Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article .com,
wrote:
Of course I knew that CDs don't require summed bass, rolled off HF or
compression to be properly mastered. It has it's own unique
requirements for best results.


It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable levels.

Bet you didn't know that.


But you're going to tell us anyway?

--
*If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #82   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Don Pearce Don Pearce is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,726
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 23:03:39 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:
Of course I knew that CDs don't require summed bass, rolled off HF or
compression to be properly mastered. It has it's own unique
requirements for best results.


It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable levels.

Bet you didn't know that.


But you're going to tell us anyway?


Bet he can't. Darkly hinting at mysteries beyond the comprehension of
mere mortals is the limit of his abilities.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

  #83   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........


Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.



Try using your ears instead. But if you can't, at least try to get some
meaningful data on the subject. What you have going there is about as
meaningful as a manufacturer's THD measuements are for an amp.



Scott

  #85   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Of course I knew that CDs don't require summed bass, rolled off HF or
compression to be properly mastered. It has it's own unique
requirements for best results.


It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable levels.


Guess again

Bet you didn't know that.


But you're going to tell us anyway?



Nah, I'll let a few people makes asses of themselves first.


Scott



  #86   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 23:03:39 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:
Of course I knew that CDs don't require summed bass, rolled off HF or
compression to be properly mastered. It has it's own unique
requirements for best results.


It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable levels.

Bet you didn't know that.


But you're going to tell us anyway?


Bet he can't.


A fool and their money...


Darkly hinting at mysteries beyond the comprehension of
mere mortals is the limit of his abilities.



Dick er Don, do you ever get tired of acting like a fool? Is it the
only way you can get that much needed attention?


Scott

  #87   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
John Phillips John Phillips is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

On 2006-10-25, Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........


Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.


Possibly a little optimistic. We have seen earlier on uk.rec.audio
the reference to RCA's research into SOTA vinyl which gave 60 dB as the
A-weighted SNR you could achieve with the *best available* vinyl.

That would be nominally 10 bits. However if you are prepared to let
distortion on peak signals reach up to 10% or so you can get more.

Actually a genuine 60 dB is quite good enough for most performances
reproduced in the home. My own experience is that more than that
(I only have one or two recordings which use more) makes setting the
"right" volume level for the entire performance difficult.

The flies in the vinyl ointment, however, are

1. Typical retail vinyl has not been SOTA. More of it may come close
these days since the absolute volume of sales is so low but in the past
the quality, in my personal experience, was nowhere near SOTA.

2. The single A-weighted SNR figure hides a frequency-dependent noise
floor which rises from about 500 Hz downwards.

--
John Phillips
  #89   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Jim Lesurf Jim Lesurf is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article , John Phillips
wrote:
On 2006-10-25, Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:


Didn't think there was any argument? Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in
excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.


Possibly a little optimistic. We have seen earlier on uk.rec.audio the
reference to RCA's research into SOTA vinyl which gave 60 dB as the
A-weighted SNR you could achieve with the *best available* vinyl.


That would be nominally 10 bits. However if you are prepared to let
distortion on peak signals reach up to 10% or so you can get more.


The following may help.

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ons/page1.html

and

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ons/page2.html

The second page may be particularly relevant here. It is based on industry
measurements on not only LPs, but also on the previous stages in the LP
production process, etc, as reported by manufacturers in JAES. Also on
similar work on the playback systems. Details in the references listed on
the pages.

The pages are a version of an article from 'Hi Fi News'. They don't say
anything 'new', but just explain what is in the professional literature.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
  #90   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Keith G Keith G is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
On 2006-10-25, Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........

Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.


Possibly a little optimistic. We have seen earlier on uk.rec.audio
the reference to RCA's research into SOTA vinyl which gave 60 dB as the
A-weighted SNR you could achieve with the *best available* vinyl.

That would be nominally 10 bits. However if you are prepared to let
distortion on peak signals reach up to 10% or so you can get more.

Actually a genuine 60 dB is quite good enough for most performances
reproduced in the home. My own experience is that more than that
(I only have one or two recordings which use more) makes setting the
"right" volume level for the entire performance difficult.

