Douglas;
You look at B&K paper, yet seem to ignore paper's implications, starting with the title.
Page 5 sums up your approach and what it ignores:
You look at B&K paper, yet seem to ignore paper's implications, starting with the title.
Page 5 sums up your approach and what it ignores:
So basically an analog machine is going to be built with modern filters that we dig recording guys use every day ?Steep subsonic filters and some sort of mid-side manipulation, only it will occur in the "magic" analog domain?
Sounds a lot like the last round of the analog Thompson Vocal Eliminator of the 70s and some of the Fairchild stuff from that era as well not to mention the DBX machines that were purpose built for consumers.
Sounds a lot like the last round of the analog Thompson Vocal Eliminator of the 70s and some of the Fairchild stuff from that era as well not to mention the DBX machines that were purpose built for consumers.
Last edited:
Women booze women booze. Probably was
82. I paid a bunch of money for it, and all I could find was classical for a while.
Would a heavier arm with low compliance cartridge somewhat solve low frequency problem ? Would that be a part of the reason why people like Denon DL103 cartridge ? A digital RIAA Preamp with precise control over filtering noise and out of phase low frequency signals is possible. Isn't it ? May be that's why (I guess Mr. Jan. I think it was some other thread I dont remember. Pardon me if I am wrong) liked the sound of Laser turntable.
Regards.
Regards.
So far, I don't think we have established whether or not the LF content adds any audible benefits to vinyl. We wil have to wait on listening reports of Mr Self's analog devinylizer to get more data points.
So is this going to add artifacts or remove them or both? I know the one artifact that I always appreciated and still do when listening to LPs is looking at the giant jacket and artwork at the same time as listening. I expect this is all tied up in the "feel" of an lp. The Santana "lion" LP would not be the same without it. Not to mention the rolling papers in Cheech and Chong or for that matter reading the liner notes from Montreal Jazz Fest. Try that on a CD jacket, probably "affect" the sonics significantly.
They only track better. The subsonic content is still to be found intact at the cartridge output.
Whether arm/cart resonance is well damped or not is a matter of specific implementation.
The definition of Devinyliser was given at post #348
That artifact plus the memories Peteleoni brings back are real parts of the ‘vinyl sound’ IMO 🙂
George
I think what many choose to not consider is that the record producer wants to sell records or CD's. Any little trick that will sell CD's will be used. Less so when classical because there is a real reference to listen to which is live music. Talking to engineers as I will tonight this idea is well understood and a bit stale. Dance music guys certainy know these things.
My friend Martina Schoener ( ex Thorens ) and I did about 7 hours listening to see if we could prove the hypothisis. We couldn't and that was a surprise. What we did prove is 90% of the time we didn't care what source the music came from as long as it is good. We thought CD had more problems than other digital sources. 90% of our time was taken by digital. Whatever you guys think you are hearing, we couldn't. Martina said something I count as important. " The guys you talk with do not know how studio sounds do sound. Nor do they realise what a real transcription turntable sounds like". She and I agreed the supposed lovable imperfections are actually not very nice if you are able to have better. This " better " can be found when the Lenco. Martina is a trained opera singer it should be said.
I would also say my digital sources are slightly better when looking for the lovable low frequencies. Where digital is less good is feeling something is missing. This usally is 1 kHz upwards. Guys are you sure this is not the " Kings New Suit " ? I do buy into filtering the 20 Hz is a mistake. It is a mistake when CD even more so. OK you will say the maths supports that. That refuses to admit that the producer ever listens to the end product. This was the sort of nonsense that stopped in the 1980's. Some reviewers were the laziest people on the planet. Some graphs and a tour of the factory, job done. Same old, same old. I loved those days because I reasonably understand the graphs. Even so it was never proof of much when reading. Ears went to shop, ears bought. OK the subjective press are a bit loony and could be naughty. They still asked the simple question. Would I buy this based on liking music?
I think what you guys are thinking in analogy is coal dust in my hair and black hands is why I like steam locomotives. No it dam well isn't. I put up with it as I like the total package. I like diesels best actually. Steam is nice. Electric, not my cup ot tea.
My friend Martina Schoener ( ex Thorens ) and I did about 7 hours listening to see if we could prove the hypothisis. We couldn't and that was a surprise. What we did prove is 90% of the time we didn't care what source the music came from as long as it is good. We thought CD had more problems than other digital sources. 90% of our time was taken by digital. Whatever you guys think you are hearing, we couldn't. Martina said something I count as important. " The guys you talk with do not know how studio sounds do sound. Nor do they realise what a real transcription turntable sounds like". She and I agreed the supposed lovable imperfections are actually not very nice if you are able to have better. This " better " can be found when the Lenco. Martina is a trained opera singer it should be said.
I would also say my digital sources are slightly better when looking for the lovable low frequencies. Where digital is less good is feeling something is missing. This usally is 1 kHz upwards. Guys are you sure this is not the " Kings New Suit " ? I do buy into filtering the 20 Hz is a mistake. It is a mistake when CD even more so. OK you will say the maths supports that. That refuses to admit that the producer ever listens to the end product. This was the sort of nonsense that stopped in the 1980's. Some reviewers were the laziest people on the planet. Some graphs and a tour of the factory, job done. Same old, same old. I loved those days because I reasonably understand the graphs. Even so it was never proof of much when reading. Ears went to shop, ears bought. OK the subjective press are a bit loony and could be naughty. They still asked the simple question. Would I buy this based on liking music?
I think what you guys are thinking in analogy is coal dust in my hair and black hands is why I like steam locomotives. No it dam well isn't. I put up with it as I like the total package. I like diesels best actually. Steam is nice. Electric, not my cup ot tea.
OK. I understand it somewhat. I guess record offcenter would also be somewhat contributing to subsonic content.
A little abstract thinking from my side. Would a two preamplifier be possible for low frequency range and high frequency range separately to have better control of filtering at both ends ? Also would like to know what is typical frequency range of surface noise of vinyl LP ?
Best Regards.
I suppose the other way to do this is to record a LP onto CD. It should be nearly identical. Is it? A wise recording engineer will find the way to do it if that's the magic bullet. Like maturing Whisky it's all part of getting the most sales. I would recomend a good turntable if so. The Lenco would be OK. It has all the bad and good things. That is rumble is quite high, Wow and flutter is quite low.
One digital engineer I met uses a Garrard 401. He says sounding the same is a tough thing to attempt. It is also repeatable years later.
Personally I feel proving the USA went to the Moon would be easier than this conjecture. Latest part of that is the boot mark on the Moon is not the same as the real boots ( no idea who is right ). Also to my eyes the protection of the suit seems too little. But, what do I know. Also why don't we hear the rocket motor as they land. If a Policeman I would have doubts about this.
One digital engineer I met uses a Garrard 401. He says sounding the same is a tough thing to attempt. It is also repeatable years later.
Personally I feel proving the USA went to the Moon would be easier than this conjecture. Latest part of that is the boot mark on the Moon is not the same as the real boots ( no idea who is right ). Also to my eyes the protection of the suit seems too little. But, what do I know. Also why don't we hear the rocket motor as they land. If a Policeman I would have doubts about this.
Know what? I like vinyl, but am beginning to love Youtube much more...😛
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CxcnB16Tyk
Ahhh,
...am loosing myself in loosy compression artifacts...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CxcnB16Tyk
Ahhh,
...am loosing myself in loosy compression artifacts...Hypothesis as to why some prefer vinyl
For me it is so simple as to why vinyl is king. Humans vocal cords vibrate to create sound drum skins vibrate to create sound as do reed valves in wind instruments and strings on stringed instruments. So my phono cartridge is vibrating to create sound just like the instruments it's reproducing.
For me it is so simple as to why vinyl is king. Humans vocal cords vibrate to create sound drum skins vibrate to create sound as do reed valves in wind instruments and strings on stringed instruments. So my phono cartridge is vibrating to create sound just like the instruments it's reproducing.
Done competently, it is.
Most famously, Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn participated in a listening test where the signal from a turntable was optionally passed through a CD-spec (16/44.1) ADC / DAC chain. He was unable to tell whether the ADC/DAC chain was in circuit or not. The state of the digital art has advanced since then, and there's widespread (though not universal) agreement in the audiophile community that a 24/96 or 24/192 capture of an LP from a good turntable/cart/preamp is as good as listening to the LP directly.
I will believe that as I have done similar. It comes down to something simple. When CD arrived so did a different attitude. Sell the people what they already own again. That would have been fine if in the hurry to do it someone had wanted good quality. 80% of the CD's I own are not as good as the LP's I have. 10 % about the same whilst not being identical. 10% of CD's better than LP. Many people like the simplicity of owning CD's. They like the product. Nearly all seeing my LP's playing can not wait to say how they prefer LP. It's funny how often they say that. It's something I can almost time to the second as to when they will say it.
What many seem to overlook is LP cutting is very very hard. It can only be done by ear. Someone who cuts bad LP's will not have a job. The sound is the least of the problems. It comes good as a choice is made. This is like not understanding a painting can not be done by anyone even given a good paint box. One who didn't caused WW2. Somehow the making of CD's stopped the critical final judgement. I don't begin to understand why, but there it is.
I would agree with youTube. About three years ago I started to build a systen that would be able to play any source. The result is that it does. Box speakers seem to favour LP. Open baffle speakers less so. The ideas put forward here are reasonable. I doubt it is the tip of the iceburg. I would say the OB speakers have enough of the real ambiance not to need any false. Perhaps that's the question that is really worth asking. A friend asked me whilst looking at my speakers " Who would ever buy that " ? "No one" was my answer. I would hate anyone except me to have them.
To give you a similar idea, Stomach ulcers were thought to be due to a tissue weakness and would need alkaine neurtalisers. Mostly they don't work when past a certain point. Then someone with an open mind noticed people who also took antibiotics ( for other problems ) and anti-acids got better faster. The ones who said this were made to feel stupid. One or two persisted and found a bacteria that can live in the acid. If we are honest in a highly scientific field like medicine we would exspect better science than we got there. We don't know everything and sometimes we die because of it. At least with LP it's a bit of fun and only an ideal we were in danger of loosing. A life of fun lost rather than just a life if you don't mind the irony.
I listened to my friend the sound engineers new Lenco 75 Linn K9 last night. It is very good. The arm is Lenco and better than many would think. K9 has about the right mechanical numbers for the arm, my gift to him. Speakers Meridian M3.
What many seem to overlook is LP cutting is very very hard. It can only be done by ear. Someone who cuts bad LP's will not have a job. The sound is the least of the problems. It comes good as a choice is made. This is like not understanding a painting can not be done by anyone even given a good paint box. One who didn't caused WW2. Somehow the making of CD's stopped the critical final judgement. I don't begin to understand why, but there it is.
I would agree with youTube. About three years ago I started to build a systen that would be able to play any source. The result is that it does. Box speakers seem to favour LP. Open baffle speakers less so. The ideas put forward here are reasonable. I doubt it is the tip of the iceburg. I would say the OB speakers have enough of the real ambiance not to need any false. Perhaps that's the question that is really worth asking. A friend asked me whilst looking at my speakers " Who would ever buy that " ? "No one" was my answer. I would hate anyone except me to have them.
To give you a similar idea, Stomach ulcers were thought to be due to a tissue weakness and would need alkaine neurtalisers. Mostly they don't work when past a certain point. Then someone with an open mind noticed people who also took antibiotics ( for other problems ) and anti-acids got better faster. The ones who said this were made to feel stupid. One or two persisted and found a bacteria that can live in the acid. If we are honest in a highly scientific field like medicine we would exspect better science than we got there. We don't know everything and sometimes we die because of it. At least with LP it's a bit of fun and only an ideal we were in danger of loosing. A life of fun lost rather than just a life if you don't mind the irony.
I listened to my friend the sound engineers new Lenco 75 Linn K9 last night. It is very good. The arm is Lenco and better than many would think. K9 has about the right mechanical numbers for the arm, my gift to him. Speakers Meridian M3.
why not press song/signal from cd to lp then compare with original cd. i bet people would say that original is better(cd) . i dont like idea of testing other way around as it from start assumes that lp is performing better than 16/44.1 cd,and cd is copy in this case. lp to cd seems to me like people who convert 128k mp3 to wav and think they got other half of song back somehow.while cd to lp in my eyes looks like converting wav to 128k mp3. i know i went too far but thats my opinion as someone who was born into mp3 not into lp or cd so i dont have any special feelings about lp/cd.started listening to music with mp3,never satisfied with sound but didnt knew why.,after few years of listening to mp3 i accidentaly went to flac/wav and never looked back, tried lp with very high expectations ,dont like ,same problem like with mp3 never right sound.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.