Why is it that even digitized vinyl sounds so good? - Page 4

I feel sorry for these young folks that did not get their brain wrinkles from vinyl and am radio.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmyjames8 

I feel sorry for these young folks that did not get their brain wrinkles from live sound.

FIFY

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anaxilus 

.

+1

^^ best handle ever.

Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to compare vinyl and digital masters because they're almost always treated differently in the mastering process.   

It would be great if a ridiculously high end record player were fed into a Lavry Gold analogue to digital converter.  Then people could compare the vinyl version with the high res digital conversion.  Of course, the playback equipment would still be a bit different, which might confuse the results.

Better yet, get access to the source tapes of the recording.  Convert those via a Lavry Gold AD.  Play the digital version back via a Lavry Gold DA.  Keep the amp and speakers/headphones the same when monitoring both versions.  If the analogue version still sounds noticeably better, I'll buy into its superiority.

One of my teachers in college, James Boyk, is a professional concert pianist and has his own record label. Around 20 years ago he released his concert album of Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" on both LP and CD. On the output of the microphone preamp he had 2 recorders: An analog and a digital tape recorder. Both were considered state-of-the-art at the time. From the analog recording he cut the LP; from the digital recording he cut the CD. In the music lab at Caltech we had a live feed so you could hear the piano directly through the microphones and then switch between the LP and CD. To me and my colleagues, the all-analog LP sounded more like the direct feed than did the CD.

You can buy the albums and listen for yourself.

http://shop.performancerecordings.com/

Agreed but make it a PM2 AD.   I've heard original R2R masters vs PM2 AD digital transfers and they were indistiguishable (both raw unmastered SBD's).

Quote:

Originally Posted by nnotis 

Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to compare vinyl and digital masters because they're almost always treated differently in the mastering process.   

 

It would be great if a ridiculously high end record player were fed into a Lavry Gold analogue to digital converter.  Then people could compare the vinyl version with the high res digital conversion.  Of course, the playback equipment would still be a bit different, which might confuse the results.

 

Better yet, get access to the source tapes of the recording.  Convert those via a Lavry Gold AD.  Play the digital version back via a Lavry Gold DA.  Keep the amp and speakers/headphones the same when monitoring both versions.  If the analogue version still sounds noticeably better, I'll buy into its superiority.

 

I definitely believe you Donald, but there are two keys to your comparison.  First, and most importantly, this was done 20 years ago.  A to D conversion started getting a lot better about ten years ago.  The best converters from 1990 were still pretty crappy by today's standards.  Second, but related to age, the recording may have been done at 44.1 or 48 Khz.  That's not enough to prevent audible roll off of high frequencies during conversion, especially given the age of the converter.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donald North 

One of my teachers in college, James Boyk, is a professional concert pianist and has his own record label. Around 20 years ago he released his concert album of Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" on both LP and CD. On the output of the microphone preamp he had 2 recorders: An analog and a digital tape recorder. Both were considered state-of-the-art at the time. From the analog recording he cut the LP; from the digital recording he cut the CD. In the music lab at Caltech we had a live feed so you could hear the piano directly through the microphones and then switch between the LP and CD. To me and my colleagues, the all-analog LP sounded more like the direct feed than did the CD.

 

You can buy the albums and listen for yourself.

http://shop.performancerecordings.com/

Originally Posted by jimmyjames8 

"Why is it that even digitized vinyl sounds so good?"

Because the brain was not meant to listen to raw pure sine waves? just like crossfeed on headphones is required because the human brain is not meant to process dual mono?

look at synthesisers, they sound like **** w/o any effects applied on top....I understand why some ppl can like a DAC w/ very poor RMAA measurements, that's because they like the harmonic distortion it adds to the sound. Like the Burson gear(that gives horrendous THD measurements) or a lot of  "vintage" software modelling plugins. I feel like God is talking to me from the clouds when I pass my music through this EQ: http://www.fullcompass.com/product/383020.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal 

Its all in the mastering,  only a few people in the world are good mastering engineers with digital (Steve Hoffman),  when you transfer to digital if you use a good preamp and ADC you are getting the Lp mastering which 9 times out of 10 is better than the compression they over use on CD's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skylab 

Agreed.  I wish I had time to needle-drop all of my MFSL LP's.  I have some real classics, where there simply isn't a CD mastering anywhere near as good.

Same case here. I have a few CD in Chinese, that " copied " off LP made in Germany professionally in studio, sound so much better than regular CD

 

Someone sent me a needle drop CD of the new Hedrix Valley of Neptune.  Even though he used a $50 ADC it sounds much better than the commercial CD version,  simply because there isn't as much dynamic compression and limiting.  The greatest artistic tragedy of the 21st century is the loudness war.