ATC Introduces Two-Track Digital Recording Format at AES

[Music Calgary]

http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2008/ATC-Two-Track-Digital-Recording-Format.html

 

Sax and Schnee, who pioneered high-quality, live, direct-to-disc studio recording on the audiophile Sheffield Lab label over three decades ago, the new format is a return to the fidelity of that golden age. "What we're getting is true high-fidelity, true dynamics again, and realism that you haven't heard in thirty years," states Schnee.

 

Damn.

[gearmike]

Great, another high resolution audio format that we can argue over and that the publice will never bite on!

 

 

-Mike

[blue2blue]

Not to worry. The 'new format' is 192kbps/24bit... it's just been slathered up in a new shiny coat of something probably chemically similar to the liquid fatty acids derived from certain snakes.

 

My favorite quote: "I was confronted with a large image that was three-dimensional, stable and coherent whilst also having natural acoustics." (Billy Woodman, president of ATC, who'll be featuring the new 'format' in their AES show room.)

 

Heady praise we've only heard about 300 times this year applied to everything from other presumably legit products to $27 marking pens for treating the edges of your CDs (prevents opto-quantum interference, donchya know).

 

 

BTW, the article actually gets it closer to right, saying it's a 'new technique' pioneered by the Sheffield Lab guys. Recording at 192kbps/24 bit through expensive converters. Take out a patent, guys, no one ever thought of that one before.

[MikeRivers]

What's the format? Did I miss something in the press release? It seemed more like it was about content and fidelity - both important of course.

 

ATC makes fine loudspeakers, a good choice to show off good recordings. What is there new format and what does it take to play it?

[blue2blue]

I suspect this is more like a headline misfire...

[Music Calgary]

 

$27 marking pens

 

 

I never leave the house with at least two = $54. Because more is better.

[nerol1st]

Is it just me or is this basically:

 

"We recorded a bunch of really nice sounding instruments at 192kbps/24bit, left all the dynamics intact, used really nice converters, used really nice mics and preamps, had people listen on our fugging really nice speakers, and didn't master it. What we have after all that is a great sounding recording."

 

How is this a new concept?

[Anderton]

 

Is it just me or is this basically: "We recorded a bunch of really nice sounding instruments at 192kbps/24bit, left all the dynamics intact, used really nice converters, used really nice mics and preamps, had people listen on our fugging really nice speakers, and didn't master it. What we have after all that is a great sounding recording." How is this a new concept?

 

 

The wonders of marketing!

[Music Calgary]

San Francisco, CA (September 10, 2008)--ATC (Acoustic Transducer Company) will put the spotlight on a high-resolution music recording technique at the 125th AES Convention at the Moscone Center Sax and Schnee hope that, in addition to providing the highest possible quality audio with which to demonstrate ATC's reference monitors, the new recording technique will attract pro audio manufacturers and record labels interested in commercializing the method. Interested parties are encouraged to visit the ATC demo room #111.

 

You guys are right, there's no point in hearing about it before criticiznig it...

[John Sayers]

I think that it is a return to the 'direct to disc' sound - i.e. no tracking then remixing though the console again. Instead of going to a disc cutter as in the past, they go directly to a DVD burner.

[Anderton]

You guys are right, there's no point in hearing about it before criticiznig it...

 

My criticism is of the press release. To wit:

 

"ATC (Acoustic Transducer Company) will put the spotlight on a new high-resolution music recording technique" which is then described as:

 

"The recording chain includes Schnee's custom, minimal signal path, analog mixing console with tube microphones, preamps, and summing through JCF Audio 192kHz/24-bit converters, with the mix printed to disc in a Tascam DA-RV1000 high-definition master recorder."

 

I don't see anything new there. I used minimal signal path mixers of my own design in 1989 and I wasn't the first (the Columbia records mixers of the 70s, used on Miles Davis albums and such, were pretty minimal). Tube mics, preamps, and 192kHz/24-bit converters aren't new (although maybe the "glue" around the converters is different, but conversion technology is pretty well-known by now), and the DA-RV1000 certainly isn't new. I just don't get what's so revolutionary about doing quality recording at high sample rates. Maybe I'm just jaded.

