Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default Turntable report

Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or refurbish my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest mat, and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4 concerts, I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like music in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.
  #2   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or refurbish

my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I

reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest mat, and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record

Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the

combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4 concerts, I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like music

in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.


Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is much more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no less. I'm
surprised no one has chimmed in and called you a promoter of mythology.
I am glad you were able to find simple solutions to your needs and
things worked out well. And just think, there is still much room for
improvement should you choose to seek it. Enjoy the music. Thanks for
the report.


Scott Wheeler
  #4   Report Post  
chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or refurbish

my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I

reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local

store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest mat,

and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record

Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the

combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4 concerts,

I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like

music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.


Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is much more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no less.


Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that vinyl is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob


Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,
the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation. That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand
piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.

And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we won't
resort to that.

BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on CD's.
  #6   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

chung wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or

refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local

store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest

mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having

spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4

concerts,
I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like

music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.

Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is much

more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no less.


Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that vinyl

is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob


Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last

week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig

sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,



Solid sustained notes? I've certainly heard this on numerous CDs of
piano but never on a live piano. This is one of the most easily
identifiable shortcomings one can hear on most CDs. A sustained note on
a real piano is anything but solid.


the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation.


There is no way any recording/playback system can reproduce a live
piano without very noticable degradation. I doubt your system CD player
and all are really any exception.



That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand


piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.



Opinions abound. The person who started this thread clearly disagrees.
It seems she does speak from considerable experience with live music.



And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we won't


resort to that.



Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you? Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?




BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on CD's.



Only CD? Can't get it on MP3?



Scott Wheeler
  #8   Report Post  
Robert Peirce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , chung
wrote:

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,
the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation. That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand
piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.


I have heard that is the case. I don't know why the piano should almost
always sound so much better on CD when other instruments don't (always).
You might think it is the percussive qualities, which a needle in a
groove might have trouble tracking, but certain drum sounds seem usually
to work better on vinyl, although not as much so as they used to.

There is no doubt CD is getting very good, which means it must be close
to being replaced. Vinyl showed the most improvement after CD came out.
Cd will probably do likewise when the next best thing comes along.
Maybe that is SACD or DVD-A. Only time will tell. Then, of course,
there will be the CD people who claim the new stuff doesn't sound as
good, and it won't for a long time.
  #9   Report Post  
Jenn
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stewart: It means that it's the standard copout for vinylphiles,
much like the
somewhat suspicious original post implying that those who live with
live music prefer vinyl. Heads up now, what really.....

Pardon me.... I don't know makes my post "somewhat suspicious" to you,
but... whatever. Nor did I imply "that those who live with live music
prefer vinyl." I simply stated that ***I*** prefer vinyl. I also
enjoy listening to CD at times.
  #10   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
chung wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or

refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local
store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest

mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having

spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4

concerts,
I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like
music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.

Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is much

more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no less.

Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that vinyl

is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob


Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last

week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig

sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,



Solid sustained notes? I've certainly heard this on numerous CDs of
piano but never on a live piano. This is one of the most easily
identifiable shortcomings one can hear on most CDs. A sustained note on
a real piano is anything but solid.


Well, I have a grand piano, and the sustained notes are solid. Perhaps
you are too used to vinyl?

You think there are some magical process in CD's that stabilize those
"real-life" wavering notes? Hey, there will certainly be fame and riches
for you if you could figure out how...


the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation.


There is no way any recording/playback system can reproduce a live
piano without very noticable degradation. I doubt your system CD player
and all are really any exception.


The degradations from a CD are much less than those from vinyl. In fact,
I have piano recital CD's that sound very close to the real thing.



That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand


piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.



Opinions abound. The person who started this thread clearly disagrees.
It seems she does speak from considerable experience with live music.


That's my point, in case you missed it. Opinions abound. and I speak
with considerable experience from listening to a live piano. In fact, I
just did.



And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we won't


resort to that.



Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you? Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?


No, some CD rigs sound bad because of poor speakers. And then there are
poorly recorded/mastered CD's. Of course, the competent CD players sound
very similar, but you know that.




BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on CD's.



Only CD? Can't get it on MP3?


You can make mp3's out of CD's, of course. What exactly is your point,
or do you have one?


  #11   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Robert Peirce wrote:

In article , chung
wrote:

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,
the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation. That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand
piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.


I have heard that is the case. I don't know why the piano should almost
always sound so much better on CD when other instruments don't (always).
You might think it is the percussive qualities, which a needle in a
groove might have trouble tracking, but certain drum sounds seem usually
to work better on vinyl, although not as much so as they used to.


The wow and flutter have the biggest impact on solid sustained piano
notes. Any inherent frquency instability (like wow and flutter) in the
turntable, any slight error in the record (off-centered holes) etc., and
of course any distortion and lack of dynamic range will show up readily,
especially on piano solos.


There is no doubt CD is getting very good, which means it must be close
to being replaced.


Assuming there are real advantages in the medium replacing it, of course.

Vinyl showed the most improvement after CD came out.


I am not sure if you can prove that statement. Some of the best discs I
own are direct-to-discs made in the late 70's.

Cd will probably do likewise when the next best thing comes along.
Maybe that is SACD or DVD-A. Only time will tell.


Time has apparently told that it is neither.

Then, of course,
there will be the CD people who claim the new stuff doesn't sound as
good, and it won't for a long time.


It's more like there will be people who claim the the new stiff don't
sound better...I have yet to hear people say that the hi-rez formats
have less accuracy.
  #13   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chung wrote:
wrote:
chung wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I

should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or

refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as

I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty

local
store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest

mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a

Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with

the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having

spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4

concerts,
I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more

like
music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.

Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is

much
more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no

less.

Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that

vinyl
is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's

because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last

week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig

sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained

notes,


Solid sustained notes? I've certainly heard this on numerous CDs of
piano but never on a live piano. This is one of the most easily
identifiable shortcomings one can hear on most CDs. A sustained

note on
a real piano is anything but solid.


Well, I have a grand piano, and the sustained notes are solid.

Perhaps
you are too used to vinyl?



No. It is not natural for any real paino to have solid sustained notes.
The decay of a note from a live piano is anything but solid.




You think there are some magical process in CD's that stabilize those


"real-life" wavering notes?




No. Simplifying a a complex signal is not magic.




Hey, there will certainly be fame and riches
for you if you could figure out how...



No. Just lower the resolution of any signal and ou will loose
information. I'm surprised you didn't know this already.





the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation.


There is no way any recording/playback system can reproduce a live
piano without very noticable degradation. I doubt your system CD

player
and all are really any exception.


The degradations from a CD are much less than those from vinyl. In

fact,
I have piano recital CD's that sound very close to the real thing.



Again. I am quite skeptical of such claims. But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.






That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a

grand

piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much

better
than vinyl on piano music.



Opinions abound. The person who started this thread clearly

disagrees.
It seems she does speak from considerable experience with live

music.


That's my point, in case you missed it. Opinions abound. and I speak
with considerable experience from listening to a live piano.



And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.




In fact, I
just did.



And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we

won't

resort to that.



Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you? Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?


No, some CD rigs sound bad because of poor speakers. And then there

are
poorly recorded/mastered CD's. Of course, the competent CD players

sound
very similar, but you know that.


I don't know that. I know some people believe that and some believe
otherwise. I have not spent much time c0omparing CD players myself.







BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on CD's.



Only CD? Can't get it on MP3?


You can make mp3's out of CD's, of course. What exactly is your

point,
or do you have one?




That it can be had on more than just CD. Wasn't it obvious?




Scott Wheeler
  #14   Report Post  
Harry Lavo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
Stewart: It means that it's the standard copout for vinylphiles,
much like the
somewhat suspicious original post implying that those who live with
live music prefer vinyl. Heads up now, what really.....

Pardon me.... I don't know makes my post "somewhat suspicious" to you,
but... whatever. Nor did I imply "that those who live with live music
prefer vinyl." I simply stated that ***I*** prefer vinyl. I also
enjoy listening to CD at times.


Nevermind...your post is simply being used as a springboard for the personal
agendas of some here. Doesn't mean they've actually read carefully or given
any real consideration to what you said. That's increasingly commong on
usenet these days, and unfortunately it has infected RAHE as well.

  #16   Report Post  
Norman M. Schwartz
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
...

Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you? Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?


Of course not, and therein lies the problem with vinyl. The best turntable
rig almost sounds as good as the least expensive CD player. Additionally the
tonearm height needs to be altered whenever playing a thicker or thinner LP.
  #17   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chung wrote:
Robert Peirce wrote:


In article , chung
wrote:

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained notes,
the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation. That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a grand
piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much better
than vinyl on piano music.


I have heard that is the case. I don't know why the piano should almost
always sound so much better on CD when other instruments don't (always).
You might think it is the percussive qualities, which a needle in a
groove might have trouble tracking, but certain drum sounds seem usually
to work better on vinyl, although not as much so as they used to.


The wow and flutter have the biggest impact on solid sustained piano
notes. Any inherent frquency instability (like wow and flutter) in the
turntable, any slight error in the record (off-centered holes) etc., and
of course any distortion and lack of dynamic range will show up readily,
especially on piano solos.


The wow/flutter issue shows up even more clearly on recordings of
instruments where sustained notes don't necessarily decay...like organ and
synthesizers.

In that sense CD was the saviour of Bach *and* prog rock ;

There is no doubt CD is getting very good, which means it must be close
to being replaced.


Assuming there are real advantages in the medium replacing it, of course.


Vinyl showed the most improvement after CD came out.


I am not sure if you can prove that statement. Some of the best discs I
own are direct-to-discs made in the late 70's.


Maybe he means turntable technology. Vinyl itself hasn't
made any technological leaps, AFAIK.


--

-S
It's not my business to do intelligent work. -- D. Rumsfeld, testifying
before the House Armed Services Committee
  #18   Report Post  
Uptown Audio
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's great! It is always a pleasure to be able to appreciate what
you have.
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty local
store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4 concerts, I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more like music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.


  #19   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
Chung wrote:
wrote:
chung wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I

should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or
refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time, as

I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty

local
store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red, Audioquest
mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a

Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived with

the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After having
spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4
concerts,
I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more

like
music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.

Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is

much
more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no

less.

Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that

vinyl
is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's

because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li last
week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig
sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained

notes,


Solid sustained notes? I've certainly heard this on numerous CDs of
piano but never on a live piano. This is one of the most easily
identifiable shortcomings one can hear on most CDs. A sustained

note on
a real piano is anything but solid.


Well, I have a grand piano, and the sustained notes are solid.

Perhaps
you are too used to vinyl?



No. It is not natural for any real paino to have solid sustained notes.
The decay of a note from a live piano is anything but solid.


Perhaps you were confused when I said solid sustained notes. I meant the
frequency of the notes, and not amplitude. I thought it was obvious from
the context, but I guess one never knows.

So, it is perfectly natural for a real piano to have solid sustained
notes in terms of frequency stability. Now, do you still want to argue
that it's not the case?





You think there are some magical process in CD's that stabilize those


"real-life" wavering notes?




No. Simplifying a a complex signal is not magic.


Taking out the frequency variations (which caused the wavering of the
pitch) is almost magic...

Now, do you think the CD is capable of removing frequency instability?





Hey, there will certainly be fame and riches
for you if you could figure out how...



No. Just lower the resolution of any signal and ou will loose
information. I'm surprised you didn't know this already.


If you can lower the resolution and hence remove the frequency
instability, there will certainly be fame and riches for you.






the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation.

There is no way any recording/playback system can reproduce a live
piano without very noticable degradation. I doubt your system CD

player
and all are really any exception.


The degradations from a CD are much less than those from vinyl. In

fact,
I have piano recital CD's that sound very close to the real thing.



Again. I am quite skeptical of such claims.


There is nothing like listening, I guess. Try recording the output of
the phono stage onto CD's. Voila, all the magical "complex" signals that
you claim can only be heard on vinyl are preserved!



But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.


So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay of
piano music on CD's?

Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your experience.







That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a

grand

piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much

better
than vinyl on piano music.


Opinions abound. The person who started this thread clearly

disagrees.
It seems she does speak from considerable experience with live

music.


That's my point, in case you missed it. Opinions abound. and I speak
with considerable experience from listening to a live piano.



And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.


The frequency is solid. Not sure what solid decay means, since I never
used that term...





In fact, I
just did.



And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we

won't

resort to that.


Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you? Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?


No, some CD rigs sound bad because of poor speakers. And then there

are
poorly recorded/mastered CD's. Of course, the competent CD players

sound
very similar, but you know that.


I don't know that. I know some people believe that and some believe
otherwise. I have not spent much time c0omparing CD players myself.










BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on CD's.


Only CD? Can't get it on MP3?


You can make mp3's out of CD's, of course. What exactly is your

point,
or do you have one?




That it can be had on more than just CD. Wasn't it obvious?


It is a rather, shall we say, pointless point then. You can of course
make cassette tapes, MD tapes out of the CD. I guess according to your
logic, when someone releases a movie on DVD, it is simultaneously
released in divx, mpeg4, vcd, realmedia, windows media formats already.

To make it easier for you to grasp, Yundi Li's music is not released in
vinyl. So is a lot of new classical music.





Scott Wheeler

  #20   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT, wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people who live
with live music.


Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way, many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.


This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound like......

Unfortunately for Wheeler, he doesn't get to write history books, and
the plain *facts* of the matter are that CD sales in the first two
years were below predictions, until the word began to spread among
classical music lovers that this new medium simply did not suffer from
wow and flutter (which, contrary to Wheeler's bizarre opinion, are
horribly destructive of solo piano music), and had such low background
noise that all kinds of musical subtleties became noticeable, which
had previously been swamped by surface noise. It was the classical
market which dragged CD out of the red in the early years, and
everyone but you is well aware of this - ask any record store owner
who was in business in the '80s, or of course go straight to RIAA
sales archives.

Certainly portable players and car players helped to boost volumes,
but note that they did not become widespread (especially car players),
until well after CD was firmly established.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


  #21   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 19 Apr 2005 23:56:22 GMT, Steven Sullivan wrote:

Chung wrote:


The wow and flutter have the biggest impact on solid sustained piano
notes. Any inherent frquency instability (like wow and flutter) in the
turntable, any slight error in the record (off-centered holes) etc., and
of course any distortion and lack of dynamic range will show up readily,
especially on piano solos.


The wow/flutter issue shows up even more clearly on recordings of
instruments where sustained notes don't necessarily decay...like organ and
synthesizers.

In that sense CD was the saviour of Bach *and* prog rock ;


Sometimes they are the same - Switched on Bach, anyone? :-)

There is no doubt CD is getting very good, which means it must be close
to being replaced.


Assuming there are real advantages in the medium replacing it, of course.


There aren't, aside from multiple channels, but that won't stop the
marketing boys selling the biggernumbers! I mean, it stands to reason
that 24/96 just *must* sound better than 16/44...............

OTOH, it does like as if SACD and the technologically superior DVD-A
will *both* sink without trace after the 'format wars', leaving DVD-V
and multi-channel DD/DTS as the market winners.

Vinyl showed the most improvement after CD came out.


I am not sure if you can prove that statement. Some of the best discs I
own are direct-to-discs made in the late 70's.


Maybe he means turntable technology. Vinyl itself hasn't
made any technological leaps, AFAIK.


Indeed so. The last 'improvement' was Direct Metal Mastering, and DMM
records were notorious for really shrill treble. So far as the replay
gear goes, and typically of the valves 'n vinyl brigade, some still
swear by really crippled technologies from the '60s such as Decca
carts and the Garrard 301/401 table.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

  #22   Report Post  
Joakim Wendel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Chung
wrote:

And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.


The frequency is solid. Not sure what solid decay means, since I never
used that term...




Scott Wheeler


Just a technical question coming; at the attack of a piano tone the
overtone spectra is quite large i think, ranging way up in frequence
even, how are the overtones decaying on a tone like that?

