S888Wheel wrote:
From: Chung
Date: 12/30/2004 8:12 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
S888Wheel wrote:
From: Steven Sullivan
Date: 12/28/2004 7:33 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
michael wrote:
S888Wheel wrote:
From: michael
Yes, I'm not sure that your personal experience is a universal base
line
though.
In any case, from home transfers it is clear that the analog
signal differs greatly from a digital source when strictly considering
non-musical program noise.
I'm not questioning what you found to be true with *your* transfers,
only
the
universitality of it.
I snipped out most of the thread becuase anyone interested can go back
and read. This back and forth is getting unmanagable. Anyhow, to
recap: I claimed that when recording from a turntable to a CD there
exists alot of analog grundge that is heard and is also shown
graphically by VU meters. This stuff is non-musical noise. Now it
appears that you are arguing the validity of this?
My suggestion: take a turntable, any turntable, and get yourself some
analog to digital software. Use any album you like. If you want to
replicate my results then I'll tell you that I use Audacity on Linux;
I'm sure there are many other similar applications out there you may
use--even Windows applications. :-)
Next, place the stylus in the lead in or the lead out groove, or any
silent passage you like. Finally, watch the vu meters bob up and down
with peaks around the -40dB value when there is supposed to be
"quietness". It helps to have a good set of headphones for monitoring.
I use Sennheisers. Once you have done this several hundred times, or
even just once or twice, then post about the "universality" of the
experiment.
Yep, the behavior you see is not unusual; you're seeing the surface noise
of vinyl, which even for the *best*, *cleanest* LP is noisier than
digital silence. It *is* a universal phenomenon.
Vinylphiles IME are loath to admit any deficiencies of their favorite
medium, but to deny the universal existence of surface noise in vinyl,
is to be, well, in denial.
Please cite one example of anyone denying the existance of surface noise.
Well, here is what you said: "Kind of a broad claim based on limited
experience don't you think?". That was in response to michael's
statement that there is noticeable noise observed from LP systems. Seems
to me that you were at least questioning the universal existance of
surface noise...
Then you are mistaken. I was questioning the notion that his experience was
indicative of the best the medium has to offer in performance. His statement
wasn't that there was just noticable noise but it gave very specific
meansurments of how much but that was based on his records on his rig. I was
simply pointing out that this limited experience is not neccessarily evidence
of the limitations of the medium but just his records on his rig.
Michael's experience was that the LP noise is very noticeable on a
digital readout as soon as the needle contacts the "lead-in" groove.
That is universally true. You seem to be saying that on some
recordings/set-ups the LP noise is not noticeable this way. That's quite
an extraordinary claim, given that the surface noise is 20 dB or more
higher than the sensitivity of today's 16-bit or higher A-D converters.
Can you cite any example where the vinyl noise cannot be heard?
Do you live in the L.A area? I'll demonstrate it for you.
Given the easily measureable noise floor of vinyl, you need to listen
more carefully...
Digital capture and display of vinyl
transfers simply makes it visible. It can be 'heard through' and thus
ignored, but it's always there.
It is not the same for all records and all TT rigs. That was my point.
It is the same in that the noise is always there.
It isn't the same in nature and level for all rigs and all records though.
It can always be
heard, no matter how expensive a rig you have, or how clean and pristine
the vinyl is.
I disagree. It is not always noticable.
You perhaps will be the only one with this belief.