Hypothesis as to why some prefer vinyl: Douglas Self

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#181
The loudspeakers will generally distort enough to make you feel the loud.

If you understand dither you will see that CD even with 16 bits can retrieve detail from below your ability to hear it in nearly every case even if you have a VERY quiet room. Low level linearity is another 80s argument against digital IMO.
 
#184
luckythedog said:
Yes, I have checked and generally below 200Hz or so there really is little intentional vertical modulation. I've read of a standard equipment module used in vinyl mastering which performed this role, though it could be overridden and sometimes was. It doesn't show up on re-issue CDs because there was never either a studio or mastering master tape with this effect on it, the module was in the feed to the cutter amplifiers.
Click to expand...
You can see why if you look at Beatles tracks. The kick drum and bass are mixed very artificially hard to one channel at about 50% full scale. Without being filtered down to mono, a vinyl version would be unplayable
 
#185
bwaslo said:
That might be. One of the things about vinyl that I notice is now gone with CD is the kind of thrilling anticipation that I used to feel when the stylus was first set down onto a disk, playing nothing yet except LF noise. It had a feeling of life to it, definitely artificial, but seeming real none the less. Of course, if this was added to CD on purpose, I'd probably find it annoying, knowing that it needn't be there!
Click to expand...

Yup, I associate that anticipation with the utter lack of dynamic range inherent in most digital recordings, especially CD, which isn't lost so much on good vinyl recordings.

Russellc
 
#188
billshurv said:
The loudspeakers will generally distort enough to make you feel the loud.

If you understand dither you will see that CD even with 16 bits can retrieve detail from below your ability to hear it in nearly every case even if you have a VERY quiet room. Low level linearity is another 80s argument against digital IMO.
Click to expand...

CD's mastered according tho EBU recommendations will have an alignement level of -18dB FS. Thus the 16 bits are not actually fully used.

Surely there are "loudness war" CD's that constantly use all 16 bits but those are defective by design and not worth mentioning in a "liniarity" and "detail" discussion.
 
#189
waaay off topic now, but you do realise that the -18dB is the effective VU level to allow for dynamic peaks in the music. So even with a recording mastered to that level will have peaks at or close to 0dBFS.

Wow there really is an 80's revival going on today.
 
#190
The old VU meter was interpreted by the good sound technicians to arrive at acceptable tape distortion at the highest levels of the transients.

I don't think that old style VU meter is any good for digital where hitting 0dBfs instantly cuts off any peak that needs to exceed that. i.e. the recording is clipped and judgement of the acceptable distortion no longer applies compared to the "soft" distortion of a tape that is asked to exceed some arbitrary level.

Similarly applying a standardised -18dBfs for average levels, does not guarantee no clipping of the recording.
 
#191
That is why I said 'effective'. -18dB average gives enough headroom for average classical recordings without clipping, so it is BROADLY equivalent to using a VU meter with tape. Except when pedants are on the loose 😛|

I do have CDs with a lower average level but they are unlistenable in the care.
 
#192
billshurv said:
waaay off topic now, but you do realise that the -18dB is the effective VU level to allow for dynamic peaks in the music. So even with a recording mastered to that level will have peaks at or close to 0dBFS.

Wow there really is an 80's revival going on today.
Click to expand...

Those 18dB are intended as headroom.

You have PML set at -18, with the headroom not intended to be used other than in an accidental way.
 
Last edited:
#193
I have some lps that are reissues of loudness era cds that are completely horrible as well. Excessive compression sounds even worse on vinyl. They seem to build up more static as they play as well, but I don't really know a way to test it.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk
 
#195
billshurv said:
Well first article google returned suggests some wrongness in your thinking. https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_2010-Q3_loudness_Camerer.pdf

So would you care to site where it says these 18dB are in case of accident?
Click to expand...

You're looking at the broadcast standard R128 (with a recommended 9dBFS of headroom....).

Have a look here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headroom_(audio_signal_processing)

there's a picture comparing all the standards. You'll notice 24dBFS headroom for 24bit master recordings. 18dBFS for CD. and 9dBFS for broadcast.
 
#196
R68-2000 off that article is also broadcast
R117-2006 is also broadcast

So where in that Wikipedia article dow it refernce anything for CD mastering? As every CD I have bar one or 2 oddities have a peak at -0.1dBFS I fail to see where you are coming from.
 
#198
SY said:
Perhaps you're not reading the datasheet correctly.
Click to expand...

Err... I think after 35'odd years in the electronics industry I know how to read a datasheet thank you:

THD+N @ 0dB Typ -95dB
THD+N @ -60db Typ -42dB

Edit, Just to be complete that's over 20Hz to 20kHz at 8xFS (352.8kHz)

Not sure why you would expect otherwise....
 
Last edited:
#199
Which standard is for MASTERING CDs? Those are all for broadcast. The picture is just that, with no reference to a std and no evidence ANYONE HAS EVERY FOLLOWED IT.

I've also never seen anyone set peaks at 130dB outside of a rock concert. And the magic 'cite needed' suggests the whole page is dubious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom