Search the Community

I'm currently listening to the recent Resonance Wes Montgomery In Paris on CD. Nice, clean sound -- the best I've heard of this event. In his notes the producer says "First, we went back to the original session reels and made a high-resolution transfer direct from the original tapes". Okay, good so far. Always go to the source. It's not from a half-speed copy the assistant took home as a souvenir, or an over-the-air tape a fan made, or a cassette hidden in a coat at the concert. "This offered us an opportunity to remix the original recording, providing a wider range of sound, and ultimately, a new, improved aural experience". Here's where I have trouble, and it may only be the choice of the word *remix*. The originals were mono, the balance decided at the time by the original producer/engineer. How do you *remix* a single source? *Remix* means to me to take separate tracks (per instrument, or several tracks -- drum set, piano bass/treble) and producing a different result. From a mono source isn't the only augmentation equalization -- with electronic means emphasize or reduce the various frequencies; or add reverb/echo. (Don't know how you'd take them out). Engineers do wonderful things with old recordings, such as clicks and pops from discs and tape hiss, ground-loop hum, and I thank them for that. But am I misunderstanding the reference to *remix*?