Vinyl dynamic range questions

It's conceivable though I suspect that you might get different results if you were using different microphones. I'd be curious if you have done any work in DSD. Don't have much experience with hi-bit PCM, just SACDs.

 

if your data is missing bits and then oversampled you're adding errors on top of untrue data. now you're on a slippery slope. i have compared oversampled to non-oversampled on a bryston bda-1 and preferred non oversampled. i found it to sound more dynamic and the oversampled to sound overly soft.

 

if your data is missing bits and then oversampled you're compounding errors on top of untrue data. i have compared oversampled to non-oversampled on a bryston bda-1 and preferred non oversampled. i found it to sound more dynamic and the oversampled to sound overly soft.

 

You seem to be expressing a preference for one of two different digital processing algorithms in your D-A box, and extrapolating the result to make a point about the underlying intention.

The mathematical basis of oversampling is not 'making up missing bits', it's allowing an improvement in the DSP filtering by running it x times faster. An interesting kluge that lives on in any 'upsampling' algorithm used in many of the current electronic boxes.

Missing bits means your data isn't your data anymore. It's probably not missing bits or data errors that are causing your listening results.

 

Talking of Piano and recordingd of those (esp a Fazioli.) None has sounded more realistically threedimensional than the piano recordings done at TACET. Check Evgeny Koroliev's Well Tempered Clavier Books I and II and the large instrument including the artist seems to be lifted / beamed right from the recording space into my living room- One word - STUNNING / or Sensational / Unbelievable. you could fool people and tell them you got a piano player in there and without looking thru the window or door 99.9 % of the people would believe you in case the volume is accordingly.
This is only my word, but the head of the Tamino Classical Music Forum from Vienna was part of that experiment, when TACET showcased their new piano recording a few years ago and invented the player of their recent piano record to a HiFi studio in Viena and he played aon Fazioli in the shop, while the recordings were played over a High End chain. Behind curtains people could vote what they heard - the real piano or the CD ? It was very close but of course in the end there were more correct answers than wrong ones - still it was incredible close and he went home with those CD' and was astonished that the same realistic performance was audible over his a5 k speakers as wells and not only over the bst speakers on the plabnet.
The equioment - The same Neumann U59 microphone used by RCA Living Stereo and an all tube mixing desk and reel to reel.
Their ALL TUBE AAA LP's sound wonderful ! The only time that a 7th symphony raised me from my chair do do the crazy conductor shuffle...
World lie between that and an average 7th on DG LP !

 

not at all. i'm just saying in the real world, mathematical theory and execution are very different things. analog signals have inherent electromagnetic losses as well.

 

Do you have proof for that 20 db ? This seems unealistically high sorry Steve Hoffmann. The DR ratings in those audiophile magazines over here in germany never went higher than 14. maybe I've seen one with 16 a while ago ? Not sure about that and this is for SACD's and/or HiRez files from LINN etc. and real audiophile recordings of course.
The new Scorpions album has a DR of 4 ...Lemme see what I find in the new mag..ooops
While standing up my old RED SEAL DMM LP with the PATHETIQE 6th Symphoy by Tchaikovsky with 30 minutes plus running time really shocked me. There was a heavy dynamic jump from hardly audible to shockingly loud. This is my 3rd classical recording today and none before had that effect. One was Lohengrin by Wagner the other The Nutcracker Suite on BIS (Hybrid CD/SACD). So I doubt that the real DR range on LP is lower than on CD. You still have 50 or 60 db left when this was 15 db ...

 

5 new releases and their dynamic range

Paul Weller - Wake Up The Nation DR 6
Francis Black (Pixies frontman) -Nonstoperotic DR 8
Hendrix - Are You Experienced (Remaster) DR 8

Brahms - Sonaten Für Klavier & Violine ( Mutter / Orkis) DR 14
Edward Elgar - Werke Für Cello Und Orchester DR 14

 

The venue plays a huge part in the perceived level of dynamic range. Many live recordings are left with a hall noise floor of -50 due to patrons and the HVAC system keeping them cool or warm as needed. This noise sits just like tape hiss in a cassette ready to intrude on all the important, quiet passages of a performance. Beautifully long reverb tails lost forever.

Some records that are kept clean by their owners can be very quiet, and there are some stylii that seem to track the gooves with less noise than others, but I have not worried about it much. A heavy platter resting in a great bearing is a beautiful thing for a black disc to ride upon for sure and makes a huge difference.

