What's the deal with vinyl? (1 Viewer)

[Steve_AS]

In either case the version of reality will be very user specific and will sonically vary to different degrees from the master. The Brave New World of Aldous Huxley don't you think? Tailoring reality to the individual desires? I'm waiting for the feelies myself!

Chu, you're cracking me up! Can I hire you as referree and color commentator for all internet debates I participate in?

;>

 

[Lee Scoggins]

If you're going for a distorted sound, tube amps can certainly do the job.

Steve, most high end tube amps are as accurate as any solid state amp...distorted amps for the most part all ended in the 80s.

Just because you think some or most people prefer tubes due to second order harmonics does not mean that tubes amps are not accurate. Indeed some people prefer odd order harmonics and there are characteristics of solid state that many people do not like.

There are many others, like myself and several dozen audiophile engineers, that choose tubes because it sounds very close to the real event we are recording. We even haul tube amps into the studio. That adds a lot of weight and energy-if we could find a good solid state amp that is natural believe me we would.

By the way Mark was simply making a point about "listener fatigue" from redbook encoding and I think there is a lot of truth about what he says on the subject.

We often got listener fatigue from working with redbook in the studio in the 90s and it is a real problem for mastering engineers who must have long sessions editing tracks. Now that I have been working with hirez, there is much less fatigue. I think this problem has been linked to high frequency harshness by AES research.

 

[Steve_AS]

By the way Mark was simply making a point about "listener fatigue" from redbook encoding and I think there is a lot of truth about what he says on the subject.

Levinson was NOT referring to listener fatique as the term is usually used. He was referring to the crackpot idea -- since debunked -- that digital actually weakens people *physiologically* -- here's his nutty speech on it:
www.acoust.rise.waseda.ac.jp/1bitcons/ 1bitforum2002/Mark.pdf

He doesn't name the 'medical doctor' who has been feeding him this nonsense for the last five years, but I did get a few people pn RAHE who *did* know his name, to comment on his and on its debunking. Start here and work down. You;; see reference to the 'AES' research pretty soon:

http://www.google.com/groups?q=g:thl...s4.newsguy.com


That's an interesting old favorite thread of mine; I'm happy to 'advertise' it. It touches on some issues we've argued about here, such as the nature and 'mystery' of human hearing, and the effects of the vinyl LP production and playback process on sound.
And it features input from a variety of sources.

The post dates from two years ago, btw, and cites a NYTimes article from a while before *taht* where Levinson said he'd be holding a news conferece about the scourge of digital (except the DSD kind) on our precious bodily fluids. I wonder if that ended up being hte speech in Japan.

 

[Chu Gai]

Hey, the feelies are coming which ought to revolutionize divorce law!
For another perspective on vinyl/CD consider the following link where an engineer looks at both approaches. Vinyl is fairly kind to equipment and can be very kind to deficiencies to the recording process.

 

[Philip Hamm]

Ever try hooking a CD player through a guitar tube amp?

Ever try hooking a CD player through a toaster? That would be just about as relevant as using a guitar amp.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Lee, with that line I was referring to guitar amps, as seemed obvious from the context. But yes, tube amps do tend to distort more than SS amps, even today -- hence their famous 'warmth'.

Steve, you have yet to show any evidence of this. There are many tube amps in Stereophile that measure very accurately.

Hey, I am just applying the same standard you make of my claims - that is show peer-reviewed papers that demonstrate one way or another.

The problem with that approach is that many audio phenomena that are real do not always have papers to test the effect, due to limits on research budgets, level of interest, etc.

Your making broad statement about tube amps being inaccurate just does not hold water. Also, your statement that LP contains less information than that of a redbook CD is very doubtful.

Where is your evidence of that?

All of this eventually gets to an "objectivist vs. subjectivist" debate. That should be reserved for another thread. Why don't you start one? In the mean time I think the Forum is better served by discussing here what people like about vinyl.

 

[Philip Hamm]

Hey, I am just applying the same standard you make of my claims - that is show peer-reviewed papers that demonstrate one way or another.

And to be fair...

Why does it seem that everyone who sees fit to debate subjects like this tend to demand much more evidence than they provide.

I listen to vinyl because to my ears it sounds good enough, I'm not a nitpicker, and there's no way I'm replacing everything in my 2/300+ LP collection with CD.

