Looking to borrow Tool's Lateralus or Aenema LP

Dec 10, 2003 at 4:26 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 17

Agent0040oz

New Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
15
Likes
0
Hello - I'm looking for someone who has a copy of Lateralus or Aenema from Tool on vinyl. I'm currently mastering all of my LPs into 24/96 digital uncompressed audio and I want these 2 albums (of which I own the cd's!) for my 24/96 collection - but they cost so much money on ebay I can't justify paying the cost for them at this time after I just bought new speakers and an amp.

Any chance any of you guys have a copy that I could borrow or "rent" to make a copy of the vinyl? This is probably a long shot but I figured I'd check.

regards,
mark
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 4:40 AM Post #3 of 17
I am using a Delta 24/96 audio card from M Audio. It is fantastic. I hooked my turntable up to my preamp and listened. Then i listented to the same thing through the Delta - i can't tell a difference. It sounds amazing.

I'm capturing that crystal clear and warm LP sound with the perfect soundstaging, treble and bass. And I play my vinyl once and then use the digital until the future when I can upgrade my turntable gear. I highly recommend M Audio products.

You'll need a monster hard drive though. Each side of an LP can run from 400megs to 800+. I back em up on CDs (some I cut up). But basically I'll keep adding 160gig hard drives until i back up my entire collection of records.

Mastering it all with an older HK turntable with an Ortofon Super OM30 and Creek OBH-8SE. Computer is an HP pavilion with 80 gigs (and dropping fast)
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 4:46 AM Post #5 of 17
Naw, screw that. I'll just buy more hard drives, I hate compressing anything because there's always a sacrifice in quality somewhere. I want totally uncompressed. Listening to a CD right now as I change lp's and it sucks in comparison.
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 4:55 AM Post #6 of 17
Don't be so fast to dismiss it. These lossLESS codecs have been proven to provide bit-perfect copies of original source material. I don't doubt that a CD sucks incomparison to well-produced vinyl, but this is not a compression that loses data from your vinyl copies. I guess you can just go ahead and ignore it then, if you have all the spare cash in the world to buy HDD after HDD with no thought about what exatcly you're doing. All I'm trying to say is that lossless compression is PERFECT sound quality with less HDD space taken, which you might find useful.
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 5:03 AM Post #7 of 17
Not dismissing it at all - Hard drives are pretty cheap though. 160 gigs for about $80.

Lossless works the same way that DVDs work (which is very clever) where they save disk space by not using as much bit rate in softer or less complex passages. So basically yeah, they sound about perfect. I've had trouble using such codecs though with 24/96. There's probably something I did wrong granted. 24/96 seems pretty hairy with a lot of computer software though, I've found recording software to be the best at handling it. I use Home Studio 2004 which was pretty cheap also.

Try that Delta Card if you get a chance, its amazing no matter what you throw at it. Even MP3's sound good!
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 5:36 AM Post #8 of 17
Yeah, I've been there, I just sold the Delta 410 that I'd been using for the past two months or so, and it ahs been replaced with an RME Digi 96/8 PAD, which is in a whole different area code, sound-quality wise. See my thread in the source forum for more details
wink.gif
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 1:45 PM Post #9 of 17
Quote:

Originally posted by Agent0040oz
Lossless works the same way that DVDs work (which is very clever) where they save disk space by not using as much bit rate in softer or less complex passages. So basically yeah, they sound about perfect. I've had trouble using such codecs though with 24/96. There's probably something I did wrong granted. 24/96 seems pretty hairy with a lot of computer software though, I've found recording software to be the best at handling it. I use Home Studio 2004 which was pretty cheap also.


