Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › "the vinyl has been replaced by the CD, largely inferior in quality"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"the vinyl has been replaced by the CD, largely inferior in quality" - Page 5

post #61 of 437
9/14/10 at 5:18pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperDuel View Post

Vinyl is an analog format.  If the orginial master tapes are analog then it will be no suprise that vinyl will sound better than digital.  If the orginial source is digital then it will sound better on any digital format.  In my opinion doing ADC is defeating the whole purpose on vinyl:  digital is bits and vinyl is a pure wavelength.  

 


Still not quite getting what you're trying to say.

 

What exactly does "pure wavelength" mean?

 

se

 

Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #62 of 437
9/14/10 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


 


Still not quite getting what you're trying to say.

 

What exactly does "pure wavelength" mean?

 

se

 


No stair steps, no comb teeth.  The way analog waves are meant to be.  ;)

 

(course no well implemented modern DAC does the stair step style conversion or a connect the dots style conversion that many people seem to imagine digital does)

Reply
post #63 of 437
9/14/10 at 5:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich View Post


No stair steps, no comb teeth.  The way analog waves are meant to be.  " class="bbcode_smiley" height="" src="http://files.head-fi.org/images/smilies//http://hfimage.head-fi.org/smilies/wink.gif" title=";)" width="" />

 

(course no well implemented modern DAC does the stair step style conversion or a connect the dots style conversion that many people seem to imagine digital does)


True.

 

Many people see over simplified explanations of how digital audio works and come to quite a few erroneous conclusions.

 

se

 

Reply
post #64 of 437
9/14/10 at 5:55pm
Thread Starter 

 

Originally Posted by 9pintube View Post

 Zaubertuba, You made a very valid point about the quality of vinyl Lps recorded in the 80's, Most were crap!  and RUSHED OUT THE DOOR TO RECORD SHOPS !! Remember what Joe Walsh said, "The Eighties were a waist of Time"......................Anyone looking for LPs today, stay away from most that have Bar Codes on the back cover.......leeperry, I can't help but ask, Have you ever heard a truly HIGH END Vinyl Play Back system??? Do you or have you ever owned a Turntable???

 

HyperDuel,  Quote: SACD should had killed redbook a long time ago.  It Did, along with the new LPs, but most people are still satisfied with using RED BOOK Disc , even this Vinyl LOVER, uses them for headphone listening


1) hehe, yes I've owned several mid-rage turntables and the noise level was horrid...I'm a funk addict and nothing beats long time out of print 7" of groups noone ever heard about. I'm totally addicted to rare groove, like this kind of compilation(I've got the 10 volumes on CD): http://www.dustygroove.com/item.php?id=cnnz4n55t7

 

The SQ is pretty bad, but the vinyl sound fits heavy funk perfectly...just like it works well on electronic music such as DNB or house as well. But it's really horrid on classical or jazz to my ears, and I see it as a last chance...that's when there's no chance you'll be getting a cleaner source anyway. Like the Beatles acetates when they didn't have any tape recorder...same story.

 

This heavy funk compilation is different, they had the 7" and managed to find the mastertapes of each song and remastered them...best of both worlds: http://www.amazon.com/Midwest-Funk-Various-Artists/dp/B00011FY22

 

And yes, these days the only point to vinyl is that many companies release grossly clipped CD's...and if you whine about it, they'll tell you to buy the vinyl! like this album: http://www.amazon.com/My-World-Lee-Fields-Expressions/dp/B0026PMN70

 

It's the same story w/ the first album of Portishead, it sounds far better on vinyl...but they were already using vinyl samples so it's a double crackling feast \o/ ..that's also why I don't like rare funk compilations on LP, double crackling is not a good deal at all.

 

2) A friend of mine ripped some SACD to 5.1 24/96 PCM w/ his Lynx-TWOC...the SQ is out of this world, it proves yet again that what you're paying for w/ SACD is improved mastering. I'm not such a big fan of DM, but their "Violator" SACD is simply eye popping.


Edited by leeperry - 9/14/10 at 6:02pm
Reply
post #65 of 437
9/14/10 at 6:19pm

leeperry, Great Info on the 7" jobbies, I've heard a few and have often wondered If I should be picking up a couple when I see them, for sale???.................So, IT'S ALL GOOD, RIGHT!!  Great Discussions with you and the others........FUNK ON my brother!

Reply
post #66 of 437
9/14/10 at 6:45pm

I think its really nice that vinyl is still around and didn't get completely phased out.  Otherwise I would have been deprived of easily owning a piece of historic technology that brought music to the masses.  I hope it continues strongly and I hope to purchase a nice turntable one day.  The more material that gets released on vinyl, the sooner that day will be.

