Quote
vancouver
nice to hear the bass for the first time for me. on higway child

That was kind of a joke. I overdubbed a bass line in the right channel and should've noted it better before circulating. That is a total Frankenstein dub job that has nothing to do with the original recording or the personnel who recorded it.

Quote
Laughingsam

Quote
Paul Kersey
What I meant Sam was to collect the songs from the 3 best sources available Grande Finale (Best source), We Hate You! and Twenty Flight Rock. Remaster them where necessary and make a definitive Hampton 81. A bit like what you did with Alternative Love You Live only you would be using these 3 sources.

Roger that Paul. I can make a best of Hampton using those 3 sources. In fact that's the next project I'll do...as soon as this awful storm passes (northeastern US) and I finally get some sleep!

Thanks for breaking the sources down for me!

Good stuff Sam! Stay safe with that storm about..

Hi Sam & all Hampton 81 advocates,

Have you heard "Ill Will" Crocodile Beat CB 53014-1?
What "raise Keith's guitar, lower the thumping bass"???!!!
Mayby it's more laryngologic problem than of remastering?
Which of course constantly can be imrproved with tools
development. But is it really so urgent and worth to fumble
adtionally with "the 3 best sources available"???!!!

More than that, there are lots of 1981 concerts which really
need remastering and which are very interesting as performances,
like for example Candlestic Park, Oct.17.

Let's treasure His Master Laughinsam's Hand and allow Him more
sleep rather than wasting His time for polishing things which
anyway are shining.

Best,
Greg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-28 12:32 by Greg44.

Quote
Greg44
Hi Sam & all Hampton 81 advocates,

Have you heard "Ill Will" Crocodile Beat CB 53014-1?
What "raise Keith's guitar, lower the thumping bass"???!!!
Mayby it's more laryngologic problem than of remastering?
Which of course constantly can be imrproved with tools
development. But is it really so urgent and worth to fumble
adtionally with "the 3 best sources available"???!!!

More than that, there are lots of 1981 concerts which really
need remastering and which are very interesting as performances,
like for example Candlestic Park, Oct.17.

Let's treasure His Master Laughinsam's Hand and allow Him more
sleep rather than wasting His time for polishing things which
anyway are shining.

Best,
Greg

i don't have so much 81 shows..philly sept 26-27 is great .it's har d to hear if itt's mono or stereo soundboard..but the audience is stereo,,

Gregg44, I hear what you're saying and agree that there are a bunch of '81 shows that need upgrading more urgently than Hampton. I'd like to accomplish a Hampton remaster though because it's such a widely circulated show -- the type that people listen to over and over -- and we ought to have the best sound possible. I'll try to focus a bit more on '81. There are a lot of mono sbd's that I can generate stereo images for using the multi-band method.

I understand Sam,
Maybe I was just a little too much pushing trying to push
MY case so as to make that "the last ones will become
the first" :-).

But on the other hand I'm of the opinion that already existing
Hampton recordings (like issued by Crocodile Beat) are better
than 85% of the materials posted on the iorr blog.
People are rave about lots of muffled materials but now they
insist on remastering something which (if ever) requires almost
none of the remastering - such perfect it is. That is hard to
understand in face ot the fact that so much material here is
left hardly listenable.

Sam, I had great difficulties in downloading the first part of
great Essential Rarieties (thank you, thank you) - 4 times the
process got broken so I simply "glued" CD1 from what got on to
computer. Probably that's why I omitted artwork, I have only
front cover which my MediaMonkey prompted me and I copied it.
If you have artwork, could you please post it?

Last but not least, in betwwen next remastering could you
please remaster just 4 songs:

- "No Spare Parts"
- "You Win Again"
- "And I Know"
- "Sweet Home Of Chicago"
First three are Some Girls sessions and the last one is from
Lonely At the Top (Swinging Pig).

Best,
Greg



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-29 10:12 by Greg44.

Just added to index on page 1 of this thread:

1981.10.17 Candlestick Park, S.F., CA [DSP remaster]
FLAC format; sourced from DAC-28

Almost kept this one in mono. It was an uneven mix to begin with and generating a stereo image really screwed things up. I compensated with parallel compressors and and an equal loudness contour on the EQ.

Let me know if you think it would sound better in mono. I'm too biased toward the stereo imaging to make an informed decision. But this mix took relatively longer than others, so if it's not a worthwhile result I'd just as soon remix it mono.

enjoy!
Laughingsam

PS - some additional notes are in the archive

Its a big improvement on the original DAC. If it won't take much of your time then by all means upload it in mono to compare. Thanks for the 81 tour

Well...
I don't know DAC but I have VGP-287 unfortunately mp3 and... your remastering
is only slightly better, it's more clear but still Jagger is in background
and overall sound is rather on a muffled site than crispiness.
I wonder if VGP as a source would give better result?

Laughingsam, please if you have a little time left, please consider
my last request, these 4 songs fit very well to your Essential Rarieties:
- "No Spare Parts"
- "You Win Again"
- "And I Know"
- "Sweet Home Of Chicago"

Best,
Greg

Quote
Gregg44
your remastering is only slightly better, it's more clear but still Jagger is in background and overall sound is rather on a muffled site than crispiness.

I agree. I almost deleted the files rather than posting. Here's the problem: These 1981 sbds were not recorded very well -- no big deal ('76 wasn't either) -- but add to that the fact that they're in mono and that's the difficulty. Whenever you drastically change a mix (like trying to generate stereo from mono), you create new problems as you correct old ones. I just haven't found an answer for these '81 concerts yet. I tried the show from Tempe a few months back and gave up.

Thanks for the input. I'll do another volume of rarities so just be patient and I'll get to your requests.

For now I'm adding the following show to the index:

1981.11.20 Unidome, Cedar Falls, IA
source: DAC-25
Part 1
Part 2

It's another mono-to-stereo convert but better results because the source was more balanced.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-31 03:50 by Laughingsam.

Quote
Laughingsam

Quote
Gregg44
your remastering is only slightly better, it's more clear but still Jagger is in background and overall sound is rather on a muffled site than crispiness.

I agree. I almost deleted the files rather than posting. Here's the problem: These 1981 sbds were not recorded very well -- no big deal ('76 wasn't either) -- but add to that the fact that they're in mono and that's the difficulty. Whenever you drastically change a mix (like trying to generate stereo from mono), you create new problems as you correct old ones. I just haven't found an answer for these '81 concerts yet. I tried the show from Tempe a few months back and gave up.
[...]

Hi Sam,

Hope you don't mind giving a little feedback on the Candlestick remaster. I do like the clarity you brought in to the recording and make it sound less 'distant' but it came with a lot of saturation and distortion. To me this is rather unfortunate. It does, however, eliminate the extra noise that came with raising the clarity rather effectively. This is at least what I found out myself after playing a little with the equalizer on the DAC 028. I tend to prefer the noise over the saturation but I realize that this is a very personal choise.

I made a sample of my 'choise' in case you're interested (or anyone else):
[www.sendspace.com]

I completely agree that the 81-82 shows in general are very hard to improve (e.g., from 'poor' to 'very good' or from 'very good' to excelent'). Often the best one can do is to make the shows a little less hard to listen to. Therefore you have my total sympathy!

Cheers,
Joyce

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

Very nice Laughingsam. Has punch!
Congratulations!
I didn't know it.

I think that it's waste of time to dig into Tempe
when "Devils & Deserts" was released by Godfatherecords
in VERY listenable remaster. The rest is a matter of
taste, in that case maybe to harsh but anyway doesn't
need to be work over and over again, in my opinion.

But where disappeared your beautiful artworks?
Will you continue this also?

Best,
Greg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-08-31 13:11 by Greg44.

Quote
rubycatgirl
I made a sample of my 'choise' in case you're interested (or anyone else):
[www.sendspace.com]

Your sample sounds great. It's in mono though. My goal was to get a decent stereo mix. The DAC source has some sibilance and distortion on it, but it's squashed into the mono mix so it's not the first thing we notice. When I scattered the sound into a stereo mix, it became more obvious.

I'd rather remaster these mono sbds into a stereo mix. It's all preference, but I just think mono sound is not the best representation of a live setting, especially with a two-guitar band like The Stones. I'd rather either separate the sounds into a more dynamic stereo mix or fail trying...and I've had some duds (like this Candlestick one).

I have some of the mixes you've done in the past. If you have updated links to your download page or know a place where your projects are seeding, please lay it on me.

Quote
Laughingsam

My goal was to get a decent stereo mix. The DAC source has some sibilance and distortion on it, but it's squashed into the mono mix so it's not the first thing we notice. When I scattered the sound into a stereo mix, it became more obvious.

