Tag Archives: recording

Asheville, Walnut Cove, Biltmore Forrest and Western North Carolina’s Audio and Home Theater specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl

I’ve got great DSD recordings, as well as great PCM recordings. Which format doesn’t tell the story on how good a recording sounds. Lots of other reasons why things sound the way they do.

Is higher better?

Working with DSD and PCM has been a real learning experience. The two formats sound different from each other though it is unclear why. Is it the analog to digital conversion processor? The DACs? That DSD is closer to analog? They are all different technologies.

On the one hand, DSD runs at a much higher sample rate than any PCM. Single rate DSD is 64 times higher sample rate than CD quality PCM. Yet, there’s not much more audio bandwidth available because of that higher sample rate.

And then there’s PCM. Few today would argue that 44.1kHz is the bare minimum required for decent reproduction. Anything less and we lose the audible frequency range. But double that, and now we can capture twice what we are capable of hearing. And 4 times that (176kHz) and we’re able to capture 80kHz. Much more than we can hear and more than sufficient for phase linearity.

Yet more seems better: 2X, 4X, 64X, 128X, and so on.

We don’t know if the “better” we are hearing is due to the change in architecture or sample rate or both.

But, in a way, what does it matter?

I have heard CDs trounce 192kHz versions just as I have heard DSD smash anything PCM.

In the end, I don’t think higher is necessarily better any more than I think lower is always better when it comes to distortion.

Gotta listen.

Asheville, Walnut Cove, Biltmore Forrest and Western North Carolina’s Audio and Home Theater specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Natural sounding

Another word for musical to describe the sound of unadulterated audio reproduction might be natural. It’s a good and reasonable alternative but I fear out of our reach unless we’re willing to make drastic changes.

Natural implies straight from nature without any intervention from us. Picking an apple off a wild tree might qualify, but listening to a commercial recording likely would not. In the real world we pluck an apple off the supermarket shelf and hope it tastes as good as that tree-ripened gem, but alas, it never does.

If you’re not making the recording and shepherding every step of the process through to your ears you’re not likely to ever achieve true natural sound. Yet, maybe that’s ok.

Most of us are into our systems and enjoying their gifts for the magic they bring us. Music through a properly set up system is such an amazing experience that the notion it’s not quite as good as being there pales to just the sheer enjoyment of it all.

No, terms like natural and musical help convey levels of performance in conversation but aren’t requirements for perfection.

Asheville, Walnut Cove, Biltmore Forrest and Western North Carolina’s Audio and Home Theater specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

The race for dynamic range in the recording industry is over. We won.

At the beginning of the 20th century the first sound recordings achieved about 15dB of dynamic range. 30 years later, following the Roaring Twenties and the advent of vacuum tubes, we had doubled that number to 30dB. The march ever forward has continued to where today, with the benefit of digital recording, we can boast 120dB and beyond.

And here’s the thing. We do not benefit from greater dynamic range in recordings. Already we can capture everything from the movement of a few molecules of air to the sound pressure of a jet engine.

Loudspeakers have yet to catch up but they cannot be too far behind.

The question then is why, after beating THD and IM below the level of audibility, increasing dynamic range past the point of absurdity, laying flat frequency response beyond measure by our ears, are we so danged far from fooling ourselves that music is live in our rooms?
Should we blame the microphones that captured the music? The rooms we play them in? Or just question the viability of the task altogether?

As engineers, we often get mired in minutiae that doesn’t move the needle any closer to the goal—like building better roads on the wrong path.

I have my guesses. You?

Asheville, Walnut Cove, Biltmore Forrest and Western North Carolina’s Audio and Home Theater specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Too much?

The race for dynamic range in the recording industry is over. We won.

At the beginning of the 20th century the first sound recordings achieved about 15dB of dynamic range. 30 years later, following the Roaring Twenties and the advent of vacuum tubes, we had doubled that number to 30dB. The march ever forward has continued to where today, with the benefit of digital recording, we can boast 120dB and beyond.

And here’s the thing. We do not benefit from greater dynamic range in audio recordings. Already we can capture everything from the movement of a few molecules of air to the sound pressure of a jet engine.

Loudspeakers have yet to catch up but they cannot be too far behind.

The question then is why, after beating THD and IM below the level of audibility, increasing dynamic range past the point of absurdity, laying flat frequency response beyond measure by our ears, are we so danged far from fooling ourselves that music is live in our rooms?

Should we blame the microphones that captured the music? The rooms we play them in? Or just question the viability of the task altogether?

As engineers, we often get mired in minutiae that doesn’t move the needle any closer to the goal—like building better roads on the wrong path.

I have my guesses. You?

Walnut Cove, Asheville, Biltmore Forrest and Western North Carolinas Audio and Home Theater specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Fundamental change

There are many great projects in the collective PS Audio head. We have lists of the things we’d love to tackle and our challenge is not coming up with more, but editing the list. Few companies have the resources to tackle all projects, big and small. It takes discipline and patience to focus only on chosen product directions, two talents I find myself woefully lacking in. Fortunately, the team at PS has both in spades.

The one project I most want to work on is the one least likely to be put on our engineering schedule. Not because it isn’t interesting, but because it is so far removed from our core product direction, with major economic uncertainties, that the CEO side of me says “no,” while the inventor side of me cries out in anguish. Tough to play both roles in a small company, and we can add a lack of self restraint to the list of my many weakness, but I am trying.

The idea is a rather simple one and its introduction would cause a fundamental change in the way we listen to our stereo and home theaters. Instead of trying to fix the room problems through the loudspeaker, we fix the room itself with active walls.
Imagine for a moment one of the problems in-home stereo systems face. The room itself confines the soundstage within its boundaries.

Certainly we have all witnessed the coveted experience of depth beyond our room’s walls, but we know it is an illusion, a magic trick that’s not all that convincing. If we try and play the Boston Symphony Orchestra in a room that is 15’x15′ our ear brain mechanisms understand it’s a trick and reject the space as too small. Even if our room is a monster, and most are not, we can never be fooled that we are actually in Symphony Hall by simply playing that which was recorded there.

But what if we could fundamentally change the size of our room such that when we close our eyes, our ear/brain mechanism confirms that the room we are in is 61 feet high, 75 feet wide, and 125 long? To prove it to our disbelieving selves, we could clap our hands, speak to the person next to us on the couch and be assured we were indeed in that size room. Then, when we play music recorded in the very space we are mimicking, the experience would be far more believable. And because our new room has active walls, the dimensions can change with each recording.

Possible? Absolutely.

More tomorrow.

Asheville, North Carolina ‘s Home Theater and Audio specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Help us change the world.

A project that has long been on my mind is coming closer to being a reality and we need your help.

For many years I have been aghast at the way the music industry treats artists, recording and mastering experts. It’s basically awful. If you are a big star you do well, anything less and it’s hard to even make a living. And on top of that, we Audiophiles never have enough quality music at hand. There are people in this industry working through these issues in a fair and honorable way, Cookie Marenco ofBlue Coast Records tops my list. There are others as well, like Chad Kassam of Acoustic Sounds. All working hard to preserve the quality and art in what we as listeners love.

But it’s a losing battle. Artists cannot make a living, recording studios as well as mastering facilities are dropping like flies. In their places are homebrew studios using Pro Tools and generally degrading the quality of recordings.

So I asked myself what is it PS Audio can do to help? And it occurred to us we could do our bit to change the dynamic, to fundamentally alter the way in which recording artists and studios are compensated. And we could do that with the support of our community of music and audio lovers willing to help.
Let me tell you what currently happens in all but a few instances. The distribution companies that publish and market music make the lion’s share of the money, many times in excess of 95% of all revenues generated. The meager remains are distributed back to the artists, the studios that recorded and mastered their work getting even less. Companies like Apple have done better, sharing 70% of the proceeds of music to the artist, 30% for themselves. This is fair and equitable and closer to the way it should be … only, the amount they charge for the music is so little that unless you are a mega star, there’s nothing in it to put food on the table and encourage the release of even more material.

So here’s what we are going to do. We have partnered with our good friend and world famous mastering engineer Gus Skinas, along with local high end recording studio Immersive, and a group of very excellent musicians (names can’t be told until the contracts are all signed, but they’re awesome) to make our first release on a new label we are starting, PS Records.

This first release, and probably most that follow, will be physical media copies, not downloads. There’s a whole philosophical thing we have about downloads and there’s not space enough to go into it here. Inside the physical media package will be two discs: a CD and a DVD. The CD will contain perfectly mastered copies of the original high resolution files. The DVD will contain both the original master DSD recordings as well as 176/24 PCM versions, so each package has three formats from which to enjoy, all mastered expertly by Gus Skinas on his system and curated and checked for final results in Music Room One on the IRSV.

We will also include a multi-page booklet, with not only a bio for each artist but the layout of the recording and photographs when we have them.

The model of distribution and reimbursement will be very different. In this version we will sell the discs around the world ourselves without going through dealers, for $39.95 each. After covering the physical costs of the package itself as well as its fulfilment (figure about $10) the balance of $30 is split 80/20, with 80% shared between the musicians and the recording people that made and funded the studio and mastering time. 20% will go to PS Audio, the distributor and marketer, with the hopes of making enough money to repeat the process and make more. This is not a money making venture for us, rather, we want the lion’s share to go where it belongs, in the hands of those that make the music.

It’s a very different, open architecture approach that we believe could change the face of the recording industry if it is both successful and then adopted by others. Fingers crossed on both accounts.

I bring this to your attention for several reasons, among them: we need to name the album and we need to start thinking about how we will spread the word to our fellow Audiophiles to help make this a success. In keeping with the originality of this venture, we have hired a photographer to shoot the front cover. Scott McCormick is a famous creative for album covers, having shot many. We gave him carte blanche and asked only that the cover reflect the same level of creativity and art direction as does the music inside. Attached is what he came up with. Yes, it’s a little dark in subject matter, but I love it!

