Good question... For the most part, yes, there's nothing wrong with using digital tools conservatively to restore audio.swo17 wrote:Isn't the issue that some degree of digital tinkering is a must for all projects, but it's an art, and some people go too far with it? Like the best CGI in movies, if people are doing their jobs right, you won't notice they're doing anything.
The problem arises from how people define audio restoration. The average consumer (and basically every reviewer) seems to think that the hiss in older films' soundtracks is something that has intensified over time, which is completely false. I don't support the application of any amount of hiss reduction to an entire movie because removing it without also removing high-frequency detail is simply impossible. CD collectors figured this decades ago, but for some reason everyone thinks these tools can be used for film without any destructive effect.
But I'm no hiss fetishist (as absurd as it sounds, they do exist), and high-frequency noise can easily be the result of a source element's inherent dupiness, too. It's exactly like grain in that way -- it multiplies with each additional analogue generation, and any attempts to tame it should be undertaken with extreme caution.
When it comes to audio restoration, I believe things like pops, clicks, and flutter should absolutely be removed where possible. But hiss, EQ, and dynamics should be left alone.
Thanks, this has been corrected.peerpee wrote:Firstly, the MoC Series didn't exist in 2003, so when Moshrom's video says "Masters of Cinema DVD (2003)" presumably this is referring to the Eureka DVD from around that time? I didn't produce either the Eureka DVD or the later MoC Blu – so I have no idea what's gone on here.