Post by William SommerwerckPost by tomdeaconNobody outside the Emil Berliner Haus in Hannover had any idea of
what was involved in this process [AMSI]. Our German colleagues
were very sanguine about the improvements, the other countries less
so. When a choice was possible most preferred to leave the sound
as-is. The Germans seemed to believe that German consumers would
like the AMSI letters attached to the product.
The name /suggests/ that synthesized ambience was added to the
recording, encoded in such a way that a Dolby Surround decoder could
easily extract it. But who knows?
One of the reasons many CDs with Dolby Surround ambience don't "sound
right" is that earlier versions of Dolby Surround had only one rear
channel -- which
doesn't work very well for ambience, for obvious reasons. (It's disappointing
that RCA hasn't reissued any of its surround recordings on SACD or Blu-ray. Of
course, RCA lives under the Sony umbrella, which "got religion" in
its old age.)
Regardless, it's generally a bad idea to add ambience -- however
appropriate or tastefully done -- to a recording. That's for the
listener to do, in his listening room and under his control.
If anyone is willing to loan some AMSI recordings, I'd be glad to give them a
listen and report back.
=============
This AMSI item (on German Eloquence cds) has been discussed before.
IRRC someone posted some (parts of) recordings somewhere where
everyone could listen without knowing what was the original release
and what was the AMSI release, and "nobody" could hear any
difference. I don't know what quality was offered then (some kind of
MP3 I suppose).
I have a few items with AMSI and without (a few Beethoven overtures by
Karajan e.g.). I have plain stereo (2 channel) equipment. The AMSI
releases sound more fuzzy (= worse).
couldn't recall if Mr. Deacon contributed to it. Since TD, worked with
myself, might enjoy learning. Since I have such an interest, I'm sure of
having participated in that old thread. Because Mr. Deacon brought up this