Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Jenn" wrote in message
What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. If you believe this - I've got some creationist books for you read... ;-) |
#82
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MD" wrote in message
I use LP and CD. Until recently I thought the remastered CD or well recorded CDs sounded as good or in some cases better than their LP counter part - so I played the CD. Recently I upgraded my cartridge from a Grado Prestige Silver to a Goldring 1012GX. The GX has a much smaller stylus. Now when I compare the LP to the CD the LP is clearly better - especially in the highs. (Sony remastered version of Kind of Blue compared to the original 6 eye pressing and the Kansas Leftoveture remastered CD compared to the half speed mastered LP) System - AMC Int tube Amp, Systemdek IIX, Triangle Celius speakers, Denon CD with Audio Alchemy D/A and Jitter box Yet another amazing individual with the power to accurately know what a violin they've never seen, heard or in many cases even say what make and model it is, should sound like. |
#83
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Jenn - view profile Date: Mon, Feb 20 2006 2:05 am Email: Jenn Cool. The Soviets generally did NOT follow the RIAA equalization curve. Well, then they should sound, um, interesting. LOL! Oh well. $4 down the ****er...:-) For a truly Russian one Some Melodiya's were made in the west for the Western market and were RIAA. The jackets were printed in English. I don't know which ones Jenn was talking about. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#84
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"vlad" wrote in message ups.com... Jenn wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: MINe 109 wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Jenn wrote: And yet, to my ears, the best LPs surpass CDs in their reproduction of acoustic music. That's too bad for you, given how much easier it is to find works on CD than LP these days. But in any case, you do realize that this is all you'll ever be able to say, right? IT's the answer you always end up giving, no matter how much about digital to analog is explained to you. It's no sort of *rejoinder*, it's simply a statement of preference that says as much, or more, about YOU as it does about the formats. If you think LPs sound better than their CD counterparts, but still want to hear 'LP sound' on CD, I suggest you carefully record your LPs to CD. That way the euphonic distortions you're enjoying so much,a nd which are missing on well-made digital recordings, will be rendered in an exremely faithful, yet far more convenient and damage-proof, format. I hope you sneered as you wrote that. I don't remember you being such a bully-boy. Maybe there's something about Jenn that encourages your brutal propensities. *You* hope I sneered, but *I'm* the brutal one? Amazing. It's like you guys don't even read what you write sometimes. As for Jenn, she's been posting her 'it doesn't matter what you say, I HEAR IT' non-argument for months on rahe. OK, you win. I now "know" that CDs sound better, so I'll just ignore what my ears tell me, since that's a "non-argument". I'm sure that my ears will now agree that CDs sound better, since I have been told that they do. My enjoyment of hi-fi in my home will no doubt now increase. Jenn, People are trying to explain to you one simple thing - your preference for LP's is not a fact proving that LP's are more accurate, superior, etc. It is just your preference. You are entitled to any opinions and preferences that you want. If you will say "In my humble opinion LP's are better then CD" nobody will have an argument with you. You have a right for an opinion. You attempts to use your subjective feelings as a proof of LP's superiority are pathetic. Now if you want to claim a fact "LP's are better then CD'c in ..." then people have a right to question your reasoning. And because you use you 'ears' as a proof you must be ready to critique of your ears. :-) Are we still friends? :-) Vlad it all depends on what one considers 'better'. That, itself, is subjective. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#85
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: snippy snip snip Too bad you snipped out the substantive points, too. Nonsense. If we're going to discuss whether the sound of a violin as reproduced matches or does not match that of a live violin, then we need a good reference. If one has experience with violins, one has a reference. Yup, all violins sound enough the same that they can provide a reliable, absolute reference for making far-reaching decisions about major advances in technology like the digital audio CD. ;-) At this point I've made about 50 digital recordings of from 1 to 8 violins and like instruments (cellos, violas, etc.). I can easily tell them all apart. I doubt that they would be as readilby distinguishable if recorded and played back from a LP. |
#86
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... If you believe this - I've got some creationist books for you read... ;-) is that as large as your sound card collection? -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#87
