Gordon, what cracks me up with your comment is that I wonder how many of the 'pure' analog / vinyl folks really know and understand how little of todays Lp's are are truly 'analog' ? Audiophiles............ a very strange breed for sure !!
Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?
- Thread starter ScottK
- Start date
Gordon, what cracks me up with your comment is that I wonder how many of the 'pure' analog / vinyl folks really know and understand how little of todays Lp's are are truly 'analog' ? Audiophiles............ a very strange breed for sure !!
all of them. anyone serious about high end vinyl is paying attention. which means there is a balance between musical merits and the degree of analog content. lots of pure analog to be acquired, and some where they are digitally sourced but the performance and production quality is such that they shine as vinyl pressings. but with billions of vinyl pressings out there one can buy pre 80's vinyl forever and never worry about it.
the casual vinyl lover sucked in by the coolness draw is a mixed bag. just like people listening to MP3 or worse.
I mentioned this interview in another thread, and am inserting it here as well as there are several segments of interest concerning analog vs digital:
He explains that only recently with DSD256 do you get a digital version that sounds pretty much like the original ("non-mastered") analog material.
Assuming he is unbiased in his assessment, and has good hearing, are the non-DSD DACs at fault? Or the source material - do we really need much higher sampling than Redbook to reproduce the full content of analog tape?
He explains that only recently with DSD256 do you get a digital version that sounds pretty much like the original ("non-mastered") analog material.
Assuming he is unbiased in his assessment, and has good hearing, are the non-DSD DACs at fault? Or the source material - do we really need much higher sampling than Redbook to reproduce the full content of analog tape?
I don't know, I am not saying he is, I am just wondering what this would imply were he correct in his judgement.
...I know, I know. I'm just reflecting back to any reader: I don't think anyone is actually unbiased.
I have not watched the video. Is he saying a label will release a version in 16x44.1 that has been altered to sound different than the master. Yet they then release a DSS256 version that is unaltered. If that is not the case, then your just taking about a format change with higher resolution. That is not any closer to the master than any other format. It might sound different due to the format and the playback equipment.
You also have to consider how it got to DSD256. I hear a lot of the high resolution is really a 16x44.1 that is upsampled. I have asked the question, can I take my 16x44.1 and reformat it into some other version? Would that help? I have never pursued the cause.
No, he is not saying that the labels alter the mastering according to the format. He just explains that when you digitize a master tape and compare it back to the analog playback of the same tape, the DSD256 version is closer ("less artefacts"). Here I assume he means that the DSD256 is "native", not upsampled from Redbook.
Right. Here s an interesting anecdote:
I am reminded of the comparison we did at Music Lovers with Cookie Marenco playing the exact same violin track in RBCD and SACD formats and the SACD sounded *smoother*, sort of buttery, more *analog* as compared to the RBCD. Most in attendance preferred the sound of the SACD, but 3 violin players in attendance all agreed the RBCD replicated the sound of the violin more accurately precisely because of the lack of this seemingly added coloration. Qualifications: exact same gear (pre, amp, speakers, player), matched volume levels, multiple comparisons, but not double blind.
From this post (#4):
Nice Review of DSD by Andreas Koch
No introduction needed :) http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue59/dsd.htm
www.whatsbestforum.com
I’ve never heard live acoustic music to sound buttery or smooth.Right. Here s an interesting anecdote:
I am reminded of the comparison we did at Music Lovers with Cookie Marenco playing the exact same violin track in RBCD and SACD formats and the SACD sounded *smoother*, sort of buttery, more *analog* as compared to the RBCD. Most in attendance preferred the sound of the SACD, but 3 violin players in attendance all agreed the RBCD replicated the sound of the violin more accurately precisely because of the lack of this seemingly added coloration. Qualifications: exact same gear (pre, amp, speakers, player), matched volume levels, multiple comparisons, but not double blind.
From this post (#4):
Nice Review of DSD by Andreas Koch
No introduction needed :) http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue59/dsd.htm
the term that i find positive and desirable in music reproduction is 'liquid', and also 'grain less', but this is not 'warm' or 'caramel'. real life is 'liquid' meaning there is no edge or 'grain' to what we hear. there is a continuousness to real life sounds. nothing with a sameness sort of texture. some digital and even solid state amplification does have a fine grain to some aspect of the music when there is ultra detail, like over driving video where the detail gets exaggerated. this is an artifact and distortion. not real.
some listeners interpret this grain as more detail. i suppose a preference to some. not me.
In my experience grain hides true detail.
Grain, in visual as well as audio arts, obfuscates…. If some think grain is detail, it explains a lot about why hobbyists argue.
Well, I got up today. I made a batch of home made eggnog and dropped a couple shots of espresso into it and started listening. Then I dropped some 7.5ips tapes onto my Otari with heads wired to outboard IEC/NAB. Its sort of disheartening and makes me wonder if there is something wrong with my vinyl and digital. Even my old 7.5 ips 4 track crush my other sources. Its sort of frustrating. At least decent classical from Barclay Croker are average $65. Not a out of reach price. Same as many audiophile reissue.
I have my name in for a customized 7.5 ips deck optimized to record. Its about $1500. I want to make mixtapes.
I have my name in for a customized 7.5 ips deck optimized to record. Its about $1500. I want to make mixtapes.
Interestingly, grain can also be introduced by unwanted short-distance room reflections. For example, most of the grain and hardness in the highs that I had before installing ceiling diffusers could easily have been mistaken for typical digital distortion (I only knew better because I repeatedly had heard the same DAC in a then better room at the time).
Think about it: In concert halls you don't typically have those nasty short-distance reflections. And then people wonder why their sound at home is so removed from the concert hall experience (there are many factors, but this is one of them). Of course, you can't remove short-distance reflections, but you can take the bite out of them. You have to diligently take care of your room, like you and I did.
***
(I still have residual room problems, but I can move my speakers out of the known problem zone, which is a matter of inches. You deal with what you have. Maybe there's still some work to do for me.)
the only 'grain' I want is in the whisky used to make my Manhattan !
That’s a rye comment
Similar threads
