02010-02-02

02010-05-15 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

Comment from February 1st, 2010 at 06:06:
Sorry to bother you with a stupid question, but since you offer not only the 320 kbps downloads but also the lossless version and since you plan to release your next album also in a 24/96 version, how can I make those play on a MacBook or ipod. I’ve tried but failed. Thanks for any help on this!

Not a stupid question at all. High end digital audio is a relatively new subject and there is a lot of bad information out there on the interwebs. Here are the basics:

A 2 bit recording has a resolution of 4.
A 4 bit recording has a resolution of 16.
A 8 bit recording has a resolution of 256.
A 16 bit (e.g. CD and mp3s) recording has a resolution of 65,536.
A 24 bit recording has a resolution of 16,777,216.
A 32 bit recording has a resolution of 4,294,967,296.

As you see the dynamic range of a 24 bit recording is dramatically larger than a 16 bit recording, 256 times larger to be exact. Think of these numbers as something similar to the amount of colors or shades or pixels in an image or video. The higher the resolution the more detail and the bigger the palette. Lots of shades of color instead of a line-drawing.

Expressed in dB it looks like this: 24-bit digital audio has a theoretical maximum dynamic range of 144 dB, compared to 96 dB for 16-bit. An increase of 3dB is roughly a doubling of power, meaning that 144 dB doubles the dynamic range of 96 dB 16 times. And that means a gentle plucking of guitar-strings can be reproduced in true contrast to a hard attack…

By the way the new album will be released in 24/88.2 and not 24/96. Why? Well, we still need a 16/44.1 version of the audio for CD and for the mp3s that are sold by the LL, iTunes, amazon and so on. That means my studio computer has to downsample the audio from 96,000 to 44,100. If we divide 96,000 by 44,100, the result is 2.17687074829932…… and so on, an infinite number. If we divide 88,200 by 44,100, the result is 2. Well, the software does a good job of downsampling 96,000, but because of the nature of the infinite number there has to be a change here and there – whether that is audible or not I do not know. But the difference between 88,200 and 96,000 is so minute, that I’d rather divide 88,200 by 2 than 96,000 by 2.17687074829932… Anyway we will record the new album at 24/88.2.

What you need to listen to HD (High Definition) audio files:
1. Software
2. a Digital-to-Analog Converter (DAC) that plays back 24bit and 48-96 or even 192k files
3. an amplifier and loudspeakers or a headphone amp and headphones.

Without an external DAC, iTunes will play back an HD AIFF file, but will automatically dither and downsample to 16/44.1. There is no computer on the market that has a built-in DAC that is better than 16/44.1!! That means you will need an external DAC to play back a 24/88.2 files at its full resolution!

To my knowledge none of the iPods or iPhones play back any files that are 24 bit and 48k or higher, whether they be AIFF, WAV or AppleLossless. There are quite a number of external DACs for iPods available, like this one by Wadia for example. (((I haven’t heard these and just saw it while searching))) A larger, dedicated, external DAC will of course sound better than the miniaturized chip inside a small iPod, but the iPod still can’t play HD files, which means you are still stuck at 16/44.1.

Have I confused you yet?

We’ll get back to DA-converters later, let’s start with the playback software.

1. the Software:

For playback I use Peak Pro, Songbird or iTunes:

Peak Pro is made by Bias and is a very nice app, for playback, editing, processing and mastering, with lots of features. Unless you want to edit music files, create fades or crossfades, change the EQ etc., this will be overkill for you. Peak is also useless at cataloging music, something iTunes does very well. I don’t mind his limitation, because I don’t have a huge catalog of HD files yet and also because I don’t mind looking for the file and loading one piece of music at a time. I like the care that goes into listening like that. I make it a point to really listen to HD files, I don’t play them as background music while I do the dishes or at a party.

Another app I use handles cataloging quite ably, is open source and is free!

Songbird – Open Source Music Player
Songbird is an open-source customizable music player that’s under active development.