In my amature recordings of 24/96 I use no compression and limiting so I must take great care to insure that I have kept my starting level at a postion that will keep my peaks at -2db to spare me some wiggle room. I do not gain ride. I want the performance to be "the performance" with no alteration from me. Since the noise floor in my last recording was at -50db due to the HVAC system some of the softer passages are mixed in with that noise.

I recorded a stream off WFMT in Chicago last fall/winter of some lost Beethoven Piano Trios. The noise floor(HVAC) from that performance in Murphy Hall was very bad, worse than my recording for the University of West GA. It was cold in Chicago and and I am sure the patrons did not want to experience a hockey game in Wrigley Field in the dead of winter. The performance and the works are so remarkable that I will suffer when I listen just to have them.

If the engineer uses no compression or limiting the performance can still feel alive as even 50db of dynamic range can be very exciting. The theoretical 16 bit floor of -96 is just that, theoretical. I am not sure if any recording studios make it there(-96db), and certainly the 24 bit -144 db is in the thermal noise floor of transistors anyway. To me it is the sample rate that matters the most anyway.

Since I have recorded I have always been amazed at once I am set up and put my sealed headphones on how much noise is in every venue I have ever been in. It almost seems like when you are just in the room your ears self-adjust to lessen your awareness of the room noise. Most of us have grown so use to the 65db sound pressure of our cars, or maybe not, that we kind of block it out.

 

Ding ding ding ding, we have a winner. Most recording's (including classical) rarily have more than 30 db of dynamic range. Rock music is even worse at around 15 db.

 

2 answers:

Elton John - Capt. Fantastic

Supertramp - Crime of The Century

 

Not even half of that !!!!

A level of more than 5 DB will kill any flow or will make background listening or a normal conversation impossibe or at least unpleasant. The days of Supertramp and or Captain Fantastic hitting te charts are long gone.
Maybe on an album you may find 1 or 2 trax with a higher range
Some label ex would make sure that the radio / Video version would be limited to under 5 db. To fit inside a regular scheme those dynamic jumps must be avoided like the pest. FACT


I am again stunned how good those old classical LP's sound with such impossible long running times. The impact of the LP is often much deeper than the CD counterpart Maybe it has to do with the fact, that I have to listen at around + 40 db volume average vs + 25 db or so with CD or file to have the same loudness level.

 

One technical matter. The way the dynamic range is measured is for an album and the average difference from lhigh vs low dynamics, not one extreme peak event. So even if one part might be extreme at around 20 db this doesn't make the album a DR 20 rated

 

So did you listen with your ears to come to this conclusion or did you actually look at the wave files for measurable data?

 

Um no not even close. What does my definition or effective have to do with anything analog? It defeats the entire purpose of any discussion if you choose to ignore the meaning of what I am saying and burn a tired old straw man instead.

 

If that is the best you got then I can understand your position. But it doesn't sound like you are using SOTA LPs of piano on SOTA vinyl playback equipment as a reference by which to judge the medium.

 

Baron, I think the dynamic range measured in these magazines leads to a misunderstanding.

How they measure is explained here:
http://www.pleasurizemusic.com/en/our-aim

They state about the Dynamic range measurement:
"The macro dynamic (difference from pianissimo to the fortissimo in a song) is not considered, because it wouldn´t deliver usable information about the degree of density."

But I think this is exactly what's discussed here, the macro dynamics. So we must be careful not to compare apples with oranges...to be honest I think most of us (incl. me) have much too little knowledge what we're talking about...this is a discussion for experts in this area

 

Jim in temperate England airco is not a problem ,traffic is.

However a new hall in Cheltenham ,with a Faz piano, has excellent acoustics natural lighting and natural air
Its called The Parabola Arts Centre
Im recording there next month
Not the piano but a dutch pair of female accordianists

http://cheltenhamfestivals.com/music-2010/parabola-rush-hour-2-going-dut

Have you tried a 'fingerprint' software on your airco recordings
This if shown the source will attenuate it
Worth a try I think

 

If you're talking about using LPs as a music reproducer, then you play music. If you use LPs as audiophile collectables, then that's another sort of obsession altogether.

