only now I realize why records become warped..... If it can produce any sound at all, it proves the medium is really good. Wow and Flutter Full On 🙂
Wow almost 3000 posts on an interesting subject, but it's getting no deeper than I know more than you do. Mine is bigger than yours and I know all about all products in the world.
Not a single person has seen the nature of things and brought to the surface why TT just may have the edge over digital medias when it comes to natural presentation.
Not a single person has seen the nature of things and brought to the surface why TT just may have the edge over digital medias when it comes to natural presentation.
if you switch from your tannoy system to what system?
if you use subs under 80 or 60 hz and NOT higher, and you learn how to integrate it, the sound is as hifi as anything.
but im curious, why a sub that makes a 60hz frequency couldnt do harmonic overtones?
Last edited:
Rough translation: "I disagree with those who disagree with me".MiiB said:
There are several reasons why LP will produce measurably, audibly inferior sound (although still sufficiently good to allow enjoyment of the music). The burden of proof is on those who assert the opposite.
Not only in the playback chain. A 30 year old LATHE cuts the master, which stamps out the stamps that stamp the vinyl. These wear out, so early stamps sound better than latter ones. And, by the way, almost all records in the last 30 years started out as digital.
Df. if you look at the signal from the source no doubt you're right, but then analog may just do something so different in a system that the equation shifts. Theres is something in a system that a TT can do that no digital source can replicate.
If you take something objective like distortion ans Noise, then digital wins, but what has that to with music and natural reproduction..?? The magnitude of those parameters says nothing about how natural a system sounds.
Personally I have heard really excellent TT's and also really good digital setups. Both can be mindblowingly good. But somehow really good TT's conway the emotional and rhythmic parts of the recordings better than their digital counterparts.
I credit this to one specific small, but very very important quality that TT's has over digital.
If you take something objective like distortion ans Noise, then digital wins, but what has that to with music and natural reproduction..?? The magnitude of those parameters says nothing about how natural a system sounds.
Personally I have heard really excellent TT's and also really good digital setups. Both can be mindblowingly good. But somehow really good TT's conway the emotional and rhythmic parts of the recordings better than their digital counterparts.
I credit this to one specific small, but very very important quality that TT's has over digital.
Last edited:
I'm curious about the process that goes from mastertapes to vinyl. and from mastertapes to digital. Anyone can tell em a good article about the process??
Just the process to digitalize and then reanalogalize the signal must cause tremendous problems and definitely alter the original analog source? no?
Just the process to digitalize and then reanalogalize the signal must cause tremendous problems and definitely alter the original analog source? no?
Last edited:
Nope, it's not difficult at all. And it's done routinely in applications far more demanding than HiFi.
The spectrometer I'm using at the moment?
Fly-by-wire?
Radio astronomy?
CAT scans and MRI?
Missile navigation?
Give me a number and I'll give you that many critical apps where this is routinely done.
Frequency response is flat, distortion is extremely low, so "tone" in the musical sense is automatically preserved, assuming it was captured correctly (microphones, production, mastering) in the first place. This is what confuses many people- digital doesn't magically change anything, it accurately captures what is fed in, courtesy of the Shannon-Nyquist theorem (that's a theorem, not a theory!). Feed in garbage and that's what you'll get out. This is an old technology now, and we're close to the point (and perhaps already there) where the products at the consumer level will not be technically differentiable, and have to be sold on features, image, and the ever-reliable fear-uncertainty-doubt.
If you are so sure we could bet some money? Bring whatever you want and will see.
I think it is quite the contrary. People try to find all possible defects of vinyl to convince themselves CD is better. The reality is CD is inferior, it has always been and the turntable has to be just a decent one. If the analog set-up is seriously good (which doesn't mean those horrible mega expensive turntables which don't solve anything) then CD is vastly inferior.... 🙂
Yes as super good as in the fantasies of the reviews....😀...but in the real world inferior! I am not joking.
In spite of what others may claim, many times digital playback does have problems - unnecessary distortion is often part of the final sound. And that distortion is of a type that directly degrades the "emotional and rhythmic parts of the recordings" - the good news is that this distortion can be totally eliminated, but a casual approach to resolving the issues will most likely not achieve useful results ...
So, it's not that TT has a special quality above that of digital, but that digital most times is carrying a monkey on its back, to a lesser or greater degree ...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.