[pinnahertz]

Let L = 1 and R = 0. We get L+R=1 and L-R = 1. Let's assume on vinyl playback the gain of L-R is 90 % of L+R (roughly -1 dB). So,

L' = L+R+0.9*L-0.9*R = 1.9*L+0.1*R = 1.9
R' = L+R-0.9*L+0.9*R = 0.1*L+1.9*R = 0.1

Separation is 20*log(1.9/0.1) = 25.6 dB

Yes, separation gets worse, but hardly zero.

Ok, so you took my "zero" literally. Did you really think that I meant if L-R and L+R didn't have identical channel gain and phase that you'd get mono? Seriously????

Alright, since you're being literal...I didn't mean zero literally (0dB of channel separation), I meant that separation is fragile, and if you jazz with gain and phase in L-R you loose it fast.

In this digital world where channel separation is basically the digital noise floor, channel separation of 25.6dB would be 7l.4dB worse than 16 bit basic/theoretical noise, a difference which perceptually is the difference between on and off. No, not zero, but pretty much destroyed separation.

BTW, the minimum acceptable separation for FM stereo broadcasting beginning in 1961 was 29.7dB, so your example isn't even acceptable separation by those standards.

Oh, of course, but I haven't. I don't even have a turntable, so I need to borrow my fathers turntable when transferring vinyls to digital form.

Huh. And yet you insist on arguing with those of us who have worked with precision, professional vinyl reproduction and mastering, at very least dealing with vinyl reproduction (when it was still called "records" and "albums") for likely more than twice the number of decades you've been around.

Do I ever feel exhausted now.

 

[Strangelove424]

I ran across a series of articles recently that opened my eyes to a startling phenomenon:

https://qz.com/103785/hipsters-are-buying-vinyl-records-but-they-arent-listening-to-them/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/ne...ng-vinyl-dont-actually-bother-listening-to-i/

I don’t mention my feelings about vinyl much on the forums, or argue for my opinion because it’s a personal preference thing, and I know there are many vinyl fans. Personally, I’m kind of over it though. I can’t argue that vinyl doesn't have great art or can sound exceptional, but that’s because it’s still a fairly decent format and music sounds good generally.

Any preference over CD comes down to tradition, psychology, format limitation, and mastering decisions. The important one that stands out, that can’t be replicated across formats are the limitations. For instance, the high frequency roll off. But is that a vinyl limitation or a symptom of analog’s demanding component chain? I remember watching a comparison of cartridges, and found that the more expensive the cartridge and the better its specs, the brighter it sounded, with more detail - more and more like digital. Even the comments section was filled with comments like “prefer the cheaper cartridge! that warm analog sound!” That got me thinking, are people buying hear-no-evil analog gear on purpose to minimize the problems with harsh mastering? Is the ugly truth written all over that vinyl format just as much as it is on CD, but muffled with dull cartridges? Perhaps.

One thing I personally loathe about vinyl is the distortion on some really bad pressings, and the clicky noise floor. The distortions are an affront to music, and it makes me want to chuck the album like a discus. I’ve never had that effect with a CD. Except for the AOL discs they used to send out all the time. The noise floor also drives me nuts. I tried a couple sound tracks on vinyl, and that was my breaking point of sorts. I realized to enjoy guys like Philip Glass or Hans Zimmer, I needed a lower noise floor. Quietness is just as important as loudness, especially with melodramatic composers. Every time the music dies down, there is this vinyl presence imparted to everything and it is not doing the music justice. Silence needs to be silence, without anything there to accompany you through it. The sound of the medium itself shouldn’t be there. It has it’s own emotion and presence, and though some people might even find it pleasing or comforting, it’s not part of the work.

I remember my first time listening to a CD so clearly, and in fact I still have that same CD ripped in my library, and it still sounds immaculate after all these years. It was/is Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue. It was so clean to me, so pristine and undiluted. It was the first time I truly heard Gershwin, appreciated every smirking nuance between the notes, and every shimmer of the clarinet. CD was a revelation when it arrived. To this day, I’ve only found one other performance of Rhapsody that beats it. In this new version, the conductor let’s it all hang out, almost tongue-in-cheek. But I still play that original CD all the time. It would be absolutely gutted by now it were on vinyl.

