Lies about vinyl vs digital

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

All of my efforts at improving digital playback help...but not in improving the gap in dynamic performance, the thing which makes my music stand out so much.

 

Isn't the gap in dynamic performance due to mastering?

[lucretius]

38 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

No ... digital lacking subjectively strong dynamics is a distortion issue - anyone who has pushed a rig over the line knows how the sound is 'transformed', in SQ terms.

 

Since dynamics is a measurable thing, I have no idea what "subjectively strong dynamics" are.  Do you have an example of the distortion issue?

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, semente said:

 

Some types of distortion can "enhance" the sound by increasing the sense of "perceived dynamism", "livelyness", "3D-ness", "spaciousness", "airyness", "warmth", "increased detail", etc.

But they always come with their naggy little side-effects and whether the listener is sensitive to those side-effects is another matter. It depends on the music one listens to, our taste in presentation, our sonic culture, our expectations...

This is what I believe explains why some people perceive the sound of accurate or higher-fidelity systems as "flat", "lifeless", "boring", "bland", etc.

 

I agree with the above (the "perceived dynamism"/"liveliness" reminds me of the loudness button on vintage receivers).  Nonetheless, I was referring to GUTB's inference that digital playback suffers from dynamic performance in comparison to his vinyl playback system.  And then @fas42 said "digital lacking subjectively strong dynamics is a distortion issue".  Unless I'm mistaken, the distortion you note is not limited to "digital" playback (or vinyl for that matter) -- both GUTB and fas42 appear to be claiming that there is distortion/lack of dynamics specifically related to digital playback making it inferior to vinyl.

 

 

 

 

 

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

The full dis was "flat-earther bits is bits fools", which I find ironic because a "flat-earther" would be someone who rejects science.

 

LOL! The "bits is bits fools" refers to anyone who claims that playing back a bit perfect file will sound the same each time (on the same equipment).

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, John Dyson said:

*Sometimes the voluntary distortion in a CD helps to mitigate quality problems in poorer equipment -- but most audiophiles primary equipment would not fall into that category.

 

The non-audiophile has a simple, inexpensive system and doesn't hear the distortion.  The audiophile has a brilliant, expensive system and must suffer the distortion.  Life isn't fair.  ☺️ 

[lucretius]

49 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 That isn't correct. A bit perfect file should sound the same each time on the same equipment, when played from and to the same location using the same playback S/W.

The disputed claim from the "bits is bits" brigade is that bit perfect files created on different types of equipment,

and saved to different storage media such as internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory, whether using Linear or SMPS PSUs, and using different Operating Systems and different ripping S/W, internal or external CD/DVD Roms  etc. MUST all sound identical.

 

You got a lot going on there. Let me enumerate it:

1. Music files created on different equipment
2. Files played from different storage media (internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory)
3. Linear vs SMPS PSUs
4. Different operating systems

5. Different ripping software

6. Ripped from internal vs. external optical drives
   
   You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
    
7. Different playback software

The "bits is bits brigade" is saying bit perfect files (delivered that way to the DAC) sound identical (same DAC, amp, speakers, room, etc.) even if 1,2,4,5,6,7 are the case.  I remember that #2 has been discussed and although there can indeed be different levels of noise generated from these different storage media, it is generally inaudible/negligible.  As for #3, any different power supply (it's not just linear vs SMPS) may pollute the output of the DAC; however, this is not always the case and I would hope that for a "good" DAC, the effect is inaudible -- yes, there are some really bad SMPS PSU's that should never be used, while many others will have no audible effect on a good DAC.

[lucretius]

12 hours ago, marce said:

You said the same gear, are your goalposts on wheels?

Same playback chain starting at the DAC, including amp, speakers, room, etc. Goalposts remain steady,

[lucretius]

12 hours ago, marce said:

I'd get some new gear If  you have such a problem...

What problem?

[lucretius]

22 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

how good does the system have to be??

 

 

 

The answer is 42.

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, John Dyson said:

ABBA Gold (1992) and more ABBA Gold(1993) are a different kind of FeralA

 

What do you mean by that? Are these albums worse than the studio albums? Since I'm not a huge ABBA fan, I thought I would keep only these 2 albums.

[lucretius]

14 hours ago, John Dyson said:

The CDs have basically all of the information that was on the vinyl, but it is a bit mangled

 

In this case, given the source is analog tape for both vinyl and CD, how is it that the signal was decoded properly before cutting vinyl but not before pressing CDs?  Is this just related to time -- the CDs being pressed many years later and studios not having access to the same equipment or just getting lazy? 

[lucretius]

29 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

I truly don't know the specific reason why feral-A occurs

 

"feralA", "feral-A".  Congrats on evolving the english language.  Just so I'm clear, by "feralA", are you referring to the cases where the signal had originated from a DolbyA encoded source (i.e. tape) and was never decoded in the production of various CDs? These specific CDs are where "feralA occurs"?

[lucretius]

4 minutes ago, marce said:

Bit identical files sounding different every time you play them.

 

That is Alex's "problem".  Sounds the same to me each time.

[lucretius]

19 hours ago, sandyk said:

IF the files were truly IDENTICAL , you would not hear any differences.

 

Yet you claim that two bit perfect files sound different.  I'm confused.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

I got a critique that the demo was too dull -- here is one with slightly different (actually less) EQ.  This shows even more that the ABBA Gold is close to raw DolbyA.  (I removed all EQ at 9k and 12k -- only about 4.5dB cut between 3k and 6k.)

 

John

 

06.stFromGoldA.mp3 1.68 MB · 1 download

 

Wow!  This new version is pretty darn good! Like the CD but with harshness removed and very natural sounding.

[lucretius]

13 minutes ago, esldude said:

In this case, I fear the future predicts the past as well. 

 

Travers-able wormholes?

[lucretius]

6 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

@k-man my point is that there are ZERO adjustments and futzing needed for a CD player where all those adjustments are necessary for a turntable to even begin to sound decent and not destroy records. If you want the best sound possible you have to set up all the parameters as precisely as possible, clean the record, get rid of static, make sure it’s rotating as precisely as possible, etc...  it’s nearly endless. To play a cd you put it on the platter and press play. 
 

As an analogy, a CD is a Keurig, a Turntable is a French Press. 
 

that makes a turntable inherently more difficult to get good sound out of than a CD player which has zero adjustments. 

 

To be fair, that is a bit of an exaggeration.  I haven't adjusted my TT since swapping the cartridge and before that only adjusted it when I first acquired it.  And, I can pull out a record I haven't touched in a few years and it is clean and static free.

[lucretius]

17 minutes ago, k-man said:

@AudioDoctor , FAO @The_K-Man

 

Why 2 IDs  @k-man / @The_K-Man ?

[lucretius]

On 1/16/2020 at 5:19 AM, k-man said:

@AudioDoctor , FAO @The_K-Man

 

On 1/16/2020 at 5:55 AM, The_K-Man said:

"FAO"?

 

On 1/16/2020 at 7:00 AM, k-man said:

For the attention of..

 

 @k-man / @The_K-Man , are you talking to yourself?  ☺️

[lucretius]

6 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

I have nothing against Rumors, however I think the best of Fleetwood Mac came long before that. 
 

 

 

What, no Stevie Nicks .... Nooooo.

[lucretius]

47 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Lies about vinyl vs digital

 Getting back to the original topic, has anybody been able to compare the Fleetwood Mac Rumours  Vinyl vs. the original CD release ?

 This thread is NOT about how great (NOT !) Robert Palmer YouTube videos, OR Shania Twain with low bit rate .aac audio sound through Franks  tiny Laptop speakers.

 I have attached a Sound Forge 9 screen shot showing how the 24/96 DVD-A audio from the track Dreams is being limited on peaks, and not being heard to it's full potential. 

 

 

I have this CD https://www.discogs.com/Fleetwood-Mac-Rumours/release/1579942.  There is no clipping on Dreams:

 

 

 

Here are the DR measurements for the CD:

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Analyzed Folder: Fleetwood Mac\Rumours\Rumours_dr.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR         Peak       RMS        Filename                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DR14       -2.96 dB   -19.89 dB  01 Second Hand News.flac      
DR15       -1.69 dB   -20.09 dB  02 Dreams.flac                
DR14       -5.59 dB   -24.70 dB  03 Never Going Back Again.flac
DR15       -2.16 dB   -19.75 dB  04 Don't Stop.flac            
DR14       -2.35 dB   -18.53 dB  05 Go Your Own Way.flac       
DR15       -9.86 dB   -29.48 dB  06 Songbird.flac              
DR16       -1.80 dB   -22.02 dB  07 The Chain.flac             
DR14       -3.20 dB   -20.26 dB  08 You Make Loving Fun.flac   
DR15       -0.78 dB   -19.73 dB  09 I Don't Want to Know.flac  
DR15       -2.37 dB   -21.74 dB  10 Oh Daddy.flac              
DR15       -5.75 dB   -25.63 dB  11 Gold Dust Woman.flac       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Number of Files: 11
 Official DR Value: DR15

==============================================================================================

 

 

[lucretius]

20 hours ago, The_K-Man said:

 

Actually, that is a real variant of big, if somewhat obscure.  Just not in heavy usage.

 

https://www.lexico.com/definition/bigly