You could interpret it as such from a practical perspective and perhaps there is little more you can expect from the average therapist these days, at least in my country.
Can digital get to vinyl sound and at what price?
- Thread starter ScottK
- Start date
You could interpret it as such from a practical perspective and perhaps there is little more you can expect from the average therapist these days, at least in my country.
maybe it is just me, but when I see the adjective "demonic" used frequently, it makes me wonder about objectivity.
Perhaps we should avoid Taylor Swift as a topic going forward.
That's what grumpy old men constantly do here, indeed.
The good ole times were so much better, blah, blah.
Blah.
It is what they (perhaps we) do in general.
Thirty five years ago I realized that if you don’t change with the times, you will likely enjoy one decade of happiness at most. If you evolve and focus on what’s good about change, you will be happier longer.
The last decade or so has forced me to acknowledge that sometimes there are limits to the “bend rather than break” algorithm for life. In hindsight many of those grumpy old men look like visionaries rather than malcontents. Of course these things are personality driven. Some of my heroes made it to their 90s without ever breaking.
Bring up the subject of satanic ritual abuse, or a similar delicate issue... and most people will walk away.
Unsurprisingly, it's often the same runaways who are at the forefront of condemning others for not complying with 'certain imposed rules'.
Manipulating the masses, Julius Caesar was an early virtuoso.
And btw, Darwin's 'theory' served a similar purpose, but you probably already knew that.
So much for scratching the surface, let's return to the topic.
Last edited:
"A Spectral Analysis of Analog and Digital Recordings
Analysis: To analyze the two audio samples, analyzing software called SpectraFoo was used. According to the manual obtained from its host website, Metric Halo (2011), SpectraFoo can be described as a “high–precision, low–latency, fully realtime audio visualization and analysis system”. SpectraFoo converts an audio signal into a visual representation of the signal. For this particular analysis, the spectragraph option was used. The spectragraph is an “ultra high resolution real-time two channel spectrum analyzer with snapshots, cursors and overlays” (Metric Halo, 2011, p. 18). The spectragraph takes the audio signal and presents it in a comparative waveform between two channels. In this study, two separate comparisons were made between the digital left and analog left, and the digital right and analog right mix channels respectively. The decision to use the final mix channels rather than the individual instrument channels was to ensure that the comparison accounted for waveform interaction between individual instrument channels as the final mix was constructed.
Figure 2 represents a comparison of digital and analog left-channel signals. The yellow waveform represents the digital signal and the blue waveform represents the analog signal. Since both signals were obtained simultaneously with no difference in signal flow (except for digitizing the analog signal for comparison), the signals should be similar, if not exact replicas of one another. However, that is not the case. The signals share broad similarities, but there are many discrepancies. For example, around the 800Hz mark, the analog signal is noticeably lower than the digital signal. The same can be concluded about the right side, which is displayed in Figure 3. In Figure 3, the pink line represents the digital signal and the green line represents the analog signal. Both graphs show a similar trend in which the differences grow greater and more frequent at higher frequencies. Starting at about 800Hz, the contrasts between the two signals become more prominent. This development is evident in both the left and right signals. The midrange frequencies from around 250Hz to 650Hz seem to be the most similar when looking at the comparison. It is also important to note the harshness of the peaks and valleys in the digital signal. When looking at the amplitude of the two signals, compared to the analog, the digital seems to produce a wider range of peaks and valleys. These differences could have a small sonic impact of the overall “sound” of the music, which may or may not be perceivable depending on the listener’s ability to listen critically. This may be a contributing factor as to why some prefer one to the other in terms of how it sounds.
Differences between the analog and digital signals are noticeable. Although these variances may not necessarily be noticeable to the untrained ear, they are clearly evident when examining the audio in a visual form as seen in Figures 2 and 3. The contrasts seen in the graphs are a result of the differences in the two technologies. Though exact causes remain unexplainable, the waveform data confirms that differences in recording technology (digital and analog) can impact the signal, and perhaps, the way we perceive and subsequently assess a musical recording."
