[number1sixerfan]

I'm trying to make sense of the whole vinyl vs. cd case. I am just a bit skeptical if a $1000 plus vinyl rig can compete with a flac based system with a top of the line dac.

 

[Sovkiller]

My very personal opinion on the subject is that digital has the potential to be a lot better format than an LP, do not judge a foramat by human errors, and the problem is not so simple, you are limiting the quality of the digital formats by a human/era/fashion factor and judging then by that result. If an egineer is not able to get a good digital recording and you get that as an example of it, then I could get one of those flimsy LP made in South America or any other part, as an example as well, see the point....

Bad manufacturing process happen in all worlds, but what is funny is that the world decided to accept as "analog format" IMO the less significant media of that method, the LP, media that easile deteriorates, has tons of background nosie, a S/N ratio very lame, takes a lot fo space, and care, and on top is expensive, also the 1.00 LPS you cna get rarely sound good...an 180grams 45rpm LP is more expensive than a CD...why not taking the R to R or maybe a metal cassette as an analog media, or maybe the master tapes...

Aslo vinyl is not slowly comming back, it was always there, we are rediscovering the labels that made them as it is becoming a very lucrative market for audiophiles, IMO we should be better served into trying to develop better and better digital sources and recording methods and using better professional to do the recordings rather than keep on spending in a dead format...

 

[islewind]

Quote:

Originally Posted by double LL /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is just something about the way that diamond point scrubs up against that vinyl.You can't play a violin with a laser gun ,you have to use friction from a bow.

You're confusing the creation of music with the reproduction of recorded music.

 

[khbaur330162]

Quote:

Originally Posted by islewind /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're confusing the creation of music with the reproduction of recorded music.

He's talking about the simple harmonics of a bow rubbed up against a string. The vibrations this combination creates displaces air creating sound. When a diamond tip scrapes on vinyl it similarly vibrates, however, in our application, its displacement of air is a rather moot point. Instead, this motion creates an infinitely complex sinusoidal pulse of electrical current which is then amplified (and amplified again) and sent to some type of transducer. A laser reading data pits can not, nor can it ever truly with today's technological faults, create as infinitely complex wave signals when compared to either of the two previous scenarios.

The subjective aspects are whether human perception can differentiate between CD/SACD sample rates to that of an infinite process, and whether or not vinyl with it's old recording processes can create not only a mere perfect wave signal, but one accurate to the source.

 

[Ingo]

Boy, Howdy. This thread will make your head spin and your cheeks pucker.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

OR we could just use laser discs to store our analog music! Best of both worlds!

Hah, that well never happen though *Sheds a tear in memory of laser disc*.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by khbaur330162 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Instead, this motion creates an infinitely complex sinusoidal pulse of electrical current which is then amplified (and amplified again) and sent to some type of transducer.

I think you will find that it is quite finite. If analog recording methods were infinite then they would have infinite bandwidth, which they do not, nor is analog playback infinite, it is continuous (sort of) but very definitely finite.


Quote:

A laser reading data pits can not, nor can it ever truly with today's technological faults, create as infinitely complex wave signals when compared to either of the two previous scenarios.

You start with a false premise, to be infinitely complex you need infinite bandwidth and infinite response time, which you dont get to have, so it cant be infinitely complex, nor is the dynamic range infinite , also for audible sound you have limits in propogation viz the speed of sound itself, also quite definitely finite, electrical transmission is faster but is still quite quite finite.

Quote:

The subjective aspects are whether human perception can differentiate between CD/SACD sample rates to that of an infinite process, and whether or not vinyl with it's old recording processes can create not only a mere perfect wave signal, but one accurate to the source.

It doesnt matter how often you say it, it is still finite.

The Myth of Infinite Resolution, was: An idea for Mackie - rec.audio.pro | Google Groups

 

[double LL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by islewind /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're confusing the creation of music with the reproduction of recorded music.

I know what you are saying ,but the key word is sound,reproduced or live and how it is recorded and played back.
There is another way that I can explain the difference between analog and digital.Digital is blips ,analog is contiuous whether it's tape or vinyl.I still think a high quality cassette recording is just as good or better than a cd ,and I have some 8- tracks that I play through a sony deck that will rock the house down with any other format that you choose.Those old 8-tracks have a bottom end that is somthin' like you have never heard.Everybody has their favorites.I'm getting ready to restore a Akai reel to reel ,and some say that reel to reel is still the best.I still like my cd collection too.Double LL

 

[serpico]

After reading that article on the death of music, I can't even imagine cd sounding better than vinyl! If some albums are compressed already how can digital transfers sound better?!

 

[khbaur330162]

hciman77: Sorry for the misunderstanding, but I'm not really talking about frequency range, merely that within the diamond's oscillations its mass cannot just warp from one section of a wave to another; it has to complete the full and fluid wave form. A digital signal simply takes samples of that same wave, "x" amount of times per second.

This sample rate versus mass actually moving is the difference between the finite and infinite variability I was talking about.

I then went on to say that although vinyl can make a perfect waveform, the wave's fidelity to that of the source (the person actually singing or playing a guitar for the recording) may be inherently warped due to the medium's shortcomings, which you went on to explain better than I could have.


All I'm saying is in the physical world that diamond can be implemented an infinite number of ways on the tonearm in order to produce an infinite amount of electrical values for its wave signal. And also, just because there are limits to it's maximum and minimum value response doesn't mean it can't produce an infinite number of values between those. (Just like there's an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2)

Edit: Read your supplied article and I still think we're talking about two different things, are we not? Idk, it was difficult for me to understand so it's hard to comment on it.

 

[Publius]

Are you proposing that playing a CD with a sine wave can produce no more than 2^16 voltages, while a turntable playing a sine wave produces an infinite number of voltages? Because that's provably false.

 

[khbaur330162]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are you proposing that playing a CD with a sine wave can produce no more than 2^16 voltages, while a turntable playing a sine wave produces an infinite number of voltages? Because that's provably false.

To a certain extent, yes. I don't see how it couldn't. Care to explain?

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by khbaur330162 /img/forum/go_quote.gif And also, just because there are limits to it's maximum and minimum frequency response doesn't mean it can't produce an infinite number of frequencies between those. (Just like there's an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2)

Fine, but nothing stops a digital system reproducing say frequencies 500, 500.1, 500.05, 500.00000000000000000000000000000000000000002 and so on

,

 

[khbaur330162]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hciman77 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Fine, but nothing stops a digital system reproducing say frequencies 500, 500.1, 500.05, 500.00000000000000000000000000000000000000002 and so on ,

I tried to change that part of my post before you'd see it because it was a dumb mistake with my choice of word. If you reread my post I say value (meaning voltage value). My bad.


Edit: Reread that article and it says the sample rate of any analogue system is dependent upon the noise floor because any value output of that system will be +/- the average uncertainty of that value. But what I don't understand is both the uncertainty of the "sample rate" and the original signal itself should be inherently infinite since they are both dependent upon an inherently infinite system themselves; physics. I'm sorry if this is excruciatingly obvious for the rest of us, but I think I'm just failing to see the correct logic here, lol.

 

[ozz]

i used to have a vinyl set up and a nice cd player at the same time
and imo the cd won out and i remember stereo review giving cd the
seal of approval but in all this talk no one has mentioned the closer
the cartridge to the center of the record the better something i remembered from 35 years ago unlike cd same fidelity all the way
through.