 

[bigshot]

I’ve heard a lot of modern speakers and headphones that have a high end boost. For speakers, it’s usually those little satellite speakers, and in headphones it’s seen as ‘analytical’. I can see how a high end rolloff would sound better than a flat response with those. In fact, I think just as warmth was favored in the 50s and 60s, crisp treble is favored today.

 

[71 dB]

Ok, so you took my "zero" literally. Did you really think that I meant if L-R and L+R didn't have identical channel gain and phase that you'd get mono? Seriously????

Of course not. That would be a dumb thing to say, especially from your mouth. Please don't take my zero literally either.

Alright, since you're being literal...I didn't mean zero literally (0dB of channel separation), I meant that separation is fragile, and if you jazz with gain and phase in L-R you loose it fast.

Yes, that's exactly what I thought you said. Have some faith in my reading skills man.

In this digital world where channel separation is basically the digital noise floor, channel separation of 25.6dB would be 7l.4dB worse than 16 bit basic/theoretical noise, a difference which perceptually is the difference between on and off. No, not zero, but pretty much destroyed separation.

Yes. Amplifiers probably limit the separation a little bit, but 70-80 dB is piece of cake from 20 to 20.000 Hz I think. The question is how much separation is needed? Based on HRTF-responces I'd say at low frequencies just a few decibels is enough and no more than 30 dB at high frequencies.

BTW, the minimum acceptable separation for FM stereo broadcasting beginning in 1961 was 29.7dB, so your example isn't even acceptable separation by those standards.

I can easily fine-tune my example to fulfill that standard if that makes you feel better (the gain of L-R is 94 % ).

Huh. And yet you insist on arguing with those of us who have worked with precision, professional vinyl reproduction and mastering, at very least dealing with vinyl reproduction (when it was still called "records" and "albums") for likely more than twice the number of decades you've been around.

You are patronizing me. I'm not a high-school teenager. I'm 46. I have admitted my mistakes when you have demonstrated them, so I don't think I insist on arguing. My problem with you isn't so much about what you say (you clearly know a lot), but how you say it.

 

[71 dB]

An elliptical filter is a particular filter type/topology that has a particular roll-off characteristic. That type of filter showed up in a mastering console made by Manley (I think) as a part of a bass-summing function. Bass summing is not mandatory, or a generic part of the vinyl mastering process. It's an option, and was adjustable anyway. Bass-summing could also be done with a Butterworth filter, or several others. Ultimately the results are subjective and applied as needed or desired to specific projects. Many, even most, need none. I've never used bass summing on any of my projects because of how they were originally mixed.

But...it's a tool that is used to increase bass and cut the record louder. That would make sense for your genres, though honestly, it's always a band-aid, as the best way to do the mono bass trick is in mixing. If that is done then no bass summing, elliptic or otherwise, is required or desired.

I know what elliptic filters are.

The fact that some mastering consoles have elliptic filters illustrate how "bass summing" is part of vinyl production. You need to think about the bass when dealing with vinyl and you know that. Otherwise you could end up with vinyls that force the stylus to jump out of the groove. If the bass content of the recording is light then of course bass summing is not necessary.

Also, as long as the chain is linear (enough), it doesn't matter at what point bass summation is done. The listener can't know if it's done by an elliptic filter of the mastering console or earlier in the mix. So, with vinyls channel separation at low frequencies is often done at some point. CDs are a different story.

 

[pinnahertz]

Of course not. That would be a dumb thing to say, especially from your mouth. Please don't take my zero literally either.



Yes, that's exactly what I thought you said. Have some faith in my reading skills man.



Yes. Amplifiers probably limit the separation a little bit, but 70-80 dB is piece of cake from 20 to 20.000 Hz I think. The question is how much separation is needed? Based on HRTF-responces I'd say at low frequencies just a few decibels is enough and no more than 30 dB at high frequencies.



I can easily fine-tune my example to fulfill that standard if that makes you feel better (the gain of L-R is 94 % ).

...(blah-blah-blah...)Then why the example to prove separation wouldn't be "zero"? Just to argue??? 'Cuz that's what you did...