Somehow i get the feeling that if you'd analyze this note
1) at attack
2) 1 second later
3) 10 seconds later
you'd get quite a variety of visible overtones thus suggesting not so
solid decay?

Excuse my lack of knowledge, the question is serious.
Joakim

--
Joakim Wendel
Remove obvious mail JUNK block for mail reply.

My homepage : http://violinist.nu
  #23   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT, wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people who

live
with live music.


Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way, many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.


This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound like......



What does Chungs inability to recognize that a sustained note from a
live piano is not solifd but cmplex and constantly changing in tone?
Does it make my true statement a false one? Where is your logic?




Unfortunately for Wheeler, he doesn't get to write history books, and
the plain *facts* of the matter are that CD sales in the first two
years were below predictions, until the word began to spread among
classical music lovers that this new medium simply did not suffer

from
wow and flutter (which, contrary to Wheeler's bizarre opinion, are
horribly destructive of solo piano music), and had such low

background
noise that all kinds of musical subtleties became noticeable, which
had previously been swamped by surface noise. It was the classical
market which dragged CD out of the red in the early years, and
everyone but you is well aware of this - ask any record store owner
who was in business in the '80s, or of course go straight to RIAA
sales archives.



Fortunately for audiophiles Pinkerton does not get to rewrite history.
The *fact* is that CD sales took off exactly when portable CD players
and car CD players became widely available at affordable prices.
Fortunately for people who enjoy CDs the success of that medium was
driven by somethging more than a niche market like classical music.




Certainly portable players and car players helped to boost volumes,
but note that they did not become widespread (especially car

players),
until well after CD was firmly established.



Wrong. The availablity of those players coicided exactly with CD
becoming the dominant medium in music play back. It wasn't just a
coincidence though. I would suggest that you take your own advice and
check out the numbers on CD sales. You should be saavy enough with math
to figure out that classical music sales didn't have much of an impact
in making CDs the dominant medium for music.



Scott Wheeler
  #24   Report Post  
michael
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound like......


I believe you are certainly correct. For me, one of the best musical
experiences is Wagner opera, and Liszt lieder. The great dynamic range
of these sources was really highlighted by CD. I am a record fan, and
have lots of them. But there is no comparison.


For anyone interested, I'd suggest the Levine/Met Ring (on CD--not the
DVD which is a "live" performance and not of the technical quality of
the studio set). The DGG engineers did a tremendous job at recreating
the dynamics, and the recording is stupendous. [Here, I am speaking of
the recording quality, only...I don't want to get into discussions or
debates about Levine v Solti, et al!]


michael
  #25   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 20 Apr 2005 23:59:14 GMT, Chung wrote:

wrote:


But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.


So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay of
piano music on CD's?

Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your experience.


What a bizarre coincidence! I only have half a dozen or so solo piano
recordings, but that superb performance is one of them, and the first
part of the 'Pathetique' is indeed a superb recording of the natural
decay of a solo piano, as is the 'Moonlight' on the same CD.

On vinyl, there would be impossible distractions from wow and surface
noise, but that CD is an immaculate recording which allows the natural
sound of the piano to flow into your listening room. Wheeler is just
plain wrong about this.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


  #26   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Joakim Wendel wrote:
In article , Chung
wrote:

And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.


The frequency is solid. Not sure what solid decay means, since I never
used that term...




Scott Wheeler


Just a technical question coming; at the attack of a piano tone the
overtone spectra is quite large i think, ranging way up in frequence
even, how are the overtones decaying on a tone like that?

Somehow i get the feeling that if you'd analyze this note
1) at attack
2) 1 second later
3) 10 seconds later
you'd get quite a variety of visible overtones thus suggesting not so
solid decay?

Excuse my lack of knowledge, the question is serious.
Joakim



Not sure what you meant by solid decay. You can certainly analyze the
spectrum of the waveform of a sustained chord, and you see the
amplitudes of the harmonics (including the fundamental) changing
(decaying) over time. But the frequency should be stable, i.e., there is
no frequency modulation on the tones.

When I used the term solid sustained notes, I was referring to the
frequency, not amplitude (which is of course decaying over time).
  #27   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On 20 Apr 2005 23:59:14 GMT, Chung wrote:

wrote:


But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.


So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay of
piano music on CD's?

Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your experience.


What a bizarre coincidence! I only have half a dozen or so solo piano
recordings, but that superb performance is one of them, and the first
part of the 'Pathetique' is indeed a superb recording of the natural
decay of a solo piano, as is the 'Moonlight' on the same CD.

On vinyl, there would be impossible distractions from wow and surface
noise, but that CD is an immaculate recording which allows the natural
sound of the piano to flow into your listening room. Wheeler is just
plain wrong about this.


I mentioned that particular recording because I also have the vinyl
version. Now someone may want to argue that I do not have the ultimate
vinyl gear, but the CD is simply superior in every respect: stability of
the tones (frequency domain) in sustained notes, the huge dynamic range
that allows the big chords to decay to silence and the quiet passages
(like the Moonlight Sonata) to come through cleanly, and the lack of any
surface effects or tracking distortion. All this from a 1981 digital
recording.
  #28   Report Post  
Steven Sullivan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT,
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people who

live
with live music.


Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way, many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.


This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound like......



What does Chungs inability to recognize that a sustained note from a
live piano is not solifd but cmplex and constantly changing in tone?


As I suspect you well know, Chung is referring to the cyclic pitch
instability always *added* in some degree to the recorded note, *as a
result of* the inevitably imperfect pressing of vinyl, versus the
granitically-stable presentation of sounded note and its audible
harmonics, in all their 'complexity', by CD. I've heard records where
sustained notes varied by as much as a semitone per rotation, due to bad
pressing -- and never due to the interaction of the note with its
overtones. You will *never* hear that sort of artifactual pitch
instability added by CD playback.

So please stop trying to obfuscate -- you aren't fooling anyone.



  #30   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 21 Apr 2005 23:55:47 GMT, Joakim Wendel
wrote:

In article , Chung
wrote:

And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.


The frequency is solid. Not sure what solid decay means, since I never
used that term...

Scott Wheeler


Just a technical question coming; at the attack of a piano tone the
overtone spectra is quite large i think, ranging way up in frequence
even, how are the overtones decaying on a tone like that?


In a typical listening room, the extreme treble will decay a little
faster than bass, but there should not be any significant skew in the
decay of a piano note.

Somehow i get the feeling that if you'd analyze this note
1) at attack
2) 1 second later
3) 10 seconds later
you'd get quite a variety of visible overtones thus suggesting not so
solid decay?


I believe that the recorded sound will match the live sound very well
in this regard, and that the timbral character of the note does not
dramatically change as it decays in either case.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


  #31   Report Post  
Chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT,
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people who

live
with live music.


Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way, many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.


This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound like......



What does Chungs inability to recognize that a sustained note from a
live piano is not solifd but cmplex and constantly changing in tone?
Does it make my true statement a false one? Where is your logic?


Well, you choose to mis-interpret Chung's statement in a way that you
could attack Chung's ability to listen. Despite the subsequent
clarification by Chung. One would think that this is a display of your
tendency to argue on semantics, and to burn the strawman.

The statement that "many classical music lovers do not spend much time
with live music" is patently false. Most classical music lovers I know
of play instruments, attend concerts and recitals, and a lot them have
children who play classical music.

Out of curiosity, do you consider the jazz music market a "niche market
that barely impact the commercial scene overall"?





Unfortunately for Wheeler, he doesn't get to write history books, and
the plain *facts* of the matter are that CD sales in the first two
years were below predictions, until the word began to spread among
classical music lovers that this new medium simply did not suffer

from
wow and flutter (which, contrary to Wheeler's bizarre opinion, are
horribly destructive of solo piano music), and had such low

background
noise that all kinds of musical subtleties became noticeable, which
had previously been swamped by surface noise. It was the classical
market which dragged CD out of the red in the early years, and
everyone but you is well aware of this - ask any record store owner
who was in business in the '80s, or of course go straight to RIAA
sales archives.



Fortunately for audiophiles Pinkerton does not get to rewrite history.
The *fact* is that CD sales took off exactly when portable CD players
and car CD players became widely available at affordable prices.
Fortunately for people who enjoy CDs the success of that medium was
driven by somethging more than a niche market like classical music.




Certainly portable players and car players helped to boost volumes,
but note that they did not become widespread (especially car

players),
until well after CD was firmly established.



Wrong.


You are wrong, CD displaced vinyl several years before the widespread
use of portable players and car players. As early as 1989, CD's already
outsold vinyl LP's by a ratio of 2.7 to 1. In 1989, portable and car CD
players were not in widespread use. For home audio, CD became the
dominant medium as early as in the mid-to-late 80's. Of course, for
mobile audio, CD did not replace cassette until mobile CD players became
popular in the mid-90's.

Wouldn't you call a medium that outsold vinyl LP 2.7 to 1 "firmly
established"?
  #32   Report Post  
Harry Lavo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Chung" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On 20 Apr 2005 23:59:14 GMT, Chung wrote:

wrote:


But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.

So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay of
piano music on CD's?

Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your experience.


What a bizarre coincidence! I only have half a dozen or so solo piano
recordings, but that superb performance is one of them, and the first
part of the 'Pathetique' is indeed a superb recording of the natural
decay of a solo piano, as is the 'Moonlight' on the same CD.

On vinyl, there would be impossible distractions from wow and surface
noise, but that CD is an immaculate recording which allows the natural
sound of the piano to flow into your listening room. Wheeler is just
plain wrong about this.


I mentioned that particular recording because I also have the vinyl
version. Now someone may want to argue that I do not have the ultimate
vinyl gear, but the CD is simply superior in every respect: stability of
the tones (frequency domain) in sustained notes, the huge dynamic range
that allows the big chords to decay to silence and the quiet passages
(like the Moonlight Sonata) to come through cleanly, and the lack of any
surface effects or tracking distortion. All this from a 1981 digital
recording.



I continue to wonder if those who claim in the past to be horrified by
wow and flutter on piano tones when playing vinyl, or who go on and on
about clicks and pops, ever really optimized their vinyl setup.

In the first place, no decent vinyl rig should have audible wow or
flutter on its own. If it does, then it needs a belt, idler wheel, or
DD motor replaced. Secondly, the arm and cartridge must be
matched...high compliance cartridge with low mass arm, medium
compliance with medium mass arm, and low compliance with high mass
arm. Any other combination will result in anomanolies caused by
stylus compression or unweighting.

