Last edited:
Is this guy for real?
- Thread starter Bruce B
- Start date
Bruce, Waldrep has VERY strong opinions, and quite frankly, a lot of his opinions are rather myopic.
I think he is very smart, highly experienced, and certainly accomplished, but like you it seems, I disgree with some of the things he says.
He was riding Pono (the music store, not the player) like hell and condemned it before the even opened for business. He was dead wrong about it.
Personally, if I get where you are going, I ALSO would take a 2nd gen 15 ips master tape dub over an HD PCM or even DSD128 dub. If I had a choice, that is.
I see another part of the blog where he disses Cookie Marenco for not having hi-rez files... wtf??
So the ultimate question still stands. Is anything that goes through an analog tape production step capable of high-resolution audio specifications? The answer is clearly no. As wonderful as Cookie’s recordings are, they are not high-resolution…but they are very high-quality standard resolution recordings.
Yeh, this is off the wall. Analog tape is not high resolution? WTF indeed.
First, correct me if I am wrong, she only records to tape if the artist requests it..like with the excellent Quilles & Cloud album.
Doesn't she record digitally most of the time, either to 192, or DSD?
I think he has overstepped his bounds.
Bruce-
Remember what they say about opinions: They are like ******ES. Everybody has one. Personally good R2R playback engages me on an emotional level far better than high-resolution files do, and I have both playback options available to me.
She might respond, but as far as I know, she records her mix down to tape and also a DSD Sonoma DAW.
Part of the E.S.E. technique includes recording to DSD or analog tape while musicians perform live in the studio without the use of headphones or overdubs. The music is mixed to DSD or 1/2" tape. The music never enters a PCM digital state, which Marenco feels compromises the sound. Hand-made cables, modified preamps and carefully chosen microphones are also part of the recording requirements. Most important, the musicians are in the same room, positioning themselves to hear each other without headphones. This requires musicians of the highest caliber. No corrections or vocal fixing overdubs are allowed. Attention to eliminating phase, blending the room and direct mics and creating balanced dynamics bring stunning results that places the listener in an audio hologram of the music.
Ok, so she does both tape and DSD. The PCM files she sells then are derived from the DSD files.
When she says the music never enters the PCM, that is during the actual recording and mixing, and mastering I am guessing. But she does
offer PCM files for sale.
Don't know about that, but he has been recording for some time. I would assume, more likely, he is quite familiar with much higher quality mag tape than that, although his tastes today run to Mch done in PCM. He loathes DSD. Yes, he is opinionated, unlike, of course, all other audiophiles and record producers.
Not to interfere with anyone else's fun, but today's mag tape comeback is awfully expensive and terribly limited in available titles.
anyone who wants to take strong positions has to do the work to back it up.
clearly this guy is out of touch with actual performance to take the positions he is taking. it's the pontification and authoritative claims which makes this guy look like a rube. lots of noise, not much signal.
the expense of tape has nothing to do with it's sonic advantages.
Waldrep has had a long and distinguished career, I assure you.
I don't think he was commenting too much on these boutique tape releases, but more so tape as a recording medium.
Let's not bull ****..the $$375 per tape market, which sells a few hundred copies per title world wide is a joke, and mostly about bragging rights.
Do they sound fantastic. YES!!! But they are for small group of well heeled individuals. I can buy 25 + hi rez downloads for the cost of one tape.
Lastly, 7.5 ips tape played back on a good machine sounds very good. I have played back primo tapes on my Revox and Sony machines for
listeners who were simply taken aback at the quality. The snobs will look down their noses at this medium but I could not care less.
Agree expense should not be a part of the argument.
I assure you he is no rube..he has mastered and engineered many, many great albums.
Pontification and an authoritative stance are only offensive when one disagrees. Of course I disagree with him as you do,
but like Bruce, I wonder why he would criticize his peers.
This hobby is filled with pontificators.
I agree. Back in the early 70's I had a ReVox G36 III. Hi speed duplicated tapes back then were generally terrible and at a price premium to LPs. But, 7.5 ips 4 track was essentially indistinguishable from the LP dubs I did.
Once they started with high speed dubs, all bets were off. Real time dupes sounded very good.
Basically the process was they would make a production copy from the master, then dub from that. So your tape was third generation from the master but with no Eq or compression
to compensate for LP.
If your TT does not beat the sound of 4 track handily, you need to look into why...
I don't really care about any perceived sonic differences between high-res and tape, but this part, to me, shows he has, at best, poor hearing, or low-fi gear.
"A few people have asked about the cables in our demo room. One individual came up to me and was proud to say that he acquired 3 power cords for only $70 each. I suggested he might want to return them because they won’t improve the fidelity of his system. I pointed out to him that the power cords in the Lakeshore B room were standard issue IEC cables. "
"A few people have asked about the cables in our demo room. One individual came up to me and was proud to say that he acquired 3 power cords for only $70 each. I suggested he might want to return them because they won’t improve the fidelity of his system. I pointed out to him that the power cords in the Lakeshore B room were standard issue IEC cables. "
Bad Company ...
He certain has; talked to him a few years ago, truth be told I enjoyed his Paul Rogers stories far more than his take on audiophilia. I can still remember his claim that analog tape was = 12 bit digital. His boutique recordings sound wonderful, as they should considering the provenance ... but his opinions don't translate well with real-world audiophile issues. Still, a very interesting chap ...
tb1
He certain has; talked to him a few years ago, truth be told I enjoyed his Paul Rogers stories far more than his take on audiophilia. I can still remember his claim that analog tape was = 12 bit digital. His boutique recordings sound wonderful, as they should considering the provenance ... but his opinions don't translate well with real-world audiophile issues. Still, a very interesting chap ...
tb1
In fairness, we all need checks and balances, whether in seminar or demonstration. And, in fairness, that means pointing out what you might think an iniquity. If it is or is not an iniquity ultimately falls to the wider public, but no-one is - or should be - immune from criticism simply because they are at the crease.
However, it's worth bearing in mind that a site with a name like 'Real HD-Audio' is probably going to come down on the side of high-res over reel-to-reel, regardless of the end result.
Personally, I find the results of reel-to-reel puzzling at times, although it routinely sounds excellent. I know at least one UK demonstrator who used reel-to-reel who, on finding he had taken the box full of blank tapes instead of recorded tapes with no time to get the recorded tapes in time for the show opening, spent the evening transferring iTunes files to tape.
Quite a few people thought it was the best sound at the show, and far better than the turntable he was demonstrating.
Similar threads
- Sticky
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |