On Monday, January 27, 2014 7:05:52 PM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
On Monday, January 27, 2014 12:24:40 PM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
On Monday, January 27, 2014 9:03:29 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
On Saturday, January 25, 2014 9:34:08 AM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
No. The compression added to the CD mastering to make it as loud as possible 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 we find so many people preferring the vinyl version of many new releases over the CD versions.
Well...some people providing mastering services for vinyl do provide repeated warnings about the limitations of vinyl and FR vs playing time and tracking.
As well they should. But unless we are talking about the extreme cases of brick walled mastering it is quite possible to cut a record from an original master without rolling the highs or bass. There are plenty of examples..
I have no idea why a brick walled master would not be able to be cut on vinyl.
It's harder because everything is maxed out from top to bottom.
It will just have to be at a level that is trackable with such nasty high frequency hash created by clipping.
That is one way of dealing with it but a clipped digital signal is not something you want to try to cut into a lacquer at any level.
Unlike digital, vinyls peak levels are a function of frequency due to print through and trackability. If one wants to cut an album with flat frequency response they will simply sacrifice dynamic range having to keep peak levels at the limits reasonable. Few recording engineers choose to do this instead tweaking the low and high ends. Bass is often made mono (no big deal as very low bass in a room lacks direction) to improve tracking and reduce amplitude.
this does happen. How regularly it happens is debatable. It also depends on what records you are buying.
Also common to rolloff deep bass and add a slight mid bass bump to get a perceived solid bass content. Lots of people with systems that don't have deep bass find this particularly pleasing over a flat CD.
I often find it pleasing even with deep bass. But then true deep bass is something in and of itself that is often not on a recording to begin with.
Rolling off highs above 14k is rarely noticed by anybody.
yep. Not much music up there anyway
http://www.saemastering.com/VinylMasteringFAQs.php
"Can you cut it extremely loud and with lots of bass?
The oldest request. The only change has been the amount of volume and bass. The less time per side is always better for more volume and more bass. Also, short 6 to 8 minute sides for a 12" record should be considered for cutting at 45rpm. Yes, I've cut them very loud and punchy. Mistracking does become a concern.
And there you have it. Yes, it can be done. Buyer beware. Your equipment may not be up to the task of playing it back.
Nor may that be the best way to produce the most satisfying results.
I think a few compromises to increase dynamic range is worth considering.
What dynamic range? The question posed was can a record be cut "extremely loud and with lots of bass." Yes it can be done but it will suck.
What do you mean by "mistracking"?
The ability of the playback stylus to follow the groove path. Poor turntable
alignment or a worn stylus hinders the ability of the playback stylus to follow the groove path. The common result is distortion and sometimes skipping in extreme cases. Different types of playback systems track and sound different.
And this should not be an issue if we are talking high end audio.
Not every record company presumes their product is going to spin exclusively on a Forsell with Koetsu cart. I'd say none of the DJ caterers presume anything like it.
And this does speak to my point that these things do depend on what records you are buying. The folks who are actually cutting records from master tapes without compression, or rolling the highs or lows are doing so with the idea that the end user will be using gear that can deal with such records.
Can you cut my master flat?
Sure, but you may not be happy with the results. Mistracking can result from excessive levels. For example bad sibilance or bright cymbals may result in groove modulations too complex to track on even the best playback systems. Excessive bass can result in skipping. Disc cutting engineers take this into account and use their judgement for the best playback results for different systems. Besides, you will hear a difference as the cartridge approaches the inner diameter of the disc. This is called "Diameter Loss".
Again, in cases of brick walling this can be an issue. Nothing new here.. So yeah it can be done and if your master has a DR of 4 or less the results will stink. But it will stink anyway.
Untrackable peaks on vinyl have nothing to do with brick walling.
Sure they do. Digital clipping makes for near certain mistracking.
I'm not even sure why you bring this up unless you presume your vinyl was digitally mastered.....
*I* didn't bring it up. I was responding to your post with all the quotes from
http://www.saemastering.com/VinylMasteringFAQs.php
but even then modern digital mastering equipment has nearly infinite bit capability so brickwalling should never come into play.
Well the FAQs you quoted are all about cutting vinyl from brickwalled master tapes. So whether or not it *should* come into play is neither here nor there when addressing the answers to those FAQs.
They should be able to do all their mastering, compress it as much as they like for "loudness" and convert to 16 bits without clipping anything.
Shoulda coulda woulda. Those FAQs are about dealing with what does happen (mastering from brickwalled sources) not with what should have happened or could have happened. What often does happen is we end up with commerical recordings that have been brickwalled to death. It's not an issue to master such recordings to CD. There can be some issues mastering that kind of a signal to vinyl. Ironically when we are talking about high quality uncompressed masters it's easier to cut to vinyl.
Regardless, this should not be an issue if we are talking high end audio.
So the answer is NO, a CD recording and a Vinyl recording will not be quite
the same!
Except when they are. There are a number of well documented examples.
Exceptions do not make a rule.
Who said anything about a rule? I said there are exceptions and many of them are well documented. That is a fact not a rule.
IME, few versions of CD and vinyl are the same.
Labels like Classic Records and Analogue productions have in large part made a living with meticulous and often superior (even with the constraints of vinyl) mastering of reissues on vinyl.
I don't think they'd be enjoying the success they have just releasing vinyl that sounds the same as already available (and much cheaper) CD versions.
Let's not confuse mastered the same with sounds the same. I have several examples of CDs and LPs that were mastered he same but they sound different as they should. My vinyl playback gear is hardly perfectly transparent. I wouldn't want it to be.
Possibly due to the limiters and filters inherent in the lathes. A step the CD recording never sees.
Nope. They are not "inherent" on the lathes. They are either being used or not being used. I can name literally hundreds of records that were cut with no use of any limiters.
The fact is that the audiophile labels you mention above and several others have actually managed to cut many LPs of many great titles without using any compression, without *needing to roll the highs or bass. (this is not to say that no EQ is applied to make for better sound) And they do it without folding the bass to mono. Many of these labels do the same titles on LP, CD and SACD. Do you think they are deliberately sabotaging the CDs and SACDs to make the vinyl sound better so as to boost the success of their vinyl sales?
No, I think they tweak the recording on vinyl to make it sound good on vinyl playback systems.
Why do you think that?
As far as folding the bass to mono...you shouldn't notice if they did it right as it's only the deep bass which provides the most benefit and which has no perceived direction.
It's not a question of noticing it. The companies making these records are stating that they are not doing it. If they are lying it would be quite easy to catch them at it since it is easy enough to determine if the bass is mono or stereo.
I have a Classic records vinyl and HD CD and they don't sound the same. I don't think they are mastered the same nor do I think they should be.
I am sure they don't sound the same. I am not so sure about the mastering being different. Bernie Grundman who cut most of the vinyl for Classics has made it quite clear that he never used compression or limiters and never folded the bass to mono and in most cases used minimal EQ. If the HDCDs were mastered differently it was due to a different mastering engineer having different taste in EQ. It was not due to any inherent limitations of what can and can not be cut to vinyl.