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"vlad" wrote in message ups.com... Jenn wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: MINe 109 wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Jenn wrote: And yet, to my ears, the best LPs surpass CDs in their reproduction of acoustic music. That's too bad for you, given how much easier it is to find works on CD than LP these days. But in any case, you do realize that this is all you'll ever be able to say, right? IT's the answer you always end up giving, no matter how much about digital to analog is explained to you. It's no sort of *rejoinder*, it's simply a statement of preference that says as much, or more, about YOU as it does about the formats. If you think LPs sound better than their CD counterparts, but still want to hear 'LP sound' on CD, I suggest you carefully record your LPs to CD. That way the euphonic distortions you're enjoying so much,a nd which are missing on well-made digital recordings, will be rendered in an exremely faithful, yet far more convenient and damage-proof, format. I hope you sneered as you wrote that. I don't remember you being such a bully-boy. Maybe there's something about Jenn that encourages your brutal propensities. *You* hope I sneered, but *I'm* the brutal one? Amazing. It's like you guys don't even read what you write sometimes. As for Jenn, she's been posting her 'it doesn't matter what you say, I HEAR IT' non-argument for months on rahe. OK, you win. I now "know" that CDs sound better, so I'll just ignore what my ears tell me, since that's a "non-argument". I'm sure that my ears will now agree that CDs sound better, since I have been told that they do. My enjoyment of hi-fi in my home will no doubt now increase. Jenn, People are trying to explain to you one simple thing - your preference for LP's is not a fact proving that LP's are more accurate, superior, etc. It is just your preference. You are entitled to any opinions and preferences that you want. If you will say "In my humble opinion LP's are better then CD" nobody will have an argument with you. You have a right for an opinion. You attempts to use your subjective feelings as a proof of LP's superiority are pathetic. Now if you want to claim a fact "LP's are better then CD'c in ..." then people have a right to question your reasoning. And because you use you 'ears' as a proof you must be ready to critique of your ears. :-) Are we still friends? :-) Vlad - She said "To the my ears, the best LP's .....". That's no different than saying IMO. Harry |
#88
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article .com,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: From: George M. Middius Date: Sun, Feb 19 2006 10:10 am Email: George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net Oops! This is where duh-Mikey will start squawking about "level matching" and "DBT" and "aBx". Then he'll claim you hate science, and from there it's just a short leap to "Clinton-loving liberal". I must be off nob's scale. According to him, I want American soldiers to die. That's worse than 'Clinton-loving liberal,' isn't it? Depends, I suppose. |
#89
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote: "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message oups.com... From: Jenn - view profile Date: Mon, Feb 20 2006 2:05 am Email: Jenn Cool. The Soviets generally did NOT follow the RIAA equalization curve. Well, then they should sound, um, interesting. LOL! Oh well. $4 down the ****er...:-) For a truly Russian one Some Melodiya's were made in the west for the Western market and were RIAA. The jackets were printed in English. Yup. I don't know which ones Jenn was talking about. The ones made in the SU with Russian language covers. |
#90
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... As for 'overtones' beyond 20 kHz -- 1) what evidence have you that you can *hear* them 2) what evidence have you LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion and 3) what makes you think they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus? Don't you remember CD-4 technology? You guys need to accept that frequencies upto 50 kHz can be imprinted on and extracted from vinyl. My Signet cart with Shibata stylus is has a spec'd FR to 55 kHz. Now I'm not saying that this any bearing on the harmonic content of vinyl recordings...but you do need to get your technology information straight. High frequency response is one area where vinyl can technically exceed CD... and not by just a little. ScottW |
#91
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: snippy snip snip Too bad you snipped out the substantive points, too. Nonsense. If we're going to discuss whether the sound of a violin as reproduced matches or does not match that of a live violin, then we need a good reference. If one has experience with violins, one has a reference. Yup, all violins sound enough the same that they can provide a reliable, absolute reference for making far-reaching decisions about major advances in technology like the digital audio CD. ;-) No, the sound of violins is distinctive enough to provide a strong reference for generating a personal preference, unlike, say, electric bass guitar. At this point I've made about 50 digital recordings of from 1 to 8 violins and like instruments (cellos, violas, etc.). I can easily tell them all apart. I doubt that they would be as readilby distinguishable if recorded and played back from a LP. Give it a try and get back to us. Stephen |
#92
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If you believe this - I've got some creationist books for you read... ;-) What you have in your library is your business. Stephen |
#93
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, A statement that no one has made. or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Another statement that no one has made. My point is (again) that the sound of violins on CD is unlike ANY violin that actually exists. |
#94
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: wrote in message oups.com In order to try to get at home the "natural" sound of violins one must know what violins do sound like. This statement is missing so much relevant info that it is worthless. Contrary to golden ear dogma, all violins do not sound the same. The identical same violin does not sound the same with different strings. The identical same violin with the same strings does not sound the same when played by a different person. No player plays the same every time they play. No violin sounds the same in different places. A violin sounds substantiatlly different depending on where you sit in the room, whether that room is a room with poor acoustics or whether that room is Detroit's Orchestra hall. The same is true of entire orchestras, as I found out when I was a member of a study group that did a comparison of Orchestra Hall and the Detroit Symphony's former location, at the request of the Symphony's Board of Directors. To paraphrase Mirabel's grotesque error into far better truth, let me write: In order to try to get at home the "natural" sound of specific violins one must know what those specific violins sound like when played by specific players, playing a specific piece of music, on a specific occasion, and playing in a specific place. While what you write here is obvious and true, you leave out one important consideration. That is, there are common traits to the sound of, in this case, all violins in all performance spaces, heard from each of the seats. As an example, you could listen to a person speaking in a variety of rooms, etc. and still know that it is THAT person speaking. In my experience, this is what is missing from the upper frequency string sound on CDs; it is as though it is a different "voice". I obtain that knowlege on the average three times a week, and have recordings that match that particular knowlege. AFAIK nobody else who posts on this newssgroup or RAHE can come close. Can come close to what; your level of experience with live acoustic music? I would beg to differ. Be that as it may, it is still impossible for LPs to be as accurate at playing back the sound of a violin. Here's another lesson on how limited LP's a http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~jcgl/Sc...t12/page2.html It would be possible to go on considering various other factors which alter the detailed performance of Long Playing records. For example, any serious comparison of 'LP versus CD' would have to take into account the relatively high levels of signal distortion which commercial cartridges produce when recovering signals louder than the 0 dB level. Typically, signals of +10 dB or above are accompanied by harmonic distortion levels of 10% or more - not a very high fidelity performance! Even at the 0 dB level, many cartridges produce around 1% (or more!) harmonic distortion. The frequency response of signals recorded on LP are also modified - the high frequency level boosted and the low frequency level reduced - to obtain better S/N and distortion performance. This means that an LP replay system must include a De-Emphasis network to Correct the recovered signal's frequency response. Here, however, we are only interested in considering those physical factors which make the LP less than an ideally 'analog' way to communicate information. These extra factors affect the performance of an LP but they don't change the basic nature of the system. And yet, to my ears, the best LPs surpass CDs in their reproduction of acoustic music. That's nothing to do with which IS more accurate. I didn't say that it did. No LP can reproduce anything better than a CD. Unless it's click and pops. And to my ears, timbres of instruments. The fact still remains that whatver sound you hear from a CD is the sound that was on the master tape. Your prefernce for the sound of violin from LP simply means that you have a preference for something other that the sound of real violins. Says you; not my ears. Thanks for admitting that you are brainless, Jenn. Of course you're not brainless - you just say that you are. Another non sequitur from the King of the same. |
#95
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:f5nKf.13356$2c4.3927@dukeread11 "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... As for 'overtones' beyond 20 kHz -- 1) what evidence have you that you can *hear* them 2) what evidence have you LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion and 3) what makes you think they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus? Don't you remember CD-4 technology? You guys need to accept that frequencies upto 50 kHz can be imprinted on and extracted from vinyl. My Signet cart with Shibata stylus is has a spec'd FR to 55 kHz. You need to read the fine print in Steven's post, Scott: 1. "that you can *hear* them" Hint: You can't. 2. "LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion" Hint: "it can't" It's not just a matter of materials, but basic geometry. LP grooves are cut with a chisel-shaped cutter, but played with eliptical or spherical styli. The difference between the cutting element and the tracing element adds significant amounts of distortion above 8 KHz or so. 3. "they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus" Here I disagree with Steven. I have a number of friends who dabble in classic audio including CD-4. They tell me that one might get upwards of 10-20 passes under ideal conditions, until the CD-4 carrier is undetectable with the better CD-4 decoders. Now I'm not saying that this any bearing on the harmonic content of vinyl recordings...but you do need to get your technology information straight. The designers of CD-4 needed in the worst way to encode information 15 KHz on their LPs. In the end they accomplished this, but in the worst way. This system was never sucessful, and not for trying. High frequency response is one area where vinyl can technically exceed CD... and not by just a little. The inverse is true to a far more significant degree. CD's have full power bandwith above 10 KHz or so, and LPs don't. The audibility of LP-induced noise and distortion in the 10-20 KHz is inarguable. |
#96
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article . com,
