[BEAR]

Someone suggested in an recent thread that they buy an LP, and if they
like it they then buy a CD to see what it "really sounds like."

An interesting idea.

One problem though. Bass.

I have noticed that MANY commercial re-releases of LP materials have had
the low bass SCRUBBED off. Meaning that it's not there at all. If it was
there, but say shelved down 20 db or something it could be recovered,
given the noiseless digital medium and a good software program.

I've seen this many times, and it really really is upsetting.
I like low bass.

It is all the more ironic, since if there is ONE THING that digital can
do in spades it is flat, low bass!!

I know that LP had the bass mono'd and compressed, but we're talking
frequency, not level. I've taken the expedient of actually checking with
a real time spectrum analyzer as well as sampling via the usual computer
based FFT software. Results the same. The low bass below 40 Hz. is
systematically scrubbed off many CD releases!

Two good examples are Stevie Wonder's Living In The City (whatever the
album was called) and Ringo Starrs first solo album... both had big
solid low end in the LP version, and thin anemic bass on the CD. Many
others that I can't recall off hand at the moment.

So much for "remastering"...

_-_-bear

[[email protected]]

BEAR wrote:
Someone suggested in an recent thread that they buy an LP, and if they
like it they then buy a CD to see what it "really sounds like."

An interesting idea.

One problem though. Bass.

I have noticed that MANY commercial re-releases of LP materials have had
the low bass SCRUBBED off.

I have experienced this as well. Any speculation as to why? I have a
couple of suggestions, mostly tongue-in-cheek, but offered here for
what they are worth... not one helluva lot. REPEAT: this is
tongue-in-cheek... somewhat.

a) Those who still utilize vinyl to any serious extent tend to have at
least one toe firmly planted in the past. Past High-End speakers
eschewed sub-woofers, point-source single-driver horns and other effete
solutions. Those speakers used big, honking woofers, multiple other
drivers and were bottomless pits for power. Consider the AR-9 for
example. Modern (little) speakers seem to stop at 8", that being a
rarity even as a sub-woofer. So, no capacity to produce visceral bass?
why include it?

b) Just as there is an entire generation of 'listeners' who judge sound
as it comes from computer speakers or ear-bud headphones, there is now
an entire generation that solves the consequences of bad choices by
litigation. So, if there is no heavy bass, those earbuds are less
likely to damage those idiots who wish to addle their brains with loud
noises directly delivered. No damage, no litigation. Or so one hopes.

c) I see multiple-speaker systems for surround sound that manage
reasonable bass... but _ONLY as compared to 'original TV sound)
typically 6 x 3 ovals at best. I have substituted a pair of AR4x
speakers (small 8" woofer & unshielded, of course) in such systems
where shielding is not critical and gotten WOW responses from my
victims. That is a 35YO speaker, and not hardly the best of its class
either.

I think what it comes down to is the 'compaction' of systems. We now
have entire systems (OK, receiver, CD & speakers) that weigh less than
five pounds in total, are only a couple of inches thick when mounted on
the wall (or less), and have all sorts of features not available in the
past. That is almost by default the 'new standard' in sound, the vast
majority of source buyers (CDs, MP3, DVDs, whatever) and so forth. When
dealing with that sort and level of demand, production standards need
not be much, at all. Consider the Bose Docking Station for the iPod as
an excellent example of this phenomenon. Convenience over quality.

Those few well-produced sources of any nature, tape, vinyl, CD are
all-the-more treasured.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[MC]

I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

[Steven Sullivan]

MC wrote:
I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.

[BEAR]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:

I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.


Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.



Yes, in all probability.

The Dorian stuff I have is tremendous, but they are not re-issues!

Almost every CD reissue I have bought has the low bass scrubbed clean.

I know that LP required the mono'd bass (usually) and compression, which
gives a false sense of increased bass, but I've looked at the spectrum
analyzer via FFT real time (HP) gear and there just ain't nuthin down
there!!

Inquiries to the major labels have been ignored so far?
Write your audio mag?
Call your Congressman??

_-_-bear

[[email protected]]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:
I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.

IF the CD reaches all the way down. And all the way up, comes to it. In
all seriousness, most do not in my experience.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[[email protected]]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:
I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.


I think the Virgil Fox LPs on Crystal Clear would be considered SOTA .
Give em a listen and decide for yourself how well they represent a pipe
organ. You might be surprised.



Scott Wheeler

[Steven Sullivan]

BEAR wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:

I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.


Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.



Yes, in all probability.

The Dorian stuff I have is tremendous, but they are not re-issues!

Almost every CD reissue I have bought has the low bass scrubbed clean.

Inlcuding classical reissues? Jazz reissues?

I know that LP required the mono'd bass (usually) and compression, which
gives a false sense of increased bass, but I've looked at the spectrum
analyzer via FFT real time (HP) gear and there just ain't nuthin down
there!!

