Necessity for Raw Transfers

[quadanasaziland]

(To have available the) raw files from QpS conversions was written into the "bylaws" from the very begining and was one of the main attractions of the organization…give's new meaning to the term no-brainer…Are we preserving people's feelings or quadraphonic recordings? Any path that ignores best practices is obviously not serious about preservation….But you can have your cake AND eat it too if you offer the raw files. That way anyone who wants to can start with a fresh cup of coffee and piss in it to their own satisfaction..

You'll find no disagreement from most of us concerning "raw" files…

And also assuming on the other hand I would want to sell/lend/teach them the operation of professional mastering equipment and my time involved therein. (for those interested, the answer is Yes, as stated above in an earlier post.)

…Those with the dedication, ability and maturity tend to accept constructive criticism, learn and improve their abilities as time and $$ allow, working together to get the best possible result. Those that cannot tend to take their toys and leave, then…attempt to demean anyone who won't comply with THEIR personal desires. Most of which mean nothing to the majority.

And the Forum Daddies have Spoken.[/quote]

He said Sarcastically!

 

[ChristopherLees]

[Semi-quotes (edited for space and clarity) from various PM's I have received this weekend]:


In the case of reel-to-reels, in order to get the best treble response, you might choose to use the pre-emphasis for the next-lower speed the tape was recorded at, i.e. playing the tape at normal speed while using pre-emphasis for 3-3/4 when remastering a tape recorded at 7-1/2.

For 8-tracks, use 1-7/8 or even 15-16 pre-emphasis (measured in us/EQ,, 120, 70, 50, 35, etc) when you transfer. You can always take the treble down in the computer later if you need to. It's a lot harder and sounds a lot worse trying to boost frequencies that were either not recorded or recorded poorly in the first place.

.

That is an interesting idea to try...but if you do that won't the wavs be sort of corrupted...in that they are no longer raw wavs as they have been transferred at the wrong eq?...not a big problem to me if it works out well, but if someone wants my raw wavs, well I sort of wouldn't have any to give him..

 

[ndiamone]

...if you do that won't the wavs be sort of corrupted...in that they have been transferred at the wrong eq?....

Well, it depends on the stringence and type of purist within the transcriptionist. In most cases, these types of transfers, properly labeled of course, stand in very nicely for ``truly flat transfers''. As all the Forum Daddies would no doubt report, if the intended audience is to process or have others process truly raw wavs transferred at the exact speed, EQ and pre-emphasis the original artist and/or duplicator intended, then yes, the resulting wavs would in fact be somewhat colored.

Except every duplication-mastering engineer, every safety-master engineer and every duplicator-calibrationist in the original production chain will calibrate his gear slightly differently anyway, coloring the material in its' own way. So the transcriptionist may still be a few generations out of what is known as `true-spec' anyway by transferring 100% completely flat.

It's a call the trained expert restorationist or transcriptionist has to make from listening to the original material.

However, if the eventual intent is restoration, it's a lot easier to put especially treble EQ back to where it belongs in the computer afterward.

The exception MAY BE tapes mastered with Dolby. To get the best, most versatile transfer in the end upon which to best perform various processes, it may be necessary to SLIGHTLY re-calibrate the professional mastering Dolby Card (A, B, SR etc) the same as adjusting Rack Wrap Height and Azimuth prior to transfer. It's one of a few equally-valid camps in the restoration field, the other namely being to transfer off the playback head straightaway into the computer, minimizing coloration of any sort. It therefore depends upon the stringence and type of the purist.

Especially since the various noise-reduction and other algorithms like a lot of treble to work off of.

Even in the case of LP's and especially CD-4 LP's and prewar and international 78's.

In the case of CD-4 LP's, to transfer without RIAA equalization preserves more of the top end upon which to better render click and pop removal, hiss removal and rumble removal afterward. The restorationist in this case may choose to apply his reverse RIAA EQ after restoration for greater clarity. Of course he would need to label his `raw transfer' as `missing RIAA' so people would be aware.

In the case of prewar US and International 78's, so many turnover curves exist and variants thereof it's almost required to transfer flat with no EQ curve at all, as so few phono preamps contain every single turnover curve available, nevermind if the turnover has to be slightly adjusted manually. And the same thing, the transfers would need to be labelled as `turnover not applied'.

And then in the case of disc, once Carl Haber's scanner is perfected http://irene.lbl.gov/ then, at least all the problems of cartridge, preamp and other playback coloration will be solved due to an absence thereof.

Technically the IRENE featured on the page though was only for mono, lateral discs, and was just a stepping stone for the one in tryouts in Summer 2008. Based on a confocal high resolution microscope, the new machine can do lateral, vertical, both simultaneously, matrix. discrete and any other kind of LP you care to find.