No actually you're wrong. That's LOSSY compression. ie: information is lost in the compression process (even if it's unecessary information like you describe). You're right about DVDs, they use lossy compression. But lossless compression (as suggested here) reduces the size of music files by 40-60% without losing a single bit of information. It uses the same type of compression as a zip file does; A file, zipped up, will be smaller than the original, but, after some processing the original can be extracted out from this smaller file. It requires some processing by the player to decode the file, but the load is really miniscule. A Flac or Monkey audio file will decode and play exactly as the source uncompressed wav file does. Period. The bits playing from memory (they will be decoded at that point) are the same as the uncompressed wav. Anyone who claims to 'hear a difference' between a wav and a lossless compression format is either using a flawed encoder/player or hearing things.

The basis of lossless compression (in zip files, music, or anything else) is patterns found in the material. If a source material contains patterns (even very low level) - it can be compressed without losing any information. If you had totally random data (completely random string of zeros and ones), you could not compress this data. Fortunately for us, music is a highly pattern-based source, allowing a large amount of lossless data compression.

I'm not trying to force you to use a lossless compression format (although in your position, there is no reason not to, unless your player of choice will simply not decode any of them under any circumstances) -- I'm simply trying to educate.

By the way -- what player are you using? It seems your serious about sound from your computer, and in my experience, playback via Foobar2000 using kernel streaming will beat the pants off any other player out there right now. Why? It bypasses the windows sound APIs that mess with the sound before it's even passed to your sound card. It's also about the only player out there built around sound quality features, instead of having options tacked on later.

-dd3mon
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 5:03 PM Post #10 of 17
Quote:

Originally posted by dd3mon
No actually you're wrong. That's LOSSY compression. ie: information is lost in the compression process (even if it's unecessary information like you describe). You're right about DVDs, they use lossy compression. But lossless compression (as suggested here) reduces the size of music files by 40-60% without losing a single bit of information. It uses the same type of compression as a zip file does; A file, zipped up, will be smaller than the original, but, after some processing the original can be extracted out from this smaller file. It requires some processing by the player to decode the file, but the load is really miniscule. A Flac or Monkey audio file will decode and play exactly as the source uncompressed wav file does. Period. The bits playing from memory (they will be decoded at that point) are the same as the uncompressed wav. Anyone who claims to 'hear a difference' between a wav and a lossless compression format is either using a flawed encoder/player or hearing things.

The basis of lossless compression (in zip files, music, or anything else) is patterns found in the material. If a source material contains patterns (even very low level) - it can be compressed without losing any information. If you had totally random data (completely random string of zeros and ones), you could not compress this data. Fortunately for us, music is a highly pattern-based source, allowing a large amount of lossless data compression.


Thanks for bringing this up, I wanted to, but I thought it would make me seem like a bit too much of a lossless nazi
biggrin.gif
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 6:27 PM Post #11 of 17
Well I'll be darned. I thought lossless was the same stuff we use to encode DVDs. I'll have to check that out - what was the software called again (or the free download or whatever it is.)

Sounds like you guys don't like the Deltas, huh. I've never used anything but my Delta 10/10 and the much smaller and cheaper Audiophile card. But I probably can't upgrade that now.

You asked what player am I using. You mean player as in on the computer? I'm using something called Cakewalk Home Studio 2004 which I picked up for $70. My originating source is a 20 year old Harman Kardon T60 with the Ortofon.

I was just thrilled to death that I could save the wear on my vinyl and keep on the computer. Thanks for the additional info guys.
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 7:19 PM Post #14 of 17
Found this:

2.6.1 - The vinyl version

In May 2001, preorders for Lateralus included a vinyl version that became "indefinitely delayed" as its June 2001 release date approached. In the December 2001, the toolband.com newsletter it was said that Volcano II is contractually obligated to release Tool's recording in vinyl format and that version of Lateralus will have to split "Disposition | Reflection | Triad" over two sides.

This was last updated Sept9,2003
 
Dec 10, 2003 at 8:07 PM Post #15 of 17
Aenima vinyls if you can find one, is likely to be at least $50. Now, as for lateralus, there is no official vinyl, if you see one for sale it is a bootleg and probably sounds no better than the CD.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top