Ok, so given this debate and potential of hi res uploads. For someone who doesn't have Lp's, turntable setup/phono stage but has a ample collection of red book cd's and a respectable front end. How many would convince such to essentially start a new hobby and invest the time and budget into vinyl?
Depends on the music he likes. If everything he wants has been released in a digital format, there's not much point in investing a lot of dollars into vinyl. But if (like me) he's an aficionado of real jazz (or other dying music forms), he'll need a vinyl system.
The one kink in my argument is the quality of digital mastering, especially Loudness War issues. The counter-kink is the execrable quality of the majority of vinyl releases. Anything re-released in high quality vinyl is almost certain to have been released in digital formats as well.
The one kink in my argument is the quality of digital mastering, especially Loudness War issues. The counter-kink is the execrable quality of the majority of vinyl releases. Anything re-released in high quality vinyl is almost certain to have been released in digital formats as well.
Difficult to say , if starting from scratch it can get pretty costly adding a analog setup and you would have to have an affinity for the medium to to make the plunge, especially based on where Digital is going.
Give it a listen, even if you don't make the plunge , you can still enjoy the medium.
SandyK ....
Last edited:
I agree with SY, would do it for the music not released in digital.
Or for the better mastering of numerous LP releases of popular music. (If you can stand the pressing variability; it drives me nuts).
Or for the sheer fun of having something to fiddle with that responds to tiny geometric adjustments, watching the shiny black discs go round and round, and marvelling that it works as well as it does. That's what sucked me back into the black vortex. 😛
All of those things are why I never entirely gave up vinyl, although when the vinyl continues to sound bad week after week despite endless tweaking you start to wonder why you are bothering... 😀
Synergy between table, arm, and cartridge is sadly often overlooked. (Seemingly good combinations aren't always as good sounding as they look on paper.)
I finally found something that worked, and the more recent acquisition of a TD-124 MKII has me now seeking out vinyl versions of some of my favorite CDs where possible.
My recently found vinyl nirvana is a restored TD-124 MKII, SME 3009 Series II arm, and a Zu/Denon DL-103-1 LOMC cartridge. The transformers and phono pre all play a huge role too. (Note that I had an SME 20/2 before and I like this better?! 😀 )
An interesting trend of late is to bundle the CD with an LP purchase. I particularly like this trend because it allows direct comparison between the CD and the LP, and apparently the labels that do this take the trouble to make sure that the CD version isn't too badly embarrassed by the LP.
The LPs obviously cannot match the CD version's noise floor, but I have found them at minimum subtly superior to the CD - I'm pretty sure that these recordings all have digital masters so it says something about the specific limitations of these two formats and how important they are to human perception in each respective format.
Had I to choose I guess I would stick with vinyl in preference to the alternative.
Last edited:
CD/LP bundles: if it is popular music, I bet the CD is made listenable when popped into a car CD player. The LP not, of course.
Your "information" is severly dated, as it comes out of the 1980's. It's now known that Vinyl is better.
As I have furnished proof that is every bit as accurate as what you've supplied above, my "troll" trumps yours!
😀
Best Regards,
TerryO
TerryO, any comparative listening test that is not completely controlled is 100% useless and 99% dangerous. I have stated how the noisiness of LP makes it virtually impossible to completely control an LP vs CD listening test. On that basis, what can you say about your comparative listening tests and your conclusions? 😉 How can you trust them?
I can't speak for my ears, but they are constantly telling me that vinyl played on my TD-124 MKII sounds sooooo much better than anything else in my system and who am I to argue with them.. 😀 (That would include CDs of the same material bundled with the LPs, and my close but not quite there SACD player which is a heavily modded SCD-777ES which at least in some quarters is held in good regard.)
Performing double blind testing would be extraordinarily difficult, but OTOH the digiphiles I know who become quite flustered upon hearing vinyl in my system have admitted they haven't heard sound like this before and in most cases would then like to know how to get it is a big clue to me..
I embraced digital very early on, and still appreciate how accessible it has made music of relatively good quality available in portable devices (if you use the right codec of course) and in the car. Inspite of the considerable inconvenience of analog media (tape and records) and the constant work required to keep my expensive antiques in top form I have to say I when I really care about sound quality I gravitate quickly to analog. This is my current preference and I can understand how others might feel the reverse particularly when talking about very high res digital such as 2496 PCM played back on the right gear..
