Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Playback Forum => Topic started by: Nick's Picks on October 25, 2006, 04:22:57 PM
-
lets suppose a release is mastered VERY well.....,
will it sound just as good on CD as LP ?
why/why not?
-
my belief (based on no actual real world experience since i do not have a turntable) is that a well mastered recording will sound better on a high end turntable than on a high-end cd player due to the nature of the technology. digital mastering at 44,100 samples per second simply cannot properly replicate the nuances of a pure analog curve. high-res audio such as 24/96 dvd-a and DSD come much closer to replicating the analog curve.
edit to clarify what i mean, using someone else's work (http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/analog-digital3.htm)
here is an analog curve:
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cd-sample0.gif)
by the binary nature of the digital realm, the exact contours of the analog curve must be approximated. with a low sampling rate, it can only approximate the curve at certain intervals, like here:
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cd-sample2.gif)
as the sample rate increases, the curve is approximated more times over the course of a unit of time, allowing the digital reproduction to get closer and closer to the analog curve, like here:
(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/cd-sample3.gif)
cd audio is limited by the size of the media as to how many times it can sample (higher sample rates=more data). whenever they chose 44.1khz as the sample rate, they chose a compromise of sound quality versus convenience, for better or worse.
-
ok..
but Mastering to 16/44 is not the issue.
mastering to analog, say 1/2 reel or something, and then going A>D for CD vs. same original master pressed to LP.
and now lets say entry level turn table vs. good CD player in the 1-2K range.
-
ok..
but Mastering to 16/44 is not the issue.
mastering to analog, say 1/2 reel or something, and then going A>D for CD vs. same original master pressed to LP.
I'm not sure if i follow what you mean here (which suggests i might have misinterpreted your original question).
and now lets say entry level turn table vs. good CD player in the 1-2K range.
I'm not sure the answer here, to be honest, since i haven't really done much vinyl listening.
-
I'm pretty sure that even though LP sits in the audiophiles holy grail territory of analog, that LPs come with their own set of problems. I forget exactly how this works, but there are sounds that when mixed together are very hard to reproduce on LP whereas in the digital realm its not much of an issue. I think therefore if one were mastering for LP vs. CD, you might actually mix/master differently. But, I'm not sure...
-
David Gilmour's 'On an Island' sounds very decent on CD, but not so good on LP - not sure why, and would like to know.
-
lets suppose a release is mastered VERY well.....,
will it sound just as good on CD as LP ?
why/why not?
The analog recording will sound better with vinyl playback, provided the record is cut properly. There is nothing to gain from taking an analog-mastered recording and converting it to digital for playback when analog playback is available. The fine details that analog does so well get quantified out of existence with CDs. I think vinyl sources of digital recordings will still generally sound better than a CD, but the difference is not quite as significant. Occasionally, the CD will get lucky and sound better than the vinyl source. I bought "Coltrane" on a Jazz Impulse reissue LP and thought the CD had better overall sound. Maybe 1 in 10 CD's might compare favorably to a new LP. It mostly depends on who is actually cutting the record.
A solid entry level table like the Rega P1 playing a good piece of vinyl will sound better than a $1k-$2k cd player. A $1000 turntable like the P3 will make you hate Sony and Philips for what they've done to professionally recorded music. I think the next recorder we buy will be an open reel deck that does at least 15 ips.
Dale has the ABB 12/31/73 radio show on the original radio station LPs. We're going to do a vinyl transfer when we get the P5 turntable in. This project almost makes me want the ad1000 back.
Chris
-
It is a different sound as much as anything. While you get more liquidity and a "smoother" sound you trade signal to noise. In high end audio circles the key in a good table is the ability to "extract" the music from the record. Analogue tape used in mastering is similar. You will trade warmth for noise. Will it sound beter? potentialy. Once it is converted to the digital realm it doesn't matter if it started on Analogue or digital.. the transfer will be far more important. Really there are 2 formats that will give you the best results but which is better is really a matter of opinion. Direct to LP mastering or full DSD mastering. Pick up any gear head audio mag and you will hear this debate over and over ad nausium.
-
Direct to LP mastering or full DSD mastering. Pick up any gear head audio mag and you will hear this debate over and over ad nausium.
indeed...
-
The only a/b I have done is with Tool's Undertow album. Last night I listened to both and the vinyl is much more open and the highs are airy and more extended. I think the openess of the recording, increased dynamics, and highs are the biggest difference. I now see why Carl had to go with that $$$$ DAC. I'm using the same Onkyo SP-1000. At $1700, the Rega P3/Elys combo smokes it given well done vinyl.
-
The only a/b I have done is with Tool's Undertow album. Last night I listened to both and the vinyl is much more open and the highs are airy and more extended. I think the openess of the recording, increased dynamics, and highs are the biggest difference. I now see why Carl had to go with that $$$$ DAC. I'm using the same Onkyo SP-1000. At $1700, the Rega P3/Elys combo smokes it given well done vinyl.
What a great fucking album to listen to on vinyl. Thats at #2 on my favorites list.
-
lets suppose a release is mastered VERY well.....,
will it sound just as good on CD as LP ?
why/why not?
That is impossible to answer, as it is based on the preference of the listener, and there are too many other factors to consider..(how was it mixed, what sort of material was being recorded, etc). I have CDs that sound better than their vinyl counterparts, and I have vinyl that sounds better than the CD counterpart. There are too many variables to say one way or the other with any authority.
-
I have Oasis "What's the story morning glory" on cd, sacd and vinyl. It's one of those albums which sounds like complete and utter ass on cd due to heavy over-compression to the point where dynamics are totally gone. The vinyl version surprisingly sounds decent on some of the softer songs, but still has a great deal of compression/distortion on the heavier tracks.
-
It truly depends on the mastering engineer more than anything else.
Don't assume that analog is "purer" - this is a falsehood. This goes 100 fold for vinyl, where there is the RIAA curve which is compensated for, adding at least another stage of electronics to color the sound.
Don't believe that preamps and amps won't color sound. Their goal, usually, is to not, but all do it, for good or ill.
Don't especially believe that an analog motor won't severely distort the sound.
This is where (all) turntables fail miserably compared to digital. (Yes, even the one that Singer Sound has for $25k)
CD at 44.1 can reproduce 22kHz sounds without distortion. When I write none, I mean that the waveform is sampled twice as fast as the wave form is and none is none. All else is "smoke and mirries", folks... yes, I am opinionated, but you'd have to prove Dr. Nyquist wrong, if you can.
The pictures show a faster waveform than the sample rate! (as in a 20kHz sound being sampled at 16kHz)
The picture also displays a wave making a move that cannot exist as it folds back on itself,which requires time to move backwards.
I doubt that you, as a human male, can hear above about 16kHz, although you will be able sense space and other qualities over 16kHz.
This is the way it is, if you doubt me, please get a hearing test!
There are a very few who can hear 18kHz, and virtually none who can hear 19kHz.
Analog is decidedly different, overall, than digital. Two flavors, take your choice.
Overall, digital will be much more accurate for many reasons. The least being that all of the R&D bucks for the last 20-30 years have gone to it, and not analog.
Many analog vendors sadly compensate for lack of product advance by lying about their technologies.
"We make our cartridges from REAL WOOD for a more ORGANIC sound!"
Freakin' Puh-lease! Is it not obvious that that is technically-retarded logic?
Again, my rant is not to try to tell you what to enjoy.
Please listen first and buy what you like best!
However, vinyl is not a panacea. In fact from a technology standpoint, vinyl was abandonded for very many valid reasons.