IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Big-label mastering engineers donít understand lossy formats, Article about Mastered for iTunes
Kohlrabi
post Mar 27 2012, 09:12
Post #1





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 1016
Joined: 12-March 05
From: Kiel, Germany
Member No.: 20561



Just found this article via twitter, circled among mastering "engineers" (in fact Heba Kadry reposted it, the girl who mastered the latest Mars Volta album, which reaches -12.79 dB on my RG scans, and is generally mastered in a horrible fashion).

This further backs my impression that most of them don't have a single clue of what they are doing. The section about the mastering practices of Rubin and Meller are especially eye-opening to me. Masterdisk "engineers" also apparently are now out to rape the Rush back catalogue. Further down they cite phase-reverse tests to prove AAC files are different from the original (wow, REALLY?).

The good thing is, I can use this article to decide which releases to avoid in the future. But I'm really at a loss what we can do beside that. I'm really fed up with mastering "engineers" destroying music releases.

This post has been edited by Kohlrabi: Mar 27 2012, 09:17


--------------------
PRaT is the new jitter.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
TrustScience
post Mar 28 2012, 23:39
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 28-March 12
Member No.: 98162



QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 27 2012, 03:35) *
I think you're being a little harsh on the article.


QUOTE (KMD @ Mar 27 2012, 04:14) *
Thats round the wrong way, the article said the waveform shapes were not the relevant factor it was the person skeptical of mastered for itunes that was looking at the sum of two file with one inverted.


From the Author

Thanks for sharing the article, Kohlrabi. If you have another read of it sometime, I think you'll find it's pretty even-handed.

I get the sense that you disagree with the claims made by the mastering engineers, and not with the article itself, which tries to take a neutral stance.

Since this was piece of reportage, rather than opinion, I wanted to accurately deliver the news, present both the commentary and the criticism, and to offer some dispassionate analysis of both stances. The article tries to remain skeptical of the magnitude of the claims, but I also stand by the fact that it's unfair to dismiss them entirely without proper tests.

If you do want to read an opinion piece, you'll probably find that my own feelings about blind listening are pretty congruent with the philosophy here at Hydrogen Audio. I'm a big supporter of this site and of ABX tests in general, and I even wrote a supportive opinion piece about blind listening tests in the very same issue you cited! (You can read that here):

"Can You Hear What I Hear? A Guide to Listening Blind"

I will have to disagree with the extreme stance that mastering engineers are generally snake-oil salesmen (I've never had an experience that would lead me to believe that) or that Mr. Ludwig or Ms. Kadry are incompetent (I know both, and they're definitely not).

However, as a matter of personal opinion, I would agree that Rick Rubin overstates the audible differences normally found between high-res AAC files and their original WAV masters. I'd also agree that at least one of Meller's comments was probably more figurative and expressive than it was literal.

With that said, the engineers I interviewed told me that in "Mastered for iTunes", Apple also fixed an actual issue they had in the past with creating AAC files from high-resolution masters. To be fair, even Bob Ludwig agrees that 256kbps files won't necessarily sound any worse than traditional CD files - Just so long as they're created properly, and the engineer can verify there were no issues with the transfer. (He says that this is something that they're now able to do.)

The other real development appears to be that MEs can now easily and effectively hear the differences between their original master and the file that the iTunes store's proprietary encoder will create. (I'm told that, for better or worse, it's not the same encoder used in the consumer version of iTunes.)

Who knows? Even if the AACs sound identical in 95% of cases, this new ability to actually listen and check can't be a bad thing

Personally, I think the new tools are a good idea, but I'm not about to replace my music library with new "Mastered for iTunes" versions anytime soon.

I definitely appreciate the healthy dose of skepticism here on Hydrogen Audio, and would agree that people who have a service or product to sell sometimes dramatize their claims... But show me a salesman who doesn't, and I'll show you a salesman who's out of a job!

Thanks again for the share and the comments. Keep doing what you guys do!

