Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Tech Talk
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Questions about vinyl
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedQuestions about vinyl
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 01 2008 at 00:50
^ I'm with you there. Of course digital recordings are always approximations of the original (analogue) data - no fan of digital audio or video would say otherwise. But the important thing is: Does this approximation happen on a level of detail which is beyond our ability to detect (hear)? I definitely think so.

Listening tests show that people can't tell the sources apart - if anything, they'll hear the different mix of a vinyl release compared to the CD remastered version, or the CD version is simply much brighter and contains more treble information than the vinyl release they're used to, which leads to statements like "CD sounds harsh". I'm 100% sure that in a double blind test comparing the actual master tape to a properly sampled version in 16bit/44.1khz, nobody would be able to tell the difference ... except maybe for some extreme cases, either extreme listeners with unusually good ears or signals which provoke glitches or exploit weaknesses in the recording process. For those we have advanced digital formats (24bit/96khz) which are *beyond* any human ear. Whatever the details, digital formats *are* clearly superior over any analogue consumer format, and even in the professional domain their advantages are obvious.


Edited by MikeEnRegalia - June 01 2008 at 00:54
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2008 at 18:55
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

 
It has an almost tangible quality to it that digital sound DOES NOT REPRODUCE.
 
Maybe someone can do the science and work out why, because all the evidence points to vinyl being significantly inferior - and yet it still sounds better.
 
The answer is smoke and mirrors.
 
Digitising quantises the information into digital words of 16-bits every 22.7µS.
 
Most people are aware of the amplitude quantisation, (a 16-bit digital waveform is composed of 65536 discrete voltage levels), but it also quantises in the frequency domain.
 
In an earlier thread on the same subject I posted that: "This quantisation means you do not get an infinite number of frequencies across the spectrum - you get a finite number of discrete frequencies that are sub-harmonics of the sampling frequency.
 
Hence, the sampling frequency used on CD's (or on any digital media) will only accurately reproduce frequencies that are an exact division of the sampling frequency - all other frequencies are spread into adjacent subdivisions and require all those subdivisions to recreate the original. "
 
This is because the sampling frequency of 44.1KHz only samples the signal every 22.7µS, which means that it can only accurately reproduce signals that are sub-harmonics of 44.1KHz ... all other frequencies are inaccurate representations.
 
In principle we should not be able to tell the difference - all the component frequencies added together should recrerate the original, however because the signals are also amplitute quantised it means that the amplitudes of all the individual subharmonics are only aproximations, so the final recreation will also be an approximation.
 
 
What?
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2008 at 15:24
^Those holophonics were used even more widely on "The Pros and Cons of Hitchiking" - it's the best thing about the album, IMHO...
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
A B Negative View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 02 2006
Location: Methil Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 1594 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2008 at 14:51
Originally posted by ClassicRocker ClassicRocker wrote:

And I can't forget Pink Floyd's Final Cut, with various sound effects such as rockets "flying" through my headphones. (Is it a safe assumption that these effects were on the original LP's?)

Yes, they were on the vinyl too, they're examples of holophonics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holophonics).
"The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time."
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2008 at 09:27
^ always nice to hear from you again!Big%20smile
Recently listened to:
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: May 30 2008 at 08:50
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:


Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

It has an almost tangible quality to it that digital sound DOES NOT REPRODUCE.

 


Maybe someone can do the science and work out why, because all the evidence points to vinyl being significantly inferior - and yet it still sounds better.
I think that the conclusion must be that the most accurate representation of the original recording is not always the one which sounds best (subjectively). Perhaps it's the way the first pressing reproduces the music which you love so much - how that particular pressing was mastered, the material used, the quality of the manufacturing process etc..For someone like me the world is entirely different ... for me the remastered digital releases are the benchmark. Vinyl can sound as good or even (subjectively) better, but there are many hazards along the way ... as I had to learn when I recently purchased the re-mastered vinyl edition of Metallica's Ride the Lightning. High quality, half-speed, 180gr etc. but sounds horrible.


Pure bullsh*ts from someone who has no experience on the subject...
A good vynil has much more informations than the same album on CD, and most of the last CD remasters are horrible, unlisteneable.


Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2008 at 07:10
^You should be able to get hold of an MFSL or Japanese pressing in the US if it's quality vinyl you're after - they're cheaper than a "Pink Island".
 
 
Japanese pressing ($40 isn't pushing it - these are very collectable, especially with the OBI);
 
 
 
 
MFSL pressing (bargain - $60 would be a good price, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it go for $100).
 
 
 
Pink i Island pressing (Could go for anything between £100-500).
 


Edited by Certif1ed - May 30 2008 at 07:24
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 23:15
So for those of us in the US, what do we have?  Say of ITCOTKC?  Just some Atlantic released sh*te?
Back to Top
ClassicRocker View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 894 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 10:47
Originally posted by Dick Heath Dick Heath wrote:

It is worth noting that in the examples of ELP and Edgar Winter (e.g. on Frankinstein) introduced channel phasing around 1970 - i.e. a particular sound shifting from RH to LH and perhaps back again over several seconds of music  - a gimmick that surprisingly did  not last too long -  I wonder if anybody has employed it more recently?
Whether or not it's considered a "gimmick", I still find the effect makes for a more enjoyable listening experience for me than if certain sound effects or notes were played without "moving."
 
