There is a smarter way

[Ron Resnick]

Peter, my various DHT-SET systems are world class and I have not heard better; that is why they are used as the reference to judge the other videos by. The DHT-SET systems also benefit from the contributions from the upgraded plasma super-tweeters tweeters, which after implementing the Remastering process are no longer needed with the WAAR system.

Having said all the above about my DHT-SET systems, there is no denying the power and resolution of the WAAR system with the Remastering process.

You are classical music lover so perhaps this video will get the point across to you and others of the power, scale, and resolution of the WAAR system with the Remastering process:

What is that sound at 0:25, 0:29, 0:42 and 0:45?

 

[dan31]

I have enjoyed reading your remastering sessions.

Do you have a single piece of equipment that is essential to your process? It would be interesting to take a deeper dive into the analog remastering chain and what you have experienced in using each piece to its optimal result.

 

[Carlos269]

I have enjoyed reading your remastering sessions.

Do you have a single piece of equipment that is essential to your process? It would be interesting to take a deeper dive into the analog remastering chain and what you have experienced in using each piece to its optimal result.

Dan, this is an excellent question and a great avenue to further explain the Remastering process.

The short answer is that the Remastering process is not predicated on any specific set of equipment or equipment class.

Allow me to further clarify this: as should be obvious based on these videos, I love to hear and listen to the underlying bass notes and energy in the music. Through equipment substitution and upgrades, I have been able to achieve improved low level bass note delineation from time to time, but always at the expense of something else or multiple other things and never to the degree that provided me 100% satisfaction. I also love an airy and spacious top end with lots of sparkle. Those two desires in my reference system’s presentation were competing interests.

It wasn’t until I first came up with the idea of using high-end mastering tools and techniques to adjust the system’s overall presentation that I have been able to achieve the perfect presentation from my reference mastering systems; and I have done this by simply dialing in and tailoring the systems’ presentation to my liking.

Based on the original system’s sound presentation, I knew what changes were needed. The specification of the needed changes drove the Remastering system’s requirements, equipment and processing-functions make up. In other words, I used specific equipment for the Remastering process for the WAAR system based on what needed to be accomplished, added or subtracted, the system’s nominal sound presentation, and lastly and perhaps most importantly the system’s capacity & capabilities for the changes required. It is very important to not push components beyond their limits or it will certainly lead to equipment damage.

In summary, every Remastering system will have a different make up based on 1) the owner’s ideal sound presentation, 2) the system’s nominal/current presentation, and 3) the system’s capabilities to be pushed to the owner’s ideal.

I have a large number of high-end mastering processors at home and picked the handful of ones that I knew would help me get the results that I wanted. I could have selected different capable devices and arrived at similar results. So it is not a specific set of equipment that are required but more so their features and functions.

With a client that says, I like to try out your method, the first thing that I would do is to conduct an interview and provide him or her a survey to find out what’s most important and ideal to them in their reference system’s presentation. Second I would listen to their system with the client and ask that they show me or indicate to me what is missing or could be done better with their current system. Based on those two information gathering efforts, I would then design a Remastering system for them to meet their objectives. Based on my recent effort with my WAAR reference system, it is clear that this can be done in a minimalist configuration and kept in the analog domain with the help of HQPLAYER for digital and streaming sources and obviously the same process would equally benefit the analog sources.

The particular set of mastering processors used on the WAAR system may not be the ones that I would use for a different system as they may not be the most appropriate.

Does the above make sense?

 

[Brucemck2]

As I mentioned in the original post, I did not want to connect my mastering system to my Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush system as that is a very complex processing chain with a very large number of potential adjustments. Over the years, I have become more knowledgeable and the use of HQPLAYER has changed my perspective on the need for any additional processing in the digital domain beyond what HQPLAYER 5 offers.

Let’s be clear about the 1MM$! in high-end mastering studio equipment, that is how much of these equipment I have throughout the house and not how much was implemented in the Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush system over the last four weeks.

I can walk you through the process that I used and next thing you will want to know the equipment that I used and this is where it will get complicated as it is not necessarily about the equipment used but rather how it is configured, in terms of both connectivity and settings.

The Cello Audio Palette MIV was added to the system before I got the pair of Wilson Audio WAMM Series VII subwoofer towers and Acapella Acoustics ION TW-1S plasma super-tweeters for the system, when it was only the four Wisdom Audio main ribbon and bass towers. The Cello Audio Palette MIV was used then and still used today for compensation at both frequency extremes.

