[Scott[_6_]]

On Saturday, January 25, 2014 6:15:56 AM UTC-8, news wrote:
"ST" wrote in message ...
=20
=20
=20
On Saturday, January 4, 2014 11:14:59 PM UTC+8, Oregonian Haruspex wrote=
:
=20
On 2013-12-29 19:19:45 +0000, ST said:
=20
......
=20

=20
That sounds highly dubious at best. One way to tell for sure is to
=20

=20
acquire a recent high-grade recording that has been printed to a CD and
=20

=20
pressed to vinyl in the same form, mic up your listening room with some
=20

=20
lab-grade mics, and play each of them over the same system. I but you
=20

=20
can predict the outcome quite accurately.
=20
=20
=20
[For some unknown reasons, my replies being rejected at the server level=
.. I=20
=20
am trying once more ( maybe my fifth or sixth time) to reply. Now I am=
=20
=20
using a new account and hope it reaches the mod.]
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
That is the kind of evidence I am looking for. Technically, is it possib=
le=20
=20
to press exact replica of CD version on vinyl?
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 4:58:25 AM UTC+8, Ed Presson wrote:
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
This view seems to ignore that the wavy, wobbly, and jittery signal tha=
t
=20

=20
arrives the ear from the vinyl will be subject to further wavy, wobbly,=
=20
=20
and
=20

=20
jittery distortion once it leaves the speaker resulting in even more
=20

=20
distortion. Somehow, I doubt that results in a closer representation o=
f
=20

=20
live sound. Perhaps I've misunderstood the OP.
=20

=20

=20

=20
Ed Presson
=20
=20
=20
Yes, the loudspeakers contribute a fair share of distortion but what=20
=20
matters here is how much of the sound wave is closer to the live=20
=20
performance when reaching the ears. Too much distortion in vinyl degrad=
es=20
=20
the sound, but here I am referring to the correct balance. I do agree s=
ome=20
=20
digital recordings are very good. In most cases, I can't make out whe=
ther=20
=20
it is vinyl or digital. I do not play vinyl but AB'ing the very best of=
=20
=20
both formats, I find vinyl is musically more pleasant.
=20
=20
=20
I started this thread because all the discussions about vinyl and digit=
al=20
=20
is based on the ability of each medium to capture and replay the signal=
as=20
=20
close to the original sound recorded at source but not the actual signa=
l=20
=20
quality heard which is wobbling and jittery when reaching our ears.
=20
=20
=20
At close range, microphones capture a fraction of the total sound. In l=
ive=20
=20
music, a bigger slice of the sound of instruments reaches our ears,=20
=20
although there too only a fraction of the entire sound reaches the ears=
,=20
=20
but the mix is entirely different compared to what's heard at close ran=
ge.=20
=20
The difference here is the whole sound loses it original wave shape by=
=20
=20
interacting with other factors creating it own cocktail of coloration w=
hen=20
=20
it arrives at our ears.
=20
=20
=20
Maybe, vinyl with his own distortion makes the sound natural when it=20
=20
arrives to our ears. So far, I have not seen actual measurement of live=
vs=20
=20
digital vs vinyl measured at the ear level which hopefully provides a=
=20
=20
better understanding about the real sound quality that matters to us fo=
r=20
=20
musical enjoyment (not accuracy).
=20
=20
=20
I think it was back 10 to 20 years ago and before, they would tailor the=
=20
=20
sound recordings to produce a Master recording to fit onto a record witho=
ut=20
=20
overcutting into adjacent tracks (grooves). That final master was then u=
sed=20
=20
to produce the CD. This made CDs back then not sound as good as they cou=
ld=20
=20
because the used the vinyl master to make the CDs as well.=20


This makes no sense. This was one of the most common explanations offered a=
s to why some of us find fault with so many CDs. But if we prefer the vinyl=
version cut from the same master it hardly explains what we don't like abo=
ut a CD cut from the same master. Further more, while this was done with so=
me LPs it was hardly done with all of them. Many LPs have been cut directly=
from original masters with none of the assumed rolling of the high frequen=
cies or folding of the bass to mono.=20


Now many=20
=20
recording companies are making Master Recordings for CDs and if they want=
to=20
=20
cut some vinyl too, they would have to make a separate vinyl master that=
=20
=20
would cut out some of the bass and use some compression to reduce the rea=
lly=20
=20
loud parts so that the record cutter doesn't cut into adjacent grooves.


No. The compression added to the CD mastering to make it as loud as possibl=
e actually is a potential problem. So with many new recordings they have to=
go to the original uncompressed master tape and cut from that or at least =
a copy of it. They don't have to cut out the bass. This is one reason why w=
e find so many people preferring the vinyl version of many new releases ove=
r the CD versions.=20


=20
=20
=20
So the answer is NO, a CD recording and a Vinyl recording will not be qui=
te=20
=20
the same!

Except when they are. There are a number of well documented examples.