You sure you aren't also counting turntable rumble?

Inquiries to the major labels have been ignored so far? Write your
audio mag? Call your Congressman??

How widespread? Scanning all the Grateful Dead albums doesn't count.
--

___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:
I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.

IF the CD reaches all the way down. And all the way up, comes to it. In
all seriousness, most do not in my experience.

True for pipe organ recordings on CDs? Really? HAve you got any .wav
analysis data to offer?


___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

[Jenn]

wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
MC wrote:
I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.

Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.


I think the Virgil Fox LPs on Crystal Clear would be considered SOTA .
Give em a listen and decide for yourself how well they represent a pipe
organ. You might be surprised.



Scott Wheeler

Also hear the Opus 3 organ disk on LP.

[mp]

wrote:

I think the Virgil Fox LPs on Crystal Clear would be considered SOTA .
Give em a listen and decide for yourself how well they represent a pipe
organ. You might be surprised.


I presume this is a 45rpm? The reason I ask is because I have a
CrystalClear Lp of Charlie Byrd. It is OK, but I'm not a big fan of
Byrd. Actually, on my Byrd Lp, the highs seem rolled off. At 45 rpm
(if indeed the Fox LP is) you are really looking at minimalist playing
time. One of the best Direct to Disk Lp's I have is an Umbrella
recording of Rob McConnell's big band. It is very dynamic, and 33 rpm.

I like Lps a lot, and play them a lot. But I'd never argue Lps are the
way to go. The recording that really made me appreciate CD was the
Levine Ring. Now, a lot of people criticize Levine's tempo, and the
singers may not be to everyone's liking, and I understand that the
recording venue may not have been ideal, acoustic-wise, however the
dynamics, and the sheer beauty of the sonics are stupendous. No "high
frequency" artifacts that many ascribe to digital are present, it has
very nice dynamic range, and great lows. I have more recordings (most
are on Lp) of the Ring than I want to think about, however none are as
beautiful as the Levine-Met-DGG for overall sonic presentation. I
cannot imagine any record ever approaching this kind of level. And, a
full recording of the Ring spans upwards of 20 Lp's. It would be hard
to find a 20 record set where at least one of them is not defective in
one way or another, even if it is just the occasional pop and click.

mp

[BEAR]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
BEAR wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:

MC wrote:


I think you're onto something. Good bass used to mean you could hear 16-Hz
organ pipes. Today, good bass means 100 Hz, terribly loud, rattling the car
windows.


Surely pipe organ works are better served on CD than they ever were on LP.




Yes, in all probability.


The Dorian stuff I have is tremendous, but they are not re-issues!


Almost every CD reissue I have bought has the low bass scrubbed clean.


Inlcuding classical reissues? Jazz reissues?

I gave a few examples, although these are pop albums...
Please feel free to do some comparisions of your own and report back?



I know that LP required the mono'd bass (usually) and compression, which
gives a false sense of increased bass, but I've looked at the spectrum

analyzer via FFT real time (HP) gear and there just ain't nuthin down
there!!

You sure you aren't also counting turntable rumble?

Yes, thank you.



Inquiries to the major labels have been ignored so far? Write your

audio mag? Call your Congressman??

How widespread? Scanning all the Grateful Dead albums doesn't count.

Suggest you might do some of your own comparisons, and compare ".wav"
files - I prefered to do the comparison by other means, but the ".wav"
file method should be reasonably good. I suggest digitizing the same
sections - editing them for very close time framing in a digital editor
- and then doing the FFT of the frames chosen, and comparing.

Of course they will be different because the LP is altered due to the
pre-pressing mastering process and the feedback on the cutter head...
but the *existence* of LF energy below say 40Hz. is what I have noticed
as being entirely missing.

Please feel free to do some tests and report back...

_-_-bear

[[email protected]]

hmmm, if anything I borrow CD's or buy them second hand then get the
vinyl to see what it sounds like. BTW, I am under 30!

bass frequencies have a larger amplitude than mid or high frequencies
and consequently this affects the total running time and loudness of a
pressing. most new LP's I get are pressed accross 2 discs with plenty
of bass, loud and crisp. but these are new pressings - often dance
styles. maybe it's worth noting that dance music has done more than
it's fair share of keeping new vinyl pressings alive today. and that
would never have happened with substandard bass! .

[[email protected]]

wrote:
hmmm, if anything I borrow CD's or buy them second hand then get the
vinyl to see what it sounds like. BTW, I am under 30!

bass frequencies have a larger amplitude than mid or high frequencies
and consequently this affects the total running time and loudness of a
pressing. most new LP's I get are pressed accross 2 discs with plenty
of bass, loud and crisp. but these are new pressings - often dance
styles. maybe it's worth noting that dance music has done more than
it's fair share of keeping new vinyl pressings alive today. and that
would never have happened with substandard bass! .