Reply
post #67 of 437
9/14/10 at 6:53pm
Thread Starter 

 

Originally Posted by 9pintube View Post

leeperry, Great Info on the 7" jobbies, I've heard a few and have often wondered If I should be picking up a couple when I see them, for sale???.................So, IT'S ALL GOOD, RIGHT!!  Great Discussions with you and the others........FUNK ON my brother!


We have a thread about it: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/477682/thumpasorous-people-s-funk-appreciation-thread

 

I managed to pick a few 7" at one of the recording studio I was working for that I've never heard anywhere else....there's been so much excellent deep funk released between the late 60's and mid 70's that even in 50 years from now we'll still be discovering new groups and new tunes.

 

And the hardcore funk collector are also crazy about library music, there's soooooooo many excellent imaginary soundtracks..and very often only released on vynil, and extremely hard to find on CD, like this one: http://www.amazon.com/Jungle-Obsession-Nino-Roger-Nardini/dp/B00005ASJH

that's the original vynil cover: 2639.png

 

I've got it on CD, and that's typically the kind of music I wouldn't like on vinyl...it's so crisp and clear sounding, it's exotica..love this music style(created in the 50's by Martin Denny/Les Baxter).

 

Vinyl music has a history, a story to tell you...but I'll take a remastered CD from the original mastertapes anyday. 


Edited by leeperry - 9/14/10 at 6:56pm
Reply
post #68 of 437
9/14/10 at 6:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 


Vinyl music has a history, a story to tell you...but I'll take a remastered CD from the original mastertapes anyday. 


But I'm glad not everyone does...otherwise I wouldn't be able to partake in the history and the story it may tell.

Reply
post #69 of 437
9/14/10 at 7:08pm
Thread Starter 

 

Originally Posted by SP Wild View Post

But I'm glad not everyone does...otherwise I wouldn't be able to partake in the history and the story it may tell.

 

There's nothing like watching a +45yo movie in HD w/ perfect PQ and SQ...this is like listening to all that 60/70's music when properly remastered. Noone has ever heard or seen this material w/ such pristine quality...this is what technology does for me, allow me to watch "Per qualche dollaro in più" in HD on my perfectly calibrated pj at home...it was released in 1965 and prolly looked horrid at that time....technology has provided me w/ a perfectly remastered copy, now this is very very cool stuff! Just like I love this 24/96 remastered CD of Otis Redding: http://www.amazon.com/Remember-Me-Otis-Redding/dp/B000000ZLJ

 

"24-bit digitally remastered digipak reissue of the late soul legend's 1992 compilation"

 

remastered from the original mastertapes...and it's got a lot of B-takes and unreleased songs, that's also what technology can do for me...and Oh my Oh my, the SQ is out of this world. I do remember Otis, I can tell you that.

Reply
post #70 of 437
9/14/10 at 8:07pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

 

 

There's nothing like watching a +45yo movie in HD w/ perfect PQ and SQ...this is like listening to all that 60/70's music when properly remastered. Noone has ever heard or seen this material w/ such pristine quality...this is what technology does for me, allow me to watch "Per qualche dollaro in più" in HD on my perfectly calibrated pj at home...it was released in 1965 and prolly looked horrid at that time....technology has provided me w/ a perfectly remastered copy, now this is very very cool stuff! Just like I love this 24/96 remastered CD of Otis Redding: http://www.amazon.com/Remember-Me-Otis-Redding/dp/B000000ZLJ

 

"24-bit digitally remastered digipak reissue of the late soul legend's 1992 compilation"

 

remastered from the original mastertapes...and it's got a lot of B-takes and unreleased songs, that's also what technology can do for me...and Oh my Oh my, the SQ is out of this world. I do remember Otis, I can tell you that.


Yeah, technology is brilliant.  Gotta love it!

Reply
post #71 of 437
9/14/10 at 8:25pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperDuel View Post

Vinyl is an analog format.  If the orginial master tapes are analog then it will be no suprise that vinyl will sound better than digital.  If the orginial source is digital then it will sound better on any digital format.  In my opinion doing ADC is defeating the whole purpose on vinyl:  digital is bits and vinyl is a pure wavelength.  

 

Personally I don't see the point of making digital stuff out of vinyl, it's not going to sound better than vinyl that's for sure.  

 

My Midnight Sugar XRCD doesn't sound near as good as my vinyl copy. 

