[analogsurviver]

And the burden of proof lies on you to substantiate this claim that a record has any meaningful information beyond 20kHz (instead of noise). Hint, it's going to be really hard since the source tapes don't have ultrasonic material.

All of my recent posts - after a long sabbatical - are only meant as a preface - and warning.

I am analogsurviver - not digitalover. It took me some time to get the digital side of things up to the standard that can reveal (most of ) the true capabilities of analog - be it tape or analog record from whatever the source material.

There are some kinks to be ironed out on the analog front as well - trivial things, such as establishing again the correct continuity in the integrated headshell cartridge with particularly linear response and superb channel separation - all the way to 50 kHz.
The thing is not meant to be serviceable and/or opened, but I did find a way that might work.
Plus making it mechanically compatible with the arm/TT of choice; in order to force one to use the cartridges from the same manufacturer of turntable, some did intentionally build their equipment not to be compatible with broadly available cartridges/headshells that did conform to EIA/JIS standards.
So this operation will have to be killing two birds with one stone - it is , unfortunately, the only way.

I could have posted the results with cartridge(s) with less linear response and lower channel separation up to and beyond 50 kHz at this time, but I want to do it RIGHT.
A month or two still needed to iron these kinks out and then re-record the most representative cases again with this "Cartridge with Checkered Past" ( it is a really long and interesting chain of coincidences that ultimately helped this cart to be still alive and well after all these decades ).

I was myself shocked what information actually can be residing in the grooves of an analog record - and particularly, from how long ago this has been possible.

RBCD is in case of extended frequency response a definitive retrograde - and, to be precise, such low resolution digital did rob many artists who have been active from the early 80s on of any really decent recordings. It also affected the amplifier quality, as there was suddenly no longer a requirement to cope with anything much higher than say 50 kHz.

The really good amplifiers for analog have usually MHz bandwidth - or close to that, definitely essentially flat to at least 100 kHz.

Amplifiers & the rest of the chain got better again only with the introduction of the SACD - but still not to the level once available at the golden age of analog.

 

[bigshot]

Are you using AI to write your posts by any chance?

Some of the best sounding albums ever made were recorded in the early days of digital audio, and many of them were recorded 16/44.1. Donald Fagin's The Nightfly, Ry Cooder's Bop Till You Drop, Dave Grusin Mountain Dance, David Bowie's Let's Dance, Peter Gabriel's Security, Herb Alpert's Rise, Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms (one of the first full digital recordings)... and in the classical world those amazing Telarc recordings.

Inaudible frequencies are inaudible. They add nothing to the quality of the sound. But it doesn't matter because LP records have a high end roll off well below 20kHz.

 

[analogsurviver]

Are you using AI to write your posts by any chance?

Some of the best sounding albums ever made were recorded in the early days of digital audio, and many of them were recorded 16/44.1. Donald Fagin's The Nightfly, Ry Cooder's Bop Till You Drop, Dave Grusin Mountain Dance, David Bowie's Let's Dance, Peter Gabriel's Security, Herb Alpert's Rise, Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms (one of the first full digital recordings)... and in the classical world those amazing Telarc recordings.

Inaudible frequencies are inaudible. They add nothing to the quality of the sound. But it doesn't matter because LP records have a high end roll off well below 20kHz.

Wrong... - on all 3 counts.

Whatever I ever write, it is from me - generally, not using even spelling check. When applying for a job in French firm some years ago, I explicitly wrote immediately after Cher Monsieur/Madame that whatever written is from me and my head - not using vocabulary, not being proofed by anyone - of course, in French(ish).
They must have had a few good laughs - until they have read me describing a really distasteful handling a job application conversation with my friend, who, unbeknownst to them, speaks near perfect French ... - and replied to them in although polite, but very sharp and concise rebuttal.
I did not want to work for people who felt themselves to be so superior to "locals" anyway - but was interested whether they would be decent enough to reply.

Non - pas de tout.

You have described some of the better POPULAR albums recorded with early digital 44.1/16. I have never heard Nightfly, Bop Till You Drop ( but own most of his albums, up to Get Rhytm ), Let's Dance ( excerpt title song that has been inescapable at the time ), I don't like Peter Gabriel in any shape or form, from Herb Alpert I have a bit later album Magic Man ( I agree - great sounding ), and of course Brothers in Arms.

There is an interesting wrongdoing on the Philips' handling of the release of Brothers In Arms. They made every effort to insure the best possible sound for both the CD and LP release. However, when the first pressing release LP played on top notch record players at the time smoked the CD in no uncertain terms, they reverted to Plan B - recalling all unsold copies of BIA LP back to Philips, so that they could destroy them and reuse the vinyl ... - in order to release a version on LP that has been intentionally made to sound worse than the CD. Because of this, rare surviving copies of the first pressing/release of BIA on LP now fetch pretty penny.

Telarc is another story. Although very impressive on first listen ( up to then, such dynamic range has only been available on very few direct to disk releases of classical music ),
the Soundstream digital recorder lacked finesse - something s great analog tape or let alone direct to disk sourced record normally does not have any problem with.

Telarc went with SACD in later years, where the superb microphone techniques could really shine - and they are now among the most prominent users of 100 kHz bandwidth microphone(s) - Sanken C100K in particular.
https://sankenchromatic.com/products/co-100k/

There are many albums available on vinyl, recorded either with 35 mm film, analog tape, direct to disk or digital with sampling at least 88.2 kHz that DO contain frequencies well above 20 kHz. They may be less popular, less middle of the road - but are both artistically and technically head and shoulder above the albums you have cited.

My Work in Progress Disclaimer:

Wish I Was Not Here in Dire Straits with Nightfly on The Dark Side Of The Moon spreading Rumors I have to sell all my Jazz At The Pawnshop

 

[bigshot]

You really admire yourself, don’t you? I hope you have friends and family to ground you in real life, because on the Internet you don’t come off the way you think you do.

 

[analogsurviver]

You really admire yourself, don’t you? I hope you have friends and family to ground you in real life, because on the Internet you don’t come off the way you think you do.

Wait for the uploading of cold hard facts to do the talk for themselves.

 

[Blanchot]

I admire your enthusiasm but your approach to audio seems to involve a lot of effort, money and technical know-how to get you where you want. When someone dives so deep into a subject that you have done, is it even possible to reach a point where you are satisfied with your setup (call it endgame or whatever) so you can focus on the music and not the gear? Or is it a constant chase for a better cartridge, stylus or whatever?

 

[bigshot]

I don’t think it has much to do with audio at all.

 

[analogsurviver]

I admire your enthusiasm but your approach to audio seems to involve a lot of effort, money and technical know-how to get you where you want. When someone dives so deep into a subject that you have done, is it even possible to reach a point where you are satisfied with your setup (call it endgame or whatever) so you can focus on the music and not the gear? Or is it a constant chase for a better cartridge, stylus or whatever?

I would not call it enthusiasm. Not in the usual way, at least.

It is more of a quest for - wanting a better term - absolute sound. Not the magazine ( although it has been an inspiration at one time or another ), but actually the quest for the ability to at least approximate live sound in recorded and reproduced music.

I am aware that this is a never ending story - and it can never be completely satisfactory; but, the least what I can do, is opposing the views that the ultimate achievable or even desirable is something that falls far too short from my objective.

With today's best digital, we have most probably reached the end for the road for anything analog - in absolute terms, let alone in bang for the buck department. I always ask young hotheads for analog how many records, tape etc ( anything analog ) they already have/own, explain that ANY analog record today costs MINIMUM 30 or so dollars, pounds, euros ( or equivalent in other currencies ) - even a used copy off Discogs at 1 $, euro or pound - the rest is shipping and duties, if and when applicable.
If I get an "...uuhh, ouch...!" response from them, meaning they are not exactly loaded with disposable income, my advice is ALWAYS to get a decent digital setup and enjoy the music that way. They can't go back in time when whole collections of LPs have been sold off for cent(s) on the dollar - nor back in time where the original pressings have been reasonably priced.

If you are not familiar that I am also recording engineer, after nearly 20 years all I can say that the sheer sound quality is a VERY minor concern to the audience at large, even the musicians themselves. I have found that less than 1% of musicians can also be described as audiophiles - with an even lesser percentage of those who do own a respectable audio setup - regardless of whether it is analog or digital or both.

Most musicians are interested only in their notes being available on the recording as perfect - and digital PCM, with its endless possibilities to "photoshop" the sound, has lead to the facto position there are today almost no musicians who can play a song / movement of a classical work / etc in one go - without major bloopers. Time and time again have musicians, confident that they can pull it off, after hearing themselves without any touch/make up, ended recording under studio "we will fix it in the mix" condition - rendering any true DSD recording impossible.

Provided that I, who can't sing, play, etc have big enough bank account, it is possible today to hire a sound engineer who would make me a star. With all the technical support nowadays available in PCM world, the true artist would then be the sound engineer - and most certainly not myself, who would NEVER be able to perform live.
At least, if I would not like to jeopardize my "stardom".

What I CAN do, is to bring attention to the fact that once upon a time, we did indeed have sound better than "Perfect Sound Forever" - aka RBCD.