[MikeRivers]

 

I don't see anything new there. I used minimal signal path mixers of my own design in 1989 and I wasn't the first (the Columbia records mixers of the 70s, used on Miles Davis albums and such, were pretty minimal).

 

You can't get much more direct than a wooden horn with a stylus attached to a diaphragm at the small end. There was nothing new about the "direct to disk" recordings in the '60s. There's nothing new about "direct to bits" recording today. It's all in what you do before the signal hits the mic.

 

Remember the recordings that Ray Kimber (Kimber Cables) was making a few years back, using a microphone setup that he was selling that looked like a huge heart-shaped baffle with a high quality omni mic on each side? It was essentially a Jecklin disk, and intended for fixed installations where the mic was always in the right place for the room. He recorded on a TASCAM DA-78HR and offered either 96 kHz or DSD(?) tapes.

 

ATC is really trying to get acceptance in the pro studio world, particularly in the US, so they want to have some good examples. I hope they do a little work on the room so we can hear what the speakers sound like

[blue2blue]

 

My criticism is of the press release. To wit: "ATC (Acoustic Transducer Company) will put the spotlight on a new high-resolution music recording technique" which is then described as: "The recording chain includes Schnee's custom, minimal signal path, analog mixing console with tube microphones, preamps, and summing through JCF Audio 192kHz/24-bit converters, with the mix printed to disc in a Tascam DA-RV1000 high-definition master recorder." I don't see anything new there. I used minimal signal path mixers of my own design in 1989 and I wasn't the first (the Columbia records mixers of the 70s, used on Miles Davis albums and such, were pretty minimal). Tube mics, preamps, and 192kHz/24-bit converters aren't new (although maybe the "glue" around the converters is different, but conversion technology is pretty well-known by now), and the DA-RV1000 certainly isn't new. I just don't get what's so revolutionary about doing quality recording at high sample rates. Maybe I'm just jaded.

 

 

That seems like it sums it up.

 

 

My favorite part of the release is still what for me is the central quote:

 

"I was confronted with a large image that was three-dimensional, stable and coherent whilst also having natural acoustics."

 

 

I'm designing a plug-in for Word and Open Office Write that generates endless variations on this basic statement (user configurable with a pretention-suppression switch to turn off brit-style expressions like whilst). I plan to have one on every other audio marketer's desktop within 2 years. It will be the Autotune, the LA2A, of marketing-speak plug-ins. The standard by which meaningless-hype-generator plug-ins are judged.

[Anderton]

 

I'm designing a plug-in for Word and Open Office Write that generates endless variations on this basic statement

 

 

Based on the press releases we receive, I think someone beat you to it.

[Music Calgary]

I think it's great if only for entertainment value. I like an atmosphere where engineers are excited about the stuff they are working on and trying to get us excited about it too -- regardless of whether it changes the way I work or not. I like new stuff. I like innovation. I like it when smart, talented people show me new stuff. It's fun.

 

I don't like an atmosphere where everything and everyone is auto-attacked everytime they try to share new perspectives. I do not think that every progression needs to be revolutionary. I think it's fun, and exciting -- and that's all it needs to be. I have no idea why people feel so defensive these days, not fun.

 

Kynicism, not cynicism my friends.

 

Cheers.

[Duddits]

 

ATC is really trying to get acceptance in the pro studio world, particularly in the US, so they want to have some good examples. I hope they do a little work on the room so we can hear what the speakers sound like

 

 

Huh?!

 

ATC is one of the most highly-regarded studio monitors in the world.

 

http://www.atc.gb.net/clients.htm

 

http://www.atc.gb.net/clients2.htm

 

The press release might suck, and it's certainly confusing, but Billy Woodman who runs ATC is an audio genius, and certainly everything they do is top notch (except, apparently... press releases!).

[MikeRivers]

Huh?! The press release might suck, and it's certainly confusing, but Billy Woodman who runs ATC is an audio genius, and certainly everything they do is top notch (except, apparently... press releases!).

I didn't say there was anything wrong with ATC speakers. They just aren't very popular in the US because they haven't had much distribution, particularly in the pro audio field. Now that Transamerica Audio Group has taken them on, hopefully they'll get more exposure. This AES demo, if they set it up well, may be very good for them.

