Sorry to bring up this old topic... and I know bmoregnr has tried to sort this out... but I confess I'm still mind-boggled between ultramatrix sources as they get posted by Miller (I am clearly not a technofile). Below are two different Miller sources for 10.3.87. Should I assume the Beta HIFI below is not the same as a Beta PCM? I confess I easily confuse with these matters... I'm tempted to say the PCM is slightly better... but it's damn close... and I guess the Beta has no patches... the PCM transferred in 2017, the BetaHIFI in 2018. Recording Info: UltraMatrix SBD -> PCM Transfer: PCM (Sony SLV-M20HF) > Sony PCM-601ESD > Behringer Ultramatch Pro > Tascam DA-3000 (16-bit/44.1k) > Samplitude Pro X3 Suite > FLAC/16 (2 Discs Audio / 1 DVD FLAC) Patch Info: UltraMatrix SBD > Cassette Master > FLAC (shnid=121961) supplies: Tuning thru West L.A. Fadeaway (The first 7 tracks) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Recording Info: UltraMatrix SBD -> Beta HiFi Master (Sony Betamax/TDK HS) Transfer Info: Beta HiFi Master (Sony SL-HF66) > Tascam DA-3000 (DSF 1-bit/5.6MHz) > dBpoweramp > Samplitude Pro X3 Suite > FLAC/24 (1 DVD FLAC)
They could very well have been recorded on the exact same machine at the exact same time. The PCM recording is a video signal composed of black or white dots representing the ones or zeros of digital audio (along with a bunch of additional information for redundancy.) The beta Hi-Fi audio track was still available. There's absolutely no reason not to record both on the same machine at the same time just as an automatic additional backup.
Note that the Beta was x-fered in 24 bit because it's an analog recording. It can be argued that the A > D converters of that era are substandard (certainly compared to current tech), and that the analog recording would have less "stuff" in the way of the sound. The ultimate test is in the listening.
Great question @lucan_g. I think Mr. Blues will likely have the answer but to his point I headed to the listening approach and bang on the '18 Beta (calling it Beta more for distinction) is easily my preferred. Full disclosure I am listening to the '17 PCM via the archives because it isn't seeded well, and the '18 Beta directly-- from what I am hearing I don't think the difference matters a lot in this case. The first thing I notice is the '17 PCM sounds very digital to me, so tonally a little sharper with less bottom end. It is clear and analytical of course, and I am not saying it is bad, but not near as rich and engaging as this '18 Beta. Next I picked songs with a lot of AUD in the beginning. The only other consideration I would entertain, and I am not so sure about it; possibly the PCM was the pure soundboard recorded to the video track and now this '18 Beta is somehow both the pure soundboard and the AUD track as fully realized in an Ultramatrix mix. I only entertain this because while there is a lot of audience in the '17 PCM it could potentially be from through the SBD feed; although I find this would have a smaller probability of being the case; the real difference is how the '18 Beta is by comparison far more fully realized of a SBD-AUD mix, the aud stands far more on it's own in the '18 Beta and the sbd component really comes out more full-range if you will, not so to me in the more sterile seemingly only one part of the equation of the PCM. Now having said that I think Mr. Blues is likely right this is the same thing, just that early A/D can't hold a candle to the A/D gear you can put to it today, that and perhaps more mastering tools applied; but again I am suprised at what a big difference these two sound to me if in fact it is just down to this factor. I'll spend some more time with these but one thing I can safely say is you found a fantastic Ultramatrix example in this '18 Beta, really fantastic sounding and some nice playing so far. Edit: The start of Terrapin seems a good example to me where the aud is well there but not as fully realized on the PCM where it stands on its own more on the Beta, and that sbd quotient of the Beta really is more present/engaging. I could come up with as many examples where the aud in the PCM seems pretty equal to the Beta. One last thing I never resolved in my research, is how much the two tracks, sbd and aud were mixed at a later date vs. on the fly. Maybe this is a case where more time was spent in post if you will, where a mix was made after the show to beta; where the PCM was the live mix. Just another guess of course.
I don't think it is so much back up as instead they would simply record a bunch of different ways and figure out what the best approach was at a later date; so perhaps more of a use every available resource and sort it out later as part of the refinement process. It seems probable to me that with all the other jobs they had they never really got around to the taping aspect as much as they would have liked, and hence there are a lot more working parts than final product.
What you said about the PCM sounding "very digital" is the key distinction, and apparently the mix may be different, or can be heard better on the Beta. The fine detail separating the audience mics from the SBD would be another place where early digital can fall short.
Great write up! I am going to take a stab at this 2018 BETA ... but in the 16 bit version (as opposed to the 24bit). Of course, the 2017 PCM was 16 bit as well so it will be more of a direct comparison. We are very lucky to be in a position to even make these kind of fine-distinction listening choices.
The early Sony PCM-F1 was only 14 bits at 44,056Khz. So even though the later transfer was via a 16 bit unit, the original was probably only 14 bits. Which unit did the Dead use to record?
I saw The Who at the Mississippi River Festival in the summer of 1971, so I guess that may been the system I heard. The sound was very good & of course it was a great concert.
I'm not sure that Beta HiFi was a purely analog process. The audio frequencies were shifted up to fit into two holes in the video chroma and luminance subcarriers, but it was recorded with the two spinning heads, and there is a gap created when switching from one head to the other that would have to be covered by some sort of delay. In theory, that could be an acoustic delay line, but more likely to was a one or two scan-line digital delay.
