Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[hopkins]

Are they an “improvement”? Of course they are and if you or anyone else had the Remastering process to use, you would use it in a way to make adjustments that “you” would considered an “improvement”. If your system playback is “perfect” then obviously there would be no changes required, but who here can claim that their playback is perfect and it’s 100% what they are after and will not make any further changes to their system?

“You tell us that your process is unique, but without detailed explanations of what you are doing, which you refuse to disclose” This is absolutely not true. In my “There is a smarter way” thread I walk you step-by-step on what I’m doing. I even numbered the steps. The only thing that I have not disclosed is the hardware that I used and how I sequence them, because frankly it’s irrelevant as I can do the same with other similar hardware, as I will be doing with a completely new set of components in my upcoming new Remastering process chain implementation.

“Are the videos convincing?”, why don’t you use your ears and listen to how much I was able to change the sound of my WAAR “system” with the “system” Remastering process. Brad said your system sound “thin” and lacks the weight and sound of the “Wood” cavity of the violin and piano, a couple of very minor adjustment to the Remastering process and the WAAR system was overflowing with Wood tones. That’s the power of the “system” Remastering process.

Think about it this way, if I were to come to your home and listen to your system and after a few minutes in the listening chair I tell you “it is lacking midbass slam”, there would be nothing you could do to add “midbass slam” to the musical presentation short of swapping speakers or the amplifier or something else that would be drastic and costly, and even more important there is no possible way that you could change anything to produce the “midbass slam” presentation that I wanted, but let’s just imagine for a minute that you had a very special amplifier in the room that you could swap in that actually produced the “midbass slam” that I want to hear and you swap that amp in, and a few minutes later I look back up at you again from the listening chair and tell you “yes, the amp improved the mid-bass slam but all the treble resolution and high-frequency detail heard with the original amp is now gone and the inner detail is now missing”. This is the typical life of an audiophile, you make improvements in one area at the expense of something else. With the “system” Remastering process I can surgically add “midbass slam” to my WAAR system without affecting the treble. The Remastering process also allows me to precisely dial in the level of midbass slam that I want.

You get the picture yet?

Are the videos convincing to your viewers, is the question.

Can you point to a specific post where you give explanations? Your thread has 9 pages. Thanks.

Your example above makes it simply sound like EQ. So is that it?

 

[Carlos269]

Are the videos convincing to your viewers, is the question.

What do you hear:

Can you point to a specific post where you give explanations? Your thread has 9 pages. Thanks.

It’s on posit #19 on page # 1.

Your example above makes it simply sound like EQ. So is that it?

It is not EQ. EQ is a static change and everything would be subject to the EQ frequency adjustment. The Remastering process is a dynamic process that is selective of the spectral content that gets acted on and to what degree. It is simply the application of advanced & sophisticated Mastering techniques used for mastering recordings in high-end mastering studios but redesigned to instead address system level adjustments instead of recordings. The Remastering process is quite unique in its implementation as it is transparent and only called to act when needed and to the degree required, both user specified.

 

[hopkins]

What do you hear:

It’s on posit #19 on page # 1.



It is not EQ. EQ is a static change and everything would be subject to the EQ frequency adjustment. The Remastering process is a dynamic process that is selective of the spectral content that gets acted on and to what degree. It is simply the application of advanced & sophisticated Mastering techniques used for mastering recordings in high-end mastering studios but redesigned to instead address system level adjustments instead of recordings. The Remastering process is quite unique in its implementation as it is transparent and only called to act when needed and to the degree required, both user specified.

So from what I understand, it is always "analog hardware based processing ". Your approach is diametrically opposed to mine. You add components to the signal path, I try to keep the components at their minimum. I don't want to offer my personal comments on your video; reading other comments I see there are positive ones, and less positive ones. I think we are touching on aspects of sound which may be difficult to capture on "phone videos".

 

[Carlos269]

So from what I understand, it is always "analog hardware based processing ". Your approach is diametrically opposed to mine. You add components to the signal path, I try to keep the components at their minimum. I don't want to offer my personal comments on your video; reading other comments I see there are positive ones, and less positive ones. I think we are touching on aspects of sound which may be difficult to capture on "phone videos".

Here are the results of our two different approaches:

Enough said!

 

[hopkins]

Here are the results big our two different approaches:

Enough said!

I will be the first to admit to the limitations of my system, and I perfectly understand that you could prefer the sound coming from your system, which you know we'll from being able to listen to it live. I hope to be able to improve mine!

 

[Rexp]

I will be the first to admit to the limitations of my system, and I perfectly understand that you could prefer the sound coming from your system, which you know we'll from being able to listen to it live. I hope to be able to improve mine!

And assuming it's representative of your in-room sound, you've found an excellent reference track to test your system, all courtesy of youtube.

 

[morricab]

Here are the results of our two different approaches:

Enough said!

Is that “The wood edition “, Carlos?

 

[Carlos269]

Is that “The wood edition “, Carlos?

Brad, no it is the “Carlos269 Edition” Remastering process settings, which retain the wood tone emphasis from the “Wood Edition” settings but bring back the space & dimensionality, and instrument separation of the original settings. I also re-recorded the Perlman violin piece with the new “Carlos269 Edition” settings:

I have to give you credit for your comments that led to the changes in my settings.

 

[hopkins]

And assuming it's representative of your in-room sound, you've found an excellent reference track to test your system, all courtesy of youtube.

I have my entire album collection to listen to..

Carlos' sound, as presented in these videos, is not a reference for me it is just another data point.

 

[PeterA]

You are too logical when it comes to vinyl playback videos.

The argument is often that vinyl sounds better than digital -- through a *digital* medium!

Of course you understand the logic here, right?

Al, the argument that some make is that it is possible under the right circumstances to get a good original LP on a superior vinyl front end to present more resolution/information (and sound more natural) than a digital version of that original analog recording through the system. It then follows that the resulting iPhone recording replayed over YouTube sounds better. If starting from a better sounding original presentation, the result in the end should also be better.

I understand that both are now digital recordings over YouTube, but one started out at a higher level, and some of that superiority is retained and heard through subsequent comparisons. That is the argument.

 

[Carlos269]

Carlos' sound, as presented in these videos, is not a reference for me.

Well, it should be!

 

[PeterA]

Here are the results of our two different approaches:

Enough said!

Carlos, I like the results of your changes to the Remastering. Your videos are improving, or at least getting closer to what I think live music sounds like.

This suggests the power of your remastering tool. I wonder if you would have made such changes were it not from the feedback you received here, and whether you yourself prefer the changes or will simply go back to the previous settings for your music listening. I respect your willingness to spend the time to demonstrate what you are able to do to the sound. It also suggests that these system videos do in fact communicate to others what one's system is doing.

This thread proves to me at least, that system videos made from simple iPhones and replayed over YouTube do in fact have utility and are worthy of discussing and sharing.

 

[Carlos269]

Carlos, I like the results of your changes to the Remastering. Your videos are improving, or at least getting closer to what I think live music sounds like.

Thanks, I agree that “Carlos269 Edition” settings are an improvement over the original settings.

This suggests the power of your remastering tool.

Absolutely

PeterA: I wonder if you would have made such changes were it not from the feedback you received here, and whether you yourself prefer the changes or will simply go back to the previous settings for your music listening.


I gave Brad “Morricab” credit for providing commentary on this threat that led to my development of the “Wood Edition” settings. The “Wood Edition” settings sound really good with acoustic music, like Classical and Jazz, but it lost space & dimensionality, and instrument separation when used with my music. So I took the “Wood Edition” Remastering process settings and adjusted them to bring back the sound that was lost on my music while retaining the Wood tone emphasis of the “Wood Edition”. Please reference post # 2508 on this thread, where I give Brad credit for his commentary which led to the development of my new improved settings.

PererA: I respect your willingness to spend the time to demonstrate what you are able to do to the sound. It also suggests that these system videos do in fact communicate to others what one's system is doing.

Absolutely, the videos convey the sound of the system and the changes in sound resulting from the different settings


PeterA: It also suggests that these system videos do in fact communicate to others what one's system is doing.

Yes, they convey the essential sound signature of the systems on the videos

I wonder if you would have made such changes were it not from the feedback you received here, and whether you yourself prefer the changes or will simply go back to the previous settings for your music listening.

I may not have been compelled to
Make changes for classical music as I don’t listen to it for enjoyment. I might have arrived to similar changes over time for Jazz music as I do listen to it more often. The comments here definitely expedited the refinement of the process settings.

This thread proves to me at least, that system videos made from simple iPhones and replayed over YouTube do in fact have utility and are worthy of discussing and sharing.

Yes, this is a perfect example of the power, insight and usefulness of these system videos.

 

[hopkins]

Well, it should be!

