I recorded 1000 or so albums on the Revox A77 1970-90, fully analog, to tape. I have great respect for tape detoriation, over time. With time, tapes lose magnetic bounding, or whatever is the term for this, and you can hear this especially in the treble - they become "dull". So, in my system, an original recording often wins out, compared to a remastering using old tapes, in terms of musical enjoyment, even if it is only from a scratchy LP - it was made there and then, it is "fresh from the bakery".
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.
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.
- ...
- 128 posts total
orpheus10 In the beginning, hardware was made available to down-load LP’s to hard drive ...Strictly speaking, you can’t "download" an LP to a hard drive. "Downloads" are for digital files and can be transferred at high speed. To get a digital file from an LP, the disc has to be played in real time, then run through an ADC on its way to a computer. Eventually new computer cards came on line, and Benchmark made a new analog to digital converter (which they no longer make), also the audiophile computer cards are no longer available.There are still plenty of high quality digital audio cards for computers, such as the Asus that records up to 24/192. Another option is an outboard ADC - of which there are many such as the Amari - or something like the M2Tech Joplin, which is an ADC that will apply RIAA eq in the digital domain. And of course there are still standalone digital recorders that include an ADC, such as the Denon DN-900R. They said it couldn’t be done (we believers did it). They didn’t believe us, now it can’t be done because what’s needed to do it is no longer available due to lack of demand.Nah, there’s still lotsa gear that can be used to digitize an LP. It’s just that - for the most part - people just don’t want to be bothered. After all, it is a tedious process. But it’s do-able. |
Cleeds, first I relax in the recliner that's in the sweet spot and listen for the needle to drop on the first LP that I've programmed on my play-list. Then I began to spiral into the holographic soundscape that's presented before me. Since I don't have to jump up like a jack rabbit at the end of each LP, I wait for side 2 and get deeper into the music; the same music that's coming out is the same music that went in, including every nuance. Each LP takes me deeper into the music, music that I've accumulated over many years and all the memories associated with that music. In regard to the process, it's no more tedious than playing a record. |
orpheus10 Cleeds, first I relax in the recliner that’s in the sweet spot and listen for the needle to drop on the first LP that I’ve programmed on my play-list. Then I began to spiral into the holographic soundscape that’s presented before me ... In regard to the process, it’s no more tedious than playing a record.I think making a high quality digital file from LP is a very tedious process, and that’s why I don’t do it more often. But I can imagine that some people might enjoy the undertaking. |
It's quite similar to recording on a reel to reel; you have to make sure the level is not too high or too low; some records are hot (high level) while others are soft, so you have to make sure that's adjusted properly on each record, but it's as easy as recording to a reel. In regard to setting up the programming, I have someone who has a degree in computer science to assist me, I must confess, I don't really understand computers, but he does. |
- 128 posts total