LPs Mastered from Digital Sources

[Scott Dolan]

Yeah, that particular point was somewhat dubious, but whatever. I personally can't hear that particular difference, but you know as well as I do some claim they can. And I've seen Foobar2000 results that make a compelling argument that some can hear a difference.

Then, I've seen results that say the opposite.

[bogdan101]

First of all, please show me where I EVER said LP's sound worse than CD's.

Please re-read this post from earlier in the thread.

What I'm telling you now is that what "sounds better" to you is the even/second order harmonics inherent in analogue recordings/playback. That, my friend, is distortion. I love how you ignore almost the entirety of that article to point out one small comparison briefly mentioned three quarters of the way through. Did you happen to catch anything other than that? You know, like the 18 other paragraphs out of the 21 total?

Look, you prefer the sound of LP's. Fine. But, let's stop playing make believe that they are superior to CD's in resolution and accuracy. They are not.

" Vinyl is physically limited by the fact that records have to be capable of being played without skipping or causing distortion. That both limits the dynamic range — the difference between the loudest and softest note — and the range of pitches (or "frequencies") you can hear.

If notes get too low in pitch, that means less audio can fit in a given amount of vinyl. If notes are too high, the stylus has difficulty tracking them, causing distortion. So engineers mastering for vinyl often cut back on extreme high or low ends, using a variety of methods, all of which alter the music."

Sorry, my mistake; you said neither is superior to the other. The problem with arguing about the specifications of vinyl vs. cd is that psychoacoustics is far from having a firm grasp of how these specs translate ultimately into our listening experience. So my question is, your conclusion that vinyl and cd are not really superior to one another, is it based on your own listening or on the paper specs of vinyl vs. cd?

Here's another view based on listening:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/accuracy-not-answer

Let's not argue about the title of that, I think it's a poor choice of words

Edit: and some of the comments are interesting.

Edited August 25, 2014 by bogdan101

[Scott Dolan]

Listening.

I couldn't care less what numbers are drummed up in a lab. They're only useful when pointing out that either side that claims superiority is full of shit. The tech specs lean digital, but so what? It's not like it's a runaway.

I prefer the cold, hard accuracy of digital vs. the fuzzed-up "warmth" of LP's. If something isn't accurate, that only leaves one option...

[bogdan101]

Listening.

I couldn't care less what numbers are drummed up in a lab. They're only useful when pointing out that either side that claims superiority is full of shit. The tech specs lean digital, but so what? It's not like it's a runaway.

I prefer the cold, hard accuracy of digital vs. the fuzzed-up "warmth" of LP's. If something isn't accurate, that only leaves one option...

I agree that the only proof is in the listening, that's why I was asking about your analog vs. digital signal chain. For one, I would not describe as "fuzzed up warmth" what I hear on a good LP. I'd say more weight, more realistic sound, better spatial reference and better ability to resolve layered sounds.

Like I said, since i upgraded my digital rig to the Oppo 105, cd playback is much better, especially in the higher frequencies. My biggest complaint right now is about cd mastering, which in general sucks. A two-eye Columbia "Kind Of Blue" from the 60's blows out of the water the Columbia cd reissue I have, and I'm sure the biggest part of that is poor mastering.

[bogdan101]

Here is a comparison test done by Steve Hoffman (and no, I'm not a Hoffmaniac, I have been banned on that forum):

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/what-sounds-just-like-the-master-tape-cd-vinyl-sacd-or-an-open-reel-tape-copy.133328/

[Scott Dolan]

Whatever you hear is fine with me. My only issue was with you claiming LP's were better and that it "wasn't close".

I look at it as a difference between a luxury car and a sports car. Both are capable and basically do the same thing. But, one is suited to be a luxurious experience, whereas the other is just a stripped down and raw experience.

Tip of the cap for a living room on wheels, I've driven them before and enjoyed them immensely. But, at the end of the day I want it to just be me and the machine.

And I no longer have a turntable, and got rid of my albums about a decade ago. My system is 100% digital. Mostly Emotiva (preamp, amp, DAC), mated to a Velodyne sub and Dynaudio X12 mains.

