Policy on "remastering"

I don't see any explicit policy on seeding "adjusted" recordings. Most of what people call remastered really isn't, if you know what I mean. I am not very keen to download a CoolEditPro-ified version of a show, no matter how good someone's intentions are. My personal feeling is that:

...if you don't own/transfer the master source, only very limited modifications are acceptable:
-speed/pitch correction
-maybe gain adjustment assuming original recording is not clipped
-maybe balance adjustment
-dc offset correction (hi Rider!)

ie No EQ, no NR. Just don't do it.

[RainDawg]

I stronly disagree....there are quite a few people here who know what the hell they're doing. I could give you a dose of some the work Five or I have done on old analog stuff with NR, EQ, and Hiss Reduction and you'd be hooked for life. It's a very valuable tool when used correctly. 90% of the time, I can tell from someone's info file if they know what they are doing or if they're faking it.

On this topic, however, I should note that DC offset correction is fine, but must be done as a complete set. I will NOT endorse any audio editing done with EAC as it's just not practical to done track-at-a-time fixed for audio.

We are planning on endorsing personal remasters heavily provided that full information as to what was done is included. Again, you can usually tell when someone has done it right....

Well, I passed on that Rush source, but we all have our own ideas about what constitutes a desirable rendering of a particular recording. Of course, it is your site, so set the rules - that is why I asked.

Believe what you want about DC offset, correcting it is a part of converting analog sources and something that I routinely do on my A>D transfers. I put it in the list of what I consider safe and harmless changes to a source based on my experience in using it. You are invited to download the shows I share and assess the effects. What's up with the "personal" tone of your post? It would seem I am trying to work together and contribute by the posts I have made in this section. Do you want to be the sole voice of technical opinion?

[Five]

most certainly not. around the time STG went down I was just getting to know you, let's just start fresh and discuss issues as they come up, okay?

[RainDawg]

Sorry man....no personal tone intended. I just remember a shitstorm that arose as a result of DC offset correction and wanted to nip it in the bud. I absolutely agree that DC offset correction is an essential part of mastering a recording, provided that it's done right and that it's done on a whole-set basis instead of track-by-track.

One of the goals Five and I had at STG before it finally went down was to make a good archive of remastering techniques and how to do them right. I have a few of the simpler ones that I'm putting the finishing touches on, including a DC offset on a complete-set basis one. So much work getting this site up that I've not had time to get those down yet.....

Listen, no personal offense taken. I post my opinions here, so let's not start to take disagreement personally. I think there are good ways to use every tool provided in the audio editing suites, and my goal at this site is to direct people to the safest and most effective way to do them, not elevate myself to position of sole arbiter of what's good.

Let's resume discussing this matter in a friendly way....

[RainDawg]

By the way, this technical discussion really belongs in the technobabble forum....

[ssamadhi97]

Originally Posted by Five

most certainly not. around the time STG went down I was just getting to know you, let's just start fresh and discuss issues as they come up, okay?

I'd rather see such matters set in stone and out of the way beforehand.. otherwise chances are we'll end up discussing them over and over again, like on STG.

To match this site's "high quality only" approach, I wonder whether we could establish some kind of quality control for remasters.. like, people are required to submit clips of the unprocessed and the mastered source, and a group of mods does a quality check to ensure that the remaster lives up to this site's standards.

Basically a pain in the ass, sure, but I think this kind of process will do good on several levels: It might scare off at least some of the people who just warezed a copy of Izotope Ozone and think they're great mastering engineers now; it'll ensure that no recordings that have just been eq'd to shit are going to be seeded; it'll allow aspiring mastering hobbyists to gather valuable feedback from people who know what they're doing, thus getting a reality check on their skills..

..and finally I think that anyone who takes pride in his skills and the time and effort he puts into (re)mastering a recording would be more than glad to comply with such requirements.


Thoughts?

[Rider]

Originally Posted by ssamadhi97

I'd rather see such matters set in stone and out of the way beforehand.. otherwise chances are we'll end up discussing them over and over again, like on STG.

To match this site's "high quality only" approach, I wonder whether we could establish some kind of quality control for remasters.. like, people are required to submit clips of the unprocessed and the mastered source, and a group of mods does a quality check to ensure that the remaster lives up to this site's standards.

Basically a pain in the ass, sure, but I think this kind of process will do good on several levels: It might scare off at least some of the people who just warezed a copy of Izotope Ozone and think they're great mastering engineers now; it'll ensure that no recordings that have just been eq'd to shit are going to be seeded; it'll allow aspiring mastering hobbyists to gather valuable feedback from people who know what they're doing, thus getting a reality check on their skills..

..and finally I think that anyone who takes pride in his skills and the time and effort he puts into (re)mastering a recording would be more than glad to comply with such requirements.


Thoughts?

Are you volunterring to be one of the mods?

[ssamadhi97]

Sure, I could do that.. as long as I don't end up just being "the mod" (it would require a whole bunch of people to ensure some basic level of "objectivity" anyway)

PS: no need to full-quote the previous post - keep the clutter down!

[Five]

it wouldn't take that long to listen to the clips. think of the fights that would break out, tho... maybe they could provide the clip and if it sucks then nobody would d/l the piece of s**t if it's banned or not

[Rider]

I wanted to do something like this al ong time ago. If you make people submit things to commity they will run and be very pissed about it.

[RainDawg]

Originally Posted by ssamadhi97

To match this site's "high quality only" approach, I wonder whether we could establish some kind of quality control for remasters.. like, people are required to submit clips of the unprocessed and the mastered source, and a group of mods does a quality check to ensure that the remaster lives up to this site's standards.

One of my ideas when we were playing throwing out features for this site was to have a special forum for "remasters" where just this kind of thing would happen....people could post before and after samples, get feedback from fellow audio tinkering geeks, and refine their remaster before seeding it. Five seemed big on the idea but a few others thought it might be more work than it's worth.

I agree completely that this would be a great way to coerce people into providing information as to what they did, and would eliminate the "i cleaned the hiss with wavclean" kind of remasters we see.

Perhaps a subforum to technobabble where were could just have an "audio remastering" forum. Then, one a remaster has been fine-tuned, post it in the regular audio forum...people who don't want to see the remastering discussion won't have to.

Would you be willing to help mod such a subforum? I know I would put my name in there and Five will likely do so too. I'll bring this up again if we have the manpower to run it.

[Five]

even at it's peak the remastering thread only had about 10 devoted followers, maybe three of which were doing more than blowing hot air about some plugin they had read the ad for or maybe tried out but never used. Or people would post about some technique and I would say, oh, could I see a before and after of that and never hear from them again. I'm genuinely interested in this stuff but I wonder if ppl just talk about it or what.

[RainDawg]

I know....which is why Lynne and the other shied away from giving it a separate subforum before : fear that not enough people would use it. I still think it would be a good idea for anyone who really wants to post a remaster, but at the least they'd better give their method before we'll approve it.

[Five]

well, it should be in the lineage anyways. they usually don't leave it out completely. I passed on a recent show on another site because it said something like "I ran it thru and eq and now it sounds much better" but if they had've said something more descriptive I would have been right on it.