[Audio Empire]

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:45:23 -0700, ScottW wrote
(in article ):

On Apr 25, 6:05pm, Audio Empire wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:42:36 -0700, Robert Peirce wrote
(in article ):

The first letter in the May/June Absolute Sound claims his LPs sound
significantly better than the same albums downloaded from HDtracks.
Ignoring for a moment that this might be true, I wonder how much depends
on equipment?

Excellent question. Truth to tell, LPs are a bit of a paradox. A cheap CD
player always sounds better (to my ears, at least) than a cheap turntable. An
expensive CD player sounds very much like a cheap one. There MAY be a sonic
difference between a $50 CD player and $5,000 CD player, but that difference
is largely subjective and may or may not show up in a DBT. OTOH, a cheap
turntable/arm/cartridge through a cheap phono preamp may sound O.K., BUT, the
same record played on a really good turntable/arm/cartridge costing thousands
and played through a very accurate RIAA phono preamp (such as the Parasound
JC-2) will sound unmistakably better in almost every way.

That leaves the question, will the LP of a superior sounding performance
sound better on an expensive phono rig than will the CD mastered from the
same master tape and played on any CD player?

Does this really happen today? Do people put onto CDs the same
master that has been created with all the constraints of vinyl (mono
bass, compressed deep bass and bumped (to compensate mid bass)?

Most likely not (although it is possible), but when I said "master tape", I
was referring to the studio master, not the production-mix master.

I've mentioned this before, but I have a Classic Records remastering on 4
single sides on 200 gram vinyl at 45 RPM of Stravinsky's "Firebird" by Antal
Dorati and the London Philharmonic recorded by Mercury's Bob Fine. The
aforementioned Classic Record release was mastered by the recording's
original producer, Wilma Cozart Fine who also remastered all of the Living
Presence recordings (including the CD of this performance) for Philips in the
1990's. Fine said in an interview at the time that the CDs were
"indistinguishable =A0from the master tapes." That being the case, one would
think that her later 45 RPM vinyl remaster of that same master tape would
sound pretty identical to the CD. I'm here to tell you that they sound
NOTHING alike. The LP sounds alive, with palpable imaging and much more
APPARENT dynamic range. It also sounds much cleaner and more real. I have
played the record vs the CD (with matched volume) for dozens of people, and
even though there is no doubt that they are BOTH the same performance, every
single listener has said that the LP sounds more like a real performance than
does the CD.

I have a theory for this. CDs are capable of flat 20-20khz response
and mastering engineers don't need to tweak the bass. LPs are not
and skilled LP mastering engineers have developped techniques to
compensate.
Bumping up the mid bass to compensate for the rolled off deep bass is
common.

To many peoples systems (which will start rolling off anywhere from 50
to 100 hz)
and peoples hearing the LP will have more bass punch and perceived
dynamic range than the CD. Engineers have used the liberty granted
by need to make a few subjective improvements.

Except, I didn't mention the bass specifically. This LP set has better
imaging, more apparent dynamic range, it sounds cleaner, one can hear deeper
into the instrumentation, and the recording sounds more palpable overall. In
fact, I'll go so far as to say that this Dorati "Firebird" is, without a
doubt, the best sounding commercially released recording I've ever heard.

Oh, and I don't have a problem with low bass. My system is flat down to the
low thirties in my room.

The little technical blurb sheet that came with this record states that it
does NOT have left channel-summed bass like the original 1960 release had and
therefore is NOT mono-compatible. (it was mastered in 2001, so that need no
longer exists).


This is, of course, anecdotal (for whatever that's worth) but it does show
that just because digital is doubtless more accurate than analog ever could
be, that doesn't mean that commercially made CDs are always going to sound
better than vinyl records made from the same source. There are so many
variables in both processes that once cannot simply assume that the CD will
always sound better.

Accuracy and perceived sound quality aren't often going to correlate.
It's pretty easy for a recording engineer to add some perceived pop to
a recording while abandoning accuracy. Claims that a mix sounds like
the original master means nothing to me.
What do the original masters sound like relative to the original
performance (if there ever was one)?


In fact, most newly remastered CDs of previously released pop material will
likely sound significantly worse than the original CD release,

I can't agree with this. Especially pop music released in the early
80's or before.
The first CDs were sometimes from LP masters and sounded just plain
awful. Subsequent remasters were often improved by simply undoing the
constraints put in for vinyl. Later efforts based on original multi-
track masters were further improved by DAW improvements with unlimited
byte length and improved dithering techniques which allowed all the
track mixing and editing without truncation.

and if the
material is old enough to have first been released on vinyl, chances are a
prisstine vinyl copy will sound significantly better than the latest CD
master. That's just the nature of the modern music business.

Not every remaster on CD has fallen prey to the "louder is better".
All the Pink Floyd and King Crimson remasters are far superior to the
original CD releases and generally better sounding than most of the
vinyl releases if for no other reason than the music benefits from a
silent noise floor.

All this being said I have found most all of my Classic reissues to be
extremely well done. They may sound subjectively better than the
original master tapes for all we know.


That's my point, of course. One cannot count on a CD sounding better than the
vinyl release just because CD (or hi-res digital downloads, for that matter)
is a more modern and technically superior format.