What I have done is to insert a few of my mastering processors in the chain after the Cello Palette and before the Wisdom Audio’s advanced “Brain” processor and electronic crossover.

Walking through the process:

1) The first thing I did was change the attack and sustain of the mid-bass from around 70 to 185Hz, by sculpting the transient characteristics of the mid-bass; this enhanced the mid bass’ texture and made it more tuneful

2) Second thing I did was decompose the Left and Right signals into X and Y components

3) In the X-Y domain, I adjusted the stereo field with a superlative very unique & novel boutique processor from Germany to add space and dimensionality to the sound, without resorting to the use of reverb or my room simulator

4) In the X-Y domain, I then used inserts in both the Mono and Differential channels

5) To the Mono signal I added some dynamic filtering and expansion at 148Hz with a relative narrow Q factor and at 12KHz with a broad Q factor. I then adjusted the threshold, attack/release, and ratio for each dynamic filter, this processor adds some great air broadly down from 26KHz

6) I then send the Mono signal to a magnetic tape head and associated circuitry where it adds tape saturation, soft clipping and the bass bump that we all like

7) Meanwhile the Differential signal goes to a different magnetic tape simulator with different characteristics, which adds more 3 dimensional texture to the bass lines and an airy harmonic richness to the upper treble

8) I then adjust the soundstage’s focus and depth before reconverting the X-Y signals back to Left and Right signals

9) I then flow the Left and Right signals to a processor that lets me put the final touches to sound by adding harmonic color and thickness to the sound without loosing focus or detail, or rolling off at the frequency extremes. This box allows me to tailor the harmonic spectral content to achieve the tone and organic character of the sound that I get with the SET/DHT systems

This is a very streamlined process with only the minimal number of processes required to achieve the sound objectives.

I hand picked the mastering tools that I wanted to use and then I sequenced them in an optimal process flow before any adjustments were made. With the push of only four buttons, I can bypass the entire process and I’m back to the original signal routing for quick A/B comparisons. I can also isolate the changes in the decomposed signal components to hear what is being added or subtracted at each stage in the work flow.

This should provide more of the detailed insight that you requested Will.

PS - To answer your question, no DSP, it’s all analog hardware based processing that was added. The only DSP in the system is HQPLAYER.

Can you list the specific equipment that is used to produce the above. Even better an equipment list and a block diagram of the flow.

 

[Carlos269]

Can you list the specific equipment that is used to produce the above. Even better an equipment list and a block diagram of the flow.

Bruce, please read the above post #123. What I have done with my WAAR system may not be the best Remastering configuration in your case so providing those details may not be of value and could potentially lead to equipment damage.

I can review your situation, and any others’, on a case by case basis. It would be irresponsible for me prescribe a solution without knowing the system, its symptoms, and the desired outcome.

 

[dan31]

Dan, this is an excellent question and a great avenue to further explain the Remastering process.

The short answer is that the Remastering process is not predicated on any specific set of equipment or equipment class.

Allow me to further clarify this: as should be obvious based on these videos, I love to hear and listen to the underlying bass notes and energy in the music. Through equipment substitution and upgrades, I have been able to achieve improved low level bass note delineation from time to time, but always at the expense of something else or multiple other things and never to the degree that provided me 100% satisfaction. I also love an airy and spacious top end with lots of sparkle. Those two desires in my reference system’s presentation were competing interests.

It wasn’t until I first came up with the idea of using high-end mastering tools and techniques to adjust the system’s overall presentation that I have been able to achieve the perfect presentation from my reference mastering systems; and I have done this by simply dialing in and tailoring the systems’ presentation to my liking.

Based on the original system’s sound presentation, I knew what changes were needed. The specification of the needed changes drove the Remastering system’s requirements, equipment and processing-functions make up. In other words, I used specific equipment for the Remastering process for the WAAR system based on what needed to be accomplished, added or subtracted, the system’s nominal sound presentation, and lastly and perhaps most importantly the system’s capacity & capabilities for the changes required. It is very important to not push components beyond their limits or it will certainly lead to equipment damage.

In summary, every Remastering system will have a different make up based on 1) the owner’s ideal sound presentation, 2) the system’s nominal/current presentation, and 3) the system’s capabilities to be pushed to the owner’s ideal.