"vlad" wrote: Jenn wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: MINe 109 wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Jenn wrote: And yet, to my ears, the best LPs surpass CDs in their reproduction of acoustic music. That's too bad for you, given how much easier it is to find works on CD than LP these days. But in any case, you do realize that this is all you'll ever be able to say, right? IT's the answer you always end up giving, no matter how much about digital to analog is explained to you. It's no sort of *rejoinder*, it's simply a statement of preference that says as much, or more, about YOU as it does about the formats. If you think LPs sound better than their CD counterparts, but still want to hear 'LP sound' on CD, I suggest you carefully record your LPs to CD. That way the euphonic distortions you're enjoying so much,a nd which are missing on well-made digital recordings, will be rendered in an exremely faithful, yet far more convenient and damage-proof, format. I hope you sneered as you wrote that. I don't remember you being such a bully-boy. Maybe there's something about Jenn that encourages your brutal propensities. *You* hope I sneered, but *I'm* the brutal one? Amazing. It's like you guys don't even read what you write sometimes. As for Jenn, she's been posting her 'it doesn't matter what you say, I HEAR IT' non-argument for months on rahe. OK, you win. I now "know" that CDs sound better, so I'll just ignore what my ears tell me, since that's a "non-argument". I'm sure that my ears will now agree that CDs sound better, since I have been told that they do. My enjoyment of hi-fi in my home will no doubt now increase. Jenn, People are trying to explain to you one simple thing - your preference for LP's is not a fact proving that LP's are more accurate, superior, etc. I've never stated that LPs are more accurate. The fact that some LPs are, in some aspects, more superior in sound is simply my opinion, based on what my ears tell me. It is just your preference. You are entitled to any opinions and preferences that you want. If you will say "In my humble opinion LP's are better then CD" nobody will have an argument with you. If others will say, "In my humble opinion CDs sound better than LPs" I won't have an argument with them either. You have a right for an opinion. You attempts to use your subjective feelings as a proof of LP's superiority are pathetic. The contortions performed by others to claim that my ears should hear something different than they do hear are pathetic. Now if you want to claim a fact "LP's are better then CD'c in ..." then people have a right to question your reasoning. I agree. And because you use you 'ears' as a proof you must be ready to critique of your ears. :-) I agree. When someone has a legitimate critique of my ears, let me know. Are we still friends? :-) Sure, as long as you don't perform lame attempts at insults simply because we disagree on this, as others do. :-) |
#97
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If so, why is she so sold on LPs? I've never heard a LP handle solo, ensemble and massed violins as well as good digital. |
#98
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "ScottW" wrote in message news:f5nKf.13356$2c4.3927@dukeread11 "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... As for 'overtones' beyond 20 kHz -- 1) what evidence have you that you can *hear* them 2) what evidence have you LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion and 3) what makes you think they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus? Don't you remember CD-4 technology? You guys need to accept that frequencies upto 50 kHz can be imprinted on and extracted from vinyl. My Signet cart with Shibata stylus is has a spec'd FR to 55 kHz. You need to read the fine print in Steven's post, Scott: 1. "that you can *hear* them" Hint: You can't. 2. "LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion" Hint: "it can't" It's not just a matter of materials, but basic geometry. You're going to argue its not accurate and without significant distortion but when using CD as the standard for HF (20 kHz) reproduction LP is significantly more accurate and less distorted. LP grooves are cut with a chisel-shaped cutter, but played with eliptical or spherical styli. The difference between the cutting element and the tracing element adds significant amounts of distortion above 8 KHz or so. 3. "they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus" Here I disagree with Steven. I have a number of friends who dabble in classic audio including CD-4. They tell me that one might get upwards of 10-20 passes under ideal conditions, until the CD-4 carrier is undetectable with the better CD-4 decoders. I knew people with CD-4 systems and they didn't seemt to have a huge problem with surround channel degradation. Try a decent stylus. Now I'm not saying that this any bearing on the harmonic content of vinyl recordings...but you do need to get your technology information straight. The designers of CD-4 needed in the worst way to encode information 15 KHz on their LPs. In the end they accomplished this, but in the worst way. This system was never sucessful, and not for trying. High frequency response is one area where vinyl can technically exceed CD... and not by just a little. The inverse is true to a far more significant degree. CD's have full power bandwith above 10 KHz or so, and LPs don't. The audibility of LP-induced noise and distortion in the 10-20 KHz is inarguable. and the complete lack of any output above 20 kHz is also inarguable. ScottW |
#99
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If so, why is she so sold on LPs? Some lps preserve some aspect of the sound that cds don't. Or so-called "euphonic distortions" play a part. If we had a specific recording in mind we could discuss the individual elements: hall; mics; recording medium; mastering; etc. I've never heard a LP handle solo, ensemble and massed violins as well as good digital. That's too bad. Perhaps you'd like to recommend a cd with a good representation of massed violins. Stephen |
#100
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: snippy snip snip Too bad you snipped out the substantive points, too. Nonsense. If we're going to discuss whether the sound of a violin as reproduced matches or does not match that of a live violin, then we need a good reference. If one has experience with violins, one has a reference. Yup, all violins sound enough the same that they can provide a reliable, absolute reference for making far-reaching decisions about major advances in technology like the digital audio CD. ;-) No, the sound of violins is distinctive enough to provide a strong reference for generating a personal preference, unlike, say, electric bass guitar. Prove it. At this point I've made about 50 digital recordings of from 1 to 8 violins and like instruments (cellos, violas, etc.). I can easily tell them all apart. I doubt that they would be as readilby distinguishable if recorded and played back from a LP. Give it a try and get back to us. Been there, done that. One thing about being my age is that I had to suffer from about 1953 to 1983 with little more than LPs to listen to in the way of recorded music. The bad news is that I was also getting a pretty steady diet of live music. The immense gulf was readily apparent. During that time all I had to listen to is LPs, live music and occasional way-to-short sessions of listening to high speed analog tape masters. |
#101
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Jenn" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message And yet, to my ears, the best LPs surpass CDs in their reproduction of acoustic music. How do you avoid the involvement of your brain in the listening process, Jenn? In what way do you believe the brain should be involved in the listening process, Arny? That's a long story that is way over your head, Jenn. I see. No you don't Jenn. You perceive. I see. More evidence that with Jenn, there's no brain involved. ;-) |
#102
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:8JnKf.13503$2c4.2070@dukeread11 "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "ScottW" wrote in message news:f5nKf.13356$2c4.3927@dukeread11 "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... As for 'overtones' beyond 20 kHz -- 1) what evidence have you that you can *hear* them 2) what evidence have you LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion and 3) what makes you think they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus? Don't you remember CD-4 technology? You guys need to accept that frequencies upto 50 kHz can be imprinted on and extracted from vinyl. My Signet cart with Shibata stylus is has a spec'd FR to 55 kHz. You need to read the fine print in Steven's post, Scott: 1. "that you can *hear* them" Hint: You can't. 2. "LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion" Hint: "it can't" It's not just a matter of materials, but basic geometry. You're going to argue its not accurate and without significant distortion but when using CD as the standard for HF (20 kHz) reproduction LP is significantly more accurate and less distorted. LP grooves are cut with a chisel-shaped cutter, but played with eliptical or spherical styli. The difference between the cutting element and the tracing element adds significant amounts of distortion above 8 KHz or so. 3. "they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus" Here I disagree with Steven. I have a number of friends who dabble in classic audio including CD-4. They tell me that one might get upwards of 10-20 passes under ideal conditions, until the CD-4 carrier is undetectable with the better CD-4 decoders. I knew people with CD-4 systems and they didn't seemt to have a huge problem with surround channel degradation. Try a decent stylus. Now I'm not saying that this any bearing on the harmonic content of vinyl recordings...but you do need to get your technology information straight. The designers of CD-4 needed in the worst way to encode information 15 KHz on their LPs. In the end they accomplished this, but in the worst way. This system was never sucessful, and not for trying. High frequency response is one area where vinyl can technically exceed CD... and not by just a little. The inverse is true to a far more significant degree. CD's have full power bandwith above 10 KHz or so, and LPs don't. The audibility of LP-induced noise and distortion in the 10-20 KHz is inarguable. and the complete lack of any output above 20 kHz is also inarguable. Show me a listener who can reliably detect the absence of content above 20 KHz with regular music and I'll be more concerned than I am. |
#103
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote: Btw, you don't need an Alesis Masterlink to do excellent recording at higher sampling rates and bit depths than Redbook. A $150 M-Audio soundcard will do. Higher bitdepths are useful to prevent audible errors if you plan to do digital cleanup of the messy LP, while higher sampling rates are simply pointless for this application, though they can be useful if you suspect that antialiasing filters of your Redbook chain are introducing audible artifacts. Pointless? Not if you've got a jones for close-miked trumpets with Harmon mutes... But then you'll need something that can play back at the higher sampling rate.. Like a Masterlink? Why are you comparing apples and oranges? The Alesis is a self-contained unit; a soundcard is an add-on to a computer. Stephen |
#104
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
Steven Sullivan wrote: *You* hope I sneered, but *I'm* the brutal one? Amazing. It's like you guys don't even read what you write sometimes Right back atcha. You were totally sneering. Stephen |
#105
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"vlad" wrote in message
oups.com In reality, what she is saying in her posts here and on RAHE - "LP's are better, more accurate, lively, etc., and the proof of this fact is that I hear it with my well trained ears." Right. In fact, the inability to hear what's wrong with LP reproduction is a simple failure to hear that which is pretty obvious. Part of the arguing on her part goes to prove that her ears are much better then ours of simple mortals. Exactly. My take on newer members of the Vinyl uber alles gang is that they've been through some kind of traumatic stress where some other vinyl bigot(s) like we've got many of around here, really put them under duress about listening to CDs. It's known that traumatic stress can make changes to the brain that show up in medical scans. These changes can have the effect of dulling their senses to all the things that are wrong with vinyl's sound. |
#106
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Btw, you don't need an Alesis Masterlink to do excellent recording at higher sampling rates and bit depths than Redbook. A $150 M-Audio soundcard will do. Higher bitdepths are useful to prevent audible errors if you plan to do digital cleanup of the messy LP, while higher sampling rates are simply pointless for this application, though they can be useful if you suspect that antialiasing filters of your Redbook chain are introducing audible artifacts. Pointless? Not if you've got a jones for close-miked trumpets with Harmon mutes... Only if you are a bat or batty. The world is full of natural sounds that have considerable energy 20 KHz. In test after test reproducing that energy or not reproducing that energy produces indistinguishable results in listeners. |
#107
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: snippy snip snip Too bad you snipped out the substantive points, too. Nonsense. If we're going to discuss whether the sound of a violin as reproduced matches or does not match that of a live violin, then we need a good reference. If one has experience with violins, one has a reference. Yup, all violins sound enough the same that they can provide a reliable, absolute reference for making far-reaching decisions about major advances in technology like the digital audio CD. ;-) No, the sound of violins is distinctive enough to provide a strong reference for generating a personal preference, unlike, say, electric bass guitar. Prove it. Okay, bass guitar can work, too. I think the concept that violins have a distinct sound is sufficiently obvious as to be taken as given for this discussion. At this point I've made about 50 digital recordings of from 1 to 8 violins and like instruments (cellos, violas, etc.). I can easily tell them all apart. I doubt that they would be as readilby distinguishable if recorded and played back from a LP. Give it a try and get back to us. Been there, done that. You made fifty lps of "1 to 8 violins and like instruments "? One thing about being my age is that I had to suffer from about 1953 to 1983 with little more than LPs to listen to in the way of recorded music. The bad news is that I was also getting a pretty steady diet of live music. The immense gulf was readily apparent. Yes, the vast majority are pretty vile. Still, we are speaking of the best examples. During that time all I had to listen to is LPs, live music and occasional way-to-short sessions of listening to high speed analog tape masters. Why didn't a picky listener such as yourself pursue commercial reel-to-reel? Stephen |
#108
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If so, why is she so sold on LPs? Some lps preserve some aspect of the sound that cds don't. Or so-called "euphonic distortions" play a part. Wrong, totally wrong. LP's can't preserve anything well - they are like the fuzz boxes that some people use with their guitars. If we had a specific recording in mind we could discuss the individual elements: hall; mics; recording medium; mastering; etc. All pointless because the LP format is well-known for adding audible trash. I've never heard a LP handle solo, ensemble and massed violins as well as good digital. That's too bad. Perhaps you'd like to recommend a cd with a good representation of massed violins. I can't think any CD that fail to do a better job on massed violins than the best LPs I've ever heard. |
#109
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Jenn" wrote in message
My point is (again) that the sound of violins on CD is unlike ANY violin that actually exists. My point is that while CD recordings aren't perfect, they are far more perfect reproducers of the signals that come out of microphones and reocrding consoles than LPs. If you don't like the sound of the violins on some CD recording, blame the guys who made the recording. They had an entirely adequate medium at their disposal and they blew it. you don't like the sound of the violins on some LP recording its completely fair to blame the medium given that unlike the CD format, it is and always has been incapable of being sonically transparent. |
#110
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message
In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: During that time all I had to listen to is LPs, live music and occasional way-to-short sessions of listening to high speed analog tape masters. Why didn't a picky listener such as yourself pursue commercial reel-to-reel? I did, Revox A77, right? |
#111
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
vladborg impales himself on the splintery spike of BorgLogic. She said "To the my ears, the best LP's .....". That's no different than saying IMO. If she means "in my opinion ..." then why did not she say it clear? She can always reformulate it and post again. There's something wrong with you. Probably caused by nanites. BTW, which newsgroup are we posting in? Maybe I'm reading the name differently from how you are. |
#112
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If so, why is she so sold on LPs? I've never heard a LP handle solo, ensemble and massed violins as well as good digital. Every single time compared double blind abx, no doubt, right Arny? Not a hint of a priori prejudice here, right? |
#113
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
Arny Krueger wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message My point is (again) that the sound of violins on CD is unlike ANY violin that actually exists. My point is that while CD recordings aren't perfect, they are far more perfect reproducers of the signals that come out of microphones and reocrding consoles than LPs. If you don't like the sound of the violins on some CD recording, blame the guys who made the recording. They had an entirely adequate medium at their disposal and they blew it. you don't like the sound of the violins on some LP recording its completely fair to blame the medium given that unlike the CD format, it is and always has been incapable of being sonically transparent. I'd like to make two observations here after reading this group and RAHE. Point One: There is a thing as 'generic violin sound' (GVS) that is used for recognizing not particular violin but to distinguish it from say, trombone, piano, cello, etc. Anyone can get GVS from LP, there is no doubt about it. I also claim that GVS from CD is also unmistakable. I remember somebody like Jenn claiming that you cannot recognize GVS from CD but I can be wrong about it. Now, is GVS-LP different from GVS-CD? I would guess they are. What is better or close to GVS-real-life? I don't know, but my personal opinion after long expose to USSR-Melodia LP's, Western made LP's, 20+ years of CD's is that CD does this job better. That is all about generic violin sound. Point Two: There are tons of badly mastered/printed LP's. There are also tons of badly mastered/printed CD's. However, I never observed or heard defects in any LP attributed to the media itself. At the same time any blemish in produced CD (that can be very well screw up of mastering engineer) is immediately attributed to 'digitalness' of the media. I rest my case. Now ladies and gents you can start you insults. vlad |
#114
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Btw, you don't need an Alesis Masterlink to do excellent recording at higher sampling rates and bit depths than Redbook. A $150 M-Audio soundcard will do. Higher bitdepths are useful to prevent audible errors if you plan to do digital cleanup of the messy LP, while higher sampling rates are simply pointless for this application, though they can be useful if you suspect that antialiasing filters of your Redbook chain are introducing audible artifacts. Pointless? Not if you've got a jones for close-miked trumpets with Harmon mutes... Only if you are a bat or batty. The world is full of natural sounds that have considerable energy 20 KHz. In test after test reproducing that energy or not reproducing that energy produces indistinguishable results in listeners. Not quite all of them Arny. Not Oohashi's very sophisticated testing which showed that was true when doing short snippet testing, but not when doing longer sampled proto-monadic testing in a relaxed environment. Then ultrasonic sound led to statistically significant preferrence (in musical terms...scalar) for the reproduction that included the ultrasonic. And this was statistically correclated to differences in brain response to the two variables. The testing also showed that there was a difference when testing ultrasonic sound alone (no difference, couldn't hear) and when it was part of the natural reproduction of an instrument (gamelan) rich in harmonic overtones above 20khz. Of course you know all this, Arny, and have belittled it repeatedly. And I certainly will acknowledge that until it is corraborated via follow-on research it is stil ultimately unproven. But it certainly is provacative, both as to the importance of overtones in music and to the flaws in conventional short snippet and audiometric testing. Others who have not yet seen the study are referred to: http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/83/6/3548. |
#115
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message What I'm getting to is that the violin sound is much more unlike the sound of real violins on CD than it is on the best LPs. I can still tell that it's supposed to be violin. It's a matter of degree and subtlety. Yup all violins sound the same, or Jenn has some magical ESP power that enables her to accurately know what a violin she's never seen or heard is supposed to sound like. Better than that: her "ESP" can tell what a violin *doesn't* sound like. If so, why is she so sold on LPs? Some lps preserve some aspect of the sound that cds don't. Or so-called "euphonic distortions" play a part. Wrong, totally wrong. LP's can't preserve anything well - they are like the fuzz boxes that some people use with their guitars. They can preserve enough well enough. Your fuzz box comparison is off by an order of magnitude. If we had a specific recording in mind we could discuss the individual elements: hall; mics; recording medium; mastering; etc. All pointless because the LP format is well-known for adding audible trash. Exactly to the point: the end medium is a result of all previous steps. I've never heard a LP handle solo, ensemble and massed violins as well as good digital. That's too bad. Perhaps you'd like to recommend a cd with a good representation of massed violins. I can't think any CD that fail to do a better job on massed violins than the best LPs I've ever heard. Can't recommend a cd that represents massed violins well? Your cd collection must be extraordinarily well-chosen because most orchestral cds aren't so great, just as in lp days. Stephen |
#116
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , "Arny Krueger" wrote: During that time all I had to listen to is LPs, live music and occasional way-to-short sessions of listening to high speed analog tape masters. Why didn't a picky listener such as yourself pursue commercial reel-to-reel? I did, Revox A77, right? How would I know? Good for you, though. Did you find the extra effort worth the trouble compared to just slapping on a record? Stephen |
#117
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote: "MINe 109" wrote in message In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Btw, you don't need an Alesis Masterlink to do excellent recording at higher sampling rates and bit depths than Redbook. A $150 M-Audio soundcard will do. Higher bitdepths are useful to prevent audible errors if you plan to do digital cleanup of the messy LP, while higher sampling rates are simply pointless for this application, though they can be useful if you suspect that antialiasing filters of your Redbook chain are introducing audible artifacts. Pointless? Not if you've got a jones for close-miked trumpets with Harmon mutes... Only if you are a bat or batty. The world is full of natural sounds that have considerable energy 20 KHz. In test after test reproducing that energy or not reproducing that energy produces indistinguishable results in listeners. Except for gamelan orchestras, eh? Stephen |
#118
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "ScottW" wrote in message news:8JnKf.13503$2c4.2070@dukeread11 "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "ScottW" wrote in message news:f5nKf.13356$2c4.3927@dukeread11 "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... As for 'overtones' beyond 20 kHz -- 1) what evidence have you that you can *hear* them 2) what evidence have you LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion and 3) what makes you think they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus? Don't you remember CD-4 technology? You guys need to accept that frequencies upto 50 kHz can be imprinted on and extracted from vinyl. My Signet cart with Shibata stylus is has a spec'd FR to 55 kHz. You need to read the fine print in Steven's post, Scott: 1. "that you can *hear* them" Hint: You can't. 2. "LP would reproduce them *accurately* and without significant distortion" Hint: "it can't" It's not just a matter of materials, but basic geometry. You're going to argue its not accurate and without significant distortion but when using CD as the standard for HF (20 kHz) reproduction LP is significantly more accurate and less distorted. LP grooves are cut with a chisel-shaped cutter, but played with eliptical or spherical styli. The difference between the cutting element and the tracing element adds significant amounts of distortion above 8 KHz or so. 3. "they'd remain that way after one or two passes of a stylus" Here I disagree with Steven. I have a number of friends who dabble in classic audio including CD-4. They tell me that one might get upwards of 10-20 passes under ideal conditions, until the CD-4 carrier is undetectable with the better CD-4 decoders. I knew people with CD-4 systems and they didn't seemt to have a huge problem with surround channel degradation. Try a decent stylus. Now I'm not saying that this any bearing on the harmonic content of vinyl recordings...but you do need to get your technology information straight. The designers of CD-4 needed in the worst way to encode information 15 KHz on their LPs. In the end they accomplished this, but in the worst way. This system was never sucessful, and not for trying. High frequency response is one area where vinyl can technically exceed CD... and not by just a little. The inverse is true to a far more significant degree. CD's have full power bandwith above 10 KHz or so, and LPs don't. The audibility of LP-induced noise and distortion in the 10-20 KHz is inarguable. and the complete lack of any output above 20 kHz is also inarguable. Show me a listener who can reliably detect the absence of content above 20 KHz with regular music and I'll be more concerned than I am. No evidence that people can consciously detect this but there is evidence of a physiological response in the brain. http://www.sowter.co.uk/pdf/ultrasonichearing.pdf ScottW |
#119
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"MINe 109" wrote in message ... In article , No, the sound of violins is distinctive enough to provide a strong reference for generating a personal preference, unlike, say, electric bass guitar. Well, I have enough basses and bass amps to hear differences and form preferences. Certainly an SVT is a favorite, and I haven't heard anything else quite like it. But I also like the more subtle tones of a Showman. As far as basses, PBasses sound a lot different than JBasses, except for my Frankenbass, more or less a JBass concoction with a Seymour Duncan PBass pick up at the bridge. But my favorite sounding one is an American PBass, with through the neck stringing, which sounds better than the Jap or the 62 reissue, without. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
#120
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
The Limits of the LP
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... One thing about being my age is that I had to suffer from about 1953 to 1983 with little more than LPs to listen to in the way of recorded music. The bad news is that I was also getting a pretty steady diet of live music. The immense gulf was readily apparent. Congrats! You finally got rid of that Garrard changer. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Natural Limits to high frequencies? | Pro Audio | |||
Interesting article | Audio Opinions | |||
USB Audio limits? | Pro Audio | |||
Richman's ethical lapses | Audio Opinions | |||
Steve Winwood on Austin City Limits, did anyone | Pro Audio |