 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
172.193.37.35
In Reply to: The offered disc isn't the real deal. posted by Frank.. on February 16, 2006 at 00:14:12:
I gather from the ad these are legal to purchase if you already own the recording in any format due to the "fair use" laws.I would like to know what turntable and phono cartridge is used? Even at 192kHz I doubt that PCM or even DSD can capture all the resolution of vinyl. Digital has not advanced that far yet.
Teresa
Follow Ups:
I've had a VPI Scoutmaster turntable for about a year now, and there is no contest between CD and Lp's, at least with Deccas, EMI's, and most Philips. The textural differntiation--esp. in the bass, (the individual timres of bassoon, low harp, plucked bass, tympani, etc.,) are so much clearer. Bass is faster. Soundstage and depth is far better than even surround SACD. I hadn't owned a turntable in 25 years, and my experience back then with Lps was only Columbia, RCA and Angel--the worst of the Classical pressing and recordings. It's no wonder I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the turntable room at the store, but one note practically was all it took to realize....Hold the phone though: I've discovered that digital Lps are far better than their CD counterparts as well, suggesting that digital may not be the problem, it may be the CD or CD player issues.
Keep up bad Lp press though, prices on lps go up every day unfortunately.
by being seduced by the easy going sound of lp's. It can sound quite good.As you indicate the problem is not digital technology.
There are several reasons why many prefer lp shortcomings over digital shortcomings.
Digital shortcomings are nasty but
Digital done right and it's no contest.
99.9% of lp produced over the last 30 years came from a digital master or went through a digital chain anyway.Frank
You said:*** I've discovered that digital Lps are far better than their CD counterparts as well, suggesting that digital may not be the problem, it may be the CD or CD player issues. ***
I think you are absolutely spot on on this. It's the only explanation that fits the multitude of conflicting information on digital.
Consider this, when CDs first came out, we had lots of musicians and recording engineerings extolling the virtues of digital, and yet lots of audiophiles were complaining how bad CDs sound.
Can both be right?
I believe so. And a simple experiment convinced me. Record something at 44.1/16 using a high quality ADC. You will notice how good and transparent it sounds, even at so called "low res" (actually, adequate res). Now burn it on a CD-R. You will notice the CD-R does not sound (in many cases) as good as the source or even the digital recording on your hard drive. Amazing, but true (at least, in my experience).
I then did a LOT of research into trying to understand why this might be (after all, bits are bits, right?). I learnt a lot about jitter, and audible effects induced from PLL correction.
I ended up designing and building my own CD player that tries to replicate the kind of jitter performance you get from hard disk playback, and it does work.
The album that started me on this journey is James Newton Howard and Friends - a Sheffield Labs title that sounds great on LP but muddy and confused on CD. Well, when you rip that CD to the hard disk, you get a sound that's very similar to the LP - all the clarity in the high frequencies, and the subtlety and "speed" of the dynamics are restored.
PS - if anyone is interested, I have made a CD-R recording of Sting's "... Nothing Like the Sun" LP - which is a digital recording. If you compare it to the actual CD version of the album, you will notice the CD-R exhibits much better dynamics, soundstage, depth (of course, you also get scratches and surface noise, and a bit of groove distortion - can't win them all). If anyone is interested do their own comparison, I can mail them a copy of the CD-R (provided you can prove you have a copy of the album).
Does that sound better than a CD? DVDs use superior error correction and are physically encoded differently.
Mainly due to need to synchronize audio and video. The earliest players featured separate clocks for audio and video, but the problem was a tendency for A/V to go out of sync.Newer designs force synchronization by regenerating the audio clock from the video clock via a PLL circuit. Unfortunately, this results in inherent jitter.
You've got the lp, the needle vibrating in it, the restored equalization in the phono stage...I tell myself the sound I'm hearing just shouldn't *be*!I wanted to mention digital lps just to be fair to PCM as it may sound on the master tape at least. ALSO: I wouldn't have a contest between lp and digital on any typical American pressing, or Columbia recording, for the most part.
