v3- bass roll off?, ansr?, gains?

[Tim]

the 50hz/6db slope is the only one I would ever use.

[ethan]

For those advocating NO HPF....have you looked at the frequency spectrum of studio albums? You'll find significantly less low end under 75 Hz than any live tape.

-e

[dklein]

or generate some test tones so you get a feel for what goes on at those frequencies

[ethan]

This is what too much bass will do for ya. 

http://news.agendainc.com/movies/Blaupunkt.mpg

[nic]

For those advocating NO HPF....have you looked at the frequency spectrum of studio albums? You'll find significantly less low end under 75 Hz than any live tape.

-e

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

[OFOTD]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

I have experimented with the HPF on the V3 quite a bit the last week or so using test tones.  While I agree that it let more gain to be used the bass frequencies weres something that could have just as easily been rolled off or trimmed in post production.  The majority of shows that I catch are loud rock shows where the extra gain is not necessarily needed.  If I was taping in a small acoustic or un-amplified setting I think I would use the filters as to increase the total gain of the recording. 

[ethan]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?

On another note there's still something to be said about getting better levels across the board. We all hear the difference between a recording recorded too low say at 6dBFS peaks and one that peaks near 0dBFS. I hear a more rich sound and more contrast personally. So why limit your ability to capture 75 Hz - 20 KHz unecessarily especially if a lot of the energy is in the low end. Roling off in post production means you've lost the chance to maximize the resolution at the higher frequencies.

-e

[fsulloway]

>>>>Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.<<<<<<<


I had a similiar conversation last night with a friend of mine who is an audio engineer. He basically said the same thing. He hardly ever uses the HPF on his own tapes but almost always when working for a client. As he put it, clients want a great sounding CD but not necessarily an accurate account of how the room sounded that particular night.

[wboswell]

and do you know why?
its because labels want the producer/master houses to make the "product" as loud as possible, because everyone knows, louder is better. if you reduce the low end, then you can bring up the overall volume.

Actually I have a good friend that works for one of the major mastering companies and while b.s.ing with him this morning I saw this post and asked him about it.  He siad the main reason that the bass is cutoff at certain frequencies is NOT due to loudness but more for the fact that the labels fear consumer backlash with discs playing poorly.  My friend explained that 99% of consumers play their cd's in the car or on stereo systems that are less than $50 dollars in total cost.  By trimming the bass it allows the 99% of consumers to hear the music instead of the cracking and popping of crappy speakers.

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?

On another note there's still something to be said about getting better levels across the board. We all hear the difference between a recording recorded too low say at 6dBFS peaks and one that peaks near 0dBFS. I hear a more rich sound and more contrast personally. So why limit your ability to capture 75 Hz - 20 KHz unecessarily especially if a lot of the energy is in the low end. Roling off in post production means you've lost the chance to maximize the resolution at the higher frequencies.

-e

Personally, I'd rather capture something that I'm happy with.  I like to share, but I'm not going to compromise (imo) my recording so that it sounds better to other people.  Call me selfish, but until I get paid to record, I'm in the game for myself... 

[OFOTD]

So it comes down to who's going to listen. So if the consumer is the judge of the recording and you seed it widely then it is in the end in your interest to seed something that sounds good for most of the listeners isn't it?
-e

Well yes and no.   If you are selling your recording as music labels do then 'yes' it is in your best interest to make it "work" for the most people you can.  In the taping realm things are different so there is your "no" becuse there is not a "mainstream" appeal to live recording as much as we wish there was.

The line

So if the consumer is the judge of the recording

is a little misleading.  The consumer is not the judge of the actual recording per se but they the ones buying the product.  Would you buy a cd if it sounds like shit in your playback devices or would you upgrade your equipment.  I would bet that most folks would not buy a cd again before spending quite a bit more money (compared to a cd price) on a new playback system. 

We as tapers tend to say "if you don't like the way is sounds then fuck off" or better yet "if you don't like the way it sounds then go buy your own taping gear".  Then again we are not selling our tapes and label do.

Catch-22 for sure!

[OFOTD]

Personally, I'd rather capture something that I'm happy with.  I like to share, but I'm not going to compromise (imo) my recording so that it sounds better to other people.  Call me selfish, but until I get paid to record, I'm in the game for myself... 

I couldn't agree with you more.  I guess its all just one more side of the record business that you don't think about.

Just the other day in fact my brother in law came over and gave me a copy of Van Halen's Womern and Children First that came out recently all remastered.  On my home system is sound like complete and utter shit compared to my original copy of the album.  But in my wife's car it sounds a noticable amount better that the original.    Again back to that damn catch-22

[CQBert]

When I ran a V3 I almost always ran a roll off...  Big bands at 75/6 and small clubs 50/6...  eliminated the low end boom and thghtened up the low end.

CQBert

[Kyle]

the 50hz/6db slope is the only one I would ever use.

I agree 100%. When I used to run KM184s, I used it in arenas with great luck, but never in clubs/bars or outside. Ditto for the TLM103s I have used recently. Really tightens the Neumanns up. With my Schoeps, I pretty much never use it except once for an FOB Allmann Bros' show. Probably didn't need it ( although I had a low stand and was near the subs) - took a chance - tape is great. I also remember using it at Phish 7/23/99 during the rainstorm in the second set. Really cut out the wind noise and left plenty of bottom end - that may be the best app for it....

[muj]

the bass cut thing depends on the music and the how loud the show is, and most importantly the mics.

i ran  gefell mk202 >josephson c606b>v3>jb3 last nite with the active filter and 50hz cut.