[mnarwold]

I have to agree with Jaddie as well. Very well said. It seems rare to have something mastered and then put onto both CD and vinyl, so they won't sound the same for that reason. I also believe the "experience" argument is valid. We can have a very similar experience with CD, but one must be more deliberate about it and we're (or should I say I'm) often too lazy or have "too much to do" to take the time to just sit and listen and enjoy.
 
For all those people arguing that "tests don't matter and you can't change what I hear", you must understand that this is the "sound science" forum. Therefore, we talk about the science behind things. We carefully create experiments and observe what happens, just like all scientists. We strive to have things be objective as possible, because that is science. In every other form of science, the double-blind test is the golden standard of testing. Now, one can argue that the scientific way of looking at sound isn't the best way and just allow everyone to hear whatever they want, but to have that discussion within the "sound science" forum is probably not the ideal place since the vast majority of people in this forum have already chosen the scientific method over the subjective method and this was created to be a place to discuss the science (similarly, our science isn't welcome in the cables forum since those forums are for people with a different core belief).
 
Scientifically, the medium of vinyl is in every way inferior to CD when it comes to actual sound (as Jaddie said, the psychological experiences play a role within our mind, but that doesn't change the sound). There is no scientific argument to the contrary. Us "objectivists" hold the science above all else to determine truth. The subjectivist holds individual experience (confirmed by the collective) above all else to determine truth. Of course, most people aren't extreme one way or the other and use both objective and subjective data to form their conclusion, but we are separated when the two pieces of data (science and experience) say different things and we must choose which is more important.

 

[jaddie]

Quote:

Actually, you're probably better off recording after two or three plays, provided your stylus is in good shape and your turntable is setup properly.

Ok, I gotta ask.....why?

 

[nelamvr6]

Quote:

Ok, I gotta ask.....why?

 
Because on the first play your stylus can smooth out any burrs left in the groove by the cutting stylus.
 
At least that's the theory that has been bounced around for years.  Hell, for decades at this point...

 

[scuttle]

 
Because on the first play your stylus can smooth out any burrs left in the groove by the cutting stylus.
 
At least that's the theory that has been bounced around for years.  Hell, for decades at this point...

 
"Burrs"??? If we're talking loose detrirtus, wouldn't a brush be better? And if we're saying that kruft will actually be attached to the vinyl which needs forcible removal and that the stylus can do this, then... well, I don't know of any way of continuing that won't sound really mean.

 

[nelamvr6]

Quote:

 
"Burrs"??? If we're talking loose detrirtus, wouldn't a brush be better? And if we're saying that kruft will actually be attached to the vinyl which needs forcible removal and that the stylus can do this, then... well, I don't know of any way of continuing that won't sound really mean.

 
 
The fact of the matter is, you simply like to argue.  Isn't that right?
 
No, I'm talking about, during the cutting/plating/stamping process that goes into making the record, pressing companies won't go to a lot of trouble to remove burrs from the stamper because they don't want to risk affecting the sound.  Consequently, it is possible that when you get the LP and put it on your turntable, there may still be artifacts of this process that are not part of the actual recorded audio.  Burrs in the groove.
 
I'm not referring to "loose detrirtus" (sic.)... 
 
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=vinyl+burrs+in+the+groove

 

[scuttle]

 
The fact of the matter is, you simply like to argue.  Isn't that right?

 
Yes: anyone who doesn't treat what you say as godlike wisdom is simply being awkward for the sake of it.
 

I'm not referring to "loose detrirtus" (sic.)...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=vinyl+burrs+in+the+groove

Yeah, I saw the same stuff when I googled. Unlike you I actually read the more intelligent links:
 

http://micrographia.com/projec/projapps/viny/viny0100.htm
 
The burrs are an artefact of the lacquer-cutting stage of record production, and are called "horns" in the trade. They are faithfully reproduced through all subsequent stages of manufacture. The technique of cutting the lacquer master with a heated stylus largely eliminated this phenomenon, and the example shown here is probably due to non-optimum heating of the engraving stylus.

They do not directly affect the sound produced by the record, but they are fragile, and if the record surface is lightly scraped or rubbed, they can overhang the groove, causing noisy playback.
 

