at this speed due to physical problems (although 30 i/ps offers best results in case of tape-hiss, attacks and higher ranges of the spectrum).

So finally we decided to keep only the slight boost @ 10 k and offer in addition a very slight boost in the mid-range @ 1 k with a low Q factor as shown here:


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Compression is exactly the same as for #19 and stereo spread is "medium" like in the sounds #014 - #019. The MP-3's now are all at 320 kb/s for best sounding performance, and each of the six new examples can also be downloaded from our server as 24 bits .wav files. You're invited to check out again and then tell everybody at:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=111189

 

And off we go again...



026 – RPL Finale, 1:1 transfer from o-tape
     Sound 026

This one we already have posted above. But for your convienience you can download it here again without having to scroll... 


027 – RPL Finale, actual treatment "M-08"     Sound 027

Like described above: same compression like #019, medium stereo-spread, slight boost in the mid-range and in the higher region.

 
028 - Goblins, Part from RPL, 1:1 from o-tape     Sound 028

Another part from Rockpommel's Land. Here we have the problem of "standing tones" in the bass-region @ 63 Hz and now it seems wise to do without any additional bass-boosting.


029 - Goblins, Part from RPL, treatment "M-08"
     Sound 029

Just to give a glimpse how the treatment enhances other parts of the album. We don't want to introduce different treatments for several parts of this album. That would kill the authenticy and lead away from the charme of this whole project.


030 - Anywhere, album track, 1:1 from o-tape
     Sound 030

Another part from the album. Sounds more acoustic with no drums and no electric rhythm guitars.


031 - Anywhere, album track, "M-08"
     Sound 031

How does the "remastering compromise" work out in this one...?

 

 Due to the deadline with the record company it would be really great if your comments and suggestions appear until May 20th. Everyone who has joined the thread in the SH-forum by posting qualified suggestions will be mentioned on the album in the credits and receive a handsigned CD when it is released.