Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#361
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard differences due to cables, in a single-blind test. More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of his listening "tests". We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double blind tests". ;-) Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-) They aren't tests at all. That's why I put the word in inverted commas. No joke. You missed it, but otherwise correct. MrT. |
#362
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Now where's the specs on the cutting lathe though :-( The cutting lathe probably performs better than the user's cartridge, etc. I'm not so sure about that myself. I'm sure there were worse cutting heads than my Shure V15VMR, and there are FAR more expensive cartridges available. Or there were and probably still are some bad cutting heads, but most that were used to produce most records were pretty good. In fact half speed mastering was to reduce the deficiencies of the cutting lathes, Sort of. Half speed mastering mostly addressed HF losses and excess heating in the cutting heads. t a cartridge doesn't need to cut a groove as it goes. (although some do :-) That may seem to be intuitively clear, but there are some hidden details. One hidden detail is that it is quite easy for a cutter to create a groove that can't be properly tracked by *any* cartridge. Still not sonically transparent, though. Depends on whose "ears" are being used obviously, going by all the other posts :-) There's a very few die-hards who find accurate reproduction to be adverse to their tastes. |
#363
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard differences due to cables, in a single-blind test. More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of his listening "tests". We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double blind tests". ;-) Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-) They aren't tests at all. That's why I put the word in inverted commas. It wasn't reproduced that way in OE. |
#364
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. You live near a busy road and are plagued with road noise in your listening room? You have hearing problems, you say? Or is it your legacy technology tubed audio components that are mucking up the works? You can whine about how that doesn't fit the measurements but again that would the classic scenerio of meter readers damning the aesthetics becuase they don't meet thier expectations based on the numbers. I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth. Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. Nahh, it was the generally improved sound quality that made CD the hugely sucessful product it became Miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle without improved sound quality had already been tried twice. The results were called 8-track and compact cassette. Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se A claim that is belied by all of the types of media that did have the advantages of miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle, but failed to be as sucessful as the CD. - quite plainly proved byhis ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... A very unfair comparison, because the lowered bitrates were *sold* to the public using a very compelling inducement: Free music that used to cost real money. |
#365
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
wrote in message oups.com... I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. The hidden agenda is that many masters that sound very lifelike on the master tape or digital master, can't possibly be transferred to vinyl without significant amounts of processing. It stands to reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to that effect. Not at all. Nothing like a little LP tracing distortion to put a lost edge back onto a poorly-made or tired analog tape master. |
#366
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
In article ,
Keith G wrote: Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. Quite obviously not around or interested when it was released. I was both, and like all my colleagues who were privileged to attend a pre-release demo - using all sorts of programme material - was absolutely stunned by the quality and instantly recognised it as a great step forward in domestic playback systems. And at the time, the only ones who weren't knocked sideways by it were those with a financial axe to grind - ie some turntable makers with all their eggs in one basket - and a few flat earth types of course. You get those in any society at any time. Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se - quite plainly proved by his ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... And your excuse for accepting a poor listening room, crappy single driver horns, SET amps and vinyl is? -- *The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#367
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-) They aren't tests at all. That's why I put the word in inverted commas. It wasn't reproduced that way in OE. Mr.T used quotation marks which aren't top set characters so may or may not come out correctly on your reader depending on a number of things. Same as the pound sign "£" (that could be fun) so should called gbp on newsnet. For this reason most use inverted commas rather than quotation marks as these are top set characters. -- *Strip mining prevents forest fires. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#368
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
In article .com,
wrote: I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. It stands to reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to that effect. Now while the idea of distortion may bother the meter readers because it makes for uglier numbers, for those who ar interested in sound quality this shouldn't create a philisophical dilema. Sounds better is better. It's a simple and pure philosophy. I note you quote Mr Ricker as saying 'often'. I wonder if he in fact said 'sometimes'? Any recording engineer worth the name knows that certain instruments can benefit from controlled distortion under certain circumstances, so it's possible a cutting engineer did too. However, if he really meant 'most' LPs sounded better than their masters he needed a holiday as his hearing or judgement had gone. Or of course was just saying what you wanted to hear to shut you up... -- *They call it PMS because Mad Cow Disease was already taken. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#369
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. You live near a busy road and are plagued with road noise in your listening room? You have hearing problems, you say? Or is it your legacy technology tubed audio components that are mucking up the works? You can whine about how that doesn't fit the measurements but again that would the classic scenerio of meter readers damning the aesthetics becuase they don't meet thier expectations based on the numbers. I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth. Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. Nahh, it was the generally improved sound quality that made CD the hugely sucessful product it became Miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle without improved sound quality had already been tried twice. The results were called 8-track and compact cassette. 8 track was a great rarity in the UK (IIRC) and cassettes were *anything but* easy handling - the spooling and rewinding put most people off them, once the novelty had worn off. Cassettes only held a certain popularity due the player being installed in 'upmarket' car audio systems for a long time and even then most people only used them to take a copy of their LPs along for the ride - as I do with CDR.... Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se A claim that is belied by all of the types of media that did have the advantages of miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle, but failed to be as sucessful as the CD. Much of CD's success was due to the plentiful supply of reasonably-priced hardware, after the market had been opened up. It had the attractive *technology twinkle* that'll sell anything until Joe Bloggs gets bored with it (witness the mass take-up of iPods and stupidly specced mobile phones today) as well as the welter of titles that quickly became available, once production got going - most of which, as you know, were straight from the vinyl masters in the early days. SACD and DVD-A could have had the same success if the MI hadn't been so greedy with the price of new releases and at least one hardware manufacturer had had the foresight to make a DVD video player with additional 5.1 *audio only* capability available at a reasonable price. I'm amazed that Pioneer didn't think of that, if no-one else - unless I missed summat...?? - quite plainly proved byhis ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... A very unfair comparison, because the lowered bitrates were *sold* to the public using a very compelling inducement: Free music that used to cost real money. No, that's been exaggerated by the above-mentioned greedy MI - there were figures a while back that allegedly proved CD sales had actually picked up due to the Napster-style downloading...??? One of your fellow countryman put it best somewhere on the Net a number of years ago: Ordinary people are not stupid and don't want to steal - at 10 (or even 20) cents a track for virtual music, that person said he would buy like a demon, but at a greedy 99c per track, he's in there *downloading* with the rest... (When the MI is happy *still* to take 16 quid a pop for CDs from kids I say **** 'em, they get what they deserve...) |
#370
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Keith G" wrote in message wrote in message oups.com... I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. The hidden agenda is that many masters that sound very lifelike on the master tape or digital master, can't possibly be transferred to vinyl without significant amounts of processing. It stands to reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to that effect. Not at all. Nothing like a little LP tracing distortion to put a lost edge back onto a poorly-made or tired analog tape master. I didn't say any of that, but who cares what processing goes into to make the final product, if that product is desirable/preferred....?? (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) |
#371
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. You live near a busy road and are plagued with road noise in your listening room? You have hearing problems, you say? Or is it your legacy technology tubed audio components that are mucking up the works? You can whine about how that doesn't fit the measurements but again that would the classic scenerio of meter readers damning the aesthetics becuase they don't meet thier expectations based on the numbers. I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth. Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. Nahh, it was the generally improved sound quality that made CD the hugely sucessful product it became Miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle without improved sound quality had already been tried twice. The results were called 8-track and compact cassette. 8 track was a great rarity in the UK (IIRC) and cassettes were *anything but* easy handling - the spooling and rewinding put most people off them, once the novelty had worn off. Nahhh. I rarely if ever spooled or rewound cassettes. Just played them end-to-end. Cassettes only held a certain popularity due the player being installed in 'upmarket' car audio systems for a long time and even then most people only used them to take a copy of their LPs along for the ride - as I do with CDR.... Cassettes achived considerable popularity in the US as for personal stereos, both Walkman, and boom-boxes. Cassettes achieved about 25% market share in the US, if memory serves. Back in the days when we had record stores, casettes were being stocked long after LPs were trash-canned. However even with chrome tape and Dolby, the SQ was never in the same league as CD. Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se A claim that is belied by all of the types of media that did have the advantages of miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle, but failed to be as sucessful as the CD. Much of CD's success was due to the plentiful supply of reasonably-priced hardware, after the market had been opened up. CDs whipped the LP even while CD players were more expensive than LP players. It had the attractive *technology twinkle* that'll sell anything until Joe Bloggs gets bored with it (witness the mass take-up of iPods and stupidly specced mobile phones today) as well as the welter of titles that quickly became available, once production got going - most of which, as you know, were straight from the vinyl masters in the early days. You'll make just about anything but the truth in order to support your agenda, eh Keith? SACD and DVD-A could have had the same success if the MI hadn't been so greedy with the price of new releases SACD and DVD-A discs are and were sold for about the same price as CDs. When the sales failed to take off, nobody with a brain invested in more new titles. and at least one hardware manufacturer had had the foresight to make a DVD video player with additional 5.1 *audio only* capability available at a reasonable price. Three words for SACD and DVD-A: No SQ advantage. I'm amazed that Pioneer didn't think of that, if no-one else - unless I missed summat...?? As a rule DVD players do just fine with 5.1 discs that are essentially music-only. - quite plainly proved byhis ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... A very unfair comparison, because the lowered bitrates were *sold* to the public using a very compelling inducement: Free music that used to cost real money. No, that's been exaggerated by the above-mentioned greedy MI Millions of happy downloaders can't be wrong. When free downloading was at its peak I very often saw gigabytes in downloads on customer PCs. CD-Rs were flying off the office supply store shelves like they were going to go away tomorrow. - there were figures a while back that allegedly proved CD sales had actually picked up due to the Napster-style downloading...??? Irrelevant to the false SQ issue you're trying to press. One of your fellow countryman put it best somewhere on the Net a number of years ago: Ordinary people are not stupid and don't want to steal - at 10 (or even 20) cents a track for virtual music, that person said he would buy like a demon, but at a greedy 99c per track, he's in there *downloading* with the rest... Well, now you're supporting my claim that what sold bitrate audio was free music. (When the MI is happy *still* to take 16 quid a pop for CDs from kids I say **** 'em, they get what they deserve...) Thanks for coming around, Keith. |
#372
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message news "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. You live near a busy road and are plagued with road noise in your listening room? You have hearing problems, you say? Or is it your legacy technology tubed audio components that are mucking up the works? You can whine about how that doesn't fit the measurements but again that would the classic scenerio of meter readers damning the aesthetics becuase they don't meet thier expectations based on the numbers. I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth. Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. Nahh, it was the generally improved sound quality that made CD the hugely sucessful product it became Miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle without improved sound quality had already been tried twice. The results were called 8-track and compact cassette. 8 track was a great rarity in the UK (IIRC) and cassettes were *anything but* easy handling - the spooling and rewinding put most people off them, once the novelty had worn off. Nahhh. I rarely if ever spooled or rewound cassettes. Just played them end-to-end. Figures. 'Track Search' (or whatever it was called) was always punted as a desirable feature on the more advanced tape deck... Cassettes only held a certain popularity due the player being installed in 'upmarket' car audio systems for a long time and even then most people only used them to take a copy of their LPs along for the ride - as I do with CDR.... Cassettes achived considerable popularity in the US as for personal stereos, both Walkman, and boom-boxes. Sure, every Brit was mad about them for a fortnight as well.... Cassettes achieved about 25% market share in the US, if memory serves. Back in the days when we had record stores, casettes were being stocked long after LPs were trash-canned. However even with chrome tape and Dolby, the SQ was never in the same league as CD. Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se A claim that is belied by all of the types of media that did have the advantages of miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle, but failed to be as sucessful as the CD. Much of CD's success was due to the plentiful supply of reasonably-priced hardware, after the market had been opened up. CDs whipped the LP even while CD players were more expensive than LP players. They don't even do that now.... It had the attractive *technology twinkle* that'll sell anything until Joe Bloggs gets bored with it (witness the mass take-up of iPods and stupidly specced mobile phones today) as well as the welter of titles that quickly became available, once production got going - most of which, as you know, were straight from the vinyl masters in the early days. You'll make just about anything but the truth in order to support your agenda, eh Keith? What agenda? I don't give a **** what people buy or use - it's you digital bigots who rush up screaming every time LPs get mention here. I always wonder what it is you are all so scared of...?? SACD and DVD-A could have had the same success if the MI hadn't been so greedy with the price of new releases SACD and DVD-A discs are and were sold for about the same price as CDs. When the sales failed to take off, nobody with a brain invested in more new titles. I remember quite clearly SACDS first hit the shelves at 24.99 in the UK... and at least one hardware manufacturer had had the foresight to make a DVD video player with additional 5.1 *audio only* capability available at a reasonable price. Three words for SACD and DVD-A: No SQ advantage. I'm amazed that Pioneer didn't think of that, if no-one else - unless I missed summat...?? As a rule DVD players do just fine with 5.1 discs that are essentially music-only. But only two channels.... - quite plainly proved byhis ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... A very unfair comparison, because the lowered bitrates were *sold* to the public using a very compelling inducement: Free music that used to cost real money. No, that's been exaggerated by the above-mentioned greedy MI Millions of happy downloaders can't be wrong. When free downloading was at its peak I very often saw gigabytes in downloads on customer PCs. CD-Rs were flying off the office supply store shelves like they were going to go away tomorrow. - there were figures a while back that allegedly proved CD sales had actually picked up due to the Napster-style downloading...??? Irrelevant to the false SQ issue you're trying to press. You split my point because it interfered with your agenda...??? One of your fellow countryman put it best somewhere on the Net a number of years ago: Ordinary people are not stupid and don't want to steal - at 10 (or even 20) cents a track for virtual music, that person said he would buy like a demon, but at a greedy 99c per track, he's in there *downloading* with the rest... Well, now you're supporting my claim that what sold bitrate audio was free music. Not really, what I'm saying *would* have sold more 'bitrate music' was reasonable pricing. Your argument is tantamount to saying more CDs moved off the shelves because they were more easily shoplifted.... (When the MI is happy *still* to take 16 quid a pop for CDs from kids I say **** 'em, they get what they deserve...) Thanks for coming around, Keith. Didn't know I was invited..... |
#373
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Keith G" wrote in message wrote in message oups.com... I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. The hidden agenda is that many masters that sound very lifelike on the master tape or digital master, can't possibly be transferred to vinyl without significant amounts of processing. It stands to reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to that effect. Not at all. Nothing like a little LP tracing distortion to put a lost edge back onto a poorly-made or tired analog tape master. I didn't say any of that, but who cares what processing goes into to make the final product, if that product is desirable/preferred....?? Preferred by who? The answer is preferred by a noisy minority who buy mostly used records anyway. (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. |
#374
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth. Me too. Even on so called "high end" turntables and with meticulous cleaning of the album with expensive cleaning solution and fancy cleaning brushes, I've always heard clicks, pops, and a constant crackle, especially on parts of albums where you were supposed to be hearing near silence. After living with CD's for the past few decades, it's hard to go back to LP's, except for those few LP's I've got that I couldn't find CD copies of. Like most of the LP's I got from my grandparents long after their record player died. The more important LP's I've already copied to CD-R, and given my grandmother copies of to play in her CD player, which I thought was the topic of discussion here. Jeff -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919) |
#375
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message ... Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. I beg to differ. What's killing the CD is the fact that today you can either pay $20 for a new CD that's got maybe one or two songs you like on it (because the rest are simply crap), or you can go to iTunes or some other online store and pay $1 or $2 to get just the songs you want. My wife recently bought the new CD by Evanescense (spelling?) and I found some of the tracks are simply *awful*. Not only is the music not very good, but I swear I heard extremely hideous distortion on one of the tracks. Today's CD's tend to be over compressed and over amplified to the point that they're clipping badly on the CD. All you have to do to verify this is to load up a track in Audacity and look at the waveform. It will go all the way to the top and stay there for some time before coming back down. Then your typical FM radio station runs that same CD through another compressor and turns up the volume even more so they sound louder than the competition and it sounds even worse. Compare that to a compressed track from iTunes and it's no wonder people think the quality of downloaded music is "good enough". :-P Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se - quite plainly proved by his ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... Joe Bloggs likely cares more about buying the music he wants and is comparing what he buys to what he hears on the radio. As more people switch to digital radio (i.e. XM, Sirius, and the like) and the bandwidth available for digital radio increases (XM just launched another satellite), I'd expect that listeners will expect higher bitrates in their purchased (downloaded) music as well. Jeff -- "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919) |
#376
