Scale the Summit's "Master" Fail, Ths is what we can expect now, I guess. Options

[Engelsstaub]

I (thankfully) don't listen to this band but I have Prosthetic Records on my Facebook due to a few others on their roster that I appreciate.

Here's a screenshot of what these dumbasses submitted to the label as their "master." Is anyone else shocked that any record company would accept this as normal?



...I guess we can expect this sort of "professionalism" from the recording industry these days.

[Engelsstaub]

My belief is this:

A Redbook CD is completely fine for a delivery format. CD-Rs shouldn't be used to cut vinyl. I think it's stupid to use a CD-R for a final master when it's easy for even a non-professional to archive at more optimal bit depths and sample rates for pre-delivery formats.

@greynol: I know you'd love to hear that records are cut with CDs. It bolsters your biases you've already elaborated on in previous conversations. That's cool.

...but seriously: if my cart is specced to deliver more frequencies than my CD player it would seem fair to include whatever info is present. That's my opinion and I don't claim to hear those frequencies. (OT: It's impossible to scientifically demonstrate that my TT sounds better to me than my CD player. I can't get that out of the realm of subjectivism and neither can anyone else reliably.)

What I said earlier about "defensive mode:" I've been around long enough to know that claiming something could be better than CD would get me dog-piled ...and perhaps rightly so. I just genuinely wasn't expecting to get dog-piled over saying that Redbook is not ideal for a pre-delivery format.

I realize the "Mastered for iTunes" thing is somewhat misguided. I would hope that it would encourage actual modern production on top of the highly-debatable benefit of having a "hi-res" master to encode to lossy from.

[greynol]

I think it's stupid to use a CD-R for a final master when it's easy for even a non-professional to archive at more optimal bit depths and sample rates for pre-delivery formats.

I think you need to back up a bit and explain why CDDA is not good enough, especially the part about about the RIAA curve.

It bolsters your biases you've already elaborated on in previous conversations.

Project much?

...but seriously: if my cart is specced to deliver more frequencies than my CD player it would seem fair to include whatever info is present. That's my opinion and I don't claim to hear those frequencies. (OT: It's impossible to scientifically demonstrate that my TT sounds better to me than my CD player. I can't get that out of the realm of subjectivism and neither can anyone else reliably.)

It doesn't seem that you've read much on the reproduction of high frequencies from vinyl. I'll take a flat response with low distortion across my range of hearing (and beyond, though my HF response is still pretty damn good) over the most "optimal" physically realizable configuration for vinyl playback any day of the week.

I would hope that it would encourage actual modern production on top of the highly-debatable benefit of having a "hi-res" master to encode to lossy from.

It is completely unnecessary. We were there long before Apple decided to get involved in the process. ...and by "there" I mean in areas where it counts: recording, mixing and editing. If it weren't for the opportunity to charge more, I wouldn't care about the people that whine about not having access to hi-res masters, none of whom would be any the wiser if it weren't for spectral plots and the like. To bring this back on-topic, we have no way of knowing how the content on that CD-R was produced ("modern" or otherwise). Do you disagree?

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 23 2013, 22:38