Very best,

Justin Colletti
Recordist, Journalist
http://justincolletti.com
http://trustmeimascientist.com
http://sonicscoop.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Canar
post Mar 29 2012, 03:12
Post #3





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3352
Joined: 26-July 02
From: princegeorge.ca
Member No.: 2796



QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 28 2012, 15:39) *
show me a salesman who doesn't, and I'll show you a salesman who's out of a job
If that's the case, I fully support sales staff unemployment.


--------------------
You cannot ABX the rustling of jimmies.
No mouse? No problem.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TrustScience
post Mar 29 2012, 14:24
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 28-March 12
Member No.: 98162



QUOTE (Canar @ Mar 28 2012, 21:12) *
QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 28 2012, 15:39) *
show me a salesman who doesn't, and I'll show you a salesman who's out of a job
If that's the case, I fully support sales staff unemployment.

Haha - Fair enough.

QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 28 2012, 22:29) *
That Bob Ludwig quote where he seemingly does not understand what audio encoding is or why it might cause clipping is particularly galling from someone doing any sort of audio work. Particularly to people like me who consider the huge amount of clipping accidentally introduced by incompetent engineers to be one of the worst aspects of modern music.


Hi Saratoga,

I think you and Ludwig would agree that most masters shouldn't be as hot as they are. From what I remember, he's come recommending that masters peak at a maximum of a full -1db below 0dbfs to reduce unintended clipping, which is an idea that was balked at by many of the mastering engineers I spoke with. Most of them seemed to believe their clients expect peaks at at least -0.5 or -0.4 dbfs, and would continue shooting for those peaks as long as they could verify that the encoder could handle it.

QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 28 2012, 22:29) *
First everything that clown (Shepherd) says is irrelevant since you can't show that one encoding is closer to CD by subtraction. [/b] Its not that his sample size is too small its that his test is meaningless. Its not that he took a song mastered at the wrong time, its that he doesn't know what hes doing. Why are you talking about EQ when nothing he says could possibly make sense? Actually, why are you even addressing this guy aside from to say "no I'm sorry, thats not how audio works"?


What you seem to take issue with here is that I presented the most damning argument last rather than first (because that's how mounting arguments work!) Otherwise, I think we're on the same page. smile.gif

Shepherd's faulty analysis was ranked high in Google and getting a ton of reads, so I felt it was only appropriate to address it in the article. Please remember that not everyone has the same level of understanding, and that a nuanced breakdown is extremely valuable to many readers.


QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 28 2012, 23:23) *
I read the paper by Apple back when we first discussed it. I don't believe it said anything about "a healthy dose of additive EQ to restore frequencies that are lost during the AAC conversion process," or did it?
...
EDIT: I read the paper again. It says nothing about additive EQ to restore frequencies that are lost during the AAC conversion process. Not a big surprise.


Correct greynol, that fact is not from the Apple paper, but from my interviews with over a half dozen of the busiest M.E.s in New York City.

They say that in practice, they use the new toolset to A/B before-and-after files, and then use additive EQ to compensate for changes in tone if they find it necessary to do so.

In theory, that's not much different than having two slightly different EQ settings so that a cassette and vinyl version sound closer.

Many of you might effectively argue that this process is subjective and open to error (true) or that the sonic differences between a 24-bit WAV and a 256kbps AAC tend to be much slighter than the differences between vinyl and cassette (also true).


QUOTE (Fandango @ Mar 28 2012, 23:14) *
PS: The Dynamic Range Meter results for Ms. Kadry's latest work are worse than Frances the Mute (DR7), Amputechture (DR6) and The Bedlam in Goliath (DR6).


To be fair, I believe that's a reflection of taste rather than competence. Making a master that's less hot isn't that difficult, and it doesn't take much advanced training at all.

To argue that Kadry or any other in-demand ME don't know what they're doing misses the point. I believe they know exactly what they're doing: Making very loud masters!

Whether you dig what they're doing is an entirely different question. I just don't think it makes sense to argue about that on a "technical" level.

(Unless you we were citing some scientific double-blind tests that compare specific levels of dynamic range with perceived enjoyment. Now that would be neat! If you know of such a study, I'd be the first to read it.)

I'll admit that I haven't heard the records you've cited here, but in defense of Kadry, it's important to remember that any mastering job can be deemed "good" as long as it's what it was intended to be. We just have to judge it by the creator's criteria.

For instance: I love the sound of a lot of Dave Fridmann's work with the Flaming Lips, which is often clipped-to-death. What's important to remember is that those records aren't clipped because they're loud... they're loud because they're clipped!

That's a world of difference. That style of mixing and mastering is an aesthetic choice, and not some unintended side-effect of ignorance or accident.

The truth is that mastering engineers who get repeat clients aren't making loud records by mistake. You don't have to like their work, but I still think it's important to make a fair argument. Otherwise, we just end up sounding like dimwits who trash on studio reverbs because they don't sound like actual concert halls.

It's also useful to remember that to people younger than us, taste-based arguments against hot, bombastic masters is going to sound a whole lot like "Hey you damn kids, get off of my lawn!"

In reality, that's part of the reason the kids are into those records in the first place! Don't you remember what it's like to be young? cool.gif What self-respecting American teenager wants to listen exclusively to music his parents would approve of?

In the end, I think that with the right effort, we can bring healthy dynamic range back into the mainstream. I just don't think we're going to do that by making negative or unprincipled arguments.

QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 29 2012, 03:36) *
It's what happens when the art-world and science/engineering-world meet head-on.
...
It would probably be even worse if we only got to hear songs written by artless science types*. Good songs, badly recorded, vs bad songs perfectly recorded? wink.gif


Now that, I'd agree with in a heartbeat.

This post has been edited by TrustScience: Mar 29 2012, 15:16
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Mar 29 2012, 17:48
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 28 2012, 22:29) *
That Bob Ludwig quote where he seemingly does not understand what audio encoding is or why it might cause clipping is particularly galling from someone doing any sort of audio work. Particularly to people like me who consider the huge amount of clipping accidentally introduced by incompetent engineers to be one of the worst aspects of modern music.


Hi Saratoga,

I think you and Ludwig would agree that most masters shouldn't be as hot as they are.


I'm not talking about intentions, I'm talking about competence. Its great if he dislikes how hot things are mastered and I completely agree with him if so. My general complaint is that you make it sound like he has no idea why clipping happens smile.gif

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24) *
Most of them seemed to believe their clients expect peaks at at least -0.5 or -0.4 dbfs, and would continue shooting for those peaks as long as they could verify that the encoder could handle it.


If by 'handle' you mean 'not clip' then this would be basically impossible. So either they don't know what they're doing, or they're just leaving clipping in for basically no reason!

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24) *
Again, the mastering engineers are claiming that there were tonal differences between the resulting AACs and the 24-bit source file that are separate from what we consider expected lossy artifacts.


If someone tells you this, then you ought to know that they are not credible.

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24) *
Again, I have no way to prove or disprove these claims. I am only able to present them as consistent statements, and to allow room for skepticism, and suggest further reading to give fuller context.


There is actually a lot of research into the artifacts produced by perceptual audio encoding. Saying you have no way to verify a statement here is incorrect. You could access the research in question, compare files yourself, or use your knowledge of how perceptual audio encoding works to realize that you're being fed a load of bullshit.

So saying you have no way to prove or disprove these claims is simply not true. I think what you mean to say is that you decided not to try and evaluate these claims. Which is unfortunate, because they are counter to the reality of how AAC encoding works.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TrustScience
post Mar 29 2012, 18:02
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 28-March 12
Member No.: 98162



QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 29 2012, 11:48) *
There is actually a lot of research into the artifacts produced by perceptual audio encoding.
...
So saying you have no way to prove or disprove these claims is simply not true.


That is a fair argument, saratoga. Still, I have to remind you that I don't have access to their before and after files, and therefore it would be patently wrong of me to say that dozens of respected audio professionals are lying without having actual direct evidence.

All I can do is remind readers that there have been a ton of listening tests and studies that suggest it's unlikely any listeners would be able to hear tonal differences between these files, if they do in fact exist.

The article was also supportive of skepticism against these claims, but maintained that those accusations should be made properly. And again, I even wrote and linked to an article supporting blind ABX listening tests that would encourage healthy skepticism.

I think that's due diligence. You're entitled to feel like I should have taken a harder line in support of your position. However, I believe my job here was to present the news, the process, and the context surrounding it. My job was not to editorialize passionately that it's a foregone conclusion that mastering engineers must be lying dirtbags because related tests raise suspicions on their claims! smile.gif So, mission accomplished, I guess.

Again, I see the atmosphere here has become less than welcoming of a nuanced and non-aggressive position like mine, so I'm going to respectfully step aside, and leave you guys to it.

This post has been edited by TrustScience: Mar 29 2012, 18:19
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Mar 29 2012, 18:13
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:02) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 29 2012, 11:48) *
There is actually a lot of research into the artifacts produced by perceptual audio encoding.
...
So saying you have no way to prove or disprove these claims is simply not true.


That is a fair argument, saratoga. Still, I have to remind you that I don't have access to their before and after files, and therefore it would be patently wrong of me to say that dozens of respected audio professionals are lying without having actual direct evidence.


They're not lying, they're confused. And no its not wrong of you to figure out whats going on. You call yourself a journalist right? Isn't that actually your job, to know whats going on and then report it? If you just report what someone says without actually figuring out if they understand what they're saying, you're not doing a very good job.

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:02) *
All I can do is remind readers that there have been a ton of listening tests and studies that suggest it's unlikely any listeners would be able to hear tonal differences between these files, if they do in fact exist.


But you didn't even do that much!

"Since the Mastered for iTunes process uses a healthy dose of additive EQ to restore frequencies that are lost during the AAC conversion process"

You're repeating something that you know isn't true! Why?

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:02) *
I believe my job here was to present the news, the process, and the context surrounding it.


So how does repeating things that aren't true work towards that end?

QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:02) *
Again, I see the atmosphere here has become less than welcoming of a nuanced and non-aggressive position like mine, so I'm going to respectfully step aside, and leave you guys to it.


Heh, I would say lazy and misinformed. And indeed, people won't be welcoming of that. But if we're welcoming of you, well that depends. Are you willing to open your mind and learn something or are you going to get angry and storm off that people don't agree with you?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Kohlrabi   Big-label mastering engineers donít understand lossy formats   Mar 27 2012, 09:12
- - evereux   QUOTE Appleís 256 kbps AAC files are supposed to s...   Mar 27 2012, 09:26
- - skamp   They obviously think what they do is teh shit. Nor...   Mar 27 2012, 09:32
- - 2Bdecided   I think you're being a little harsh on the art...   Mar 27 2012, 09:35
|- - Kohlrabi   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 27 2012, 10:35) I ...   Mar 27 2012, 09:44
|- - Nessuno   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Mar 27 2012, 09:44) Jus...   Mar 27 2012, 10:55
||- - DonP   QUOTE (Nessuno @ Mar 27 2012, 05:55) QUOT...   Mar 27 2012, 12:38
|- - dhromed   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Mar 27 2012, 09:44) I...   Mar 27 2012, 14:10
|- - Fandango   @greynol: Oh, here it is explained by a guy named ...   Mar 29 2012, 05:14
|- - skamp   QUOTE (Fandango @ Mar 29 2012, 06:14) PS:...   Mar 31 2012, 10:59
- - KMD   Thats round the wrong way, the article said the ...   Mar 27 2012, 10:14
|- - Arnold B. Krueger   QUOTE (KMD @ Mar 27 2012, 05:14) Thats r...   Mar 27 2012, 17:15
- - Porcus   I bet the people behind Monkey's Audio will wa...   Mar 27 2012, 11:15
- - RobWansbeck   Vlado Meller is reported as saying : ď The high...   Mar 27 2012, 16:11
- - greynol   http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st...   Mar 27 2012, 16:14
- - TrustScience   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 27 2012, 03:35) I ...   Mar 28 2012, 23:39
|- - Canar   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 28 2012, 15:39)...   Mar 29 2012, 03:12
||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (Canar @ Mar 28 2012, 21:12) QUOTE ...   Mar 29 2012, 14:24
||- - greynol   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 06:24)...   Mar 29 2012, 15:22
|||- - krabapple   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 10:22) So t...   Mar 29 2012, 17:14
||||- - greynol   QUOTE (krabapple @ Mar 29 2012, 09:14) Yo...   Mar 29 2012, 18:03
|||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 09:22) Your...   Mar 29 2012, 17:18
|||- - greynol   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:18)...   Mar 29 2012, 17:39
|||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 11:39) QUOT...   Mar 29 2012, 17:49
|||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 12:49)...   Mar 29 2012, 18:02
||- - greynol   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 06:24)...   Mar 29 2012, 15:37
|||- - krabapple   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 10:37) QUOT...   Mar 29 2012, 17:17
|||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 09:37) QUOT...   Mar 29 2012, 17:32
||||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 12:32)...   Mar 29 2012, 18:00
||||- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 16:32)...   Mar 29 2012, 18:26
||||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 29 2012, 12:26) QU...   Mar 29 2012, 18:52
||||- - Canar   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 10:52)...   Mar 29 2012, 18:58
|||||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (Canar @ Mar 29 2012, 12:58) QUOTE ...   Mar 29 2012, 19:02
|||||- - greynol   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:32)...   Mar 29 2012, 19:04
|||||- - Canar   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 10:52)...   Mar 29 2012, 19:04
||||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:52)...   Mar 29 2012, 19:37
||||- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 17:52)...   Mar 30 2012, 10:19
||||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Mar 30 2012, 04:19) It...   Mar 30 2012, 17:19
||||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 30 2012, 12:19)...   Mar 30 2012, 19:06
|||||- - TrustScience   That's true. I did make a couple clarifying ed...   Mar 30 2012, 20:13
||||- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 30 2012, 17:19)...   Mar 31 2012, 10:33
||||- - krabapple   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 30 2012, 12:19)...   Mar 31 2012, 21:59
|||- - saratoga   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 10:37) QUOT...   Mar 29 2012, 18:19
||- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:24)...   Mar 29 2012, 16:45
||- - krabapple   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24)...   Mar 29 2012, 17:10
||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 09:24)...   Mar 29 2012, 17:48
||- - TrustScience   QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 29 2012, 11:48) The...   Mar 29 2012, 18:02
||- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 29 2012, 13:02)...   Mar 29 2012, 18:13
|- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 28 2012, 18:39)...   Mar 29 2012, 04:29
||- - greynol   QUOTE the Mastered for iTunes process uses a healt...   Mar 29 2012, 04:46
|- - Fandango   QUOTE (Canar @ Mar 29 2012, 04:12) QUOTE ...   Mar 29 2012, 04:34
|- - IgorC   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 28 2012, 19:39)...   Apr 6 2012, 23:17
- - greynol   I read the paper by Apple back when we first discu...   Mar 29 2012, 05:23
- - Fandango   Ah, it has been discussed before and Apple actuall...   Mar 29 2012, 05:30
- - greynol   I provided a link already. Go to the first post i...   Mar 29 2012, 05:35
|- - Fandango   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 06:35) I pr...   Mar 29 2012, 05:51
- - saratoga   I think the most damning thing about the mastered ...   Mar 29 2012, 05:53
|- - Fandango   QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 29 2012, 06:53) Ess...   Mar 29 2012, 06:04
- - greynol   As I said in the dedicated discussion, Apple is ad...   Mar 29 2012, 05:59
|- - saratoga   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 29 2012, 00:59) As I...   Mar 29 2012, 06:12
- - greynol   RE: Big-label mastering engineers donít understand lossy formats   Mar 29 2012, 06:30
- - 2Bdecided   It's what happens when the art-world and scien...   Mar 29 2012, 09:36
- - drewfx   Perhaps interviewing someone with a background in ...   Mar 29 2012, 19:02
- - greynol   When I am in a position to improve something of mi...   Mar 30 2012, 16:49
|- - TrustScience   QUOTE (greynol @ Mar 30 2012, 10:49) When...   Mar 30 2012, 17:40
|- - saratoga   QUOTE (TrustScience @ Mar 30 2012, 12:40)...   Mar 30 2012, 19:13
- - greynol   I'll try not to make this a long post as I...   Mar 30 2012, 20:47
- - saratoga   At least from my point of view (and as I mentioned...   Mar 30 2012, 21:41
|- - db1989   QUOTE (saratoga @ Mar 30 2012, 21:41) And...   Mar 30 2012, 21:53
|- - saratoga   QUOTE (db1989 @ Mar 30 2012, 16:53) QUOTE...   Mar 30 2012, 22:23
- - greynol   Aside from db1989's point in the next post whi...   Mar 30 2012, 21:52
- - greynol   Since others are piling on while admittedly not ad...   Mar 31 2012, 22:14
- - Axon   Perhaps TrustScience would have found our reaction...   Apr 1 2012, 17:26
|- - Kohlrabi   QUOTE (Axon @ Apr 1 2012, 18:26) In that ...   Apr 1 2012, 18:09
|- - knutinh   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Apr 1 2012, 19:09) Warr...   Apr 1 2012, 22:06
|- - Kohlrabi   QUOTE (knutinh @ Apr 1 2012, 23:06) QUOTE...   Apr 1 2012, 22:22
|- - knutinh   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Apr 1 2012, 23:22) My p...   Apr 2 2012, 09:00
|- - skamp   QUOTE (knutinh @ Apr 2 2012, 10:00) let u...   Apr 2 2012, 09:15
|- - knutinh   QUOTE (skamp @ Apr 2 2012, 10:15) iTunes ...   Apr 2 2012, 12:31
- - krabapple   It's possible that calling famous mastering en...   Apr 2 2012, 07:17
- - Kohlrabi   The notion that mastering engineers who deliberate...   Apr 2 2012, 13:07
|- - db1989   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Apr 2 2012, 13:07) I al...   Apr 2 2012, 13:25
- - Kohlrabi   Thank you very much, db1989. That was what I had i...   Apr 2 2012, 13:48
- - db1989   Great!   Apr 2 2012, 13:50
- - absinthe33   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Mar 27 2012, 10:12) Jus...   Apr 2 2012, 15:22
|- - dhromed   QUOTE (absinthe33 @ Apr 2 2012, 15:22) br...   Apr 2 2012, 16:08
|- - absinthe33   QUOTE (dhromed @ Apr 2 2012, 17:08) QUOTE...   Apr 2 2012, 23:04
|- - splice   QUOTE (absinthe33 @ Apr 2 2012, 15:04) .....   Apr 2 2012, 23:52
- - 2Bdecided   Some lossy codecs can introduce audible temporal s...   Apr 2 2012, 15:28
- - skamp   Heba Kadry again: "While Im all for setting a...   Apr 4 2012, 15:23
|- - Kohlrabi   QUOTE (skamp @ Apr 4 2012, 16:23) Heba Ka...   Apr 4 2012, 22:29
|- - splice   QUOTE (Kohlrabi @ Apr 4 2012, 14:29) ... ...   Apr 5 2012, 01:33
- - 2Bdecided   ...which leads back to Justin's latest article...   Apr 4 2012, 16:25
|- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Apr 4 2012, 16:25) ......   Apr 5 2012, 11:24
- - stephan_g   ^Agreed. A "decent stereo", btw, include...   Apr 5 2012, 16:30
|- - krabapple   QUOTE (stephan_g @ Apr 5 2012, 11:30) Why...   Apr 5 2012, 18:04
|- - 2Bdecided   QUOTE (stephan_g @ Apr 5 2012, 16:30) ^Ag...   Apr 5 2012, 18:43
- - stephan_g   Don't know about that, but I was just browsing...   Apr 5 2012, 21:56
- - markanini   QUOTE (stephan_g @ Apr 5 2012, 21:56) Not...   Apr 6 2012, 02:01
- - krabapple   QUOTE (stephan_g @ Apr 5 2012, 16:56) Not...   Apr 6 2012, 20:28
2 Pages V   1 2 >


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st August 2014 - 02:14