Vinyl Asylum

RE: Accuracy and realism. Two of the most misguided ideas in all of audio.

113.28.145.117

This Post Has Been Edited by the Author

In Reply to: RE: Accuracy and realism. Two of the most misguided ideas in all of audio. posted by flood2 on August 03, 2017 at 00:56:32

I understood what you wrote. I just wanted to express my personal views on accuracy and realism in audio since you mentioned them. But since you made a thoughtful post on the subject I will offer some responses to your points.

"However, in the context of the "act" of recording...the process of recording is to accurately record what the mic is picking up."

It certainly can be but it doesn't *have to* be. There are options.

"Accuracy of the original "experience" is a completely different matter which is down to the skill of the tonmeister to position the mics correctly and is unlikely to be equivalent."

Tonmeister has nothing to do with it. The experience of live music is so intrinsically different than the experience of audio recording and playback that the comparisons are absurd. Truly apples to oranges.

"However, it is the mastering engineer and cutting engineer who affect the sound of the final product. So the final product is far removed from what the mics were picking up in some cases."

That is true. The final commerical release often gives us an electrical signal that is very different than the ones that came off the mics. I'd say this is almost always true and for many reasons.

"In the case of vinyl, the deviation from the original will always be far greater."

No, not "always." Not even close. Deviations from the signal leaving the mics is far more a matter of recording engineers tweeking and mixing and mastering engineers doing more tweeking than it is a function of vinyl vs. digital. Now, all else being the same, yes a sufficiently hi enough resolution digital transfer will be more accurate on most parameters than vinyl.

"Digital recording of an existing recording on a tape or record these days results in a "copy" that is undetectably different with equipment of a suitable technical quality."

It *can.* Digital *can* be audibly transparent and often is.

"In the past this may not have been true, but certainly now the technology is very affordable and within reach of consumers."

I totally agree with thsi point.

"Those who insist that digital is "inferior" usually lack the technical knowledge required to understand the process or base their opinions on experience gained on inferior equipment. Those who insist vinyl is "more accurate" clearly lack the technical understanding of the cutting and replay process."

IMO digital is inferior to vinyl but it is more accurate. I am confident that my digital components are audibly transparent so this is not an equipment issue. But remember what I said about accuracy? That it was a misguided goal in audio? This illustrates why quite nicely. Equating accuracy and excellence. Bad idea. Sends most audiophiles in eroneous directions that are not paths to better quality sound or better understanding of audio.

Follow Ups: