SH Spotlight Vinyl vs. master tape?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Holy Zoo, Jan 12, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Holy Zoo

    Holy Zoo Gort (Retired) :-) Thread Starter

    Location:
    Santa Cruz
    Not sure.. whatever comes with iTunes.
     
  2. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Ho my gosh! Krabbapple! YOU DA MAN! I just got back home and saw that "last page" thing! I had to look! Krab, you got them ALL! WELL DONE! Toche!:D :D :D
     
  3. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Oh, ok. But, still, wouldn't one's opinion still be subjective rather than objective anyhow? I'm not questioning your integrity or anything here, I'm just saying that an opinion, is judt that, an opinion and is usually subjective. :)
     
  4. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    I agree with most of that krabapple , except one thing. I DO believe one can say what is better. For example, I don't think anyone in this forum would claim that, say, playback of a cassette on a fisher price toy is better than playback of that same music on an LP or a CD on their audio gear. Then again, who knows. ;) I think, also, that a burn of an LP to CD-R will probably sound different, because in order to make that burn, one has to pass it through a signal chain that will add noise and colourations that are not present on the LP itself. This is the same reason why I have been stating over and over, that a CD will not sound 'identical' to a master tape, but, IMHO, will sound the closest to it than any other format; ALMOST identical to it, especially if it is a digital master dubbed through digital signal path.
     
  5. Bob Lovely

    Bob Lovely Super Gort In Memoriam

    GB,

    I offer my opinion from the following perspective--I own over 1500 albums, 800 12" singles, 1200 45's and 5000 CDs. I believe both analog and digital media can sound great when the mastering is well done for the media. Additionally, I am professionally trained to be objective and not let my personal biases color my conclusions. Yes, I am human but I offer myself as an reasonably independent party to conduct some critical "listenings" of transfers of vinyl to CD-R and report my findings back to Forum members.

    Bob
     
  6. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    First of all, I never argued which format sounded better to any particular person. I started off this whole ridiculous thing saying that I thought a CD more closely matched the sound of the original master than an LP, because it captured more of the musical information, didn't have added surface noise, didn't have rolled off frequencies, and had a wider dynamic range. And also, this is what I have experienced myself, from hearing original masters of people I know which were subsequently transfered to CD, LP and cassette. None of your arguments have yet disproved any of that.

    As for your TT argument:
    Well, one can reasonably assume, to use one of your arguments, that a formula 1 race car can and will outperform, say, a Honda Civic, in a straight 0-60 run. One doesn't have to drive both or own both to make that determination. Why? Because one can be familiar with the sizes of the engines, any performance boosting technologies that may be in use, and the number of Formula 1's in use in Formula 1 races, as opposed to Honda Civics. And these determinations can be made from using non-subjective numbers, or, to use a dirty word here, specifications. Top speed, torque and the like. Say whatever you want to say, but you still have not proven to me that there is more musical information on an LP, or that it is more quite, more accurate and has a wider dynamic range than a CD. You tell me you don't like Numarks, so you write off my ability to assess a format because it is your opinion that my own personal TT doesn't sound good to your ears. That is just that - opinion; subjective yet again. Maybe I would hear YOUR TT and say the same thing, maybe I wouldn't notice any difference. Who knows? What I can tell you is that there is NO TT in the world that will put those rolled off frequencies and that dynamic range on an LP. So, the discussion is meaningless, It's apples and oranges. There is no way to compare the relative quality of two completely different technologies without looking at the numbers. Period. At what price point do the comparative qualities of a CD player and a TT even out? Is it at the same price point? Do I have to spend more on my TT than my CD player? Or is it the other way around? Do I have to go and listen to every TT and every CD player in the world to figure this out? The only reason I can see for avoiding the numbers in such an argument, is if one knows that the numbers disprove one's beliefs, and one doesn't want to face the truth. And, in answer to your previous question, no, I don't just read specs and purchase my gear. I read specs and determine the products in my price range with the best possible specs, and then listen to them and compare. I find it works quite well for me. :)
     
  7. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Well, not to start another debate here, I never once argued that I wasn't conditioned. It's my firm belief that we are ALL conditioned in one way or another. This is why I've argued on the grounds of specs AND what I 'hear' (i.e. I don't hear surface noise, which is there no matter how quiet you think your gear is, and I KNOW I'm not hearing rolled off frequencies) but it seems like when one mentions specs around here, one gets one's head cut off and becomes accused of all sorts of things. ;) I never argued 'against' LP's. I grew up listening to LP's. I own many LP's, still buy a few new LP's and still 'listen' to LP's. Somehow, everyone seems to equate one arguing a very narrow argument of what format sounds more like the orginal master in favour of a CD, with one 'hating' or 'bashing' LP's. I don't 'hate' LP's. I never said I did. Just because a format brought 'hi-fi' to the masses, does that mean one can't utter a single bad word against it? Hey. cassettes brought a lot of music to the masses, even to some who eventually became 'audiophiles', but I don't think people would could come down on me here if I argued that cassettes don't capture thetrue sound of an original master. Let me tell you something, if the 'cold hard truth' was all I was ever after, I wouldn't be listening to Steve's DCC gold CD releases, with his tubes and things. ;)
     
  8. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Bob,

    I'm not grilling you here or anything so, please, don't take offense. :) When you say you are 'professionally trained to be subjective' what do ou mean? are you a recording engineer or a record producer or something? If you are, cool. I too am a professionally trained recording engineer. I went to CMA (Center for the Media Arts) back in '91 to become a recording engineer. I think they became part of Columbia University now. I also have my own home studio.

    I also have to say WOW, that's a huge collection. I've got about 500 records, 1,000 cassettes, 10 (pre-recorded) MiniDiscs, 20 digitally recorded MiniDiscs, and 3,000 CD's. :cool:
     
  9. Beagle

    Beagle Senior Member

    Location:
    Ottawa
    Wow, nice to see everyone was too immersed in their music to post anything over the weekend :rolleyes:

    I think a couple of people posted about 200 times each since Friday. Amazing. And we still have not proved anything except that analog is superior to digital ;) and that we like what we like.
    End of story?
    Yes, and this way you avoid the embarrassment of being proven wrong...
     
  10. sgb

    sgb Senior Member

    Location:
    Baton Rouge
    Well, this is assuming, of course, that the interconnects used between the CD player and your control amp have no effect whatsoever on the character of the sound, and your A/D converter has no signature of its own. Even if the cables between the turntable and preamp are identical to those used between the CD player and preamp (and the A/D converter is perfect), you will have, in effect, doubled the cable length. So, even if an *exact* replica of the sound of an LP could be made, one could only hear a close approximation of it. I do note that you make this inference by saying, *You want it to sound as much like the LP as possible.*


    But, if there is even the slightest difference - as I suspect there always will be - and one still finds the vinyl superior, it could not be adjudged that the result were something being added by the TT (remember, we're talking about a record to CDR transfer), but instead, something not being reproduced in the digital playback. You might have to have the ears of a bat to hear this, but we are picking nits in this thread.
     
  11. Bob Lovely

    Bob Lovely Super Gort In Memoriam

    GB,

    No problem, I am a Human Resources Executive (see my profile). As such, I resolve and mediate disputes between managers, employees, etc. as part of my many duties and responsibilities. In order for me to be effective in this role, I have learned to not form a predisposition for outcomes--to gather facts before drawing any conclusions. Personally, I am 51 years old so I grew up with vinyl and I embrace digital media as well. As my avatar suggests, my hobby is recording programs on a reel recorder. I make CD-R transfers of programs recorded on the reel machine for use in the car and for ease of use in the home. I began collecting music when I was about 7 or 8 years old. My father spent his career as a Broadcast Engineer so I grew up around Radio stations. Additionally, as a human being I am pretty mature, non-judgemental and open-minded. As someone who is not heavily pre-disposed to either analog or digital media, I am willing to offer myself as an objective "listener".

    Bob :)
     
  12. sgb

    sgb Senior Member

    Location:
    Baton Rouge
    but it does.

    Oh, I'm not so sure about this, my old MS-190 is pretty neutral and far from warm; so are a number of other good tube amps out there. I'd venture that the sound from tubes and solid state designs is converging in modern equipment,

    True.
     
  13. sgb

    sgb Senior Member

    Location:
    Baton Rouge
    When they finally introduce a means of digitally recording real sound without the need of analog microphones, I'll be ready to agree with you 100%. Until then, I'll stand by my earlier comment that sometimes I prefer analog, others it's digital.

    Nothing in this world is perfect, but in restricting our considerations to this statement we cannot come to a universal conclusion.
     
  14. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    krabapple,

    I'm so glad thre is finally someone here who can see the light of day. I agree with you almsot 100% (well, you know, nothing's absolutely perfect.) ;)
     
  15. Todd Fredericks

    Todd Fredericks Senior Member

    Location:
    A New Yorker
    In my opinion, a digital copy (44.1/16) from an analog source will have different sonic qualities than the original (even with a top-notch D/A). It may not be easy to hear depending on the expertise of the transfer but there will be differences. For me, an easy instrument to detect a "difference" with is an acoustic guitar. I've done many tests with this instrument recording directly to DAT, ADAT, PC multitracker, high-end gear (owned by a friends father who owns a label, etc.), and many other high quality digital input devices and there is always a very slight change that occurs (in my experience). How can I describe this change? It sounds like the natural tone of the acoustic guitar (notes, chords, etc.) develops a slight "sheen" to it. I think we've heard this "sheen" very clearly (and very exagerrated) on badly mastered CD’s, which some people describe as harsh, lifeless, sterile, etc. No matter what equipment I've used I can detect it's preasance (even very, very slightly). I called it an artifact of "digitizing." Now, I'm not saying this to attack digital or the CD format because I can write about the artifacts I've heard with making copies, recording, etc. in the analog domain. I have always believed (and I'm also open to change my views with more experience) that a copy (no matter of high the resolution digital or analog or some "unkown" bubble in the future) will ever be more important or cricial as the original source. A high-resolution copy (actually several) is very key for having as a back up of the original in case something horrible happens to it yet the original must always be the "be all, end all" (and almost protected like a treasure). A copy or mastering work can always be made from the original source yet to do the same from the copy would not be as good (you know what I mean). We all know that many labels made a bad move in the 80's (and even still today) of "digitizing" master tapes and then scrapping the originals because they thought it would save on storage and they thought there would be no difference in sound (??). Well, they made a big mistake and destroyed some history. Anyway, enough rambling...

    Todd
     
  16. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Uh, no, I don't think so. First of all, I'll say this again - I NEVER SAID I COULD MAKE A PERFECT COPY OF AN LP ONTO A CD-R. :rolleyes: The tesat would prove nothing if the conditions are not controlled. All it might prove is that I either have anexcellent rig or I have a crappy one that screwed up the soud when I PLAYED BACK the LP through a signal path that obviously changes the sound to whatever extent. It doesn't DISPROVE, however, that a CD more accurately represents a master tape than an LP does.
     
  17. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Cool. :cool: Nice hobby. I was about 10 years old when I began collecting music. Music, as well as poetry, turned into an obsession with me - and still is. :D So I had to pick up a guitar, and 2 years after graduating from high schol, and without much direction (college didn't take) I spotted an ad on TV for CMA and realized that was what I had to do, as a person so involved with music. It has led to many WILD adventures - both good and bad - for me. I too believe I can be pretty objective when listening to a recording - I have to be. I can focus in on one intrument or one sound effect or I can just hear the recording as a whole, not focusing on any one particular aspect. It's an ability one needs in order to mix a multi-track recording.

