Roots Archives Forum

Listening to Yabby You “Deliver Me From Mine Enemies“ the Blood and Fire reissue last night I thought it sounded a bit too clean. Looking at the credits I see it has been digitally restored. My question is this : can such restoration affect not only the overall sound of the original vinyl but also can it remove some of the ambience ,the vibes if you like , of a session? Just seems to me that compared to an original vinyl press say :“Conquering Lion“ by the Prophets something is missing from the cleaned up version. We hear a lot about cds compressing sound, removing some of the low end and top end frequencies, wonder if it also takes away some feeling too?

I imagine any restoration/tampering/"cleaning up" has to take something away, so yes, it's perfectly feasible.

i agree with GEOFFREY ...
but there's enuff room on the shelf for both formats (if u own a car, home, sound OR p.a system u want it too sound loud, klear & kleen that's where the cd format comes in...
if you're @ home remembering your childhood & the good old days then the hissing, popping & frying of vinyl is just what the rhythm doctor ordered !!!!!

I've ripped enough vinyl to say yes absolutely - when you start cleaning up the 'imperfections', something is lost. Personally I leave the rips as they are and only clean up the most grievous clicks and pops. After that the only thing I do is normalize so that the files are as loud as they can be without distortion. No compression. Sounds pretty close to listening to the vinyl.
Then when listening adjust the EQ to taste.
In general I think Blood and Fire have done a superlative job with their restorations but I'm sure that in an A/B listening test the differences would be obvious.
I'm sure we've all heard chronically bad 'restorations' where so much cleaning up was done that even without hearing the original vinyl you just know that the digital version is a mistake.
It's a matter of good judgment really...some have it, some don't.

Overall the answer would be yes, but it does depend a hell of a lot on exactly what you are using to clean your vinyl up with and how hands on you're getting.

Using software with filtering algorhythms as opposed to going in with your very own scalpel and excising the bits you want out and replacing them with material from elsewhere will yeild poor results. Much better results are acheived by NOT using a one button approach.

But of course once you remove something, there's a gap, if you're filling the gap with something but the material that was originally there, (ie, from another copy), then you will change the ambience.

If you want to hear someone at work who really can do a great job of restoration check out the Boogu Yagga Gal cd on heritage on which Ron Geesin restored 78rpm dubs digitally. The results are magnificent.

I for one almost prefer listening to my cdr copies of Vinyl recordings I've mde that have all the pops, hiss, and scratches on, I really do. I've learnt to love the 'ambience' of the originals and not to need to hear them restored unless they're really in the poorest state possible.

thanks for your answers.Personally I grew up listening to vinyl so i suppose its the format I'm most used to ,though I do have several hundred cds and find them useful for hearing rare music i couldnt afford to buy on original vinyl.I also have some original reggae singles which in spite of being quite scratched, cant be matched for mood and ambiance, the music shines through the crackles and spitting!

I was having a chat with Steve Barrow on the wekend about just this question and he proffered the opinion that if you told Producers and Artists that you preffered their recordings with hisses, popls and crackles, many would probably punch you on the nose!

I can see his point, but I have to say, I like the 'ambience'

He thought the whole question was rather perverse I think!

since 'restoration' or 'remastering' have no official meaning, chances are great that you might notice a difference.

the problem for consumers? subjective terms like 'ambiance of vinyl' mean nothing literally. combine that with the manufactures' vague process of restore/remaster ... confusion reigns!

the only practical solution with scientific merit is a cadre of trained listeners.

The original recording and engineering flaws in the pieces are largely what give many of these tracks their beauty, character and warmth. it's also how we (through listening) derive their authenticity and age. To bring these recordings in line with today's engineering/audio standards can destroy a lot of this, certainly from an engineering aspect, new equalization is applied overriding the old etc, this can be harmful and subtleties can be overlooked.

Bad restoration/digital remastering is something that I've encountered, however IMO what's worse is when no attempt is made to rectify simple flaws at all, it's so disappointing if you've bought a CD and you hear crackle and pops present from crudely "ripped" vinyl, or even worse when you buy a new vinyl which has had Pops/Crackle and even Cue burn pressed in along with it. THAT really bugs me, though more with CD's. This happens a lot because the original master tapes are harder to get hold of or sometimes lost completely, old master tapes tapes can and often do become damaged with age though, so often recordings are made of the remaining records still in circulation and then re-pressed. However, larger record labels are starting to use better tools and technology and do often have access to the original masters and %80 of the time are getting it right now!!

There are some common pitfalls inherent with digital restoration/remastering though. Damage can be done with the misuse of noise reduction tools certainly, noise gates are a prime example, they are often applied to remove background hiss, but if used incorrectly they will shorten the length of cymbal crashes, hi hats, and the tail from reverb. other digital noise/hum removal processes can also be destructive like noise reduction algorithms whilst at first appearing to work miracles, often will remove midrange ambiance, subtle room characteristics, naturally occurring reverb within the studio/hall etc EQ also does this to an extent.

The second most common mistake is over brightening the top end, with the hiss removed the tops can now be freely increased in volume without having to worry about the presence of hiss, this is where much of the warmth of the original recordings appears to be getting lost, it's not actually being lost but the balance/relation between the two is being changed.

Lastly compression (see the loudness war) does lesson the dynamic range and most noticeably the recordings can loose a lot of their original "punch" because of this, it's a simple trade off, punch is lost in favour of raising the average volume level of the tracks.

IMO all of this can be done well, however unwanted artefacts like bad tape hiss and (If vinyl is used as a the source) loud crackles, Pop's, and loud surface noise should be reduced to an acceptable level as they do detract heavily from the listening experience. (IF) the source material has become damaged for example the original brightness of the recording has deteriorated, then it is correct to restore the brightness back to it's original level.