Performing double blind testing would be extraordinarily difficult, but OTOH the digiphiles I know who become quite flustered upon hearing vinyl in my system have admitted they haven't heard sound like this before and in most cases would then like to know how to get it is a big clue to me..
I embraced digital very early on, and still appreciate how accessible it has made music of relatively good quality available in portable devices (if you use the right codec of course) and in the car. Inspite of the considerable inconvenience of analog media (tape and records) and the constant work required to keep my expensive antiques in top form I have to say I when I really care about sound quality I gravitate quickly to analog. This is my current preference and I can understand how others might feel the reverse particularly when talking about very high res digital such as 2496 PCM played back on the right gear..
Last edited:
Not so much if you do it indirectly. Run the analog system into an A/D then D/A, set to 16/44. Bypass the A/D/D/A. If you can detect the digital insertion (proctological humor here!), then the CD-quality system is a limitation. If you don't, then it's likely that either you prefer the noise/compression/FM/distortion of analog playback or the mastering of vinyl records.
I did this with my M-Audio card and have to admit I heard no difference at all. I have no evidence, but I strongly suspect that if the experiment were reversed, it would be easy to detect by ear alone.
This is actually an excellent methodology, and I even have the M-Audio cards to try it. Oddly I am not feeling compelled to perform these sorts of experiments any longer, although I do think it could be pretty conclusive. Quite a few years ago I participated in similar experiments with rigorous controls that did demonstrate that there were problems with CD quality digital signal processing AD/DA. (Analog sources were master tape, and the analog output of a well regarded Sony CD player.) I was surprised at the differences I could hear, and many of the other participants reported similar results. The guys who mixed the demo cds at this company had 100% repeatability on these tests, I was better than 90%, and IIRC everyone tested was above 60%. Those guys also used exotic high end French made speaker systems, and a well regarded high end amplifier brand for mix down at what was otherwise a decidedly mid-fi company.
I prefer the convenience and recognize the theoretical precision/accuracy of digital, but definitely prefer the sound of analog distortion to digital precision..
I do have the ability to easily convert bit depths and rates from some of the higher resolution PCM files I have on my hard drive to 44/16 and had the admittedly very unscientific impression that something was definitely lost in the down sampling to CDDA quality.
I'm telling you what our opinion of the comparisons were, and I don't believe that I'm demanding that you accept them as an absolute last word on the subject.
In all fairness, what have your carefully controlled, peer reviewed and published results concluded?
In the early 80's there was wholesale approval and promotion by many (most?) reviewers that CDs were better than vinyl. No well vetted documentation, no completely controlled tests to speak of, and just the discussion of theoretical posssiblities. I haven't seen any real change in the arguements, although for some strange reason, the first run CDs with a few exceptions, are acknowledged to be sonically quite a bit less than the best sounding CDs available today. If they had all the answers then, why has there been an ongoing and relentless effort to improve upon them?
As for your estimates of 100% useless and 99% dangerous, I can see that anything that might in some small way rock the boat may be uncomfortable for some, but dangerous?
Am I now condemned for digital profiling, or 16/44 hate speech or forum bullying against people that...what? Don't think that digital can be improved?
I may be mistaken, but I believe that I've made it very clear what my opinion is numerous times through this whole thread, which I also believe, you haven't read.
Terry
Sales and marketing. Can't let you live with what you have, you gotta buy the New and Improved version. And buy magazines telling you how New and Improved it is.
I note that a lot of the retro stuff has gotten fashionable again- what does a non-counterfeit TDA1541 go for these days? A CD101 in good condition?
Sy,
I'm sure that the profit motive has a decided influence on marketing, but the real concern is: How does it sound?
If you listen at random to several CDs that use different formats and the general consensus is that "B" sounds a bit better than "C" and a whole lot better than "A", I believe that it may indicate that something is going on. As I've mentioned before in this thread, this was done with one label that used the same master for all three.
I very seldom read the Audio rags, although when one comes into my possession, I usually treat it like Playboy magazine and just look at the pictures.
😀
Best Regards,
TerryO
Implementation is everything. That DCX is a fairly pants piece of engineering in terms of noise control as far as I've seen from pics online - never examined one first-hand though. Where the design is done right, I believe the AD-DA process is transparent (even at 44k1) - colleagues have done ABX and found it so, though not at only 16bits.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.