zachariaswmb Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I was just listening to the '93 recording while thinking about this thread, and I've got to say that I would add that to the list. Those really let the power come through! I mean, you can feel it. That's what I like. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the 50 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I'm still pretty partial to the 86 recordings for some reason. A lot of it has to do with it being Analog recordings as compared to Digital. Um, the 1986 recordings were digital. Every year since 1982 has been digital. Now, at the time, Ken Kobold was still recording Prelims, and I'm pretty sure he was using analog (reel-to-reel) equipment 'till the end. Maybe SOMEDAY, DCI will make those recordings available. While the relative merits of digital vs. analog recording can be debated ad nauseum, the fact is it's a digital world that we live in. Modern digital recording technologies, such as 24 bit/96+kHz sampling and Direct Stream Digital are darn impressive in the right hands. Of far greater importance, I believe, in recording drum corps are things like microphone selection, number, placement; weather conditions (wind wreaks havoc); venue and mixing. Someone also correctly pointed out that the amplified pits of today make it practically impossible to get a good BALANCED recording of a drum corps competition. (Note to the pit EQ guys: balance for Row 15 and we'll all be happier.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCranford82 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I'm suprised no one has mentioned 81 yet (maybe I'm just too old!) - had to be the worst recording of a DCI finals, much worse than 95. If I'm not mistaken 81 was the last year Ken Kobald did the recording, switching to digital with Lawrence Rock and Jim Unrath in 82. Please don't think I'm bashing Kobald, he did more for Drum Corps than anyone could possibly realize, I just always wondered what in the world happened in 81. 80 wasn't that hot either but 78 and 79 were fantastic. I always chalked it up to it being the first year at Olympic Stadium, the acoustics in that monstrosity had to be an incredible challenge. 82 actually turned out to be one of my favorite recordings when they were able to use the echos to great effect, Crossmen's "Russian Christmas Music" being a beautiful example of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichCranford82 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Now, at the time, Ken Kobold was still recording Prelims, and I'm pretty sure he was using analog (reel-to-reel) equipment 'till the end. Maybe SOMEDAY, DCI will make those recordings available. Not trying to brag or anything, but I actually have copies of a bunch of Kobald's reel-to-reel recordings and I can tell you they are absolutely out of this world, to this day my favorite recordings. I was lucky enough to march with a guy who was a nut for electronics who happened to know Mr Kobald and in turn I was able to get alot of that stuff. You haven't lived until you've heard his reel-to-reel of 75 Muchachos!!! (or 77 Bridgemen for that matter!) The best thing DCI could ever do is make those recordings available (pretty sure they have them) to the general public. THATS a petition we should be getting together! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Not trying to brag or anything, but I actually have copies of a bunch of Kobald's reel-to-reel recordings and I can tell you they are absolutely out of this world, to this day my favorite recordings. I was lucky enough to march with a guy who was a nut for electronics who happened to know Mr Kobald and in turn I was able to get alot of that stuff. You haven't lived until you've heard his reel-to-reel of 75 Muchachos!!! (or 77 Bridgemen for that matter!) The best thing DCI could ever do is make those recordings available (pretty sure they have them) to the general public. THATS a petition we should be getting together! LOL Rich, you and I both ! I have a few Kobold Reel to reel's from Dave Barth also !! Havent talked to him in a while. Do you have the recording of us from 81 and 82 ?? I agree with you also about the 81 recordings, especially SCV, and so much yelling. Not so much with the corps outside the top twelve, but the upper cors could have been better. ~G~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 I'm suprised no one has mentioned 81 yet (maybe I'm just too old!) - had to be the worst recording of a DCI finals, much worse than 95. If I'm not mistaken 81 was the last year Ken Kobald did the recording, switching to digital with Lawrence Rock and Jim Unrath in 82. Please don't think I'm bashing Kobald, he did more for Drum Corps than anyone could possibly realize, I just always wondered what in the world happened in 81. 80 wasn't that hot either but 78 and 79 were fantastic. I always chalked it up to it being the first year at Olympic Stadium, the acoustics in that monstrosity had to be an incredible challenge. 82 actually turned out to be one of my favorite recordings when they were able to use the echos to great effect, Crossmen's "Russian Christmas Music" being a beautiful example of that. I agree. Im too old also, and 82 recordings off the top 12 in Olympic, as well as the rest at Molson are outstanding ! I just listened to Troopers, Defenders, and Alliance today and the quality is still outstanding ! ~G~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesmr Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 It's pretty obvious to me (being an audiophile) that there were years where there was wayyyyy to much digital frequency masking. This is a post production thing .. or it's set that way in the preamp EQ's. To put it simply, like in a MINIDISC recording, it will only record the dominant sound on one frequency, masking out a weaker voice. Basically, you're not getting all the sound that's being produced, which makes for a "cleaner" recording. Give me the analog stuff, that had some GIRTH. You may indeed be an audiophile, but you don't know much about the recording process! 1. 1986 DCI recordings were digital. The analog transfer to vinyl will introduce artifacts and certainly limitations due to requirements for stylus tracking, etc., but this is a byproduct of the medium, not the recording process. 2. I've engineered and produced location classical recordings for over a decade, and I've never heard of "digital frequency masking". (I have, however, heard of lousy mastering). 3. Mic preamps don't perform equalization. Equalizers do that. 4. A self-proclaimed "audiophile" should NEVER publically claim that they listen to minidisc recordings! :P 5. "Girth" in a recording has everything to do with recording techniques employed, equipment choices and mastering decisions. Since at least the 1950s, it has had nothing to do with the medium to which the recording is rendered (analog tape or whatever form of digital storage you can dream up....) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesmr Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 While the relative merits of digital vs. analog recording can be debated ad nauseum, the fact is it's a digital world that we live in. Modern digital recording technologies, such as 24 bit/96+kHz sampling and Direct Stream Digital are darn impressive in the right hands. Of far greater importance, I believe, in recording drum corps are things like microphone selection, number, placement; weather conditions (wind wreaks havoc); venue and mixing. Someone also correctly pointed out that the amplified pits of today make it practically impossible to get a good BALANCED recording of a drum corps competition. (Note to the pit EQ guys: balance for Row 15 and we'll all be happier.) Bingo! Dead-on correct in every respect.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesmr Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 (edited) I'm suprised no one has mentioned 81 yet (maybe I'm just too old!) - had to be the worst recording of a DCI finals, much worse than 95. If I'm not mistaken 81 was the last year Ken Kobald did the recording, switching to digital with Lawrence Rock and Jim Unrath in 82. Please don't think I'm bashing Kobald, he did more for Drum Corps than anyone could possibly realize, I just always wondered what in the world happened in 81. 80 wasn't that hot either but 78 and 79 were fantastic. 95 was an unmitigated disaster in every respect, but I hear what you are saying re 80/81. I don't know really what to attribute the change to, but it could be any or all of the following: - switch to a new mastering engineer/house for the vinyl issue (can't say ... never heard the original master tapes) - location recording equipment change (different mics, array, etc) - recording in a large "bowl" venue with an artificial turf field (lots of potential first reflections introduced that you wouldn't get with a grass field) My guess would be the first reason. I do agree, though .... Kobold's mid-70s material is fantastic! Edited January 31, 2007 by hughesmr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dckid80 Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 When you take into account the recording technology and the horns corps were using, I still think it sounds pretty darn good. Um... I don't know about that when compared to some more recent recordings, but... those horn hits at the beginning of Spanish Fantasy by BD kick it, as does all of Legend!!! The tacked on ending (the name escapes me, but think of Troopers '85) at the end of the Malaguena opener by the Scouts is also a winner! Somehow, those recordings DID let the power really shine through! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.