GG Re: Humming, DSP & musical reductionism

["Thomas W. Conklin" <tconklin@btc-bci.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas W. Conklin <tconklin@btc-bci.com>
To: John Hill <jphill@home.com>
Cc: f_minor <F_minor@email.rudgers.edu>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 1999 10:17 AM
Subject: GG Re: Humming, DSP & musical reductionism


> Hi John:
>
> Thanks for your reply.  I had a brief time in my life when I became
> interested in commercial recording complete with the big high speed Ampex
> reel to reel, U47 mikes, etc.  When we recorded "Forsaken of Man" by Leo
> Sowerby (New World Records), I became very aware of the fact that even
with
> the very best of analog equipment, placement, direction, mike choice, tape
> quality and speed, cables, monitors and the artistic judgment of the
> producer (Liz Ostrow) were critical to the final result.  The end result
> attempts to imitate the actual music experience. It did not and never
could
> recreate it.  Making things digital, has not improved anything except
> surface noise in trade for a loss of ambience.  Most digital sound reminds
> me of an African desert lake that is miles wide and only inches deep not
to
> mention harsh.  Most CD playback equipment is unlistenable to me.  Mark
> Levinson has a CD transport or all in one that comes close to good analog,
> but costs $5,000 + and needs an equivalent esoteric hi fi system.  Of
> course, good analog is very expensive too.  However, what seems to me to
be
> the issue is the realness of the Glenn Gould experience.  Give me a hum if
> it leads my mind to the actual musical event and it takes me away from
> multi-mike sterility of the recording medium.  My only real criticism of
> Glenn (if someone as pedestrian as myself can presume to criticize) is the
> heavy razor blade editing done so as to produce the exact performance
> desired by Glenn.  However, all is forgiven since it was Glenn making the
> edit choices.
>
> I agree with you that there are some very nice re-recordings into digital
> done by sensitive studio engineers.  One of the very best I have heard is
> the CD done by Testament UK reissue of the Verdi Requiem.  When Christoff
> sings near the end, it is truly thrilling.
>
> Anyway, thanks for writing. I think I'll drop back into the shade for a
> while and let the ebb and flow of comment proceed.  After all, music
> preference is a matter of opinion and recreation of music is an illusion
or
> a medium to be properly understood purely on its own terms.
>
> Tom
>
> P.S. Hummmmm
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Hill <jphill@home.com>
> To: Thomas W. Conklin <tconklin@btc-bci.com>
> Cc: BONG <bong@iti.lt>; <f_minor@email.rutgers.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 1999 2:50 AM
> Subject: GG: Humming, DSP & musical reductionism
>
>
> > Thomas W. Conklin wrote:
> >
> > > I have read many comments on "improving" Glenn's recordings.  I have
> > > collected and listened to recorded classical music (and live) for more
> than
> > > 50 years including most of Glenn's LP's.  It is my conviction that any
> > > electronic manipulation, including analog to digital, is going to take
> away
> > > from something that was there in the original and/or replace it with
> > > something that was not there before.  Mainly, what is taken away is
> > > ambiance.  Such detraction will reduce the actual recorded information
> that
> > > carries with it the perception of musical stage width, height and
depth.
> >
> > Hi, Tom......and Greetings to the Collective!
> >
> > As a music recording engineer and one who is something of an audio
purist,
> > I have to concur with your argument above.  Anyone who has struggled to
> craft
> > a good recording knows that it rarely gets better than the first
> generation master
> > tape.  In many cases, things get audibly worse.  Does everybody remember
> > back in 1983 when Sony and Philips promised that digital audio would
> provide
> > "Perfect Sound....now and forever"?  Many of us have been less than
> thrilled with
> > that promise for the past.......oh, fifteen years or so.
> >
> > However, new developments in digital audio and DSP show great promise.
> > High resolution digital encoding at the 96k, 24-bit level *can* sound
very
> good,
> > when done correctly.  The new SACD (Super Audio CD) system from Sony is
> > also opening many eyes and ears.  Telarc has a number of releases out
> already
> > and, when compared directly to standard red book CD, the new format is
> really
> > an astonishing step forward in sound quality.  Interestingly, each new
> development
> > in digital technology seems to elicit the response among critical
> listeners that
> > "this sounds more like *analog*".  Hmmmmm....
> >
> > Restoration and remastering of old analog master tapes (most of GG's
> catalog)
> > is another area where great strides are being made.  Several hard-disk
> editing
> > systems offer "de-noising" algorithms that can be quite effective in
> making older,
> > noise-laden master tapes sound more musical.  But these manipulations
are
> > not trivial.  Musical results will only be obtained (as always) by
editors
> who have
> > musical ears/training and who respect the integrity of the master tapes
> with
> > which they're working.
> >
> > > Sadly, we cannot bring Glenn back, but even if we could, I suspect he
> would
> > > still hum because the intensity of his musical expression could not be
> > > limited even by him.  Do we really want to yoke him in?
> > > Bless him.
> >
> > As to the question of removing GG's signature humming.....I'm with you
all
> the way.
> > I view GG's humming as an organic part of his performance.  I wouldn't
> *want* it
> > removed and I see this as a completely separate argument from the
question
> of
> > digital transcription or noise reduction.  Improving and updating
> limitations
> > of the
> > original *media* is one thing;  tampering with GG's performance is quite
> another.
> > He made that sound at the session;  I'd like to hear it from my playback
> medium.
> >
> > There were, of course, some attempts made at various times to reduce the
> audible
> > level of Gould's humming.  On one record jacket, I remember reading
about
> the
> > engineers fitting GG with a gas mask and some kind of baffling system to
> try
> > to keep
> > this sound from reaching the primary mics.  Not surprisingly, what they
> ended
> > up with
> > on tape was a slightly quieter, but more muffled and bizarre-sounding
hum
> that
> > probably drew more attention to itself.  I wonder if maybe GG hummed
even
> louder
> > at those sessions...
> >
> > cheers,
> > jh
> >
>