Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Tech Talk
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Which is best - vinyl or CD ?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedWhich is best - vinyl or CD ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112 13>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
marktheshark View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 12:39
So a higher kps means more compression?
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 11:53
The higher the compression, the worst the sound.
Back to Top
marktheshark View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 11:04
I'm a little new on the mp3s. So what's better for sound? The higher bit rates like 256 and 320, or the lower like 128 and 192? And does the bit rate matter when converting mp3s to standard CD? In other words, does a 320 kps mp3 sound the same as 128 kps mp3 when converted to a CD?
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21133
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 08:29

Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

Thanks for the comment about my sig.
Nice collage indeed.

You said that digital artifacts -make worse by over compression- sometimes destroyed your musical exp, that's it?

Yes ... but only sometimes. It depends on many factors:

  • How much compression (128, 192, 256, etc.)
  • The system you play it on
  • The mood you're in
  • The environment (noises)
  • ...

If I had to answer the question "does lossy compression (wma, mp3, ogg, etc) destroy your listening experience?" without any "buts" or "ifs", my answer would be:

No.

 

Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 08:23
Thanks for the comment about my sig.
Nice collage indeed.

You said that digital artifacts -make worse by over compression- sometimes destroyed your musical exp, that's it?
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21133
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 08:12

Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

It destroys your musical experience?
That's not odd, that's digital!

You should become a politician, oliver! You're great at misinterpreting and wrong quoting.

BTW: Nice picture in your sig!

Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 08:07
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Originally posted by goose goose wrote:

Digital trumps CD? That doesn't even begin to make sense..


It's odd ... sometimes, when I'm listening to some stuff that I ripped from CD in 192kbps WMA, it sounds really amazing and leaves nothing to be desired ... then again sometimes the compression artifacts jump right at me and destroy my listening experience. I don't know why that happens ... it's not just differences in the quality of the files, it also has a lot to do with your current situation (stress) and a whole bunch of other factors not related to music.



It destroys your musical experience?
That's not odd, that's digital!

BTW: While it's actually impossible for a compressed version of some source to sound better than the source, there are some explanations:



  • The compressed version was ripped from a better source (e.g. the remastered CD)

  • The compressed version is in 24bit/96khz (my new Creative X-Fi can create that from 16bit/44.1khz).
Back to Top
goose View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 08:03
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ and with CDs you don't have any noise ... at least unless you listen to your music at unreal volume.
False. High ends players on transparent systems reveals noise on MOST OF the cds, even some DDD ones!! Surprising, isn't it? The paradox is that we audiophiles are happy when we hear noise on CDs: cause it shows how transparent and revealant the digital set up is.


 Of course there is noise on CDs. But the noise you hear on most recordings was already there on the master tape.the signal to noise ratio on a CD is 96 dB (unless I'm much mistaken), which is much more than on any vinyl or cassette. That means that with a perfectly mastered CD with the volume turned up so loud that the loudest parts of the recording would reach 96 dB, the noise would still not be audible.

True enough, but that only holds for peak level. Also is that the noise level with dithering or without? I can't remember the figures offhand

Edited by goose
Back to Top
goose View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 20 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4097
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2006 at 07:58
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

Originally posted by goose goose wrote:

Digital trumps CD? That doesn't even begin to make sense..


It's odd ... sometimes, when I'm listening to some stuff that I ripped from CD in 192kbps WMA, it sounds really amazing and leaves nothing to be desired ... then again sometimes the compression artifacts jump right at me and destroy my listening experience. I don't know why that happens ... it's not just differences in the quality of the files, it also has a lot to do with your current situation (stress) and a whole bunch of other factors not related to music.


BTW: While it's actually impossible for a compressed version of some source to sound better than the source, there are some explanations:



  • The compressed version was ripped from a better source (e.g. the remastered CD)

  • The compressed version is in 24bit/96khz (my new Creative X-Fi can create that from 16bit/44.1khz).

For a start CD is a digital format, as I'm sure I don't need to explain . Also while surely there are digital formats that are higher fidelity than CD, tracks compressed from the CD source and uploaded to itunes certainly aren't one of them. I'm almost positive that there aren't any companies selling downloads above 16 bits or 44k unless perhaps they're lossless.
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2006 at 12:12
Mmm...but a good analog always beats a good numeric...

Nothing to do!
Back to Top
mystic fred View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 28 2006 at 10:01

Originally posted by Politician Politician wrote:

I think the question is unanswerable: it depends entirely upon the
mastering. I have some CD reissues that beat the vinyl originals hands
down for sound quality, and I have some vinyl originals that sound vastly
better than the CD reissues. It's practically impossible to compare like for
like.

you have it there in a nutshell, my son!Big smile

Prog Archives Tour Van
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21133
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 14:55

Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ and with CDs you don't have any noise ... at least unless you listen to your music at unreal volume.


False. High ends players on transparent systems reveals noise on MOST OF the cds, even some DDD ones!!

Surprising, isn't it?

The paradox is that we audiophiles are happy when we hear noise on CDs: cause it shows how transparent and revealant the digital set up is.

 Of course there is noise on CDs. But the noise you hear on most recordings was already there on the master tape.the signal to noise ratio on a CD is 96 dB (unless I'm much mistaken), which is much more than on any vinyl or cassette. That means that with a perfectly mastered CD with the volume turned up so loud that the loudest parts of the recording would reach 96 dB, the noise would still not be audible.



Edited by MikeEnRegalia
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 14:19
Originally posted by marktheshark marktheshark wrote:

Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

As you point out, these DBX boxes expand the dynamic which can be nice also!

What's your new tapedeck?

Denon DRM555P, nothing too fancy. All I do is play the tapes I burned off my audiophile vinyls 20 years ago, so I didn't get dual deck.


A very cheap and musical "current" tape deck is the Yamaha KX 530. It's very musical with beautiful aerial and open mids/highs. Unfortunatly, it's quite thin in the low.




Among recent decks, you have the Teac V8030s (the biggest they made in 1998) which is good(but not extremely musical).



Edited by oliverstoned
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 14:16
Originally posted by ivan_2068 ivan_2068 wrote:

Oliverstoned wrote:

Quote


False that vynil is torn after a few passages.


Torn is a hard word, but I have almost 2,000 vinyls, and even when I can't be more careful with them, after a few passages there are noises, this is inevitable. Some are scratched (What was easier than with CD's), but that's because lack of care in a specific case or an accident.


With a GOOD cartridge on a good turntable, playing a good record, it doesn't get torn...


Physic laws are clear any two solid things in constant contact will sufer degradation. As long as a needle touches the surface of a vinyl, both will suffer, despite the quality. I have a Dual with all those weights at the end of the arm to be graduateds, and always suffers.And no, cassette doesn't sucks...


Analogic reproduction of an LP to a Cassette causes a certain loss of quality, that's also a fact, that's why each time you duplicate a cassette from another cassette, the quality loss is more evident.


Cassettes are affected by heat, fungus (Well Lma is a city with 95% of humidity average), and also suffer degradation because the tape touches the playing and/or recording head, so in a shorter time than a LP will loose quality.


There was another problem, it was harder to select songs, and when you did it, the constant FFD or Rewind, will cause that the tape leght change and of course a distortion of the sound.


When you copy a CD to a CDR there's absolutely no loss of quality.


Believe me, I was raised with LP's, I love them, I keep and play carefully each and everyone, but with my CD's I have lets say 1% of the problems than with LP's.


Iván<!-- Signature -->



Indeed, there's a slight degradation, but it's often due to the dirt phenomenon which "bakes" the dirt on the stylus and so "plots" the groove (that's how many second hands vynils are ruined, even if they look new).
I also admit that contrary to digital -when it's well done, not on a computer-, analog copy involves degradation.

But, when you practice both on good hifi equipment (not necessary high end, but good and musical devices), you quick understand the absolute superiority of analog over digital, like tube versus solid state in the highs, and the torn problem become soon a pure theorical issue.

Eventually, it's a matter of choice. For sure, digital is more convenient.

Edited by oliverstoned
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 14:10
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ and with CDs you don't have any noise ... at least unless you listen to your music at unreal volume.


False. High ends players on transparent systems reveals noise on MOST OF the cds, even some DDD ones!!

Surprising, isn't it?

The paradox is that we audiophiles are happy when we hear noise on CDs: cause it shows how transparent and revealant the digital set up is.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 12:18

Oliverstoned wrote:

Quote

False that vynil is torn after a few passages.

Torn is a hard word, but I have almost 2,000 vinyls, and even when I can't be more careful with them, after a few passages there are noises, this is inevitable. Some are scratched (What was easier than with CD's), but that's because lack of care in a specific case or an accident.


With a GOOD cartridge on a good turntable, playing a good record, it doesn't get torn...

Physic laws are clear any two solid things in constant contact will sufer degradation. As long as a needle touches the surface of a vinyl, both will suffer, despite the quality. I have a Dual with all those weights at the end of the arm to be graduateds, and always suffers.

And no, cassette doesn't sucks...

Analogic reproduction of an LP to a Cassette causes a certain loss of quality, that's also a fact, that's why each time you duplicate a cassette from another cassette, the quality loss is more evident.

Cassettes are affected by heat, fungus (Well Lma is a city with 95% of humidity average), and also suffer degradation because the tape touches the playing and/or recording head, so in a shorter time than a LP will loose quality.

There was another problem, it was  harder to select songs, and when you did it, the constant FFD or Rewind, will cause that the tape leght change and of course a distortion of the sound.

When you copy a CD to a CDR there's absolutely no loss of quality.

Believe me, I was raised with LP's, I love them, I keep and play carefully each and everyone, but with my CD's I have lets say 1% of the problems than with LP's.

Iván

            
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21133
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 12:15
^ and with CDs you don't have any noise ... at least unless you listen to your music at unreal volume.
Back to Top
marktheshark View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 12:07
Originally posted by oliverstoned oliverstoned wrote:

As you point out, these DBX boxes expand the dynamic which can be nice also!

What's your new tapedeck?

Denon DRM555P, nothing too fancy. All I do is play the tapes I burned off my audiophile vinyls 20 years ago, so I didn't get dual deck.
Back to Top
Politician View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: July 02 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 521
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 12:02
I think the question is unanswerable: it depends entirely upon the
mastering. I have some CD reissues that beat the vinyl originals hands
down for sound quality, and I have some vinyl originals that sound vastly
better than the CD reissues. It's practically impossible to compare like for
like.
Back to Top
oliverstoned View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 27 2006 at 11:59
As you point out, these DBX boxes expand the dynamic which can be nice also!

What's your new tapedeck?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112 13>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.145 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.