 
There's nothing here to say that playing can remove these burrs effectively, which was my point. This also makes it clear that the first pass probably will be the best one, because there is the least chance of overhangs. What you don't get is that the tip of a stylus is both delicate and hard, which makes it one of the worst imagineable cleaning tools! Fortunately what will actually happen is that the stylus will treat the burr the same way it treats the groove - ie it will track it rather than trying to obliterate it. Thus reducing sound quality, but not actually destroying itself or the record.
 
Believe it or not, I actually am interested in this stuff in its own right - and like peope keep explaining, this is the SCIENCE forum.
 
Oh well - back to work.

 

[scuttle]

That link is pretty interesting by the way - there's lots of info and pictures about your vinyl's microscopic landscape. Eg
 
 
Quote:

 
The vegetable agent in the picture below is an anonymous fungus. The mycelial threads are seen radiating from small lumps stuck on the record surface which are dried silverfish droppings. Four as yet fungally unexploited items of the same kind are seen in the right-hand portion of the picture. It has been estimated that one silverfish turd would keep the average fungus happily fed for God knows how long -- depending on the temperature and humidity conditions in the location of your record collection.
 

 

 

[jaddie]

Quote:

 
Yes: anyone who doesn't treat what you say as godlike wisdom is simply being awkward for the sake of it.
 
Yeah, I saw the same stuff when I googled. Unlike you I actually read the more intelligent links:
 
 
There's nothing here to say that playing can remove these burrs effectively, which was my point. This also makes it clear that the first pass probably will be the best one, because there is the least chance of overhangs. What you don't get is that the tip of a stylus is both delicate and hard, which makes it one of the worst imagineable cleaning tools! Fortunately what will actually happen is that the stylus will treat the burr the same way it treats the groove - ie it will track it rather than trying to obliterate it. Thus reducing sound quality, but not actually destroying itself or the record.
 
Believe it or not, I actually am interested in this stuff in its own right - and like peope keep explaining, this is the SCIENCE forum.
 
Oh well - back to work.

...and it was going so well.  Can't we play nice?
 
Seems to me there would be a few cases where a burr could be knocked off after a few plays.  Perhaps not every time, and perhaps these instances are few, but not impossible. Most of what's wrong on a record will be there on every play, and get worse, but that's not to say everything.  When I was listening to test pressing after test pressing, trying to find one to approve, I found that every glitch I heard was actually a problem with vinyl imperfections.  We tried to use Quiex II, a high-performance and more expensive vinyl than a more general Kaiser product, but the Quiex was too inconsistent.  Surface noise was a tiny bit lower, but glitches were much higher.  Kaiser was glitch free.  I also found that at least a couple of problems happened during the plating process, which meant new lacquers, metal, etc. Vinyl is a rather "soft" process, filled with variation.  As such, it seems that the idea of a couple of plays knocking off a burr or two isn't all that implausible.  You just have to weight that against wear of challenging grooves.  I don't know if I'd pre-play a piano solo recording, or a choral record, but others probably would be ok. 

 

[nelamvr6]

Well, that theory has been part of vinyl lore since I was a small child, and that's a long time.
 
As I mentioned, I usually record on the first pass.

 

[scuttle]

Quote:

...and it was going so well.  Can't we play nice?
 
Seems to me there would be a few cases where a burr could be knocked off after a few plays.  Perhaps not every time, and perhaps these instances are few, but not impossible.

 
Microscope Man has a collection of 5000 records. He does not mention this as a possibility in a 4 page article on the micro-detail of vinyl albums, so I think if it happens at all it must be very rare. He does mention the burr folding over and throwing off the needle, so I think we must accept this as the likely real world behaviour.
 
He also says that such burrs are indicative of flawed pressing, so hopefully they are not too common. I think the real lesson here is that handling vinyl in such a way to prevent the folding of the burr (low pressure in the rack?) is probably a good idea. Oh - and if you go to the last page of his article there is some very positive information about how well vinyl can last (if it is saved from hipsters with blunt stylii.) 50 years of regular play is quite possible, making nonsense of a lot of early CD propaganda.
 
BUT: The real reason I came back to make a last post before getting back to caffeine and coding: there are some great micro pics of stylii in the article - I thought that Jaddie would enjoy them. But, you know, not in a sick way.

 

[nelamvr6]

Quote:

...and it was going so well.  Can't we play nice?
 
Seems to me there would be a few cases where a burr could be knocked off after a few plays.  Perhaps not every time, and perhaps these instances are few, but not impossible. Most of what's wrong on a record will be there on every play, and get worse, but that's not to say everything.  When I was listening to test pressing after test pressing, trying to find one to approve, I found that every glitch I heard was actually a problem with vinyl imperfections.  We tried to use Quiex II, a high-performance and more expensive vinyl than a more general Kaiser product, but the Quiex was too inconsistent.  Surface noise was a tiny bit lower, but glitches were much higher.  Kaiser was glitch free.  I also found that at least a couple of problems happened during the plating process, which meant new lacquers, metal, etc. Vinyl is a rather "soft" process, filled with variation.  As such, it seems that the idea of a couple of plays knocking off a burr or two isn't all that implausible.  You just have to weight that against wear of challenging grooves.  I don't know if I'd pre-play a piano solo recording, or a choral record, but others probably would be ok. 

 
 
It seems that there are some pressing plants that get it right most of the time, while others have problems releasing even one nice pressing.
 
I love Speakers Corners releases, they press mostly, if not exclusively, at Pallas in Germany.  Most of their pressings are excellent.
 
RTI seems to be improving, but they are still not up to Pallas' standards IMHO.  If I'm not mistaken, MoFi is now using RTI, and most of their pressings are quite good.  Perhaps RTI has one set of QA controls for MoFi, and different criteria for other labels...
 
I wish we would shuck off this 180g fetish, I have more problems with non-fills on 180g vinyl than standard weight, by a long shot!

 

[jaddie]

My experience was with RTI, Sheffield did the plating, and Grundman cut the lacquers.  The project goes back many years to 1984, a time when records were still being made a lot, and CDs were just penetrating the popular market.  I couldn't believe the trouble we had with the vinyl, the CD pressing came off perfectly the first time. Hopefully, Quiex II today is more consistent, but they certainly don't make as much today as then.

 

[xnor]

High-end or good vinyl setups were mentioned a couple of pages back.
 
Would the Pro-Ject Xtension 10 Evolution (€ 3000) qualify as high-end or at least as good?
 
Some measurements:

 
Bearing rumble, DIN B-weighted, into 47 kohm: -68 dB where 0 dB = 53 mVrms at 1 kHz
Wow and flutter: 0.09%
 
If we compare this to digital that's worse than ancient digital tech with ENOB below 13 bits.
 
That is without a preamp. I guess a high-end preamp isn't much cheaper is it? Maybe € 2k?
If designed properly it shouldn't add much distortion and noise (yeah, some high-end preamps are actually not designed properly).
 
 
Now this might sound outrageous, but a € 40 sansa clip can directly drive headphones, store gigabytes of lossless (if you wish) tracks, has less noise, no wow/flutter (jitter components down about -120 dB), higher dynamic range, lower crosstalk ...

 

[scuttle]

If we compare this to digital that's worse than ancient digital tech with ENOB below 13 bits.
 
That is without a preamp. I guess a high-end preamp isn't much cheaper is it? Maybe € 2k?
If designed properly it shouldn't add much distortion and noise (yeah, some high-end preamps are actually not designed properly).
 
Now this might sound outrageous, but a € 40 sansa clip can directly drive headphones, store gigabytes of lossless (if you wish) tracks, has less noise, no wow/flutter (jitter components down about -120 dB), higher dynamic range, lower crosstalk ...

 
But the Clip is still going to sound worse than the $6000 dinosaur set-up if the dinosaur gets to play competently mastered vinyl that has been treated well, while the Clip is fed with a modern over-loud re-master. And this is what really irritates me: it wouldn't cost record companies a thing to make multiple downloads of the same album available, a "hot" version for the kidz with Beatz and, oh, the "extra-dynamic" one for people with taste. With old albums they could simply use the original pre-Loudness War masters. But there's no demand, because - and I don't blame people - they don't understand what is often the real cause of problems they blame on digital technology. (Where the problems exist at all.)

 

[jaddie]

Quote:

BUT: The real reason I came back to make a last post before getting back to caffeine and coding: there are some great micro pics of stylii in the article - I thought that Jaddie would enjoy them. But, you know, not in a sick way.

I did.  Thank you.  Didn't vomit once.