Compare for yourself: Vinyl vs. CD
Compare for yourself: Vinyl vs. CD
Apr 1 2003, 07:37
ABC/HR developer, ff123.net admin
Group: Developer (Donating)
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 12
This is from a message I just posted to uk.rec.audio and rec.audio.opinion:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 22:53:58 GMT, Moi <zis_guy@NOxSPAMMxhotmail.com>
>This one is from Peter Kater's "Gateway" ca. 1988 (Gaia/Polygram
>Records). This one may in fact exist on CD, so somebody may be able
>to check perceived speed stability and etc. against the CD. The song
>is from side 1, track 2 titled "Talk Back."
>This one was also most likely recorded to digital before pressing the
>LP, and I'm not responsible for any possible digital ugliness you may
>Wish I could post longer samples, but space and downloading time
>constraints prevent it. As again, this one is about 3.5MB in size,
>and requires the LPAC decoder, available here:
>The sample itself can be downloaded here:
I changed the link to point to my server to remove the bandwidth load
from Moi's site.
Moi described his setup in an earlier message: TD-160/M97xE/Technics
I purchased the 1988 CD version of this album (< $10 used) and ripped
the same section as Moi's sample.
I time aligned it as best I could. The sample is about 34 seconds
long. The vinyl version takes about 60 msec longer to complete than
the CD version, so the speed accuracy of the turntable is about 0.2%
on the slow side if the CD can be considered the reference.
I applied -0.43 dB to the left channel of the CD version, and +0.26 dB
to the right channel. The volume was compared with the vinyl version
via average RMS. WavGain (which uses David Robinson's replaygain
algorithm) gives about the same answer as average RMS.
I applied a linear fadeout to about the last 4 seconds of the sample
to approximate what Moi had done with his sample.
I won't say what I hear just yet. If you think the difference is
sufficiently subtle to warrant the use of a double-blind tool, visit
one of the following sites:
Edit: Oops, I think I posted this to the wrong forum
This post has been edited by ff123: Apr 1 2003, 07:41
Apr 4 2003, 09:08
Joined: 20-November 01
From: Irvine, CA
Member No.: 504
QUOTE (ger@co @ Apr 2 2003 - 04:27 AM)
I Think (because I'm not positive) that the mastering for vinyl incorporates EQing, or sound processing if you prefer, not to make it sound better, but, rather, to compensate for the medium. Whereas, for CDs, the engineer does not have to worry about the sound of the stylus scraping across the vinyl or tape being dragged across the playback heads, and the final result is truer sound. As a result, vinyl may sound better because of the processing, while CDs give a more accurate representation of the original recorded sound. Dolby is another example of sound processing--EQing--that further compensates for the limitatons of tape.
Not sure if your'e talking about RIAA equalization or something else.. You HAVE to
use the RIAA eq, but because it's a standard, and is accurately (hopefully!) re-compensated
for in your phono preamp, it's transparent and should result in no change to the sound.
Since you are carving little sound waves in the record, but want to keep the speed of the needle
motion to a fairly consistant maximum, you have to (if I remember right) emphasize the low frequencies
nearly 20 db, (cause they're slow) and de emphasize the highs a similar amount. (cause they're fast)
This is why you can't just amplify your cartridge and put it into your soundcard or whatever.
Tape as I recall is much more linear, (though I'm not as sure of this) and dosen't need quite
as drastic of a eq as the really huge one that is the RIAA standard.
All this should be independent of the "sound".. just ways to make the medium "flatter" and
more transparent to the listener. What the sound engineer does to affect the "sound" is another
|Lo-Fi Version||Time is now: 1st September 2014 - 22:31|