[what?]

i don't doubt any of your science, and sometimes i enjoy the surface noise of a record, reminds me of when i was 16  
 
my best explanation is that i used to listen to vinyl until i was about 18, then cds / mp3s for 35 years, then recording this vinyl recently.
 
psycho acoustics maybe but i have been enjoying my rips of my friends vinyl, 
 
can 100,000s of vinyl collectors worldwide all be mistaken ?

 

[RRod]

 
can 100,000s of vinyl collectors worldwide all be mistaken ?

 
Yes 

 

[what?]

can you share 25 words about what this means re my recording my friends vinyl please?
 
Quote:

  Original CD release of VH comes out as DR12, fwiw:
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    
 Album: Van Halen
 Artist: Van Halen
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    
DR    Peak    RMS    Duration    Title [codec]    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    
 DR12     -0.98 dB     -16.30 dB    3:35    01 - Runnin' With The Devil      [flac]    
 DR12     -1.59 dB     -16.79 dB    1:41    02 - Eruption      [flac]    
 DR11     -2.28 dB     -16.06 dB    2:37    03 - You Really Got Me      [flac]    
 DR13     -1.95 dB     -16.73 dB    3:49    04 - Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love      [flac]    
 DR12     -1.85 dB     -16.63 dB    3:46    05 - I'm The One      [flac]    
 DR13     -1.78 dB     -17.95 dB    3:29    06 - Jamie's Cryin'      [flac]    
 DR12     -2.51 dB     -17.15 dB    3:00    07 - Atomic Punk      [flac]    
 DR12     -3.58 dB     -17.79 dB    3:41    08 - Feel Your Love Tonight      [flac]    
 DR13     -2.29 dB     -18.09 dB    3:23    09 - Little Dreamer      [flac]    
 DR13     -2.58 dB     -19.25 dB    3:20    10 - Ice Cream Man      [flac]    
 DR14     -1.18 dB     -17.77 dB    3:00    11 - On Fire      [flac]    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------    
 Number of files:    11
 Official DR value:  DR12
    
 Sampling rate:          44100 Hz
 Average bitrate:          934kbs 
 Bits per sample:          16 bit
    
Dr14 T.meter 1.0.16 
==============================================================================================    

 

[RRod]

It's just giving the original value of the metric we're talking about (the DR rating) for the album. The take-home is that if a YT download is only DR8, then it's probably been compressed compared to the original CD, and thus the original CD might be a better basis for comparison for your vinyl rip.

 

[what?]

  It's just giving the original value of the metric we're talking about (the DR rating) for the album. The take-home is that if a YT download is only DR8, then it's probably been compressed compared to the original CD, and thus the original CD might be a better basis for comparison for your vinyl rip.

and what is it specifically that makes you believe all the vinyl lovers are wrong? I'm sure we have both heard good digital and vinyl rigs, and i think we might agree the analogue did sound good/less fatiguing ?

 

[RRod]

 
and what is it specifically that makes you believe all the vinyl lovers are wrong? I'm sure we have both heard good digital and vinyl rigs, and i think we might agree the analogue did sound good/less fatiguing ?

 
"Good digital" is not a phrase I typically associate with vinyl lovers. I'll happily share a beer with those vinyl lovers who can admit the superiorities of digital. This thread is about measures of dynamic range, and in my view this is one of those areas where vinyl must yield to digital formats, "loudness war" mastering notwithstanding.

 

[what?]

   
"Good digital" is not a phrase I typically associate with vinyl lovers. I'll happily share a beer with those vinyl lovers who can admit the superiorities of digital. This thread is about measures of dynamic range, and in my view this is one of those areas where vinyl must yield to digital formats, "loudness war" mastering notwithstanding.

what percentage of normal industry release music is free of 'loudness war mastering'  and related problems.
 
and wouldn't making a digital copy of a great pressing of vinyl be the best of both worlds?

 

[RRod]

 
what percentage of normal industry release music is free of 'loudness war mastering'  and related problems.
 
and wouldn't making a digital copy of a great pressing of vinyl be the best of both worlds?

 
Plenty if you're talking stuff old enough to have a pre-LW CD release. And sure, if there's a mastering on vinyl you just love then by all means, digitize it. But the fact that you can digitize it and not lose anything somewhat gets at my point.

 

[nick_charles]

  It's just giving the original value of the metric we're talking about (the DR rating) for the album. The take-home is that if a YT download is only DR8, then it's probably been compressed compared to the original CD, and thus the original CD might be a better basis for comparison for your vinyl rip.

 
I was quite impressed that encoding a wav file to VBR 0 did not incur any significant loss of dynamic range (within the measurement accuracy of the DR tool anyway). One day when I am really bored I'll repeat the exercise at lower bitrates and see when it get nobbled...

 

[what?]

   
 the fact that you can digitize it and not lose anything somewhat gets at my point.

your point is ?  

 

[nick_charles]

 
... and i think we might agree the analogue did sound good/less fatiguing ?

 
I do not agree with that at all, a bucketful of unnecessary surface noise is hardly desirable!

 

[nick_charles]

  your point is ?  

 
One of the most common anti-digital arguments is that some undefinable quality is lost when digitizing, there are many variants of this basic argument ranging from intersample peaks and whole segments of sound getting lost by sampling to just a vague loss of naturalness or musicality and well far too many others to name.
 
If however A and B when digitized are still easily distinguishable as A and B it implies that any loss caused by digitization is not significant enough to disguise differences between two stimulae. 
 
Back in 1984 Scottish Audio's favorite Thatcherite and head of Linn took part in a notorious set of tests run by the BAS where he was woefully unable to detect the insertion of a 14 bit ADA loop...

 

[what?]

   
One of the most common anti-digital arguments is that some undefinable quality is lost when digitizing, there are many variants of this basic argument ranging from intersample peaks and whole segments of sound getting lost by sampling to just a vague loss of naturalness or musicality and well far too many others to name.
 
If however A and B when digitized are still easily distinguishable as A and B it implies that any loss caused by digitization is not significant enough to disguise differences between two stimulae. 
 
Back in 1984 Scottish Audio's favorite Thatcherite and head of Linn took part in a notorious set of tests run by the BAS where he was woefully unable to detect the insertion of a 14 bit ADA loop...

sounds like the richard clarke challenge  http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/

 

[Don Hills]

 
sounds like the richard clarke challenge  http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/

 
"sounds" more like this one:
 
http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm
 
There's also this thread from 2010:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 
It's an amazing thread - over 6500 posts, and you only have to read the first one.

 

[RRod]

Scanned my CD rips and got a max of DR28 for this beaut (track is 11:00 long):

 
Conversion to both 128k and V0 lame mp3 doesn't change the DR rating.