Thanks Mooly. Yes, there are noise differences, there should be. These are two different masters, one is a remaster for CD/SACD, the other a 1/2 speed master from Mobile Fidelity. They do sound somewhat different.
And then there is a processed version of each. One is the vinyl that has been high pass filtered at 20Hz, 36dB/octave and the bass mixed to mono below 150Hz. The vinylized CD track has noise <150Hz from my Rek-o-Kut Rondine Jr turntable mixed in. If I left the noise above 150Hz, it was too obvious.
What I am hoping for is to know if anyone hears differences in LF phase or ambiance, and if you do, what does that do for you? I hear it, don't know if I like it or not. Your comments about the LF envelope are interesting.
And then there is a processed version of each. One is the vinyl that has been high pass filtered at 20Hz, 36dB/octave and the bass mixed to mono below 150Hz. The vinylized CD track has noise <150Hz from my Rek-o-Kut Rondine Jr turntable mixed in. If I left the noise above 150Hz, it was too obvious.
What I am hoping for is to know if anyone hears differences in LF phase or ambiance, and if you do, what does that do for you? I hear it, don't know if I like it or not. Your comments about the LF envelope are interesting.
Any chance you can post higher rez versions of these files?
A & E are the winners for me, especially the very beginning where you can hear the watch ticking on the left channel, plus the bass is really solid and deep. I can hear a faint humming in the background that sounds like motor noise.
B sounds like doo doo at the beginning, where it sounds like someone is hitting a cardboard box. Plus there's some upper bass noise that sounds quite strange. E isn't much better.
jeff
I like Vinyl because the music on Vinyl has more dynamic range then the music on CD's. I know it should not be that way but a lot of music is recorded too loud on a CD. So constant loudness and add a dash of digital distortion. When the last CD player died it was not replaced.
I can post FLAC files if you think it will make any difference. I don't know that the high bitrate MP3 does any harm to the LF.
Pano
I listened to the four files through headphones.
In B, heartbeat has a characteristic echo
In C, heartbeat is a bit muffled.
In A and E, heartbeat sound almost the same, in A a tad more ‘open’
Then I turned up the volume and listened to the silence at the beginning.
A and E have a hum like noise.
B has a low hiss.
C is silent
Pano, the low freq content of the vinyl in all the spectrums you posted (#564, 566, 567), is centred around 10Hz where arm/cart resonance lives. So, don’t’ blame much CD for HP filtering by looking at these two spectrums (#566, 567)
Then, remembering that vertical record wrap produces an out of phase signal and radial eccentricity produces an in phase signal, we are able to comment on the condition of the records by looking at the lowest frequencies the amplitude of the red/blue curves (Your Sinatra’s record is in very good condition).
Thanks for investigating and sharing.
Hi Lucky
You are correct of course.
I had in mind the great frequency separation btn vert/horiz resonances with that arm, which is only good IMO (as is also the highish freq of the vertical resonance)
True!
I can hear the whistle of the referee
George
I listened to the four files through headphones.
In B, heartbeat has a characteristic echo
In C, heartbeat is a bit muffled.
In A and E, heartbeat sound almost the same, in A a tad more ‘open’
Then I turned up the volume and listened to the silence at the beginning.
A and E have a hum like noise.
B has a low hiss.
C is silent
Pano, the low freq content of the vinyl in all the spectrums you posted (#564, 566, 567), is centred around 10Hz where arm/cart resonance lives. So, don’t’ blame much CD for HP filtering by looking at these two spectrums (#566, 567)
Then, remembering that vertical record wrap produces an out of phase signal and radial eccentricity produces an in phase signal, we are able to comment on the condition of the records by looking at the lowest frequencies the amplitude of the red/blue curves (Your Sinatra’s record is in very good condition).
Thanks for investigating and sharing.
Hi Lucky
You are correct of course.
I had in mind the great frequency separation btn vert/horiz resonances with that arm, which is only good IMO (as is also the highish freq of the vertical resonance)
True!
I can hear the whistle of the referee
George
Thanks George!
Just FWIW, I ran a reverse RIAA filter on silent groove noise from my TT to have a look at the spectrum from the Stanton 680 cart, before it gets the RIAA boost and cut. Rumble is my biggest problem, followed closely by 120Hz hum then the arm resonance. The RIAA curve makes the arm resonance the biggest peak.
True, I was just thinking that the recordings from vinyl have massive VLF that the CD's don't. Getting rid of that might make them sound more like CD. Or maybe not, so far the file listening test isn't conclusive.
Just FWIW, I ran a reverse RIAA filter on silent groove noise from my TT to have a look at the spectrum from the Stanton 680 cart, before it gets the RIAA boost and cut. Rumble is my biggest problem, followed closely by 120Hz hum then the arm resonance. The RIAA curve makes the arm resonance the biggest peak.
Thanks everso for posting your content here, Pano, much appreciated.
The VLF in vinyl mostly has its origin in mechanical headshell motion, and this is only audible as FM (pitch modulation) - no amount of high pass filtering can 'fix' this once it's there it's there. The baseband VLF content itself is subsonic and most domestic systems can't reproduce it, beyond woofer pumping - so many preamps filter it anyway. The VLF doesn't amplitude modulate programme material. So audible effects really are 'just' FM or pitch modulation. FM doesn't show up in spectral analysis of programme content, other than as a slight smear, it's effectively invisible but not necessarily inaudible.
Yes Pano, I agree.
I attach two FFTs (different frequency resolution,) from the same recording. Green trace is the unamplified, nonequalized output of an Audio Technica AT110E reading a test groove. (0dB=1.286Vrms)
My past observations make me say that at ~10Hz the signal coming out from the cartridge is an equivalent to a modulation of 1.5 to 3 cm/s.
This is the result of signal amplification by ~12db due to arm/cartridge resonance.
The actual vinyl content at subsonic frequencies is an equivalent of a 0.2-0.4 cm/s miniscule modulation velocity.
Lucky, no. There is AM modulation and plenty of it. One can not see it with music material but with single test tones or noise, it comes out. If you want more FFTs or wav files for to test yourself, tell me.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/276155-vinyl-coefficient-friction-4.html#post4372884
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/loun...ch-preamplifier-part-ii-4500.html#post3703271
Again you surprise me. FM shows up as sidebands left and right of the tone peak when observing FFTs of test tones. And when we zoom-in high in frequency axis, we see the result from all the intermodulation products
I don’t comment on AM or FM audibility but someone here mentioned Leslies
George
Attachments
Last edited:
Good way to look at it, George.
Relate the noise to the modulation velocity of an engraved signal.
Finally got some time to listen. testing the poweramp to cure a trip problem so slowly ramping the volume up. So far I think A and E and B&C pair up in terms of closeness. Now what follows is clearly based on listening again and again so new things pop out on each listening, but I was focusing on the heartbeat and the panned synth noises.
A: heatbeat sounds like a heartbeat, panning is flat left to right and jumps over the centre.
B: Heartbeat sounds like coming from 2 kick drums with a distinct spacial seperation. synth panning is an oval rather than flat left right
C: Heartbeat as B but more echo. panning oval more pronounced.
E: For want of a better work, muddier than B or C, better than A
I'll take another listen at higher levels to see if that changes things, but a hint of tinnitus in right ear so I'm not in 'reference' mode. I couldn't say at the moment which was which, but if pushed would say C was most likely the CD.
I should also note my speakers do not plum the stygian depths. Something on my list to fix since the wife got me a round tuit for xmas. So anything below 50Hz I am unlikely to spot.
A: heatbeat sounds like a heartbeat, panning is flat left to right and jumps over the centre.
B: Heartbeat sounds like coming from 2 kick drums with a distinct spacial seperation. synth panning is an oval rather than flat left right
C: Heartbeat as B but more echo. panning oval more pronounced.
E: For want of a better work, muddier than B or C, better than A
I'll take another listen at higher levels to see if that changes things, but a hint of tinnitus in right ear so I'm not in 'reference' mode. I couldn't say at the moment which was which, but if pushed would say C was most likely the CD.
I should also note my speakers do not plum the stygian depths. Something on my list to fix since the wife got me a round tuit for xmas. So anything below 50Hz I am unlikely to spot.
Thanks for the report, Bill. I will post the key tonight, Hawaiian time (GMT+10). I was hoping Douglas would get chance to listen.
So far no one seems to be getting a feel of surround sound from any of these files - is that right?
On my system there is a weird pressure right at my ears on the low notes from the vinyl and the vinylized versions. Maybe it's a room mode. 8Hz and 16Hz are my lowest modes.
So far no one seems to be getting a feel of surround sound from any of these files - is that right?
On my system there is a weird pressure right at my ears on the low notes from the vinyl and the vinylized versions. Maybe it's a room mode. 8Hz and 16Hz are my lowest modes.
George, there's a big difference between summing VLF content with programme material, and amplitude modulation. There is no (prominent) mechanism for amplitude modulation by VLF in vinyl, whereas there is no doubt that plenty of VLF content is transcribed by the cartridge. I hope you can see the difference......! There is no low frequency Leslie style AM of programme material in vinyl, IME.
What is at issue is whether Leslie style FM modulation (pitch modulation) can separately affect in-phase and out-of-phase programme content ie become spatial L-R modulation. To examine this, I just measured in-phase and out-of-phase VLF (<30Hz) FM modulation of a 3kHz vinyl test tone, and found them to identical in magnitude and time (phase). When you think about it, it must be this way because FM arises by 'virtual' speed variation caused by stylus 'scrubbing' which is the same for vertical and lateral planes of stylus movement.
I found that out-of phase programme material experiences the same FM modulation as in=phase programme material in terms of magnitude and time, due to all causes below 30Hz.
There's no question that test tones show up FM modulation at cart/arm resonant frequency (eg B&K)- I've never seem evidence of prominent AM modulation and doubt it. With programme material FM spectrum smudges FM sidebands so that they are invisible to the spectrum analyser, that is what I mean.
Leslies. Yes, Leslies tell us everything we need to know here, perhaps.
Last edited:
Can't speak for these files, but I have many various vinyl mastered versions of DSOTM and most of them are different as to spatial presentation. The most extreme I have is a NZ Harvest green label mastering, which gets pretty spacey in parts, also is definitely remixed as to levels and sound. Point is that DSOTM, for whatever reason, already has tons of spatial content, even as 'standard' whatever that might be. One has to be careful as to comparing versions, because there are many of them. Just look at the track layout/groove spacing of a few copies...........! As to CD, well I have DSOTM in one or two versions, but none move me for whatever reason.
Yes, it does. That's one of the reasons I chose it!
And yes, the CD and the vinyl masters are noticeable different. So perhaps a monophonic vinyl recording would be a better test. Leave the out of phase LF artifacts then remove them to hear if there is any enhancement or change. Easy to do with DSP.Anyone have a good mono vinyl rip we can try?
Something 100 to 200 posts back reminded me of this - it's meandering, but I get to the point in a few more paragraphs as noted:
I recall circa 1977 when my fellow college students didn't believe me (at least one even got angry!) when I said the Dual 1229 used a spring to adjust the stylus tracking force. Even as an EE student, when I saw the ads I understood the mechanics of the tonearm and of it being "dynamically stable" (and thus ability to play a record vertically or upside down, as had been previously demonstrated at some audio show). But the ad on the back cover of (I think it was) Popular Electronics was quite explicit about what was in that little cylindrical adjustment at the tonearm pivot, both in the drawing and in the text. Otherwise, why not just have the tracking scale on the counterweight (which then dynamically unbalances the arm), like so many other TT's did?
But (thinking of their objections to springs, but also just brainstorming) I had the idea back then of using a magnet (fixed to the horizontal moving part of the gimbal) and a coil around it (fixed to the tonearm) with DC going through it to generate the tracking force (and likewise for the antiskating force). This has the advantage of being able to change these forces while a disc is playing, and thus optimize them by sound. The antiskating could even be changed over the tonearm angle (using one or more lights and photocells activated by horizontal gimbal shading) that interpolate antiskating over the settings of several potentiometers.
