[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Analogsurviver I'm going a bit off topic but you mentioned you prefer one single driver be it headphone or iem. A lot of high end iems are ciems and most of the high end ones are multi-ba drivers. What's your take on that?

It is not off topic - at all. Issues arising from time related problems in audio are ALWAYS connected with equipment one uses - from microphone setup to loudspeakers or headphones, recording medium and every electronic stage in between.
 
A typical multimiking setup or studio recording/mastering will have such groos distortion in time coherence that it almost does not matter whether speakers or headphones are time coherent or not - time errors in recording are so big that smaller errors a loudspeaker or headphone/IEM can cause are next to negligible.
 
A carefully placed pure two mike setup or artificial head (binaural)  that introduces zero time errors ( other than natural in any real recording venue that is not anechoic chamber ) will ruthlessly expose such time errors in either speakers or headphones/IEMs. I wish I could afford Sennheiser IE800 ( a wide band one way single driver )  - or at least have the chance to audition them using my own recordings and others I find of acceptable quality. Or lesser IEMs with a single good BA, like Ortofon etc. 
 
Half a wavelenght at 20 kHz is 17 mm, meaning a 180 degree phase shift is when your drivers are 17 mm apart; that is a bit much, but you can hardly reduce physical displacement of drivers below 3 mm in multi way IEM. It is also true that crossover frequency usually takes place lower, making it easier. Yet - go to inner Fidelity measurements, look up Shure top models, and you will notice that although their frequency response in amplitude is pretty flat and extended, square wave reproduction will reveal first negative blip from the tweeter, etc - compare that response to any good single BA and you will see what I mean. Multi driver IEM manufacturer would perhaps be the last person interested to show any pulse response(s) - unless per some extremely difficult process bordering on miracle arrived at a point multidriver sound output blends so well that remaining inevitable time discrepancies approach zero and are effectively offset by increase of dynamic and frequency range of the resulting uber multi driver IEM. I would consider such IEM that would through any measurements that show performance in time domain  approach/meet the performance of best single driver IEMs while improving in dynamics and/or extension. It can be extended and flat from DC to light while being flawed in time domain - I would keep on trucking with a $5 single dynamic driver chinese IEM that does better in time domain. I certainly do like extended response below 20 Hz and WELL above 20 kHz - but would always take something that is rock solid from 100 Hz to 10 kHz over patched together more extended competition.

 

[grokit]

There are some amazing single-driver IEMs out there; I adore my FX700, Final Audio Design has some extremely high end ones, and Cardas' upcoming Ear Mirror has me intrigued to name a few.
 

 
These guys evidently don't even use soft tips.

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

There are some amazing single-driver IEMs out there; I adore my FX700, Final Audio Design has some extremely high end ones, and Cardas' upcoming Ear Mirror has me intrigued to name a few.
 

 
These guys evidently don't even use soft tips.

Interesting. I will quietly sit not exactly in the first row and consider something that will kind of stand the test of time. After the hype subdues to reasonable levels. Not even multidriver IEMs totally excluded from consideration - but unlikely a multi driver of required performance to happen in forseeable future.

 

[reddragon]

Interesting... what you just said is like the exact opposite of some people who believe more drivers= better performance. Analogsurviver, you are not into ciem? I don't know any top tier ciem that uses a single BA. Ie800 is too expensive, if I'm paying that much I will want to have custom fit... and grokit, that pic is beautiful, its a final audio design iem right?

 

[grokit]

Yes that's one of their upper Piano Forte models. It's important to remember that the typical single-driver IEMs use a different type of drive unit (dynamic) than a multi-driver IEM, which is usually all balanced armature drive units but there are also hybrids that use both.

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Interesting... what you just said is like the exact opposite of some people who believe more drivers= better performance. Analogsurviver, you are not into ciem? I don't know any top tier ciem that uses a single BA. Ie800 is too expensive, if I'm paying that much I will want to have custom fit... and grokit, that pic is beautiful, its a final audio design iem right?

As you have realized by now, I am after performance, regardless of trends and/or prices. Sometimes it is within my budget, most of the time unfortunately not. 
 
I am coming from phono cartridges. After learning their ills and quirks for 35+ years I know exactly what determines sound quality - and even the best headphones available today have actual measured performance FAR worse than good, let alone excellent carts. Ask yourself one thing : how many multi driver IEMs - or more important yet, how many CIEMs - provide any proof that left and right ear piece are within any given tolerance in amplitude ? Compare that to the industry's most stringent QC, that of Quad electrostatic speakers since ESL 63: EVERY speaker produced is referenced against the prototype, using square wave as a signal. Both speakers are positioned exact distance opposite microphone exactly in beetween; if the ressultant response is zero, that is to say both speakers cancel each other out perfectly, the speaker is ready to be packed and shipped out - if not, it is attended to until it does. Square wave is the most difficult signal of all to get right, as it is both amplitude and time domain checked at once - I know of no other speaker manufacturer who dares to publish this simple but extremely revealing test, let alone uses it in daily production QC.
 
Loudspeakers do have quite a "cushion" in regard of their "sameness between channels" - the room is likely to cause far greater deviations between channels than decent speakers themselves. Now consider IEMs and CIEMs; with direct insertion into ear canal, there is no other way you are going to hear them as they really are, for good - or for bad, IEMs are relatively easy to sell if they proove not to your liking; with CIEMs you are "married" and like real divorce, costs dearly to end up the relationship. Although above my current budget for IEM, I do not consider Ie800 too expensive; they make quite a good point regarding the resonance that takes place in any real ear canal at approx 7 kHz - no other godzillion driver IEM to date did not adress this "minor" issue ! No point having a driver good enough to please a bat you can not hear due to ear canal resonance inherent to all IEMs and CIEMs that did not take care of it; to my knowledge, IE800 was the first and is still the only IEM that at least acknowledged  the problem exists and took some action(s) against it. I am anything but a Sennheiser fanboy, but they scored quite a big chunk of points due to this in my eyes.
 
II also think it could well be possible to make custom mouldings for Ie800 ( or any other IEM ) - from professional hearing aid sources to DIY using Sugru, for example. If going DIY Sugru way, it would be wise to start practicing on some dirt cheap IEMs, to get the necessary experience and not to mess up or even destroy pricey ie800. With DIY approach, you can perhaps really tune it to your ears to the max, by making several "ear mouldings" - probably better than pro that is usually limited to a single impression. This is just a thought, not something I actually did and have experience with.
 
You are right that I am not into IEMs; In fact, I FAR prefer ear speaker approach ( AKG K 1000, Jecklin Float ), that is to say transducers that do not in any way change our natural hearing, which includes all the effects of the pinna that are modified/distorted by any earpad either surrounding the pinna, let alone lying and compressing on it as supraural/on ears; IEMs directly into ear canal are worse offenders still. All three approaches also close circuit the natural crossfeed/crosstalk we use in normal sound field. The sole reason why I joined head-fi was hope to find some closed type headphones/IEMs I can use during monitoring live recordings in the same acoustic space as performers, where isolation is perhaps the most important
criteria and are my otherwise so beloved ear speakers totally useless. And these IEMs should be as faithful to the sound of the real thing heard live without any technical means - meaning when listening to the mike feed performance during recording in IEMs and listening directly there should be zero or minimal difference. With IEMs, that necessitates the use of crossfeed of one sort or another.
 
And I am afraid that getting iE800 would be cheaper in the end than trying to get by trying a couple of "less expensive" IEMs ...

 

[mironathetin]

Quote:

There are records exceeding 500 $ per single LP - for some fortunate few, this is peanuts, for most of us it is out of the question. 

Agreed, there is even a market for copies, because some original recordings are so expensive and rare that it starts to make sense to redo them in finest like original state.
Interesting read also, because it shows how the quality of the products that we buy today has degraded without our notice:
 
Enjoy a look here...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/may/25/pete-hutchison-interview-new-vinyl-recording
 
... and here: 
http://theelectricrecordingco.com

 

[jibzilla]

  OP idea was AT USB table > PC. Tascam CD-RW 900SL is approx 400 $ - and should be better way to get vinyl>CD.
 
Add a decent TT - it starts spiralling up und up. I did not want to go into condition of records - if they are new/mint/well preserved, you can get by using not TOTL stylus geometry. I have been donated a sizeable collection of really well selected classical music library on LPs - unfortunately previous owner tracked them ar too light vertical tracking force, rendering them useable only with VdH I or Micro Line/Ridge/SAS stylus. Using anything less sophisticated and result is unlistenable and certainly not anything one would want to record. The least expensive Micro Whatever stylus currently available is Audio Technica AT 440 MLa. Such styli do demand proper VTA adjustment - which further adds to the cost. Etc, etc.
 
I do not think OP had in mind buying new LPs to rip to CD - CD new is generally cheaper than vinyl new, throwing any cost advantage out of the window before the first pitch was thrown. S/H records from any source can suffer the above problem - even if cleaned with a RCM. If you are a great LP collector and attend yard sales, vinyl meets etc, actually any place you can get used vinyl without the possibility to listen first before buying, it pays big dividends to use a portable LP player - Audio Technica Sound Burger and its current knock offs, Sony Flamingo etc. After returning home with your "Mint/ VG+" vinyl in new outer and inner sleeve, professionally cleaned with a top RCM, you might still find the record to be trashed to FUBAR condition. Depending on what used vinyl you are buying, use of say $400 Flamingo can be way over the top - or greatest possible bargain. Rare out of print LPs can command really silly prices. Not personally there yet, but had this type of dissapointment when searching for a record long on my wish list often enough to bring this potential problem up.
 
I want simply everyone to understand that below certain level of quality analog makes no sense. It does not have to be absurdly expensive - yet if you are on a tight budget, it makes sense to wait till you can afford something that is not analog for analog's sake but actually sounds good enough to allow re-recording of vinyl to digital whatever allowing you to save some money in the long run, preserve your vinyl or record vinyl in friends' possesion you can not afford. There are records exceeding 500 $ per single LP - for some fortunate few, this is peanuts, for most of us it is out of the question. 

 

[mironathetin]

Quote:

Am I personally sticking with mp3? Yeah because I own serato now and can turn my mp3's into vinyl but that's a decent chunk of change too.  
 

What sense does that make? You take a lossy digital format and convert it to analog? 

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Agreed, there is even a market for copies, because some original recordings are so expensive and rare that it starts to make sense to redo them in finest like original state.
Interesting read also, because it shows how the quality of the products that we buy today has degraded without our notice:
 
Enjoy a look here...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/may/25/pete-hutchison-interview-new-vinyl-recording
 
... and here: 
http://theelectricrecordingco.com

I knew such a thing was possible, yet finding a nut crazy enough to do it ...ahem...I meant distingushed connoisseur not deterred by the cost and most probably never even break even - is an entirely different matter. He is lucky not to have me as consultant for old equipment restoration, as it would not have been  mere "10 times the purchase price" to ressurect those old analog beauties - LoL !
 
Seriously, chapeau to Mr. Hutchinson for bringing it alive, although it is beyond my reach to buy such records in anything like quantity. I might treat myself to one if and when I feel a special achievement on my part deserves such self-reward.
 
Yes, cost no object, I would have gone similar path - but cost IS an object. I agree that ultimate system is Hollow State Device ( tubes, valves, "lampe"
in coloquial slovenian audio lingo ) - but in real world, solid state is more cost efficient and unless you can afford the very best of the very best hollow state, say a system above  50 K, you are better off with solid state. Just to stop " I think I can put together HSD system for under a grand" type replies - meant is the level of quality that is at least the equal of anything solid has to offer, even where  HSDs are at their technical disadvantage(s). And that does cost dearly indeed. OTL power amps actually capable of some serious output, not singledigitpointsomething watt jobies requiring horns one can park own house within to be practical in terms of frequency and dynamic range.
 
Cruel fact - one can get ears "accustomed" to digital ( and by digital I mean especially CD or 44,1 kHz 16 bit PCM ) - and not miss "anything". I had to
completely stop listening to CD for two months before I re-acquired the perception to diferentiate analog from digital reliably - meant is analog and digital recording from vinyl. And this bussiness unfortunately does go even lower - to CD/MP3 "I do not hear appreciable difference"; even some very high quality cans here on head.fi get commented upon via listening to MP3s - brrrrrrrr....! Or at least comments that a certain very high end HP/IEM does not "sound too horribly with MP3s" are not all that uncommon. I am not in concert hall or recording on daily basis - but often enough to know the real thing and how insufficient 44.1/16 PCM, let alone MP3 is.
 
On the other hand - MP3 recording done with minimalist miking can sound surprisingly natural and certainly much better than what even sometimes audiophile labels are issuing. If recording is multimiked and overmastered, , the end format on which it is finally issued does not matter much. Remember, those old analog recordings owe much of their excellence to the mere fact there was no more "advanced" equipment available - if it were, somebody would sure be tempted to use "features" that most usually lead to lesser sound quality. It was bare bones, but HIGH QUALITY carefully used and operated bare bones - 2 -3 track recorders, simple low mic count setups; compare that to a typical multimiking of a symphonic orchestra in XY channels of today, where it is practically possible to single out almost every member of the orchestra and mix/master/re-mix ad libitum ad nuseaum - till the actual artist is the person doing mastering and not musicians themselves. 
 
Multimiking did not come into being because of its superiority but because it allows clever producer to cut costs of the recording considerably. You have to position a simple mike setup JUST RIGHT - and that time required for mike setup also counts into the fee that has to be paid to the musicians, not only the time they play once you found your sweet spot. Try that with any top orchestra today - after seeing the "price list", there is hardly anyone capable of financing such an endavour, regardless how well intended and noble such recording attempt might be. Unfortunately, it all boils down to money. The times and spirit of late 50s, when memories of WWII were still fresh, the enthusiasm of everyone concerned is something that today just can not be duplicated - not only did we fail to see the decline in recording quality despite of or because of improved or "improved" equipment, the degree of consciousness and dedication of the musicians themselves is no longer, despite increase of knowledge, at that level. I am glad there are still proverbial exceptions proving that rule.
 
A word of caution: if you are sensitive enough to think you would be able to discern the quality of the new vinyl recordings mentioned above, played on equipment that does them justice, in case you can not afford it all, STAY WELL CLEAR - not even go to demo if per some miracle available. Because landing back in real world within your own reach might well prove to be painful indeed. It is much the same as with super cars - how many 20 years olds have their own Ferrari or ( insert your dream car here ) while they are still young and crazy enough to really drive it close to its limit - at 60 or so one is no longer capable and willing of doing things like that anymore, Ferrari or non Ferrari. My own experience of the sort while I was 19 is Beveridge 
electrostatic speaker - no matter what I am listening to, after the initial "wow" that short demo of 34 years ago starts creeping in..."...how would it sound on the Bev's..." - EVERY time, without exception, whenever listening to some premium currently available equipment worthy enough to trigger that sensation.
 
You might argue that Bev http://www.bevaudio.com/products.html is available again. It was $ 7500 or so in mid/late 70s. Considering the inflation, it was approx the equivalent of current price that is not far removed from the six figures. EU did severe its electrical regulations - meaning no more Bev imported in Europe, even if and when you have the money. 2 m tall 200 kg (or so) heavy speaker system , with built in dedicated valve amps at 1500VA ( watts , written here as Volt Amperes much more appropriate considering the electrical nature of the speaker load - pure capacitor, with the inevitable US power plug and lack of CE certification  ) would be a formidable trick to sneak through the customs. As it stands, it is the closest equivalent of Mission Impossible I can think of 

. Even if I win the lottery.
 