 

[Steve_AS]

Ever try hooking a CD player through a toaster? That would be just about as relevant as using a guitar amp.

Exactly! And it's just about as relevant as using 'tubed guitar amps sound better' as an argument in support of tubed hi-fi components.

 

[Chu Gai]

I listen to vinyl because to my ears it sounds good enough, I'm not a nitpicker, and there's no way I'm replacing everything in my 2/300+ LP collection with CD.

pragmatic and sensible IMHO.

 

[Steve_AS]

All of this eventually gets to an "objectivist vs. subjectivist" debate. That should be reserved for another thread. Why don't you start one? In the mean time I think the Forum is better served by discussing here what people like about vinyl.

Which is *exactly* what my first post to this thread was about: what people tend to like about vinyl, and where those qualities might come from.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

And as for LP's information-passing capablities, have you any idea what the 'resolution' of an LP is (answer: several bits lower than CD, *at best*)? Or the frequency response of an LP/turntable system (answer: demonstrably far less *flat* over the 20-20k range than that of a decent CD/CD player system).

Your comments remain meaningless until you show some evidence of your claim. Those little grooves and cartridges can interpret a lot of analog data. Until you can show a good comparison of musical content on each medium, I will continue to believe the LP reins over 16/44!

 

[Tom Grooms]

Just got the new edition of Stereophile "September 2003" and in John Atkinson's "As we see it" he mentioned something very interesting.

Stereophile webmaster Jon Iverson explained that in Early July: Sales of vinyl so far in 2003 totaled 661,100 units, compared with just 234,000 units sold by DVD-Audio and Super Audio CD combined. Makes you think!

 

[Chu Gai]

The SACD sales will increase as people get replacements for their cracked disks.

 

[Philip Hamm]

And as for LP's information-passing capablities, have you any idea what the 'resolution' of an LP is (answer: several bits lower than CD, *at best*)? Or the frequency response of an LP/turntable system (answer: demonstrably far less *flat* over the 20-20k range than that of a decent CD/CD player system).

Steve, you've left a very critical part fo the equasion out.

*Sample Rate*

Compare sample rates on digital recordings to a *truly continuous* analog waveform.

Or would you contend that sample rate is unimportant (since you didn't mention it)? Or, if you believe that common sample rates are sufficient to replicate a truly continuous waveform. If so, which one? DSD, DVD-A, and CD use different sample rates.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Compare sample rates on digital recordings to a *truly continuous* analog waveform.

That's why many feel that the actual music content on LP exceeds redbook CD. I am not sure one way or the other when comparing to hirez formats.

 

[Chu Gai]

Or would you contend that sample rate is unimportant (since you didn't mention it)? Or, if you believe that common sample rates are sufficient to replicate a truly continuous waveform. If so, which one? DSD, DVD-A, and CD use different sample rates.

CD is adequate to reproduce a 20 kHz signal with perfect accuracy. The Nyquist theorem states that any signal maybe be perfectly reproduced at 2x (twice) the expected frequency. Perfect. No degradation whatsoever.

 

[Rachael B]

I've heard long-play vinyl crush an SACD and I've heard an SACD beat long-play vinyl. I have about 300 12" singles and they sound magnificent. Neither Redbook or SACD can compete with the typical 12" single. It sounds obvious that there is more content in these wide grooved records.

Long-play albums on vinyl vary wildly in quality for many reasons. The most important of which is how long are they. IMO, vinyl sides over 18 minutes begin to suffer because of the length.

 

[LanceJ]

Chu,

Concerning that Nyquist thing: wasn't he talking about a PURE sine wave (very rare in Nature I think), or a musical sound wave?

Because the two waves are not identical: one is simple & the other can be very complicated.

LJ

 

[Saurav]

Has anyone told him to stop?

That was the funniest thing I have read in a long time But I have a serious question. Going into orgasms because you can hear the saliva on Diana Krall's lips as she opens her mouth to take a breath - do you think that falls into a similar category?



Hope all is well with you and yours, my friend.

Saurav

 

[Chu Gai]

But I have a serious question. Going into orgasms because you can hear the saliva on Diana Krall's lips as she opens her mouth to take a breath - do you think that falls into a similar category?

So you bought those stain repellant pants they're advertising on TV? BTW, does it work equally as well for girlfriends and wives?

Hope all is well with you and yours also Saurav.