Another reason why so many of us still love vinyl

[DTB300]

[ The so called superior dynamic range of digital hype is just that.

Wow...what a very general, complete blanket statement you have made...

First you need to talk with Michael Bishop of Telarc and inform him of the limitations you say exist.....

"In the "old days," a tremendous effort was made to fit the dynamic range of our digital sources onto the lacquer master and still have the resulting vinyl pressing be able to play at all. DSD and multi-channel SACD have pretty much removed most of the obstacles between what we record and what the home listener can experience"

Second talk to some of the people more in the know:

"I found it to be the vinyl (not analog) format *itself*. All but the very best arms/cartridges can track the demands of, for example, the Fischer Mahler 2nd, without audible distortion or flat out mis-tracking. So, the vinyl industry itself compressed the climaxes on recordings to that the "average Joe" could cope. You can *hear* the compression on many vinyl recording. All one has to do is look at the vinyl itself; in non-audiophile recordings it is easy to see the compression of the grooves during the loudest pages."

Both formats have their issues, both can sound great, and both can sound poor. Listen to the format you like and move on with life and stop the blanket generalizations.

 

[risabet]

Wow...what a very general, complete blanket statement you have made...

First you need to talk with Michael Bishop of Telarc and inform him of the limitations you say exist.....

"In the "old days," a tremendous effort was made to fit the dynamic range of our digital sources onto the lacquer master and still have the resulting vinyl pressing be able to play at all. DSD and multi-channel SACD have pretty much removed most of the obstacles between what we record and what the home listener can experience"

I defy any home listener to utilize the theoretical 96dB dynamic range of a CD, higher on SACD or DVD-A. Assuming a background noise level of 20dB, which would be quite low; 40dB would be more common, would have peak levels of 116dBs in room. It is possible in the same scenario to utilize the 65dB range of vinyl as one could get 85 dB peaks in room. Even with the more realistic room level minimum in urban settings of 40dB vinyl will only generate peaks of 105dB or about the max forte of a large symphony orchestra. Usable dynamic range is more important than actual. Keep in mind that vinyl will resolve sounds beneath the noise floor so you are actually looking at a DR of 70 to 75db for the best vinyl. Analog tape will record a DR of 100db w/o NR at 30 ips.

Second talk to some of the people more in the know:

"I found it to be the vinyl (not analog) format *itself*. All but the very best arms/cartridges can track the demands of, for example, the Fischer Mahler 2nd, without audible distortion or flat out mis-tracking. So, the vinyl industry itself compressed the climaxes on recordings to that the "average Joe" could cope. You can *hear* the compression on many vinyl recording. All one has to do is look at the vinyl itself; in non-audiophile recordings it is easy to see the compression of the grooves during the loudest pages."

No doubt that a mid-fi system has trouble tracking some of the hottest cut discs but we aren't really in the "Average Joe" category are we? I've yet to find a disc that can't be tracked save the Telarc 1812 Overture, which is a lame performance so no great loss. Many current reissues are cut with minimal compression, especially 45 rpm discs. You can definitely hear some gain riding on classic Mercury's and RCA's but that was for 1950's/60's technology, not a modern cartridge and arm, set up properly, that can basically track any album made, save the Telarc above.

Both formats have their issues, both can sound great, and both can sound poor. Listen to the format you like and move on with life and stop the blanket generalizations.

Yep!

 

[DTB300]

I defy any home listener to utilize the theoretical 96dB dynamic range of a CD, higher on SACD or DVD-A.

And while a specific format can do something, does not mean it is either utilized in the recording process or can be used by a home system. But having the ability of MCH for SACD gives the home user more chance to reach that dynamic range level - if the recording allows it. Here is more on the subject from Bishop.

"Additionally, you are correct in saying that MCH can handle extreme dynamics with more ease than the typical stereo system simply because of the vast audio real estate that carries and plays back the signal. We're not forcing five gallons of sound through a 2-gallon container."

Notice he says.. "can handle"...but it does not mean the end user can appreciate it unless their setup is geared towards it.

Again each format has the ability to put out some great sonics, but the setup must be able to fully utilize it to fully appreciate it.

No doubt that a mid-fi system has trouble tracking some of the hottest cut discs but we aren't really in the "Average Joe" category are we?

But I bet they are cut to a certain point knowing the limitations, otherwise it is a worthless release which does not sell and make money, just complaints by the end users. But notice the quote I posted stated: "All but the very best arms/cartridges can track the demands of..." so they were not talking about the mid-fi systems, but some of the top vinyl setups and setups which people really know what they are doing in terms or setup.

As you stated, most of us here are not the average joe in terms of our setups and expertise.

 

[CLS2ASTAT]

Thanks Risabet for expounding on this issue. Btw, I spoke with Doug Sax("a person in the know"), of The Mastering Lab regarding this very topic. His comments were as follows:

"Certainly the formats of SACD and 96/24 offer more musical abilities than the "Redbook" CD. The only digital that feels like it really has got there is the best implementation 192/24. But remember, these are only bigger and better canvases. The real art is in creating the painting".

 

[DTB300]

Thanks Risabet for expounding on this issue. Btw, I spoke with Doug Sax("a person in the know"), of The Mastering Lab regarding this very topic. His comments were as follows:

"Certainly the formats of SACD and 96/24 offer more musical abilities than the "Redbook" CD. The only digital that feels like it really has got there is the best implementation 192/24. But remember, these are only bigger and better canvases. The real art is in creating the painting".

Dynamic range ability is not HYPE...it is there, it is how well it is used or not, as you quoted Doug. I would consider Bishop as another person in the know. BTW, very cool to be able to talk with Doug....

Trouble in our fine hobby is the hype and marketing poop thrown at all of us for all sources, equipment, tweaks, and on and on. It is our job to try to filter through it all and find stuff we enjoy for the music and not the hype.

So I see Doug admits to the better abilities as does Michael. It does not mean all engineers use it to the best of its abilities. But I completely agree with Doug, first get a great master made, then knowing the medium one is doing the recording for create the final product.

 

[Jeff Zaret]

All of this debate is fine and all of us here , as Dan stated are at different levels of opinions and expertise, but I think the underlying comment Doug Sax was really alluding to is not only the recording process but the music itself. Lets be honest about this, not matter how good or how bad the recording, overall processing is/was, and on what type of medium it was done on will really not matter at all, if the performance is just a "flaming piece of crap".

Jeff

 

[Rich]

Btw, I spoke with Doug Sax("a person in the know"), of The Mastering Lab regarding this very topic. His comments were as follows:

"Certainly the formats of SACD and 96/24 offer more musical abilities than the "Redbook" CD. The only digital that feels like it really has got there is the best implementation 192/24. But remember, these are only bigger and better canvases. The real art is in creating the painting".

This is all very well and good. But his comments refer to the greater resolution of SACD, etc. over normal CD, which is not really the same topic as dynamic range compression and the inherent differences in dynamic range between formats, so I am not sure how relevant it is to this discussion. He may be correct that the real art is in "creating the painting" but unfortunately many engineers today subscribe to the Jackson ******* school of painting. Lots of great music is being butchered by compressing the dynamics until the life is clipped out of the music.

 

[DTB300]

All of this debate is fine and all of us here , as Dan stated are at different levels of opinions and expertise, but I think the underlying comment Doug Sax was really alluding to is not only the recording process but the music itself. Lets be honest about this, not matter how good or how bad the recording, overall processing is/was, and on what type of medium it was done on will really not matter at all, if the performance is just a "flaming piece of crap"

Thanks for jumping in here Jeff to expound with your expertise on this issue... Very well said.

This is all very well and good. But his comments refer to the greater resolution of SACD, etc. over normal CD, which is not really the same topic as dynamic range compression and the inherent differences in dynamic range between formats, so I am not sure how relevant it is to this discussion.

Rich, it was just a way of addressing my Bishop and quote from people using/recording vinyl and their experiences with it. Guess the messenger got killed....not too worry...flak jacket on...keep 'em coming...

Lots of great music is being butchered by compressing the dynamics until the life is clipped out of the music.

Yes it is unfortunate that some of the most popular music out there suffers from the compression tactics. Vinyl has it, digital has it, and it is too bad it has too happen.

 

[twich54]

Back to my original theard "Topic Tiltle", I thought I'd share a good quote from Shelby Lynne......"you can't roll a joint on an I-Pod, buy vinyl" !

 

[DTB300]

Back to my original theard "Topic Tiltle", I thought I'd share a good quote from Shelby Lynne......"you can't roll a joint on an I-Pod, buy vinyl" !

But the seeds which get stuck in the grooves are a pain....That is why they made record cleaners...

 

[Jeff Zaret]

Isn't that what album covers were for?

LOL

Jeff

 

[slowGEEZR]

Ha ha. That's what I was going to say!

 

[DTB300]

Good to see a couple of people are paying attention... For the others, put down your Hookah hose.....step away from the Lava Lamp and quit playing songs backwards....

 

[Gordon Gray]

Hi guys,

Interesting thread. One thing I don't believe I've read is the hardware side of the equation. By this, I mean the systems ability to respond "quickly" to a large dynamic swing.

Anectodally, I suspect we've all had components that sounded "slow" after you hear a replacement that has a quicker rise time response, thereby allowing one to more clearly distinguish a gain in dynamic range and the relative difference between ppp (lowest volume passages) and fff (highest volume passages) within any particular recording, be it vinyl or CD.

I believe this involves not only the inherent "noise floor" of your system, but all the things the initial source can transmit (the speed of dynamic contrasts) as well as everything else the source signal "travels through" before it reaches the speakers. And then there is the question of the actual "speed" of the transducer.

I'm sure you have had folks that have never heard an ML speaker, and once they have, will invariably say how the music sounds "quick". I believe this is one inherent advantage of the ML's as well as other, non traditional transducers.

Another example is an overly damped room, which will likely sound perceptively slower, and therefore less dynamic, that a somewhat live room.

Bottom line for me is the system's ability to quickly transmit the differences between ppp and fff for the available dynamic contrast that exists on any particular recording, regardless of the medium.

GG

 

[risabet]

Isn't that what album covers were for?

LOL

Jeff

Bob Marley thought so and wrote on Rastaman Vibration "This album jacket is great for cleaning herb." Jah Ras Tafari!

 

[the-chauffeur]

And as if any further justification were needed for keeping the vinyl fires burning...

300+ classical albums (90% of which are NM or unplayed) for £1. Thanks eBay.

Now all I gotta work out is how to sort them...

 

[Bernard]

300+ classical albums (90% of which are NM or unplayed) for £1. Thanks eBay.

Now all I gotta work out is how to sort them...

You lucky devil !

 

[MiTT]

Yeah, I don't even know him, but I kind of hate him....

Just kidding of course, sounds like a MAJOR score. Good for you and happy listening.