[judgmentday]

  Well, for what it's worth, I agree that the CD track here sounds almost ludicrously bad.  I apologize about the "noisy" vinyl but I have a very modest setup consisting of a new Sota Moonbeam (entry-level solid table with a decent Rega tonearm mounted) using the cheapest MC cartridge money can buy (Denon) with an elliptical stylus.  But it's 10 dB quieter than my vintage Thorens was with the same cartridge so, I'm moving up in the world.  I also don't have a record-cleaning system.  But I do use Stylast, and I proved in another thread that these two products (cleaner+lubricant) decrease rumble by 5-10 dB.

safulop, thanks for bringing this up!
I can understand why digiphiles perceive vinyl as "inferior" or "noisy" in comparison to a digital recording. The fact is that the comparison is never fair or done with a state of the art TT and LP and all the vinyl requirements for the format to sound acceptable. If there are pops, needle noise or anything that is in the way of the music, yes, this recording is not acceptable to my taste either.

 I don't share the notion that digital per se is bad.  That's why, to my ear, the vinyl recorded onto CD is essentially indistinguishable from the live vinyl playback, when done correctly.  I have a professional-grade CD recording deck from Tascam, and it is adequate for this purpose.

Well, if you don't hear differences probably there are not many, but a good sounding LP stands out vs. a CD and you can hear the difference without too much effort.
I think that CD sounds good if you have nothing else to compare to.  Our planet earth is big but when compared to Jupiter is real small. Everybody can see the huge difference between the two planets.  Digital was meant for convenience and portability.  Vinyl was meant to be listened in a room with a suitable and decent 2 channel stereo high resolution setup. Something like a decent room, respectable TT & cartdridge, tube Preamp, tube Amp, decent speaker cables and interconnect cables, decent speakers.

 My point has always been to prove that the differences arise almost entirely from differences in mastering, and that these differences are usually so great that the inherent mechanical inferiority of vinyl is swamped by the vastly better masters that are commonly available on this format.

Mastering for vinyl has always been superior to CD because it takes a lot of skill and is very expensive to produce.  Any body can do a master for CD using protools and it does not even require an educated ear to do it.  Mastering for vinyl are great engineers that actually are great musicians also. They do have a great ear and great talent to create magic.  Just ask anyone on the vinyl mastering community.  They are geniuses.

 So yes, I think the CD track of this sounds dreadful by comparison, but the reason is not because it is on a CD.  The reason is because it was poorly mastered, as usual.

But even the 24bit/96kHz HDtracks have some thin and unnatural sound to it.  Even if you digitize the LP onto CD it does not mean that it sounds identically to the real live playing LP when played in a high resolution setup. Listen to the Diana Krall Live in Paris LP vs. the CD but use a high resolution setup with really good speakers not headphones.

 

[judgmentday]

  Surely the sound of cd version is a matter of taste. To my ears it does not sound particularly horrible compared with most other cd versions of 1950s - 1960s recordings. The qualities may result from the original recording, not just from mastering. Actually, without access to original master tape its is very difficult to say anything about mastering. We just do not know.

Since both are Wav 16bit/44kHz is very hard for a casual listener to tell apart the LP version from the CD version on a portable setup with headphones.  Safulop could have trans-coded a 320kbs MP3 into a wav file and we would not perceive much difference on thinking that is a real CD also.

 Does the vinyl version sound subjectively better then? Both versions are entirely listenable but to my ears the cd version is subjectively better in every way. YMMV. Fortunately classical music (so far at least) has not been much affected by 'loudness wars'.

To me, the LP version, let me clarify,  which is "B" sounds better than the CD version which is "A". Even with the pops and needle noise that should not be there, still I prefer the LP version.

 Also, to my ears the vinyl version is not particularly noisy - for vinyl. Vinyl is an inherently noisy medium. Sure, storing, cleaning, and handling LP's properly may reduce noise. But contrary to what many vinylphiles claim, even the cleanest, most lovingly treated LPs played on most esoteric high-end tuntables, tonearms and cartridges will be noisy.

Given safulop vinyl setup and with this particular LP limitations to me it sounded the way anyone may expect it to sound.
As for noise, all 2 channels home audio setups have some noise to be expected which generally over rides the noise that a decent TT setup produces.  For instance, all amps have some noise and you can hear it by placing you ear near the speaker tweeter.  This is to be expected but it is not detected from the listening position (the sweet spot).  So the noise that the TT produce is irrelevant because it cannot be heard from the listening position. Tubes are even more noisy, but the noise cannot be detected from the listening position either. Otherwise it would be in the way of the music and that is not the case.  Audio Research, Conrad Jonson and other tube audio gear manufactures would not be in business.

 

[RRod]

  Mastering for vinyl has always been superior to CD because it takes a lot of skill and is very expensive to produce.  Any body can do a master for CD using protools and it does not even require an educated ear to do it.  Mastering for vinyl are great engineers that actually are great musicians also. They do have a great ear and great talent to create magic.  Just ask anyone on the vinyl mastering community.  They are geniuses.
 
But even the 24bit/96kHz HDtracks have some thin and unnatural sound to it.  Even if you digitize the LP onto CD it does not mean that it sounds identically to the real live playing LP when played in a high resolution setup. Listen to the Diana Krall Live in Paris LP vs. the CD but use a high resolution setup with really good speakers not headphones.

 
I guess you don't listen to classical music, where great engineers have been making outstanding sounding digital stuff since the medium began. And I always love the setup "listen to this specific track using this specific equipment." I'm sure I can cherry pick many a CD of mine that would give vinyl a heck of a time.