Makes sense... although I don't really know what your 'stereo-recipe' is. Did you raise the levels after you've done the stereo trick? I had the feeling the somewhere along the line some clipping had occured. Anyway - like I said - I totally sympathize with your efforts to take recordings like Candlestick to another level. I hardly have time anymore for mixing and mastering - I just had a long summerbreak! (...just a few days and I'll be back in class...) - but when I do, I tend to be rather conservative. A lot of my 'old' remasters are pretty bad actually (too much saturation). That's why I'm not gonna re-up them anymore. But if there are requested, I'll see what I can do

Cheers!

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

Thanks mate for the Cedar Falls,,,absolutely BEST show from 1981 tour,my favorite.
Just listen how they synch together on Going to a go go.

Quote
rubycatgirl
I had the feeling the somewhere along the line some clipping had occured

It's not clipping. It's a limiter. I limit the overall signal to create a louder mix. It limits the dynamic range of the mix, which in turn allows for an increase in the output level.

It's like compression only there's expansion taking place ** when it's setup correctly ** it's an intelligent process -- analyzing the input signal and reacting quickly to transient sounds and slowly to bass, switching on and off the whole time. There's even an option in the limiter module to "prevent inter-sample clipping," which I always turn on (see example below)

I hear what you're saying about not having time to spend mixing. My job sometimes affords me a lot of time to spend on hobbies and then just when I think "cool!" it consumes all my time. Listening to music and remixing it is something I've done for years though and I don't expect that will change.

Anyone on here besides Gregg44 have suggestions about outtakes to include on the next round of rarities? Please post them here: IORR

Here are some examples of the DSP's I use. iZotope Ozone 4 is the most commonly used. There's no hardware involved in my remastering (hence the Digital Sound Processing label):


iZotope Ozone 4 (loudness maximizer module view)


iZotope Alloy (macro view)


iZotope Nector (compressor module view)

You can see that these suites allow a great deal of control and provide good visual feedback on what's going on with the mix. Each module has it's own sub-screen with additional controls and visual meter readouts.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-01 02:47 by Laughingsam.

Very cool to have a look in your kitchen (I d/l'ed images from megaupload...), it looks very fancy indeed I haven't worked with limiters for a long time but I once had a job at a video and audio mastering department in a professional music plant. In fact it was ten years ago and all those limiters were still analogue. I suppose that digital limiters are far better able to anticipate to peaks and silent parts.
I just d/l'ed Cedar Falls and I like it a lot better than Candlestick, although I can't compare it with the original. The only thing is that inbetween the songs the audience seems to 'wobble' (hope you know what I mean!). Not a big deal as these SB's hardly have any audience to begin with but I wondered if this was an effect then of the limiter or if it is just from the original. Jagger sounds very nice and well balanced with the band - I like it.
One more question: most 'upfront' music of CF and Candlestick (e.g., voacals, guitar, saxaphone) are most prominent on the left channel. Is this a choice you've made or did it just turned out that way?

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

LaughingSam,

I hope that your silence regarding your artwork
doesn't mean that you're going to discontinue
that part of your work, your covers are as goog as
your remasters, i.e. artowrk for Cow Palace or Baton Rouge.
I even haven't seen such photos of Jagger!
So I'll be a leech: PLEASE continue that also.

Best,
Greg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-01 11:15 by Greg44.

about the mono soundboard.it makes more fun live dimension..in merge stereo..

we have the great falomix la 1975..

Quote
rubycatgirl
I once had a job at a video and audio mastering department in a professional music plant. In fact it was ten years ago and all those limiters were still analogue. I suppose that digital limiters are far better able to anticipate to peaks and silent parts.

It's funny to hear you say that because a great deal of what these DSPs offer is analog-modeled processing. They try to replicate analog sound digitally. But you're right, they do offer digital processing that provides linear phase precision that's very elusive (if unattainable) on analog equipment.

Quote
rubycatgirl
The only thing is that inbetween the songs the audience seems to 'wobble' (hope you know what I mean!).

I know what you mean, that phenomenon occurs most often when the attack/release settings don't match the update interval for the volume. I don't hear that happening on here. I check the files in Goldwave to ensure things like that don't happen. There's a nice audience portion after "Just My Imagination" and before "YCAGWYW" have a look below. When the wobbling occurs, you can not only hear it but you can see the levels jumping up and down. Here the only time the levels move is when Mick speaks into the mic or Charlie hits a drum.


The beginning of YCAGWYW


The end of "Just My Imagination" -- the only time the Aud level rises is after Mick says something about Iowa.

Also, here's a shot of the multi-band stereo tool in action. I've explaining it in notes before, but it's far easier to observe:


Here with no settings on the bands, you can observe the straight vertical line in the vectorscope on the right, indicating a mono signal. This is also indicated by the correlation meter above the vectorscope -- when the correlation meter reads +1 it indicates the right & left channels are exactly the same.


Here once some variables are introduced across the 4 bands, you can see the vectorscope on the right shows random disbursements indicating a stereo signal. Also the correlation meter is jumping around 0, indicating uncorrelated channels.

Quote
rubycatgirl
One more question: most 'upfront' music of CF and Candlestick (e.g., voacals, guitar, saxaphone) are most prominent on the left channel. Is this a choice you've made or did it just turned out that way?

Remember that this mix originated in mono and we're diverting independent pieces of bandwidth to generate stereo sound. So similar sounds -- like male vocals and lead guitar are likely going to end up most prominent in the same channel, while dissonant sounds will likely end up in the opposite channel or scattered in both.

Everything in the multi-band stereo imaging module can be adjusted, there's even a channel options menu (not shown) where you can rotate the phase, invert, swap channels, etc. So that if you end up with an unrealistic mix, you can try to fix it.

I just wanted to get some images up here so people who are curious have a frame of reference and perhaps a peaked interest in doing their own mixes.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-01 22:15 by Laughingsam.

Updated on index:
Essential Rarities Cd1:

115 Honest Man (alternate mix)

It sounds less bright, more dense than original.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-02 00:12 by Laughingsam.

Thank you Sam for being so thorough and elaborate in your explanation.
It really is an ingenious procedure. The wobble I heard was, I believe, after
LSTNT (but I'm not able to check it right now). And indeed, you need to see
What you are actually hearing

Cheers,
Joyce

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

Quote
Laughingsam
It's funny to hear you say that because a great deal of what these DSPs offer is analog-modeled processing. They try to replicate analog sound digitally. But you're right, they do offer digital processing that provides linear phase precision that's very elusive (if unattainable) on analog equipment.

Sounds pretty good. And this is all in iZotope? Think I will like this programm!
I sometimes use the compressor on a very light setting (between 1:1.3 and 1:1.5)
but this digital-analogue limiter would actually be far more effective for the
purposes I have in mind.

'...I said we...we are heaven bound...'

Thanks for the continued fine work Sam Curious, I don't see that you have attempted any 78 Tour shows.

I think that particular tour is going to be quite a popular topic in the near future.

J

JMARKO, I have the excellent 4CD Handsome Girls remaster and the Sucking In Detroit release from last year. I love the sound on those releases and never thought about changing anything. But I guess there are a couple of shows that can use remastering, like Capitol Theatre, Passaic NJ (the site of which is down the street from where I live :-)

Quote
I think that particular tour is going to be quite a popular topic in the near future.

You know something? Do tell.

Quote
Laughingsam

Quote
I think that particular tour is going to be quite a popular topic in the near future.

You know something? Do tell.

...the forthcoming Some Girls deluxe edition, most probably featuring the Fort Worth concert on DVD.

Thanks again for your uploads; I'm checking out a couple of them

Quote
Erik_Snow

Quote
Laughingsam

Quote
I think that particular tour is going to be quite a popular topic in the near future.

You know something? Do tell.

...the forthcoming Some Girls deluxe edition, most probably featuring the Fort Worth concert on DVD.

...and now it's confirmed: [www.amazon.co.uk]
(thanks to Father Ted for link)

Ideal would be to combine two versions :-)
Well... the second is more "meaty" but I always
prefere voice up front.
Thanks, Laughingsam.
And... I'm waiting for MORE & MORE :-)
Please keep in mind these small venues concerts.

Best,
Greg

Just downloaded Baton Rouge 1975
Look forward to listen to your remaster. Thanks again.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-10 13:16 by Erik_Snow.

You San Francisco 1975 "remaster" is really great
Finally had the chance to listen to it, closely, today.
I am not a fan of "remasters" at all - but LaughingSam is obviously a big exception - he has great ears and judgement
Thanks!