You are patronizing me. I'm not a high-school teenager. I'm 46. I have admitted my mistakes when you have demonstrated them, so I don't think I insist on arguing. My problem with you isn't so much about what you say (you clearly know a lot), but how you say it.

Looks like my estimate of your age was off but only a couple dB.

 

[pinnahertz]

I know what elliptic filters are.

The fact that some mastering consoles have elliptic filters illustrate how "bass summing" is part of vinyl production.

If by "part of vinyl production" you mean it's a tool, like mastering EQ, that may or may not be used...then fine.

You need to think about the bass when dealing with vinyl and you know that. Otherwise you could end up with vinyls that force the stylus to jump out of the groove. If the bass content of the recording is light then of course bass summing is not necessary.

Clearly you've never dealt with cutting a lacquer master. No, it's not that simple, and no, bass doesn't make the stylus jump out of the groove. In fact over-cutting HF is also a problem, and there's a way to deal with that too. There's a maximum level "curve" that chances with frequency, level and phase, and all of that translates into stylus velocity. Add to that the fact that driving bass into two transducers, either speakers or headphones, emphasises it in the presentation much more than what you'd expect from simple addition. As compared to a single channel only, with two driven equally you'd expect +6dB, it sounds more like 10 in headphones or widely separated speakers. More like +6 in a "juke box" stereo where drivers are close together. Either way it's a way to get more bass, even if groove mod is not hitting the max, or even -6dB from it.

There's an HF issue too that is geometrically related to stylus velocity. And it's not solved with an elliptic filter. But no matter, none of the "solutions" are part of vinyl production any more than any other tool on the mastering console, and there are quite a few tools.

Also, as long as the chain is linear (enough), it doesn't matter at what point bass summation is done. The listener can't know if it's done by an elliptic filter of the mastering console or earlier in the mix.

Wrong. It does matter. Bass summing mandates a filter/crossover, center-panning of the bass content does not. Sorry of you can't see the difference. Bass-summing is a band-aid for a mix made without consideration of a high average cut level. That's it. That's all. You'd be surprised at how many tracks don't have bass-summing, but do have perfectly centered bass.

So, with vinyls channel separation at low frequencies is often done at some point. CDs are a different story.

No, absolutely not! You're still assuming bass-summing is standard, common, required, part of the system, etc. It's a tool. Does a carpenter use a router on every job? Nope, only the job that requires it. Do you wear sunglasses every time you drive your car? Nope, just on sunny days..

"Your" music may require bass-summing because it's likely mixed by the uneducated semi-pro in his basement who doesn't know beans about cutting a lacquer, and it's extremely bass-heavy content that's desired to be cut and played at the highest level possible. Move out of your genre and consider some others. Classical never...NEVER...requires bass summing. I just listened to a jazz track this week with hard right panned string bass. Off-center bass is not unusual, hard panned bass is a bit more unusual but hardly unheard of. Then go down the list. The "loudness war" genres will all have centered bass, those less involved in the conflict are open to options. If centered bass is required because of the desire for high bass presentation, it's mixed that way, no bass summing needed or used. If it's not mixed that way, and it's discovered in mastering, they "fix" the mix and cut the lacquer hot. If you don't need it cut hot, there's no issue!

Get it? Hot cutting + Bass = Centered bass...Unless somebody goofed in the mix! Then apply bass-summing.

The audio world is no more black and white than any other part of the world. And I'm sorry if you feel I embarrass you, that's not my point. But take a lesson from my grade school band director who, in an effort to make our band more listenable without ear plugs, said, "When in doubt, breath in, not out."

 

[bigshot]

Someone please get these gentlemen a ruler so they can settle it once and for all.

 

[pinnahertz]

Someone please get these gentlemen a ruler so they can settle it once and for all.

Got to your room!

 

[bigshot]

Got to your room!

 

[71 dB]

...(blah-blah-blah...)Then why the example to prove separation wouldn't be "zero"? Just to argue??? 'Cuz that's what you did…

My example was just a calculation of what happens if the gain of L-R is only 90 % of what it should be. If someone is eager to argue here it's you.

Looks like my estimate of your age was off but only a couple dB.

