CD-sourced vinyl — myth or reality?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Stone Turntable, Jan 17, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bibijeebies

    bibijeebies Forum Resident

    Location:
    Amstelveen (NL)
    also my personal observation: 16-track analog...after that it went downhill...
     
  2. UncleHalsey

    UncleHalsey Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle, WA, USA
    A bit related, the new Ryan Adams "Ashes and Fire" was recorded to analog tape. Bob Ludwig is credited with mastering it in the main insert. There is a secondary insert that credits Doug Sax with mastering the vinyl, but no confirmation that the vinyl was sourced with the analog tape.

    So annoying. I love the sound of this vinyl, whatever the source, so why the gag order? I can handle the truth.
     
  3. SixtiesGuy

    SixtiesGuy Ministry of Love

    Ok, then connect your CD player directly to the boutique tubed pre-amp and... voila! all the positive sound qualities and you're one generation "closer to the musical truth". To ease the transition you can put a cheap album of some sort on your turntable and watch it spin while you're listening to the CD...:winkgrin:
     
    Engelsstaub likes this.
  4. Paul K

    Paul K Senior Member

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Uh...that kinda won't work!
     
    spencer1 likes this.
  5. SixtiesGuy

    SixtiesGuy Ministry of Love

    It will if your boutique tubed pre-amp also has line-level inputs.
     
  6. mikemoon

    mikemoon Forum Resident

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I've heard this lp briefly and you are correct it sounds very good and very 'analog.' Like our host mentioned early, cut by a good engineer. To me it would only make since to cut the lp from tape if it was already recorded and mixed analog. Of course, the high rez master will sound good if done correct but in most cases the analog master will sound better.
     
  7. mikemoon

    mikemoon Forum Resident

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    This would be a bad assumption for someone to make, especially if it's vinyl sourced from a cd. Some analog mastered records are just bad as well. This goes back to 'Sid' making the statement about the mastering being more important than the source which has some truth. My only conclusion I've made over the past few years is that cds only vaguely interest me, the little vinyl I have that "sounds cd sourced" rarely gets played and vinyl sourced from an analog master is the most pleasing with high rez sourced vinyl second. These are just personal conclusions and I think my disinterest in the cd came from being a product of that generation and the advent of the mp3 as its equal on non-audiophile systems. No mp3s don't sound as good as well mastered cds. When I heard analog sourced vinyl for the first time a light went off.

    As far as the last great cash in, majors aren't banking much off these reissues. Also, how is the customer getting ripped off by having the opportunity to buy a Gray/Hoffman analog mastered 'Icky Thump' or 'Stadium Arcadium' on and on. Have you heard the cd counterparts? The cd with its low product cost/bloated price tag, was the last ingenious record industry idea. I commend them for this marketing concept. It was absolute genius.:righton:
     
  8. Thurenity

    Thurenity Listening to some tunes

    With the recent purchase of my Furutech GT40, I'm actually mulling over this potential problem right now. Up until now I've been doing 24/48 needle drops as my setup really didn't support 24/96 (was using a laptop line-in that I was pretty sure was 24/48 max). But the GT40 does support 24/96 recording and my tests with old analog vinyl seems to confirm that. So I could start recording in 24/96, at this point.

    But with my modern vinyl, even going back to the late 1980's, I'm not sure if it's worth doing that. When I was recording in 24/48, I figured that there really wasn't much of a difference in storage space between that and 16/44, so if I was padding things a bit unnecessarily because the source was actually 16/44, it wasn't a big deal. But with 24/96 it's a huge size difference.

    I may have to test record a track or two first from each album and then take a best guess using a tool like Spek if the remainder of the album is even worth doing at that high a sample rate. Or, I might record in 24/96 completely and then downsample, if I feel it's needed, during the editing process. If I see, for example, that the vast majority of the album isn't going above 22khz, I'm thinking it's not necessarily worth keeping it at 96khz.
     
  9. Thurenity

    Thurenity Listening to some tunes

    Well, I've done a few albums so far and I'm definitely seeing information above 22khz (and, in some cases in the 30's and 40's too) but I just don't know if this is a good metric or not.

    But I do have at album that I'm needle dropping now (Moving Mountains "Waves") that so far has little to no information above 22khz. Since I know that my setup is working as 24/96 in, I'm going to take a guess at this point that this particular album might be 44khz sourced. It certainly sounds pretty crappy but of course that in itself may not mean anything.