I have a large number of high-end mastering processors at home and picked the handful of ones that I knew would help me get the results that I wanted. I could have selected different capable devices and arrived at similar results. So it is not a specific set of equipment that are required but more so their features and functions.

With a client that says, I like to try out your method, the first thing that I would do is to conduct an interview and provide him or her a survey to find out what’s most important and ideal to them in their reference system’s presentation. Second I would listen to their system with the client and ask that they show me or indicate to me what is missing or could be done better with their current system. Based on those two information gathering efforts, I would then design a Remastering system for them to meet their objectives. Based on my recent effort with my WAAR reference system, it is clear that this can be done in a minimalist configuration and kept in the analog domain with the help of HQPLAYER for digital and streaming sources and obviously the same process would equally benefit the analog sources.

The particular set of mastering processors used on the WAAR system may not be the ones that I would use for a different system as they may not be the most appropriate.

Does the above make sense?

The above makes sense and is clear that you have made selections based on your systems and the desired outcome.

I would not think to replicate what you have done. I am more interested in your personal experience with your large curated inventory of unique equipment and the pieces you have selected for your current project.

I find your curated inventory of these rare components and your use over time interesting to me and my guess is others would find it educational and entertaining to delve deeper into a few components and your experimental design for a specific component.

 

[Carlos269]

The above makes sense and is clear that you have made selections based on your systems and the desired outcome.

I would not think to replicate what you have done. I am more interested in your personal experience with your large curated inventory of unique equipment and the pieces you have selected for your current project.

I find your curated inventory of these rare components and your use over time interesting to me and my guess is others would find it educational and entertaining to delve deeper into a few components and your experimental design for a specific component.

There is no doubt that there are some fundamentals and consistent themes to my approach. In general the concept is not to paint in broad strokes with wide brushes. Rather what I aim to do is to accent those elements that interest me; this is not to be confused with spotlighting.

My goal is to create texture in the sound and in order to do that you need to use dynamic filters. So that is the first class of tools in my remastering utility belt.

Secondly, the best results are optioned when different processes are used for the mono and differential part of the signal. So the second class of tool in my remastering utility tool belt are X-Y decomposition matrixes.

Thirdly, I look for coloring tools that can provide tube, transformer, or magnetic tape saturation and compression.So coloring and harmonic enhancing or generating tools are the third class of tools in my remastering utility belt.

Fourth are spatializer type tools to adjust the dimensionality and for editing the stereo sound field. There are a number of approaches here from altering or redistribution the spatial makeup, to adding reverb, best done in the digital domain, or through room emulation, again best done in the digital domain. Spatializers and dimensional tools form the fourth class of tools in my remastering utility belt.

The fifth class of tools needed are transient sculpting tools to design and address bass characteristics. These tools are transient sculpting tools and have profound effect on the general dynamic presentation of the system.

The sixth class of tools for remastering are parallel blending processors that allow you to keep the dry unmodified signal available to you at all times for referencing, use and bypass purposes.

The big over-righting technique is to make the changes sound organic and any dynamic transitions subtle so that they don’t sound unnatural.

There are more specialize type of tools and what I’m seeing recently are tools that incorporate several of the above classes of tools in a convolution type arrangement to produce special and unique effects.

This provides a good account of the general types of mastering tools that are nice to have for the Remastering process but again, the goal is to produce a result and several different permutations of tools can be used to accomplish the tasks at hand. The biggest things to have are knowledge of what you need to accomplish, a good understanding on what you need to do to accomplish what needs to be achieved, and third an artistic creative imagination to use the tools at hand to achieve your goals.

The Remastering process is analogous to cooking. You need to have a clear goal, know how to use the ingredients, and how to make the most with what you have on hand.

 

[Brucemck2]

Bruce, please read the above post #123. What I have done with my WAAR system may not be the best Remastering configuration in your case so providing those details may not be of value and could potentially lead to equipment damage.

I can review your situation, and any others’, on a case by case basis. It would be irresponsible for me prescribe a solution without knowing the system, its symptoms, and the desired outcome.

Ok … my intent wasn’t to replicate your setup in mine, but instead feeding my aging EE/CS chops by perusing the user manuals and technical literature for the gear to get a better sense for the processing you’re doing. (In prior setups I’ve inserted a daw and played with various plug ins to get a better handle on the sonics of my setup.)