One aspect worth pursuing is digitizing the analog records in the best possible quality - in cases master tapes are no longer available, have deteriorated past usability or first gen digitizations leave too much to be desired - if and when there is a desire for re-release of certain music that is out of print or only mediocre sounding re-releases from dubious sources are in circulation.

Here, pushing the envelope with analog record playback makes perfect $€n$€ .

Please DO at least try to ignore all the over the top extravaganza in the first 20 or so minutes of the video below; for me, the gist of this movie is when the gentleman, with fire and passion in his eyes, starts explaining WHY he and his friends from the club are pouring all the time and money into their systems - because of the recordings from late 50s/early 60s, which did capture all the enthusiasm after the finished war, with things always getting better, more positive - and that spirit is immortalized in playing on those recordings.



And today ? It is possible to catch a triangle player ( who admittedly has his three moments in the final movement ) to play on his/her smartphone a video game during the entire concert, with fellow musician(s) used as "alarm clock", so that those three three strokes on triangle actually do get played.

In concert ... - not to mention rehearsals.
Imagine the uproar and mutiny among the musicians if today anyone would try to enforce the "Basket for Smartphones" - even during the rehearsals.

 

[bigshot]

I think your interest is focused entirely on a particular format. It isn't really about sound quality or even the music.

 

[analogsurviver]

I think your interest is focused entirely on a particular format. It isn't really about sound quality or even the music.

Partially true. But remember how fervently you & Co. have been and are still opposing any digital with higher resolution than RBCD. Bats ... - and all that jazz.

However, if - and that is big IF - the RBCD had not been rushed to the market under the gun ( particularly by Philips, who had a big financial flop due to their way too late Video 2000 system, which arrived on the scene after JVC's VHS conquered consumer market and Sony had to satisfy itself with Betamax for pros ), there would most likely be no more need for analog record - IF that " hypothetical (insert any color but red)BCD " used sampling frequency of 88.2 kHz or more and truly available 20 bit resolution.
That would be most probably too expensive in late 70s, when the CD has been developed.

My first exposure to CD has been at Sejem Elektronike ( Electronics Fair ) in my hometown - Ljubljana, then the most important electronics exhibition in then Yugoslavia. I can't remember the year, it could have been anything from 1979 to 1982 ( one year after that, there were also CD players from Sony, Hitachi and probably more - with Philips CD100 now as a finished product available commercially ) - but, it was Philips prototype of what later became available as Philips CD-100.
https://www.hifinews.com/content/philips-cd100-vintage
I even brought my own amplifier and a pair of electret headphones - so that any unfamiliarity with whatever they were otherwise demoing their prototype with could be excluded.

The only CD disk has been a demo sampler by Philips - some classical, some easy listening and a single track from what later became Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms.
I can no longer remember exactly which classical pieces from Philips catalog I have been familiar with were on that demo CD - but 10 minute or so listen has been more than enough to reveal that CD is NOT what everybody - myself included - have been hoping for.

After telling the presenter my true impression, he immediately took the defensive position " It is a prototype and not finished product for the market " -. or something to that effect. He was saved from my further inquiry by the sudden appearance of the official Chinese delagation to the fair - and made every effort to "dispose" of me and my criticism ASAP.

 

[bigshot]

I’m a format agnostic. In my collection I have 78s, LPs, RtR tapes, cassettes, CDs, DVD-As, SACDs, lossy audio files, and blu-ray audio discs. I prefer formats that are audibly transparent and convenient, but some music is only available on obsolete formats like LPs and 78s.

I am in the hobby for the music, not to make a fetish of black plastic discs or expensive electronics. If I limited myself to LPs, I would be VERY unhappy, because that would mean that I can’t listen to music on the go, I can’t stream music wirelessly throughout my home, I’d be limited to music produced in a narrow window between the mid fifties and the mid eighties, I wouldn’t have multichannel sound, storage of my library would be an issue, I’d have to put up with reduced response and higher levels of noise, and I would have to play songs on an album in a strict order. All of those things would stand between me and my music.

Music is what matters. Any money spent on esoteric and expensive equipment is money taken away from buying music. If you won’t allow yourself to engage with music in any way but this inconvenient and limited way you seem to have imposed on yourself, I can only feel sorry for you. By focusing on equipment instead of music, you’ve cheated yourself of one of the greatest pleasures in life.

 

[Blanchot]

I think you are being too harsh. He loves the sound of vinyl just like some people are crazy about birdwatching. There’s nothing wrong with that.

 

[bigshot]

We can smile and pat him on the head and ignore him if you want. I don’t think that’s how he sees it though.

 

[Blanchot]

There's another option: treat him with normal decency.

 

[bigshot]

All right. I deleted the part you're objecting to. But it's pretty clear that his logic doesn't follow a straight line. His arguments certainly don't.