Third, records must be cleaned. I don't necessarily mean with a
washer, but at least cleaned with a record brush before every playing
or as I do using Last cleaner fluid and application brush. Otherwise
the stylus will run into grunge in the grooves which will distort
sound in addition to creating lots of the dread clicks and pops, which
will only become worse with time if they are ground in by playing an
uncleaned record. If you have a supply of Last record preservative
(hard to get these days) treatment will create records that sound
subtly cleaner in the mid's and high's, an effect that is permament
(only need to treat once). It must also be mentioned that a bi-radius
or line-contact stylus is necessary to minimize noise and get the most
from the grooves.

Finally, a record clamp is needed to prevent vinyl resonance..no using
one will accentuate pops and clicks and can cause slight
disintegration of image localization.

All this of course is to naught if the cartridge is not matched
properly to the preamp input. This requires an effort to get and
understand information and to work to make whatever changes are
required to get that optimization. This is one area where most high
end phono preamps made the job much easier than lower priced preamps,
which tended to be non-adjustable. Since 1990 I have used three
different cartridges in three different turntable/arm/cable combos and
into two different headamps/preamps. I hve never been unable to get
the cartridge/turntable/preamp combo to sound tonally identical to my
CD players during this period of time. There are still subtle
differences, often to the preference (in my case) to phono, but they
are subtle and not in any way major difference in tonality.

When all is right, their needs be little or no difference between CD
and vinyl. Including wow and flutter. Case in point, I picked the
top record off the group of RCA's I had out, which was Van Cliburn
playing the Rachmaninoff 2nd Piano Concerto with Fritz Reinger and the
Chicago Symphony orchestra. I recently picked this up as a $2 used
record, but only played it once now that I also have the SACD release
of this same recording. This is not the original, but a Dynagroove
re-release on inferior, thin vinyl. Accordingly it is somewhat warped
and especially vulnerable to vinyl resonance. So put it on the
turntable (at this point a modest Dual 701 with Accuphase AC-2 MC
cartridge, into a modified Marcoff PPA-2 headamp). Cleaned it, clamped
it, synced the start with my Sony C222ES SACD machine...and listened
through the whole piece, occassionally switching back and forth CD to
Vinyl and back. The two where reasonable level matched and synched.
Other than an occassional low-level pop (maybe one a minute) I'd be
hard pressed to remember which I was listeing to. Plenty of sustained
tones and no difference in wow and flutter. The record was showing
plenty of warp, but the cartridge and arm were riding the groove with
equanimity and no sign of "bounce".

My conclusion, if you really want to enjoy your records, make the time
and effort to optimize your system...the annoyances of vinyl will be
largely minimized and the sound quality may astound you.




  #33   Report Post  
Ban
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Harry Lavo wrote:


I continue to wonder if those who claim in the past to be horrified by
wow and flutter on piano tones when playing vinyl, or who go on and on
about clicks and pops, ever really optimized their vinyl setup.

In the first place, no decent vinyl rig should have audible wow or
flutter on its own. If it does, then it needs a belt, idler wheel, or
DD motor replaced. Secondly, the arm and cartridge must be
matched...high compliance cartridge with low mass arm, medium
compliance with medium mass arm, and low compliance with high mass
arm. Any other combination will result in anomanolies caused by
stylus compression or unweighting.

Third, records must be cleaned. I don't necessarily mean with a
washer, but at least cleaned with a record brush before every playing
or as I do using Last cleaner fluid and application brush. Otherwise
the stylus will run into grunge in the grooves which will distort
sound in addition to creating lots of the dread clicks and pops, which
will only become worse with time if they are ground in by playing an
uncleaned record. If you have a supply of Last record preservative
(hard to get these days) treatment will create records that sound
subtly cleaner in the mid's and high's, an effect that is permament
(only need to treat once). It must also be mentioned that a bi-radius
or line-contact stylus is necessary to minimize noise and get the most
from the grooves.

Finally, a record clamp is needed to prevent vinyl resonance..no using
one will accentuate pops and clicks and can cause slight
disintegration of image localization.

All this of course is to naught if the cartridge is not matched
properly to the preamp input. This requires an effort to get and
understand information and to work to make whatever changes are
required to get that optimization. This is one area where most high
end phono preamps made the job much easier than lower priced preamps,
which tended to be non-adjustable. Since 1990 I have used three
different cartridges in three different turntable/arm/cable combos and
into two different headamps/preamps. I hve never been unable to get
the cartridge/turntable/preamp combo to sound tonally identical to my
CD players during this period of time. There are still subtle
differences, often to the preference (in my case) to phono, but they
are subtle and not in any way major difference in tonality.

When all is right, their needs be little or no difference between CD
and vinyl. Including wow and flutter. Case in point, I picked the
top record off the group of RCA's I had out, which was Van Cliburn
playing the Rachmaninoff 2nd Piano Concerto with Fritz Reinger and the
Chicago Symphony orchestra. I recently picked this up as a $2 used
record, but only played it once now that I also have the SACD release
of this same recording. This is not the original, but a Dynagroove
re-release on inferior, thin vinyl. Accordingly it is somewhat warped
and especially vulnerable to vinyl resonance. So put it on the
turntable (at this point a modest Dual 701 with Accuphase AC-2 MC
cartridge, into a modified Marcoff PPA-2 headamp). Cleaned it, clamped
it, synced the start with my Sony C222ES SACD machine...and listened
through the whole piece, occassionally switching back and forth CD to
Vinyl and back. The two where reasonable level matched and synched.
Other than an occassional low-level pop (maybe one a minute) I'd be
hard pressed to remember which I was listeing to. Plenty of sustained
tones and no difference in wow and flutter. The record was showing
plenty of warp, but the cartridge and arm were riding the groove with
equanimity and no sign of "bounce".