 

[Carlos269]

Ok … my intent wasn’t to replicate your setup in mine, but instead feeding my aging EE/CS chops by perusing the user manuals and technical literature for the gear to get a better sense for the processing you’re doing. (In prior setups I’ve inserted a daw and played with various plug ins to get a better handle on the sonics of my setup.)

Doing this process In The Box (ITB) would certainly be less costly, offer more flexibility, and be quicker to trial a solution that could later be implemented with external hardware. This is what I do when experimenting with new crossover designs, I experiment with digital crossovers and do the final implementation with LRC’s.

 

[Carlos269]

Doing this process In The Box (ITB) would certainly be less costly, offer more flexibility, and be quicker to trial a solution that could later be implemented with external hardware. This is what I do when experimenting with new crossover designs, I experiment with digital crossovers and do the final implementation with LRC’s.

After some thought, the challenge with experimenting with ITB is two fold: 1) Scaling in order for system level remastering can be achieved and 2) on the fly real-time adjustments.

The key takeaway is that the “system level” remastering settings stay the same for all genres of music as they are impartial to the source material:

 

[sbo6]

Listen, I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings. As Peter mentioned, many different things to chew on this forum besides my innovative approach to achieving one’s goals in this hobby. If you prefer to keep doing the trail and error approach, have at it. Relax, stay cool, and enjoy the tunes.

Just reading this after a nice beach vacation, ahhh..


Buddy, no worries, I got who you are many posts ago, you can't offend me.

If I may offer some constructive criticism - You may want to re-read what you type and adjust as necessary (or not) before hitting send. You have a propensity to appease and insult in the same sentence, something I highly recommend you work on. Either way, happy listnening!

 

[Carlos269]

Just reading this after a nice beach vacation, ahhh..


Buddy, no worries, I got who you are many posts ago, you can't offend me.

If I may offer some constructive criticism - You may want to re-read what you type and adjust as necessary (or not) before hitting send. You have a propensity to appease and insult in the same sentence, something I highly recommend you work on. Either way, happy listnening!

It’s all good. I’m cognizant that I’m an alpha personality.

 

[Carlos269]

Here are a few more videos of the Remastering process on the WAAR system:

 

[Carlos269]

Another example of the Remastering process implemented on my WAAR system:

 

[Argonaut]

Some things really should be left alone …

 

[Carlos269]

Some things really should be left alone …

Obviously, my video is of the studio album track and not of a live version like the YouTube video you posted. If my video fooled you into thinking that it was a live version of the song, that’s a great complement, but it is not, it is the studio version.

I have not heard better than my WAAR system’s Remastering version. Would like to hear videos of other members’ high performance systems playing back the studio album version for comparison.

 

[Argonaut]

If my video fooled you into thinking that it was a live version of the song, that’s a great complement, but it is not, it is the studio version.

Rest assured it did not Carlos … That said your r’e-mastered to your own personal taste ‘clips do make one sit up and listen .. however for my part they come across ( Full caviat for YouTube recordings aside ) somewhat akin to a Heston Blumenthal Deconstructed / Re-constructed version of a classic dish which during that process looses the essence of the original recipe , technically impressive tho it may be
.

 

[Carlos269]

Rest assured it did not Carlos … That said your r’e-mastered to your own personal taste ‘clips do make one sit up and listen .. however for my part they come across ( Full caviat for YouTube recordings aside ) somewhat akin to a Heston Blumenthal Deconstructed / Re-constructed version of a classic dish which during that process looses the essence of the original recipe .

Okay, point well taken but understand what I’m doing is no different than doing component or cable substitutions in one’s system; but with my Remastering process this is done in a more predictable, scalable, and in a more surgical way. I hope that you understand this. My approach is much more powerful and the evidence speaks for itself.

 

[bonzo75]

somewhat akin to a Heston Blumenthal Deconstructed / Re-constructed version of a classic dish which during that process looses the essence of the original recipe , technically impressive tho it may be
.

I haven’t been to fat duck yet. “Dinner” always has excellent starters and the mains disappoint. There is another restaurant of his in Bray that we have been to which was ok nothing great.

 

[Argonaut]

I hope that you understand that this

Of course … We understand were you and I as individuals view your work through slightly dissimilar lenses.