In the future, it is hoped from these elements, that a consumer disc-xerox machine can be perfected as a computer peripheral. It will then be possible to perform the equivalent of Photoshop upon the resultant disc image, thereby minimizing sonic colorant in the process.

 

[phydo]

You know, this QpS, anti-QpS crap is starting to really piss me off.

NOBODY is forced to join QpS. QpS is not (as Jonathan stated) the only way to deal with conversion.

QpS is a MEMBERSHIP group that members CHOOSE to join. No one is forced, no one is held hostage. There is nothing that says there cannot be another "group" to do whatever the hell they want.

If some ex-QpS members are/were unhappy, well fucking LEAVE. I'm tired of this forum being dragged down to the gutter over a few folks who don't like QpS.

QpS IS NOT QQ, they are hosted here because QQ members started QpS. Despite the pleas of some of you, QpS is STAYING. So live with it.

I am really at the edge of throwing all of you whiners the hell outta here. ALL OF YOU

Jon:

Please pull the trigger.

Justin

 

[ChristopherLees]

Well, it depends on how big of a purist and what type you are. As all the Forum Daddies would no doubt tell you, if your intended audience is to process truly raw wavs transferred at the exact speed, EQ and pre-emphasis the original artist and/or duplicator intended, then yes, your resulting wavs would in fact be somewhat colored.

Except every duplication-mastering engineer, every safety-master engineer and every duplicator-calibrationist in your original production chain will calibrate his gear slightly differently anyway, coloring the material in its' own way. So you may still be a few generations out of what is known as `true-spec' anyway by transferring 100% completely flat.

It's a call the trained expert restorationist or transcriptionist has to make from listening to the original material

However, if your eventual intent is restoration, it's a lot easier to put especially treble EQ back to where it belongs in the computer later. The exception MAY BE tapes mastered with Dolby. To get the best, most versatile transfer in the end upon which to best perform various processes, it may be necessary to SLIGHTLY re-calibrate the professional mastering Dolby Card (A, B, SR etc) the same as adjusting Rack Wrap Height and Azimuth prior to transfer.

Especially since the various noise-reduction and other algorithms like a lot of treble to work off of. Even in the case of LP's and especially CD-4 LP's and prewar and international 78's.

In the case of CD-4 LP's, to transfer without RIAA equalization preserves more of the top end upon which to better render click and pop removal, hiss removal and rumble removal later. The restorationist in this case may choose to apply his reverse RIAA EQ after restoration for greater clarity. Of course he would need to label his `raw transfer' as `missing RIAA' so people would be aware.

In the case of prewar US and International 78's, there's so many turnover curves you almost have to transfer flat with no EQ curve because so few phono preamps have every single turnover curve available, nevermind if the turnover has to be slightly adjusted manually. And the same thing, you'd have to label the transfer as `turnover not applied'.

And then in the case of disc, once Carl Haber's scanner is perfected http://irene.lbl.gov/ then, at least all the problems of cartridge, preamp and other playback coloration will be solved due to an absence thereof. Technically the IRENE though was only for mono, lateral discs, and was just a stepping stone for the one in tryouts in Summer 2008. Based on a confocal high resolution microscope, the new machine can do lateral, vertical, both simultaneously, matrix. discrete and any other kind of LP you care to find.

So, again, it depends on how stringent and of what type the purist within the transcriptionist is.

wow well that is very interesting information...it is so detailed and complex , I
have to wonder what the true definition of a raw transfer means...as it can mean so many different things to so many people, that if someone asks for a raw transfer it could mean
1) direct input from tape as you would normally hear it,
or
2) transferred without eq or different eq ,no RIAA or anything else that you talked about

In fact it seems that a raw transfer could even be more worked on , than anything that a normal home converter did to procure his finished product...
i.e. the finished dvda product from a converter , that customers end up with could have less work done on it, than a supposed raw transfer from someone else..

and looking at your explanations I can see why consumers really have no need for a raw transfer

 

[phydo]

I like being a member of QPS. I have purchased every disk they have released. If you accept the fact that we are dealing with 30+ year old source materials I believe the product I receive in the mail sounds great and worth much more than the $15.00 that includes shipping and handling. I am grateful there are members that have fulltime jobs plus family commitments that are willing to volunteer what little spare time they do have to do these conversions since I do not have the requisite skills or equipment to do so.

For me it is all about the music and what I get from QPS sounds great.

Justin

 

[ChristopherLees]

The following comes from another thread, but it seems to be more relevant here, as ndiamone puts forward some very good reasons as to why most people would never want a raw transfer

Originally Posted by ndiamone
[Semi-quotes (edited for space and clarity) from various PM's I have received this weekend]:


In the case of reel-to-reels, in order to get the best treble response, you might choose to use the pre-emphasis for the next-lower speed the tape was recorded at, i.e. playing the tape at normal speed while using pre-emphasis for 3-3/4 when remastering a tape recorded at 7-1/2.

For 8-tracks, use 1-7/8 or even 15-16 pre-emphasis (measured in us/EQ,, 120, 70, 50, 35, etc) when you transfer. You can always take the treble down in the computer later if you need to. It's a lot harder and sounds a lot worse trying to boost frequencies that were either not recorded or recorded poorly in the first place.

.
Originally Posted by ChristopherLees
That is an interesting idea to try...but if you do that won't the wavs be sort of corrupted...in that they are no longer raw wavs as they have been transferred at the wrong eq?...not a big problem to me if it works out well, but if someone wants my raw wavs, well I sort of wouldn't have any to give him..


Originally Posted by ndiamone
Well, it depends on how big of a purist and what type you are. As all the Forum Daddies would no doubt tell you, if your intended audience is to process truly raw wavs transferred at the exact speed, EQ and pre-emphasis the original artist and/or duplicator intended, then yes, your resulting wavs would in fact be somewhat colored.

Except every duplication-mastering engineer, every safety-master engineer and every duplicator-calibrationist in your original production chain will calibrate his gear slightly differently anyway, coloring the material in its' own way. So you may still be a few generations out of what is known as `true-spec' anyway by transferring 100% completely flat.
It's a call the trained expert restorationist or transcriptionist has to make from listening to the original material

However, if your eventual intent is restoration, it's a lot easier to put especially treble EQ back to where it belongs in the computer later. The exception MAY BE tapes mastered with Dolby. To get the best, most versatile transfer in the end upon which to best perform various processes, it may be necessary to SLIGHTLY re-calibrate the professional mastering Dolby Card (A, B, SR etc) the same as adjusting Rack Wrap Height and Azimuth prior to transfer.

Especially since the various noise-reduction and other algorithms like a lot of treble to work off of. Even in the case of LP's and especially CD-4 LP's and prewar and international 78's.

In the case of CD-4 LP's, to transfer without RIAA equalization preserves more of the top end upon which to better render click and pop removal, hiss removal and rumble removal later. The restorationist in this case may choose to apply his reverse RIAA EQ after restoration for greater clarity. Of course he would need to label his `raw transfer' as `missing RIAA' so people would be aware.
In the case of prewar US and International 78's, there's so many turnover curves you almost have to transfer flat with no EQ curve because so few phono preamps have every single turnover curve available, nevermind if the turnover has to be slightly adjusted manually. And the same thing, you'd have to label the transfer as `turnover not applied'.

And then in the case of disc, once Carl Haber's scanner is perfected http://irene.lbl.gov/ then, at least all the problems of cartridge, preamp and other playback coloration will be solved due to an absence thereof. Technically the IRENE though was only for mono, lateral discs, and was just a stepping stone for the one in tryouts in Summer 2008. Based on a confocal high resolution microscope, the new machine can do lateral, vertical, both simultaneously, matrix. discrete and any other kind of LP you care to find.

So, again, it depends on how stringent and of what type the purist within the transcriptionist is.

Originally Posted by ChristopherLees

wow well that is very interesting information...it is so detailed and complex , I
have to wonder what the true definition of a raw transfer means...as it can mean so many different things to so many people, that if someone asks for a raw transfer it could mean
1) direct input from tape as you would normally hear it,
or
2) transferred without eq or different eq ,no RIAA or anything else that you talked about

In fact it seems that a raw transfer could even be more worked on , than anything that a normal home converter did to procure his finished product...
i.e. the finished dvda product from a converter , that customers end up with could have less work done on it, than a supposed raw transfer from someone else..

and looking at your explanations I can see why consumers really have no need for a raw transfer

 

[Cai Campbell]

Sounds like denial through obsfucation. Yes, let's make it way more complicated than it needs to be.

It's really simple, a raw transfer is the media played back the way it was intended (now don't get cute here) without any additional processing.

The output of the raw transfer can then be processed in the digital domain (or even in the analog domain, if you prefer) to suit individual tastes. You can argue the technical details of playback if you like, but that doesn't interfere with the exceedingly simple concept of a raw transfer.

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

At the rate you are going you and a of q can chuckle and eat eggs together!

Damn straight, think I'll have a cheese omelette this morning. Mmmmmm....I like eggs.

 

[quadtrade]

Damn straight, think I'll have a cheese omelette this morning. Mmmmmm....I like eggs.

Been here done that.

This whole thread makes me want to puke............ eggs.

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

That reminds me of a great episode of jackass.

 

[ndiamone]

I can see why consumers really have no need for a raw transfer

However, one would hope, in an audiophile subject forum, very few if any members would classify themselves as `consumers', otherwise they'd refer to their pocket MP3 player with its' included headphones, desktop amp and docking station as their `home stereo'.

 

[lonster]

However, one would hope, in an audiophile subject forum, very few if any members would classify themselves as `consumers', otherwise they'd refer to their pocket MP3 player with its' included headphones, desktop amp and docking station as their `home stereo'.

I know that you don't see it, nor do you even think you are doing it, but you continue to insult people with your holier than thou attitude and 'I can do it better than you' persona, even though you are a completely untested 'professional', and a totally unknown quantity here.
A number of us on this forum (ME too) do NOT have any Quad recording components. A number of us on this forum also have a limited ability to play back many of the different types of Quad recordings that are still available.
I am a consumer.
I don't own an MP3 player or any of the other items that you so smugly mentioned with your nose in the air, but I have a pretty awesome playback system that does a GREAT job of letting me listen to the DVD-A's that the great folks at QpS put out.
You don't know me. You don't know hardly anybody on this forum, so please stop pretending that you know what's best for anyone besides YOURSELF.
How about this: If you want to enjoy some of the best Quad conversions available, sign up with QpS. If you don't want to enjoy them, then why don't you just shut the heck up and try posting something that will benefit the members here at QQ.
That's what *I* think YOU should do.

Peace,

Lonster

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


I'm sorry, what I meant to say is, I like eggs. You know, a skillet, with eggs, potato, pepper, sausage is some awesome stuff. Ahhh...the power of eggs.

 

[ChristopherLees]

Sounds like denial through obsfucation. Yes, let's make it way more complicated than it needs to be.

It's really simple, a raw transfer is the media played back the way it was intended (now don't get cute here) without any additional processing.

.

Cai your definition of a raw transfer is simple but ndiamone 's isn't.
In fact his is so different to yours that it's not even on the same page...
His can be even more complicated and changed than anything that any home converter has ever done to achieve his finished product.

Under his circumstances the only way you would get a raw master is if you created one yourself ...i.e. obtaining the original tape or lp and playing it back and recording it into your own computer.

There is no cuteness here Cai , because in ndiamone's own words ,when you both say raw transfers , you are in fact not even talking about the same thing...

Even under your own definition it wouldn't be perfect because as he states..."every duplication-mastering engineer, every safety-master engineer and every duplicator-calibrationist in your original production chain will calibrate his gear slightly differently anyway, coloring the material in its' own way. So you may still be a few generations out of what is known as `true-spec' anyway by transferring 100% completely flat".

I bet most people here would be incapable of processing his version of a raw transfer...e.g. no riaa on 4 channels, tape at different eq speed. ...and as such it would be a waste to give it to them....now that's not saying his transfers are bad...it's just saying that they are of no benefit to you, and do not reflect in any way what you are thinking of....and that Cai is a no brainer !!

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

Give a man a raw egg, he can cook it how he wants to.

Give a man a cooked egg, he has no choice, but can eat now.

Give a man some chickens, and if he knows how to raise chickens, he can make his own supply of eggs.

Give a man a forum, and he'll nitpick for days and days and days and go around in circles.

 

[ChristopherLees]

Give a man a raw egg, he can cook it how he wants to.

Some men have genetically modified eggs but call them raw, because they haven't been cooked.

 

[lonster]

What's this give, give, give stuff.
Get your own dang eggs!
And leave mine alone.

Lonster

 

[Cai Campbell]

I'm guessing here but I believe ndiamone is approaching this from a recording engineer's perspective and not that of consumer/hobbyist. I mean, in most instances, we're talking playback of an LP, an 8-track tape or a commercial reel tape. The playback options are pretty limited, or at least they should be! I believe ndiamone is speaking in terms of playing back a master tape, or even pre-production masters, which of course entails EQ decisions, RIAA equalizaiton, blah, blah, blah, NONE of which the we need to worry about (if the recording engineer did his/her job right) when dealing with consumer formats.

So yeah, I guess we are talking about different things when we refer to a raw transfer, but I think it's just a misunderstanding. ndiamone, we're talking, by and large, about transferring consumer audio media. Did you not get that? I can see the confusion because this all started around a discussion about obtaining the Three Dog Night master tapes, but that's a whole other ball game that I don't believe anyone here has dealt with, at least in terms of transferring legacy quadraphonic material.

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

Remind me to avoid the quadraphonicquad breakfast buffet. Not only is there piss in the coffee, but now the eggs are genetically modified.