Is the BIS 'warning' on their early discs for real?

[johnb]

Was the ripping to capture the data done correctly?

Yes.

Using EAC with no manipulation. Exactly the same method as was used for the Blomstedt.

<Smiley for huffing in affront>

Being a sceptical soul I do wonder whether the Nielsen/Chung was really a one off mistake by the engineers. It was one of a sequence of discs all with the same warning. It is always possible that the BIS engineers at that time decided to push the dynamic range upwards (in a way similar to that done in the pop industry) as part of a deliberate policy to give the perception of a greater dynamic range, and they left the resulting clipping untouched. The overall result is a "raw-er", punchier sound in the climaxes - but also a less refined sound.

In the thread I gave a link to, a few posts above that the post with the graphical representations I posted a link to sine waves that I had pushed into varying degrees of clipping - so that people could hear the audible effects.

[johnb]

John, I can't recall whether you wrote to Robert von Bahr Re. the clipping problem on those BIS CDs. I have found him to be ready to respond personally to specific enquiries regarding BIS disc issues.

Bryn,

JLW contacted RvB and she posted his response in the thread. As I remember it, he said he was not involved in the production of the Nielsen/Chung (a useful disclaimer) but avoided addressing the issue and went on to imply there were issues with Sound Forge. (Well, he does have a vested interest in the reputation of BIS.)

That was partly what prompted me to post the graphical representations.

[Gordon]

Bryn,

JLW contacted RvB and she posted his response in the thread. As I remember it, he said he was not involved in the production of the Nielsen/Chung (a useful disclaimer) but avoided addressing the issue and went on to imply there were issues with Sound Forge. (Well, he does have a vested interest in the reputation of BIS.)

That was partly what prompted me to post the graphical representations.

Hmm! the plot thickens. I fail to see why, if a company takes pride in capturing a clean and wide DR at source, it would then "enhance" it, requiring more bits, and actually risk damaging it. It sounds like intervention for the purposes of changing what the musicians did in the space which is counter to the principle of fidelity. However I know people do this sort of thing but I thought BIS promoted themselves as whiter than white in this respect. I agree with jb that it is possible to tinker with the top or bottom or both ends of the DR scale, especially if you start with a poor DR. If you want to improve the punch of a recording then sure, you can alter relative dynamics on a micro-scale just as restorers do with old material. Why not get the musicians to do it properly in the first place? Or are we dealing with some sessions that went wrong?

As to the ripping etc causing the problem, use another tool on the same material, there are enough to choose from. Anyway the tool jb used seems to work with other material. A spurious digital gain step hidden in the ripper processing might cause a problem with some source material whose levels are already high but might not be noticed if they were sat down enough. Just a thought.

[Dave2002]

Yes.

Using EAC with no manipulation. Exactly the same method as was used for the Blomstedt.

<Smiley for huffing in affront>

Just checking - not intended to offend.

So at the very least it looks as though one or more BIS CDs were badly engineered. Whether the digital masters were then doctored in the way suggested to give more "punch" is possible, though is there any evidence for that? Presumably mixing could also increase the effective dynamic range on a recording - or on the other hand decrease it. Usually the loudest passages have brass and drums, so if they are on separate microphones and put into the mix say 10dB up wouldn't that increase the DNR? That wouldn't require post processing. However, if the additional gain were left on throughout there'd be unwanted additional noise, so the gain would be better turned down when those instruments are not playing.

I don't know enough about how BIS records to know whether they would have done that kind of thing in the earlier days of digital to CD recording. They probably didn't have too many channels to record in the infancy of CDs. Probably nowadays companies would record many channels and do some of the balancing later, and each channel could be more or less optimised to avoid clipping, and to minimise noise. However, note that some very good recordings were made "even" in the analogue era, using simple microphone layouts and techniques, and with only a few channels recorded. Some companies used minimal processing, even when going to LP.

It does not follow automatically that additional complexity will produce better recordings.