(Relevant Paragraph follows)
What also came to mind is the ability to DYNAMICALLY change the tracking (and of course antiskating) force using low-frequency (say, around 15Hz and below) stylus movement as input, in order to reduce or nearly eliminate it. This would servo the arm movement so that the stylus remains fixed relative to the cartridge, and make it better track a warped record and greatly reduce the subsonic content of the cartridge output (which highpass filter would do). It would maintain the stylus angle (more nearly) constant, thus reducing the FM modulation (which no filtering can possibly do). The FM has always been obvious to me at high "bump" levels (that disturb the arm but aren't quite big enough to make it skip), and I suspect it's audible at very low levels, as the 10Hz or so compliance/arm resonance is often rather high Q and thus VISIBLE with very little excitation of the tonearm or turntable.
I've been wanting to do this or parts of it (at least adjusting tracking and antiskating with knobs on the plinth instead of at the tonearm) off and on ever since, but never did. Has anyone (DIYer or manufacturer) ever done anything like this?
I recall circa 1977 when my fellow college students didn't believe me (at least one even got angry!) when I said the Dual 1229 used a spring to adjust the stylus tracking force. Even as an EE student, when I saw the ads I understood the mechanics of the tonearm and of it being "dynamically stable" (and thus ability to play a record vertically or upside down, as had been previously demonstrated at some audio show). But the ad on the back cover of (I think it was) Popular Electronics was quite explicit about what was in that little cylindrical adjustment at the tonearm pivot, both in the drawing and in the text. Otherwise, why not just have the tracking scale on the counterweight (which then dynamically unbalances the arm), like so many other TT's did?
But (thinking of their objections to springs, but also just brainstorming) I had the idea back then of using a magnet (fixed to the horizontal moving part of the gimbal) and a coil around it (fixed to the tonearm) with DC going through it to generate the tracking force (and likewise for the antiskating force). This has the advantage of being able to change these forces while a disc is playing, and thus optimize them by sound. The antiskating could even be changed over the tonearm angle (using one or more lights and photocells activated by horizontal gimbal shading) that interpolate antiskating over the settings of several potentiometers.
(Relevant Paragraph follows)
What also came to mind is the ability to DYNAMICALLY change the tracking (and of course antiskating) force using low-frequency (say, around 15Hz and below) stylus movement as input, in order to reduce or nearly eliminate it. This would servo the arm movement so that the stylus remains fixed relative to the cartridge, and make it better track a warped record and greatly reduce the subsonic content of the cartridge output (which highpass filter would do). It would maintain the stylus angle (more nearly) constant, thus reducing the FM modulation (which no filtering can possibly do). The FM has always been obvious to me at high "bump" levels (that disturb the arm but aren't quite big enough to make it skip), and I suspect it's audible at very low levels, as the 10Hz or so compliance/arm resonance is often rather high Q and thus VISIBLE with very little excitation of the tonearm or turntable.
I've been wanting to do this or parts of it (at least adjusting tracking and antiskating with knobs on the plinth instead of at the tonearm) off and on ever since, but never did. Has anyone (DIYer or manufacturer) ever done anything like this?
The Key
OK, here is what the files are:
Seems most people heard the difference in the 2 masters. Did anyone like E? That was the CD with groove noise, rumble and arm+cart noise added in. It did not seem to get much love.
OK, here is what the files are:
- A=CD Rip
- B=Vinyl with 20Hz HP and mono under 150Hz
- C=Vinyl straight
- E=CD with empty groove noise added.
Seems most people heard the difference in the 2 masters. Did anyone like E? That was the CD with groove noise, rumble and arm+cart noise added in. It did not seem to get much love.
A=CD Rip
B=Vinyl with 20Hz HP and mono under 150Hz
C=Vinyl straight
E=CD with empty groove noise added.
Perhaps it's better to try this with mono vinyl.
B=Vinyl with 20Hz HP and mono under 150Hz
C=Vinyl straight
E=CD with empty groove noise added.
Some good ears for sure, you all heard more than I did. Neither vinyl nor CD was a clear winner. The CD certainly does have more hiss than the vinyl, which is funny. Different master. Nobody seemed to like the vinyl because of any surround effect so that didn't work.
Perhaps it's better to try this with mono vinyl.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.