Can you help us by suggesting names for this first work? The name of the album should reflect both the ‘thumbing our nose’ attitude toward the status quo of how artists and recordists are compensated and also reflect the care and beauty of what is inside. On this you will have to trust me, the sound quality is nothing short of breathtaking on all cuts. I have nearly fallen off my chair listening to them, so good they are and this is an album you will all treasure having.

Any help and suggestions as to the name and ideas of how to spread the word are greatly appreciated. We hope to release in late spring.

If you have suggestions, email them to me or go here to our forums and suggest.

Thank you. It’s important.

Asheville, North Carolina ‘s Home Theater and Audio specialists present Cane Creek AV and Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Need anyone say more?

My friend Mark (aka. Soundminded), a frequent contributor to the comments section of these posts, posed a question of his own. I will paraphrase: “Would I rather have a great performance and a bad recording or vice versa?”

Most of us would immediately respond we’d prefer a great performance over a great recording. But what about the extremes? What about something on the edge of unlistenable by our standards? The 78 rpm scratchy record of Caruso over today’s better recordings? The YouTube screech of something resembling music?

Just applying some honest introspection I fear I may fall into the category of those that stick with what sounds better. Fear of ridicule from music snobs over audio snobs? I don’t know. But here’s what I do know. Mark gives us an example of a great performance with sound that is awful and I could not turn it off. I listened on my crappy little monitor speakers. The video’s awful. But the performance. The music. I nearly swooned listening to it.

Got an extra 45 minutes? Click here if you dare.

It’s not what real people listen to

Trying to describe to one of our vendors the difference between a great recording and a so,so recording elicited an interesting response.  ”I think I understand, but how would music that real people listen to sound on your system?”

In one form or another that’s an often asked question.

One of the guys out in the warehouse brought in music from the latest Bruno Mars double CD.  Track 1 was simply beyond bad.  And this from an artist I really like.  Bruno’s a talented fellow, but really?  Does he even listen to his product?

And then he whips out a CD from rapper Jay-Z.  I am prepared for an even greater assault.  Hmmmm.  It sounds great!  And who starts singing the chorus?  Bruno Mars.  And Bruno sounds great.  The recording is excellent.

“Normal people” music is the same any of us listen to.  No, you may not like Jay-Z or Bruno, but on a good system it’s intriguing to all that have the opportunity to peel back the musical onion and discover an entirely new level of musicality and degrees of excellence among musicians.

Certainly is for me.  Bruno, are you listening?

Paul McGowan – PS Audio Intl.

Standing out

Following Tuesday’s post Always Hopeful we sparked a lot of discussion on the nature of recordings; most being not too great.  The few that are good a combination of three critical elements: a musician who cares, a producer that understands and a recordist who knows how to pull it off.  And all this IF the goal of the artist is to make a great sounding recording.

Take an artist like Adele.  Some of the worst sounding recordings yet.  Compressed, loud, unforgiving.  And such a shame, as she’s a really great artist, one that I personally enjoy.  The recordings are bad enough I simply cannot bear to hear them on any system save, perhaps, my car (and then only in small doses).  But maybe her producer’s intent was to play the loudness game, the one that helps her track stand out on the crowded airwaves of popular radio.  It certainly cannot be that she doesn’t have the money to hire a good recording engineer.  And it certainly doesn’t seem to have hurt her success.

Truth be told I think my expectations of hope may be unrealistic.  Let’s face it, the world doesn’t work that way.  Just about any category of product or service I can think of follows the classic 80/20 or even 90/10 rule.  80% of any product in any category is going to be mediocre, relative to the 20% that stands out.

It’s true for high end audio, restaurants, cars, music, recordings.  Heck it’s probably true for people as well.

I look at my music collection and realize even the way I catalog them reflects this pattern.  20% of it is a treasure, 80% of it is just ok.

What we as a collective should do is figure out a way to make sure that in some way we support the 20% that really deserves rewarding.  It may, over time, help raise the level of the 80%.

The ratio will remain the same, because a rising tide lifts all boats, and that’s just fine for me.

Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.

Always hopeful

Whenever I get a new recording, chosen because the music’s something I am sure I’ll enjoy, I am always hopeful the recording will stand out as something special on its own.  That magical combination of great music you love to listen to + a really well recorded piece.  Why is this so rare?

We’re disappointed when one or the other doesn’t line up and thrilled to find a gem of both musical value and appreciation of the recorded arts.

I am always questioning how musicians, many of whom spend their lives refining and mastering their craft, seem to leave out how their music will sound when played back.  I suppose the same’s true for live performances: many get it right, but so many more don’t seem to understand the importance of how it sounds to their audiences.  Imagine a painter who spends her life mastering the skills necessary to paint and then displays that painting only to display it in dim light so the intended audience can never appreciate the work properly.  Makes no sense to me.

Do you think it’s incumbent on the artists to make this better?  Do you think perhaps most artists already think their work is reproduced the way they intended?  Or do you think they just don’t care?

I am curious.

Paul McGowan – PS Audio, Intl.