2. analog
  3. 1245107782

"Cut from the original master tapes"

this is a phrase I see often when looking at new vinyl of old recordings. I always wonder if this is a good thing. I'm sure the tapes used are of a better quality than the 8 track, casette, or reel to reel tapes that I used but were they really of a quality that they would still be Quality today? Do they not lose their muster, so to speak, like everything that one deems to be from that period of time referred to as "In the day" (yours truly included)?
pkemery
jaybo
4,478 posts
 
only 'one' disc is actually cut 'directly' from the original master tapes, and the term 'original master tapes' is almost never spelled out. if it sounds good, it doesn't matter.
rcrerar
215 posts
 
I think it is possible to have more than one Master. This is achieved simply by sending the signal from the console to more than one tape machine simultaneously. Each of these Masters would theoretically have identical sound quality as long as identical tape machines with identical set up were used. Each of these tapes would correctly be labeled first generation.
mitch2
3,967 posts
 
Is the standard a 16-track "master" tape? Did many studios routinely record more than one master tape simultaneously? Commcat, it sounds like you have some experience with recording, and have actually heard a master tape played back. I hope I have that opportunity some day.
stanwal's avatar
stanwal
3,147 posts
 
No serious recorder ever used a 16 track tape. These are for multi track mono pop recordings where each musician comes in separately and lays down a track. In this case the concept of a "MASTER" is meaningless, there is NO original performance, only sounds to be mixed and manipulated.
jaybo
4,478 posts
 
its like the term 'remastered' can mean just about anything.
More to discover