We’re working on creating a non-proprietary, cross platform, extensible tool that will help enable new ways to playback, manage, and discover music. There are lots of ways to contribute your time to the project. We’d love your help!

Songbird is a free open source application that is available for Mac, Linux and Windows. It plays back a bunch of different file formats including FLAC files in 16 and 24 bit, from 44.1 to 96kHz. Very nice.

I use iTunes for my main music library, which contains the music from my 1,500+ CDs, ripped as AppleLossless (((Apple Lossless Audio Codec or ALAC))) files. iTunes does a great job with large catalogs. Sadly iTunes does not play FLAC files, which means one has to use one of these free apps to convert the FLAC file to an .AIFF or .WAV file, which one can then import into iTunes and convert to ALAC. I use an older iMac which sends the digital signal via my home-network to an Apple Airport Express. The Airport Express in turn is hooked up to an external DAC, which creates the analog signal that goes into the stereo amplifier and speakers.

The Amarra Plugin for iTunes, made by highly respected SonicStudio looks good, but it’s $995 (((for a plugin!))), although there is also a mini-version for $295. Weiss in fact recommends Amarra on their website.

I haven’t gone that route yet. The Amarra-iTunes combination together with a nice external DAC would work very well if the computer is located near the stereo system and can be wired in, but, and I haven’t researched this well enough, I don’t think the iMac sends full HD over a network. So, the computer would once again downsample to 16/44.1 automatically…

2. the DAC:

My Digital-to-Analog Converter, is the Weiss DAC2, which I mentioned (here and here) already. The Weiss DAC2 D/A Converter is made in Switzerland. Look at it, it recalls Helvetica, speaks of handmade precision… and looks expensive in that small edition audiophile way.

Yes, but you won’t need a CD-player!! The Weiss DAC2 is a Digital-to-Analog converter that connects to your computer via FireWire and turns zeros-and-ones into delicious analog sound, parsing anything from 16/44.1 to 24/192. Your audiophile super system will only consist of a computer with FireWire output, the Weiss DAC2, and whatever amplification you choose, that is, a nice headphone amp and cans (((studio slang for headphones))) or pre-amp, power-amp (((or one that combines the two))) and a pair of loudspeakers.

What I find most attractive about this setup is that one can have a very high-end sound system using only three or four relatively portable components: a laptop, the Weiss DAC2 and a headphone amp + headphones. Nice!

There are many different DACs out there. The price range is enormous! Most of them are hooked up via FireWire, but there are also USB-connected ones. Google “DAC audio converter” or something like that. Or visit a dealer – it’s always good to listen first. You might bring your laptop with a few HD files you know and like so you can compare. (((Songbird or iTunes will not switch a DAC to the desired resolution automatically, but iTunes with the Amarra plugin, or Peak will. So, if you use Songbird to play back a 24/96 file, you must switch the DAC to that resolution manually… otherwise, if the DAC is set to 16/44.1, the computer will once again downsample the file and you will listen to 16/44.1)))

If you want something small that allows you to listen to HD audio on headphones and doesn’t break the bank, you might want to check out this:

CEntrance -> DACport
– Audiophile-grade D/A converter plays 24-bit/96 kHz HD music natively, with bit-for-bit accuracy.
– Headphone amp, designed for hours of listening without fatigue offers clarity, soundstage and detail.
– No drivers needed. Plug ‘n play operation with most laptops, nettops and music servers.
– No power adapter needed. DACport uses USB power and works anywhere you take your laptop.
– Stereo, 1/4-inch headphone jack, perfect for the most advanced headphones on the market.

The DACport might be perfect solution for people who want to listen to audiophile HD music files, but want something mobil. Pair the above DAC with a good set of headphones and you are ready to go – anywhere you carry your laptop. Cost: $500 for the above DAC plus the price of a set of headphones.

3. Amps, loudspeakers and headphones:

This is a very personal decision. I don’t want to recommend any loudspeakers because they all sound so different. Since a external DAC outputs an analog signal, that signal can be amplified by any old amplifier/loudspeaker combination you want to hook up.

I use the STAX SRS-4040II Signature System II, which includes Ear-speakers and a wonderful vacuum-tube-low-noise-Class-A-DC-amplifier. I listened to STAX for the first time in Köln in the early Eighties, while visiting my parents. I bought my first STAX system around 1997, I think, and have used it on every mix since.

I also own a pair of Ultrasone PRO 900, which I found on Amazon. These headphones sound great with some music and not so great with most music. I find that they deliver too much of the top and the bass and do not have a pleasing mid-range. One should try them before buying, if possible.

Then there are these Sony Headphones ($70), a true workhorse. And, for something more discreet, for walking around for example or or for the stage – this is what we wear during our concerts – there are the Shure SCL5CL earphones ($350).

The pair of headphones I currently use the most are the Bowers & Wilkins P5 Mobile Hi-Fi Headphones – here is a review. Beautiful mids and no exaggerated lows and highs. I’d say except for the un-mobile Stax, the B&W P5 are my favorite headphones.

Find an audio store and test-drive a bunch of headphones. Price and quality both vary enormously.

One last thing about headphones. Our ears are all different and since the shape of the ears is so instrumental in creating what we hear, headphones are not for everyone, and not every set of headphones works with every set of ears. If you had, say, large ears that stand out quite a bit, you might find that some headphones force your ears back and that might not sound good to you or could be uncomfortable. Your ears are meant for loudspeakers, maybe, or a different headphone design.

I have always enjoyed headphones. Headphones are as introverted as a boombox on one’s shoulder in the Eighties was extroverted…

02010-02-03

02010-05-14 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

Thoughts about the new album:

The music will be defined as much by what was left out, or what we did not use or do, as by what we will do. The music will be recorded with 21st century recording equipment, but with a 20th century recording ethos.

a trio of musicians
a Flamenco guitar, an electric bass guitar amd a drumkit
post-genre music

contrary to common 21st century recording practices, these are methods we will not use:

no clicktrack
no quantization
no pitch-correction
no time shifting
no tempo-shifting,
no overdubs (((I am not going to avoid overdubs at all costs – if a song calls for it, I might do an overdub – as an exception)))
no (over-)compression

You might already know my thoughts about modern dynamic compression. I know, it’s very confusing, but there are two kinds of music compression. There is Audio Compression, which is a form of data compression to reduce the file size, e.g. mp3, AAC, FLAC, ALAC. And then there is Dynamic Range Compression, which is what I am talking about. I have mentioned this often before, for example here, here, here, and here. I might do a little dynamic compression, as much as I used on The Scent of Light, but am considering doing no compression for the HD version of the album. I’ll do whatever sounds best.

Jon told me that the Yamaha Subkick microphone arrived at his studio and we will check it out tomorrow during rehearsal. As you might have noticed, I generally prefer having a large, heavy kick sound (((I have often used a modified 808-type kick))) on the first beat of each measure, leaving the rest of the bar open for percussion and bass. That is something I have done since Solo Para Ti, where Davo brought in a huge marching drum we used as a kick. My plan for this album is to record Michael’s kick drum with several microphones – Jon wants to use three altogether – giving us a lot of low-end from the Yamaha Subkick and a tighter sound from the other mics. Rather than having a huge kick sound every time Michael plays the drum, my plan is to use the subkick on the one of the beat (((or wherever I want the accent))) and to mute it for the rest of each bar, leaving the tighter kick sound in those places. This will mean quite a few hours of muting, but I like that we are not overdubbing a low-low kick – it’s the natural performance as captured by the microphones. One reason I like the low-low kick is that there isn’t anything else that will deliver that sort of physical sensation, as neither the guitar nor the bass really cover that spectrum. If you listen closely, I have done several albums (((Little Wing and Innamorare come to mind))) where Jon overdubbed some synth bass, which has more low-end than a fretless bass guitar, because I wanted that physical element.

In a way this is going to be the most hybrid of my albums. I am writing and playing without considering anything external. There isn’t even an occasional look to any tradition here. It’s Post-Category music. The music is defined only by the chemistry of the trio. There is a great feeling of independence, of liberation.

