[bigshot]

   
There are many techniques for getting a loud mix. That works on CDs but you cannot do that with vinyl.
 
 afraid you're very wrong about anything above 17kHz on vinyl being surface noise, it's simply not true. The recording and tracking ability of vinyl is well over 50kHz, possibly right up to 100kHz.
 
Like I said before, we may not be able to hear much above 50kHz, but we can still detect those frequencies

 
You certainly can over compress vinyl to get the equivalent of the loudness wars. It was done on 45 rpm singles back in the day.
 
Frequencies above 17kHz can be cut into vinyl, and turntables can certainly track them... but after a couple of plays, these frequencies would turn to mush because the modulations would be so fine the physical contact between needle and groove would destroy them. LP record mastering involves a low pass filter applied as the lacquer master is being cut that eliminates these high frequencies to guarantee that the record wouldn't wear out prematurely.
 
Blind listening tests have shown that although people may be able to detect super audible frequencies as sound pressure if the volume is high enough, it doesn't add anything to music. In fact, they polled people to listen to two samples.... one a full frequency response recording, and the other with the whole top octave- everything above 10kHz- lopped off. A large majority of people said that the two samples were of equal sound quality.
 
20kHz is more than enough to contain the fundamentals of any acoustic musical instrument along with its significant harmonics. Take an LP record, perform a low pass filter to isolate everything above 20kHz and pitch it down into the audible spectrum so you can hear what's up there. I guarantee you, it won't be pretty.

 

[bigshot]

  I have concluded that, to me, my initial thought that the vinyl sounded better was likely the result of an poor DAC and poorly mastered (loudness war) CDs.

 
The DAC problem has been solved. Today, even the cheapest CD players can produce audio that would have been considered "high end" a decade ago.
 
The mastering is the problem. Mastering is everything. It's impossible to directly compare LPs and CDs as a format, because LP mastering is an entirely different process involving a much more indirect way of transferring sound. A CD is audibly identical to the master. LPs have all sorts of compromises and mechanical considerations that make it impossible to exactly duplicate the master. It's possible that someone might like the sound of LPs better... narrower dynamics, rolled off high end, etc... But that isn't fidelity to the master.

 

[acs236]

That's certainly consistent with my observations.  By any chance, do you know where I could read about the changes in DACs over the last decade or so?  I'd like to learn more.
 
Quote:

   
The DAC problem has been solved. Today, even the cheapest CD players can produce audio that would have been considered "high end" a decade ago.
 
 

 

[bigshot]

I'm not an expert in that, but it has to do with oversampling and brick wall filters. Try googling that and you'll find what you're looking for.
 
Also, the way electronics are designed and made has changed. Instead of building their own components, manufacturers now use stock components made by companies that specialize in specific parts. This has made it a lot easier, because manufacturers don't have to "reinvent the wheel". They can just buy a stock part off the shelf and know that it performs to spec.

 

[Kost]

Now, I can assure you, that there are tests out there where you can hear an identical mix/master at 44.1kHz, 96kHz, and 192kHz, and whether I listen in my studio, or on my home hifi, the difference is relatively huge. If you choose to keep your head up your own ass, that's fine by me. All I'm interested in is "educating" any people who may still be open to debate, rather than closed-minded fools. It's OK to admit being wrong, and only fools never change their minds.

 
I would be really interested in finding a test like this online.  I've got several vinyl rips as well as the digital counterpart but it's hard to find the same master in both formats.

 

[ploppy666]

  Blind listening tests have shown that although people may be able to detect super audible frequencies as sound pressure if the volume is high enough, it doesn't add anything to music. In fact, they polled people to listen to two samples.... one a full frequency response recording, and the other with the whole top octave- everything above 10kHz- lopped off. A large majority of people said that the two samples were of equal sound quality.

 
Rubbish. You're going to have to back that up with a reliable source. No way can you be serious.
Who is "they" and who is this "large majority"? Were they testing on rats, or was it monkeys?
If you'd said 20kHz I might have believed you, but 10kHz?!
 
I honestly think you're just a WUM hence your sentence "It's possible that someone might like the sound of LPs better... narrower dynamics, rolled off high end, etc... But that isn't fidelity to the master."
Ridiculous. You really need to ask the opinion of professional mastering engineers before spouting such rubbish I'm afraid.
 
Did you even look at those graphs I posted? I guess you'd put all that vinyl high end down as "surface noise". LOL
If it was surface noise it would be unlistenable by the way.
 
Anyway...
 
@Kost, I can give you a link to a download if you like, for Metallica's Ride The lightning (1984), those graphs are from that. I have the original CD (1989), which looks like it has the same mastering (the waveform looks very similar, but not identical). So you could at least have the 192kHz file, and then if you search around for a CD rip, you might be lucky enough to find what you're looking for. Let me know and I'll find the link for the Metallica torrent.

 

[bigshot]

Here is one... http://www.hificritic.com/downloads/Archive_A10.pdf
 
By the way, I work in the business and have supervised sound mixes for LP, CD and TV release. I'm not making this stuff up.
 
By the way, CD and LP mastering are ALWAYS different, because of the attributes and limitations of the mediums.

 

[bigshot]

Also, you might not be aware of it, but 10kHz to 20kHz is only about one octave- just the top 10% of the range of human hearing. No acoustic musical instrument has fundamentals that high. All that exists up there is upper harmonics on triangles and cymbals, and those are masked by very loud harmonics lower in the spectrum. 10-20kHz is the least important octave in human hearing.

 

[Davey]

I'm not making this stuff up.

 
Sadly, that part is probably true.

 

[ploppy666]

From page 5 of 8:
 
"The test showed that a filter limiting at 10 kHz was reliably audible for nearly everyone. There was a sigh of relief all round!"
 
So you were making it up.
 
Next please!
 
In case you didn't actually read the article, this test was with a synthetic, wide-band, repetitive pulse train. Not music.
 
Other extracts you may have missed from your own article, which do talk about music:
 
"Full bandwidth was preferred to CD bandwidth"
 
"Full bandwidth replay was judged from the physiological data to give greatest listening pleasure"
 
"Boyk generally supports the wider bandwidth proposition and provided a useful assessment of the bandwidth of many musical instruments, showing that they radiate at least to 40kHz. This was not widely accepted until this material was published."
 
"For loudspeakers the effort to extend bandwidth again may improve quality in the lower frequency range."
 
"We should be encouraged to use the widest bandwidth possible to preserve the greatest information content."

 

[brunk]

  Also, you might not be aware of it, but 10kHz to 20kHz is only about one octave- just the top 10% of the range of human hearing. No acoustic musical instrument has fundamentals that high. All that exists up there is upper harmonics on triangles and cymbals, and those are masked by very loud harmonics lower in the spectrum. 10-20kHz is the least important octave in human hearing.

I have an odd ability that only a couple people i've come across in my life have the same thing. When a monitor, TV, PC or some other devices is powered on with absolutely no sound or video, speakers disabled etc., i can "hear" the device operating. I have tested this with a friend in the living room and me at the complete opposite end of the house, I could tell him precisely when it was on or off. That's just one of many different times I have tested myself to make sure i wasn't crazy lol. Is there an explanation for this?

 

[bigshot]

It's probably squeals up above 18kHz, Brunk. Fluorescent lights can put off that kind of sound when the ballast goes bad too.

 

[analogsurviver]

  I have an odd ability that only a couple people i've come across in my life have the same thing. When a monitor, TV, PC or some other devices is powered on with absolutely no sound or video, speakers disabled etc., i can "hear" the device operating. I have tested this with a friend in the living room and me at the complete opposite end of the house, I could tell him precisely when it was on or off. That's just one of many different times I have tested myself to make sure i wasn't crazy lol. Is there an explanation for this?

Normal. Rare, but normal. We have become so acustomed to the noise in our surrounding to "adapt" to the lowest level constant sound and treat is as "zero" - it is the new threshold of "silence". 
 
I am not making this up .  I lived in a city and am living in a city for the majority of my life. But did spend a year in the country/hills/inthemiddleofnowhere.
At first, I had trouble falling asleep at night - it was so damn spooky quiet, a most unusual and eerie sensation for someone used to the drone of the city we are not even longer aware it is there. Remove it - 

 ! 
 
Thing repeated itself in reverse upon returning to the city.
 
If nothing else, it proves your hearing is at the very least good for whatever age you might be. Once you stop hearing transformers buzzing, computer screens making funny noises etc - perhaps time to pass some super headphones to someone that still does hear those sounds.

 

[brunk]

  It's probably squeals up above 18kHz, Brunk. Fluorescent lights can put off that kind of sound when the ballast goes bad too.

Maybe that's what it is...but i can hear it clear as day through several walls in a quiet house. I know the buzz in the flourescents you're talking about and those are very easy for me, almost sounds like a fly next to your ear, but these frquencies im talking about seem to be much, much higher that, no?
 

  Normal. Rare, but normal. We have become so acustomed to the noise in our surrounding to "adapt" to the lowest level constant sound and treat is as "zero" - it is the new threshold of "silence". 
 
I am not making this up .  I lived in a city and am living in a city for the majority of my life. But did spend a year in the country/hills/inthemiddleofnowhere.
At first, I had trouble falling asleep at night - it was so damn spooky quiet, a most unusual and eerie sensation for someone used to the drone of the city we are not even longer aware it is there. Remove it - 

 ! 
 
Thing repeated itself in reverse upon returning to the city.
 
If nothing else, it proves your hearing is at the very least good for whatever age you might be. Once you stop hearing transformers buzzing, computer screens making funny noises etc - perhaps time to pass some super headphones to someone that still does hear those sounds.

Yes! There is an immediate difference between night and day, even in the country. I am still amazed to this day the thousands (?) of tires rolling across roads miles away, and how quiet it gets at night. I feel odd talking about all this, but I am glad to see I'm not alone...just with small company
 
EDIT: I'm 29 by the way, wherever that age may fall in the bell curve for high frequency hearing, i don't know.

 

[bigshot]

I haven't read all these yet... still at work. have fun.
 
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=14195
 
http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/
 
http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/publica/labnote/lab486.html