2. analog
  3. 1066677509

Do cd's store a more exact copy of sound than LP's

I am very interested in moving into the vinyl/analog world after several very rewarding auditions. However, I came across this comment of someone in the recording industry:

"LPs can and do sound absolutely sutnning with the right turntable and vinyl, but don't fool yourself - it is a euphonic coloration. SACD, DVD-A, CD or analog tape are a more accurate method of storing a more exact copy of what is on the master tape"

This seemed contrary to my understanding. For example, I understood that CD's recorded at 16/44.1 created phase errors which needed to be corrected by very complicated algorithms. What do the vinyl guru's reply?
conscious
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
16/44.1 is frought with problems too great to get into on this forum. The biggest problem outside of error correction is it assumes that sounds outside the 20-20,000 Hz range does not affect audible sound. It does, and that is why CDs sound thin and lifeless.

I know the CD proponants will take exception to this but the medium is fatally flawed. SACD has much more potential, but there will be the learning curve with it just like redbook CD. Early digital recordings sounded dismal. In the last twenty years recording studio engineers have learned to use the format so new recordings are listenable.

LPs do not have these limitations. The frequency response is not unlimited, but it is far greater than CD, or digital formats.

The fact that SACD became a reality is an admission that CD was a flawed format.

Let the fireworks begin!!!
agaffer
256 posts
 
I'm no engineer but, seems to me since analog is continuous and CDs are based on sampling the CDs can't be a more exact copy.
slappy
903 posts
 
Nrchy,

While i woul disagree that all cd's sound lifeless, i will agree that sonic information outside the human hearing range does effect the way you hear the frequencys within the range.

As to weather or not CD's are a more exact copy...

I would be very hesitant to agree with that statement. Mainly for the pure fact that digital is nothing more than a "Representation" of analog. Break a signwave into digital and it goes from a smooth wave to a step-ladder look. Im sure logic processors might to a great job to smooth that wave out, it doesent garauntee it will be an exact replication of the origional wave.

Ive always wondered personally about Records and how exact they are as well. Do records erode from too much use? if so, then a record will be the best copy, untill it gets played too many times.
Dont know much about records, so i guess i better keep my nose outta that.

It only takes a small understanding of digital and analog, PCM and TDM to understand that digital can never theretically reach the resolution of analog. However digital takes a hell of alot less bandwidth and can sound extremly close to analog.
I guess it is the smallest of nuances that are left out.
as well as a large inaudible frequency range that really DOES matter
More to discover