Post an entry
:: Posted by DannyX on January 24, 2014
One might assume that since they still tour together, Tony and Pat would not have agreed to the new Crimson lineup had Adrian not been OK with it. Adrianís Facebook post seems to suggest otherwise. Business is business, I suppose. One might also assume that with Jakko in his place (and Melís sax), the band might concentrate on revamping earlier works...but recent reports of Thrak material being rehearsed also seems to suggest otherwise. Perhaps both are evidence why one must never assume anything when it comes to the mighty King. That being said, I, for one, am curious but not overjoyed at the prospect of an Ade-less drumdundant Crimson. But we shall wait and see...and listen.
re: another perspective
:: Posted by jimfisheye on January 23, 2014
Check your bass management settings for your subwoofer again. The low frequencies (bass gtr, kick and all) are anything but subdued! In fact, my reaction was - Wow! Finally Billís kick has the right bottom end and Johnís bass is just huge! If you play this content from a standalone hardware disc player instead of a media player on a computer, this can be VERY cumbersome to set up correctly depending on the player.
I would have been fine with 96k program too. They transferred it at 192k, so just in the spirit of not íprocessingí anything, the simple thing to do was give it straight to us since consumer formats fully support this now. I ripped the discs to FLAC files (as I do with everything) to conserve space.
And yes, itís all about getting the sampling frequency FAR away from the content. I can hear the difference between 44.1k/48/ vs 96k on my Apogee converter unit I use for listening to music. There arenít more high frequencies and there certainly isnít some weird thing going on above the range of human hearing. Simply a little bit less distortion that arises from trying to filter out a sampling frequency from the top end of the music at the lower rates.
Just to put that into further perspective, 24 bit vs. 16 bit at ANY sample rate is FAR more apparent. 16 bit has a "sound" and that is what I referred to as "chirpy".
Iíve heard discussions on this where the theory was that 96k has less distortion simply because the hardware AD DA converters we can currently build operate better at this rate. That is, if we were able to build better converters that 44.1k would be sufficient to contain the music program with no loss or added distortion.
On the production side, some plugins (processing) seem to work better (with the internal math going on) at 192k vs. 96k. Again, this might be that itís easier to program this for 192k vs. 96k with the current technology.
Certainly, the fact that we have these historical analog recordings which already include 2 generations (printing the mix originally and playing it back for the transfer) warrants using the very best digital capture so nothing is further altered. Fidelity loss snowballs.
This is all VERY picky stuff!
I really am happy as long as the music stays 24 bit. In fact I will only purchase 24 bit music at this point. Itís 2014 after all. If I need it reduced for some portable player, there are plenty of apps to do that conveniently.
:: Posted by emory0 on January 23, 2014
From my EE/Physics days, I had thought that the real advantage of 24/196kHz (is there actually 24/192?) wasnít that the ear could directly hear any difference, but that the 196kHz sampling rate significantly reduced some of the (audible) artifacts from the sampling process, such as Gibbs phenomenon (ie, ringing of a square wave).
Theoretically, then, if the mix is the same with 24/92, then the apparent change in tonal balance in effect removes some crud that wasnít really in the original event anyway.
That said, what could be happening is that if the mix was done largely in the 24/92 realm, it was including the sound of that gunk into the levels which, at 24/196, will sound a little quieter (ie, because the mix assumed the presence of the gunk which is gone at 24/92).
Just a thought. Probably wrong. But I canít think of why the bass should sound much quieter at that sampling rate.
:: Posted by dhberry on January 23, 2014
Happy to read of Mr. Frippís resolution of past horrid music business issues. My son is headed full speed into this area and I must have him read some of your diary entries and hopefully learn that sometimes people are not as they seem.
another perspective on the hi rez
:: Posted by Undisciplined on January 22, 2014
:: Posted by jimfisheye wrote:
These 5 shows in 24/192 stereo... Wow, just night and day better from the chirpy 16 bit teases weíve heard before.
Interesting that the reaction to the 24/192 BR discs was different from mine. Hereís what was experienced on my system, which does feature a subwoofer - all of the elements from the higher frequencies were raised appreciably, which included guitar, mellotron and even some of the percussion At the same time, low frequency levels, specifically John Wettonís bass, was reduced considerably. This was so much so that some strain was required during listening sessions. (This listener is NOT yet hard of hearing!). It would seem in contrast to "realism" from the actual live performances, as the bass was believed to be quite prominent during that era.
Now, this isnít necessarily a complaint, because the matter did receive adequate attention. A few email exchanges and a transatlantic telephone call took place between Neil Wilkes and myself to analyze the situation. We both found the limits of hi rez to be rather fascinating, but also agreed that the 192 sample rate was probably overkill. Please note that this was not the case with the Red studio material. We could take playback equipment into consideration, although there might have been some prior expectation of certain discrepancies from the technical staff. Recall that David Singleton had given indication in his notes, that the results of the hi rez were not necessarily "better," but different. He had also detected brightness in the high end.
24/92 should be enough to satisfy the audiophile elements among KC fandom, although this certainly isnít an attempt to discourage future attempts and utilizing the BR format. One last thought is that Steven Wilson, of course, has done fabulous work on some of the mixes. Credit goes to the other gentlemen, who put in a great deal of time and effort to help make these releases possible, as well.
Slow Music dates and venue
:: Posted by altariel on January 22, 2014
April 14 and 15 at the Triple Door in Seattle.
Slow Music & The Humans in Seattle!
:: Posted by eric_m_allen on January 21, 2014
Is this a one-off gig?
If not, do you have the dates and venues available?
:: Posted by KmanDins on January 21, 2014
Iím really happy to read the 24/192 material is killer. DGM/Mr. Robert Fripp have been the precursor/leaders for downloaded music. Last time Iíll beg here but canít you please extend this to all the recorded material as well? It would be really appreciated and makes it available to even more fans. Iím a sick-in-the-head-audiophile and KC fan since ITCOTCK first came out. All I want is the best sound.
I picked up the USA and ripped the DVDA 24/96 files to disc. Wow. A big improvement in sound.
re: pleading at the shrine
:: Posted by jimfisheye on January 21, 2014
You know, I trade live recordings of some of my favorite bands who choose to let their fans trade them for free instead of offering them for sale officially.
When youíre a little bit insane over a band, itís hard to turn down sometimes! And if the band has made the decision to not offer them for sale, all is well.
But these guys...
Look at all the live recordings they have and all the restoration work they put into them! Theyíve found the technology to take control of this area of their artistic output and present it to the world with intention.
I honestly donít even look for KC roioís anymore. In fact I havenít even been able to keep up with this fan club anymore over the years!
Road to Red
:: Posted by jimfisheye on January 21, 2014
Where to even start digging into this...
The high res content on the blu-ray discs of course!
Started with the 5.1 remix of Red (now in 96k).
I really think Mr. Steve Wilson is a genius the more of his remixes I listen to. I normally do not like remixes done long after the fact in any way shape or form but Mr. Wilson is the clear exception to that rule!
So I was surprised that I preferred the original stereo Red to the remix when I git the original DVDA disc.
This new version sounds like the same mix but with the veil lifted vs. the 48k version on the DVD. I wouldnít have thought reducing 96k to 48k would make that much of a difference. It normally doesnít in my experience. Honestly, just give me 24 bit at any sample rate and Iím happy. But this new 5.1 master absolutely trumps the original for me now. Maybe it was a remix over the 1st 48k release as well?
Anyway, that in itself was almost worth the $200!
These 5 shows in 24/192 stereo... Wow, just night and day better from the chirpy 16 bit teases weíve heard before. Listened to these each about 3 or 4 times now. This is how live concert recordings are supposed to be presented! (Sure there are sonic shortcomings and bits of harshness vs. studio perfection but presenting this especially with this wide open dynamic format removes the format degradation that these challenging recordings suffered with in the past and it just works beautifully.)
This is all really over the top well done!
And Iíve still got all the 16 bit soundboard recordings to dig into yet.
I really like the way the storyline of all this is presented in the coffee table book too (even having read some of these diaries before in the Young Persons Guide lp).
I canít help but notice a marketing pattern here:
The LTIA DVD version did not include the full res 24/96 transfer of the original stereo mix - you had to get the box set with the blu-ray for that.
The Red DVD did not include the 24/96 master of the 5.1 mix - you have to get this box for that (again, unless this is a new remix).
See where this is going?
The ITCOTCK & Lizard DVDís have the 5.1 remix in 48k.
Does this mean we will be seeing box sets for those albums down the road?
Iíd pre-order those right now!
<< Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Next >>
Back to top | Post an entry