If you didn't noticed yet, my nickname tells you the year I was born.

 

[pinnahertz]

My example was just a calculation of what happens if the gain of L-R is only 90 % of what it should be. If someone is eager to argue here it's you.

why did you show the math and then say, "Yes, separation gets worse, but hardly zero. " ... unless you want to argue with my "zero" statement?

If you didn't noticed yet, my nickname tells you the year I was born.

I thought it just was a mediocre signal-to-noise ratio. Kinda still think so.

 

[Niouke]

lol that's savage

 

[71 dB]

Clearly you've never dealt with cutting a lacquer master. No, it's not that simple, and no, bass doesn't make the stylus jump out of the groove. In fact over-cutting HF is also a problem, and there's a way to deal with that too. There's a maximum level "curve" that chances with frequency, level and phase, and all of that translates into stylus velocity. Add to that the fact that driving bass into two transducers, either speakers or headphones, emphasises it in the presentation much more than what you'd expect from simple addition. As compared to a single channel only, with two driven equally you'd expect +6dB, it sounds more like 10 in headphones or widely separated speakers. More like +6 in a "juke box" stereo where drivers are close together. Either way it's a way to get more bass, even if groove mod is not hitting the max, or even -6dB from it.

How many percent of people have dealt with cutting a lacquer master? 0.01 % ? 0.001 % ? I don't possess knowledge of cutting a lacquer master. My university studies of acoustics did not include much about vinyls. Our lecturer said to us: "Vinyl audio is about scratching a plastic plate with a rock and trying to get good sound out of that." This was in early 90's, long before the vinyl revival we have today. At the time vinyl was considered an obsolete format killed by CD. So no time was wasted on it.

There's an HF issue too that is geometrically related to stylus velocity. And it's not solved with an elliptic filter. But no matter, none of the "solutions" are part of vinyl production any more than any other tool on the mastering console, and there are quite a few tools.
Wrong. It does matter. Bass summing mandates a filter/crossover, center-panning of the bass content does not. Sorry of you can't see the difference. Bass-summing is a band-aid for a mix made without consideration of a high average cut level. That's it. That's all. You'd be surprised at how many tracks don't have bass-summing, but do have perfectly centered bass.

Ok.

No, absolutely not! You're still assuming bass-summing is standard, common, required, part of the system, etc. It's a tool. Does a carpenter use a router on every job? Nope, only the job that requires it. Do you wear sunglasses every time you drive your car? Nope, just on sunny days..

Ok. I get it.

"Your" music may require bass-summing because it's likely mixed by the uneducated semi-pro in his basement who doesn't know beans about cutting a lacquer, and it's extremely bass-heavy content that's desired to be cut and played at the highest level possible. Move out of your genre and consider some others. Classical never...NEVER...requires bass summing. I just listened to a jazz track this week with hard right panned string bass. Off-center bass is not unusual, hard panned bass is a bit more unusual but hardly unheard of. Then go down the list. The "loudness war" genres will all have centered bass, those less involved in the conflict are open to options. If centered bass is required because of the desire for high bass presentation, it's mixed that way, no bass summing needed or used. If it's not mixed that way, and it's discovered in mastering, they "fix" the mix and cut the lacquer hot. If you don't need it cut hot, there's no issue!

My classical music collection (about 1000 CDs) doesn't include vinyls, because this kind of music is available so well on CD. I believe I have explored quite many genres of music. This week I happened to listen to Miles Davis' Jack Johnson on CD and found it extremely hard-panned. Actually I listened to it on mono-mode of my headphone adapter. Worked best that way!

 

[71 dB]

why did you show the math and then say, "Yes, separation gets worse, but hardly zero. " ... unless you want to argue with my "zero" statement?

You just can't leave it as it is can you? I wanted to test how severe the reduction of separation is and made the calculation to have some idea. Is the separation 1 dB? 10 dB? 30 dB? 60 dB? Turns out it's about 26 dB, which is hardly "zero" (small like 5 dB or so).

I thought it just was a mediocre signal-to-noise ratio. Kinda still think so.

Your thoughts reveal what kind of person you are. It's if your purpose of life is to put me down. Everyone else on this forum have been super friendly to me.