The flies in the vinyl ointment, however, are

1. Typical retail vinyl has not been SOTA. More of it may come close
these days since the absolute volume of sales is so low but in the past
the quality, in my personal experience, was nowhere near SOTA.

2. The single A-weighted SNR figure hides a frequency-dependent noise
floor which rises from about 500 Hz downwards.




I have tried to ignore this crossposted thread where the same old faces are
thrashing over the same old rubbish, but I have to ask: What is it with
vinyl that starts all the stupid, invidious comparisons with other, more
modern (speed and convenience) media?

In my book, all the arguments are tantamount to saying a Ford Mondeo is a
better car than a 30's Bentley - a record is a record and does what a record
does, if you don't happen to like that, or prefer summat else, then don't
****ing use them!

How hard is that....??







  #91   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article .com,
wrote:
Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.



Try using your ears instead. But if you can't, at least try to get some
meaningful data on the subject. What you have going there is about as
meaningful as a manufacturer's THD measuements are for an amp.



Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc? Proper blind
testing? It's quite revealing. The crunch point comes at about 12 bits
(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get cloudy.
The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at 16 bit
weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.

--
*Go the extra mile. It makes your boss look like an incompetent slacker *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #92   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article .com,
wrote:
It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable
levels.


Guess again


Not a guess. I deal with digital recording all the time. I also well
remember the shortcomings of all analogue recording methods and the tricks
needed to try and circumvent them.

Bet you didn't know that.


But you're going to tell us anyway?



Nah, I'll let a few people makes asses of themselves first.


Typical 'get out' reply. Afraid of getting shot down in flames - again.

--
*(over a sketch of the titanic) "The boat sank - get over it

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #93   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I have tried to ignore this crossposted thread where the same old faces
are thrashing over the same old rubbish, but I have to ask: What is it
with vinyl that starts all the stupid, invidious comparisons with
other, more modern (speed and convenience) media?


In my book, all the arguments are tantamount to saying a Ford Mondeo is
a better car than a 30's Bentley - a record is a record and does what a
record does, if you don't happen to like that, or prefer summat else,
then don't ****ing use them!


I take it you've never driven a '30s Bentley? Fun though it might be for
occasional outings, only a fool would choose it for daily use over a
Mondeo. Things move on... But why compare a Bentley with a Ford anyway?

Whatever - if you did start such a thread in a car group you'd also get
shot down unless you heavily qualified your opinion. Which is what happens
here to all those who constantly harp on about how marvellous vinyl is
while knocking digital.

There are vintage and classic car groups for those who want to enthuse
about obsolete products. And makers who still reproduce such things for
the few who want them.

But this isn't uk.rec.vintage.audio...

--
*Do they ever shut up on your planet?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #94   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


wrote in message
oups.com...

Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........

Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Try 12 bits.


Try using your ears instead.


Hiss, tic, tic, pop.

But if you can't, at least try to get some meaningful data on the subject.



Letsee, measurements can't be used, and neither can listening unless it
produces the *right* results.

What you have going there is about as
meaningful as a manufacturer's THD measuements are for an amp.


Obviously Scott, you don't remember what audio was like before amp THD specs
got to be reasonable.


  #95   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Keith G Keith G is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I have tried to ignore this crossposted thread where the same old faces
are thrashing over the same old rubbish, but I have to ask: What is it
with vinyl that starts all the stupid, invidious comparisons with
other, more modern (speed and convenience) media?


In my book, all the arguments are tantamount to saying a Ford Mondeo is
a better car than a 30's Bentley - a record is a record and does what a
record does, if you don't happen to like that, or prefer summat else,
then don't ****ing use them!




OK Plowie, I twigged you want to talk to me so I have fished you out of my
****ter - see if you can stay out of it...

(Doubtful...)


I take it you've never driven a '30s Bentley?



Nope, but I've driven loaded lorries with crash boxes, 'welded steering' and
no brakes worth a damn and owned two (real) Land Rovers in my time, so I
expect I could cope with one....!! ;-)


Fun though it might be for
occasional outings, only a fool would choose it for daily use over a
Mondeo.



Why? I know which I'd rather have....


Things move on...


Sure they do, but ever for the better? Name a single instance - how about a
Morris Minor buzzing along leafy lanes at, say, 60 mph compared with a
Ferrari doing 20 mph on the North Circular....???



But why compare a Bentley with a Ford anyway?


Why not, they're both cars ain't they??



Whatever - if you did start such a thread in a car group you'd also get
shot down unless you heavily qualified your opinion. Which is what happens
here to all those who constantly harp on about how marvellous vinyl is
while knocking digital.



Er, got that twisted about *as usual* - it's more a case of the little
gaggle of bashers who come rushing up to yap about how bad vinyl is every
time someone mentions it. I got news for you - I prefer it to CD bigtime and
nobody's 'shot me down' yet! I go further and suggest to you that not one
single person has been put off vinyl by all the yap here about how 'bad' it
compares with CD...



There are vintage and classic car groups for those who want to enthuse
about obsolete products. And makers who still reproduce such things for
the few who want them.



Get real and FFS stop *denying* for a moment - if you won a raffle and had
the choice of a 30's Bentley or a Mondeo which would you choose....???


But this isn't uk.rec.vintage.audio...



And it ain't uk.rec.digital.audio neither....






  #97   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?

Try 12 bits.



Try using your ears instead. But if you can't, at least try to get some
meaningful data on the subject. What you have going there is about as
meaningful as a manufacturer's THD measuements are for an amp.



Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc?


Yes I have. Have you?

Proper blind
testing?


Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many comparisons
have you made of various issues of the same commercial titles blind?
I've done hundreds.


It's quite revealing.


Yes it is. Give it a try.


The crunch point comes at about 12 bits


What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?


(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get cloudy.
The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at 16 bit
weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.



Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices. You get what you
deserve.
Me, I'll keep listening.


Scott

  #98   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?

Try 12 bits.



Try using your ears instead. But if you can't, at least try to get some
meaningful data on the subject. What you have going there is about as
meaningful as a manufacturer's THD measuements are for an amp.



Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc?


Yes I have. Have you?

Proper blind
testing?


Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many comparisons
have you made of various issues of the same commercial titles blind?
I've done hundreds.


It's quite revealing.


Yes it is. Give it a try.


The crunch point comes at about 12 bits


What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?


(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get cloudy.
The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at 16 bit
weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.



Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices. You get what you
deserve.
Me, I'll keep listening.


Scott

  #99   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable
levels.


Guess again


Not a guess. I deal with digital recording all the time.


OK what commercial CDs have you mastered? This could be quite revealing
since the vast majority are soooo poorly mastered these days.


I also well
remember the shortcomings of all analogue recording methods and the tricks
needed to try and circumvent them.



Maybe that was an issue for you. Were talking SOTA here. Were not
talking about your best efforts.



Bet you didn't know that.

But you're going to tell us anyway?



Nah, I'll let a few people makes asses of themselves first.


Typical 'get out' reply. Afraid of getting shot down in flames - again.


In your head.

Scott

  #100   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
OK Plowie, I twigged you want to talk to me so I have fished you out of
my ****ter - see if you can stay out of it...


Please put me back in.

Pratts who parade their killfiles to the world don't deserve the time of
day. Just who do you think you are that it should concern all who you do
and don't read?

--
*I started out with nothing, and I still have most of it*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #101   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article . com,
wrote:
Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc?


Yes I have. Have you?


Yes

Proper blind
testing?


Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many comparisons
have you made of various issues of the same commercial titles blind?
I've done hundreds.


I'm not quite clear what you mean.


It's quite revealing.


Yes it is. Give it a try.


Why repeat what I said?


The crunch point comes at about 12 bits


What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?


Ah - you didn't understand what I meant at all. And obviously haven't
conducted this sort of test.


(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get
cloudy. The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at
16 bit weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.



Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices.


Not *my* choices, pal.

You get what you
deserve.
Me, I'll keep listening.


Keep giving us the proof you simply don't know what you're listening to.

--
*Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #102   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Keith G Keith G is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 552
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
OK Plowie, I twigged you want to talk to me so I have fished you out of
my ****ter - see if you can stay out of it...


Please put me back in.




With the greatest pleasure!

**splash**


Now, how long before the stupid **** starts replying to my posts again...???




  #103   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article . com,
wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
It has no unique requirements other than observing peak allowable
levels.


Guess again


Not a guess. I deal with digital recording all the time.


OK what commercial CDs have you mastered?


Who said anything about mastering CDs?

This could be quite revealing
since the vast majority are soooo poorly mastered these days.


Indeed. Is this butchering what you were referring to? However, it's not
'poor' suggesting a mistake or lack of knowledge but deliberate. It's what
the public like, apparently.

I also well remember the shortcomings of all analogue recording
methods and the tricks needed to try and circumvent them.


Maybe that was an issue for you.


So you don't understand the shortcomings of all analogue recording methods?
Figures.

Were talking SOTA here.


Do you understand what that means?

Were not talking about your best efforts.


You don't need 'best efforts' with decent digital recorders. They simply
function as designed.

Perhaps you're too young to remember - or simply don't know - how much
skilled effort went in to making a 'SOTA' analogue tape recording. And to
cut a lacquer from it.


Bet you didn't know that.

But you're going to tell us anyway?



Nah, I'll let a few people makes asses of themselves first.


Typical 'get out' reply. Afraid of getting shot down in flames - again.


In your head.


Then please enlighten me.

--
*If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #104   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Now, how long before the stupid **** starts replying to my posts
again...???


Nice language. Shows you for the pillock you are.

Your posts don't need replies - just comments on their stupidity.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #106   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:
Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc?


Yes I have. Have you?


Yes

Proper blind
testing?


Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many comparisons
have you made of various issues of the same commercial titles blind?
I've done hundreds.


I'm not quite clear what you mean.


Sorry that my attempt to stay on subject confused you. Remeber the
subject of why it makes sense to digitize LPs? Remember the claim that
one good reason is becuase in so many cases an LP version of a given
title is sonically superior to any CD version? Sorry that my attempt to
move back to the real issue confused you.




It's quite revealing.


Yes it is. Give it a try.


Why repeat what I said?



Where did you say "Yes it is. Give it a try?"




The crunch point comes at about 12 bits


What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?


Ah - you didn't understand what I meant at all. And obviously haven't
conducted this sort of test.


Right. I haven't conducted tests below 16 bits. Why should I when I
hear differences between 16 and 24?




(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get
cloudy. The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at
16 bit weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.



Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices.


Not *my* choices, pal.



My bad. I forgot that some just can't think for themselves


Scott

  #107   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


wrote:
In rec.audio.tech
wrote:

wrote:
In rec.audio.tech
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006 12:23:30 -0700,
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:15:16 +0100, Eiron wrote:

wrote:

Have you ever heard a SOTA LP on SOTA playback gear?

Can you give any examples of SOTA LPs?

Unfortunately they are pretty much all SOTA. :-(

Why on earth are you chiming in on this subject. Didn't you make a big
enough fool of yourself last time you talked about this subject?


You're thinking of that Scott bloke


No. you were the fool who insisted that all LPs were mastered with
summed bass and HF roll off. Are you back to make some more ridiculous
claims?

I posted my test results on HF rolloff with Herr beloved Cardas test record
some time back in RAHE. Now you're over here posting the same drivel.

You're just wrong, but enjoy your LP's. Lots of fine music on them.


Only an idiot would draw universal conclusions about LPs from one
example. You get to join Don and Arny in the corner with the dunce cap.


You made a specific technical claim that is easily refuted.


Really? Knock yourself out dude. Refute the claim that not all LPs were
made with summed bass and rolled off HF. Join your pals in the corner.

Nobody said anything
about 'universal' until you did.


Wrong.


You're a weird dude man...


You're an idiot.


Scott

  #108   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article . com,
wrote:
Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many
comparisons have you made of various issues of the same commercial
titles blind? I've done hundreds.


I'm not quite clear what you mean.


Sorry that my attempt to stay on subject confused you. Remeber the
subject of why it makes sense to digitize LPs? Remember the claim that
one good reason is becuase in so many cases an LP version of a given
title is sonically superior to any CD version? Sorry that my attempt to
move back to the real issue confused you.


Ah. Of course. Now I understand you haven't a clue as to why some CDs will
sound different from the 'same' LP. It's not some magic which can't be
measured - it's because they go through different mastering processes. In
the case of CD because the intention is to 'improve' on the master tape.
With LP often essential to produce a playable version.
But if you're copying a LP to CD at home, this doesn't apply.



It's quite revealing.


Yes it is. Give it a try.


Why repeat what I said?



Where did you say "Yes it is. Give it a try?"





The crunch point comes at about 12 bits


What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?


Ah - you didn't understand what I meant at all. And obviously haven't
conducted this sort of test.


Right. I haven't conducted tests below 16 bits.


Why not? You seem convinced 16 bit doesn't deliver what *you* want - so
perhaps 12 might? After all, the measurable parameters of an LP are well
below 16 bit spec in every way, so perhaps this would be just what you're
looking for.

Why should I when I hear differences between 16 and 24?


Right. Thank you for confirming you don't know how to conduct proper
testing.

(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get
cloudy. The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD
at 16 bit weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.



Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices.


Not *my* choices, pal.



My bad. I forgot that some just can't think for themselves


Oh you certainly 'think'. Think you can hear differences where non exist.
Or where they do, don't actually care why.

--
*Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #109   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


wrote in message
ups.com...

wrote:
In rec.audio.tech
wrote:

wrote:
In rec.audio.tech
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On 25 Oct 2006 12:23:30 -0700,
wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 19:15:16 +0100, Eiron
wrote:

wrote:

Have you ever heard a SOTA LP on SOTA playback gear?

Can you give any examples of SOTA LPs?

Unfortunately they are pretty much all SOTA. :-(

Why on earth are you chiming in on this subject. Didn't you make
a big
enough fool of yourself last time you talked about this subject?


You're thinking of that Scott bloke


No. you were the fool who insisted that all LPs were mastered with
summed bass and HF roll off. Are you back to make some more
ridiculous
claims?

I posted my test results on HF rolloff with Herr beloved Cardas test
record
some time back in RAHE. Now you're over here posting the same
drivel.

You're just wrong, but enjoy your LP's. Lots of fine music on them.


Only an idiot would draw universal conclusions about LPs from one
example. You get to join Don and Arny in the corner with the dunce cap.


That seems to be very important to you, Scott. I guess you have this dream
where "Makeup Artist Refutes Audio Technicians".

You made a specific technical claim that is easily refuted.


Really? Knock yourself out dude. Refute the claim that not all LPs were
made with summed bass and rolled off HF.


Since that is your straw man Scott, why should we bother?



Join your pals in the corner.



  #110   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


wrote in message
ups.com...

Right. I haven't conducted tests below 16 bits. Why should I when I
hear differences between 16 and 24?


Because that was based on flawed tests. It would be good for you to first
learn how to control all relevant variables before you run around claiming
that which is known to be impossible.




  #111   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] Theporkygeorge@aol.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 275
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:
Dude I do almost all of my comparisons blind. You? How many
comparisons have you made of various issues of the same commercial
titles blind? I've done hundreds.

I'm not quite clear what you mean.


Sorry that my attempt to stay on subject confused you. Remeber the
subject of why it makes sense to digitize LPs? Remember the claim that
one good reason is becuase in so many cases an LP version of a given
title is sonically superior to any CD version? Sorry that my attempt to
move back to the real issue confused you.


Ah. Of course. Now I understand



No you don't. I suspect you never will.

you haven't a clue as to why some CDs will
sound different from the 'same' LP.



Good lord are you really that ****ing stupid?


It's not some magic which can't be
measured - it's because they go through different mastering processes.



OK an honest question here. Are you really so ****ing stupid that you
have missed it every time I have said as much or are you just incapable
of having an honest conversation on this subject? Really which is it?


In
the case of CD because the intention is to 'improve' on the master tape.
With LP often essential to produce a playable version.



Dude get your head out of your ass. It will help you hear better. You
really think the current state of CD mastering is about improving the
sound? You must be deaf or a complete ****ing idiot to believe that
crap. Hey I have an idea go get the new Dylan album on CD and tell us
how the mastering improved the sound on the master tape.


But if you're copying a LP to CD at home, this doesn't apply.



It's quite revealing.

Yes it is. Give it a try.

Why repeat what I said?



Where did you say "Yes it is. Give it a try?"





The crunch point comes at about 12 bits

What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess you
came up with this number using blind listening tetsts yourself?

Ah - you didn't understand what I meant at all. And obviously haven't
conducted this sort of test.


Right. I haven't conducted tests below 16 bits.


Why not?


I answered the question just below didp****.

You seem convinced 16 bit doesn't deliver what *you* want - so
perhaps 12 might? After all, the measurable parameters of an LP are well
below 16 bit spec in every way, so perhaps this would be just what you're
looking for.



You are indeed a ****ing idiot.



Why should I when I hear differences between 16 and 24?


Right. Thank you for confirming you don't know how to conduct proper
testing.



thank you for confirming your head is in fact way up your ass.



(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get
cloudy. The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD
at 16 bit weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.


Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices.

Not *my* choices, pal.



My bad. I forgot that some just can't think for themselves


Oh you certainly 'think'.


Yes, you might want to give it a try some day.

*Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment *



Is that how you do things? Explains a lot. No thank you. I am a big fan
of excellence.



Scott

  #112   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article . com,
wrote:


In the case of CD because the intention is to 'improve' on the master
tape. With LP often essential to produce a playable version.



Dude get your head out of your ass. It will help you hear better. You
really think the current state of CD mastering is about improving the
sound?


You don't understand the use of parenthesis? Or irony?

You must be deaf or a complete ****ing idiot to believe that
crap.


Better, perhaps, than being just plain uneducated. ;-)

Hey I have an idea go get the new Dylan album on CD and tell us
how the mastering improved the sound on the master tape.


It's an interesting one. Someone of the likes of Dillon complains about
poor CD - or rather digital, sound - and then allows his first new album
in many years to confirm just that. Can't somehow see him being over-ruled
by his record company, so perhaps he couldn't be bothered to do anything
about it.

But if you're copying a LP to CD at home, this doesn't apply.



It's quite revealing.

Yes it is. Give it a try.

Why repeat what I said?



Where did you say "Yes it is. Give it a try?"





The crunch point comes at about 12 bits

What didn't you understand about "using your ears?" Let me guess
you came up with this number using blind listening tetsts
yourself?

Ah - you didn't understand what I meant at all. And obviously
haven't conducted this sort of test.


Right. I haven't conducted tests below 16 bits.


Why not?


I answered the question just below didp****.


No you didn't. You sort of stated the nonsense that you could here the
difference between 16 and 24 which isn't the same thing. It suggests you
started out thinking 16 bit isn't good enough...

You seem convinced 16 bit doesn't deliver what *you* want - so perhaps
12 might? After all, the measurable parameters of an LP are well below
16 bit spec in every way, so perhaps this would be just what you're
looking for.



You are indeed a ****ing idiot.


Why? You apparently love the degradation *all* vinyl causes. Unless you
think clicks and plops - just as an example - were actually there before?



Why should I when I hear differences between 16 and 24?


Right. Thank you for confirming you don't know how to conduct proper
testing.



thank you for confirming your head is in fact way up your ass.


First start with an open mind...



(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters
get cloudy. The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded
- and CD at 16 bit weren't plucked out of the air as some seem
to think.


Dude keep on using those numbers to make your choices.

Not *my* choices, pal.



My bad. I forgot that some just can't think for themselves


Oh you certainly 'think'.


Yes, you might want to give it a try some day.


*Aim Low, Reach Your Goals, Avoid Disappointment *



Is that how you do things? Explains a lot. No thank you. I am a big fan
of excellence.


Tag generators are beyond you too?

--
*Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #113   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Steven Sullivan Steven Sullivan is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,268
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In rec.audio.tech Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , John Phillips
wrote:
On 2006-10-25, Geoff wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:


Didn't think there was any argument? Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in
excess of 16 bits?

Try 12 bits.


Possibly a little optimistic. We have seen earlier on uk.rec.audio the
reference to RCA's research into SOTA vinyl which gave 60 dB as the
A-weighted SNR you could achieve with the *best available* vinyl.


That would be nominally 10 bits. However if you are prepared to let
distortion on peak signals reach up to 10% or so you can get more.


The following may help.


http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ons/page1.html


and


http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...ons/page2.html


The second page may be particularly relevant here. It is based on industry
measurements on not only LPs, but also on the previous stages in the LP
production process, etc, as reported by manufacturers in JAES. Also on
similar work on the playback systems. Details in the references listed on
the pages.


The pages are a version of an article from 'Hi Fi News'. They don't say
anything 'new', but just explain what is in the professional literature.



See also the 'extra page' where Mr. Lesurf responds to reader comments.

http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioM...s/letters.html



___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason
  #114   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Glenn Richards Glenn Richards is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

The Wave editor that comes with the full version of Nero Burning
ROM has a very good noise reduction and declicker filter, and I've
had very good results from this when transferring vinyl using the
method above.

If you're going to use such software the quality of the sound card
becomes pretty meaningless.


Not at all. Garbage in, garbage out.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation
  #115   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
y I have an idea go get the new Dylan album on CD and tell us
how the mastering improved the sound on the master tape.


It's an interesting one. Someone of the likes of Dillon


Fooking spool cheekers...

--
*Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #116   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


wrote in message
ups.com...


Good lord are you really that ****ing stupid?



Yet another Scotty melt down in progress.


  #117   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
[email protected] neil@thump.org is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:20:07 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


But Audacity is open-source freeware, and works well enough for transcribing
LPs on a budget.


Open source is never freeware. It will have a GPL, L-GPL or GNU
license. That's why its called open source.
  #118   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........


Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Of course not!
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 14 bits?

MrT.


  #119   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
Have you ever had the chance to experiment with a variety of programme
material over a wide range of sampling frequencies, etc? Proper blind
testing? It's quite revealing. The crunch point comes at about 12 bits
(straight) Once you use companding or over sampling the waters get cloudy.
The figures for NICAM TV sound - 11 bit companded - and CD at 16 bit
weren't plucked out of the air as some seem to think.


16 bits was an obvious choice because it's two bytes and provides a
sufficient degree of overkill. What you could also say is that not for
nothing was the early use and acceptance of 14 bit CD players, when 16 bit
converters were more difficult/expensive to make.

As for companded systems and compressed data formats, it's always a trade
off for any number of reasons.

MrT.


  #120   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
Mr.T Mr.T is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,108
Default Vinyl to CD on a PC


"Keith G" wrote in message
...
Whatever - if you did start such a thread in a car group you'd also get
shot down unless you heavily qualified your opinion. Which is what

happens
here to all those who constantly harp on about how marvellous vinyl is
while knocking digital.


You have it back to front. I can't remember the last time anyone STARTED a
thread bashing vinyl, rather than simply responding to the ill informed.

If the vinyl lovers wish to enjoy their personal choice without disparaging
remarks, all they need do is stop claiming to the world that it is better
than CD.
Seems simple enough to me.

MrT.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why would someone like LP? Helen Schmidt High End Audio 376 July 22nd 05 01:07 AM
Swap Vinyl Save Cash! swapthing Marketplace 0 March 5th 05 08:11 PM
Timing Michael Mossey High End Audio 58 January 7th 05 09:19 PM
CD verses vinyl - help clear dispute WideGlide Pro Audio 188 March 13th 04 10:23 PM
SOTA vinyl mastering Thom Halvorsen High End Audio 26 October 24th 03 12:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:12 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"