On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 07:39:21 -0800, Keith Hughes wrote
(in article ):
Sonnova wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 13:55:40 -0800, Keith Hughes wrote
(in article ):
Sonnova wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:36:12 -0800, wrote
(in article ):
snip
Right, so on the basis of two totally different masterings (i.e. the
actual spectral composition was changed between formats, not 'just' the
requisite RIAA curve application) of the performance, you think you can
make a valid comparison of formats? Sorry, not possible - whatever
format comparison you choose (MP3-Vinyl-CD-SACD-etc.).
Keith Hughes
That's not important.
What's not important? Your comparison?
The LP sounds incredible, the CD sounds mediocre. I'm
not inferring ANYTHING from that other than what I said.
The point is, the mastered version used for the LP could well sound
superior (to LP) if recorded on CD. You don't, and can't, know unless
you hear the same mastering on both formats.
Sigh! Look, I already stated that I transferred this 3-record set to CD and
that the CD I made sounds essentially like the record with all of the
excitement and visceral impact of the LP.
So there is no basis (in
this example) for concluding, as you clearly seem to have done, that one
format is more *real* than the other.
But in this case it IS. Like I said in another post, this LP sounds better
than any of the more than 2000 CDs I own. I would just like to know why.
Instead of discussing it, we sit here arguing back and forth over who said
what to who.
There is a hugely confounding
variable, for which the impact is unknown, besides medium/format.
I don't disagree in the least!