Page 212 of this describes the matrix approach in pretty decent detail https://www.toysintheattic.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/DylanPettyDead_Mix_Nov86.pdf A lot of it is above my head, maybe @Chris DeVoe can make more sense of it, and it seems to create more questions than it answers, but I would note it pretty definitively states it was a "box" that Pearson/Healy/Peters developed, so it shoots down my theory this may have been done through the matrix section of a console. Second I would point out this article was in November '86 but is based on the summer tour, and we know the first Ultramatrix recordings out there are from December '86 I believe, so the setup described here would be from the very beginning of its use I believe.
The source is an AKG C34. It has 4 capsules in one body. In the above photo, rotate it the gold circle visible through the wire mesh is one capsule, there is one behind that facing the other direction. The top part has another two capsules, back-to-back. The upper part can rotate 90 degrees, and the pick-up patterns of each capsule can be adjusted between omni-directional and cardioid, and the phase of each capsule can be altered. There is a special cable coming off of the mic for balanced audio from each capsule. AKG supplied their own box, but it appears Meyer and the Dead engineers built their own box to give it even more capabilities. One of the ways to use a microphone like this is "Mid-Side" recording. Here's an excellent explanation: Mid-Side (MS) Mic Recording Basics | Universal Audio In a nutshell, you have one pair facing left and right, wired together as a "Figure 8" with one in phase, and one reverse phase. That is one channel. You have another microphone facing forward. The forward is one channel, the "Figure 8" is another channel and can be recorded on two tracks. Obviously, you wouldn't want to listen to that directly. When it is played back, it needs to go through a "matrixing" circuit (or today, software) and the advantage is that you can alter the stereo spread afterwards.
Pretty detailed description of the Europe '72 box mixing, mastering process which may come in handy for someone some day Communing With The Dead
Poking around the '87 Charlie Miller releases and I noticed this May 2018 comment from CM regarding the 7-6-87 show "The hi-8 video master has a pure sbd on it (no ambient mic). working on that soon." It seems to back up the notion that they had the individual parts recorded separately as well.
Charlie has also seeded recordings of just the ambient mics used to make the UltraMatrix recordings. These certainly overcome the limitations of straight FOH boards. And yet nothing beats a dedicated recording mix.
8-23-87 is another case with a PCM and a Beta HiFi (called .bm. in the file name so I'm going with BM). Comparing those two, both directly via flac files this time, I am getting generally the same results as the 10-3-87 comparison above. Also I noticed 10-1-88 had a BM of what Charlie Miller noted was a rare (for the Ultramatrix days I suppose) Healy SBD with no aud mixed in; 10-2-87 had one as well so listened to those. I don't know why I didn't think of it earlier but with all the mic gating done, yeah pretty much zero aud gets in on those, so this indeed seems to be the advantage of the latter day A/D transfer. It still seems the mix of mostly the sbd is pretty much as important as ever as I am noticing 5-10-87 a UM-BM didn't seem to turn out quite as well as 10-3-87 or even 8-23-87, mostly because of the vocals I think. I've listened to 3-24-87 the UM to cassette master tonight, which is indeed an upgrade from what I've heard before, but I'd have to hear a few more of these more traditional UM-CMs to make more of a comment on them vs these BM. Also, I think we knew this already but if it helps as a puzzle piece, somewhere a question was asked to CM "Were the PCM and Hifi masters recorded onto the same deck and same Beta tape in these cases?" and the answer was "same tape". Finally, it seems like it was as recent as May of this year when for 7-6-87 it was noted "First GD beta hifi master recording ever circulated (from any show)". So this may turn out to be a pretty significant development in GD taping land. In the comments CM noted "There's a lot more like this to come." so this should be fun.
Info on the Meyer Sound MS-8201 used as part of the Ultramatrix process. Meyer Sound : Patents Edit: wow I thought I was at risk of being too geeky on the topic. I don't even know where to begin with this one, but it looks a pretty serious analysis https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/bitst...ful Live Mixing 2016 Published.pdf?sequence=1
That second one is particularly far out. They are creating a multi source Matrix that provides user adjustable parameters, like you could "walk around" at a show. Most importantly they have something that can align the recordings one to another, that could revolutionize the experience.
Skull and Roses and Veneta '72 were recorded by Betty, but I wouldn't classify them as "Betty Boards" since they are from multitracks.
Here is a 1988 Audio Magazine article on the tapers. It starts page 54. https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1988-01.pdf
I remember reading that at the time. Incredibly detailed, especially considering it was intended for an audience of non-professionals.
I thought you might find this interesting, on page 27 the schematic on the left looks like they name the UTC L-141 is as part of the differential mic setup. https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-DB-Magazine/70s/DB-1976-04.pdf I understand these can be used as mic splitters as well; and remember Rick Turner among others have stated they developed transformer based mic splitters as early as ‘69. I think these UTC L-141’s have been around since the 50’s if not earlier. Here are some examples of them being used for various purposes. PAIR Of UTC LS-141 W/ XLRs Mix Bus Flavor ! Transformers The schematic to the right on page 27 shows the John Curl ULD summing amp which I think there is a picture of it arond here if the link isn’t dead.
