|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.100.1.10
Does anybody go hi-rez by, for example, recording their 45RPM super-vinyl recordings as 96Khz 24 bit?I hate having to change physical media, but CD resolution just does not sound that good.
Follow Ups:
... if you convert your "hi-res" LPs with semi-professional hi-res equipment ( <$500 soundcard) to DVD-A, it will necessarily sound better than a "lo-res" CD mastered with professional equipment?It's worth trying, but the resolution only is not the only factor for sound quality.
In my view, if you think that all CDs sound bad, your CD player is just not good enough.
There is some real musical cd's if played back on good equipment.An easy entry might be a sub $1000 D/A converter. See the "Digital" forum for advice.
Lately I've been archiving some of my vinyl to DSD via EMM Labs/Genex converters into a Pyramix DSD Mastering Workstation. Priceless!!
gaspasser, when you are done with the mastering, will you be selling your old LPs?
Howdy"gaspasser"? I know Bruce, he's serious and lives not far from me. I still have to go visit his new studio, but I've seen the pictures of it being built and he brought a bunch of equipment to the local audio club and did a live recording for us.
"gasspasser" It's a term, much like the military guys give each other (jarhead, squid...) that doctors gave to anesthesiologists. They pass gas to their patients. Ask him what an orthopod is. No, you won't find one in an archeological dig.If Dr. Bruce is downloading all of those records to tape or disc, he must intend on playing the digitized copies. Hence, what to do with the originals.
HowdySorry for being too testy there.
Yeah, hopefully soon after I get this thing built I won't have to "pass gas" anymore. At least that's the plan!
Now I wonder who would want 3500 albums??
nt
The feeling is 24/96 can capture most of Vinyl's resolution. Also you might ask this question over there.
"Analog is Music, Digital is mathematics"
Happy listening,
Teresa
Hi Teresa, I've always considered you as a person with very good ears and one who is well versed in vinyl (remembering your vinyl phase). Have you heard any of the 24/96 direct from vinyl recordings? It would seem that you, more than anyone else on either of these forums would be considered the most respected source of critique on this concept.If you haven't heard any of these recordings yet I hope you do get a chance to. I'd love to hear what you think.
I am sorry I haven't experimented with recording Vinyl to 24/96 PCM yet but "tubesforever" who also lives in Reno has done it and says it makes an almost perfect copy of an LP. Next time I go over I will check it out.I have recorded Vinyl to DAT (16 Bit 48kHz) not much more resolution than CD but my recordings didn't have the dreaded shrill upper-midrange that makes me run screaming from the room in pain. I don't know if it's a difference in the extra 5,900 samples per second or format with physical contact sound better than laser read ones.
LPs I recorded to DAT lost a little bit of ambiance, and the high frequencies lost some impact and that shimmering airiness they have live, but from the midrange down the DAT made to my ears a near perfect copy something I have never heard a CD-R do so I am sure 24/96 has to be even better and may actually sound identical to the LP. I'll let you know after I check it out.
Oh I did try some pre-recorded DAT's from Sheffield Lab and Direct to Tape Recording Co. when I still had the player, must be over a decade ago. They were much better than the CD versions but LP easily surpassed them. As you know the format never took off as a consumer format and I think there was only about 10 pre-recorded tapes ever released.
"Music is love"
Teresa
"I have recorded Vinyl to DAT (16 Bit 48kHz) not much more resolution than CD but my recordings didn't have the dreaded shrill upper-midrange that makes me run screaming from the room in pain. I don't know if it's a difference in the extra 5,900 samples per second or format with physical contact sound better than laser read ones."Some feel that the threshold of transparency may be lower than us audio geeks think. Say somwhere in the 50kHz area. If you haven't already, do check out an SACD of on of the early DMP recordeings. Recorded at 55.1 kHz on an early digital machine (Soundstream?), they sound pretty darn good. The Leonhart has some very nice piano sound and is a cute disc. Jay is no slouch on the bass either.
Wow, you seem to have tried every pre-recorded audio format.
It is interesting to note that DAT @ 48/16 did not cause you irritation. Could it be low rez PCM coupled with static electricity generated by a plastic disc rotated at high speed and noise from the servo mechanism and noise from the laser gives you pain?
Have you tried a MP3 player with no moving parts (ie, flash memory based, no HDD). I suspect your pain problem may disappear!
HowdyAt MikeL's place Alex Peychev recorded from Mike's Rockport TT to Redbook and it sounded wonderful! ( http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/hirez/messages/227489.html )
I can't imagine how much better it would sound with a higher resolution recorder, but part of the magic was clearly the careful mods Alex had done to his recorder.
-Ted
up on top of the head. In my not so humble opinion, most people who prefer vinyl have thoroughly tweaked their systems for years in order to get their prized LPs to sound the way they want. And for good reason. If they had put as much of an effort into their digital front ends, the gap just might disappear. But then again their systems might end up not sounding so well on vinyl. Perhaps the Ying Yang thing taking place? Unike Teresa, I find CD on my slightly tweaked system can sound pretty darn good. It may not be the be all, end all in resolution, but I can get a high level of enjoyment without being driven out of the room from high frequency digititis. When I put a well recorded SACD, it shouts to LP, bring it on.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: