Jump to content

LPs Mastered from Digital Sources


Teasing the Korean

Recommended Posts

I am quite sure that the vast, vast majority of the overpriced vinyl reissues that we're seeing these days are mastered from digital sources. (I realize that there may be exceptions, like the 45 rpm audiophile albums.)

I have always bought and loved vinyl, but aside from the currently-in-vogue vinyl fetish, what is the point of these digital LP releases? It seems to me that you are getting the drawbacks of both platforms and the advantages of neither.

Now, I suppose you could argue that with a CD or digital file, you have a digital source and digital playback, whereas with a contemporary LP you have a digital source and "analog" playback, but is there really a difference?

It would be one thing if these were priced at $5.98 like the OJC reissues of the past, but given that these go for between $30 and $50 a throw, it seems silly to me.

What are your thoughts?

Edited by Teasing the Korean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I suppose that a vinyl mastered from a high rez or a DSD file should sound better then a cd, but not better then a high rez or a sacd played at full rez with a streaming player, but I think the elements in the game are too many, an all analog mastering doesn't secure nothing more then a what it is, an all analog mastering, without securing a better sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it sounds like there are a lot of factors involved in why a digitally sourced LP may or may not sound better, as good, or worse. One link in the chain changes everything.

Certainly not worth my stressing about, especially considering how cheap used CDs are these days.

Edited by Teasing the Korean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose that a vinyl mastered from a high rez or a DSD file should sound better then a cd...

In theory, I guess. Unfortunately, high resolution sounds no better than good, old-fashioned 16/44.1 Redbook audio.

Actually I suppose, never compared, and I will not do it in the future, I am pretty satisfied of my cds...and pretty enthusiast of my Lps.

Edited by porcy62
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always bought and loved vinyl, but aside from the currently-in-vogue vinyl fetish, what is the point of these digital LP releases? It seems to me that you are getting the drawbacks of both platforms and the advantages of neither.

You hit the nail on the head. Most new vinyl I come across sounds terrible, but there are exceptions. A good rule of thumb is if the label isn't forthcoming about sourcing, mastering, etc., you are likely getting iTunes on a vinyl platter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always bought and loved vinyl, but aside from the currently-in-vogue vinyl fetish, what is the point of these digital LP releases? It seems to me that you are getting the drawbacks of both platforms and the advantages of neither.

You hit the nail on the head. Most new vinyl I come across sounds terrible, but there are exceptions. A good rule of thumb is if the label isn't forthcoming about sourcing, mastering, etc., you are likely getting iTunes on a vinyl platter.

Which would sound no different than CD to 99.99% of the populace.

No vinyl is better than CD/digital snobbery, please. It's fine to prefer one over the other, but let's not descend into fooling yourselves that either is superior. And let's please bury the myth of iTunes somehow offering an inferior product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article has a point in that information from companies putting out vinyl reissues is sometimes misleading or nonexistent regarding sources and mastering. However, it is misleading in itself when the author comes to the conclusion that a certain LP must be mastered from a CD because it sounds so bad.

I agree with Porcy's post, while I also share Scott's scepticism when it comes to hi-rez formats. At the risk of sounding like a corrupted digital file, I advice anyone truly interested in finding out the merits of an audio format to organize a double blindfold test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which would sound no different than CD to 99.99% of the populace.

No vinyl is better than CD/digital snobbery, please. It's fine to prefer one over the other, but let's not descend into fooling yourselves that either is superior. And let's please bury the myth of iTunes somehow offering an inferior product.

To be clear, I like both vinyl (analog) and CDs (digital), and can objectively appreciate the advantages and disadvantages of both.

The impetus for my post is that I suspect that many of these overpriced vinyl reissues use basic digital sources, meaning that you get the disadvantages of both. So I would rather have either a CD or an analog LP, not a digital LP.

Edited by Teasing the Korean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries, brother. My post was meant strictly for Mr. Clugston and his unnecessary sideswipe of iTunes.

Reminds me of the time not so long ago when I challenged folks to compare a CD track to the same at the iTunes standard format (256kbps VBR AAC), and Mr. Lowe took me up on it. Even with his gear and ears he said it was to close to call. And in fairness, Daniel A feels that evidence points to 320kbps being the real point of diminished returns. Fair enough (and apologies to Mr. A if I'm not representing his view correctly). It's a point that I don't feel is necessary to argue since I can't hear the difference at the lower sampling rate while also taking into account I have mild to moderate tinnitus AND 44 y.o. ears.

I honestly believe people have too many misconceptions concerning digital audio, much of it based on the horrid 96kbps MP3's that dominated during the Napster revolution. Yes, they definitely did NOT sound as good as 16/44.1 Redbook. But, the modern codecs are so advanced these days that one has to ask the age old question, "is it live, or is it Memorex?" (why not show our age a little? ;) )

I also whole-heartedly agree with your assessment that both LP and CD have their advantages and limitations. Those strengths and weaknesses leave them both at even money, IMO. It's an over-generalization, but CD's will give you the cleanest reproduction (warts and all), while LP's will present a more pleasurable listening experience. Hey, there's something to be said for second order harmonics.

But, I'm still kinda dubious as to why a LP produced from a digital master is problematic. As was mentioned above, I'd have to think the only weak link in that chain would be the DAC. Then again, unless it were some back alley company using a $100 DAC, I'm not sure why it would make a difference. Is there something else in this that I'm missing?

Edited by Scott Dolan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the article. They basically identified the labels that are transparent in identifying their sources and the ones that are not:

Transparent:

"We do get it from certain labels, like Mobile Fidelity, ORG, ORG Music, Analogue Productions, Music Matters, IMPEX, Mosaic, Rhino, Pure Pleasure, Speakers Corner, Reference Recordings, more recently Sony/Legacy and probably a few others I can't recall off the top of my head."

Less transparent:

"These include Doxy (not Sonny Rollins' label—apparently there's another one using the same name), ZYX from Germany, Vinyl Lovers, Simply Vinyl and Abraxas."

If you are paying say $10.99 and the re-issue label is not identified, sure, you may be rolling the dice. But the transparent ones usually go to great lengths to explain how they do things. I really don't think this is a big problem among reasonably informed buyers. Certainly the vast majority of "overpriced" jazz reissues come from these very labels.

Edited by Eric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my little comparison between two versions of "Duke Ellington and John Coltrane", one being the all analogue 45rpm Analogue Productions vinyl, and the other the latest Impulse reissue on CD (the one in the box set). The vinyl was better sounding, and it wasn't close.

Edited by bogdan101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, I'm still kinda dubious as to why a LP produced from a digital master is problematic. As was mentioned above, I'd have to think the only weak link in that chain would be the DAC. Then again, unless it were some back alley company using a $100 DAC, I'm not sure why it would make a difference. Is there something else in this that I'm missing?

Well, if it's a digital source, I think I'd rather have it in a digital medium. But that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the main reasons I stopped buying CDs and started buying LPs again is compression/digital limiting/brickwalling that takes place on most CDs released these days.

I could have bought the latest Black Sabbath album on CD, but then I would be stuck with 5db of dynamic range...whereas the LP version has 11db of dynamic range and sounds MUCH better because of it.

That to me is more than enough justification for buying the LP instead.

Edited by Shawn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the main reasons I stopped buying CDs and started buying LPs again is compression/digital limiting/brickwalling that takes place on most CDs released these days.

Interesting. Does that mostly happen on rock/pop records, or does it extend to other music?

It extends to other forms, though I've primarily been purchasing rock albums for the past several years.

Some other recent examples:

That great Sound City documentary about the legendary Los Angeles recording studio? The CD was squashed to 6db of dynamic range, the LP has 12db of dynamic range.

The entire Opeth catalog (aside from Heritage and Pale Communion) is squashed beyond belief, in almost every case the LP has more than double the dynamic range of the CD.

This website is invaluable: http://dr.loudness-war.info

Another recent release: Deep Purple's Now What. CD has 6db of dynamic range, LP has 11db of dynamic range.

It's not just LPs either, check out these numbers comparing the CD release of Tom Petty's Hypnotic Eye with the hi-res versions...

CD = 6db

Blu-ray = 13db

HDtracks = 13db

Edited by Shawn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, I'm still kinda dubious as to why a LP produced from a digital master is problematic. As was mentioned above, I'd have to think the only weak link in that chain would be the DAC. Then again, unless it were some back alley company using a $100 DAC, I'm not sure why it would make a difference. Is there something else in this that I'm missing?

Well, if it's a digital source, I think I'd rather have it in a digital medium. But that's just me.

Same here. I generally avoid new vinyl issues unless it's clear regarding source used and overall sound quality of the product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my little comparison between two versions of "Duke Ellington and John Coltrane", one being the all analogue 45rpm Analogue Productions vinyl, and the other the latest Impulse reissue on CD (the one in the box set). The vinyl was better sounding, and it wasn't close.

It's this kind of hyperbole that amuses me.

What you mean to say is that you like a little harmonic distortion to "warm" up the sound. That's fine, I love the way records sound as well. But calling it "not close" is absolutely absurd.

Might as well say I prefer the cherry Koolaid over the grape, and it's not even close! Sure, they taste different, but they're both still Koolaid.

I'll take the cold accuracy of digital any day. But even I'm not silly enough to say it's a runaway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done my little comparison between two versions of "Duke Ellington and John Coltrane", one being the all analogue 45rpm Analogue Productions vinyl, and the other the latest Impulse reissue on CD (the one in the box set). The vinyl was better sounding, and it wasn't close.

You should have compared against the Analogue Productions hybrid SACD. Both were mastered by Kevin Gray. That is also far better sounding than the recent Impulse CD.

It's all in the mastering.

Edited by erwbol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...