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Keith G" wrote in message wrote in message oups.com... I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. The hidden agenda is that many masters that sound very lifelike on the master tape or digital master, can't possibly be transferred to vinyl without significant amounts of processing. It stands to reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to that effect. Not at all. Nothing like a little LP tracing distortion to put a lost edge back onto a poorly-made or tired analog tape master. I didn't say any of that, but who cares what processing goes into to make the final product, if that product is desirable/preferred....?? Preferred by who? The answer is preferred by a noisy minority who buy mostly used records anyway. Hmm, I suspect the noisy minority in here is *me* - simply because I'm the only one willing to resist the efforts of another *frantic* noisy minority here who attack vinyl like it's been rodgering their mothers and want it banned from this group! (Sorry to disoblige...!! :-) Speaking for myself, I don't buy much new vinyl as it isn't much my sort of thing these days, but asitappens I still have this pic of a very recent crop of *brand new* vinyl, bought only a week or so ago on my Show N Tell page: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/New%20Records.JPG I grabbed a quarter of a metric tonne of secondhand vinyl from charity shops when it was at sensible prices, but never visit them now. What secondhand vinyl I do buy these days is usually/mostly from eBay... The last time I was in the Heart Shop (where I used to be a regular) the gorgeous young manageress rushed up and asked if I would go up to the stock room with her and take her from behind - quickly and roughly, like an uncontrollable dog with my eyes rolling and tongue lolling... Er.... No... Sorry, she didn't say that! (I don't know where that came from....??) She rushed up to tell me gleefully that the records were back down to sensible prices! But, even at 79p a go, I simply can't handle Max Bygraves (or Phil Collins, come to that) - with or without inner sleeves!! (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. Grain....??? Ah, you'll be talking about vinyl with ss ampflication here - sorry, I've got no sympathy for anyone who can't get vinyl *right* and use a decent valve amp.... |
#377
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. Grain....??? Gotcha Keith. One of the complaints you hear from guys who really learned vinyl inside and out from the days when vinyl was practially all that we had, is that you don't know vinyl technology well. Well, read this and learn: http://eil.com/explore/guide/vinyl_making.asp Grain noise was a low almsot rumble-like noise that was due to hasty nickel plating. Ah, you'll be talking about vinyl with ss ampflication here - sorry, I've got no sympathy for anyone who can't get vinyl *right* and use a decent valve amp.... |
#378
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message ... "Keith G" wrote in message ... Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and lifestyle. I beg to differ. What's killing the CD is the fact that today you can either pay $20 for a new CD that's got maybe one or two songs you like on it (because the rest are simply crap), or you can go to iTunes or some other online store and pay $1 or $2 to get just the songs you want. OK, the day's wrecked anyway now - I'll bite... My wife recently bought the new CD by Evanescense (spelling?) and I found some of the tracks are simply *awful*. Not only is the music not very good, but I swear I heard extremely hideous distortion on one of the tracks. Impossible!! You *are* talking about a CD here, you know!! Today's CD's tend to be over compressed and over amplified to the point that they're clipping badly on the CD. All you have to do to verify this is to load up a track in Audacity and look at the waveform. It will go all the way to the top and stay there for some time before coming back down. Like I haven't seen that 20 million times, ripping CDs to MP3 on this computer.... ;-) Then your typical FM radio station runs that same CD through another compressor and turns up the volume even more so they sound louder than the competition and it sounds even worse. Compare that to a compressed track from iTunes and it's no wonder people think the quality of downloaded music is "good enough". :-P Good point... Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about *quality* per se - quite plainly proved by his ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music... Joe Bloggs likely cares more about buying the music he wants and is comparing what he buys to what he hears on the radio. As more people switch to digital radio (i.e. XM, Sirius, and the like) and the bandwidth available for digital radio increases (XM just launched another satellite), I'd expect that listeners will expect higher bitrates in their purchased (downloaded) music as well. No idea, I don't download anything. I downloaded a few legitimate 'publicity tracks' from new names when Audiogalaxy was about but they were mostly ****e anyway.... (There is a certain computer store not far from here where the proprietor has at least one machine *dedicated* to downloading pirate movies all day long! Who the **** could be arsed with it...??) I'm afraid I see vinyl like a joint of roast beef - bags of hassle and expensive but *well worth* the effort, whereas 'digital music' is like burgers - ubiquitious, cheap and utterly obnoxious/nauseating, except the ones from the van outside B&Q which have bacon and cheese in them... |
#379
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Mr.T wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Try all it likes, CD will never beat a good LP for a sense of *realism*..... I'm puzzled as to what you think he means? Can a sense of "realism" (whatever that really means) If you don't know what that means you really aren't qualified to discuss hifi. It's not in any engineering text I've read, LOL and that is where the world of audio begins and ends for dorks like you. Scott |
#380
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. Grain....??? Gotcha Keith. One of the complaints you hear from guys who really learned vinyl inside and out from the days when vinyl was practially all that we had, is that you don't know vinyl technology well. Well, read this and learn: http://eil.com/explore/guide/vinyl_making.asp Grain noise was a low almsot rumble-like noise that was due to hasty nickel plating. Gawd... Stoppit FFS! I only play the damn things - I don't *manufacture* them!! (Although, if wuz younger....) You're trying way too hard, Arny - it's this simple: We have *hundreds* of bloody CDs here and maybe more than a dozen different gadgets that can play them. Once in a while I'll put one of a very small, select few on (no LP equivalents) and, sure as eggs, I'll wander off after a while and quite simply *not hear* the rest of it. I can't recall the last time I was ever able to sit through an entire CD - it must be *years* ago now!! LPs? One after the other, usually - sometimes 'til the wee small hours, unable to stop slapping them on to the turntable!! Get the idea? No-one to impress, no-one taking note..... Now, if you (or anyone else) get anything like the same pleasure from your CDs, I am utterly *delighted* for you!! :-) |
#381
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message ups.com... Mr.T wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Try all it likes, CD will never beat a good LP for a sense of *realism*..... I'm puzzled as to what you think he means? Can a sense of "realism" (whatever that really means) If you don't know what that means you really aren't qualified to discuss hifi. It's not in any engineering text I've read, LOL and that is where the world of audio begins and ends for dorks like you. What kills me is these clowns don't seem to realise there is no small degree of *engineering* in vinyl and vinyl playback systems... |
#382
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Mr.T wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Which is all I'm complaining about, the unprovable claim that vinyl is better than CD (rather than simply saying - some CD's are dreadful despite the mediums huge technical superiority.) Hey mr science dude. How on earth is the claim unbprovable? It's a simple claim to test and it has been tested with vinyl coming out on top. You can wave your arms all you want but that reality will not change. So where is this "proof"? Talk to the guy who made the world's only recording that was made specifically to test this. Now where is your proof to the contrary? ::crickets chirping:: Scott |
#383
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: Who was it that said I don't get irony? Don Plowman? Dick Pearce? You can't remember this thread while you were posting to it? Scott, Dick Pierce and Don Pearce are two different people. Funny thing about the meter reders, they actualy do all sound th same. Both are capable of laying your arguments to waste, So they choose to make asses of themselves instead? Odd choice. so perhaps that's what's confused you. I wasn't confused. Thank you for finally taking the bait. I had all but given up on my punchline about all meter readers sounding the same. Strange you are so against using technology to aid judgment. I'm not. I use my glasses to help my eye sight. But are so keen to name drop all the engineers you 'know'. You sound like you don't know one end of a soldering iron from the other and think that all the equipment you use was hatched from an egg rather than designed by an engineer... One would think from your post that one's ability to solder has something to do with one's ability to make aesthetic judgements. Do I hve to tell you just how stupid that idea is? Engineers do the work the hobbyists consume it. One does not need to know anything about engineering to evaluate the results. It seems that in the case of the meter readers a little bit of knowledge is a destructive force. Sad. To see you posture one would think you have this wacky idea that you were actually a somebody in the world of audio. Scott |
#384
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Arny Krueger wrote: (redundant bull**** from a chronic underachiever snipped) Arny, you are just a troll. It is the best you can do in life. That is sad. I know we are not supposed to feed trolls but sometimes you are just too funny not to toy with. But alas, in the long run you are boring. Same old crap day in and day out for years. Years from now, if you are still alive, I could check in and with out a doubt see you saying the same crap. I am done toying with you for now. This your cue to declare victory and do your Usenet loser victory dance. Seriously, if I were you I'd think about putting a bullet through my head. I shudder to think what it must be like to have your ego and be a life time under achiever. Scott |
#385
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. Perceived? You can't hear the difference of more than 20 dB? Explains a lot. What the **** would you know about it? you've never made a reasonable comparison. You cant get past the numbers. Scott |
#386
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: Please do tell us how the claim that vinyl inherently sounds more life like than CD in stereo playback violates any laws of physics. Try find any vinyl with natural sounding speech on it. You won't... Wrong. Sonnyboy Williamson Keepin it to Ourselves. APO. But thanks for failing to answer the question. Bull**** posturing about physics is exposed for what it is. Scott |
#387
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article . com, wrote: WTF cares who the engineers are? I must be psychic, I predicted you didn't know squat about the subject. Gosh who the **** cares about who mastered their favorite music? Audiophiles that are in it for the enjoyment of music. You see dip**** if you know who is mastering your recordings and you have an idea of the quality of their work it makes it easier to narrow down the likely sonic winners and losers. As I thought. You've no interest in music at all. Unless it's wearing the correct badge. Jeez, Come up with something original. You don't even attempt to make any logical argument. You just parrot what I said about you. What's next? "I know your but what am I?" Man I feel like I am beating up a crippled midget. Scott |
#388
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Steven Sullivan wrote: Oh that isn't a problem for incompetent engineers. However, to make an LP sound as good as a well recorded CD is impossible. And that's the crux of the matter. Depends on what sounds 'good' to the listener. If you like the 'sound' of the LP medium, then a CD won't ever sound as good as LP unless you transfer the LP to CD (or develop a mastering scheme that replicates that sound). An LP transcripted to CD using the finest equipment and the greatest care still won't 'sound' the same to vinyl nuts. Their 'realism' comes from watching the turntable go round and round... Well when all your arguements are shot down this is all you have. Of course you have to ignore simple facts infront of your face. When I said that I can't distinguish between an LP and a 24/96 copy of that LP did you.. 1. not understand it 2. chose to ignore it because it violated your religious preconceptions about vinyl enthusiasts. Typical strategy of meter readers when all their arguments are laid to waste. Just make **** up about the people you are arguing with and point to that as proof you are right about everything. pathetic. maybe you should search this post for typos and spelling errors so you can feel better about your pathetic self. Scott |
#389
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. Says it all about some mastering people. "My job is to improve the master" You really are a moron. what didn't you understand about "flat transfer with no processing?" You think that is a mastering enginee's attempt to "improve the master?" **** you really are amazingly stupid. Scott |
#390
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
|
#391
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message ups.com... Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: Please do tell us how the claim that vinyl inherently sounds more life like than CD in stereo playback violates any laws of physics. Try find any vinyl with natural sounding speech on it. You won't... Wrong. Sonnyboy Williamson Keepin it to Ourselves. APO. But thanks for failing to answer the question. Bull**** posturing about physics is exposed for what it is. Scott Scott, before you finally squish the whiney little maggot to death, whisper the words 'Jeff Wayne's War Of The Worlds' into his little cloth ears. Second thoughts, make that *shout* the words.....!! YHFL....!! :-) |
#392
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message
ups.com Mr.T wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Which is all I'm complaining about, the unprovable claim that vinyl is better than CD (rather than simply saying - some CD's are dreadful despite the mediums huge technical superiority.) Hey mr science dude. How on earth is the claim unbprovable? It's a simple claim to test and it has been tested with vinyl coming out on top. You can wave your arms all you want but that reality will not change. So where is this "proof"? Talk to the guy who made the world's only recording that was made specifically to test this. I can easily believe that Boyk, a well-known analog bigot, made a recording designed to conceal the well-known audible deficiencies of the LP format. Now where is your proof to the contrary? Not a neutral source and very much at odds with the refereed scientific papers I cited. |
#393
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message
ups.com Scott makes up a straw man argument: One would think from your post that one's ability to solder has something to do with one's ability to make aesthetic judgements. Do I hve to tell you just how stupid that idea is? No Scott, you told us how stupid that idea is when you made it up. Engineers do the work the hobbyists consume it. Scott might have us believe that all engineers: (1) never make aesthetic judgements. (2) have no interest in aesthetics One does not need to know anything about engineering to evaluate the results. Simply not true. It takes technical knowlege to properly evaluate a technological product. |
#394
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message
oups.com Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at their best are neck and neck. Perceived? You can't hear the difference of more than 20 dB? Explains a lot. What the **** would you know about it Scott's 19th meltdown. |
#395
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. Grain....??? Gotcha Keith. One of the complaints you hear from guys who really learned vinyl inside and out from the days when vinyl was practially all that we had, is that you don't know vinyl technology well. Well, read this and learn: http://eil.com/explore/guide/vinyl_making.asp Grain noise was a low almsot rumble-like noise that was due to hasty nickel plating. Gawd... Stoppit FFS! I only play the damn things - I don't *manufacture* them!! (Although, if wuz younger....) Information like this was frequently published in consumer audio magazines back in the day. You're trying way too hard, Arny - it's this simple: We have *hundreds* of bloody CDs here and maybe more than a dozen different gadgets that can play them. Once in a while I'll put one of a very small, select few on (no LP equivalents) and, sure as eggs, I'll wander off after a while and quite simply *not hear* the rest of it. I can't recall the last time I was ever able to sit through an entire CD - it must be *years* ago now!! Speaks to your prejudices. LPs? One after the other, usually - sometimes 'til the wee small hours, unable to stop slapping them on to the turntable!! OK, you've got an obsession with playing LPs, or maybe a fetish. Get the idea? No-one to impress, no-one taking note..... Enjoy!, but don't run around blaming your prejudices, obsessions and fetishes on failings of the CD format. Now, if you (or anyone else) get anything like the same pleasure from your CDs, I am utterly *delighted* for you!! :-) Given the wonderful variety of music available on digital formats, being able to listen to them for hours and hours is some kind of a wonderful gift. |
#396
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. wrote in message ups.com Scott makes up a straw man argument: One would think from your post that one's ability to solder has something to do with one's ability to make aesthetic judgements. Do I hve to tell you just how stupid that idea is? No Scott, you told us how stupid that idea is when you made it up. Engineers do the work the hobbyists consume it. Scott might have us believe that all engineers: (1) never make aesthetic judgements. (2) have no interest in aesthetics One does not need to know anything about engineering to evaluate the results. Simply not true. It takes technical knowlege to properly evaluate a technological product. Utter ********, consumers are the best evaluators of *any* product - every crock produced since the Beginning Of Time has been graded/passed as 'OK' by someone, for some reason or other..... |
#397
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
wrote in message
ups.com Arny Krueger wrote: (redundant bull**** from a chronic underachiever snipped) Arny, you are just a troll. It is the best you can do in life. That is sad. I know we are not supposed to feed trolls but sometimes you are just too funny not to toy with. But alas, in the long run you are boring. Same old crap day in and day out for years. Years from now, if you are still alive, I could check in and with out a doubt see you saying the same crap. I am done toying with you for now. This your cue to declare victory and do your Usenet loser victory dance. Seriously, if I were you I'd think about putting a bullet through my head. I shudder to think what it must be like to have your ego and be a life time under achiever. Scott's obviously out of his league - his posts are either peppered with insults or just plain insulting. Here's some helpful advice Scott - find a good newsgroup about some area where you have some expertise in, like makeup. |
#398
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message (Most vinylists I'm aware of go on to *process* the sound further with their own kit selection and tweakery - not everyone simply slaps it down on a cheap plank deck and starts bitching about *rumble* and *bearing noise*....!! ;-) Agreed that turntable rumble and bearing noise are not characteristic of quality LP playback equipment. But also noted that "grain noise" added during the production process gets more and more audible, the higher the quality of the LP playback equipment. Grain....??? Gotcha Keith. One of the complaints you hear from guys who really learned vinyl inside and out from the days when vinyl was practially all that we had, is that you don't know vinyl technology well. Well, read this and learn: http://eil.com/explore/guide/vinyl_making.asp Grain noise was a low almsot rumble-like noise that was due to hasty nickel plating. Gawd... Stoppit FFS! I only play the damn things - I don't *manufacture* them!! (Although, if wuz younger....) Information like this was frequently published in consumer audio magazines back in the day. No idea. I had a lot better things to do than read magazines, back in 'the day'.... .....now I'm feeling real bad about the time I spend on this bloody newsgroup.... |
#399
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. wrote in message ups.com Arny Krueger wrote: (redundant bull**** from a chronic underachiever snipped) Arny, you are just a troll. It is the best you can do in life. That is sad. I know we are not supposed to feed trolls but sometimes you are just too funny not to toy with. But alas, in the long run you are boring. Same old crap day in and day out for years. Years from now, if you are still alive, I could check in and with out a doubt see you saying the same crap. I am done toying with you for now. This your cue to declare victory and do your Usenet loser victory dance. Seriously, if I were you I'd think about putting a bullet through my head. I shudder to think what it must be like to have your ego and be a life time under achiever. Scott's obviously out of his league - his posts are either peppered with insults or just plain insulting. Here's some helpful advice Scott - find a good newsgroup about some area where you have some expertise in, like makeup. ??? 'his posts are either peppered with insults or just plain insulting.' **** me! The *hypocrisy* of it....??? (Surely it's not just me that sees it....???) |
#400
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Vinyl to CD on a PC
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. wrote in message ups.com Scott makes up a straw man argument: One would think from your post that one's ability to solder has something to do with one's ability to make aesthetic judgements. Do I hve to tell you just how stupid that idea is? No Scott, you told us how stupid that idea is when you made it up. Engineers do the work the hobbyists consume it. Scott might have us believe that all engineers: (1) never make aesthetic judgements. (2) have no interest in aesthetics One does not need to know anything about engineering to evaluate the results. Simply not true. It takes technical knowlege to properly evaluate a technological product. Utter ********, consumers are the best evaluators of *any* product - Speaks to your ignorance of modern product evaluation, Keith. Product evaluation takes place on many levels and involves many different people with various skills. Consumers are the *final* evaluators of any product. However, products get evaluated many times during their development. Particularly in the earlier stages, skilled evaluators are invaluable. every crock produced since the Beginning Of Time has been graded/passed as 'OK' by someone, for some reason or other... In many cases, the people who graded the subsequently failing product as being OK were themselves consumers. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why would someone like LP? | High End Audio | |||
Swap Vinyl Save Cash! | Marketplace | |||
Timing | High End Audio | |||
CD verses vinyl - help clear dispute | Pro Audio | |||
SOTA vinyl mastering | High End Audio |