OH I love dance music. Is there a lot of stuff on LP by ATC and Real
McCoy?

[---MIKE---]

Some of the Living Stereo CDs have plenty of low bass (Saint Saens Organ
Symphony for example).


---MIKE---
In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
(44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

[Steven Sullivan]

BEAR wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
BEAR wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:

Almost every CD reissue I have bought has the low bass scrubbed clean.


Inlcuding classical reissues? Jazz reissues?

I gave a few examples, although these are pop albums...
Please feel free to do some comparisions of your own and report back?



I know that LP required the mono'd bass (usually) and compression, which
gives a false sense of increased bass, but I've looked at the spectrum

analyzer via FFT real time (HP) gear and there just ain't nuthin down
there!!

You sure you aren't also counting turntable rumble?

Yes, thank you.



Inquiries to the major labels have been ignored so far? Write your

audio mag? Call your Congressman??

How widespread? Scanning all the Grateful Dead albums doesn't count.

Suggest you might do some of your own comparisons, and compare ".wav"
files - I prefered to do the comparison by other means, but the ".wav"
file method should be reasonably good. I suggest digitizing the same
sections - editing them for very close time framing in a digital editor
- and then doing the FFT of the frames chosen, and comparing.

Of course they will be different because the LP is altered due to the
pre-pressing mastering process and the feedback on the cutter head...
but the *existence* of LF energy below say 40Hz. is what I have noticed
as being entirely missing.


Well an electric bass has a low E at 41 Hz. So where's the missing
low bass energy to come from in this pop music? drums? synths? left hand piano?
Moreover, I dimly recall an analysis done some years back which claimed
that few if any pop releases HAD much music-derived energy below 40...even in the
LP era.


Please feel free to do some tests and report back...

You might want to define 'scrubbed clean' or 'entirely missing' first. Down how many
dB in the 'scrubbed' frequencies?

Just by way of example I've got FFT-based Audition data for three different CD remasters
of the David Bowie tune 'Jean Genie'. Levels from 22 Hz to 38 Hz range
from -64 (+/- 2 dB) dB to -43 dB (-1, +2dB), respectively, for all three
remasters (at least two of which were likely sourced from different tapes. and
all of which were mastered for CD by different engineers; the first of them
was done in the 80's, the last circa 2000).

Now, do these levels represent 'scrubbed clean' or 'entirely missing' to you?


___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

[Steven Sullivan]

and here is some data for an LP versus three CD versions.
Measurements were taken of the same section (a screaming
Moog solo with drums and bass and guitar blazing away in support)
of the Yes track 'Revealing Science of God' from a clean 1982-vintage
Japanese LP pressing, the first Atlantic CD issue (circa
late 80's), a japanese HDCD remaster (circa 1997) and
the recent Rhino remaster.

levels shown were taken at 22, 32, and 42 Hz
for left and right channels.


JLP
-43.6 -45.2
-39.3 -42.5
-33.7 -37.0


AtlanticCD
-42.0 -45.6
-37.0 -41.0
-31.1 -35.0

JHDCD
-38.0 -44.3
-32.3 -36.3
-26.4 -29.7

RhinoCD
-45.1 -45.5
-39.0 -38.4
-33.0 -32.3

___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

[[email protected]]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
and here is some data for an LP versus three CD versions.
Measurements were taken of the same section (a screaming
Moog solo with drums and bass and guitar blazing away in support)
of the Yes track 'Revealing Science of God' from a clean 1982-vintage
Japanese LP pressing, the first Atlantic CD issue (circa
late 80's), a japanese HDCD remaster (circa 1997) and
the recent Rhino remaster.



Just a word of advice on Yes LPs. Stay away from the Japanese versions
for the first 10 albums. All three versions of each. It seems to me
they were given screwy copies of master tapes to use. OTOH definitely
go with the Japanese version of 90125. Plates rom Sterling, vinyl from
Sony.

[BEAR]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
BEAR wrote:

Steven Sullivan wrote:

BEAR wrote:


Steven Sullivan wrote:

Almost every CD reissue I have bought has the low bass scrubbed clean.


Inlcuding classical reissues? Jazz reissues?


I gave a few examples, although these are pop albums...
Please feel free to do some comparisions of your own and report back?



I know that LP required the mono'd bass (usually) and compression, which
gives a false sense of increased bass, but I've looked at the spectrum

analyzer via FFT real time (HP) gear and there just ain't nuthin down
there!!

You sure you aren't also counting turntable rumble?


Yes, thank you.



Inquiries to the major labels have been ignored so far? Write your

audio mag? Call your Congressman??

How widespread? Scanning all the Grateful Dead albums doesn't count.


Suggest you might do some of your own comparisons, and compare ".wav"
files - I prefered to do the comparison by other means, but the ".wav"
file method should be reasonably good. I suggest digitizing the same
sections - editing them for very close time framing in a digital editor
- and then doing the FFT of the frames chosen, and comparing.


Of course they will be different because the LP is altered due to the
pre-pressing mastering process and the feedback on the cutter head...
but the *existence* of LF energy below say 40Hz. is what I have noticed
as being entirely missing.



Well an electric bass has a low E at 41 Hz. So where's the missing
low bass energy to come from in this pop music? drums? synths? left hand piano?
Moreover, I dimly recall an analysis done some years back which claimed
that few if any pop releases HAD much music-derived energy below 40...even in the
LP era.



Please feel free to do some tests and report back...


You might want to define 'scrubbed clean' or 'entirely missing' first. Down how many
dB in the 'scrubbed' frequencies?

Just by way of example I've got FFT-based Audition data for three different CD remasters
of the David Bowie tune 'Jean Genie'. Levels from 22 Hz to 38 Hz range
from -64 (+/- 2 dB) dB to -43 dB (-1, +2dB), respectively, for all three
remasters (at least two of which were likely sourced from different tapes. and
all of which were mastered for CD by different engineers; the first of them
was done in the 80's, the last circa 2000).

Now, do these levels represent 'scrubbed clean' or 'entirely missing' to you?


___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

Seems pretty much like they are not there at -43dB at 38Hz, given that a
kick drum has significant energy below 40 Hz...

That does not mean that all original masters had significant or usable
LF information below 40Hz., but since some of the LPs, as I mentioned,
did actually have "usable" information down there, there does seem to be
a "trend" toward scrubbing things below 40Hz using rather steep slopes.

Given that 22Hz is less than one octave below 40Hz, by your example
that's a ~64dB/oct filter! Not sharp enough to qualify for you??

_-_-bear

[BEAR]

Steven Sullivan wrote:

and here is some data for an LP versus three CD versions.
Measurements were taken of the same section (a screaming
Moog solo with drums and bass and guitar blazing away in support)
of the Yes track 'Revealing Science of God' from a clean 1982-vintage
Japanese LP pressing, the first Atlantic CD issue (circa
late 80's), a japanese HDCD remaster (circa 1997) and
the recent Rhino remaster.

levels shown were taken at 22, 32, and 42 Hz
for left and right channels.


JLP
-43.6 -45.2
-39.3 -42.5
-33.7 -37.0


AtlanticCD
-42.0 -45.6
-37.0 -41.0
-31.1 -35.0

JHDCD
-38.0 -44.3
-32.3 -36.3
-26.4 -29.7

RhinoCD
-45.1 -45.5
-39.0 -38.4
-33.0 -32.3

___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

Now, let's take a moment to think about this...

In general terms the level at 40 Hz vs. the level at 20 Hz. is shown to
be within ~10dB in this example. That is ok fine by me.

The examples I cited and the ones I am referring to have virtually
/nothing/ to be found below 40Hz., as if someone applied a sharp DSP
based filter, and scrubbed the information off entirely.

I was not suggesting that this is done in every case, but that it seems
to show up /far too often/!!

_-_-bear

[Steven Sullivan]

BEAR wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:

and here is some data for an LP versus three CD versions.
Measurements were taken of the same section (a screaming
Moog solo with drums and bass and guitar blazing away in support)
of the Yes track 'Revealing Science of God' from a clean 1982-vintage
Japanese LP pressing, the first Atlantic CD issue (circa
late 80's), a japanese HDCD remaster (circa 1997) and
the recent Rhino remaster.

levels shown were taken at 22, 32, and 42 Hz
for left and right channels.


JLP
-43.6 -45.2
-39.3 -42.5
-33.7 -37.0


AtlanticCD
-42.0 -45.6
-37.0 -41.0
-31.1 -35.0

JHDCD
-38.0 -44.3
-32.3 -36.3
-26.4 -29.7

RhinoCD
-45.1 -45.5
-39.0 -38.4
-33.0 -32.3

___
-S
Still not bloggin'.

Now, let's take a moment to think about this...

In general terms the level at 40 Hz vs. the level at 20 Hz. is shown to
be within ~10dB in this example. That is ok fine by me.

The examples I cited and the ones I am referring to have virtually
/nothing/ to be found below 40Hz., as if someone applied a sharp DSP
based filter, and scrubbed the information off entirely.

I was not suggesting that this is done in every case, but that it seems
to show up /far too often/!!

yet these materings were done in two different countries, by
four different engineers, over a span of twenty or so years,
and none of them show the charcteristic you claim is seenn far too
often.

Curious indeed.

Unfortunatly I havve few more LP-to-CD digitizations at hand, but I will
see what the few I do have show, compred to their official CD releases.

___
-S
Still not bloggin'.