Dubstep Dubplates & CD-Rs - Healthy?

[pangaea]

say half the producers export a 16bit wav at 41.1khz, then cut the plates from this

I'd reckon that the vast majority of dance music or music made exclusively on computers doesn't go beyond the 16bit/41.1khz model...it doesn't really need to, either.

Skream is a prolific (and pretty darned good) producer. Many of his tracks may not make it to vinyl for full release. Why can't he (and others) create a site where we can pay for and download the WAV file? This means that producers can sell their wares direct to punters and take all of the profit. I guess it is becasue to make any serious money they have to sign a publishng deal and that takes away their right to sell their own music?

Tempa haven't released their back catalogue for download yet. But unless they're completely against the concept, it'll probably happen soon. I'm sure the 'exclusive download' idea (eg. Fukkaz) will become more common, but this doesn't neccesarily mean a producer will want to compromise the quality of their released output. I mean, Skream (and Tempa) could release all of the hundreds of tracks on his hard drive and watch the profits roll in...but I'm 110% sure that's the last thing they would want to do

[drbluebeat]

Interestingly Bleep are offering Burial as electronic download in FLAC format from July 1st.

It's not perfect but its very very good. Well done Bleep.

[2000f]

its vinyl or nothing, even 16bit 44.1kHz is lossy. Everything else is ok if its all there is. I'm amazed at how quickly and easily people accept reductions in fidelity.

Sorry? I think you are bit off here, mate. Of course 16 bit (and 24 bit) is a digital reproduction of the analogue world (and therefore "lossy" in that sense only), however I´m 100% sure that almost all of the Dubstep releases have been made on computers and have never seen the analogue domain before mixing or mastering. And so the masters they hand in to mastering and cutting are digital and are kept in the 16 bit/44.1 kHz domain. So why should this turn out better on vinyl?

The vinyl media of course has it´s advantages and disadvantages compared to the digital media. And remember that an acetate definately doesn´t sound as good (frequency and dynamics-wise) as a "proper" vinyl. And then you must take the turntable, the stylus and the RIAA amplifiers in the mixer into consideration as well. Saying that 16 bit and 44.1 kHz is lossy is quite a statement. You reckon Benga records his samples to a reel-to-reel tape machine and then mixes it on a proper analogue mixer (I don´t reckon Behringer, Mackie etc. are worth mentioning as pro mixers) and then master this straight to acetate, metal lacquer or 1/2" analogue 2-track?

[2000f]

say half the producers export a 16bit wav at 41.1khz, then cut the plates from this

I'd reckon that the vast majority of dance music or music made exclusively on computers doesn't go beyond the 16bit/41.1khz model...it doesn't really need to, either.

Seen!

[forensix (mcr)]

its vinyl or nothing, even 16bit 44.1kHz is lossy. Everything else is ok if its all there is. I'm amazed at how quickly and easily people accept reductions in fidelity.

Sorry? I think you are bit off here, mate. Of course 16 bit (and 24 bit) is a digital reproduction of the analogue world (and therefore "lossy" in that sense only), however I´m 100% sure that almost all of the Dubstep releases have been made on computers and have never seen the analogue domain before mixing or mastering. And so the masters they hand in to mastering and cutting are digital and are kept in the 16 bit/44.1 kHz domain. So why should this turn out better on vinyl?

i was gonna make this point but you beat me to it and probbaly did a better job of it then i ever wouldve

[Forensics]

Haven't had the chance to read all 3 pages, but having checked
the first one - I agree with Mr Plastic, there's plenty coming out.
And just like with any scene it's often a matter of where you look
- you've obviously got the 'mainstream', which is gonna be prone
to exclusivity (if that's a word!) But there are loads of people with
different takes on dubstep who are well worth checking, and lots
of labels worldwide pushing the sound. I think the bottom line is
people should be supporting small runs from producers testing
the water instead of purely waiting for big releases to surface -
let them know that there's a market for tunes which don't follow
a standard dubstep structure. It's such a diverse scene, plenty
to explore. And it's the diversity which makes it so great / will
keep it interesting. It'd be a real shame if it Does become like
dnb - everyone waiting for the same crap tunes from the same
old dinosaurs. Gotta keep things moving to keep em frrrresh

Edit: Wasn't implying any of the big Dubstep producers
are dinosaurs.... although give em ten years, lol!

Edit #2: That was my 300th post, bo!!

[doomstep]

its vinyl or nothing, even 16bit 44.1kHz is lossy. Everything else is ok if its all there is. I'm amazed at how quickly and easily people accept reductions in fidelity.

Sorry? I think you are bit off here, mate. Of course 16 bit (and 24 bit) is a digital reproduction of the analogue world (and therefore "lossy" in that sense only), however I´m 100% sure that almost all of the Dubstep releases have been made on computers and have never seen the analogue domain before mixing or mastering. And so the masters they hand in to mastering and cutting are digital and are kept in the 16 bit/44.1 kHz domain. So why should this turn out better on vinyl?

The vinyl media of course has it´s advantages and disadvantages compared to the digital media. And remember that an acetate definately doesn´t sound as good (frequency and dynamics-wise) as a "proper" vinyl. And then you must take the turntable, the stylus and the RIAA amplifiers in the mixer into consideration as well. Saying that 16 bit and 44.1 kHz is lossy is quite a statement. You reckon Benga records his samples to a reel-to-reel tape machine and then mixes it on a proper analogue mixer (I don´t reckon Behringer, Mackie etc. are worth mentioning as pro mixers) and then master this straight to acetate, metal lacquer or 1/2" analogue 2-track?

44.1kHz 20Hz - 20kHz. yeah. so 0 Hz to 19.999 hz ??? and any other freqs above 20kHz (give or take a Hz) are lost,

a very pedantic point yes, in the case of digitally generated music I think its even more important, I like a little randomness / noise & all pro DAWS n "soft studios" are operataing well above CD quality. I know I stopped using 16 bit samples along time ago

I dunno if Benga uses reel to reel or not, but I do kno that FL sounds way better once its been pressed to vinyl I do know, from recording to 2 inch 24 track, that mastering to tape will make a differance, and alot of old school vinyl purists say that usein a CD master for vinyl is pointless. But if your stereo tell the diff. between CD & a 192 mp3 it wont really matter

[2000f]

I´m not sure you understand. What I wrote was:

if you reckon that vinyl will add anything to a digital master that´s not existing on the digital master (eg. frequencies above 22.5 kHz), then you are wrong. Vinyl will of course make it sound different, and that´s what you prefer. Cool. However, saying that 16 bit / 44.1 CD´s is lossy is only correct if you think of it as being a reproduction of an analogue sound wave. It´s not lossy compared to eg. mp3´s.
I admit that it does sound different than vinyl or analogue tape, but all medias have their pros/cons.

By the way, the 16/24 bit haven´t got anything to do with the frequency range, but the dynamic range. And the reason why I´m mentioning reel-to-reel tape machines is that no Dubstep producer I have heard of are using these machines (and they also have a rather steep cut-off at the sub frequencies and at the very top frequencies, depending on bias, calibration, tape type, speed etc.) and I´m sure that 99% use samples they use are either 16/24 bit 44.1 (or 48) kHz. You reckon they use 88.2, 96 or even 192 kHz? So the samples are digital and limited to the industry standard 44.1 kHz.
And so, if what they hand is a final stereo master featuring a digital (I´m sure they don´t hand in a 1/2" 2-track analogue tape) mix, then what should the vinyl process add? Of course mastering will alter the sound and so will the process of cutting the vinyl (or acetate).

As to conclude; vinyl does sound different, acetates too (and these have a dodgy dynamic and frequency range compared to vinyl) to digital. However, saying this, you have to take into consideration that this doesn´t imply "better". A Technics SL-1210 isn´t a hi-fidelity turntable, but rather a DJ "work horse". And the typical RIAA amplifiers built into the DJ mixer are not of the highest standard either. And what about the PA systems in the clubs (except for eg. Platic People´s)? I mean, the vinyl media isn´t perfect either, just different sounding.

Anyway, this is a very technical debate, and really doesn´t belong in this thread, but you comments regarding everything else than vinyl is lossless just had to be commented.

[2000f]

I like a little randomness / noise & all pro DAWS n "soft studios" are operataing well above CD quality. I know I stopped using 16 bit samples along time ago

You are not 100% correct. All pro studios run 16 or 24 bit. And this hasn´t got anything to do with the frequency range. And what should the fact that you like randomness / noise got to do with this debate? The fact that eg. analogue tape and vinyl adds this? Well, that is to some extent true, however, if that´s what you prefer - fair enough. I like all the medias, because I know that all of the have slight imperfections (pros/cons). Do you record you mixes to analogue tape or straight to eg. a DDM (Direct Metal Mastering) cutting lathe? +90% (maybe 100% in terms of the Dubstep producers) hand in the final masters as either: audio CD, DAT or 16/24 bit WAV/SDII/AIFF files. Some do hand in 1/2" (or even 1") 15 or 30IPS 2-track analogue tape, but that´s only from the pro studios.

[boa]

2000F Studio School now open! Thanks for the hard data man!

[shonky]

Haven't had the chance to read all 3 pages, but having checked
the first one - I agree with Mr Plastic, there's plenty coming out.
And just like with any scene it's often a matter of where you look
- you've obviously got the 'mainstream', which is gonna be prone
to exclusivity (if that's a word!) But there are loads of people with
different takes on dubstep who are well worth checking, and lots
of labels worldwide pushing the sound. I think the bottom line is
people should be supporting small runs from producers testing
the water instead of purely waiting for big releases to surface -
let them know that there's a market for tunes which don't follow
a standard dubstep structure. It's such a diverse scene, plenty
to explore. And it's the diversity which makes it so great / will
keep it interesting. It'd be a real shame if it Does become like
dnb - everyone waiting for the same crap tunes from the same
old dinosaurs. Gotta keep things moving to keep em frrrresh

Edit: Wasn't implying any of the big Dubstep producers
are dinosaurs.... although give em ten years, lol!

Edit #2: That was my 300th post, bo!!

Good point made well there - keep it diverse. If the audience doesn't encourage new angles and support new producers, they're partly to blame if it gets real stale in a few years

[2scoops]

Thanks for your thoughts peeps...

Wasn't meaning to get into the whole sound quality debate... Can we put that to one side for a moment? Although I appreciate this music is all about low end (which then gets lost in the MP3, 123 whatever format etc) lets not forget that the majority of punters aren't actually that bothered about the exact frequencies and sound quality of MP3 releases - dare I say they're simply not as geeky as us lot...

So moving on from that...

Firstly respect to all the producers dropping dubs - I appreciate totally the need to test out and hype. Also I completely understand the economics of releasing vinyl. I tried it for years and I know if you manage to sell 1,000 copies you're making little to no profit...

Which is why I'm surprised the MP3 release format has not taken off for this music as I'd expected. The online scene is so thriving with forums, myspace pages, blogspots etc. This is a scene that embraces the internet and its possibilites yet you can only find a cluster of tracks on Bleep if MP3 is your chosen method of buying music...

Surely this music is no good to you as a label unless people can buy it - and don't you want to offer it to as many people as possible?! I personally hate iTunes and everything they stand for but if it meant I could afford to release more vinyl & develop my label because I sold 1,00 downloads on iTunes then so be it..

I think a record label should treat its MP3 release schedule in the same way it deals with CD and vinyl. I'm kinda old school in that I've not really embraced the download model but even I have come to accept its not going away, in fact it really represents the future of retail for most music. (Please - I do'nt really want to get into that debate either - but you get my point?!) Vinyl releases have effectively become, for many labels, marketing tools for their CD releases. Why not treat MP3 as an equal format? Do exclusive MP3 releases, bundle tracks together...what a cheap way to earn profits out of back cat without having to repress..

Which makes me think...who is distributing the majority of the labels? I know ST are on it...whoever it is - surely as a distributor you should have digital distribution on lock too?! Are you not trying to sell as many records (in whatever format) for your label as possible? And surely if you don't have digital or physical distribution as a label then its worth sorting the digital front yourselves - save yourself the risk of upfront manufacturing/artwork costs and get this music out there - hell the profit margins on an MP3 are almost the same as vinyl anyway.

Please don't think I wish to see the death of duplate/vinyl culture and the bastardisation of this music....but a handful of tracks on Bleep just doesn't satisfy or do justice to the music and - if you're talking supply and demand then meet the demand and supply the music in whatever format for all to enjoy..

[doomstep]

You are not 100% correct.

Never said I was, & I have no real interest in ever being 100% correct, how boring.

I understand your points mate, and yeah it doesn't belong in this thread (its a far more interesting topic still), for what its worth I went SAE as well (and Im aware of what bit depth & sampling rates relate to) and the main ting I took from it, was that specs dont matter, my ears do & my ears tell me vinyl sounds better (better being entirely subjective yeah) it dont have to look better on paper, we're not talkin fidelity in the sense of an accurate representation of acoustic sound, but in the sense of what does the music justice.

a digital reproduction of the analogue world (and therefore "lossy" in that sense only)

Thats exactlly how I meant bro. All digital encoding is lossy.

Analog actually adds to your sounds (some people call it distortion), if I can find the disks I'll fling u some .TIFF files I converted to .WAV and recorded to 2 inch tape - heaviest bass I ever heard - .JPGs sound shit in case u were wondering.

I kno fr a fact that digital files sound better (that word again) once they have been to vinyl. Sorry I cant back my facts up with figures or wotever, but I base my opinans on what I have heard in the real world, for myself. If you like I'll record some loops (24/96 of course, but via my inferior technics/vestax RIAA preamp) that where pressed on a lock groove 12" a few years back & I'll dig out the CD quality "masters" so u can compare, if I can find em (that disk again).

anyway. My intial post was more in dismay at peoples willingness to accept "inferior" or reduced sound quality in exchange for "ease of use".

I personlly think that vinyl is a far more "involving" media, it encourages the listener to participate in listening, rather than sticking iTunes on shuffle and passivlly consuming. But thats taking the thread even more offtopic, so I'll stop now.

sorry bout the thread de-railment folks