Anyways, I only have the CD editions of them, but I do remember hearing channel-crossing on Zeppelin II, and the ending of ELP's "Karn Evil 9 (3rd Impression)" of course has those classic "blips" floating back and forth. I'm pretty sure the intro to Sabbath's "Iron Man" features it too... And I can't forget Pink Floyd's Final Cut, with various sound effects such as rockets "flying" through my headphones. (Is it a safe assumption that these effects were on the original LP's?)
 
Most recently, I have heard it in the form of various sound effects on the Animal Collective album Strawberry Jam, with tracks such as "Cuckoo Cuckoo." I'm not 100% sure but I may have also heard some channel phasing on Panda Bear's album Person Pitch as well. I guess the "gimmick" is still (at least somewhat) alive.
 
Consider this: does anyone know of recordings (stereo- or monophonic) that originally had "stable" sounds but integrated channel-crossing on the CD (or even other vinyl) remasters?


Edited by ClassicRocker - May 29 2008 at 11:08
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 06:03
^ The album is available on Napster ... I'll listen to the song!
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 05:06
SA wrote poppy songs with "wooey" noises on their 1st album. "Contact" is a bit more interesting, but "You and I" sounds like Public Image Limited, and the wierder electronic excursions sound more like Kraftwerk's mid 1970s period.
 
There's really not much in common with SA's music and Trance, despite Trance fans' determination to give their music some history before the late 1980s rave scene - while "Love Without Sound" by WN simply IS Trip Hop. I had to pinch myself and re-read the album sleeve to remind myself that it really was created in 1969 the first time I heard it. Delia Derbyshire was a genius Wink 
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 04:35
^ and the Silver Apples created Trance!Big%20smile
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 03:43
Originally posted by MikeEnRegalia MikeEnRegalia wrote:

^ I'll definitely hang on to it ... listened to it yesterday, the pressing/mastering is awesome!

 the new album is much, much more experimental. Only a few songs are "trip hop", the rest is an eclectic mix of styles with all sorts of influences including Anekdoten, Radiohead or even Silver Apples - it's still quite unique and original though. I think I'll even propose them for addition. Smile 
 
After White Noise, of course, who created Trip Hop in 1969... Wink


Edited by Certif1ed - May 29 2008 at 03:44
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 03:24
^ I'll definitely hang on to it ... listened to it yesterday, the pressing/mastering is awesome!

 the new album is much, much more experimental. Only a few songs are "trip hop", the rest is an eclectic mix of styles with all sorts of influences including Anekdoten, Radiohead or even Silver Apples - it's still quite unique and original though. I think I'll even propose them for addition. Smile 

Edited by MikeEnRegalia - May 29 2008 at 03:37
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2008 at 02:50
^Heh!
 
Hang on to that - it'll be worth a fortune in 40 years time...
 
I really like some of Portishead's older stuff (predictable things like "Glory Box", etc) - is the new album more of the same, or have they made any interesting departures?
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
MikeEnRegalia View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21149 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2008 at 15:55
Anyway ... today I purchased the new Portishead album on vinyl, and what do you know: It's an authentic UK first pressing!Big%20smile
Recently listened to:
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2008 at 15:40
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

you're probably wearing sandals.


Shocked you don't know how right you are.
My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2008 at 15:21
Originally posted by Dick Heath Dick Heath wrote:

Since vinyl relies on analogue/mechanical signal, the longer the album  less mechanical information per second of music can be packed onto each side of a 12" disc. Ideally 15min is the maximum per side  - which in theory means all those early  Beach Boys album should give a broad audio range, but your average prog albums at 40min or more will have bass bottom and treble top clipped and then probably the whole compressed. Thats why early unremastered CDs of prog albums - i.e. using a mix/mastering which was only intended for vinyl release - tend to have treble right in yer face, which wouldn't have not happen on the vinyl equivalent because of deliberate treble loss
 
It's also true that vinyl needs to have a sgnificant amount of bottom removed anyway (below 50hz, I believe), to prevent the grooves running into each other - and also a certain amount of top (the "air" around 18kHz), simply due to its freqency limitations.
 
Theoretically, digital can handle this - in reality, 16-bit 44kHz audio tends to artefact in these areas if they're left in, so they tend to get rolled off anyway. 24-bit 96kHz is another piscean boiling device. I've upgraded all my audio recording kit to it (because I can't afford the analogue alternatives LOL).

Originally posted by Dick Heath Dick Heath wrote:

But I've said it before the vinyl chloride/vinyl acetate copolymer used is a dire polymer choice and worse it  combined with one of the worst polymer moulding methods - there are numerous new polymers and sophisticated processing methods that have come along since the 50's, to make a far better 12" mechanical/analogue disc.
 
That's true - and I believe that differing quality compounds were used for the different press runs, again making for a lot of inconsistency. Japanese presses were renowned for the vinyl quality - as well as the decent mastering, hence their relatively high second hand value.
 
Most collectors I know go for the UK 1st every time, if they can afford it Wink
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2008 at 15:04
^Because it's great.
 
Get a first press or MFSL copy (it tends to be one of the cheaper MFSLs because it was one of the most popular, and there are more copies of this in existence than the others) and put it on an audiophile system  (important, because the soundstage in the mix is first class) - if it doesn't knock your socks off, you're probably wearing sandals.


Edited by Certif1ed - May 28 2008 at 15:11
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 28 2008 at 12:51
Originally posted by Certif1ed Certif1ed wrote:

The best vinyl albums to own are...Supertramp's "Crime of the Century"


Haha...I have that. Dunno which pressing. I don't like it, though, and I certainly have no idea why it's so highly regarded.
My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>

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.