This thread has proven to be much more exciting than it appeared at the first glance. I do not have either time or wish to add much more; hope you have been able to realize things are a bit more complicated than mass media at any given point in history would want lead you to believe. I also warned you really good reproduction might be habit forming - list of the Bev users will tell you they were/are musicians first, celebrities second -because being great musicians in the first place.

 

[jibzilla]

  What sense does that make? You take a lossy digital format and convert it to analog? 

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

Well I was under the impression that old boy already had a record collection. I still don't think it would be that expensive. My Tascam was $400 but that was years ago, a used mk2 will run you 400 and I'm sorry but you don't need some badass cart. to get great results, plenty on cheap ones out there including the cc's which are extremely easy to setup that will yield you nice results.
 
Vinyl isn't that expensive imo. More expensive than mp3 yeah. More expensive than cd's, depends on the genre imo. Probably 150 of my 300 records I got for $5 a record buying from 2 others individual's collections. The rest came from usarecords.com, breakbeat.co.uk, and redeyerecords.co.uk and still round $10 (a few train spotters $25) a record of $5 a track at least for what I spin. Am I personally sticking with mp3? Yeah because I own serato now and can turn my mp3's into vinyl but that's a decent chunk of change too.  
 
I'm certain for under 1k you could have a badass setup for vinyl to cd and if you already have 2k invested in vinyl, like me, why not.

I see where are you coming from. You ave every right to think so - but with all due respect, if you want to do any serious ripping of vinyl, you will need record cleaning machine. The rock bottom price for effective RCM is $ 200 or so  ( KAB or Audio Advisor ) , $ 400 for CD-RW - leaving you with $ 400 for a turntable and phono preamp. That will get you entry level Project or Rega with a very basic cartridge. I do not think these are satisfactory conditions to start ripping vinyl - with all the record preparation, setting the recording levels etc, time needed to record per LP is close to double its real time, and you have to add the time for editing, eventual de clicking , etc. Are you sure you would like to commit all this hard work and time - to record an entry level TT ?
 
Recording engineers will point out at one time or another one of Aichille's heel(s) of analog vinyl - channel separation. It is "unlimited" with decent digital, being well in excess of 80 dB; good analog recorders also maintain separation at approx 50 dB or so, across the entire audible band.. There is exactly one brand of phono cartridge in existance and available today that sports 60 dB of channel separation across the entire audible band, not just midrange ( enough to stay on the safe side cart will not limit the quality of transfer from any vinyl you wish to rip ) - and you are not going to get it ( and an arm capable of supporting said cartridge to full effect ) for below at least about 10 times the amount remaining after you deduct RCM and CD-RW from your hypothetical grand. And you have to know how to adjust that (or any other ) cart to actually achieve that channel separation analog vinyl should in practice be impossible of achieving . And have test records and test equipmewnt and knowledge/ability to use both. Theorethical limit for stereo records is just below 60 dB of channel separation - a paper published in JAES in late 50s, the time of first stereo recordings became available, by a mathematician from South America. It took about half a century to arrive at the cartridge that actually does achieve these theorethical limits; out of necessity, it is hand built, it is adjusted to beyond n-th degree in order to be able to do that - and its potential it has over more conventional still top cartridges is fully wasted if not adjusted in the arm to the same beyond n-th degree. 
 
Now, that requirement for 60 dB all the way up to 20 kHz is admittedly more than extreme requirement. But at the very least 35 dB channel separation at 20 kHz is something I would start considering using for serious vinyl ripping. This is still a very tall order, but is more realistic proposition than before. It can definitely be done - but even more definitely not on $ 400 budget for TT and phono stage.
 
It unfortunately boils down to money - again. My experience with cartridges suggests you need either to buy and test a larger number of samples of relatively inexpensive cartridges//styli or shell out serious money for a really precisely made cartridge/stylus. In worst case scenario, you might end up buying 10 carts//styli at say $500 each without getting single one being good enough. Unfortunately, every 10K cartridge is not per default as good 
as it should have been, either - and the price is not necessarily guarantee for quality.
 
I have seen your reply during typing of this post - your music genre is electronic and that explains a lot. I applaud you for sticking with the vinyl against all ods in your profession. Audiophilles should more often thank DJs and other users of vinyl on more quantitive level who were still using vinyl in large enough quantity for the pressing plants and cartridge manufacturs to survive to the present day. Big THANK YOU is in order, and more than fully deserved.
 
BUT - the degree of sophistication, either on the part of the music or equipment to (re)produce it, is worlds apart. You might find my comments as over the top, high nosed snobbish attitude, etc - and I could perfectly understand your reaction. Yet, unfortunately, it does take the amount of precision on the technical part>ultimately money to achieve such results. If you have not already, please do click on the second link posted by mironathetin ; please make absolutely Shure you sit while discovering how much these probably best ever vinyl LP pressings cost...
 
I can understand and justify the price; whether or not I ever pull out a feat for which I decide to self-award myself to that level remains BIG if. 
 
It was similar sensation after discovering a certain pianist gives a series of concerts around the globe; mainly for the inner circle of admirers, who follow  said pianist around the globe, from concert to concert. Absolutely zero promotion in the country/town the concerts are held in. Entrance fee : half a grand Euro per recital per seat. I found hard to believe it then, but it is true. Try as I might, could not pry the name of the pianist from the man to whom slipped this piece of info.

 

[Oregonian]

Quote:

It makes sense cause I'm mixing my mp3's like I would vinyl using my two technics TT's and my mixer. My collection of 300 mp3's from beatport.com, redeye.co.uk, etc. cost me around $500. My vinyl collection 300, 600 tracks cost me around $2k. Add in the price of my serato sl-3, $700, and my 300 mp3's and you get $1200, but I can probably start saving money soon because my next 600 tracks are only going to cost $1k not $2k.  
 
You can go out there and find individuals who are selling there records but it's sort of difficult. Also for what I spin, electronic, most of the online record stores have either gone mp3 or dried up... r.i.p. usarecords.com. For most/all electronic dj's it was go serato or get left in the dust a good 5 years ago. I can tell you from personal experience using serato performance vinyl and my ortofon OM s-120 cart's it's very, very close to the real thing. Most of the electronic produced today also comes on mp3 a whole lot more than vinyl.

FYI bud, are you a member of Audiokarma?  There are guys that sell albums in Barter Town (you have to be a $25 contributing member to access this area).  LOTS of good albums. 

 

[jibzilla]

 
FYI bud, are you a member of Audiokarma?  There are guys that sell albums in Barter Town (you have to be a $25 contributing member to access this area).  LOTS of good albums. 

 

[penmarker]

Quote:

Haven't been to audiokarma. Thank you for the info. I am a vinyl junkie but it's hard to pass up the price and convenience of mp3 especially after getting my serato sl-3. I have to say it's as much the convenience as it is the price. If it were 5 years ago I would say that vinyl smoked mp3 sq wise but now that encoders have developed and gotten better I really can't say that my 320kbps mp3's don't match my vinyl in the sq department. 
 
I'm going to check out audiokarma for sure but electronic just hasn't had much of anything new come out since 2008. I gotta have new music to keep me motivated and while I bet audiokarma has some records I missed I bet that 99% are post 2008. 

Just for opinion's sake and through my level of equipment, I'd say my vinyl rig doesn't sound better than their digital counterpart. But they do sound different and I have the tendency to lean towards my vinyl rig. I get it now when people say vinyl has that 'smoother' feel and such.