[bogdan101]

Whatever you hear is fine with me. My only issue was with you claiming LP's were better and that it "wasn't close".

That was a specific case of LP vs.CD where it "wasn't close", and I strongly suspect that mastering was the issue.

[Scott Dolan]

I would think so. As long as you have consistent quality throughout your playback chain, mastering inequalities will be the only reason you'd hear that definitive a difference.

[Chuck Nessa]

One can configure hardware or software to make anything sound superior.

[etherbored]

equals remastering...

[Teasing the Korean]

I should add that, beyond the analog/digital issue, there are a number of reasons I avoid contemporary LPs, including off-center pressings, warpage, and excessive sibilance. I've had too much bad luck with recent-ish LPs.

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Here is a comparison test done by Steve Hoffman (and no, I'm not a Hoffmaniac, I have been banned on that forum):

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/what-sounds-just-like-the-master-tape-cd-vinyl-sacd-or-an-open-reel-tape-copy.133328/

I hope you're aware that this thread was created when Steve Hoffman started a reissue project that involved him cutting new LPs. Before this thread, he had another thread that declared SACD as the best representative of the master tape. When this thread first started out, a few people quoted his old thread. Now that old thread and all references to it have been erased.

I wish I could change my posting history like that.

[Stefan Wood]

Steve Hoffman is just plain annoying. He has done some good work, but I wouldn't take his word as gospel. He's as much influenced by trends as anyone else.

[Head Man]

Steve Hoffman.......... is as much influenced by trends as anyone else.

More than most.... he makes a living from it.

[bogdan101]

Here is a comparison test done by Steve Hoffman (and no, I'm not a Hoffmaniac, I have been banned on that forum):

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/what-sounds-just-like-the-master-tape-cd-vinyl-sacd-or-an-open-reel-tape-copy.133328/

I hope you're aware that this thread was created when Steve Hoffman started a reissue project that involved him cutting new LPs. Before this thread, he had another thread that declared SACD as the best representative of the master tape. When this thread first started out, a few people quoted his old thread. Now that old thread and all references to it have been erased.

I wish I could change my posting history like that.

Hmm, I didn't know that, but somehow it does not surprise me...

[bogdan101]

I should add that, beyond the analog/digital issue, there are a number of reasons I avoid contemporary LPs, including off-center pressings, warpage, and excessive sibilance. I've had too much bad luck with recent-ish LPs.

Also the analogue reissues tend to be more carefully produced, including the pressing quality. The problems you mention have been with vinyl all along, and I would add bumps in the grooves, which I always find in the used bins but not so much on new pressings.

[Scott Dolan]

I never had a run in with Dear Leader during my short stay on his board, but man oh man, there are some incredibly delusional cats over there.

[Teasing the Korean]

The problems you mention have been with vinyl all along, and I would add bumps in the grooves, which I always find in the used bins but not so much on new pressings.

Yes, but they have been more prevalent in recent years, at least in my experience. I truly believe that some of these pressing plants and mastering engineers do not know what they are doing.

[Stefan Wood]

Has a new pressing plant been made in thirty - forty years?

[Teasing the Korean]

Has a new pressing plant been made in thirty - forty years?

I don't know, but new humans who work in them certainly have. God knows what they do when parts wear out or break, assuming anyone would notice.

[Leeway]

Has a new pressing plant been made in thirty - forty years?

I hink a lot of pressings are coming out of Eastern Europe and Russia, so in that sense there are a lot of new sources of vinyl. Very very variable quality.

[Big Beat Steve]

Has a new pressing plant been made in thirty - forty years?

I hink a lot of pressings are coming out of Eastern Europe and Russia, so in that sense there are a lot of new sources of vinyl. Very very variable quality.

Knowing a couple of niche-market vinyl producers and issuers, I can partially confirm that. New pressing plants (geared towards those niche markeds, including small pressing runs) have sprung up in comparatively recent years in Germany (NOT Eastern Europe) and the Czech Republic (Eastern Europe), and they are delivering good quality. But you have to select your plants carefully, so I am told.

[clifford_thornton]

NoBusiness uses a pressing plant in Lithuania (where they're based) and the pressings are really, really good (even if I'm not always a superfan of the mastering jobs).