Untrue, imo and in my experience, once you get a decent turntable with good perfect speed (strobe shows solid speed), and then pure noise-free amplification, it comes down to a great cartridge and A-D capture device, and the right pressing of the clean LP. Really strong results can be had at about $2,500. I didn't originally think my drops got it that right, and I always figured they were second best against CDs of the same titles. It was not until later, I got to treat them to a gentle pass or two of ClickRepair, and bought much better speakers that I realized my drops were amazing and more often than not better than the CDs of the same titles. My drops have a depth to the sound that you can turn up and hear into, whereas the standard CDs can sound cloudy and congested. This is where old MFSL, DCC, and other audiophile CDs and SACDs shine. I describe my drops as sounding "organic" rather than processed. I believe that often EQ and other treatments that are done in the mastering are performed at the 16/44.1 rate. And they suffer as a result. That is why SH's CDs for DCC sound amazing, he does all the EQ and other work in analog and then captured without messing with the 16/44 bits. (Tip: You don't even need those fancy expensive cables praised in those other threads)
I suggest using an EQ so every stage before you had an EQ(at least 3), and for some reason audiophiles don't think you should EQ at your final listening position, just lol.
My average DJ record probably has more bass on it than most of your CDs. Despite the media format limitations, proper deep bass is just as viable on records as it is on CD (I’ve mixed with both CD and vinyl in the past - house music is all about the bass). As for the 8Hz argument: the opposite can be said for the highest possible frequencies, which can go up to 40 or 50khz for records (line contact styli required), while CDs are inherently limited to about 20khz due to their 44.1khz sample rate (see: Shannon-Nyquist theorem). Both arguments are fallacies though, since both frequencies are outside the range of perceptible frequencies (20hz to 20khz).
Sure, but real bass extension, or boomy bass within just that which vinyl can reproduce? Play time, signal-to-noise, fidelity: pick two. I just scrolled through my CD FLACs to see the first thing I could pull out of the bin and needledrop - Jody Watley - Real Love (extended). One side of the 33.3 RPM 12" gets a single 6:59 track. CD in green, 12" in red, approximately the same musical selection (11kHz/32 downsample to analyze bass): What do we learn? Someone turned up 100Hz on their EQ to master pumped-up vinyl. Both are gone by 30Hz, the vinyl giving tonearm resonance instead. No mastering credit, but "Futuredisc" scribbled in the opposite side deadwax. Actually doing better than a prior post of mine in the needle drop thread. Quarterflash vinyl vs CD remaster: the bass of the CD keeps going while the vinyl is cut (CD also gets a 3kHz boost):
We learn that the differences in mastering and recording dwarfs the differences between media formats. The format itself isn’t responsible for an absence of bass.
If the OP isn't doing these transfers himself, who knows what gear was originally used. I enjoy the one's I do and it captures what's on the format -good and bad depending on the mastering.
This is a perfect example of a 1980/1990s extended dance mix. It's all about the bass. The mastering engineer boosted the frequency at 100Hz which is where the boost should be, falloff at 30Hz is fine. However, this isn't a typical dance mix. A hot mix (different from the album version) is required with a heavy boost in bass. The mastering will adjust levels so the tonearm doesn't jump the grooves, followed by the lathe cutter who has free rein to to make an extremely hot recording playable.
First of all, please use "vinyl", without the plural s. "vinyls" should never be used. otherwise: LPs, records, vinyl albums etc. are all OK. Second, which turntable, arm, cartridge, ADC, acquisition software, digital filters against rumble and noise were used? Without this basic information no further discussion has any sense.
you can definitely feel the subsonic bass content from a high amount of turntable rumble at high volume. It feels sort of like your ears are about to pop. And you can see the excursion in the big woofers of full-range speakers, presuming the grilles are off. They pump- and then pin- grab the tonearm off the record before they blow! (Smaller speakers don't present a problem, because the higher natural resonance of the bass transducers- the woofer drivers- rolls off the lowest frequency content.) Vinyl rarely has any bass content below 40 Hz. (Neither does CD, for that matter.) The most well-known example of true low bass on an LP is on the Mickey Hart and Airto Moreira record Dafos, which is 45rpm, a speed that permits some extra cutting depth for the masters and allows more of the lower bass frequencies to be preserved. Anyway, at one point in Dafos, Mickey Hart picks up one of his custom percussion instruments, lifts it off the ground, and drops it- ! -and the resulting fundamental note is way down there, like 24 Hz. It's pretty well-known in some vinylphile circles as a torture test for cartridges, tonearms, turntables, and speakers. Like, see if the stylus can stay in the groove, and if the room quakes. The dance music vinyl records you referred to are most often 12" and 45rpm, too. That allows for a lot of bass content in the groove. Not as much as CD, technically. But as you've said, really low notes are inaudible. 40Hz is plenty low. The "low bass" content on those records is often more like 40Hz-80Hz, which is technically more like midbass (the fundamental of the low note on a 4-string electric bass guitar is around 40Hz, but the 2nd harmonic is typically emphasized, so what the ears register when the open note on the E string is played is more like 80Hz.) 40Hz-80Hz is all the "low bass" content any human can properly absorb. Vinyl mastering and reproduction technology tends to emphasize that part of the frequency spectrum, with the result that the bass of a dance mix on vinyl often sounds a bit richer and fatter than CD. Subsonic frequencies 10Hz-12Hz and below at top volume can lead to excursions for more than speaker woofers- they can pump your guts. The results are what you might predict. Subsonic generators have been used by police paramilitary units as a "nonlethal weapon" technology, for crowd dispersal.
I think this is why some like to upgrade the AT dj cart instead of switching carts, built for bass. I imagine its a matter of magnet and coli placement inside the housing of the cartridge. The phone stage I think has a big part in the bass, as its supposed re EQ the bass back in as per the whole vinyl limiting factors of technology or the parameters you have to use because it is what it is......IDK I'm all for adding a little EQ and a sub if needed.....I don't even think a sub is needed with a good EQ most of the time.
I’ve found that Return To Forever’s “Romantic Warrior” has some of the lowest bass notes on any vinyl. My Focal speakers only go down to about 35hz and they don’t reproduce the lowest notes on that album. They barely suggest it. However when I play a vinyl rip of that record in my Grand Cherokees stereo, the subwoofers have no problem with the low frequencies that are otherwise inaudible, and they come through strong and articulate.
they were done by several persons, on several equipment. the only thing in common, was that they were ripped from vinyls in mint. the DR ratings of mint vinyl rip of Dr Dre 2001 compared to the CD . CD DR6 -0.07 dB -7.33 dB 3:27 02-The Watcher DR8 -0.08 dB -8.32 dB 4:31 04-Still D.R.E. (feat. Snoop Dogg) DR6 -0.07 dB -7.69 dB 3:58 05-Big Ego's (feat. Hittman) DR6 -0.06 dB -6.71 dB 4:04 07-What's the Difference (feat. Eminem & Xzibit) DR7 -0.07 dB -8.41 dB 4:25 17-Some L.A. Niggaz DR7 -0.07 dB -8.72 dB 2:41 09-Light Speed (feat. Hittman) DR6 -0.06 dB -7.02 dB 3:42 10-Forgot About Dre (feat. Eminem) DR6 -0.05 dB -7.18 dB 2:42 11-The Next Episode (feat. Snoop Dogg) DR7 -0.07 dB -7.74 dB 2:28 15-Murder Ink (feat. Hittman & Ms. Roq) DR6 -0.04 dB -7.12 dB 4:14 13-Bitch Niggaz (feat. Snoop Dogg, Hittman & Six-Two) DR6 -0.07 dB -6.62 dB 3:42 21-Bang Bang vinyl DR13 -0.10 dB -14.00 dB 3:26 02-The Watcher DR14 -0.10 dB -15.21 dB 4:31 04-Still D.R.E. DR14 -0.10 dB -16.21 dB 3:58 05-Big Ego’s DR13 -0.10 dB -15.15 dB 4:04 07-What’s the Difference DR14 -0.10 dB -17.08 dB 4:25 17-Some L.A. Niggaz DR14 -0.10 dB -16.41 dB 2:41 09-Light Speed DR14 -0.10 dB -16.23 dB 3:42 10-Forgot About Dre DR14 -0.10 dB -15.89 dB 2:42 11-The Next Episode DR14 -0.10 dB -15.43 dB 2:28 15-Murder Ink DR13 -0.10 dB -14.95 dB 4:14 13-Bitch Niggaz DR12 -0.10 dB -13.41 dB 3:42 21-Bang Bang -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know that the Dr numbers are misleading in vinyl rips. but the difference is quite big. so probably the vinyl mastering is less compressed. the CD obviously has more bass. and so all the other rips I have.
the quality of the gear in the chain used to do the transfer is crucial. The bandwidth limitations or coloration of each link affects the ones that follow it. That's how it is that I'm mystified by audiophile comparisons on Youtube. Comparisons of guitars, pickups, and musical instrument amplifiers have much the same problem. But at least they can provide a rough approximation of some gross differences, even if they aren't definitive or trustworthy. With the nuances of audiophile sound reproduction, forget it. The same level of conscientiousness that applies to obtain a high-quality "audience recording" of a live performance applies to needle drops. The best recordings include a complete provenance of the signal chain: the mics, their placement, the model of recorder used, and the brand and type of tape used (if any), and how many generations of transfer (arguably not imperative for digital, but often useful.) So provenance of the signal chain for a good needle drop should include the model of cartridge and stylus, the tonearm and turntable, the preamplifier (imperative for phono), any other EQ or other signal processing gear inserted in the chain, the type of digital conversion, and the gear used for the final step. Even the cables can make a difference. The best needle drops should include an advance run-through that includes a listening test through top-quality headphones before committing to the final step.
My favorite are where the uploader is switching back and forth on a track with cartridges and they aren't even playing back the same sections of the song. Typically a tame outer groove track as well. Worthless.
It is because all vinyl records are terrible and they suck so give me all of yours and I will dispose of that junk. You're welcome.
I make great needle drops, and it's not a 5K system, it is just a simple "chain" of components that have good synergy. At least the vinyl that has better mastering produce a needle drop cd-r that sounds better than the commercially available cd, so that is the main thing.
I agree with a transparent EQ (Schiit Loki?,) component between the phono pre-amp and recording device (I use a cd recorder.)
Fair point.. there's likely something to it, to the perception of frequencies out of our conscious hearing range. But the argument applies to both subsonic and ultrasonic, or neither of the two. Otherwise the argument would be inconsistent. My statement about my DJ records was more pragmatic. I know digital can go infinitely lower in frequency (in theory). But when it comes to the musical experience, there's definitely nothing left to be desired in terms of the amount of bass. No such thing as "lack of bass" - which this thread is all about. What does strike me as odd is that this "lack of bass" is specifically at these rips the OP is talking about. How do these records sound when played in real time? I would bet that they'll sound just fine, unless they're bad quality. Seems like this should've been more of a "recording vs. the real thing" debate rather than a "digital vs analogue" debate. So lets continue with that: This is what I do. I always list the gear used in the descriptions of my YT uploads. I also list a link to the exact release of the record on Discogs. This is exactly what my needledrops are for, not to get a definitive idea of the sound signature of a cartridge, but just a general impression of its sound - the smallest nuances are gone because of the YouTube compression anyways. I don't think that the different sounds of different cartridges are just "nuances". It's like using a different EQ preset or something similar. I switch between cartridges to voice my system to my needs - the differences are as big as changing speakers. But yeah... if you compare for example a 33rpm pressing with 45rpm pressing of the same master... sure. Those nuances are so ridiculously small that those could never make it through YT compression. There are audiophile comparisons and there are audiophile comparisons...
It is quite a difference. Usually if the same mastering is used you'd get a maybe a 3 point difference. Why you usually see a DR 10 on a LP transfer or so for bricked mastering's on CD. -.10 dB on every track has me suspicious though.
I have that Dre 2001 album on vinyl. Mine is the instrumental version which is preferable since Dre was never a good MC anyway. Don't have a CD version of the same album to compare but I can tell quite a bit of compression was used in the recording and mixing process, if not mastering as well. If you want more dynamic hip hop plenty of better choices. I don't bother with DR score for vinyl because it's a waste of time.
