2. tech-talk
  3. 1042832803

Question for recording artist/engineers

Let's say you have a jazz band who wants to sell cds of their music with the best quality of sound they can achieve at the lowest out-sourced cost or do-it-yourself. If one wants to do a just-in-time type of manufacturing of their cd, how can they improve things?

Currently they are recording at 48k in Pro-tools, mastered in Sonic Solutions by Air Show Mastering, and then they use top of the line cds (Taiyo Yuden) with a Microboards Orbit II Duplicator. This has produced average cds but we want to do better.

What would you engineers do to improve this so it gets closer to audiophile quality? Would you recommend using a different mastering house, different cds, or a different Duplicator? Or would you just bite the money bullet and go directly to a full-scale manufacturer? We are trying not to have that much money tied up in inventory.

If this is the wrong place to post this question, please suggest another message board to post.

Thank you for your feedback and assistance.
lngbruno

Showing 5 responses by zaikesman

zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Flex you da man baby :-)
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Thanks for taking a stab Flex, but the reply only reiterates the question...anybody else have an insight?
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Some informative answers, except the nature of the question makes it seem to me that this material has already been recorded and will not be redone. In which case you are limited to either remastering, or if that seems to have been performed competently the first time, then remixing beforehand as well. The quality of the mixdown engineer and facilities is absolutely crucial, and even a surprising amount of 'turd-polishing' (if needed) can be achieved by a great pairing here. It'll cost, but not nearly as much as beginning over with rerecording. A worthwhile fact-finding mission might be to take the studio 2-track master (plus a mastered CD) to a prospective remix studio or two, and see what the band and you - and especially the resident engineer - think of what you've got to work with. I would do this particularly if you all remember the sound as you experienced it in the studio you've used so far as seeming somehow much better during the recording and mixing process than what you ultimately came out with when you listen to the finished product at home.
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Flex - I don't know the answer to this myself, but if there were no advantage to using the simplest possible algorithm (i.e., "throw out every every other sample") as opposed to something more complex, than why do you suppose we have inherited standards that represent frequency doubling (48KHz to 96KHz to 192KHZ, 44.1KHz to 88.2KHz) and tripling (44.1KHz to 132.3KHz)? Are these just remnants of a time when computing power was more precious?
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Thanks for the tutorial (I wasn't necessarily being literal about the 'throwing away' part). What I'm still curious about is this: How did we end up with two standards so close together as 44.1KHz and 48KHz? I understand the reason for picking a frequency in this area, just not how we got to both of these...
More to discover