 


 

 


Vinyl sadly is a far from pure wavelength ??. It is a 3rd hand approximation of the original signal. It is continuous but not infinite, it has neither infinite bandwidth nor infinite SNR. In order to get the wavelength ??? on LP it has to be subjected to a massive EQ curve which is reversed on playback, pure it is not. In fact when you look at the complex chain from source to playback it is remarkable that vinyl sounds as good as it does. You are dragging a rock through a rough canyon with it careening wildly from side to side, as it goes from outside to inside the alignment changes radically, it is only optimum for a small percentage of its journey. Then there is the whole 2 x pi x R thing each revolution takes about 1.8 seconds but the data density/inch at the center is very different to the outside and tracking becomes more problematic, especially for high amplitude high frequency signals.

 

Digitizing this medium however can be done subjectively transparently with the benefit that you can put the LP away in the cupboard where damage and accident stop being a problem, seems like a deal to me !

Reply
post #72 of 437
9/14/10 at 8:35pm

Back in the mid 1990's I had a good vinyl setup, VPI 19 MkIII with an ET2 air arm, a high output MC cartridge, VTL Ultimate tube preamp. I had direct to disk, MFSLs, Sheffield Labs, etc... vinyls. Then I had the chance to home demo a Linn Karik/Numerik CD setup, that was the best CD player I have ever heard at that time. Fast forward today, digital has progressed so far that I will never go back to vinyl with all of its drawbacks.

Reply
post #73 of 437
9/14/10 at 8:51pm

Vinyl sadly is a far from pure wavelength ??. It is a 3rd hand approximation of the original signal. It is continuous but not infinite, it has neither infinite bandwidth nor infinite SNR. In order to get the wavelength ??? on LP it has to be subjected to a massive EQ curve which is reversed on playback, pure it is not. In fact when you look at the complex chain from source to playback it is remarkable that vinyl sounds as good as it does. You are dragging a rock through a rough canyon with it careening wildly from side to side, as it goes from outside to inside the alignment changes radically, it is only optimum for a small percentage of its journey. Then there is the whole 2 x pi x R thing each revolution takes about 1.8 seconds but the data density/inch at the center is very different to the outside and tracking becomes more problematic, especially for high amplitude high frequency signals.

 

 

Whoa!    Funny thing I had never thought about that...so the data density is never truly constant as the needle tracks towards a smaller and smaller diameter circle...or rather the data density per linear inch of track increases constantly from the edge to the center.

 

But wait, isn't this a technical issue with CD's as well--I mean, they play back at a constant rotational speed, right?  

 

 

Digitizing this medium however can be done subjectively transparently with the benefit that you can put the LP away in the cupboard where damage and accident stop being a problem, seems like a deal to me !

 


I've often thought of this.  I'm wondering though, what's the point of diminishing returns with respect to the level of digitization equipment/playback equipment, where any aural benefit of digitizing vinyl (and I'm assuming a decently mastered and reproduced copy) is nullified?  Would it even be worth doing with say, a $500 reconditioned table/cartridge combo and a "prosumer" card like the eMu 1212m? Or is it not worth it unless you've got a Clearaudio unit like 9pin's running into a Lynx or RME Hammerfall card?

Reply
post #74 of 437
9/14/10 at 9:07pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaubertuba View Post

But wait, isn't this a technical issue with CD's as well--I mean, they play back at a constant rotational speed, right?  

 

No. Rotational speed varies. Compact Disc is CLV (Constant Linear Velocity).

 

se

 

 

 

Reply
post #75 of 437
9/15/10 at 6:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaubertuba View Post

 

 

Quote:
 Digitizing this medium however can be done subjectively transparently with the benefit that you can put the LP away in the cupboard where damage and accident stop being a problem, seems like a deal to me !

 

I've often thought of this.  I'm wondering though, what's the point of diminishing returns with respect to the level of digitization equipment/playback equipment, where any aural benefit of digitizing vinyl (and I'm assuming a decently mastered and reproduced copy) is nullified?  Would it even be worth doing with say, a $500 reconditioned table/cartridge combo and a "prosumer" card like the eMu 1212m? Or is it not worth it unless you've got a Clearaudio unit like 9pin's running into a Lynx or RME Hammerfall card?


The key is in the 'subjectively transparently" bit. Whatever your source is you can capture it to the point where in synchronized testing you cannot tell the difference between the two. The better the source the better the recording. Whilst LP in theory has life above 20K, it is generally a long way down and it is not the strongest nor most important part of a normal musical signal, LP also does not have a dynamic range that is a problem for a 16 bit ADC. There is no strong empirical evidence (i.e DBT) that you need better than 16/44.1, but there is nothing stopping you running your recorder at 24/96 if you so desire, it's your hard drive space. As for the recorder it just needs to be low noise/distortion and have a flat frequency response. Remembering that your source, however good will have much more ( a factor of at least 10x) incipient noise anyway, the noise added by a good ADC stage will be utterly unnoticeable.

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › "the vinyl has been replaced by the CD, largely inferior in quality"