Analysis: To analyze the two audio samples, analyzing software called SpectraFoo was used. According to the manual obtained from its host website, Metric Halo (2011), SpectraFoo can be described as a “high–precision, low–latency, fully realtime audio visualization and analysis system”. SpectraFoo converts an audio signal into a visual representation of the signal. For this particular analysis, the spectragraph option was used. The spectragraph is an “ultra high resolution real-time two channel spectrum analyzer with snapshots, cursors and overlays” (Metric Halo, 2011, p. 18). The spectragraph takes the audio signal and presents it in a comparative waveform between two channels. In this study, two separate comparisons were made between the digital left and analog left, and the digital right and analog right mix channels respectively. The decision to use the final mix channels rather than the individual instrument channels was to ensure that the comparison accounted for waveform interaction between individual instrument channels as the final mix was constructed.
Figure 2 represents a comparison of digital and analog left-channel signals. The yellow waveform represents the digital signal and the blue waveform represents the analog signal. Since both signals were obtained simultaneously with no difference in signal flow (except for digitizing the analog signal for comparison), the signals should be similar, if not exact replicas of one another. However, that is not the case. The signals share broad similarities, but there are many discrepancies. For example, around the 800Hz mark, the analog signal is noticeably lower than the digital signal. The same can be concluded about the right side, which is displayed in Figure 3. In Figure 3, the pink line represents the digital signal and the green line represents the analog signal. Both graphs show a similar trend in which the differences grow greater and more frequent at higher frequencies. Starting at about 800Hz, the contrasts between the two signals become more prominent. This development is evident in both the left and right signals. The midrange frequencies from around 250Hz to 650Hz seem to be the most similar when looking at the comparison. It is also important to note the harshness of the peaks and valleys in the digital signal. When looking at the amplitude of the two signals, compared to the analog, the digital seems to produce a wider range of peaks and valleys. These differences could have a small sonic impact of the overall “sound” of the music, which may or may not be perceivable depending on the listener’s ability to listen critically. This may be a contributing factor as to why some prefer one to the other in terms of how it sounds.
Differences between the analog and digital signals are noticeable. Although these variances may not necessarily be noticeable to the untrained ear, they are clearly evident when examining the audio in a visual form as seen in Figures 2 and 3. The contrasts seen in the graphs are a result of the differences in the two technologies. Though exact causes remain unexplainable, the waveform data confirms that differences in recording technology (digital and analog) can impact the signal, and perhaps, the way we perceive and subsequently assess a musical recording."
D.D, how much influence do you think your digital processor had on the signal. Can you do the same test with a different A to D processor? It would be interesting to see if the results were the same. Sorry if you posted the tools you were using earlier. I don't frequent this thread often. Did you use a Pro Tool?
Good question, but the analysis is not mine, it's part of a thesis
SpectraFoo is a high resolution metering and sound analysis tool (VST) primarily used by recording/studio/FOH engineers.
The ADC obviously afffects the analog signal, but so does the analog equipment used, as stated in the conclusion:
""The research presented in this project is not perfect due to equipment limitations, and there are improvements that could be made. As stated before, there is a chance worn equipment could have played a factor in the differences between the two signals. Perhaps newer equipment would produce more accurate readings, but you cannot buy “new” tape machines anymore – you can only accept the old technology as it is, with some improvements in the form of “modifications” or “new old stock.” Although digital and analog technology are often compared and looked at as two independent forms of technology, it is important to note that analog is inescapable in the recording process. The amount at which one chooses to embrace it will continue to be a personal choice."
SpectraFoo is a high resolution metering and sound analysis tool (VST) primarily used by recording/studio/FOH engineers.
The ADC obviously afffects the analog signal, but so does the analog equipment used, as stated in the conclusion:
""The research presented in this project is not perfect due to equipment limitations, and there are improvements that could be made. As stated before, there is a chance worn equipment could have played a factor in the differences between the two signals. Perhaps newer equipment would produce more accurate readings, but you cannot buy “new” tape machines anymore – you can only accept the old technology as it is, with some improvements in the form of “modifications” or “new old stock.” Although digital and analog technology are often compared and looked at as two independent forms of technology, it is important to note that analog is inescapable in the recording process. The amount at which one chooses to embrace it will continue to be a personal choice."
Even if you were to do the same test with a good dose of redundancy - e.g. using multiple identical setups with NOS SOTA analog gear (and the same redundancy for digital), the chaos factor of analog still applies.
In an analog reproduction (hi-fi) chain this factor is greater, because there are various mechanical/electrical 'disturbances' at play, from the vinyl record to the (tube) amplifier.
For the analog enthusiast, these 'disadvantages' do not outweigh the (subjective) advantages and I completely understand that. I certainly enjoy such setups as well. These are part of my personal frame of reference.
It's 'the fuss' - buying and storing records, the wear/tear and replacement of tubes, the heat of class A, etc. - that annoys me.
It's all personal of course, but I'm looking out for a Class D amplifier (or a power DAC) with the pleasant signature of a SET amp (2nd harmonic dominant, not 3rd) + a DAC that's good enough. The speakers remain the most important part in the reproduction chain imo.
The last time I listened to Magico speakers was in an all analog setup: vinyl + Angstrom amps.
It still sounded quite digital (~clinical, unnatural).
In an analog reproduction (hi-fi) chain this factor is greater, because there are various mechanical/electrical 'disturbances' at play, from the vinyl record to the (tube) amplifier.
For the analog enthusiast, these 'disadvantages' do not outweigh the (subjective) advantages and I completely understand that. I certainly enjoy such setups as well. These are part of my personal frame of reference.
It's 'the fuss' - buying and storing records, the wear/tear and replacement of tubes, the heat of class A, etc. - that annoys me.
It's all personal of course, but I'm looking out for a Class D amplifier (or a power DAC) with the pleasant signature of a SET amp (2nd harmonic dominant, not 3rd) + a DAC that's good enough. The speakers remain the most important part in the reproduction chain imo.
The last time I listened to Magico speakers was in an all analog setup: vinyl + Angstrom amps.
It still sounded quite digital (~clinical, unnatural).
Last edited:
I was simply looking at the picture from a technical perspective. Why did the signal change. I don't think it had anything to do with the vinyl. Isn't the SpectralFoo reading the output of the phono pre. And the output of the now digitized and stored on a hard drive digital file. The file should look exactly like the analog copy unless the AD converter altered it.
Of interest would be what AD converter was used. And what environment was it set in. If this was done in a well known studio where tape copies were professionally stored to digital and the distortions were occurring, that big news. If this was some off the shelf hobby DA converter thrown on a table with general wall power, rhen the anslysis is very flawed to me.
@Bruce B BruceB has a real AD studio. It would be interesting to hear from him if he has done a spectral analysis of the copies he made.
Of interest would be what AD converter was used. And what environment was it set in. If this was done in a well known studio where tape copies were professionally stored to digital and the distortions were occurring, that big news. If this was some off the shelf hobby DA converter thrown on a table with general wall power, rhen the anslysis is very flawed to me.
@Bruce B BruceB has a real AD studio. It would be interesting to hear from him if he has done a spectral analysis of the copies he made.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
I've done many of these graphs when I had 6-8 A/D converters doing tape transfers for David Wilson and HDtracks. There are many variables to take into consideration but you try so hard to keep those variables to a minimum. I was using software by Algorithmix and Cedar and doing all my conversions with Pyramix ... even at different sample rates/bit depths. This stuff will drive you crazy.
@Bruce B
how dramatic are the variables D.D has shown.
it sounds like you say there are alwayd changes. How do the variations in duplication compare to a duplication of tape to tape. Or from tape throught the process of making vinyl.
Are these same variations seen in a digital file to digital file copy?
how dramatic are the variables D.D has shown.
it sounds like you say there are alwayd changes. How do the variations in duplication compare to a duplication of tape to tape. Or from tape throught the process of making vinyl.
Are these same variations seen in a digital file to digital file copy?
The analysis is obviously (inherently/inevitably) flawed, but it was not intended to be irrefutable.
I could supply Bruce with the VST, but I don't own a full-fledged AD studio.
Telling and I don't need to add anything to this.
On a sidenote: Bruce, you seem to be an AMG enthusiast. Have you ever driven this one?
Last edited:
I think Bruce is a 2 wheel man. He arrived at my house on a nice bike.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Would certainly love to! I go the AMG Driving Academy at COTA every year. I'm on my 3rd AMG now.......
The C63 is probably one of my favorites, not in the least because of this video fragment:
Nice motto by the way. It reminds me of a statement by a local historian:
"Some squirrels continue to collect nuts even when they already have far more than they can eat".
Nice motto by the way. It reminds me of a statement by a local historian:
"Some squirrels continue to collect nuts even when they already have far more than they can eat".
Last edited:
Similar threads
