Sy, Pano,
Why record the analog to digital if the sound is inferior, is it really worth the effort ? well i guess you guys are building some kind of music bank, might as well let the software avg, hence no clipping, It's going to be almost impossible to account for all the dynamic changes with old analog LP's..
regards.
Why record the analog to digital if the sound is inferior, is it really worth the effort ? well i guess you guys are building some kind of music bank, might as well let the software avg, hence no clipping, It's going to be almost impossible to account for all the dynamic changes with old analog LP's..
regards.
Its a flawed human condition to fuss over the differences when both experience are vastly more incredible then our day to day experiences. That is the point but you might not have the intellictual insight in understanding that.
You can not make an accurate cognitive decision unless you to the properly controlled test....you are definitely naive if you think you can 🙄
Since I have driven both and I have been to BOTH factories I do understand the differences. Where have you travelled to again, do you even make enough money to drive either??
btw, When have I posted that anything sounds better? You are completely missing the point of what Im talking about when I post "techinically superior".
I have 4 setups. Custom HT room, Office, bedroom setup, family room setup. I have waveguide designs, I have ribbon designs and I have NHT speakers, Im currently build more speakers to replace the waveguides. I have CD players (numerous choices), I have full house AV distribution and 30,000 songs to choose from (once had a friend working for a radio station give me 300gB, man that is a lot of music!!). I have Marantz, Onkyo, NAD and Outlaw pre/pros. I have too many amps to care (Bel Canto, Outlaw, Sunfire). I have 2 sub system that make single subwoofer setups look like little baby setups.
Yet, my prefered playback just might be my favorite playlist on my Ipod since Im either golfing, travelling or building speakers in the garage. Most times have incredible enjoyment with a quality set of headphones and the Ipod. Of course that wouldn't make me a music lover like someone sitting in a dark room not able to play their favorite songs without getting up, moving the needle, finding a new LP, cleaning it and putting it back down. Im in the automation business...that guy would be fired in my business 😉
What else do you want to know?? Im naive?? Of course, I too busy making $25K over these past 3 days....did you do that last week? 🙄
Last edited:
This is a bragging contest now?
I can make $25K in an afternoon, but I don't think the US treasury would look kindly on it.
I can make $25K in an afternoon, but I don't think the US treasury would look kindly on it.
This is a bragging contest now?
I can make $25K in an afternoon, but I don't think the US treasury would look kindly on it.
treasury doesn't mind at all - just keep good books, issue 1099's to subcontractors, border guards, local law enforcement, be prepared to justify cost of goods sold, other business expenses...
Then you should. If its 3 days work and $25K who wouldn't do it?? Congrats on having that sort of opportunity too!!
Anyways, it was never about bragging rights period but if people want the p!ss!ng match, I welcome it. I was not the one to ask the stupid online question...."What is your system?", like there is some litmus test on what counts or does not count. Maybe others members should post more on topic and less antagonistic style posts, telling someone they must not be music lovers or they are naive goes nowhere period. In real life that sort of thing gets solved in about 2 minutes, they do it ONLY because its online.
Pano, you do the best job at having a debate. You made great points, many times. Your posts have been really good. The recent posts about ripping are great because its nice to learn something.
Last edited:
The second pass shouldn't be needed. Just make sure on first recording the peak level is below the peak input of the A/D input, and normalize in any modern DAW/recording program. Nowadays they all do matth with 32 bit floating point, and dither back to 24 bit or 16 bit - a volume change will not change the sound, and the noise floor of a decent A/D is well below an LP playback at any frequency. If anything, the second pass would be an extra playing of the LP, causing a little more wear and degradation of the sound.
As Sy said, you could do it in software (you have to "encode" the RIAA curve at the actual played-back speed then "decode" at the normal speed, but you can make a single filter that effectively does both at once).
But it may be better done with the RIAA preamp itself - double the capacitor values for half-speed play, or halve them for <cringe> double-speed play, then when the recorded file is played back at normal speed it will have the proper EQ applied.
But what will you listen to while doing this? Other than the stylus making sounds like a bumble bee...
Last edited:
Hey, makes 2 Mil a year.
If that's Net, you don't need a CD or a TT, you're ready for a boat ride (and it's tax deductable).
Sigh. Obviously it's not necessary for every disc. And if you think there is significant enough degradation with a subsequent play, then you don't actually have a lot of experience with LP.
Although my suggestion about the "transparency" of 16/44.1 was just a hypothetical 'if', ripping vinyl to CD seems to be generally accepted as a reasonable thing to do in this forum.
Does this mean that there is a consensus that vinyl sprinkles some magic dust (!) on the sound that digital does provide, or does it mean that the mastering was likely done with more care than the commercial CD version, and people just want to access it more conveniently?
If it is the former, then it should be possible to produce a convincing 'plug-in' to reproduce the magic of vinyl for any digital recording. If it is the latter, then all the record companies have to do is to digitise the master that was used for vinyl and they've cracked it.
Of course, 16/44.1 has not been proven to be audibly "transparent" and quibbles can be found for any possible testing method, but if I had to, I would put money on an output resolution of 16/44.1 being transparent (you could use higher resolution prior to this). I would also wager that a $1 ADC and $1 DAC are audibly indistinguishable from anything more expensive.
(Personally, I'm 100% convinced that digital is the truth and the light, but I take the point that we have no control of how bad the original master is).
Does this mean that there is a consensus that vinyl sprinkles some magic dust (!) on the sound that digital does provide, or does it mean that the mastering was likely done with more care than the commercial CD version, and people just want to access it more conveniently?
If it is the former, then it should be possible to produce a convincing 'plug-in' to reproduce the magic of vinyl for any digital recording. If it is the latter, then all the record companies have to do is to digitise the master that was used for vinyl and they've cracked it.
Of course, 16/44.1 has not been proven to be audibly "transparent" and quibbles can be found for any possible testing method, but if I had to, I would put money on an output resolution of 16/44.1 being transparent (you could use higher resolution prior to this). I would also wager that a $1 ADC and $1 DAC are audibly indistinguishable from anything more expensive.
(Personally, I'm 100% convinced that digital is the truth and the light, but I take the point that we have no control of how bad the original master is).
I'm reading from where I left off a couple of days back and I see that you mentioned a "Vinyl Listening Club" in answer to Pano's post mentioning a recent meet our club had. It's painfully obvious that you have no knowledge of either what our club does, or has done in the past.
FYI, it was not just about vinyl, our club is not about vinyl and the excercise of our testing was to get a glimps of the recent advances in digital technology. We are committed to the highest fidelity, from whatever source.
Sinse what Pano and I'm talking about, was mentioned earlier in this thread, you either didn't read it, so you have no idea what you're talking about, or you can't be bothered to stay within the discussion without injecting your own highly biased and snide comments.
Sincerely,
TerryO
He explained that later, I think the point still stands to actually hear a quality LP system is really out of the question for 99.9% of all who enjoy listening to music. Availability is one factor also in decide if something is good or not.
My points about the technology has nothing to do with bias. There is more to deciding how good any audio technology is then just how it sounds. People can set sound has the highest priority but that just choice for them and their priorities do not supercede the majority of choices when it comes to defining any technology as good or bad overall. How something sounds is about the most subjective part of the debate and comes with more bias then anything else so I think its impossible to discuss.
You are right about the snide remarks but I will not be quiet when insulted, online or in real life. Its just a flawed thing I have in defending what I think is right and wrong.
Last edited:
I can assure you there's certainly no more degradation in applying a few dB of gain in the digital domain, AND it's a lot faster than recording another playing.
This is really a strange thread.
Some years ago I started modding my CDP and after 2 years it became better sounding than my TT setup. Now the CDP has 9 TX, 11 sregs and a jfet discrete output stage.
I was amazed how good a CD could sound but I was unhappy about the TT so I decided to build a good phono preamp.
Now the TT completely obliterates the CDP , providing an organic fluid and continuous sound.
My best sounding vinyl pressings are from the 80´s, when recordings were done with analog tape recorders and the cutting lathes still used analog head amplifiers.
I can not hear any tics and pops, maybe because all my vinyl discs are pristine and I am using a modern MC cart with a good swiss diamond.
I like high res file music better than CD but nothing compares to a good high end TT with a well built phono preamp.
The trebble is simply better and there is a continuity I never heard on digital recordings.
Some years ago I started modding my CDP and after 2 years it became better sounding than my TT setup. Now the CDP has 9 TX, 11 sregs and a jfet discrete output stage.
I was amazed how good a CD could sound but I was unhappy about the TT so I decided to build a good phono preamp.
Now the TT completely obliterates the CDP , providing an organic fluid and continuous sound.
My best sounding vinyl pressings are from the 80´s, when recordings were done with analog tape recorders and the cutting lathes still used analog head amplifiers.
I can not hear any tics and pops, maybe because all my vinyl discs are pristine and I am using a modern MC cart with a good swiss diamond.
I like high res file music better than CD but nothing compares to a good high end TT with a well built phono preamp.
The trebble is simply better and there is a continuity I never heard on digital recordings.
It seems that some people, and the public schools have increasingly encouraged this over the last few decades, believe that consensus is everything and when someone disagrees with your position, they have "Dissed", or insulted, you.
I should add that you can readily defend what you think is right or wrong within the bounds of civil discourse just as easily and still maintain the respect from those who may disagree with you on some point or other.
Best Regards,
TerryO
- Status
- Not open for further replies.