Vinyl rules !!!!!

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by jdandy

Records are not immune to the loudness war, not by a long shot. It has been going on in the vinyl domain, as well. The technique of raising the softer sounds, and reducing the loudest sounds to achieve a higher audio impact across the board has been going on for a long time, and often is done to the analog signal at the mastering stage. Using a magnetic tape master that has had heavy gain riding and compression applied, the loudness war scurge, won't provide a better finished product sound just because the analog signal is transfered to vinyl. Vinyl, in and of itself, is no miracal recording medium. Tracking vinyl, with all of its physical limitations and mechanical necessities, is no assurance of audio nirvana, either.

Intentionally reduced dynamic range in the interest of loudness is a curse to all recorded music, in my opinion. Dynamic range that mimics reality is one of the goals to lifelike musical playback. There is little doubt the dynamic range capabilities of CD/SACD/XRCD exceed that of vinyl. 45 dB of dynamic range is considered excellent in vinyl, as is 30 dB of channel seperation during playback. One has to look at owning something like the Clearaudio Goldfinger phono cartridge ($10,000) to achieve a claimed 45 dB of channel seperation. The Clearaudio Stradivari ($3500) claims 30 dB of crosstalk. These numbers pale in comparison to 100 dB of dynamic range, and 98 dB of channel seperation typical of high-end digital audio players. Stereo music reproduction is as much about the absence of sound versus peak levels, as it is about frequency response and channel seperation. Limiting any of these criteria, individually or in unison, ultimately reduces the authenticity of the reproduction, and the listener's enjoyment.

Reproduction of music is never accurate to the original performance no matter what medium is chosen. That's why it is called a reproduction, and not live. Both mediums, vinyl and digital, have positives and negatives, and have their advocates and adversaries. Both mediums are far from perfect vehicles for delivering the sonic perfection that we quest. We can talk about pre-ringing, post ringing, jitter, and more when trying to explain why digial is inferoir to vinyl. We can talk about mistracking, inner groove distoration, arm resonance, arm/cartridge complience, rumble, wow and flutter, speed accuracy, dynamic range reduction, back ground noise levels, and the inheriently delicate nature of vinyl as a storage medium when we try to explain why vinyl is inferior to digital.

It boils down to personal preference. There is no right or wrong, simply a difference of opinion. Many embace both mediums of playback, and accept the shortcomings as simply part of the experience. Both playback mediums in there present configurations are flawed. If you want an absolutely perfect audio performance, hire Steely Dan, or Katie Melua to perform in your living room. There will be no loss of dynamics, no loudness wars, no pre-ringing or jitter, no mistracking, or wow and flutter, just pure unadulterated music. This hobby is about fun......remember?

Many valid points Dan. Like I said earlier, CDs are technically superior but that rarely equates to better listening enjoyment. No matter how much dynamic range it has, no matter how insignificant jitter or pre and post echo's are, you can't ignore what your ears are telling you. And mine as well as many others out there are hearing the same thing.

About dynamic range, an orchestra can easily reach a span of over 110dBs. Taking 35 to 40dB of ambient room noise and adding 110dB on top of that, good luck for your or anyone else's system to reproduce that. They don't record CDs with that much dynamic range anyways.

So here we are, CDs are able to accomodate more dynamic range but your system would not be able to reproduce it, if it did, the noise floor of the room would necessitate a much too loud for comfort peaks.

So in reality, it is not a great advantage after all. Yes, some vinyl has been loudness mastered but they can't get away with nearly the same amount, cartridges would not be able to track it. While CDs show clearly and intentionally clipped peaks. You don't hear too many complaints about vinyl but you do all the time with CDs.

Why is there such a vinyl push these days? Could it be that some analog rigs, tonearms and cartridges are much better given the modern designs making the vinyl experience the best it has ever been? I believe so...

I will continue to enjoy it while digital is catching up.