    And that's fine. I'm going to record 24/96 for everything and then, if the info isn't there, I'll just transcode it down to 48 or 44khz FLAC's. No use making a 24/96 FLAC for something that's 44khz max. :)
     
  10. Mylene

    Mylene Senior Member

    Those Ruskie Universal records from the early naughties (Claudine Longet, Marianne Faithfull etc) sound like they're done from CDs. Come My Way even has the same random bonus tracks.
     
  11. libertycaps

    libertycaps Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    I just don't buy vinyl recorded or pressed post-1983. Simples.
     
  12. Thurenity

    Thurenity Listening to some tunes

    Never mind on that last album, I'm seeing stuff above 22khz as well. I guess I have to give them the benefit of the doubt, unless I know otherwise.

    As usual, I A/B tested against my digital copy and the vinyl has slightly better dynamics (although it still sounds like a compressed mess vs. what it could sound like if properly mastered). And again that's the gist of it for me - if it sounds better, it's worth spending a few dollars extra to buy the vinyl. Plus it's nice to look at so you get some extra benefits for your money. (Btw, in the case of this particular album, it was on clearance so it ended up being cheaper than a MP3 download. So a win/win there).

    :( Sorry to hear that. I have a lot of nice vinyl post-1983 that sounds really good, at least to my ears.
     
  13. yamfox

    yamfox Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    Not even all-analog Hoffman/Gray stuff?
     
  14. Plan9

    Plan9 Mastering Engineer

    Location:
    Toulouse, France
    You will most of the time have spurious harmonics above 22kHz when needledropping an LP, especially with Direct Metal Mastered ones. it doesn't mean they are mastered from analog or Hi-res sources. It is just that your cartridge, aligment, turntable, or preamp are creating these harmonics.
    Some recordings don't have anything above 20kHz, but it doesnt mean they are sourced from a CD.

    You have to check for a line in the 19-22kHz range where there seems to be an artificial diminution of the frequency response. It is rarely a clear-cut stop at 22kHz.

    Of course sometimes the age of the recording gives it away. Albums recorded between 1980 and 1995 may have their masters in 44,1/16 resolution only.

    I'll post examples if I have the time.
     
  15. Thurenity

    Thurenity Listening to some tunes

    I appreciate the input. Up until now I was needledropping at 24/48, so it didn't really matter. But at 24/96 I have to decide whether or not a recording is worth keeping at that level if the source was really 44khz. If you have the time and you have example, that would be great to see.

    I'm getting better at reading Spek, but I still have a lot to learn on how to truly understand what I'm seeing. I do know that just because there's information above 22khz, that it doesn't automagically mean that the source is above 22khz - as you mentioned, or could be coming from somewhere else.
     
  16. kevintomb

    kevintomb Forum Resident

    So really its not a problem, if you dont know?

    It becomes a problem once you realize its redbook sourced?
     
  17. libertycaps

    libertycaps Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    Details please! Not aware of that.

    In the gray mid-80's and on (when digital mixing/mastering quickly became the new industry standard) redbook/remastered CD's are fine. I own about 900 lp's and 2K CD's, so it's not like i'm w/o plenty of music to listen to staying with my No lp's after 1982 rule. I only recently got back into vinyl these past 3 to 4 years after dumping my record collection in the early 90's. a lot of people did in favor of CDs back then. :shake:
     
  18. mikemoon

    mikemoon Forum Resident

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Who said either of those statements? Sometimes, you don't know before you purchase a particular lp is what I'm saying. For example, if I pick up a Wilco or Spoon release I know that it's either analog or high rez but if I'm picking up a newer artist like Janelle Monae, I won't know what the album sounds like until opening the it up and playing it. Sometimes you know right off and occasionally you are not quite as sure. It's really about how the music makes you feel and then how it sounds is plus but sometimes this plus brings you back to the music. You just tend to grab the average sounding (cd mastered) discs less.

    Another example was when I ordered the import lps of the White Stripes Elephant and the White Stripes White Blood Cells. At the time, I figured they were both analog sourced. When I played them, the difference in sound was night and day and it was evident that something was different about the two titles. Later, I learn that this version of WBC was sourced from a cd and Elephant was all analog. I knew something was different here without having the info, only later did I have a confirmation. So, to answer your question, I knew it wasn't up to par upon initial listens without knowing.

    Outkast's Aquemeni is a different example. This is 3 lp version of an album from 1999. I can only assume that it's sourced from a cd and it sounds amazing. So, to answer your question, no problem here thinking if it is a cd sourced.

