Is the DR database really accurate for vinyl?

In the case of CD vs. vinyl, sure! But why rule out using other methods to compare CD to CD?

 

As I mentioned earlier I have done some radical EQ changes that would probably never be done in the real world and only got a 2db difference on the DR meter. It will not make a 4db change or else it would sound radically different. So EQ won't do that. As far as whether the master was 24/44 or 24/96 etc. that won't make a DR difference when we are talking DR ratings in the 8 to 12 db range. So a higher res master isn't the answer either.

 

Is there a list somewhere online that compiles all of the vinyl releases that were sourced from the same master as the CD?

 

I would say CD to CD comparisons on the DR database will be more accurate comparisons. I would say that is the best way to use this tool. But just not to compare vinyl to CD.

 

If I do a de-clip on a CD ripped track that's brickwalled, I can actually knock up the DR ratings by 3 or 4.

 

I wish. Many artists/engineers are very secretive about that for some reason. My guess is its because they use the same master most of the time and if that is advertised they will lose out on record sales which are more profitable than CD/iTunes sales.

 

I prefer waveforms to compare CD masterings (I don't ever use the DR database), as I like the visual and I feel I get more info when comparing.

 

Thanks. I was hoping to find some documentation for the new Nine Inch Nails album.

 

Right which proves my point that when you actually listen to them through your system they will not sound much different except for the coloring discussed earlier.

 

That whole DR tool, is kinda vague and confusing. Yes a very high or very low number mean something, but a lot of the inbetween numbers are very confusing. I had one CD that was on the list that was extremely dynamic but it got a mediocre rating.

Turns out the way they do the rating, is taking an average of loudness, not actual dynamic range.

So a tune that has a lot of very quiet parts, and a lot of all of the sudden loud bursts that last for many seconds, DOES not qualify as dynamic. Makes no sense.

It only works for songs that are mostly at a constant fixed level, than it measures variations FROM that level to a certain point.

It DOES NOT determine if the song has a wide dynamic range as many of us think.

DR Rating is only useful in one way. Otherwise it is not useful to show actual real dynamic range.

 

Good luck. I was involved in a thread on this forum that discussed this and there isn't anything definitive but I have the vinyl and the Audiophile Master digital version and besides the coloring that my TT setup and vinyl adds to it I couldn't really hear much if any of a difference.

 

Gotcha! So in your opinion, they are either sourced from the same masters or the sound is close enough that it's negligible?

 

With a 24/96 drop you can also, to a point, look at spectrograms to try and gauge if the source was 44khz sourced, but even that isn't 100% reliable. It really is a guessing game.

Here's the other thing I do now - for modern vinyl, you usually get a download code so I can at least compare it to that, just to get a feel for what the CD likely would sound like (I used iTunes Match to match the download). And again, whatever sounds better is what I listen to -- hopefully it's the vinyl drop or else I just paid a premium for basically nothing, but it's the game we all play with new releases I suppose.

 

He gives possible reasons for this around 9:15 in the video. Although he doesn't mention (and probably doesn't realise) that different phono gear will produce a signal with different dynamics. This is obvious to anyone who's done comparisons using a record, and changing only the cartridge, or preamp, etc.

The biggest thing I learned from this video: I'd never want Ian Shepherd to master a CD for me. I prefer to control the "loudness" myself, via a volume knob, rather than have a mastering engineer do it with peak limiting.

 

If you watch the video he debunks being able to base your opinion on that also, check it out. I will say it again trust your ears people not what your computer tells you. There aren't definitive tool/tools out there to tell you what you want to know besides your ears. If you like the sound of vinyl better than the CD with the same mastering (assuming the master is not super hi res digital) that's fine but that is probably because either your vinyl rig is better than your CD rig or you just prefer the noise and coloring that vinyl adds to the music and that's cool, I do to sometimes.

 

The vinyl he plays back, sounds dull and rolled off on the high end.

NEWSFLASH: Vinyl colors the sound. Noticeably.

 

Again, keep in mind it's a YT video so that's going to affect what we're hearing as well.

 

I'm talking per unit. They make more on one vinyl than they do on one CD/iTunes download. That is why I'm saying that they don't want you to know that the vinyl has the same master. They are gonna want you to buy that record instead of the CD so they can make more money. They may even get you to buy the CD too if it isn't included in the vinyl purchase.

 

If you knew anything about Ian you would know how silly of a statement that is. He is one of the biggest cheerleaders for ending the loudness wars. He has set up a Dynamic Range Day and many other things to promote better dynamics in the music today.

 

That's great, but we all saw the evidence in the video of that particular CD he mastered, that shows he was certainly not a cheerleader for ending the loudness war, not in this case anyway. I guess he has to cave on his principles once in a while (artist demands, etc).

 

Why would you say that? Because it doesn't have a DR rating over 10? Please....

 

I started threads on stuff like this years ago, and was laughed at mostly.

Vinyl add some stuff to the sound or modifies it in some ways. It does not represent the master and some mastering engineers have gone into detail about how it changes the sound, as far as the actual frequency response, phase changes, and simply the physical traits of making and playing vinyl alter certain aspects of how the sound is.

Some mastering engineers say it sounds different or better than the actual master used to create it, but that induced laughs.

To some, distorted, to some "Better sound".

 

I did watch it. He is only comparing vinyl to CD and his conclusions about comparing waveforms of vinyl to CD are compelling. I was speaking of comparing waveforms of CD to CD, something he didn't address.

 

It has been proven years ago, that vinyl modifies the sound from the master. It adds phase changes, and the amount of out of phase material on playback is increased in relation to what CD reproduces.

There are about a dozen changes it introduces.

When I mentioned many of these mild to moderate changes, many made the wrong assumption that I was bashing vinyl. Simply, some of these changes DO occur.

The why is somewhat unknown. Some like them, some do not.