This should get some debate going!

[Johnny Vinyl]

Maybe some of you have seen this already, which I wouldn't doubt, but I wanted to post it regardless.

*I didn't know where to put this, so please move to the appropriate section if needed.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

I think you'll be surprised what he has to say about that at the end. I need to listen to it a little more (only saw the whole thing once) and I thought I heard some differences, but hey...what do I know. I do know that you and the boys who are into analyzing this sort of stuff would find it interesting and I'd love to read everyone's thoughts about it.

 

[Groucho]

I think you'll be surprised what he has to say about that at the end. I need to listen to it a little more (only saw the whole thing once) and I thought I heard some differences, but hey...what do I know. I do know that you and the boys who are into analyzing this sort of stuff would find it interesting and I'd love to read everyone's thoughts about it.

Excellent! My guess is that it's a simple case of phase shifts at different frequencies in the vinyl chain, that 'decompose' the waveform in the time domain, making a flat top look spikey or vice versa. I found the clearly audible EQ differences between the two versions very interesting, and indeed the vinyl version sounded as you'd expect vinyl to sound, as described by a fan of vinyl.

 

[jkeny]

Yep that was the elephant in the room that I mentioned on the Vinyl Vs Digital thread - the playback mechanism accounts for the majority of the audible differences between these two formats.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Yep that was the elephant in the room that I mentioned on the Vinyl Vs Digital thread - the playback mechanism accounts for the majority of the audible differences between these two formats.

I'm not informed enough to say its the majority of the difference, but in general I agree with what you said.

 

[mojave]

While I dont know what particular algorithims are used for the TT meter, if it is looking at peak, then there are a lot more peaks in the vinyl to be added up over time, and thus me, personally, can see how it sees more dynamics.

Here is how the DR number is calculated for the TT Meter: http://www.dynamicrange.de/sites/default/files/Measuring%20DR%20ENv3.pdf

JRiver Media Center V19 calculates the DR value and the R128 (new international standard) dynamic range value when performing Audio Analysis and puts these in tags.

 

[NorthStar]

Excellent! My guess is that it's a simple case of phase shifts at different frequencies in the vinyl chain, that 'decompose' the waveform in the time domain, making a flat top look spikey or vice versa. I found the clearly audible EQ differences between the two versions very interesting, and indeed the vinyl version sounded as you'd expect vinyl to sound, as described by a fan of vinyl.

Yep that was the elephant in the room that I mentioned on the Vinyl Vs Digital thread - the playback mechanism accounts for the majority of the audible differences between these two formats.

Should this come into equation in that thread mentioning Michael Fremer's listening differences between the digitally remastered LP and the two digital hi-res audio files (at different bit depth and sampling rate) from that Tom Waits - 'Bad as Me' recording?

 

[jkeny]

Should this come into equation in that thread mentioning Michael Fremer's listening differences between the digitally remastered LP and the two digital hi-res audio files (at different bit depth and sampling rate) from that Tom Waits - 'Bad as Me' recording?

That's the thread I'm talking about, Nortstar

 

[mep]

The digital file is clipped and the LP needle drop isn't. Too many things that Ian can't explain. Yes, the vinyl has more dynamic range. No, don't believe what the software is telling you with regards to the dynamic range. Whatever.

 

[NorthStar]

That's the thread I'm talking about, Nortstar

I thought of that from reading your above post, John.

 

[jkeny]

The digital file is clipped and the LP needle drop isn't. Too many things that Ian can't explain. Yes, the vinyl has more dynamic range. No, don't believe what the software is telling you with regards to the dynamic range. Whatever.

But that can't be as the vinyl was cut from the digital file as it's master so if it was clipped on the master it would be similarly clipped on the vinyl system.

 

[mep]

So explain why it's clipped on the digital file and it's not clipped on the vinyl version? How can analog "unclip" a digital file and still have apparently greater dynamic range? Maybe the digital file was mastered too hot?

 

[jkeny]

So explain why it's clipped on the digital file and it's not clipped on the vinyl version? How can analog "unclip" a digital file and still have apparently greater dynamic range? Maybe the digital file was mastered too hot?

Yes that is the question but it might be that the "unclipping" may just be the characteristics of the analog/mechanical replay chain & it's visible effect on the signal waveform?

 

[mep]

Yes that is the question but it might be that the "unclipping" may just be the characteristics of the analog/mechanical replay chain & it's visible effect on the signal waveform?

I don't think so. That falls into the "all the analog distortions add up to one big ball of sonic goodness" theory.

 

[NorthStar]

...Or that analog disguises clipping distortion as euphony?

 

[jkeny]

I don't think so. That falls into the "all the analog distortions add up to one big ball of sonic goodness" theory.

Not necessarily. There are some things that vinyl may well do better than digital & there are some things that it may do worse. I don't think it's black & white

 

[Groucho]

So explain why it's clipped on the digital file and it's not clipped on the vinyl version? How can analog "unclip" a digital file and still have apparently greater dynamic range? Maybe the digital file was mastered too hot?

He says that the LP was cut from the same file. Why can it not just be incidental phase shifts/EQ in the viny recording/playback chain? Take a square wave, for example, and apply different phase shifts and/or frequency selective boosts/cuts to the different harmonics and you'll change it from a square wave into a peaky, pointy thing. It may sound almost identical, but look completely different.

 

[NorthStar]

He says that the LP was cut from the same file. Why can it not just be incidental phase shifts/EQ in the viny recording/playback chain? Take a square wave, for example, and apply different phase shifts and/or frequency selective boosts/cuts to the different harmonics and you'll change it from a square wave into a peaky, pointy thing. It may sound almost identical, but look completely different.

That sounds right.

 

[j_j]

Well, this is the simple fact:

Analog clipping introduces harmonics and intermod, a great deal of analog clipping is well over 20khz, and just fails to go through the equipment.

If you clip a DIGITAL signal, you create harmonics, they ALIAS, and all wind up back in the band you can hear. Furthermore, they are generally anharmonic, i.e. they sound (bleepity bleep) awful.

Let me see if I have an image handy.

Frik. No, I don't. It's in one of my tutorials. I kind of wish I knew which.

Ok, http://s238.photobucket.com/user/jj_0001/media/plots/clip2.jpg.html shows this.

The first line is a sampled (i.e. no reconstruction filter, so you still see the sample intervals) sine wave near fs/2.
The second line is its spectrum. Note, 1 line below fs/2, no muss, no fuss.
The third line is the same signal, but clipped to .5 (where the second was max 1). This is digital clipping, remember?
The last line shows the spectrum of the third line. Look at all that crap.

And it's not a mistake. Every one of the harmonics that was created by the clipping aliases back down into the audible range. Every one.

The short version:

DIGITAL CLIPPING SUX.

Clear enough?

 

[j_j]

WOW, digital can sound good can it.......THAT DIGITAL FILE from the LP sounded just like an LP does!

Yes, and one can use digital processing to convert a CD to that sound, once you pick a coloration you like, too.

And that's fine, mind you.