PS: I didn’t end up using the subkick mic in the manner I envisioned above. We liked the sound of the subkick microphone by itself and I didn’t use the second mic we had set up – just in case. I also didn’t mute anything and went with the kick as performed. We did end up doing a few overdubs: a couple of rhythm guitar parts at the end of Backwards Firefly, the guitar soli in the verses of Future Green, Jon’s bass solo on Dancing Alone, the tambourine on Jump and the djembe on Future Green and Backwards Firefly – and that’s all.

02010-02-04

02010-05-13 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

Working with the trio is a new way to work for me. Normally I work in my laboratory by myself, arranging the guitars, playing to a click track (((usually a drumloop that has the feel I am looking for))) and by the time another musician, either Jon or a percussionist, hears the track it already has a form, a vibe, a clear definition.

Last week I was very enthusiastic, yesterday I felt it was all uninspired – at least until Jon sent me the audio files from the rehearsal, which put me in a much better mood. Luckily I have a lot of experience with the ups and downs of creative energy. I remember being alternately incredibly excited and incredibly down about the music during the recording of Nouveau Flamenco (((and most other albums I have done)))…

I forgot my camera again, so here is a shot of the Subkick with the phone. Sounds amazing. (((Michael is playing Jon’s drumkit in our rehearsals. When we start recording in a couple or three weeks, he will bring in his own)))

Well, today’s rehearsal went really well. We played through most of the music for he album and added little things here and there. In my opinion it’s always the little things, that we remember about a record – an unexpected chord change, tempo change, feel change and so on.

02010-02-05

02010-05-12 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

A blade of light near the studio’s entrance:

Today I walked to the studio and fired up the console to do a couple of test mixes. I remembered a bunch of albums from the Sixties, where the stereo field of a trio (((I think the Beatles might have done a few mixes that were similar, once they went stereo, but I could be wrong))) has the guitar or vocal in the middle and the drums and bass off to the sides. That sort of mix uses the width of the stereo field to create a better separation between the instruments.

There used to be severe limits to this kind of mixing, because of the nature of recording in the early days – literally cutting a groove into an acetate disc – and also because of the way vinyl worked: the groove was deepest in the center and therefore the bulk of the bass had to be delivered there. Bass over to the side did not work.

So Jon sent me a track from yesterday’s rehearsals and here is what I did: the bass lives at -50, half-left, the stereo drums are half-right, between +20 to +80, and the guitar is in the center. (-100 is hard left, 0 is center and +100 is hard right)

02010-02-06

02010-05-11 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

Last year (((or was it in 2008?))) my friend Joe Mozdzen took a few photos of me in San Juan Capistrano (((come to think of it, it might have been September 12, 2008 – like this photo of Stephen))) for a publication which no longer exists. Because of that Joe was able to send me some of the photos he took that day. So interesting how different the B&W and color versions look!!

02010-02-10

02010-05-10 | Petals on the Path, Uncategorized

This was our first trio rehearsal in early March of 2009. The original intent was to see whether I wanted to play with a drumkit again, but as you can hear it sounded very nice right away. Jon recorded this with just three mics, one on the guitars and two on the drum kit.

So here we are, almost a year later, rehearsing to record an album together. One works differently in color than in black & white, differently with a brush than with a pencil or a can of spraypaint. In that sense the trio has inspired me to write differently. This little group can turn on a dime, and so I have come up with more tempo and time changes than usual. Today we started working on a new piece that switches from fast-sounding triplet-arpeggios in the verse to slow and romantic quarter-notes in the chorus. The inspiration for this piece was how our sense of time shifts and changes. The hustle of the errands we have to run, the daily work-pace, versus those precious moments where time feels suspended… deep in meditation, or gazing at the moon, or looking into a lover’s eyes. The tempo remains the same, but the division is different.

Well, writing about music is like dancing about architecture… and you’ll hear it soon enough. Anyway, enjoy the music from the very first meeting of the trio.