Dr. AIX

Mark Waldrep, aka Dr. AIX, has been producing and engineering music for over 40 years. He learned electronics as a teenager from his HAM radio father while learning to play the guitar. Mark received the first doctorate in music composition from UCLA in 1986 for a "binaural" electronic music composition. Other advanced degrees include an MS in computer science, an MFA/MA in music, BM in music and a BA in art. As an engineer and producer, Mark has worked on projects for the Rolling Stones, 311, Tool, KISS, Blink 182, Blues Traveler, Britney Spears, the San Francisco Symphony, The Dover Quartet, Willie Nelson, Paul Williams, The Allman Brothers, Bad Company and many more. Dr. Waldrep has been an innovator when it comes to multimedia and music. He created the first enhanced CDs in the 90s, the first DVD-Videos released in the U.S., the first web-connected DVD, the first DVD-Audio title, the first music Blu-ray disc and the first 3D Music Album. Additionally, he launched the first High Definition Music Download site in 2007 called iTrax.com. A frequency speaker at audio events, author of numerous articles, Dr. Waldrep is currently writing a book on the production and reproduction of high-end music called, "High-End Audio: A Practical Guide to Production and Playback". The book should be completed in the fall of 2013.

11 thoughts on “Newport Beach Show : Day 2

  • May 31, 2015 at 9:26 am
    Permalink

    Singe, double, and quad DSD and Analog recording have something huge in common. In today’s market their promoters are spreading BS to make large profits for both the hardware and software manufactures. Look out guys, the MQA marketing wing is looking to knock you off that “sounds like analog” hill fast.
    Dispite what your friend said Mark, I don’t see them writing any “Manufacturers Comments” letters back to the reviewers saying “Oh no, we’re not a sound enhancement device, only a very good compression codec”. 🙂

    Reply
    • June 1, 2015 at 9:36 am
      Permalink

      I had a great lunch with the co-inventor of MQA and friend Robert Stuart yesterday. I think I’ve got the straight scoop on the technology and their plans. I don’t know if I’ll get the post written today, but stay tuned.

      Reply
  • May 31, 2015 at 10:06 am
    Permalink

    Off Topic, Sorry
    When time allows could you do a blog explaining the details of why modern recordings are still being done at 48/24 when so much better is easily available. I was shocked the other day to read that even film sound is done the same way. Here I was foolishly believing my DTS-HD Master Audio blue ray movies were delivering me at least 96/24 7.1 or 192/24 5.1 sound. All this highly capable tech available and it’s just going to waste while we are being lied to that the capabilities is what we are receiving. 🙁

    Reply
    • June 1, 2015 at 9:37 am
      Permalink

      It is very hard to move glaciers like the music and film industries. I seriously doubt that they will be upgrading to high-resolution audio anytime soon. There are real challenges to working with 192 kHz or even 95…and they don’t hear any difference.

      Reply
      • June 1, 2015 at 7:34 pm
        Permalink

        It just confuses the heck out of me how so many people can work so hard developing advanced technology’s like bluray, DTS-HD Master, Dolby Digital, etc. Then they rightly promote it’s capabilities to sell discs, (and motive seats).. But the guys back at the recording end waste all that and are allowed to turn it into a lie recording and editing in a much degraded manner.
        The public never ends getting lied to and screwed. SAD

        Reply
        • June 2, 2015 at 9:05 am
          Permalink

          Exactly. The artists, engineers, producers, and labels need to up their game…but they are unlikely to do so. The attitude is..”who cares?”

          Reply
  • May 31, 2015 at 10:54 am
    Permalink

    The DSD fans treat DSD with religious fervor. The fact that it tends to roll off the top and a little at the bottom for that “analog sound” doesn’t matter to them. And quad DSD is an absolute joke designed for one purpose, and that is to charge even more money for a recording. It sounds no different than double DSD which in turn sounds remarkably like single DSD. If it mattered (and is doesn’t), Jared Sacks, whose recordings are spectacular, would use it. He uses single DSD.

    Reply
  • May 31, 2015 at 7:02 pm
    Permalink

    Terrific idea !! wrt “PCM: The Ultimate High-Resolution Digital Format…Bettering Analog.”

    Reply
  • June 1, 2015 at 9:11 am
    Permalink

    How about creating a Studio Master Source logo with associated wording to state the format and resolution of the studio master source. Or perhaps, adapting the Hi-Res logo.

    The word ‘True’ could also indicate that the transfer to another format had not taken place during the creation of the studio master source.

    So, a DSD studio master source edited in PCM could not claim to be ‘True’.

    Resulting examples could be:

    LOGO
    Source: True 96/24 PCM

    LOGO
    Source: True DSD128

    LOGO
    Source: DSD128

    LOGO
    Source: Analogue Tape

    People who care will make informed choices about whether they want to buy upscaled, downscaled recordings or those reformatted from/to DSD or PCM.

    People who don’t care won’t care….

    Reply
    • June 1, 2015 at 9:42 am
      Permalink

      Julian, thanks for your input. I’ve thought about this a great deal over the past couple years. And my experience with audiophiles, audio companies, website etc. has convinced me that we have to circumvent the DEG, CEA, JAS, NARAS, and the rest of them. Everyone with any sense is simply ignoring their meaningless and confusing definitions and logos. I’m going to make my case directing to the download sites, the manufacturers, and audio community. Maybe we can build a ground swell that will wash away the misleading mumbo jumbo that’s already out there and get some real information to consumers. Stay tuned.

      Reply
      • June 1, 2015 at 3:00 pm
        Permalink

        T.R.U.E could be a good acronym to use.

        True Resolution Unmolested Encoding or True Resolution Unmodified Encoding.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

14 − fourteen =