2. analog
  3. 160855-86984

vinyl versus digital redux

Has anyone compared the sound of vinyl with the sound of digital converted from a vinyl intermediary ?

I am referring to 'rips' of vinyl made with high end, high quality vinyl playback systems, with
conversion to high resolution digital.
I find it nearly impossible to distinguish the two results.
The digital rip of a vinyl record sounds identical...or very nearly so...to direct playback of the vinyl.

If one has 'experienced' the foregoing, one might question why digital made without the intermediary of vinyl sounds so different from vinyl.   A detective story ?

We are talking about vinyl made by ADC (analog to digital conversion) of an amplified microphone signal and re-conversion to analog for output to the record cutting lathe, or from analog tape recording of an amplified microphone signal, and then....as above...via ADCl and back to analog for output to the cutting lathe.

Of course vinyl can be and is 'cut' (pressings made from 'stamper' copies the 'master' cut in lacquer) without digital intermediary.  Such practice is apparently uncommon, and ?? identified as such by the 'label' (production)

Has anyone compared vinyl and high resolution digital (downloads) albums offered by the same 'label' of the same performance ?  Granted, digital versus vinyl difference should diminish with higher digital resolution.   Sound waves are sine waves....air waves do not 'travel' in digital bits.    A digital signal cannot be more than an approximation of a sine wave, but a closer approximation as potential digital resolution (equating to bit depth times sampling frequency) increases.

If vinyl and digital well made from vinyl intermediary sound almost identical, and If vinyl and digital not made via vinyl intermediary sound quite different, what is the source of this difference ? 

Could it reside....I'll skip the sound processing stages (including RIAA equalization)...in the electro-mechanical process imparting the signal to the vinyl groove ?

Is there analogy with speaker cone material and the need for a degree of self-damping ?
Were self-damping not to some extent desirable, would not all speaker cones, from tweeter to sub-woofer, be made of materials where stiffness to weight ratio was of sole importance ?

Thanks for any comments.
seventies
ericseaberg's avatar
ericseaberg
3 posts
 
I am asking about LP's made decades ago from analog tape...whether these lp's preserve sound...particularly high frequency sound...better than does the tape itself.
Regarding possibly 'misleading commercialization', I refer to 'high resolution digital transfer'...ie transfer from tape... and 'digital re-mastering of tapes recorded decades ago....before high resolution digital recording became available.

When I was recording to tape in the 70s to late 80s prior to Digital, our multitrack tape machines were capable of HF response above and beyond 23-24kHz, with SN ratios approaching 70dB, depending on tape format and speed.  

One of the projects I did in the mid-80s was mixed to ½" analogue tape at 30ips as well as DAT tape 48kHz/16bit.  There was NO comparison to the sound and we stuck with the analogue tape, transferring it to DAT once the final mixes were edited & assembled for mastering. 

Many of the early CDs were mastered using what was called an EQ COPY of the master tape, taking into consideration EQ and processing for mastering to vinyl and NOT from the original master tape.  It took several years for companies to REMASTER for CD using the original tapes and not use EQ copies.

That being said, since there was a limitation of HF response on tape, purchasing anything above 96kHz of an original analogue album is a waste of money.  Even finding something at 48k/24bit is going to sound as good as the original tape... the extra 48k sampling (for 96k product) is just leftover, in most cases.  
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 

How sweet it is! My favorite cut "Singing Winds and Crying Beasts" off of my all time favorite album, "Santana Abraxas" coming to me off of my computer play-list, from my latest LP down-load after new cartridge, plus NOS tubes installed in phono.


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xskk5q1DL6A


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wT1s96JIb0


It's like hearing this for the first time; although I have worn out numerous LP's that I played to death, I never heard it like I'm hearing it now. This music takes me back to the 70's, at my favorite club, the "Fontainebleau" (no, not that one, but another one with the same name)

The color was "hot pink", and ladies wore those stockings that glowed under black lights. When they walked through the club wearing these stockings, the lights from down low made it appear as though there were beautiful glowing legs walking through the club. This music intensifies my memories of those fantastic times.

Looking for a new pipe at a "head shop" was a lot of fun; there were these glowing posters, and always the smell of sweet incense, which was another item on the shopping list. Decisions, decisions; so many different sweet fragrances, which one to choose; jasmine, peach, or wild-flower?

This was the age of "Aquarius";


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajgeaOt_HTQ


Those were the most incredible times in my life, I hope you were there.


         
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 

Seventies, there have been many good answers in regard to your questions. I'm curious as to whether or not all your questions were answered to your satisfaction, and what decisions have you made?
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
12,095 posts
 
Atmasphere, what is wrong with digital signal processing assuming it is used correctly? I know it is easy to screw things up, done correctly.
Its easy to screw up is all! I prefer a minimalist approach, using as little as I can. The more DSP gets into the mix, the more it seems to harm the final signal. But my experience with DSP is limited to its used in recording applications.
Does playback (with or without digitization) of lp's made, say 40 years ago, from audio tape offer advantage over hi res digital transfers made today from those 40-year-old tapes ?
@seventies
Of course! Tape degrades from the day it was recorded. If you want the best sounding LP from tape, you cut the LP ASAP. You then have the lacquer plated ASAP- that's how you get a lively vivacious recording. If you wait 40 years, no matter what method you use, the master tape will sound a bit 'sleepy' compared to the day it was recorded!
Analog tape is surprisingly robust for storage. It is usage that degrades it.

@audio2design
This statement is false unless very special care is taken in storage which is quite rare! If the tape is polyester, it is prone to absorbing moisture which leads to shedding; trust me on this if a tape has gone too far you won't even be able to spool it off the reel. Think: goo
I am asking about LP's made decades ago from analog tape...whether these lp's preserve sound...particularly high frequency sound...better than does the tape itself.
Yes. LPs have a lifespan of nearly a century if stored correctly (normal humidity and temperature, upright, not too many on a shelf). Stereo LPs have bandwidth to 40KHz or so, tape does not.



audio2design
1,351 posts
 
Atmosphere, the op was referring to master tapes which in general will be stored properly for any media company of note and for which my comment applied.  Note my next sentence.

The biggest concern is break down of the underlying binder for the magnetic materials and the plastic substrate.


If they are stored properly which major media companies generally do, then they are rather robust. 40khz bandwidth is of little use when the mastering media can't match it. That's also 40khz with effectively noise reduction, i.e. RIAA equalization at high frequencies. 
More to discover