Jump to content
IGNORED

Lies about vinyl vs digital


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Paul R said:

 

Well then,  can using 24 bits hurt?  (No, it can only help.) 

 

Do you know anyone who is recording at 16bits?  (If you do then you are in a different world than I am. )

 

And come to think of it, I am not sure but that some cassette versions of music are not better than the same music butchered for CD. 

 

 

 

Some cassettes sound way better than the CD, assume they use the same master? 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

 

That destined for CD was undoubtedly limited or dynamically compressed to hell.

Are you a recording/mastering engineer, are you saying they use a different master for CD v cassette? 

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Rexp said:

Are you a recording/mastering engineer, are you saying they use a different master for CD v cassette? 

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure they would have different masters in most every case.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

Actually, it's not hard at all (use Mp3tag). The problem is a lack of a standard and getting players to recognize the metadata.  Last time I checked a wav file, I checked it against JRiver Media Center and there was no problem at all with metadata.

 

It's also that the available metadata for a WAV file can be specific to BWF, and include stuff that other formats do not recognize. In BWF format, it also has more strict rules that have to be followed.

 

I think that unless you clearly hear an advantage to WAV files, they are kinda clumsy to use. JRMC for example, stores a lot of metadata externally to WAV files. If you lose the JRMC database, rebuilding it can be a bit of a pain. Rebuilding with FLAC, AIFF, or other more common formats is usually much less troublesome. 

 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
3 hours ago, The_K-Man said:

 

And there's nothing wrong with that!  Criminy, you audiophiles are are making 16bit as a deliverable out to be inferior to CASSETTE!

 

Stop it already.  I'm banking on Nyquist.

 

You need to keep score better. I’ve been breaking hearts about hi res since 2010.

 

I’ve consistently said you will find hi res a very difficult sell. One reason I’m opposing. MQA or did you forget?

 

And finally I am considered a professional not an audiophile. Too many years consulting in the broadcast industry.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

I’ve consistently said you will find hi res a very difficult sell.

 

We'll see over the next 12 months... if this rumour about Amazon turns out to be true.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/26/18518182/amazon-music-service-cd-quality-hi-fi-tidal-competitor-unlimited-prime-price

 

All previous theories about why hi-res will be a very difficult sell, go out the window if one of 'The Big Four' (Apple, Amazon, Spotify, Google) makes the first move...

 

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, Em2016 said:

 

We'll see over the next 12 months... if this rumour about Amazon turns out to be true.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/26/18518182/amazon-music-service-cd-quality-hi-fi-tidal-competitor-unlimited-prime-price

 

All previous theories about why hi-res will be a very difficult sell, go out the window if one of 'The Big Four' (Apple, Amazon, Spotify, Google) makes the first move...

 

 

How are they going to have enough hi res music to stream? 400,000 tracks isn’t enough. 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

How are they going to have enough hi res music to stream? 400,000 tracks isn’t enough. 

 

Is that number fixed? Does it have no room to grow?

 

I'm personally not too fixated on the 'hi-res' aspect of the Amazon rumour... if it means Amazon has 40+ million tracks of "CD quality and better" it means there's more chance Spotify and Apple Music may move to do similar (CD quality minimum...) and that's good for us as consumers... and the hi-res number will continue to grow of course...

 

1072965716_ScreenShot2019-05-21at2_08_32pm.png.bc84665e233c5518608845cdfc3e8378.png

 

 

https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/8510134/record-labels-hi-res-music-riaa-format-streaming-downloads

Link to comment

If you master for CD, you can have dynamics as 'massive' as you want - what trips up then is that the playback chain isn't up to it - and as so often in audiophile land, everything is blamed except what is near and dear to the audiophile; his beloved rig :D.

 

I have quite a few CDs which I would never bother trying first time on an unknown rig; there is every chance they would make a complete mess of them; and the possibility of getting somewhere with the owner would likely be lost ...

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

How are they going to have enough hi res music to stream? 400,000 tracks isn’t enough. 

 

All the tracks on iTunes are high resolution already. They are simply delivering them as AAC 256 right now. They could just as easily deliver them as ALAC. 

 

I am pretty sure, but do not know for certain, that Amazon and others already have at least CD resolution for their libraries. 

 

 

 

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Paul R said:

Simple.  It isn't good enough for everyone.  Never has been. 

 

It is fairly evident why when you walk through the Shannon-Nyquist proof. Very clear when you start to understand why aliasing occurs.

That has nothing to do with 16 vs 24 bits. Perhaps it's not so simple after all.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Rexp said:

Are you a recording/mastering engineer, are you saying they use a different master for CD v cassette? 

 

Look at all the waveform comparisons of CD vs LP on line.  The LP shows all the spikes, the CD fills the whole space, no empty areas.  I'm sure a cassette rip would show at least some dynamics compared to a post-1990s CD rip.

 

Before 1990, I'm sure some CDs were slightly dynamically compressed - along with some mild EQ - in the interest of making them sound 'different' enough to give the public reason to buy CDs of material already in their LP catalog. 

 

That's how the record industry works!

 

When I consult the on-line Dynamic Range Database, and compare Vinyls to CDs of top classic albums, the in most cases the early CD has 2-3dB lower PLR(peak loudness ratio) than the LP needle drop.  For a 2000 or later CD for which a vinyl version is available, the vinyl kicks the CD's ass, with DR rating at least 4-8dB higher!  That's the loudness war effect on digital, which is more tolerable of such abusive client requests than analog formats.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, fas42 said:

If you master for CD, you can have dynamics as 'massive' as you want - what trips up then is that the playback chain isn't up to it - and as so often in audiophile land, everything is blamed except what is near and dear to the audiophile; his beloved rig :D.

 

I have quite a few CDs which I would never bother trying first time on an unknown rig; there is every chance they would make a complete mess of them; and the possibility of getting somewhere with the owner would likely be lost ...

 

Now you have your audiophile-hat on.  

 

My early CDs of "Brothers In Arms" and "Aja" sound terrific - on my big living room rig, in the car, or one of my CD boomboxes.  In other words, properly mixed and mastered material translates well across a broad spectrum of playback systems.

 

Over-compressed, brickwall limited, hyper-EQd and otherwise mangled shit sounds just like that - over-compressed, brickwall limited, hyper-EQd shit - no matter what it's listened to on!  And that's sad, because I do like some of todays's pop, r&b, and rock releases, despite current, hurrible production values...!

 

So don't suggest that listening systems and rooms need tweeking, and start realizing that how CD and high-res deliverables need tweeking - of how the frickn' things are MASTERED!

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

My early CDs of "Brothers In Arms"

 

The typical example of music NOT to try to test out any system (for purchase or whatever).

Now why would that be ...

 

Bland stuff.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

The typical example of music NOT to try to test out any system (for purchase or whatever).

Now why would that be ...

 

Bland stuff.

 

Only an audiophile would say that.  

 

I'm a mand of the people: music for the masses!

Link to comment
Just now, The_K-Man said:

Only an audiophile would say that.

 

OK, try Edgar Froese then. The one from back then, not the one in the coffin - that would be too much of it.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment

Are you equating

 

Quote

I have quite a few CDs which I would never bother trying first time on an unknown rig; there is every chance they would make a complete mess of them; and the possibility of getting somewhere with the owner would likely be lost ...

 

with

 

6 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

 

Over-compressed, brickwall limited, hyper-EQd and otherwise mangled shit sounds just like that - over-compressed, brickwall limited, hyper-EQd shit - no matter what it's listened to on!  And that's sad, because I do like some of todays's pop, r&b, and rock releases, despite current, hurrible production values...!

 

 

?

Link to comment

The playback system must not add any further distortion to 'poorly mastered' material - this is much easier said than done, and highly compressed recordings put much greater stress on the playback's capabilities; exposing weaknesses in reproduction chain more readily.

 

This doesn't excuse bad mastering; but don't blame particularly poor subjective reproduction as being caused by "accurate" playback ...

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

OK, try Edgar Froese then. The one from back then, not the one in the coffin - that would be too much of it.

 

What the heck WAS that?  😆  Weeewww what a ride.  Got my cats' heads spinning!

 

But that's not stuff the masses typically listen to.  

 

I'm trying to promote the production values that resulted in albums like Joel's 'The Stranger' from 1977.  Blows away any recent Bieber album in terms of any measurement of actual fidelity.   And guess what: It, like Bieber's works, was made for the masses. 

 

Lately, it's been the artists and the labels that have been pushing today's comparably over-processed stuff on the music-buying public. And claims of mastering to sound good on MP3 players and smart phones with amps the size of this letter 'O' instead of mastering to sound good across all sizes of systems, like they did when that 'Stranger' was released.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

This doesn't excuse bad mastering; but don't blame particularly poor subjective reproduction as being caused by "accurate" playback ...

 

I don't know what  to make of ^this^!   Can you sort out that disaster?

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

[...] Joel's 'The Stranger' from 1977 [...] And guess what: It, like Bieber's works, was made for the masses. 

 

I'll grant you that.

Still I'd rather have Joe Jackson sound right. Or Elvis Costello. Or Ian Dury and a couple of Blockheads. And they sure do. Also made for the masses but different masses.

Dire Straits always sounded right everywhere. And therefore it was wrong. I loved the band back in the days. But today I never play them. There's nothing much in it. Too easy. No challenge. No ABBA but no challenge either.

Try Grand Funk. War. And if you really don't know where to go to, the very first of Supertramp. Or King Crimson's first, if you can find the not-remaster sh*t. And a couple of 1000 others.

 

Btw, Bleeper has no works. Madonna just died too, on that stairs. I hope you missed it.

 

I will try The Stranger tonight. See what's in it these days. See whether you are right, never mind we agree already.

Maybe after that I'll try The Moody Blues.

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...