Because it didn't exist! It is clear you have no or very little experience with vinyl otherwise you should know.....
Several companies issuing LPs today emphasize that they do not use even a single AD/DA conversion in their production processes.
Aha, there are 5 million LPs sold every day 2nd hand?
Again you're running out of arguments.That's not the point. It's not the fault of the production techniques that there are a lot of bad productions. A digital recording at 192kHz would give you much better quality without all the errors vinyl introduces (wow, flutter, rumble, cracking and clicking noises).
Best, Markus
Dolby AC-3 allows only a MAXIMUM of 640Kb/s, often as low as 320 Kb/s for FIVE full frequency response channels plus the Subwoofer channel, lower than most MP3. That's pretty far short of 'high SQ' , in my book. OTOH, a set of Bose Cubes aren't the best way to evaluate HT SQ in the first place.
Last edited:
OT:
Not many, but unlike CD sales the slope of growth in vinyl sales in the USA has been consistently positive over the past few years. In 2008 sales of vinyl was up about 38% over 2007 which was up over 2006 by about 18% or so - at the same time sales of CDs were headed down. Sales of new LPs will probably number well under 2 million in the USA this year, but this completely ignores the rather large activity in used vinyl and the new production of some indie manufacturers that do not fall under the aegis of the RIAA.
I suspect examining the numbers more closely you will find a significant number of those LPs going to people who fall into our niche category of hobbyists/audiophiles who care about sound quality whether it be two channel stereo or multi-channel or HT. (Yes there is multi-channel audio supported by DVD-A [dead?] SACD, and BD on the music side.)
I think the issue of music delivery formats is somewhat superfluous to the discussion? And to most of the industrial world out there our hobby is dead. How much money do you think anyone makes on the collective bunch of us??
Kevin the fact is that the present AD/DA process is not good enough to match vinyl as a rule.
I hope that together with liquid music they will improve the conversion process too leaving to users different quality options.
But that's just hope....
45
I wrote that I don't buy digitally mastered vinyls. I know what I buy if you don't it's not my business.
You just look for flames every time.... Are you frustrated or envious? If not just don't quote my messages and I will not waste my time in replying. Because it is a waste of time, IMO.
No, you didn't. I asked you where to buy "digital free" LPs. You answered "Because it didn't exist!". So I concluded that you must be buying stuff that is older than about 30 years. I asked a simple question you responded with something that can't be called an answer.
I only get frusted when someone insults me or is making false statements without having a single argument.
If discussing a topic is a waste of time for you then why did you join this forum? Makes no sense.
Best, Markus
Last edited:
Get the facts right. Blu-ray allows for Dolby Digital at 640 kbit/s, Dolby Digital Plus at 1.7 Mbit/s and Dolby TrueHD at 18 Mbit/s. Here's what actually can be found on Blu-ray: Technical Statistics Page - Blu-rayStats.com
The music industry doesn't deliver that kind of quality. I only know one exception: http://aixrecords.com/
Best, Markus
Last edited:
Good afternoon 45,
As I understand it the sampling rate for the standard audio CD is around 44 kHz. The Nyquist theoretical maximum encoded frequency would then be just under 22 kHz. Certainly, we have enough sampling to resolve 20 kHz. Does a true analog source like vinyl really have an advantage here?
This is along the lines of what I was just talking about with 45. Those kinds of sampling rates are not needed for reproduction of the audio spectrum. It's just wasted - bigger numbers in this case don't mean better. Those media formats require that kind of data throughput largely for high-resolution video, which is far more data intensive than even multiple channels of audio. I don't think in this case, quoting 'performance' numbers such as those are really applicable.
No. It's just theory. In practice I can't see a device that can work without dithering and/or noise shaping i.e. artificial modification of the time sequence of the samples (because you cannot know what kind information you are removing a priori).
This is by far the worst limitation of digital devices. In principle 44.1 KHz could be enough in practice they are not. At least until they don't sort out the above problem.
In an analogue recording the time sequence is not manipulated. In the worst case you can talk about phase but, remaining time continuous, you have the tools to deal with it.
Get the facts right yourself, Marcus. Obviously you missed the fact that what I was discussing is Dolby AC-3, the DOMINANT (and default for DVD) audio coding scheme for video discs in the real world and, by the way, rebutting dishonest sales pitches hyping the sad SQ that actually exists on most DVDs and BDs.
Last edited:
CD4 vinyl was cut to 45khz. So, unless you believe brick wall filters at 20khz are perfect, I guess the answer would be 'yes'.
Yes but Thoriated, perhaps I am missing the point - but we can't hear frequencies that high. Is extension to 45 kHz an advantage?
these are not timeing errors, sure your not thinking of jitter?
IMO the worst part of vinyle is the wear of production devices, mainly the stamp, but also the lath cutting head. Every time a piece of vinyl is pressed the stamp wears a little, when you buy an LP you dont know if it was pressed at the begining or end of the stamp life, with each consecutive pressing deteriorating.
I agree that DVD multichannel AC-3 is inferior to 2 channel PCM but that's not the point. The original sound recordings for movies are as good (or bad) as music productions. Blu-ray is available and offers equal or better resolution than CD and all the great benefits that additional channels can deliver. There's no need for anybody to get a DVD with AC-3. The music industry could deliver that kind of quality level too but they just don't care because the consumer doesn't care. Otherwise iTunes would offer uncompressed downloads. Apple lossless is around for years.
Best, Markus
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.