To the vinyl guys - What about vinyl wearing out?
Also, does the sound of vinyl degrade with use. I really don't know about this. I used to have vinyl years ago, but when CDs came out I switched - not at first but several years later. I just don't like the fact that there's a mechanical link to the sound, just like 8 tracks and cassettes.
I really used to hate buying vinyl because I got so many that were warped. I don't know how many times I returned vinyl for that reason alone - and some that skipped repeatedly. A couple of the japanese pressing I had were excellent though - of course they're more expensive too.
-Ken
Also, does the sound of vinyl degrade with use. I really don't know about this. I used to have vinyl years ago, but when CDs came out I switched - not at first but several years later. I just don't like the fact that there's a mechanical link to the sound, just like 8 tracks and cassettes.
I really used to hate buying vinyl because I got so many that were warped. I don't know how many times I returned vinyl for that reason alone - and some that skipped repeatedly. A couple of the japanese pressing I had were excellent though - of course they're more expensive too.
-Ken
blacklight said:
Thats's my point.
Nothing spectacular happend the last 25years, in our little audio world on the source material side!
Even new and better stuff like SACD and DVD-As failed.
With vinyl we are even going 60 years (or 80) back! 😀
The studios are working with 32bit floats these days,
we stick to 16/44,1 or scratchy two-sided vinyl!
This can't be true.
CD as good as Vinyl?
Hi All
YES, yes, and another yes!!
I haven't bought seedees for many moons as I have a large vinyl collection, and archive what I want to CD-R. Originally as intended, it was supposed to be for my cars but the results are absolutely stunning and exceeds commercial cd's.
A friend recently sent me the last Gramophone mag with the usual 'free' CD attached. I was again shocked at how crappy it sounds compare to my own brews.
I make recordings to CD-R by Garrard 301 transcription decks, either a Grace G-727 Gyromaster arm or a modded Micro and play the vinyl with a homebrew mc cart. Other ingredients for these musical delicacies are an ancient dc Nagatron mc phono pre, an Edirol UA-1EX o/b soundcard and Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10 recording software. Pretty low-tech stuff at best but this proves again that something is horribly wrong with the stuff you find in music stores.
bulgin
Hi All
YES, yes, and another yes!!
I haven't bought seedees for many moons as I have a large vinyl collection, and archive what I want to CD-R. Originally as intended, it was supposed to be for my cars but the results are absolutely stunning and exceeds commercial cd's.
A friend recently sent me the last Gramophone mag with the usual 'free' CD attached. I was again shocked at how crappy it sounds compare to my own brews.
I make recordings to CD-R by Garrard 301 transcription decks, either a Grace G-727 Gyromaster arm or a modded Micro and play the vinyl with a homebrew mc cart. Other ingredients for these musical delicacies are an ancient dc Nagatron mc phono pre, an Edirol UA-1EX o/b soundcard and Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10 recording software. Pretty low-tech stuff at best but this proves again that something is horribly wrong with the stuff you find in music stores.
bulgin
blacklight said:
I agree downloads on to hard drives are a prescription for losing all your stuff when not if the HD fails. Yes, I have been saying for 5-7 years now most music and more so movies/t.v. media will be ordered and downloaded on to media centre P.C. for you to listen or watch as you desire, but I have also said that ability to record on to a CD-R or DVD-R for backup will become the wise choice for those who understand MURPHY'S LAW.
24bit audio is IMO a true test for vinyl to meet or exceed. 16 bit Redbook CD sounds maybe 8 or 9/10ths of a decent LP but are not better sounding. Not one CD I have an LP variant of sounds better than the LP. They may sound as a close rival or different but not better. SACD, DVD-A were basic equals if the discs were mastered well to a good LP but both formats are basically niche to dead today
16 and/or 24bit downloads will become normal in a few years and that will change audio buying but if you keep these only on a HD you will be sorry when it fails. On top of that LP's will still be found in thrift shops for $0.50 to $1.00 each and garage sales maybe even less. New LP's will still be niche made and will be priced similar to any CD or cost of downloading most full albums.
I have a very nice CD player and truly it makes nice 16bit CD sound but my turntable just makes better sound. Soon we will all have media P.C.'s hooked into our systems and we will be able to download not MP3 puss but full minimum 16 bit audio or higher and be able to download movies too. But always, always back it up so that when the HD fails you don't lose everything.
300 gb 100 dollars (us)
At this point if you have a large album collection, you have thousands invested that you are eroding every time you play them. I understand the time involved to rip the album, but you would still have the album, and with a little up front work before and after listening to the same thing, you could have quite a collection.
You could always keep a spare drive with all your music on it, (which is what I try and maintain, since I had to recover my music collection after overwriting it on a bad day) and you can also burn dvd's of data files, which is what the 64 bit waves would fall under. I just read about terrabyte dvd's, cross those fingers!!!
If you spend money on a decent drive, they tend to last a long time, I've had a few for almost 10 years now, but keep moving the data to the newest one, which is inevitably 3 times the size for the same money I paid (or less) than the last one.
digital is here to stay, analog correctly done is a wonder to behold.
pesky
At this point if you have a large album collection, you have thousands invested that you are eroding every time you play them. I understand the time involved to rip the album, but you would still have the album, and with a little up front work before and after listening to the same thing, you could have quite a collection.
You could always keep a spare drive with all your music on it, (which is what I try and maintain, since I had to recover my music collection after overwriting it on a bad day) and you can also burn dvd's of data files, which is what the 64 bit waves would fall under. I just read about terrabyte dvd's, cross those fingers!!!
If you spend money on a decent drive, they tend to last a long time, I've had a few for almost 10 years now, but keep moving the data to the newest one, which is inevitably 3 times the size for the same money I paid (or less) than the last one.
digital is here to stay, analog correctly done is a wonder to behold.
pesky
Vinyl is always better
This is a great thread and has some serious commentary. I have in only rare occasions preferred the “remastered” CD instead a good copy of the vinyl that I have recorded to CD.
I didn’t really get into the LP to CD thing until a few years ago when the technology became so much better. My experience with cassettes was disappointing at best and disasterous at worst. Now there are so many great editing capabilities with the computer.
I have compared several wave forms of vinyls to these “remastered” CDs and I note that a lot of the subtleties are lost. The CD tends to max out everything and you get a lot of clipping. The lower volume areas are pushed up.. Just my thoughts but the waveform doesn’t lie.
Here are some of the things I have found out.
I just about always use an editing tool in the LP to CD transfer process.
Pops: occur even on virgin records. I remove pops that are less than 1 millisecond and have at least a 35 % threshold. This pretty much assures that the signal is left alone.
Hiss: My record stylus captures up to 23k and believe me, there is just hiss up there. I start reducing the db level slightly at 18k and again at 20k by about 5 dbs. This does a real good job to clean up the hiss while preserving the headroom.
I have some web pages that may give a little more detail. Don’t know if this will help any.
Some hints and ideas about LP to CD.
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/audio/audio.htm
some personal thoughts:
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/lp/lp.htm
capturing old records:
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/records/records.htm
good forum.
This is a great thread and has some serious commentary. I have in only rare occasions preferred the “remastered” CD instead a good copy of the vinyl that I have recorded to CD.
I didn’t really get into the LP to CD thing until a few years ago when the technology became so much better. My experience with cassettes was disappointing at best and disasterous at worst. Now there are so many great editing capabilities with the computer.
I have compared several wave forms of vinyls to these “remastered” CDs and I note that a lot of the subtleties are lost. The CD tends to max out everything and you get a lot of clipping. The lower volume areas are pushed up.. Just my thoughts but the waveform doesn’t lie.
Here are some of the things I have found out.
I just about always use an editing tool in the LP to CD transfer process.
Pops: occur even on virgin records. I remove pops that are less than 1 millisecond and have at least a 35 % threshold. This pretty much assures that the signal is left alone.
Hiss: My record stylus captures up to 23k and believe me, there is just hiss up there. I start reducing the db level slightly at 18k and again at 20k by about 5 dbs. This does a real good job to clean up the hiss while preserving the headroom.
I have some web pages that may give a little more detail. Don’t know if this will help any.
Some hints and ideas about LP to CD.
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/audio/audio.htm
some personal thoughts:
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/lp/lp.htm
capturing old records:
http://dvautier.home.comcast.net/records/records.htm
good forum.
@ DVAUTIER
I don't buy your statement "vinyl is always better".
If people would put that much attention on the digital chain as they do on the analog chain, I think the above myth wouldn't exist
any longer. Comparing Sony CD Players with turntables - Come-on this is not meant serious!
As mentioned earlier. I brought my PC-DAC (DIY)setup that far that I am pretty much able to compete with vinyl on 16/44.1.
By offline upsampling my whole collection , which is a far better start than the uneven 44,1 or realtime upsampling, my audio heaven opened up! It needs some tweaks though but it is relatively easy to achieve.
When it comes to CD quality. Yes I fully agree. I'd say more than
90% of the recordings are not acceptable on high-end audio
environments.
You need to find the pearls out there!
Less is more! Rather listening to a low number of high quality recordings than wasting your time with poorly recorded or remastererd stuff. So 500GB will be more sufficiant for the pearls out there. The rest you can store as MP3s! 😉
For mainstream and other stuff, where sound quality is not an issue you get along with internet-radio quite well.
Cheers
I don't buy your statement "vinyl is always better".
If people would put that much attention on the digital chain as they do on the analog chain, I think the above myth wouldn't exist
any longer. Comparing Sony CD Players with turntables - Come-on this is not meant serious!
As mentioned earlier. I brought my PC-DAC (DIY)setup that far that I am pretty much able to compete with vinyl on 16/44.1.
By offline upsampling my whole collection , which is a far better start than the uneven 44,1 or realtime upsampling, my audio heaven opened up! It needs some tweaks though but it is relatively easy to achieve.
When it comes to CD quality. Yes I fully agree. I'd say more than
90% of the recordings are not acceptable on high-end audio
environments.
You need to find the pearls out there!
Less is more! Rather listening to a low number of high quality recordings than wasting your time with poorly recorded or remastererd stuff. So 500GB will be more sufficiant for the pearls out there. The rest you can store as MP3s! 😉
For mainstream and other stuff, where sound quality is not an issue you get along with internet-radio quite well.
Cheers
the quality of the listening environment
is the biggest factor as to what you'll hear. The better the playback rig, the more likely to hear the artifacts from downsampled material. I have heard the difference better capacitors and other mods in an Audio research rig a friend had, and it can be startling. Just when you thought it was as good as it gets, it got better, the spacial imaging and fullness jumped to another plane. ALL the albums he played improved, rather dramatically.
If you are listening on an ipod, or a 300 dollar stereo, it's really not a problem.
is the biggest factor as to what you'll hear. The better the playback rig, the more likely to hear the artifacts from downsampled material. I have heard the difference better capacitors and other mods in an Audio research rig a friend had, and it can be startling. Just when you thought it was as good as it gets, it got better, the spacial imaging and fullness jumped to another plane. ALL the albums he played improved, rather dramatically.
If you are listening on an ipod, or a 300 dollar stereo, it's really not a problem.
kec said:
Vinyl take many plays to show noticable wearing out. If you have a good cartridge and tonearm that is properly setup it can take hundreds of plays before any real noticeable wear is heard.
Think of things this way too, a scratch on an LP will be a noticeable click and annoyance. A scratch beyond the error correction abilities of CD player will often lock up your player making the CD useless.
CD as good as Vinyl?
Hi dvautier
I enjoyed some of your soundfiles and have done archiving of my 78's too, with somewhat errr...different results. Equipment used: Garrard 301/Grace or modded Micro arm/Edirol USB UA-1EX o/b soundcard and Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10 archivin software.
For stereo lp's, I use a homebrew mc cart and for 78's I use a Shure ME78ED mm cart, fitted with a 78 profile stylus. Other carts suitable for 78's are some of the Stantons or Pickerings.
bulgin
Hi dvautier
I enjoyed some of your soundfiles and have done archiving of my 78's too, with somewhat errr...different results. Equipment used: Garrard 301/Grace or modded Micro arm/Edirol USB UA-1EX o/b soundcard and Magix Audio Cleaning Lab/10 archivin software.
For stereo lp's, I use a homebrew mc cart and for 78's I use a Shure ME78ED mm cart, fitted with a 78 profile stylus. Other carts suitable for 78's are some of the Stantons or Pickerings.
bulgin
to phileas on Vinyl degradation
Vinyl degredation
Depends on what kind of cartridge and weight you use. I run with a Shure at ¾ gram and have discovered that after 20 plays I find no degradation (I usually do it once and digitize). When I buy old used records I have no way to tell how good they are because some gorilla cartridge may have gone in there with a 5 gram monster and wrecked havoc with the grooves and it doesn’t show at all.
Remember that vinyl can last forever if stored properly. So can digital but not on CD which can deteriate in 5 years.
Vinyl degredation
Depends on what kind of cartridge and weight you use. I run with a Shure at ¾ gram and have discovered that after 20 plays I find no degradation (I usually do it once and digitize). When I buy old used records I have no way to tell how good they are because some gorilla cartridge may have gone in there with a 5 gram monster and wrecked havoc with the grooves and it doesn’t show at all.
Remember that vinyl can last forever if stored properly. So can digital but not on CD which can deteriate in 5 years.
dvautier said:
Used records are a chance at times but at such cheap prices often worth it. The secret to better used LP playback is investing in a high quality cartridge with a finer and/or smaller sized tip stylus so that the stylus rides deeper in the grooves than what likely was used when the ham fisted gorilla owned the LP.
Phono carts need not be the most expensive to get good sound but invest in better quality ones other than the entry level crap most turntables came with or what casual listeners bought at the time and you will enjoy LP playback more.
I own a Denon DL-110 and it has a very nice tip but in time I will upgrade from it to an even better one.
So to conclude after all this feedback:
1.CD usually does not sound as good as vinyl except in special cases.
2.Digital 16/44.1 playback has the potential to sound as good as vinyl if properly done.
3.Higher quality digital i.e 24/96,192 can sound as good or better than vinyl.
4.Normal CDs ripped to PC by EAC and upsampled by pro software sound much better (playing from a hard disk).
5.CDs ripped and burned by EAC sound better than the original.
There still remains the question of
1) why the music industry cannot produce a good sounding CD - equal to vinyl-and
2) why Conclusion no.5 stands -since it has nothing to do with the quality of the remastering but more the quality of stamping etc.
I don´t buy that the bad sound of cds is due mainly to overuse of compression since the vinyl version then would have the same problems.
Recalling question no 1): How can a home brew cd-r from vinyl sound better than a professional production cd mastered from the tape?Does not make sense!
1.CD usually does not sound as good as vinyl except in special cases.
2.Digital 16/44.1 playback has the potential to sound as good as vinyl if properly done.
3.Higher quality digital i.e 24/96,192 can sound as good or better than vinyl.
4.Normal CDs ripped to PC by EAC and upsampled by pro software sound much better (playing from a hard disk).
5.CDs ripped and burned by EAC sound better than the original.
There still remains the question of
1) why the music industry cannot produce a good sounding CD - equal to vinyl-and
2) why Conclusion no.5 stands -since it has nothing to do with the quality of the remastering but more the quality of stamping etc.
I don´t buy that the bad sound of cds is due mainly to overuse of compression since the vinyl version then would have the same problems.
Recalling question no 1): How can a home brew cd-r from vinyl sound better than a professional production cd mastered from the tape?Does not make sense!
protos said:
Digital doesn't sound anything like vinyl. So which is your standard for good? Digital or vinyl?
protos said:
That the audio manufacturers and their mouthpieces in the audio press tell us. I'm still waiting for a CD player that doesn't suck. Until then, how can anyone know?
protos said:
From talking to guys who online state they are or were in the industry, they noted CD's sound bad of the last 10 years or so as they are being reproduced to make up for the low quality of the lousy audio systems many buyers have such as plasticky boom boxes/mini-systems and the likes, they also need to take into note Ipod, MP3, and portable CD players (for volume and as such compression of volume as I will note below) along car audio systems which can sound fabulous (better than most home systems if done right). I use to design and sell kick *** car audio systems, some over $20,000) but most again are bought by young kids and are bass heavy. So the CD and the type of music most sold today is designed for exploiting the limited qualities of such things.
As for compression. Too much has always been made out of this by the digital camp. The 16 Bit Red Book CD has a dynamic range of 96db. But that range cannot effectively be used by engineers. The typical backgrond noise of a house and even worse a car is at minimum 30db for a house and 50+db for a car. This means if the engineers want the quietest sound to be above the noise floor his max. dynamic range will be 126db (for house 96 +30 ) and 146db (for most cars 96 + 50 ) which is unlistenable for 99% of us. Now the engineer can do gain riding when engineering music which then artificially raises or lowers the apparent volume of the media and if not done right sounds even more annoying.
So the answer is compress the overal signal to the 70-80 db range. This will raise the lowest sounds up above background noise and cut the highest volume sound from making ears bleed. Hence we are now in the LP range of dynamic range.
Now of course type of music will affect such compression. Since popular music has little dynamic range it is easy to do such be it a recording or live in concert. You can have 120+ db pop/rock concerts because the quietest music above the noise floor is maybe only 20-30db lower than music peaks. Pop CD's are easier to compress and Pop LP's are easier to fit within RIAA standards.
Jazz and Classical music be it recorded or live is much more difficult to engineer well esp. if using microphones and amps for any live stuff or for designing acoustics to the sound. This is why Jazz clubs and Concert Halls for classical music ask or demand the audience remain quiet during play because esp. classical music has wider dynamic range and in order to keep the loud transients from being too loud but to keep quiet parts from being masked by background noise the Concert producers and conductor must factor in how loud and soft this music will be. Same goes with recording Classical and Jazz music. The engineer must be very careful to try to keep dynamic range as maxed out as he/she can but not too much so that the listener at home is having to ride his/her volume control.
I won't go on any further about the pro vs con of LP vs CD but I just wanted to make my above points.
Dynamic range is a nice STATISTIC but in reality anything above 70-80db worth will for the most part be too much for most listeners to enjoy esp. at home with recorded music.
Hi folks.
This is for sure not a black or white discussion here.
PHN is right in one point.
Unless there is no benchmark defined, nobody can claim this or that is better.
Even if somebody would do some kind of fair shootout, you could not convince the rest around here. These discussions are usually waste of time and don't lead anywhere.
The same thing applies for questions like - What is the best amp or the best speaker asf? You won't find the answer around here.
This thing especially when it comes to the analogue fraction becomes usually very emotional. There is a lot of personal taste and feelings involved.
I think we are all clear that there are as many crappy turntables out there as there are crappy CDPs out there.
High End Turntables are doing a hell of a great job. And I think it is easier to get a turntable up2speed than a digital player.
When it comes to digital, as mentioned earlier my personal believe is to get away from turning or moving sources as a first thing. 2nd your digital chain has to be extremely dynamic and heavily tweaked to be able to compete soundwise with a good turntable. I think the PC in conjunction with real good, jitter-free DAC might be able to sound as dynamic and emotional as a good turntable.
Still this has to be somehow prooved, otherwise we wouldn't have this discussion. ( I am prepareing for such a shootout in January. 😉 )
When it comes to the media itself, I think it is no question that a Harddisc storage (with backup facility) is superiour over CD or
LP. The LP is by far the worst, at least, when it comes to abraison effects. You have to clean it all the time and keep it very carefully stored, still you can't avoid abraison.
As a temporary storage for playback RAM is IMO the absolute first choice!
When it comes to the recording, you need to find the LP pearls as you have to find the CD pearls out there.
Bad productions or copies ( which is the majority) sound bad, on both medias.
Most of the audio freaks I know do not listen to Pop or mainstream stuff any longer. Most of them shifted to Classic, Jazz, Folk produced by labels such as Chesky, Opus 3 etc.
This is what I learned over time. The better my system developped, the more I enjoyed well recorded classical music (e.g. one mic recordings!!).
To conclude from my perspective:
The majority opinion is that high-end turntables are still better in terms of overall musical performance than digital player.
Newest digital equipment still has to proove that it plays as musical, emotional or dynamic as turntables/ LPs.
Though, I think the digital fraction is pretty close. Watch out analog freaks! Analogue can't develop further -- digital can! 😀
PS: What has not been discussed until now are tapes as a media. Many analogue people claim that good old tapes outperform LPs easily!
This is for sure not a black or white discussion here.
PHN is right in one point.
Unless there is no benchmark defined, nobody can claim this or that is better.
Even if somebody would do some kind of fair shootout, you could not convince the rest around here. These discussions are usually waste of time and don't lead anywhere.
The same thing applies for questions like - What is the best amp or the best speaker asf? You won't find the answer around here.
This thing especially when it comes to the analogue fraction becomes usually very emotional. There is a lot of personal taste and feelings involved.
I think we are all clear that there are as many crappy turntables out there as there are crappy CDPs out there.
High End Turntables are doing a hell of a great job. And I think it is easier to get a turntable up2speed than a digital player.
When it comes to digital, as mentioned earlier my personal believe is to get away from turning or moving sources as a first thing. 2nd your digital chain has to be extremely dynamic and heavily tweaked to be able to compete soundwise with a good turntable. I think the PC in conjunction with real good, jitter-free DAC might be able to sound as dynamic and emotional as a good turntable.
Still this has to be somehow prooved, otherwise we wouldn't have this discussion. ( I am prepareing for such a shootout in January. 😉 )
When it comes to the media itself, I think it is no question that a Harddisc storage (with backup facility) is superiour over CD or
LP. The LP is by far the worst, at least, when it comes to abraison effects. You have to clean it all the time and keep it very carefully stored, still you can't avoid abraison.
As a temporary storage for playback RAM is IMO the absolute first choice!
When it comes to the recording, you need to find the LP pearls as you have to find the CD pearls out there.
Bad productions or copies ( which is the majority) sound bad, on both medias.
Most of the audio freaks I know do not listen to Pop or mainstream stuff any longer. Most of them shifted to Classic, Jazz, Folk produced by labels such as Chesky, Opus 3 etc.
This is what I learned over time. The better my system developped, the more I enjoyed well recorded classical music (e.g. one mic recordings!!).
To conclude from my perspective:
The majority opinion is that high-end turntables are still better in terms of overall musical performance than digital player.
Newest digital equipment still has to proove that it plays as musical, emotional or dynamic as turntables/ LPs.
Though, I think the digital fraction is pretty close. Watch out analog freaks! Analogue can't develop further -- digital can! 😀
PS: What has not been discussed until now are tapes as a media. Many analogue people claim that good old tapes outperform LPs easily!
In an episode of Everybody Loves Raymond, Ray and wife buy a CD player as Christmas present for Ray's grumpy father. Eventually Ray's father listens to a CD. It sounds good. He doesn't like it at all. After some further ado, they put on a vinyl album. It's almost a parody of vinyl, with hiss and stuff. (The episode isn't anti-vinyl, rather the opposite, if I remember.) It still sounds damn good. Call it ambiance, whatever. But even a worn vinyl album has qualities a CD does not.
Is vinyl better than CD? It is if you think poor channel separation is a good thing. I would say vinyl is a pretty bad format, but despite all things sounds damn good (or pleasant, if you like).
This summer I found an old "mid-fi" cassette tape I had stored away. (I always hated the Philips cassette tape.) I also found two tapes and decided to test it. Lots of background hiss. It didn't sound like anything I associate with hi-fi. It was everything the CD is not. But you know, it still sounded good. In some ways better than the CD, in my opinion.
I'm not trying to sell vinyl here. There's no right or wrong. There's only personal taste.
As for hiss and pops. I do hear it, but it doesn't detract the least. It's like riding a motorcycle. It's windy. But it's part of the experience. Take away the wind and you have a car.
If you hate hiss and pops, get Japan pressings. I have an album from the 1980s. Must have been played 100 times. Like new. Not a hint of hiss and a sound to die for. I don't get it. I have a Japanese CD. Same CD and casing as American and European CDs. But somehow it just feels like it's of much higher quality. It cost twice as much as a standard CD, and I can understand why.
Is vinyl better than CD? It is if you think poor channel separation is a good thing. I would say vinyl is a pretty bad format, but despite all things sounds damn good (or pleasant, if you like).
This summer I found an old "mid-fi" cassette tape I had stored away. (I always hated the Philips cassette tape.) I also found two tapes and decided to test it. Lots of background hiss. It didn't sound like anything I associate with hi-fi. It was everything the CD is not. But you know, it still sounded good. In some ways better than the CD, in my opinion.
I'm not trying to sell vinyl here. There's no right or wrong. There's only personal taste.
As for hiss and pops. I do hear it, but it doesn't detract the least. It's like riding a motorcycle. It's windy. But it's part of the experience. Take away the wind and you have a car.
If you hate hiss and pops, get Japan pressings. I have an album from the 1980s. Must have been played 100 times. Like new. Not a hint of hiss and a sound to die for. I don't get it. I have a Japanese CD. Same CD and casing as American and European CDs. But somehow it just feels like it's of much higher quality. It cost twice as much as a standard CD, and I can understand why.
soundcheck said:
OK.There are two main themes here.
1.Is CD player playback as it stands now able to equal good quality vinyl?Of course the benchmark here is vinyl.I think most people with good quality vinyl and Cd player systems have said that they usually prefer vinyl.
2.Is it possible for 16/44 or 24/192 digital playback to equal good vinyl playback?The feedback here and my personal experience seems to point to the conclusion that this is possible under certain circumstances.Homebrew 16/44 or 24/96,192 recordings for unknown reasons sound much better than production Cds/DVD and played from a hard disk /PC can come very close or equal vinyl sound.However most CD/Universal players don't manage this feat yet although technology is improving at a steady pace.
One other serious problem as I have already proved (at least to myself) is the bad quality of the production CDs (perhaps due to the stamping process )which sound quite inferior to a ripped and burned CD-R of the original.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.