Silly question about Mosaic selects

[jmjk]

Are the recordings transferred at 24-bit?

[Chuck Nessa]

Please don't tell me this is a deal breaker for you! I have 16 bit transfers which sound better than 24 bits. Let you ears decide, not your eyes.

The answer is yes, they are 24 bit.

I would guess almost all cds issued in the last few years have been "so-called" 24 bit transfers. Most studios have the equipment and it would be a pain in the ass to dig out the old stuff.

jmjk, please don't take this personally - I just needed to vent about technology and the people using it.

Edited September 18, 2003 by Chuck Nessa

[vibes]

jmjk, many of the discography pages on the Mosaic website list who did the transfers and at what bitrate they were transferred. Here's an example from the Randy Weston discography page:

Rremixed from the original three-track masters (D & E) transferred in 24-bit and mastered by Malcolm Addey at the Malcolm Addey Studio, New York City. Session C is mono. All others are stereo.

Randy Weston Mosaic Select Discography

I hope this helps.

By the way, I just checked a couple of older sets and it does say who did the transfers but not at what bitrate. What Chuck says is very true, however - the bitrate is not the most important thing. I, like many people here, really like the masterings done by Malcolm Addey. His non-24-bit work is fabulous.

I also just noticed that if you pull up the HRS sessions discography page, at the bottom you also get the OOP Phil Woods 20th anniversary set discography. Weird!

Edited September 18, 2003 by vibes

[Shrdlu]

I agree about ears rather than bits, though the more recent CDs usually sound better than the old 1980s (16 bit) ones.

Does anyone else prefer the 20 bit CDs to the 24? A lot of the 24 bit ones are very loud (I instinctively turn down the vol. knob before starting a 24 bitter). I have several 20 bit CDs that sound great, and, particularly, I think Ron McMaster's work peaked in his short 20 bit period. This is an important point, as we are stuck with Ron for a lot of rare recordings.

[Brad]

I believe that they've been using 24 bit since the Byrd/Adams or the Parlan sets.

[Claude]

For the Gracham Moncur Mosaic Select McMaster used 24bit and the Sonic Solutions noise reduction process. It sounds perfectly digitally clinically dead.

[DrJ]

I agree that one should just listen to decide about sonic quality, and that there are a lot of other factors (the person doing the transfers probably is most important) that influence the sound quality of remasters beyond just the "bits."

Edited September 18, 2003 by DrJ

[JSngry]

24 bits is, what, $3.00?

[jmjk]

Please don't tell me this is a deal breaker for you! I have 16 bit transfers which sound better than 24 bits. Let you ears decide, not your eyes.

The answer is yes, they are 24 bit.

I would guess almost all cds issued in the last few years have been "so-called" 24 bit transfers. Most studios have the equipment and it would be a pain in the ass to dig out the old stuff.

jmjk, please don't take this personally - I just needed to vent about technology and the people using it.

Chuck, I know better than to take anything personally from you . As a fellow scotch drinker, I know we can vent on many things at a moments notice!

It is not necessarily a deal breaker for me...until now, I hadn't gotten around to picking up any Selects. I pre-ordered the Patton, and I went for the Carmell yesterday, and I'm curious as to what the bit rate was.

I feel that the sound on some of the 16 and 20 bit transfers in the Conn series suffered a little---to my ears, anyway. So, that the Selects are transferred in 24-bit makes me happy that the sound quality was addressed somewhat---I wouldn't want to have the Selects sound exactly like the old Collector's Choice issues, or the regular domestics from the 1980s.

As to the points made about using ears instead of eyes---I usually agree with this! However, if I knew that I was getting an early 1990s digital mastering on a 2003 product, I'd be a little less excited about ordering it. And going into it blindly, I can't really order a Select, and then return it, saying, "Sorry guys, the sound sucks."

Thanks for the input, y'all!

[Claude]

I feel that the sound on some of the 16 and 20 bit transfers in the Conn series suffered a little---to my ears, anyway. So, that the Selects are transferred in 24-bit makes me happy that the sound quality was addressed somewhat

I only have the Moncur Select, and as I wrote above it is not a good remastering, despite the 24bits. The earlier Connoisseur CDs of "Some other stuff" and "Destination out" sound much better.

Don't focus on the number of bits, it's irrelevant compared to all the factors that make a successful remastering: availablitity of the original master tapes, accuracy of the transfer from the analog tape machine to the mastering console, decisions by the engineer on tonal balance and correction and stereo spread, use of noise reduction systems, etc

[jmjk]

I feel that the sound on some of the 16 and 20 bit transfers in the Conn series suffered a little---to my ears, anyway.  So, that the Selects are transferred in 24-bit makes me happy that the sound quality was addressed somewhat

I only have the Moncur Select, and as I wrote above it is not a good remastering, despite the 24bits. The earlier Connoisseur CDs of "Some other stuff" and "Destination out" sound much better.

Don't focus on the number of bits, it's irrelevant compared to all the factors that make a successful remastering: availablitity of the original master tapes, accuracy of the transfer from the analog tape machine to the mastering console, decisions by the engineer on tonal balance and correction and stereo spread, use of noise reduction systems, etc

Thanks, Claude.

I'd love more education on all this stuff. Any good books or journals on digital mastering, and/or modern recording considerations?

[michel devos]

I feel that the sound on some of the 16 and 20 bit transfers in the Conn series suffered a little---to my ears, anyway.  So, that the Selects are transferred in 24-bit makes me happy that the sound quality was addressed somewhat

I only have the Moncur Select, and as I wrote above it is not a good remastering, despite the 24bits. The earlier Connoisseur CDs of "Some other stuff" and "Destination out" sound much better.

Don't focus on the number of bits, it's irrelevant compared to all the factors that make a successful remastering: availablitity of the original master tapes, accuracy of the transfer from the analog tape machine to the mastering console, decisions by the engineer on tonal balance and correction and stereo spread, use of noise reduction systems, etc

Thanks, Claude.

I'd love more education on all this stuff. Any good books or journals on digital mastering, and/or modern recording considerations?

I agree with you Claude, all these factors are more important that the bit rate...However, I'm surprised almost nobody mentions the quality (or lack of) of the DAC's used for the mastering.

There are many good remastering jobs which are ruined by the graininess of the DACs, resulting in muddy bass sounds, distortion,lack of depth etc...just because of the bloody little low quality chips...

Some years ago, the Yamaha OV 1 was fashionable in the mastering labs around here...ever cared to make an AB test between say a Yamaha OV1 and a DAR Sabre...?The DAR Sabre is kind of dinosaur (15 years old...) but the DAC's are very close to transparency, compared against more recent chips.At least, they do NOT degrade the signal

Edited September 19, 2003 by michel devos

[BruceH]

I pre-ordered the Patton, and I went for the Carmell yesterday,

I'll bet you're going to like the music in the Carmell set!!!