[PHC1]

Still hard for me to believe that some folks just can't hear how more natural vinyl sounds as compared to CD. Its not like I have a state of the art vinyl rig and a really crappy CDP. I can easily compare my current vinyl rig to the MCD1000/MDA1000 I used to have, the current CDP and many others I have owned and heard. I have also heard some top notch vinyl rigs and I don't need to say more....

[jdandy]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Many valid points Dan. Like I said earlier, CDs are technically superior but that rarely equates to better listening enjoyment. No matter how much dynamic range it has, no matter how insignificant jitter or pre and post echo's are, you can't ignore what your ears are telling you. And mine as well as many others out there are hearing the same thing.

About dynamic range, an orchestra can easily reach a span of over 110dBs. Taking 35 to 40dB of ambient room noise and adding 110dB on top of that, good luck for your or anyone else's system to reproduce that. They don't record CDs with that much dynamic range anyways.

So here we are, CDs are able to accomodate more dynamic range but your system would not be able to reproduce it, if it did, the noise floor of the room would necessitate a much too loud for comfort peaks.

So in reality, it is not a great advantage after all. Yes, some vinyl has been loudness mastered but they can't get away with nearly the same amount, cartridges would not be able to track it. While CDs show clearly and intentionally clipped peaks. You don't hear too many complaints about vinyl but you do all the time with CDs.

Why is there such a vinyl push these days? Could it be that some analog rigs, tonearms and cartridges are much better given the modern designs making the vinyl experience the best it has ever been? I believe so...

I will continue to enjoy it while digital is catching up.

Serge.......The difference in dynamic range between CD and vinyl is clearly audible to me, and my systems have no problem revealing the difference. When a drum kit is being worked by a good drummer, and has been well recorded, the impact of the dynamics on CD are far superior than on vinyl, at least to my ears. I can say the same about voices, which have great dynamic range, as well. I have a number of albums that I also have on CD, and find in almost every instance I prefer the CD to vinyl. To me, it is equally important what I find present on CD and absent on vinyl, as the other way around. I am not a vinyl adversary. A large part of my past audio history was sourced solely by vinyl for many years, and enjoyed completely. Your ears most certainly hear differently than mine. I am comfortable with that. There is nothing wrong with my hearing, either. We have differing attitudes.. Since hearing, and satisfaction are so personal, and extremely subjective, there really is not a right or wrong with respect to this subject.

I have nothing bad to say about anyone embracing vinyl playback. I still have my Micro Seiki turntable and two very nice moving magent cartridges. I play vinyl from time to time, and enjoy the experience. I much prefer listening to CD/SACD, though. Perhaps if I put $15K into a turntable and arm, $4K into a cartridge, $4K into a phono preamplifier, $2K into premium interconnects, and $2K into a record cleaning machine I might hear something that would elevate my interest, but I am not willing to make that kind of an investment in a vinyl playback system. Something tells me I would still prefer digital playback.

There may be a vinyl push, but total sales volume of vinyl doesn't show it to be taking over. Album sales are a fraction of digital sales. It is a niche market at best. As long as the companies involved in making turntables, phono cartridges, and albums see the ability to turn a profit they will continue to try to make the sale. Publications that garner profit from these same industries will continue to tout the wares. Certainly, there have been technological advances in turntables, arms and cartridges, and no doubt these improvements have increased owner satisfaction. If it sounds good to you, that's all that matters.

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by jdandy

Serge.......The difference in dynamic range between CD and vinyl is clearly audible to me, and my systems have no problem revealing the difference. When a drum kit is being worked by a good drummer, and has been well recorded, the impact of the dynamics on CD are far superior than on vinyl, at least to my ears. I can say the same about voices, which have great dynamic range, as well. I have a number of albums that I also have on CD, and find in almost every instance I prefer the CD to vinyl. To me, it is equally important what I find present on CD and absent on vinyl, as the other way around. I am not a vinyl adversary. A large part of my past audio history was sourced solely by vinyl for many years, and enjoyed completely. Your ears most certainly hear differently than mine. I am comfortable with that. There is nothing wrong with my hearing, either. We have differing attitudes.. Since hearing, and satisfaction are so personal, and extremely subjective, there really is not a right or wrong with respect to this subject.