    I'm just saying it's stupid to assume new vinyl (not analog reissues) are automatically cd sourced. Vinyl haters usually makes this assumption or people who are detacted from new music. I also try to promote newer vinyl from modern artists that sound great regardless of source. If it sounds good, it sounds good. Trust me, many times these are high rez soruced and sometimes cd sourced and sometimes even analog sourced.

    I listen to way too much music to try limit myself, so many times I will take chances and usually I'm very satisfied with my vinyl purchases. Regarless of the source, it can still be a satisfying listen. For the most part, I think I can tell if an album is cd sourced but I'm not an expert. Most of my cd sourced vinyl sounds very average but the one's that sound good stay in my rotation but sometimes it's just not the same experience as high rez or analog and it's senseless to lie to myself that I like the sound something more than I do. This is the same for bad analog sourced vinyl.

    It is a good physcological question as to whether you like something better or worse now without the knowledge or later with the knowlege of the source. Trust me, I've put myself through this trial to some degree. It's strange, the human brain is an interesting tool. It will usually guide you to the pleasures of the world. You simply know what you like and what you don't like.
     
  19. mikemoon

    mikemoon Forum Resident

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I mainly stay away from 80s music as I'm not as happy with the sound of many these releases. I think it's mainly the production.

    I think 90s vinyl sounds better than many 80s releases for some reason.

    Hip-hop (80s-90s) usually sounds really good too.

    Weren't there still a high percentage of artists still recording, mixing and mastering analog after 1982? From what I can gather many were doing this into the mid 90s. Of course, I'm excluding some of the major pop artists that I'm sure went over to digital.

    Also, I'm not sure if anyone asked this but were the mastering mastering facilities of this time (Sterling, Masterdisk, K-Disc, etc.) still using all analog mastering systems? Did any of them switch to a digital preview head. Hopefully, my terminolgy is correct andn this question is clear.
     
  20. Stefan

    Stefan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Plus some of the mastering choices tended to go for the sound of the day. I know Steve has mentioned before on here about how the "bass cloud" was shaved from 80's music a lot to make it sound like synth bass, etc. I've been going through some old CDs and digitizing them for storage on a network-attached HD and listening to them on occasion. A lot of those early releases, in addition to sounding grainy in some cases due to those old converters, sound really thin on the bass end of things.
     
  21. Plan9

    Plan9 Mastering Engineer

    Location:
    Toulouse, France
    I have some LPs from the early 80's, cut at Sterling, which are sourced from digital.
     
  22. libertycaps

    libertycaps Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    Horses for courses, but in my mind buying an analogue format that was digitally mixed/mastered defies common sense. I also stay away from vintage lp reissues due to uncertainty about any digital step(s) taken in the production process. Strange that it's not more widely considered/discussed. Then again, most music consumers aren't "Audiophiles." We are music 1%'ers....i have no illusions about that!
     
  23. Thurenity

    Thurenity Listening to some tunes

    I'm not an audiophile, at least not the classic definition of one. If I ever got to that point, my wife would probably divorce me. :)

    But using your logic, would you avoid a CD that was AAD or ADD? My reasoning being that digital / analog mix is not bad as a standard, but it's really about the mastering. Even a 44khz sourced one.

    It's also what keeps me buying vinyl, even modern vinyl - if it sounds better than the CD, then that's all that really matters to me.
     
  24. kevintomb

    kevintomb Forum Resident

    Okay so you are implying the mastering was radically different then, not simply the sampling rate?

    Ive owned several 80's era vinyl records that are digital sourced (16/44 obviously) and they still to this day sound fantastic, but if you are talking radically different masterings I can understand. I just didnt get where it being the redbook resolution as compared to a higher resolution source being something that would be that noticable upon a casual listen is all.

    Ive always found the mastering and original recording session quality to determine the sound quality, Far far beyond anything with sampling rate or resolution could ever affect the "overall" sound quality.
     
  25. libertycaps

    libertycaps Forum Resident

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    *Heh. My ex-wife asking for one gave me the Green Light to become one! She got what she wants:"Freedom." I get what i want: The House and endless Time and Space to do exactly what i want when i want! Win/Win.

    **No, analog to digital is fine. Counter productive to go the other way me thinks. Sure. Not all mastering jobs are created equal, but analog/digital is fairly binary, isn't it?

    ***Horses for courses. Redbook/remastered/HD/SA CDs do what they do quite well enough for me to keep buying them too!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine