Sampling frequency on Radio programmes - Taking it off topic

Kevin Lynch klynchk at
Mon Apr 27 08:36:25 PDT 2015

I finally listened to the programme earlier today. It was really
interesting. They had spoken with a three remixing engineers working
in different genres.
There appears to more latitude with are remixing early twentieth
century music, as the microphones and recording techniques at the time
were so much more primitive than later.
23m14 Andrew Rose of pristine classical talked about his work, after
removing the pops and crackles. The things he can do to
They played a piano recording from 1936, which he cleaned up. He
explained that Steinway the piano manufacturer go to great lengths to
ensure that Steinway piano's are tonally consistent over decades. The
tonal characteristics of a recording made today against the older
recording should be the same. He can see the Frequency response on his
Digital Audio Workstation and he's happy to replace the tonal
characteristics as he knows what it would have sounded like then. He
acknowledges that his techniques would be wrong to apply to say a '60s
I was prompted to think of the  philosophical question if you change all the
parts of a ship is it the same ship.

On 27 April 2015 at 12:34, michael norman <michaeltnorman at> wrote:
> On 27/04/15 09:25, Jim web wrote:
>> In article
>> <CA+L9Mav+WTCNAAL+d6RVJ7+cT+ndXg3V4F+=xaobVqz6GZjDEw at>,
>>     Kevin Lynch <klynchk at> wrote:
>>> Although this discussion is largely closed I just wanted to draw
>>> attention to  this show on R4 that investigates the whole "art" of
>>> remastering I have not listened
>>> to it yet but it's in my queue
>> Stretching the OT just a bit further...
>> Its an interesting programme. But for some strange reason it seems to
>> overlook the cases where a recording may have been 'remastered' to bypass
>> flaws in the earlier 'versions'. ;-> You can see one or two examples of
>> what I mean at
>> ...and alas I've also found a recent BBC Music Magazine cover CD with such
>> flaws. So, alas, the game isn't over.
>> Jim
> I'll only trust "remastering" if the people who do it define what their
> source is, if its digital exactly what bitrate etc, what their mastering
> chain is and more pertinently what they are trying to achieve by remastering
> in the first place, and what if anything they have sought to improve.
> Without that information debate is pointless.
> Disclaimer : I have not heard the programme so I don't know whether those
> sort of issues were raised.
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> get_iplayer mailing list
> get_iplayer at

More information about the get_iplayer mailing list