Better than Perfection?

[Bruce B]

I've beat my brains out for the past couple of months trying to put this all in perspective.
I was given the monumental task of remastering one of the greatest mono jazz recordings ever produced and turn it into a stereo production worthy of it's legend.

Like most audiophiles, I sit in a darkened studio, with my eyes closed and try to visualize the venue. O'kay... smokey jazz club.

Now I know that most of the "tricks" that mastering engineers do try to trick the brain into believing that the artist is right there in front of them. I also know that some of these tricks have that "wow" factor, but it's not true to original event.

What is the consensus of the group on remasters? I know it's a hit or miss thing and you're not going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time. I know I'll get panned by the purist.
So... what's your take?


Regards,

 

[Jay_S]

Bruce, I don't know if there is a consensus but my view is that mono is already great. Also, how do you convert mono into stereo - is there more than one recorded track?

 

[MylesBAstor]

Lol....

 

[Bruce B]

Bruce, I don't know if there is a consensus but my view is that mono is already great. Also, how do you convert mono into stereo - is there more than one recorded track?

No... there is only one track. If you double it, L/R, you just have a louder mono track. This is the first time it's been done to this album. The 2 or 3? other remasters have just been in mono.

I've given a copy to a couple of other audiophiles for their critique. I've been second guessing myself and wanted an unbiased opinion.

Regards

 

[stehno]

I've beat my brains out for the past couple of months trying to put this all in perspective.
I was given the monumental task of remastering one of the greatest mono jazz recordings ever produced and turn it into a stereo production worthy of it's legend.

Like most audiophiles, I sit in a darkened studio, with my eyes closed and try to visualize the venue. O'kay... smokey jazz club.

Now I know that most of the "tricks" that mastering engineers do try to trick the brain into believing that the artist is right there in front of them. I also know that some of these tricks have that "wow" factor, but it's not true to original event.

What is the consensus of the group on remasters? I know it's a hit or miss thing and you're not going to please 100% of the people 100% of the time. I know I'll get panned by the purist.
So... what's your take?

Regards,

Bruce, I realize your original post was generated 6 years ago but I wanted to wait for just the right moment to respond.

My preference is to never lose the emphasis of a well-seated attendee in the audience specific to the venue.

The wow factor you mentioned is always entertaining, especially for some. But your question is really not much different than some others.

The jump factor is probably an excellent example of a similar dilemma. When doing some unrelated experimentation, I accidentally encountered a severe case of this jump factor. Which in my case was really the result of higher noise floor levels and when amplified by high-powered amps and an active line stage, can be frickin' overwhelming with many note's initial attack. Sure, it's engaging and it can present some odd sense of "you are there" feeling but there's really very little legitimacy to any such jump factor at a live performance unless perhaps the listener is seated right in front of a speaker.

Likewise is the dilemma of hearing pristine high-frequency percussive instruments. So crisp, so clear, so delicate, pristine, etc, and yet so near. At some point a perceived distance between the ear and the instruments is a requirement to achieve higher levels of musicality that more closely assimilates the live performance.

That's just a few other wow factor dilemmas.

Anyway, my answer if given the opportunity is to always err on or at least lean toward the side of the live performance with a reasonable distance between the listener and the soundstage. I was able to resolve my severe jump factor issue induced primarily by 600 wpc amps (and quite musical) by switching to a passive volume attenuator. Something I swore numerous times I'd never do because of my love for dynamics.

Not only did the highs become even more delicate but I now had a far more reasonable perspective of the instruments' notes remaining entirely on the soundstage with a distant to my ears planted firmly in the audience. And yet, because of the high powered amps, I'm able to demonstrate a more realistic dynamic presentation.