 

[judgmentday]

   
I guess you don't listen to classical music, where great engineers have been making outstanding sounding digital stuff since the medium began. And I always love the setup "listen to this specific track using this specific equipment." I'm sure I can cherry pick many a CD of mine that would give vinyl a heck of a time.

Until now I have not listened to a SACD, DVD-Audio, 24bit/96kHz HDTrack much less CD that sounds better than a LP though. I'm talking about a $70K ~ $100K 2 channel speaker setup not a pair of headphones and a headphone amp or a $200 TT and $3.00 used LP.  I'm talking serious listening.

 

[Leporello]

   
Mastering for vinyl has always been superior to CD because it takes a lot of skill and is very expensive to produce.  Any body can do a master for CD using protools and it does not even require an educated ear to do it.  Mastering for vinyl are great engineers that actually are great musicians also. They do have a great ear and great talent to create magic.  Just ask anyone on the vinyl mastering community.  They are geniuses.

 Indeed. Interestingly enough, everything you just said rather proves the superiority of digital.

 

[RRod]

 
Until now I have not listened to a SACD, DVD-Audio, 24bit/96kHz HDTrack much less CD that sounds better than a LP though. I'm talking about a $70K ~ $100K 2 channel speaker setup not a pair of headphones and a headphone amp or a $200 TT and $3.00 used LP.  I'm talking serious listening.

 
Ah yes, the "I listen to music seriously and you don't argument", with a monetary requirement. It's just veiled ad hominem, really. The fact remains that CDs can have excellent engineering, regardless of how many don't due to the loudness wars.

 

[Leporello]

 This is to be expected but it is not detected from the listening position (the sweet spot).  So the noise that the TT produce is irrelevant because it cannot be heard from the listening position. 

Usually it is quite easy to hear, particularly with classical (or any type of music with sufficient dynamic range). And particularly with headphones of course. First you mistake vinyl sound for cd, then you are unable to hear noise that is trivially easy for most people to detect. What is going on?

 

[icebear]

 
Until now I have not listened to a SACD, DVD-Audio, 24bit/96kHz HDTrack much less CD that sounds better than a LP though. I'm talking about a $70K ~ $100K 2 channel speaker setup not a pair of headphones and a headphone amp or a $200 TT and $3.00 used LP.  I'm talking serious listening.

 
I don't compare formats against each other, I compare to the live concert.
If I enjoy listening at home for hours and it gives me the shivers the same way the live performance, then this is good enough for me, seriously too

... but that's only on a system at 10% of your low end $$ figure, so it might not qualify

.

 

[judgmentday]

  Usually it is quite easy to hear, particularly with classical (or any type of music with sufficient dynamic range). And particularly with headphones of course. First you mistake vinyl sound for cd, then you are unable to hear noise that is trivially easy for most people to detect. What is going on?

If you are able to detect noise (I doubt it)  coming from the 2 channel home audio setup amp from the listening position on quiet passages of the music then you are going to detect it listening to CD or any digital recording as well as a TT. If you listen to headphones you hear the music inside your head how good is that vs. listening to a real home stereo?

 

[judgmentday]

   
I don't compare formats against each other, I compare to the live concert.
If I enjoy listening at home for hours and it gives me the shivers the same way the live performance, then this is good enough for me, seriously too

... but that's only on a system at 10% of your low end $$ figure, so it might not qualify

.

To each his own though.  Lots of people are over joyed listening to mp3s @128kbps. I'm a very fine, demanding and purist audiophile.  I'm allergic to headphones but once in a while I listen to 2 o 3 songs thru my Sennheiser HD650

 

[Leporello]

  If you are able to detect noise (I doubt it)  coming from the 2 channel home audio setup amp from the listening position on quiet passages of the music then you are going to detect it listening to CD or any digital recording as well as a TT. If you listen to headphones you hear the music inside your head how good is that vs. listening to a real home stereo?

Not necessarily, vinyl noise of course being on much higher level than noise from cd or power amplifier.

 

[sonitus mirus]

  To each his own though.  Lots of people are over joyed listening to mp3s @128kbps. I'm a very fine, demanding and purist audiophile.  I'm allergic to headphones but once in a while I listen to 2 o 3 songs thru my Sennheiser HD650

 
You don't come across as being too demanding, as you prefer vinyl.

 

[safulop]

   
The fact remains that CDs can have excellent engineering, regardless of how many don't due to the loudness wars.

This I agree with.  There is no way I would attempt to "prove" the superiority of all vinyl over all CD.  But it does seem distressingly hard to *find* the CDs that are actually engineered correctly.  In classical it is not hard, although as I've shown here you can get trouble with "remasters."  Pop music though, forget it.  A pop fan like me almost *has* to buy vinyl to get decent sounding tracks from the likes of Taylor Swift, Lorde, Sarah Bareilles etc.  The CDs and digital downloads can be dreadful by comparison.

 

[judgmentday]

  Not necessarily, vinyl noise of course being on much higher level than noise from cd or power amplifier.

I disagree with you Leporello.  Have you even seen a real TT in your life?
 
 

 

[judgmentday]

   
You don't come across as being too demanding, as you prefer vinyl.

Have you even seen a TT in your life?
If you can't beat digital playback, then you know you need a better TT, cart, or phono stage. A decent TT sounds more real, natural with a better stage front to back, and better separation of instruments and voices.
More emotion is conveyed via a good vinyl recording, compared to a good digital recording...
Even with a low end cart and phono stage vinyl spanks the ass of  CD or any digital recording any day.