How did they do this. A 1979 recording with fabulous 5.1 sound

[timetohunt]

My music collection far exceeds my knowledge of audio. As a matter of fact, I'm just really learning to unleash the potential of my new Klipshe FR-83s and the new 350 watt sub.

I really love concert DVDs with 5.1 option, other than that, its mostly 2 channel for me.

But what my question is here: I was watching/listening to the Grateful Dead's closing of Winterland DVD (1979). Aside being from a very soulful, happy, and damn near perfect effort from that band. .... How in the world is that recording so good? How did they do this in 5.1.? I swear, It could not have sounded better being in the 'sweet spot' at the show itself.

I know very little about the recording business. But how do they make a 1979recording into a masterful and beautiful 5.1 experience. I was floored when I broke out this DVD and decided to choose 5.1 on the audio selection.

Any body? I just want to have a little insight.

 

[highfihoney]

Your 5.1 dvd has had the audio track remastered into 5.1 & is not original to the concert.

BTW,even way back in the 50's(i think the time line) there was 3 channel stereo recording,the center channel was a blended mix of left & right.

 

[mtrycrafts]

My music collection far exceeds my knowledge of audio. As a matter of fact, I'm just really learning to unleash the potential of my new Klipshe FR-83s and the new 350 watt sub.

I really love concert DVDs with 5.1 option, other than that, its mostly 2 channel for me.

But what my question is here: I was watching/listening to the Grateful Dead's closing of Winterland DVD (1979). Aside being from a very soulful, happy, and damn near perfect effort from that band. .... How in the world is that recording so good? How did they do this in 5.1.? I swear, It could not have sounded better being in the 'sweet spot' at the show itself.

I know very little about the recording business. But how do they make a 1979recording into a masterful and beautiful 5.1 experience. I was floored when I broke out this DVD and decided to choose 5.1 on the audio selection.

Any body? I just want to have a little insight.

Perhaps they have the multi track masters and is used for this remaster?

 

[jaxvon]

Perhaps they have the multi track masters and is used for this remaster?

That's what I would guess. If they put a lot of money into the recording of the concert, they would've had a huge multi-track setup with a few of those crazy-nice (and crazy-expensive) Studer 24-track tape machines going, or perhaps even a fledgling digital system. I do know that 3M had just come out with a digital recording system at the time, so it's a definite possibility. Steely Dan was going to use this new system to record the Gaucho album, but their attempts to link two 16-track units together didn't work right and they reverted to analog tape. But as for the topic at hand, provided they had high-quality analog masters, it's very possible to remix the material from the source and get a high quality sound, especially with material coming from the late 70s when, in my opinion, recordings truly became hi-fi.

 

[markw]

The dead cared very much about the sound of their concerts and recordings.

Multi-track recording was a norm by this time and you can bet yer bippy that Jerry and crew were at the forefront of good sound. You could record each insturment on it's own track and blend and pan 'em as you choose.

But, like the others have said, while it may be a whiz-bang multi-channel release, the sound you hear in no way reflects the actual acoustics of the performance venue or the directionality of the sounds.

Gotta lovethose mix-downm engineers. Give 'em something clean to start with and they'll turn out something pleasing every time.

 

[jsantos615]

That's what I would guess. If they put a lot of money into the recording of the concert, they would've had a huge multi-track setup with a few of those crazy-nice (and crazy-expensive) Studer 24-track tape machines going, or perhaps even a fledgling digital system. I do know that 3M had just come out with a digital recording system at the time, so it's a definite possibility. Steely Dan was going to use this new system to record the Gaucho album, but their attempts to link two 16-track units together didn't work right and they reverted to analog tape. But as for the topic at hand, provided they had high-quality analog masters, it's very possible to remix the material from the source and get a high quality sound, especially with material coming from the late 70s when, in my opinion, recordings truly became hi-fi.

I'd have to agree with jaxvon, not just because he's a Wolverine, but because I do audio production professionally and have worked on similar projects. I'm guess that since they were filming the show, they recorded each input of the house mixer onto multitrack tape...probably a Studer...maybe an Otari. Anyway, since the tapes were still playable, all they had to do was lay each track into software capable of recording all tracks at once and keeping them in sync. My guess is that they recorded eack track into a ProTools HD system. ProTools HD pretty much the industry standard when it comes to computer recording software and supports 5.1 mastering. At that point, all they had to do was clean-up any recording artifacts and apply any desired EQ, compression/expansion, etc. and remix. Since the re-mastered video footage is timecoded, all the engineers had to do was sync the newly-mastered audio to the video, and voila! You've been transported back to '79 without having to find a power source capable of generating 1.21 gigawatts of power. An earlier post is right as well. Most producers of audio for video care more for the combined impact of the video/audio presentation, even if it means straying from the way the venue actually sounds (I have to thank my suspension of disbelief when I watch sci-fi movies because there is no sound in space, let alone bone-rattling explosions). Remember what it was revealed that Kiss actually embellished the source material in a studio after canning the Detroit show for the "Alive" record? The producers and engineers of the album admitted to doing this because acoustics and mic placement are problematic in many venues. In any case, congratulations for truly enjoying your system for what it was meant to do: take you to another time and/or place and make you feel like you were in the middle of the sweet spot, right then and there.

Check-out this article from Mix Magazine. It goes over some of the techniques that they used to re-do "Apocalypse Now". Many of these techniqes were used to re-master "Superman: The Movie" from the available two track masters. Some of these techniques were most likely used for your Dead DVD. Funny...Mickey Hart even participated with the score of "Apocalypse Now"

enjoy!

joe

 

[mtrycrafts]

Check-out this article from Mix Magazine. It goes over some of the techniques that they used to re-do "Apocalypse Now". Many of these techniqes were used to re-master "Superman: The Movie" from the available two track masters. Some of these techniques were most likely used for your Dead DVD. Funny...Mickey Hart even participated with the score of "Apocalypse Now"

enjoy!

joe

Wasn't the original Superman movie on 6 track mag or optical on the 70mm print? Where did that come from?
Or, is this a different movie of Superman?

 

[Resident Loser]

Might this...

...have been part of the treasure-trove of performances Bill Graham had salted away in those recently discovered archives? It appears he had a major multi-track studio recording both audio and video for posterity.

Also the Dead used their sorta' in house techno-wizards Alembic to tweak, build or re-build everything from Jerry Garcia's guitars to the stage mics...One of the reasons Europe '72 sounds great IMO...

jimHJJ(...just my $.02...)

 

[Swerd]

Also the Dead used their sorta' in house techno-wizards Alembic to tweak, build or re-build everything from Jerry Garcia's guitars to the stage mics...One of the reasons Europe '72 sounds great IMO...

And then there was the ultimate example of their willingness to push the tweaking and rebuilding to the limit - the Wall of Sound. Every instrument or voice had its own vertical array of speakers. It's too bad the cost, difficulty in set-up, break-down and transport, and the tecnical problems it introduced were greater than the benefit in sound it made, it was abandoned after about a year of use. It still looks amazing, and still makes me say "Where's Jerry Garcia now that we really need him."

 

[mtrycrafts]

And then there was the ultimate example of their willingness to push the tweaking and rebuilding to the limit - the Wall of Sound. Every instrument or voice had its own vertical array of speakers. It's too bad the cost, difficulty in set-up, break-down and transport, and the tecnical problems it introduced were greater than the benefit in sound it made, it was abandoned after about a year of use. It still looks amazing, and still makes me say "Where's Jerry Garcia now that we really need him."

WOW, never seen so many speakers in one place.
Do these guys have any hearing left?

 

[Swerd]

WOW, never seen so many speakers in one place.

It allowed increased head room - but not in the usual sense

Do these guys have any hearing left?

Two in the photo don't have any cranial function left - they're dead.