You have made that abundantly clear. But the improvements I plan on implementing are not going in the direction of the sound I hear from your videos, at least I hope not

 

[Carlos269]

You have made that abundantly clear. But the improvements I plan on implementing are not going in the direction of the sound I hear from your videos, at least I hope not

Instead of being so vague, why don’t you share how you want to improve the sound. Those of us with extensive experience can point you in the right direction or provide you with some helpful tips or give you some guidance. Do you know what you are after? Do you have a target goal?

Listen, I’m sitting pretty with the sound I enjoy and want. It is you who is looking for improvement. Do yourself a favor and learn from others that know more than you.

The ultimate guy that you will need to satisfy is yourself not me, so don’t attack me for my superior sound; rather learn to understand that with my “system” Remastering process you can achieve the sound that you like, which according to you is different than the sound I like. Don’t cut your nose to spite your face!

 

[hopkins]

Instead of being so vague, why don’t you share how you want to improve the sound. Those of us with extensive experience can point you in the right direction or provide you with some helpful tips of give you some guidance. Do you know what you are after? Do you have a target goal?

Listen, I’m sitting pretty with the sound I enjoy and want. It is you who is looking for improvement. Do yourself a favor and learn from others that know more than you.

The ultimate guy that you will need to satisfy is yourself not me, so don’t attack me for my superior sound; rather learn to understand that with my “system” Remastering process you can achieve the sound that you like, which according to you is different than the sound I like. Don’t cut your nose to spite your face!

Well, I want to preserve what I like and improve on other aspects. I am not attacking you, I am just stating my opinion on what I hear in your videos, which is a lack of finesse and coherence in the sound. It could be the recording, I don't know. I did not want to comment on your video, but since you are so insistant I felt I needed to clarify.

This is just my opinion, you can respect dissenting views and leave it at that.

 

[Carlos269]

Well, I want to preserve what I like and improve on other aspects. I am not attacking you, I am just stating my opinion on what I hear in your videos, which is a lack of finesse and coherence in the sound. It could be the recording, I don't know. I did not want to comment on your video, but since you are so insistant I felt I needed to clarify.

This is just my opinion, you can respect dissenting views and leave it at that.

I humbly submit the sound of these five (5) videos as evidence of the sound quality for all to judge:

Five “system” Remastering process videos with “Carlos269 Edition” settings

I’m very happy with the sound and enjoying my music. When I feel the need to further experiment, I will make any additional adjustments required.

 

[Wavetouch]

What do you hear:

Your new recording sounds much better. I see that your reference is now the original music (you should know now that your recording or any reproduction audio can't sound better than the original music) and your listening skill is improved. You can improve your system further, please read my post #2438 again very carefully.

My suggest of improvements for your sound system. *The original music is the best in every ways and is a reference to other recordings.

---- a) Silkier, vibrant, and smoother sound. Compare violin sounds in above recordings. While the orig music sounds vibrating musically, your recording sounds zzizzc (dry sound).
-----b) Openness and effortlessness of sounds.
-----c) Musicality. Listen to above recordings >1 minute each. Find which music makes you more pleasant and emotionally satisfying?

 

[Carlos269]

I humbly submit the sound of these five (5) videos as evidence of the sound quality for all to judge:

Five “system” Remastering process videos with “Carlos269 Edition” settings

I’m very happy with the sound and enjoying my music. When I feel the need to further experiment, I will make any additional adjustments required.

Alex, answer this, if the original recording is the best possible, why do record companies issue remastered editions and claim better sound?

These type of exchanges do not reflect well on your understanding of the music mastering process.

 

[Carlos269]

They have a master tape. All originals are from master tapes. Your works are from a copies (or copies of copies).

I like many original videos sound better than remastered ones. I asked people the same question last March "80's sound vs. modern sound. Which one sounds better?" * AudioShark forum link-don't click if you don't want visit their site.

I like older one better. It is a subtle. You must listen >2 min continuously to judge the sound.

I have digital copies of digital files, they don’t degrade.

Listen to the original and compare them to the 30th anniversary 2021 remastered edition of Nirvana’s iconic “Nevermind” album and the 2010 remastered version of Nine Inch Nails’ “Pretty Hate Machine” that was released In 2011.

I will tell you this, the sound on my videos sound great and every time you post one of your videos with mine, they make mine sound even better. You are in business you should consider stopping the damage of the self inflicted wounds. Keep posting as you are helping me make my point.