Jump to content
IGNORED

Bob Ludwig on Digital Audio


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, firedog said:

Read full comments here:

Bob likes digital, but talks about how sometimes an LP can sound better than the CD made from the same master, and even better than the master tape itself. 

In short, a form of euphonic distortion introduced by vinyl. 

I agree with the possibility about situations where impairments normally thought of as distortion or unintended signal modifications/defects can sometimes result in better sound.  Sometimes unintentional compression can improve recordings, sometimes the 'softening' of vinyl can sound better.  Sometimes vinyl sound 'improvement' might actually result from cartridge behavior or a reassuring low level rumble.

I have decoded some digital recordings that are just too hot sounding, but not by mutliple dB, but sometimes just at the single dB level or lower.  A small cut that rolls off (or increases) perhaps 0.25dB at 10kHz, 1dB at 20kHz can possibly sound better.   Maybe even the dynamics of the vinyl record producing apparatus might impart enough of a change that could slightly improve the sound.

 

John

 

Link to comment

What are the long term effects of digital music listening versus analog music listening on the human brain? 

 

* As an aside, there is another thread on "forum decorum", locked, and I was wondering what the fuss was about? 

 

I was going to comment on couple points but what is the purpose of a thread in a forum if you can't comment? 

Link to comment

I'd say so, both analog and digital audio have improved since then. 

In 1989 music recordings use different audio gear and mic techniques. 

Everything was different in 1989.

 

Going back in time and comparing with today everything has changed; most of the audio past and preferences are mostly irrelative with today. We should ask Bob what he thinks today, with his older ears behind all those years. 

 

Link to comment

Not sure what was used to record Pink Floyd's Meddle album. But it still sounds good today. The newest "remaster" however, is not any better in my opinion than the old CD release, maybe a little worse (and for that I have a theory why).

 

OTOH, we don't know how it would sound like if recorded today. But if one wants to compare something, David Gilmour's recent solo albums in hires certainly don't sound bad either.

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment

Film on pellicules from reel-to-reel tapes, yes I would enjoy watching them, very much so. They fuel better in my brain, more natural filmic, smoother for my inner chords.

 

It's the same for music listening...long term. I feel my brain more relaxed, less stressed. 

 

This is my own personal disposition on music and films for the long run.

In the short runs, blips, I'm ok with hires ultra high def audio and picture. 

 

In the year 2020 I watch films 100% digitally, but what I do with the film evolution doesn't automatically mean that I prefer it all the time. It's an adaptation with the tech we live in. 

The ones watching movies in the analog form are the vintage niche people. I have the greatest respect towards them and they are among my best friends.

 

Analog and digital music I can easily alternate between them and I do; it comes in periods when my brain tells me. It's a personal thing, not a generalised one. 

 

I was asking genuinely on a scientific medical neuroscientific way about the side effects between the two. And you are 100% correct, we ear music in analog. Also correct that it is very important how it was engineerly recorded and mastered. 

 

Main thing is I believe it's worth discussing to explore further, discover and a higher learning. 

 

Link to comment
On 1/19/2020 at 2:44 PM, Axial said:

What are the long term effects of digital music listening versus analog music listening on the human brain? 

<snip>

 

I have no data on this, but one thing I've noticed for myself.

Due to 're-listening' to my newly cleaned LP collection, I haven't listened to digital for a few months--and my tinnitus has markedly decreased.

Link to comment

Just as a higher performance vinyl player will better dscriminate between signal and noise, a better system will highlight the deficiences of vinyl which in my view and experience detract from the realism of the reproduction. This matters to me because I listen to classical music and illusion of listening to sound made by instruments and vocals in a naturally reverberant place is paramount.

 

Stereophile's glossary has this to say about "musicality":

 

musical, musicality A personal judgment as to the degree to which reproduced sound resembles live music. Real musical sound is both accurate and euphonic, consonant and dissonant.

 

QED

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
On 1/20/2020 at 12:26 AM, Miska said:

Not sure what was used to record Pink Floyd's Meddle album. But it still sounds good today. The newest "remaster" however, is not any better in my opinion than the old CD release, maybe a little worse (and for that I have a theory why).

 

OTOH, we don't know how it would sound like if recorded today. But if one wants to compare something, David Gilmour's recent solo albums in hires certainly don't sound bad either.

 

The track echoes is available MCH and it's the best sounding (even played ST)

Link to comment

A simple way of looking at what is going on is this:

 

Digital allows the correct reproduction of types of recorded sound which vinyl may struggle with, purely because of the intrinsic limitations of that medium ... in fact, the vinyl, in an effort to convey the essence of the sound, will "round the edges" a bit, just to make sure that the message gets through.

 

Digital doesn't need to do this - which is why people perceive there to be so many "bad recordings" 😜 out there ... you're getting the full measure of what the mastering came up with.The big trouble has been all along that many, many playback rigs haven't "got the balls" to handle what is encoded - so the easy solution is to blame what can't be easily fixed ... the recording.

 

Which means, that digital will always do the better job - on a level playing field. The downside is that the engineering of the digital playback has to be of a higher standard, to accurately reproduce what was recorded, with no audible anomalies caused by the playback chain not being up to the task.

 

The more powerful the engine in a car, the more capable the tyres, the better the brakes have to be sorted, the more the suspension has to be finessed ... otherwise, any imbalance in capability of the parts only means uncomfortable, dangerous or even disastrous travelling ...

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...