24 bit digital easily surpasses vinyls capabilities.Thats fact.
Frank
You said: "24 bit digital easily surpasses vinyl’s capabilities. Thats fact."That is not only wrong but it is very wrong. All you have to do is compare an audiophile LP to any DVD-Audio or SACD out there. It's really that simple.
No digital format completely captures the sonic realism of a symphony orchestra in a concert hall the way Vinyl does.
Digital even DSD and 192kHz is still too slow . No digital format has even close to the transit response of Vinyl, the huge soundstaging of Vinyl, the dynamic impact of Vinyl, the micro-dynamics of Vinyl, the ambiance of Vinyl or even the timbre accuracy of Vinyl.
Case in point Direct to Disc LPs are the highest resolution Vinyl as they use neither Digital or Analog tape .
Someday I hope Digital will equal the sonic realism of Vinyl but we are not there yet.
Have you ever heard a Sheffield Lab Direct to Disc LP? Sheffield Lab LPs have measured frequency response to 50kHz.
Have you ever heard "Pomp and Pipes" on Reference Recordings 180 Gram LP? The bass is the deepest I have ever heard in any format and the dynamic range of this LP was measured at 80dB with S/N ratio of 70dB. The bass on the LP version versus the HDCD version is more realistic, thicker and actually hits the pit of your stomach the same way deep bass does live.
Could be you have been listening to Recycled Vinyl LPs made by the major companies in the USA which have at the most 50dB dynamic range and usually much less?
Vinyl LP is still the highest resolution invented yet, but there is always hope someday that Digital will surpass the realism of Vinyl. SACD, 96kHz and 192kHz PCM come close enough for me.
You need to hear a great turntable before you make anymore silly comments.
Teresa
Yes indeed, the digital SACD, DVD, and CD formats do not reproduce the snap, crackle, pop of albums. So you miss out on the vinyl experience. They also have not figured out how to reproduce the analog noise floor of vinyl.I too liked the overall sound of vinyl for the few good plays a record had. But now enjoy the clarity and detail of digtal much more. I only hear the music, not the noise floor & snap, crackle, and pops.
There is no way to compare vinyl to digital in an objective method.
People can listen to each and decide what they like or dislike about each format. It depends on the quality of the playback equipment for both, and the condition of the vinyl.
A good record cleaning machine. If not the money for the Clean the LPs with Last Power Cleaner and treat with Gruv-Glide. Both together will get out all the grit from the groves and remove static forever from the LP you treat, thus no more snap, crackle and Pop.Record Claps and better tonearms can get surface noise so low on a Virgin Vinyl presssing you can barely hear it even with your ear on the tweeter. LPs pressed on Recycled Vinyl especially from the USA have the noise and grit sealed into the LP you will still hear some surface noise. Try to get Virgin Vinyl LPs, such as audiophile LPs or European and Japanese pressings.
Now if you get a scratch I can't help that. You'll hear glicck-glicck-glicck until you get past the scratch.
But I was not talking about noises I was talking about resolution, two different things.
If you do still have your Vinyl you owe it to yourself to clean it up, de-static it and play it on a great turntable.
Happy listening,
Teresa
Great point, theres always new advances in analog playback technology, even though direct to disc is a old one, to do it with modern equipment has given a fresh new step. as for the cost of vinyl, theres plenty of reissue labels that sell their vinyl cheaper than their CD counterparts, 8 - 10,$US Vinyl / 10 - 13,$US
so many reissue labels out there too, i find new ones all the time.
This argument has been running for years and every test ever done, blind or otherwise, always indicates that vinyl sounds nothing like an original performance or a master tape, there are just so many things wrong with it. What vinyl proponents always do is talk about measurements that mean little, such as frequency response, but fail to talk about the vast amount of distortion from vinyl. Pitch, modulation, harmonic, you name it."Have you ever heard a Sheffield Lab Direct to Disc LP? Sheffield Lab LPs have measured frequency response to 50kHz."
And is that response linear? No, not even close. 192kHz PCM is linear to 96kHz, so that statement above doesn't mean much.
"The bass is the deepest I have ever heard in any format and the dynamic range of this LP was measured at 80dB with S/N ratio of 70dB."
S/N of 70dB is shameful, so that's another moot point. As for bass, Telarc's Liszt: Battle of the Huns Beethoven: Wellington's Victory has 5Hz content at -13.7dBfs. That's next to impossible without huge amounts of distortion from vinyl, I suggest you check it out for comparison.
There are many vinyl vs. digital listening test out there. If I remember correctly, the BAS Speaker included a test where vinyl from a very high-end rig was recorded to 44.1kHz 16-bit PCM, burnt onto a CD and played back. None of the listeners could tell it apart. I'll try to find the issue for more details.
Bottom line as far as I'm concerned is that some people just prefer how vinyl sounds, that's fine. The problem is when they try to use technical arguments that just don't hold up to justify that. Just say "I like it better" and leave it at that.
I really believe with enough samples that the greater sonic realism of vinyl can be captured.I hate cleaning LPs, I hate cleaning the stylus, I hate adjusting VTA.
With SACD and DVD-Audio I just put it in and it plays. Is it too much to ask for greater realism from SACD and DVD-Audio? I don't think so!
Teresa
Trying to quantify vinyl with some sort of "resolution" doesn't make any sense. The point is whether vinyl is faithful to the original recording or performance and it quite clearly isn't no matter what criteria is used.The format has so many compromises that even getting a recording onto the disc often involves changing it in some way, either by mixing in some EQ or squashing dynamics to prevent overmodulation. Mastering vinyl is a lot more difficult than mastering digital (which incidentally is ironic as more engineers make a mess of digital than they ever did with analog).
For most, DVD-A and/or SACD has all the realism you could ever want, I think you're very much in the minority on that one. Have you heard 'The Window' on SACD?
Good points there. But you failed to realize the fact that most modern, digital-era recordings and digital remasterings have also been futzed with excessively: Heavy-handed EQ, severe compression (almost to zero dB) and/or (in the case of digital remasterings of analog-era stuff) heavy-handed digital noise reduction (or what's called "NoNoise"). And although all NR systems degrade the sound quality at least somewhat, the digital NR systems are notorious for mangling the sound (artificially introducing "swishing" or "garbling" even when such flaws weren't there).And blame all that on the mastering, not on the format. You see, the mastering engineers had to master this digital stuff for the crappy boomboxes which most people own - but many of them went too far to that extreme, making such digital recordings sound AWFUL on even mid-fi equipment (let alone high-end equipment). Of course, you would NOT want the exact opposite extreme, either - that is, mastering only for the high-end equipment which almost nobody can afford, and making even mid-priced equipment struggle mightily just to even produce listenable sound from such recordings.
Yes “The Window” is an excellent SACD from a DSD master. I never said SACD or DVD-Audio was not very realistic sounding and I prefer them to LPs. But they do not yet have the resolution available from the best audiophile LPs on state of the art turntables using excellent moving coil cartridges.What I hate about LPs:
1) Surface noise
2) Pops and ticks
3) Warps
4) End of groove distortion on LPs cut too close to the label
5) Constant cleaning of LPs
6) Cleaning of the stylus
7) Having to jump up at the end of an LP side to remove the tone arm before it hits the lead out groove.What I love about LPs:
1) Resolution! The most realistic sound I have ever heard comes from Pure analog audiophile LPs, sharp transient attacks, warm, deep and full bass and the beautiful delicacy of high percussion instruments, etc.When I talk about "resolution" I mean "resolution" as I believe someday Digital (PCM or DSD) will be able to resolve this extra musical information. Until then Vinyl has more resolution than any digital format but there is always hope for the future.
Happy listening,
Teresa
is actually the side effect of the compression used to keep the dynamic range within vinyls bounderies, it's not 'higher' resolution.
Frank
All based on audiophile myth and your own limited observations.I have heard vinyl reply direct from the cutting table in direct comparision with the master tape input. The quality drop is unmistakingly.
Frank
The problem with vinyl is that it's actually at least three - and more typically, five - generations down from the actual master tapes. With typical vinyl records, the master tapes' content gets transferred to what's called a "lacquer". That lacquer is good for only one use: to make a single "master" disk for making "mother" disks from. (One master disk can make dozens of mother disks.) The mother disk is then used to make "stamper" disks - dozens of them. And each stamper disk can press thousands of LP's or 45's. DMM pressings eliminate two of the four intermediate steps.On the other hand, it's much easier to produce a really bad-sounding digital recording than it is to produce a craptacular-sounding analog recording: One tiny slip-up in the digital domain can ruin everything.
actually would help a friend who was an assistant engineer down at Elektra/Asylum studios on La Cienega Blvd. in Hollywood. I would help dupe tapes on their high speed machines for the executives and stuff gopher stuff like that.I would watch as laquers were being cut for The Eagles THE LONG RUN, The Cars CANDY-O, etc. I was even there when Jackson Browne did RUNNING ON EMPTY, I think, as he was not doing too well dating Daryl Hannah and was medicated if you know what I mean. Kind of threw a tantrum in the other room, IIRC?
I even had a few laquers at the time. It was neat to watch the cutting head do it's thing while everybody was tweaking the board and such. I was in High School at the time and would sneak out of the house and accompany him down there, usually this all took place late in the night.
Those were some fun times. I still have some of their generic blank tapes that we used for the demoing the most recent albums.
I remember once, maybe 79/80, we got in (one of five in the world) a 3M Digital portable tape machines, 1" I think and we were tranferring a double (LP) Classical piece to laquer and the machine backlashed and ate part of this master tape and these guys were all freakin' out. I was kind of clueless and was just sitting in the back keeping my mouth shut, but they weren't too happy. It was a fun time.
Chris
What exact music and musicians have you heard on master tape and directly from the cutting board?
Some crappy dance music that happened to be cut at the moment.The music is not important when a direct comparison is possible.
Frank
one time you heard some "crappy dance music" being cut to LP. I guess I will trust the words of recording engineers such as Steve Hoffman and Tony Faulkner who have a little bit more experience than this.And they don't agree with you.
the music doesn't matter.Show me where SH and TF claim that a vinyl disc is a better recording medium than hires digital.
Frank
NT
- http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=vinyl&n=220232&highlight=faulkner&session= (Open in New Window)
That's exactly where I started.A tour at the ex columbia pressing plant in holland.
He doesn't exactly claim that a direct cut disc is the best recording medium in excistense.
TF is just supporting the audiophle myths and thats just what the vinyl addicts like to hear.
Good for sales.Frank
"TF is just supporting the audiophle myths and thats just what the vinyl addicts like to hear.
Good for sales."Why'd you ask if you didn't care anyway?
I'm done with this nonsense.
FWIW, I don't really care what Mr Faulkner thinks. I have the sampler disc he did with the London Symphony Orchestra. And the sound quality is mediocre at best, even by CD standards.
but I do not delude myself that either one actually has more resolution than LP.I am a realist and admit it is the lower cost, convenience and near LP quality that attracts me to SACD and 96kHz and 192kHz DVD-Audio. But I will not delude myself into believing that either one is sonically superior, I cannot suspend belief in the same way that you can.
Here is a simple test for you: compare The Weavers Reunion at Carnegie Hall – 1963 96kHz 24 Bit Classic Records DAD to the 180 Gram LP pressing of the same. While this is one of the best sounding DVD-Audios in my collection. The LP version is more realistic, I wish it was not true as I hate all the mess and the care and up-keeping of Vinyl.
I do hope I live long enough to hear Digital surpass Vinyl, perhaps 32 Bit 384kHz? Who knows?
Teresa
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