My conclusion, if you really want to enjoy your records, make the time
and effort to optimize your system...the annoyances of vinyl will be
largely minimized and the sound quality may astound you.


This is a really fine description of what you have to go through as a black
record fan. And I noted that Harry tries to avoid the usual hype about the
sound. I have been doing the same from 1971 with a Thorens150 until 1985
when I got my first CD-player, a Philips 101 or whatever. I immediately
tossed my in the mean time quite costly turntable rig and just started
buying almost all the CDs that were available in those times, my record shop
had around 50 then. I already had made many tapes to play on my reel to reel
machine, because the 20min. to listen and then turn around the record were
for me a PITA.
It is the same with the collector spirit of vintage cars nowadays. But
nobody claims that the performance is better than a modern car.
Isn't it enough to ride a 50yrs. old Porsche356? There isn't even the
question that a simple modern car will outperform it in all diciplines, but
still the feeling of riding or rather cruising is untopped. The love for the
car and the beauty will just go to the vintage model. This cannot be
measured in contrary to speed and acceleration, and somehow I have the idea
it might be similar with the vinyl-enthusiast.

--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy
  #34   Report Post  
chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Harry Lavo wrote:
"Chung" wrote in message
...

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


On 20 Apr 2005 23:59:14 GMT, Chung wrote:


wrote:

But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.

So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay of
piano music on CD's?

Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your experience.

What a bizarre coincidence! I only have half a dozen or so solo piano
recordings, but that superb performance is one of them, and the first
part of the 'Pathetique' is indeed a superb recording of the natural
decay of a solo piano, as is the 'Moonlight' on the same CD.

On vinyl, there would be impossible distractions from wow and surface
noise, but that CD is an immaculate recording which allows the natural
sound of the piano to flow into your listening room. Wheeler is just
plain wrong about this.


I mentioned that particular recording because I also have the vinyl
version. Now someone may want to argue that I do not have the ultimate
vinyl gear, but the CD is simply superior in every respect: stability of
the tones (frequency domain) in sustained notes, the huge dynamic range
that allows the big chords to decay to silence and the quiet passages
(like the Moonlight Sonata) to come through cleanly, and the lack of any
surface effects or tracking distortion. All this from a 1981 digital
recording.




I continue to wonder if those who claim in the past to be horrified by
wow and flutter on piano tones when playing vinyl, or who go on and on
about clicks and pops, ever really optimized their vinyl setup.

In the first place, no decent vinyl rig should have audible wow or
flutter on its own. If it does, then it needs a belt, idler wheel, or
DD motor replaced. Secondly, the arm and cartridge must be
matched...high compliance cartridge with low mass arm, medium
compliance with medium mass arm, and low compliance with high mass
arm. Any other combination will result in anomanolies caused by
stylus compression or unweighting.

Third, records must be cleaned. I don't necessarily mean with a
washer, but at least cleaned with a record brush before every playing
or as I do using Last cleaner fluid and application brush. Otherwise
the stylus will run into grunge in the grooves which will distort
sound in addition to creating lots of the dread clicks and pops, which
will only become worse with time if they are ground in by playing an
uncleaned record. If you have a supply of Last record preservative
(hard to get these days) treatment will create records that sound
subtly cleaner in the mid's and high's, an effect that is permament
(only need to treat once). It must also be mentioned that a bi-radius
or line-contact stylus is necessary to minimize noise and get the most
from the grooves.

Finally, a record clamp is needed to prevent vinyl resonance..no using
one will accentuate pops and clicks and can cause slight
disintegration of image localization.

All this of course is to naught if the cartridge is not matched
properly to the preamp input. This requires an effort to get and
understand information and to work to make whatever changes are
required to get that optimization. This is one area where most high
end phono preamps made the job much easier than lower priced preamps,
which tended to be non-adjustable. Since 1990 I have used three
different cartridges in three different turntable/arm/cable combos and
into two different headamps/preamps. I hve never been unable to get
the cartridge/turntable/preamp combo to sound tonally identical to my
CD players during this period of time. There are still subtle
differences, often to the preference (in my case) to phono, but they
are subtle and not in any way major difference in tonality.

When all is right,


That's a big "when"!

their needs be little or no difference between CD
and vinyl. Including wow and flutter. Case in point, I picked the
top record off the group of RCA's I had out, which was Van Cliburn
playing the Rachmaninoff 2nd Piano Concerto with Fritz Reinger and the
Chicago Symphony orchestra. I recently picked this up as a $2 used
record, but only played it once now that I also have the SACD release
of this same recording. This is not the original, but a Dynagroove
re-release on inferior, thin vinyl. Accordingly it is somewhat warped
and especially vulnerable to vinyl resonance. So put it on the
turntable (at this point a modest Dual 701 with Accuphase AC-2 MC
cartridge, into a modified Marcoff PPA-2 headamp). Cleaned it, clamped
it, synced the start with my Sony C222ES SACD machine...and listened
through the whole piece, occassionally switching back and forth CD to
Vinyl and back. The two where reasonable level matched and synched.
Other than an occassional low-level pop (maybe one a minute) I'd be
hard pressed to remember which I was listeing to. Plenty of sustained
tones and no difference in wow and flutter. The record was showing
plenty of warp, but the cartridge and arm were riding the groove with
equanimity and no sign of "bounce".

