In the Eighties it was common practice to CONVERT lp to cassette
There were some very good tape decks, indeed.
Somehow this belief had origin that the stylus damaged the vinyl and so on.
So you'd find libraries full of NEW lps and tapes ( mostly Cr/ Metal )having copies of them.
Everyone who had made that iteration knows that the sound of a ( well masterized by yourself ! ) tape is different from the original.
Anyhow, after some years also the tapes start to deteriorate !
There were some very good tape decks, indeed.
Somehow this belief had origin that the stylus damaged the vinyl and so on.
So you'd find libraries full of NEW lps and tapes ( mostly Cr/ Metal )having copies of them.
Everyone who had made that iteration knows that the sound of a ( well masterized by yourself ! ) tape is different from the original.
Anyhow, after some years also the tapes start to deteriorate !
The problem with that is the signal has to be made to work. The CD from LP is a job anyone can do to a good standard ( that begs a question I think ). Unlike real life when LP to digital one can have a few goes and spend nothing except your time. Many will not know many DDD CD's were ADD. A high grade analogue recorder with pro Dolby was run side by side with a Sony PCMF-1. The analogue was a safety copy with no obvious noise penalty. Dolby correctly calibrated is not so bad. Don't relate it to your cassette deck Dolby.
On returning to do the editing often the safety copy was far far better. The reason being the real world dynamic range was better handled or at least more as memory remebered it. What then happened over many days a fake DDD was made by comparing. The window of good transfer was about 5 dB +/-. Often this was taken to the company as the master. As the engineer said " They must be deaf as any good engineer will hear wow on analogue " how you hear it is a jelly like quality. When you know it, it is like sugar in tea. It isn't horrible, it is obvious even when near perfect in analogue terms.
On returning to do the editing often the safety copy was far far better. The reason being the real world dynamic range was better handled or at least more as memory remebered it. What then happened over many days a fake DDD was made by comparing. The window of good transfer was about 5 dB +/-. Often this was taken to the company as the master. As the engineer said " They must be deaf as any good engineer will hear wow on analogue " how you hear it is a jelly like quality. When you know it, it is like sugar in tea. It isn't horrible, it is obvious even when near perfect in analogue terms.
lp is one thing ,analog master tape is other thing. there is some sort of harmonic distortion i keep hearing on lp ,just like there is some 16k signal from studio screen hV supply on some modern recordings,how is that possible?maybe people like stuff like that ,on other hand , pretty much everyone who likes to listen to lps is older than 40 years, so 16k(to hell,someone says over 13k after 40yrs old is gone) is non existent so we have nothing to talk about here its easy to conclude why some prefer lp.
audio recording should be like football(soccer) 35yrs old ,go to pension/training someone young.
audio recording should be like football(soccer) 35yrs old ,go to pension/training someone young.
I think what people overlook is LP is very imperfect. This gives choices. A pick up cartridge will look very poor on graphs. That is not an error of design. It is a choice.
Long before RIAA is used to restore " correct " frequency responce many little things are done in the lathe. Each lathe is how that designer saw the problem.
Maybe this is why CD is dissapointing. Record, make, sell. Can't help thinking someone somewhere didn't do their job.
Long before RIAA is used to restore " correct " frequency responce many little things are done in the lathe. Each lathe is how that designer saw the problem.
Maybe this is why CD is dissapointing. Record, make, sell. Can't help thinking someone somewhere didn't do their job.
Thank you sir. Good to know that it is possible. Personally I believe we should not be afraid trying new things related to audio. There might be bad or good surprises if we try. Unfortunately I am not knowledeable about electronics. I would even dare say we can even entertain two conflicting thoughts regarding audio to expand our horizons. A thought just came to me if we want a quick listening how the above idea sounds we can use a mono record use left channel for woofer and right for tweeter driven by a stereo amplifier.
Regards.
Just to remind everyone. The cuts of vinyl I've heard are close to the cutting master. This is very surprising considering the complications of cutting. Perhaps this need a very special person who seeks a correct representaion of the master. Somone who will fight to do a good job. What people seem to forget is making a CD or LP has no accurate reference. As I said before the sound to my ears in Winchester Cathedral is hopeless. With careful microphone placement the cathedral can be rescued. Already somone has choosen to change reality and why not. For some mysterious reason CD mostly was a less well made product. That would be fine if only sold on it's durability. Perfect sound that lasts for every was and is a lie.
What is suggested here is one thing might be making people like LP. If it is anything it is the careful use of compression in both cutting and mastering. Ghostly ambiance is unlikely. Also do you really think your speakers can show that? As for headphones, the presentation is wrong to start with. Also the ear can not hear much below 200 Hz when headphones. It is heard in the body and is reconstructed by the brain from harmonics.
Hiten, Sir. Although I have no proof I suspect a really powerful mono bass unit that goes to about 100 Hz ( from 15 Hz ) and two open baffle speaker using a full range units could work. In my own example I use a tweeter at 6 kHz as I found it better than attempting true full range. As far as my ears tell me stereo bass stops at about 100 Hz. The reason is the room does what it likes with it at that frequency. One can always build a second bass box. I suspect it will be prefered, not because it's stereo. Just the power.
What is suggested here is one thing might be making people like LP. If it is anything it is the careful use of compression in both cutting and mastering. Ghostly ambiance is unlikely. Also do you really think your speakers can show that? As for headphones, the presentation is wrong to start with. Also the ear can not hear much below 200 Hz when headphones. It is heard in the body and is reconstructed by the brain from harmonics.
Hiten, Sir. Although I have no proof I suspect a really powerful mono bass unit that goes to about 100 Hz ( from 15 Hz ) and two open baffle speaker using a full range units could work. In my own example I use a tweeter at 6 kHz as I found it better than attempting true full range. As far as my ears tell me stereo bass stops at about 100 Hz. The reason is the room does what it likes with it at that frequency. One can always build a second bass box. I suspect it will be prefered, not because it's stereo. Just the power.
We have about a 20 db at best stereo separtion. Like seeing in the infra red it has no value to to think 110 dB something to get excited about.
I tried very hard to make a headphone speaker sound simulator. It was not a sucess. That seems a good question which I think is highly related to this. At last this thread is looking to what we can hear. My opera singer friend says 70 % of what we hear when ourselves is through the bone. She introduces people to their own voices slowly so they don't get a shock.
I tried very hard to make a headphone speaker sound simulator. It was not a sucess. That seems a good question which I think is highly related to this. At last this thread is looking to what we can hear. My opera singer friend says 70 % of what we hear when ourselves is through the bone. She introduces people to their own voices slowly so they don't get a shock.
Although speakers and cardridges are both transducers, speakers have to produce soundwaves. And as we all know the efficiency with wich they do that depends among others on the frequency and their size. Tweeters can produce very low frequencies, but not with high SPL.
Cardridges react only to the grooves, they don't need to be large to create low frequencies. Same goes for microphones.
Audible Effects of Mechanical Resonances in Turntables:
The paper makes it very clear that bulk of resonances are at frequencies below range of human hearing, yet produce audible effects.
The paper also makes it clear that low frequency signals occur at high S/N levels. This is well demonstrated in high resolution spectra from recordings of records.
Wallace throws out high level low frequency content signals of records and non-linearity of cantilever suspension as possible source of potential for some people's preference for records over other sources, and proposes instead that low level signals leads to preferences.
First Wallace needs to discount all the large signals as source of preference.
Wallace's hypothesis is crap.
Modulation of subsonic record/turntable signals with noise and sine signals produces revealing effects. I've applied 15Hz brickwall low pass filter to recordings and multiplied this with pink noise and sine signals. Modulation with pink noise leads to a track that sounds like a record that is both badly worn and tracking poorly. Modulated with sine waves a stereo effect is heard.
I think you should listen to these effects.
Here is link to files with noise and with 1kHz sine modulated onto recording provided by gpapag:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wjvj30ur7c67zip/AABeT9Gc5VETummROfwkV-Loa?dl=0
With the sine modulation, pure tone can be added to both channels and the stereo effect narrows. The effect remains audible when pure sine is added on top at -14dBFS. The sound characteristic is highly similar to 1kHz tone of original track, only more pronounced. A track with added 1kHz is included with above link.
It dawned on me that there may be few issues with dual arms. First of all, the time that each is set down will be different each time you play a record so although the delay is constant, it is different at each play so you need to tune in at the start. Not handy.
Secondly, and I am not sure I get this right, but since each cart will be on a different diameter compared to the other, the delay changes monotonously during the play and will be smallest at the end of the record. Right?
Jan
More reasons why CDs are best.....
This just surfaced ... it turns out to be around a year old, but gives a perspective from an engineers' point of view, rather than faith-based opinions.. see Do CDs Sound Better Than Vinyl? | L.A. Weekly
No intention of upsetting any vinyl-fundamentalists of course.
This just surfaced ... it turns out to be around a year old, but gives a perspective from an engineers' point of view, rather than faith-based opinions.. see Do CDs Sound Better Than Vinyl? | L.A. Weekly
No intention of upsetting any vinyl-fundamentalists of course.
Oh dear
And yet relevant and interesting. What's not to like.. and don't get excited.
And yet relevant and interesting. What's not to like.. and don't get excited.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.