 

ATC speakers are a notch or two more expensive than what most of us in the real world are accustomed to paying, but Brad Lunde of Transamerica thinks they're worth it and hopes he can sell enough of them to make some money. But if they really have a new way of recording, I guess we'll have to wait for the show to see what it is.

 

By the way, speaking of press releases, with the distraction of a new recording technique, it took me a while to realize that I was familiar with the ATC of the press release. I translated some ATC marketing material into "American engineer English" for the Transamerica web site, taking a lot of their technical information on faith since I've never heard any of their speakers (no, they didn't give me a pair). Don't you hate when writers do that? I'm as eager as anyone to hear what I've been writing about. I hope I'll be suitably impressed.

[alfonso]

As a side note, but not so much, I'm having in these last weeks an empirical perception on the huge improvements that the digital technique has run across from the early 80's, despite what someone has obsessively stated in this forums on the subject.

I'm currently buying the whole collection of the CD releases of the Steely Dan stuff, Aja, Gaucho, The Royal Scam and so on....fantastic stuff, I've been stolen the Aja record long time ago so i started with it and I can't avoid getting the other ones. Those CD's are more or less recently digitally remastered, obviously by the same magician (R.N.) who recorded them originally and, useless to be said, they sound great.

Few days ago i also purchased Fagen's "The Nightfly", which was originally recorded digitally, in 1982. Same engineer, almost same people recording as the previous more recent stuff but......man the difference in sounds is abyssal. Drums sound like cardboard and there is a flatness and a veil...a sort of very thin but opaque and grainy wrapping around the whole thing. A great recording, on the artistic side, but I couldn't believe my ears. Something that for me has been always clear but for someone is not, that digital recordings of the early eighties sound quite bad compared to today's standards, here is evident beyond any explanation.

Keep in mind that the S.D. and Fagen have always been recorded by R.N., in the ABC studios with the absolute best stuff that was available each time.....but the difference of the oldest stuff, recently remastered with the first all digital recording is massive. At least to my ears. Someone (irritating the 16 bit/44.1khz fanatics even more) would say that the tape recording has its role for the better quality, but in this case it's not true. In fact, if you listen to a more recent S.D. full digital production, like "Two against Nature", it sounds great, really great, infinitely better than "The Nightfly" and quite comparable to the remasters.

 

I know, this has nothing to do with the advertising hype discussed here, but I can't never be enough happy that things move and progress. You can test it in your stereo.

[blue2blue]

 

Based on the press releases we receive, I think someone beat you to it.

 

 

Yes... but will their audiophile-marketing-copy plug generate deathless, glowing phrases like: "I could hear every molecule of air surrounding the musicians in the recording quivering with a music so shimmeringly alive that it filled my heart with a joy so deep that no religious ecstasy, no moment of divine grace could match it... I heard a depth of field opening before me so vast you could park three Andromeda Great Spiral Galaxies in it and still have room left over for a couple of black holes."

 

Of course, that's from the Pro version. Call for special pricing on group orders.

[blue2blue]

As a side note, but not so much, I'm having in these last weeks an empirical perception on the huge improvements that the digital technique has run across from the early 80's, despite what someone has obsessively stated in this forums on the subject. I'm currently buying the whole collection of the CD releases of the Steely Dan stuff, Aja, Gaucho, The Royal Scam and so on....fantastic stuff, I've been stolen the Aja record long time ago so i started with it and I can't avoid getting the other ones. Those CD's are more or less recently digitally remastered, obviously by the same magician (R.N.) who recorded them originally and, useless to be said, they sound great. Few days ago i also purchased Fagen's "The Nightfly", which was originally recorded digitally, in 1982. Same engineer, almost same people recording as the previous more recent stuff but......man the difference in sounds is abyssal. Drums sound like cardboard and there is a flatness and a veil...a sort of very thin but opaque and grainy wrapping around the whole thing. A great recording, on the artistic side, but I couldn't believe my ears. Something that for me has been always clear but for someone is not, that digital recordings of the early eighties sound quite bad compared to today's standards, here is evident beyond any explanation. Keep in mind that the S.D. and Fagen have always been recorded by R.N., in the ABC studios with the absolute best stuff that was available each time.....but the difference of the oldest stuff, recently remastered with the first all digital recording is massive. At least to my ears. Someone (irritating the 16 bit/44.1khz fanatics even more) would say that the tape recording has its role for the better quality, but in this case it's not true. In fact, if you listen to a more recent S.D. full digital production, like "Two against Nature", it sounds great, really great, infinitely better than "The Nightfly" and quite comparable to the remasters. I know, this has nothing to do with the advertising hype discussed here, but I can't never be enough happy that things move and progress. You can test it in your stereo.

 

I'm not sure who the heck you're hinting and hedging about -- if you've got something to say why not just come right out and say it like a grown-up?

 

Anyhow... I'm pretty sure that the guy I at first thought you were on about does not maintain that digital technology hasn't improved over the course of the last quarter century... so I guess it can't be him.

 

But... of course, if we all knew who you were talking about -- then maybe he could come in and defend whatever positions he does hold.

[alfonso]

I'm not sure who the heck you're hinting and hedging about -- if you've got something to say why not just come right out and say it like a grown-up? Anyhow... I'm pretty sure that the guy I at first thought you were on about does not maintain that digital technology hasn't improved over the course of the last quarter century... so I guess it can't be him. But... of course, if we all knew who you were talking about -- then maybe he could come in and defend whatever positions he does hold.

 

I think you're indulging too much on a quite secondary aspect of the issue, which is related to the "who", of which I don't really care, also because it is not an isolated voice.

 

When you suggest me about "talking like a grown up" you miss the fact that it's exchanging the main subject with the silly personal issues (which are totally absent in my thoughts) that is quite childish.

The simple fact that you immediately relate someone to what I said is showing that you also remember very well that someone said that anything more than 16bits/44.1khz is absolutely not necessary to increase quality.

 

You mean that I should say that i don't agree with Ethan? I think it has been so clear from hot but absolutely respectful and friendly debates we had here, but as i remember well he was not alone, although he's one whose arguments deserve more attention and respect, which doesn't imply I have to agree with....I have no problem to affirm that I think that the productive process at higher bit depths is paramount for the quality of the results, this for me is the core of the improvement, so the differences between positions are transparent.

 

The thread is open to everyone here, to chime in and refute whatever, sorry if I give more importance to the technical issues themselves.

 

Anyway, if you still haven't done it, do yourself a favour and get those Steely Dan remasters, they are fantastic stuff....

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

When you suggest me about "talking like a grown up" ...

 

 

My old pal ALFONSO from ROMA is posting from a children notebook in between being breast feeded by Donna Magdalena di Ostia...

 

 

Anyway... an AES RECORDER is nothing more then a recorder with an AES/EBU protocol with AES3 standard IEC 60958 and IEC 60958 parts, writing the data uncompressed and free of loss to memory sticks, or via HD-SDI to hard drive, just like all audio and video (HDCAM and CineAlta) recorder today.

[Duddits]

By the way, speaking of press releases, with the distraction of a new recording technique, it took me a while to realize that I was familiar with the ATC of the press release. I translated some ATC marketing material into "American engineer English" for the Transamerica web site, taking a lot of their technical information on faith since I've never heard any of their speakers (no, they didn't give me a pair). Don't you hate when writers do that? I'm as eager as anyone to hear what I've been writing about. I hope I'll be suitably impressed.

 

I'm not sure if Google Translate offers a British to American Engineer English option yet, but perhaps if you used their translate engine to translate the British version first into Japanese, then into German, and then into English, it could be used to produce something along the lines of "American Engineer English."

 

As for the sound of ATC speakers, in my experience, I'd say they give you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

As for the sound of ATC speakers, in my experience, I'd say they give you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

 

[Jeff da Weasel]

Brad Lunde has been selling ATC for many years. However, I believe his company is called TransAudio. "Transamerica" is a movie about a transsexual on a road trip. I don't believe Transamerica will have a booth at AES this year, although it was an excellent movie!

 

I chortled at this. ^

 

And AES being in SF, I could run into both Brad and the star of "Transamerica" in the same weekend! Probably not both at the Moscone Center, but you never know.