What a ridiculous response. "Yes, you—the sallow complected gent behind the sales counter. Give me the SOTA pressing of the Gieseking/Galleria Emperor and make it snappy!" Like there's another pressing available that actually sounds good. Why bother with all this nonsense, I'll just get the CD rather than put up with this idiocy.

That Steinway B that used to be in my living room—that's SOTA piano sound, no LP can touch it.

 

Rolo46,

That sounds like great fun. Let us know when the recording will be released. Are you running analog tape and/or 2496?

 

OK, I'm confused. I have absolutely no idea what your point is.

 

In theory maybe more than 60, but in reality, many times noticably less than 60. Depends on MANY factors, such at cutting level, overall peak levels, running time per side, Not cutting too close to center to avoid inner groove distiotion and several other variables.

There is way too much variability between even pressings of vinyl to arrive at one number. Just because you can "find some vinyl" that will beat the 60db figure a decent amount, doesnt mean most or the average vinyl will.

Also that article while "Informative", is Pro-vinyl and they are trying to make a point. The noise levels they measure seem quite optimistic to say the least. As anyone actually "listening to vinyl versus CD" realizes right off which has more noise. Thats a no brainer.

The part about dynamic range is quite assumptive also. They make no attempt to actually see is both recordings ( CD and Vinyl ) are actually mastered the same at all. In other words they could be comparing 2 totally different masterings, with the CD one compressed.

Its not truly scientific at all. Ive made several comparisons with identical "classic music" recordings and its quite obvious, the LP had much more noticable surface noise on low level parts. And they were pressings which were actually noticably quiet, not some thrift store 2nd hand junk. As for the dynamic range part, yes at its best a record will do better than 60db, but that requires one to mentally "ignore" surface noise. Thats something that not all can do at will. And it greatly depends on the frequency and masking effect of the music. Some low level music will be totally lost in surface noise, some will be heard, if you can ignore the record surface sounds.

Like anything with vinyl, there is no cut and dried answer at all....just tons of variables. Just when one mentions 60db as the range, another will say ..no...68, then another 80, then another maybe 72......

Sure a 45 RPM top notch totally quiet and perfect disc will maybe manage 70db if its cut really hot, and is a very short recording, but the reality of the average disc is quite different.

 

Totally agree......

 

You must have some pretty frustrating experiences with piano recordings on LP. Well I only have one Piano LP a Galerie (DG offshoot) pressing from the 1980 ies with Piano Sonatas No. 1 $ ballads Op. 10 Played by Krystian Zimmerman and again despite an awful long running time this LP sounds as good as most good sounding CD's in my collection. If we start talking about audiophile quality again TACET has to be mentioned. The piana sound on no other CD I or the head of the Tamino Classical forum have ever heard is produced there. I do not own a TACET piano LP, but from the dynamics that the polish chamber philharamonic orchestra recording of the 7th by LvB has to offer on the all analog tube only LP it would not sound a bit less brilliant than the CD.
I can understand that you and most other classical fans have changed to CD for everyday use, but I still choose some LP's for my listening habit, cause they offer a different feeling and somehow draw more attention towards the music. I think it has to do with the average listening/playback volume. If my amp plays at 40 watts average on LP playback and 20 to 25 watts on CD playback the more dynamic parts have more authority on vinyl ! I am pretty sure this has something to do with it if everything else is about the same sound wise.

Regarding the Dynamic range measuring. am not sure how these are measured exactly in Stereo magazine germany, but the purpose is to give the reader data on how large the difference from low to loud parts are - over the course of an LP on average. Not for peaks. I have no idea what macro and micro dynamics have to do with that. fact is that the average radio or MTV consumer nowadays is sued to music with a minimum of dynamic range. If the music is different he gets annoyed. i noticed that two years ago when I played ELVIS White Christmas during our family meal / meeting. This kind of music is not suited for occasions like that. It was either so low that you did not hear it clearly or so loud that it got in the way of a conversation.
1960/1970 music was not playing everywhere all the time like today. Today even at work the radio is playing all the time and the makers know that and choose their material accordingly. Too much dynamic range - it won't get heavy airplay - fact !

 

Jim,

This has been my experience as well.

I've collected many of the original and Classic Records versions of the Living Stereo series as well as the superb SACDs from Sound Mirror. It doesn't sound to me like the SACDs are adding much more in terms of dynamics. I seem to play and like both equally.