|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.166.122.67
In Reply to: RE: Question only for those that have, at length, compared these much lauded technologies: posted by Bill Way on April 22, 2014 at 16:17:38
A simpler answer?Traditionally phonograph mastering used some dynamic range compression, often done tastefully and manually. In moderate doses it can sound good as the quieter parts are more perceptible, and thanks to fletcher Munson effects, sound more correct.
As far as I have heard, people who rip their phono with a high quality ADC say that the resulting digital file upon playback sounds virtually identical.
Edits: 04/22/14Follow Ups:
Usually its there for other reasons- one of the most common being that the producer does not want the mastering engineer to take the extra time and test cuts to do the mastering job without compression.
(An LP mastering system is impossible to overload, see the link below which is in this same thread)
For Redbook, its usually a good idea to apply compression, as the bits available to define the signal drops off with the signal level. This causes a loss of low level resolution.
So as a result 'tasteful' compression is going to be with us for a while...
There is no need for dynamic range compression for home listening if one has a decent domestic situation and an adequate playback system. If the producers want to limit the dynamics to increase the size of their (perceived) market they should instruct the musicians to limit their dynamics. The result will be better musically and sonically.
There is certainly no need for Fletcher Munson compensation on playback. One simply adjusts the volume control to appropriate concert hall volume.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: