| Author |
|
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6514
|
| Posted: 18 May 2021 at 12:44pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
That explanation helps clear up what the Dolby A is doing a little better. Are you saying, though, that Dolby A is not manipulating any particular frequencies or filtering out what it deems to be tape hiss? The range from 6 to 10 kHz seems to be particularly affected. I've never fully understood how Dolby achieves the noise reduction, although I can often identify the effects of Dolby-gone-wrong.
Re: how it was supposed to sound all along. Yeah, most of the time I'd agree. If I can edit down the LP version to greatly improve the sound quality vs. what's available on CD, that's my preference. In this case, however, the reverb and synths sound different enough that it feels like a different mix, even though I know it's not. It almost sounds "wrong" trying to "right" the mistakes of a past engineer in this particular case.
__________________
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
mjb50
MusicFan
Joined: 28 April 2021
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: 18 May 2021 at 4:44pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
aaronk wrote:
| Are you saying, though, that Dolby A is not manipulating any particular frequencies or filtering out what it deems to be tape hiss? The range from 6 to 10 kHz seems to be particularly affected. |
|
|
Dolby A is indeed manipulating some frequencies more than others. But it is not really detecting hiss, per se. It's only reacting to and adjusting volume levels.
The hiss added by the tape is at a constant, low level, and is in all frequency bands (it's literally all frequencies at once), so we try to drown it out as much as possible when recording. If we just record the song at
the loudest level we can without distortion, all the really loud parts are where the bass is loud, or when there's a whole bunch of "noisy" sound like claps/snares/cymbals, or densely harmonic instruments (brass, synths).
Meanwhile, the rest of the music, especially in the higher frequencies, is relatively quiet; it could be made much louder without distorting.
Dolby A is four automatic volume-level processors, operating on different frequency bands. So it is like a four-band EQ. One band is for the deep bass (bass instruments), one is for the high bass and lower midrange (voice
& tonal instruments are concentrated here), one for the all of the higher frequencies (harmonics and hiss/ess/treble-y sounds), and one for an overlapping section of the highest hiss/"ess"/treble-y sounds (just to provide
a stronger effect in that range).
During the encoding/recording stage, each processor is reacting to the volume level of what it "hears". If it's already loud, nothing happens. But the quieter the volume gets, the more of a boost it gets. (There's also a
limit to how much of a boost is applied, depending on which band is being processed.) Imagine listening to just the 3–10 kHz range, and you've got one hand on a volume knob or slider, and you're quickly cranking up the
volume whenever the signal level drops. The more it drops, the more of a boost you give it. You never make it too loud, you just make it not quite as soft as before. This is dynamic range compression. It can also be
achieved the way most compressors work, which is to reduce the volume of the loudest parts, then amplify the result by a constant amount so the loudest sounds are at their original level.
The end result is that within each frequency band, the volume level is brought closer to constant—it still varies, just not as dramatically as before—and this relatively dense, hiss-drowning-out signal can be recorded to
tape. So instead of the quiet parts being, say, 30 dB louder than the hiss, they're now 40 dB louder than the hiss.
During playback, an expansion effect is applied to undo the changes—that is, the automatic four-band EQ is applied with complementary logic, each processor reacting to a slight drop in volume level by turning the volume
down even more. The quieter sounds are restored to their proper not-so-loud levels, and the hiss in those parts is now 10 dB quieter than it would've been without the NR system. So the net effect is the music hasn't
changed but the hiss is being magically and variably reduced during the quiet moments.
dbx's type I system does the same thing, but does not split the signal into four frequency bands. It still works well enough, but can create what people call a "breathing" effect. Dolby is not perfect either; it requires
precise calibration of levels and the player has to be running at exactly the same speed as the recorder.
If you use a standalone expander, or if you use the Dolby or dbx unit to process a signal which hasn't been encoded by the same system, you get the sound we are hearing in the 45 version of "Puttin' on the Ritz". The fact
that it's concentrated more in some frequency bands than others, and is on a pro reel-to-reel rig (not cassette), suggests it is probably Dolby A. Or I can think of a couple other ways it could be happening, with the use
of standalone expanders, but my money is on simple Dolby A for now.
I think there's still a question as to whether this NR is on all copies of the 45 version. All I know for sure is it is on my Canada-made original pressing, and it's on all the CD reissues. But is it on all of the 45s?
The edit was also on the Netherlands 7"; I wonder if it's better, or if anyone noticed and used a better master on later North American pressings.
Edited by mjb50 on 18 May 2021 at 7:11pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6514
|
| Posted: 18 May 2021 at 9:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is a fantastic, detailed explanation, and it makes complete sense. It's easy to hear the hi-hat get sucked away by the NR while the frequencies in lower ranges remain intact.
You raise a good question about other 45 copies. I just put my Canadian stock copy on the turntable, and the NR is there, just like your copy. I highly doubt anyone went back and re-edited the song to remove this artifact. As a kid, my US-pressed RCA copy was on styrene, so any "hiss" removed by the NR was sure to be there tenfold after a handful of plays. I likely have an unplayed US stock copy, too, and I'll try to remember to look for it when time permits.
__________________
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
mjb50
MusicFan
Joined: 28 April 2021
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: 19 May 2021 at 3:14am | IP Logged
|
|
|
aaronk wrote:
| I highly doubt anyone went back and re-edited the song to remove this artifact. |
|
|
Agreed, but what I was saying is that it's possible that not all of the production masters have the NR.
With the help of Discogs, we know (based on durations printed on the labels) that this version was released on 7" in Holland (The Netherlands), Canada, USA, South Africa, and The Philippines. I would say it almost certainly
was created for, and in, either Holland or Canada.
To create the edit, somebody would've started with a copy of the album version on tape. They physically cut that tape with razor blades and spliced the seams to create the edited version.
That tape may have directly been the basis of one of the 7"s. Or, they may have made copies of the edited tape first, and sent those second-generation copies to manufacturers. It's possible third-generation copies were made
for some of the markets. Any one of these tapes could have been the first to have the NR on them, and thus all copies descended from them would, but the others may not. If the very first copy that was physically edited has
it, then of course they all do.
We can't even know for sure that all of the Canadian copies have the NR; they might've caught the error and used a better master for a repress. That seems unlikely, though; they probably were more concerned about counting
the money than replacing a bad tape!
Anyway, I just closely inspected the rip I found online that does not have the NR, and decided it is a fake, just someone's reconstruction; they didn't get the seam before the "Gotta Dance" segment exactly right.
Edited by mjb50 on 19 May 2021 at 3:18am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
mjb50
MusicFan
Joined: 28 April 2021
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: 19 May 2021 at 5:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Jody Thornton wrote:
I just mean to say that the various parts on the LP version don't sound like they merge as naturally, whereas the single sounds more merged together naturally. For example, go to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMstTM01m28 (or pull out an LP version). At 3:31 and 3:42 sound like awkward junction points. [...] So I wonder if sometimes, content is actually added rather than edited out. |
|
|
OK, I kinda see what you mean. It's just the way this particular medley is set up. In the album version, it goes from "Alexander's Ragtime Band" melody into a part where we hear a funky guitar and vocal ad-lib (where he
spells out R-i-t-z), and then it goes into the "There's No Business Like Show Business" melody. The 45 version cuts out the funky interlude and just goes straight from one melody into the other.
The album version's transitions sound good to me. The start of the vocal ad-lib "put it on, puttin' it on" overlaps the last note of the first melody, and the end of the patter ("how 'bout you and me says") overlaps the
beginning of the first note of the 2nd melody.
I like it both ways. The edits they made in the 45 version are all really good. They tighten up the song, keeping it moving, without losing anything too important. They did a great job with it, overall.
It's hard to say how that part of the medley in the album version was constructed. It's likely there was layering of "live" material and previously recorded material onto multitrack tape. So in a sense, you're right, it
was an additive process. But since the edit can be perfectly reconstructed, content-wise, by cutting sections out of the album version, that's certainly what they did. The edit does not derive from an alternate mix which
didn't have the ad-libs in it.
Does adding things in ever happen? Usually no, but I can say that for '70s disco songs, the album versions were often the 12" versions, which were often created by adding and repeating parts from the original multitracks
for a short version of the song. '80s remixing legend Shep Pettibone said in an interview that he always started by making a 7" remix and then he'd derive his 12" versions from that. And I occasionally run across cases
where both the album and single versions or video of a song both seem to have been edited down from a longer, unreleased mix, but may in fact have been created by adding rather than subtracting. Duran Duran's "Is There
Something I Should Know?" is in this category. So it's true, editing doesn't always involve cutting things out.
Edited by mjb50 on 19 May 2021 at 5:56am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6514
|
| Posted: 19 May 2021 at 5:58am | IP Logged
|
|
|
mjb50 wrote:
Any one of these tapes could have been the first to have the NR on them, and thus all copies descended from them would, but the others may not. If the very first copy that was
physically edited has it, then of course they all do. |
|
|
Yes, agreed--all possibilities. I don't think I'll be importing 45s from Holland to find out, though :)
__________________
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KentT
MusicFan
Joined: 25 May 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 650
|
| Posted: 28 May 2021 at 9:59am | IP Logged
|
|
|
jimct wrote:
Ed, this doesn't answer your question,
but just as an aside, this's song meteoric rise to Top
40 poularity in 1983 caught the U.S. division of RCA
Records SO completely by surprise, that they didn't feel
they could press up normal RCA promo 45s quickly enough
to service U.S. radio, especially given its "novelty
song" angle. So RCA decided to both quickly purchase and
distribute stock copies of the song from their "RCA
Canada" division, where it was already popular. They
then affixed those small, black-and-white "NOT FOR SALE"
stickers, that RCA would sometimes utilize, whenever
they would happen to ship out a stock 45 copy to radio,
as a "promo 45 substitute." To this day, I still only
have 3 of those "stickered Canadian vinyl stock 45s,
used as U.S. promo 45s" in my 1983 promo 45s box. I
wonder if, later during its hit chart run, RCA might
have went back and ever issue a "standard yellow label"
RCA promo 45 for "Puttin' On The Ritz?" Does anyone
know, or happen to have one? FYI, in all my years inside
Top 40 radio, this was the ONLY time I can ever remember
a label utilizing a "mass stock 45 purchase, from an
international division of their own company" to more
quickly service radio, rather than taking the time to
press up a standard U.S. promo 45! |
|
|
A note: RCA by then did not own a pressing plant as
they'd sold them. RCA had to get their records pressed
elsewhere by other plants.
__________________
I turn up the good and turn down the bad!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: taco "puttin’ on the ritz"