    One thing, I know many people here may think I'm a digital bigot, but when I trained, I never even used a digital recorder. When I strated my home studio, I used a Tascam TRS-8 1/2" 8-track reel-to-reel and a Mackie board. Eventually I moved to a digital setup and made sure to invest in some tube pre-amps for my microphones. I do still have an apreciation for the sound of analog recordings.
     
  18. Bob Lovely

    Bob Lovely Super Gort In Memoriam

    GB,

    Love of recorded music is a very positive hobby, profession and passion. I began to number my "masters" in 1988. Since then I have recorded over 270 reels of programs (now at master # 0272). That is a lot hours under the "cans" recording. Based on experience, I have learned a lot through experimentation, trial and error and by being a member of this forum. I am still learning. It is interesting to play a reel program for someone who has never heard a reel deck recording played back. I have found the reaction to be very consistent--"Wow!, I never realized that reel recorders sound that good!". Of course, a lot of care has to be taken to make a program sound "great" but I enjoy the challenge and the outcomes of the process.

    I enjoy using my CD recorder as well!

    Bob :)
     
  19. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Sigh!:(
     
  20. Beagle

    Beagle Senior Member

    Location:
    Ottawa
    Well, maybe an LP played back on a lousy system/setup. But an LP played back on a hi-rez one will usually dance all over a CD. No contest. Never has been. never will be. I mean, I simply don't buy that there are that many crappy sounding master tapes that CD is supposedly representing "accurately". I don't buy that most master tapes are boring, irritating and non-musical.
     
  21. Todd Fredericks

    Todd Fredericks Senior Member

    Location:
    A New Yorker
    I think Steve put it best (and he should know). "It's all in the mastering" This is all becoming apples & oranges (which is better??). Fine, I'll eat a peach instead...


    Todd
     
  22. GoldenBoy

    GoldenBoy Purple People Eater

    Location:
    US
    Whatever. I'm with Todd now, only, I think a nice juicy Mango sounds right just about now. :)
     
  23. Scott Wheeler

    Scott Wheeler Forum Resident

    Location:
    ---------------
    Well. Much has been said since I last logged on. I see krabbapple wants to dismiss the real scientific work of James Boyk. Do you really think Cal Tech would keep him around if he were conducting psuedoscience?Or is Cal Tech a second rate institution for science? Did any of the people on this thread who still vouch for CD superiority bother to e mail James Boyk for his scientific perspective? Krabapple have you ever done controled blind tests between state of the art CD players and turntables to compare them to master tapes? Have any of the advocates of CD playback supereriority actually sat down and listened to state of the art LP playback and compared the two? And as for specs, the CD advocates love to ignore the one spec that matters with CD playback 16 bits and 44k sampling rate. The assumption that this is not an issue is justy that, an assumption. Lets compare it to the number of bits and sampling rate of an LP. You can't can you? There is no doubt that LPs have colorations that CDs do not have but the opposite is also true. There is no sampling rate or limmited number of bits on an LP. Also the notion that LP mastering and stamping is colored while the disassembly and reassembly of an anolog wave by means of digitizing is uncolored is a joke.
     
  24. Bob Lovely

    Bob Lovely Super Gort In Memoriam


    Todd,

    Very well said and "the" real pervasive bottom line on this debate. "Mastering correctly for the media" is the real key to great sound on any medium. I would contend that much of the criticisms of media are actually mastering or manufacturing derived problems that live on in the media whether the medium is vinyl, digital or even a cassette.

    I would, rather, focus on mastering and manufacturing standards and how "we" can collectively encourage labels (especially the majors) to have "high quality" standards with regards to mastering techniques, practices and manufacturing processes.

    Bob :)
     
  25. Scott Wheeler

    Scott Wheeler Forum Resident

    Location:
    ---------------
    Bob the bottom line is the end product is no better than the accumulated flaws in the chain. If the original recording sucks your done. If you use a boom box the mastering is almost irrelevent. Unfortunately it all matters, the recording, the mastering, the manufacturing, the playback equipment, the electronics, the speakers and the room they are in and the set up.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine