In Reply to: An uniformed hypothesis posted by Bob Neill on August 7, 2006 at 06:40:53:
Digital recordings and CDs "suffer from" an unusually flat high frequency response that often does not sound like the high frequency roll off that we were used to from stereo cartridges, records, microphones, and speaker tweeters "in the old days".Part of the subjective high frequency "roll-off" was caused by the masking effect of harmonic distortion inherent with records (up to 100 times higher than CDs), and surface noise.
The result is some high frequency roll-off on vinyl which sounds natural to most listeners. I don't recall any people claiming records would sound better if only they had more high frequency output, although many complained about the surface noise.
CDs can easily provide a "conductor's perspective" of a performance, especially with close-miked recordings, which is brighter (more detailed) than we would hear at our seats in the middle of an auditorium during a live acoustic performance (air is a good high frequency sound absorber).
This effect is easily reduced with a slight twist of a treble control ... which is hard to do if you are an audiophile who shuns tone controls of any kind and has never even experimented with this "tweak".
There is often less bass roll-off under 50Hz. on CDs, when compared with most records, but many people enjoy this.
The redbook sampling frequency is MUCH too fast for our ears to hear "gaps" and room reflections (reverberation) could easily fill in much larger "gaps".
A real test would require listeners to compare a person playing an instrument live to a digital recording/CD of the same person & song and an analog recording/vinyl record of the same person & song. Without objective tests, people often claim to hear whatever they were expecting to hear before the audition.
The sound we hear has been transformed from acoustic energy in a hall or recording studio into electrical energy, and then from DC to AC more than once, and then from electrical energy back to acoustic energy in a different room. It's amazing what we hear sometimes sounds like live music being performed in our listening rooms.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
My Stereo is MUCH BETTER than Your Stereo
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "unnaturally crisp quality of digital sound" can be eliminated - Richard BassNut Greene 13:52:51 08/07/06 (33)
- Re: "unnaturally crisp quality of digital sound" can be eliminated - Soundmind 04:51:36 08/08/06 (18)
- 'Nothing is news', is not a salient point. - soulfood 07:56:25 08/08/06 (0)
- Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - Richard BassNut Greene 07:54:19 08/08/06 (16)
- Re: Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - Dave Kingsland 09:38:10 08/08/06 (15)
- Re: Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - Soundmind 15:00:40 08/08/06 (13)
- Re: Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - theaudiohobby 04:37:33 08/09/06 (5)
- Insofar as recordings are concerned - Soundmind 06:14:18 08/09/06 (4)
- Boy you need to listen to better systems... Perhaps even multichannel [nt] - Ted Smith 11:00:36 08/09/06 (3)
- And you need to listen to live music..in concert halls, and not in the front row either [nt] - Soundmind 15:06:38 08/09/06 (2)
- I do [nt] - Ted Smith 15:18:58 08/09/06 (1)
- I now pronounce you man and wife - Richard BassNut Greene 13:16:29 08/10/06 (0)
- Yes, it's a matter of personal preference - Dave Kingsland 20:31:05 08/08/06 (0)
- Re: Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - Bob Neill 15:34:43 08/08/06 (5)
- Re: Concert Hall at home -- high frequency rolloff is a dynamic event? - Soundmind 19:27:09 08/08/06 (4)
- Now that's some wisdom! - Tuckers 14:49:36 08/10/06 (0)
- Reproductions are not real. - soulfood 09:15:39 08/09/06 (2)
- Re: Reproductions are not real. - Soundmind 15:26:01 08/09/06 (1)
- A reproduction is "completely short". - soulfood 16:32:36 08/09/06 (0)
- Re: Same here - theaudiohobby 14:50:46 08/08/06 (0)
- Re: "unnaturally crisp quality of digital sound" can be eliminated - mauimusicman 03:26:45 08/08/06 (1)
- My experience with Sheffield is that eliminating the tape recorder was a good thing to do - Richard BassNut Greene 07:35:25 08/08/06 (0)
- Re: "unnaturally crisp quality of digital sound" can be eliminated - morricab 14:28:53 08/07/06 (11)
- Right on the money. My experience too. - Sean 20:24:56 08/07/06 (7)
- Repeat: Re: Right on the money. My experience too. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:54:37 08/08/06 (0)
- Re: Right on the money. My experience too. - morricab 04:17:50 08/08/06 (4)
- Eliminate the harmonic distortion and surface noise using CDs (versus vinyl), and you WILL have leaner sound - Richard BassNut Greene 07:29:24 08/08/06 (3)
- Re: Eliminate the harmonic distortion and surface noise using CDs (versus vinyl), and you WILL have leaner sound - morricab 01:19:42 08/09/06 (2)
- This really IS the debate, isn't it??? - Feanor 07:36:21 08/10/06 (1)
- Re: This really IS the debate, isn't it??? - morricab 08:05:13 08/11/06 (0)
- Re: Right on the money. My experience too. - mauimusicman 03:28:57 08/08/06 (0)
- "The digital recording always sounded brighter" - Richard BassNut Greene 14:56:51 08/07/06 (2)
- Re: "The digital recording always sounded brighter" - morricab 04:26:29 08/08/06 (0)
- Re: "The digital recording always sounded brighter" - soulfood 16:21:58 08/07/06 (0)