I have nothing bad to say about anyone embracing vinyl playback. I still have my Micro Seiki turntable and two very nice moving magent cartridges. I play vinyl from time to time, and enjoy the experience. I much prefer listening to CD/SACD, though. Perhaps if I put $15K into a turntable and arm, $4K into a cartridge, $4K into a phono preamplifier, $2K into premium interconnects, and $2K into a record cleaning machine I might hear something that would elevate my interest, but I am not willing to make that kind of an investment in a vinyl playback system. Something tells me I would still prefer digital playback.

There may be a vinyl push, but total sales volume of vinyl doesn't show it to be taking over. Album sales are a fraction of digital sales. It is a niche market at best. As long as the companies involved in making turntables, phono cartridges, and albums see the ability to turn a profit they will continue to try to make the sale. Publications that garner profit from these same industries will continue to tout the wares. Certainly, there have been technological advances in turntables, arms and cartridges, and no doubt these improvements have increased owner satisfaction. If it sounds good to you, that's all that matters.

Sorry Dan, my Clearaudio Maestro Wood cartridge mounted on my rig was just a bit superior to any CD, the Dynavector XX2MKII simply crushes the CD playback with the drumwork. Not only is the bass a lot less dry and fuller, it is also simply there fleshed out and anchored to the floor... right in front of me, big, bold, analog quality bass. Like it sounds in real life.

That's what I meant when I said that vinyl is a much more tweaky media. From turntable to tonearm to cartridge and setup, phonostage, it will all sound different. I am ecstatic what I hear from my analog rig. You should be able to clearly hear the difference. CD playback is not, if you hear a substantial difference between different CDPs, count your lucky stars.

If you are ever in the area, do drop by. You will leave a believer.

[Masterlu]

Wow, things are warming up in here...

[PHC1]

Jim, for you... The definitive guide to 24-bit FLAC – Bowers and Wilkins Blogs

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by PHC1

The fact that vinyl mastered from digital sounds edgy, glary and harsh only underlines the fact that it the digital nasties do not go away once introduced into the process. Its just the nature of the beast.

No doubt digital will still keep evolving and maybe someday it will be impossible to tell at all. I sure hope so. It is no doubt a much less tweaky media and more convinient once placed into music servers, PCs, etc.. In the mean time I listen to both but really enjoy the vinyl for its more natural sound that is rich, dynamic and musical to my ears.

Your presumption that digital nasties are always there is not a fact nor are they always introduced into the original process. You can have a well recorded digital track just as easy as you can have a well recorded master tape, and without the potential issues of noise floor or hiss.

I fully understand what how a digital recording needs to produce an analog like curve, but your graph makes it look like a 16 bit 44.1k cannot generate a smooth curve and that is not correct.

[PHC1]

Dan, you are a bit off on the dynamic range of vinyl by the way.

"The dynamic range of vinyl, when evaluated as a the ratio of a peak sinusoudal amplitude to the peak noise density at that sine wave frequency, is somewhere around 80db."

[PHC1]

Ok, this is funny, I just asked my wife who is not an audiophile and is unbiased. She does have a musical ear and plays the piano though. I was curious what a non-audiophile would think. "Which sounds better, CDs or when I play records". She answers "Records"... So I asked her "why"? She said records sound purer in tone and punchier...

[Masterlu]

Originally Posted by PHC1

Ok, this is funny, I just asked my wife who is not an audiophile and is unbiased. She does have a musical ear and plays the piano though. I was curious what a non-audiophile would think. "Which sounds better, CDs or when I play records". She answers "Records"... So I asked her "why"? She said records sound purer in tone and punchier...

That settles it, then it must be true.