VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

samowry

Here is an interesting tidbit sent to me by an engineer friend. Something we have debated for a long time, with him on the losing side it seems. I am actually shocked as I usually get the short end in these arguments.

I hope that the gear section is appropriate.

http://theaudiocritic.com/blog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=41&blogId=1

SamA

bobsouer · Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:34 pm Post subject:

Sam,

Very interesting. Thanks for that link.
_________________
Be well,
Bob Souer (just think of lemons)
The second nicest guy in voiceover.
+1-724-613-2749
Source Connect, phone patch, pony express

Deirdre · Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject:

I say "Yay!

Kinda simplifies things.
_________________
DBCooperVO.com
IMDB

samowry · Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject:

My feelings exactly. One less variable to worry about.

todd ellis · Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:41 am Post subject:

answers a burning questions for me! thanks, sam!
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

Travis · Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:02 am Post subject:

A few years ago I heard a SACD demonstration at an AES show. I was not impressed. I was confused by the demonstration, because the music they were playing was from groups that were using digital keyboards and distorted guitar amps... I asked the Sony Rep at the demonstration how this demonstration made any sense. Except for a poorly miked Piano solo, there was nothing that wasn't 16-bit original audio in the first place. The rep shrugged his shoulders and said "I don't get it either."

I don't know how well SACD works, but I do know that you can hear a big difference between 44.1 16-bit and greater bit-depths/higher sampling rates. Most of us can hear an improvement, even when the sampling rate is increased to jsut 48kHz.

In my opinion 44.1/16 is partly responsible for the lack of good music today. Since the CD replaced LPs, No new music has emerged - everything sounds pretty much the same as it did 30 years ago. Because CDs emphasize the coarse aspects of music, all the subtlety and nuance is lost.

Once upon a time, people liked music because it was "beautiful". When's the last time you heard any new music that was described as "beautiful". - It's because 44.1/16 bit emphasizes odd-order harmonic distortion, which is rough and coarse and mostly impulsive, and suppresses even-order, which supports warmth, melody and nuance.
_________________
Travis
www.VOTalent.com

louzucaro · Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:29 am Post subject:

Travis, I understand what you're saying about music today vs. "back in the day" but I still think there are people making beautiful music.

Yes, it's true, there's a lot of darkness and angst in music today, and I'm not at all fond of such stuff (which is why I listen to a lot of '70s and '80s music haha) but there are still people making music with great melodies, etc.

One of my favorite bands that I've stumbled across in the last couple years is called Te Vaka. A band of like 12 people whose songs are mostly sung in Tokelauan (a Polynesian language) since the lead singer is half-Tokelauan. Although I can't "understand" what they're singing (without reading the liner notes Smile

) I can certainly appreciate the beauty of their music.

And then there's Jeremy Soule who, along with his brother Julian, has created some stunningly beautiful music for video games such as Morrowind and the three Guild Wars games (Prophecies, Factions and Nightfall).

These are just two examples off the top of my head, because I've been listening to both a lot lately haha.
_________________
Lou Zucaro
http://www.voicehero.com

"Well, yeah, there's my favorite leaf!"

Travis · Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:23 pm Post subject:

Hi Lou,

Of course, people are writing and performing beautiful, and otherwise worthy music, but very few people feel inspired to buy it. "44.1/16 Digital audio" forces us to focus primarily on the impulse, or rythmic sounds on the recording, and it makes other factors, such as tone and melody feel "gritty", and that makes feel uncomfortable with that music.
_________________
Travis
www.VOTalent.com

allensco · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject:

Good point Travis. Some of my favorite music is Big Band/Swing...gotta love that stuff Smile

Even though it's available on CD...I listen to it on vinyl LP's. The record just sounds so much better than the CD. It has much better dynamic range than the CD. I have several Swing/Jazz LP's...Glenn Miller etc. and they all sound great. I've thought about putting them on CD...but haven't done it. It wouldn't be the same. In my vehicle, the road noise would drown out the nuances and I wouldn't be able to enjoy it.

Long live Vinyl!

Allen

bobsouer · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject:

Allen,

How do you keep the vinyl from skipping while you're driving? Laugh

_________________
Be well,
Bob Souer (just think of lemons)
The second nicest guy in voiceover.
+1-724-613-2749
Source Connect, phone patch, pony express

todd ellis · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject:

bob, would you please pass me the new frankie avalon '45?
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

Frank F · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:27 pm Post subject:

I hate to rain on anyones parade, but the key is how you (or anyone) is/are listening to audio... if you use 16 bit/44.1 kHz to listen to a higher end file, you are still only processing (or listening) to what the equipment can output -- 16 bit/44.1 kHz audio.

Recently we tested 96 kHz/32 bit processing of an original audio file in my studio. The original file was the larger bit rate and was then down-converted to CD quality.

Played back on optimized equipment there was a dramatic audible difference. However, playing back the same files through equipment optimized for CD quality... there was no, none, zero, ZILCH discernible audio difference between the two files.

In your vehicle, on your portable iPod or .mp3 player, or your home stereo and even on your computer you will likely not hear the unique quality differences between the high end audio and the CD quality - although some Audiophiles will disagree with me.

You be the judge and listen for yourself on higher end optimized audio equipment. Do not use a CD for the comparison, use original files which you have created for yourself and then down-converted to CD quality.

Toodles

F2
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

allensco · Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:32 pm Post subject:

Heh heh heh...you guys! I use a cheap BSR changer with the spring suspension!

Actually, I play them on a 1970 vintage Admiral console stereo system. It features AM/FM and a record changer. 45 watt amplifier powers an eight speaker system (2 woofers, four midrange and two tweeters) for a great sound.

Picked it up at the local Christian Mission for $10 bucks. Needed a stylus for the tonearm...$10 dollars more and I'm in business. Ebay is loaded with big band/swing LP sets, many are in mint condition.

Sorry for the jack Wink

Allen

Travis · Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:59 am Post subject:

There are many things that we have lost in our appreciation of music since the CD replaced vinyl.

(1) You bought not just an audio disc, but a piece of art, that was a bit larger than 12 inches square. The artpiece, could be an intricate design, a photograph of the artist, or some other artistic statement. On the back side could be more art, or "liner notes" which were set in a type size you could actually read.

(2) The disc inside was valuable, it was fragile, and you needed to treat it with care. You had to keep your fingers off of it, and remember to put it back in the jacket when you finished playing it.

(3) When you carefully placed the LP on your stereo, the sounds were truly magical. Whether Rock, Jazz, or Classical, or spoken word, you could hear the magic. --That was the first thing I noticed about CDs - they sounded good, but for reasons yet to be adequetly explained to me, they NEVER sound "magical". This isn't because I suddenly became "old" or something, I bought several CDs of some Vinyl albums I had, and A/B compared for myself. The CDs SOUNDED cleaner, the highs were crisper, and the magic was missing. I realized, however, that if you left an album and a CD on the sofa overnight, the next morning, the CD would win - so I grudgingly gave up on the magical albums and embraced the new sterile, "edgy", cutting edge world of high-tech.
_________________
Travis
www.VOTalent.com

Jeffrey Kafer · Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:11 am Post subject:

In defense of CDs, Travis, early CDs were of crap quality because they were simply ports of albums, which were mixed heavier on the highs to compensate for the natural degradation that occurred from playing them.

While CDs can't hold a candle to 3 inch analog tape masters, you have to admit that today's CDs sound much better than those released 25 years ago.
_________________
Jeff
http://JeffreyKafer.com
Voice-overload Web comic: http://voice-overload.com