My conclusion, if you really want to enjoy your records, make the time
and effort to optimize your system...the annoyances of vinyl will be
largely minimized and the sound quality may astound you.


If the preceding paragraphs have not scared off potential vinyl lovers
already...


Since Mr. Wheeler believes that the CD just cannot reproduce the live
piano, unlike the vinyl, are you right or is he right? I can't see how
you both can be right, since you seem to say that other than surface
noise (which is a big degradation in solo piano pieces), the CD and
vinyl sound about the same, while Mr. Wheeler believes that the CD just
cannot reproduce the magical decay of complex piano notes (he said it's
one of the most easily identified shortcomings on most CDs!).

I would also grant you that some better-conditioned LP's have lower
wow-and-flutter and surface noise than others, and better rigs can have
less distortion. But compared to the CD, those imperfections are an
order of magnitude larger still, and noticeable in sustained notes or in
high dynamic range recordings, as in piano solos.

Try comparing some more recent digital recordings of piano sonatas on
the two media, Harry, like the one I mentioned. See if the difference is
still unnoticeable to you.
  #35   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chung wrote:
wrote:
Chung wrote:
wrote:
chung wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Hi all,

A couple of weeks ago, I solicited opinions on whether I

should
pruchase a new lower cost TT like the Pro-ject, et al, or
refurbish
my
old Denon DP-62-L that had been in storage for some time,

as
I
reenter
the analogue world. Well, I took the TT in to my trusty

local
store,
Audio Ectasy, and had them mount a new Grado Red,

Audioquest
mat,
and
replace the stock cable with Audioquest. I also bought a

Record
Doctor
and some isolation feet from Audio Advisor. I've lived

with
the
combo
for a few days now. The results? WONDERFUL! After

having
spent a
week in Carnegie Hall recently, conducting and hearing 4
concerts,
I
now remember why I like analogue so much. It's MUCH more

like
music
in
a good hall. Thanks to everyone for your advice.

Hmmm, someone who lives with live music and thinks vinyl is

much
more
like it than CD playback. And with an entry level system no

less.

Hmmm, does this mean that the next time someone suggests that

vinyl
is
less than perfect, we won't hear in response, "Well, that's

because
you've never heard a really high-end rig"?

bob

Well, I attended a piano recital by the rising star Yundi Li

last
week.
And throughout the recital, I kept thinking how close my CD rig
sounds
to the live piano I was hearing. You know, the solid sustained

notes,


Solid sustained notes? I've certainly heard this on numerous CDs

of
piano but never on a live piano. This is one of the most easily
identifiable shortcomings one can hear on most CDs. A sustained

note on
a real piano is anything but solid.


Well, I have a grand piano, and the sustained notes are solid.

Perhaps
you are too used to vinyl?



No. It is not natural for any real paino to have solid sustained

notes.
The decay of a note from a live piano is anything but solid.


Perhaps you were confused when I said solid sustained notes.



I don't think so. Perhaps you didn't mean what you said. Solid does
have a pretty well known definition.
(2) : joined without a hyphen a solid compound c : not interrupted by
a break or opening a solid wall
3 a : of uniformly close and coherent texture : not loose or spongy :
COMPACT b : possessing or characterized by the properties of a solid :
neither gaseous nor liquid .


I meant the
frequency of the notes, and not amplitude. I thought it was obvious

from
the context, but I guess one never knows.



Well there are several different overtones coming from a sustained note
from a piano, Their decay patterns are each different which creates a
sound that is constantly changing in tone, location and volume. By the
above definitions how does one find such a character of decay solid?
IMO the decay of a sustained note of a piano is quite the opposite of
the above cited definitions of solid.




So, it is perfectly natural for a real piano to have solid sustained
notes in terms of frequency stability. Now, do you still want to

argue
that it's not the case?



Yes. You are now changing your claim and yet it still doesn't hold
water in terms of human perception. If one listens to a sustained note
on a piano it does not *sound the same in tone* as it decays. Now if
one were to take a test tone or a combination of test tones and dim the
level at a constant rate in time you would have what I would call a
solid sounding sustained note. That is nothing like what one hears from
a live piano. It does acurately describe the sound of a sustained note
on any number of CDs I have listened to.








You think there are some magical process in CD's that stabilize

those

"real-life" wavering notes?




No. Simplifying a a complex signal is not magic.


Taking out the frequency variations (which caused the wavering of the


pitch) is almost magic...



No it's not.




Now, do you think the CD is capable of removing frequency

instability?


I think it is possible to get CDs in which this has happened. I don't
think it is magical or desireable.








Hey, there will certainly be fame and riches
for you if you could figure out how...



No. Just lower the resolution of any signal and ou will loose
information. I'm surprised you didn't know this already.


If you can lower the resolution and hence remove the frequency
instability, there will certainly be fame and riches for you.



Really? It's that difficult to lower the resolution of a live piano in
the recording and playback proccess? I think you are quite mistaken
here. Any telephone will do the trick quite nicely. No fame or riches
for me. Loss of resolution has been with us all along.










the great dynamic range, and so on. There was no way the LP can
reproduce that piano sound without very noticeable degradation.

There is no way any recording/playback system can reproduce a

live
piano without very noticable degradation. I doubt your system CD

player
and all are really any exception.


The degradations from a CD are much less than those from vinyl. In

fact,
I have piano recital CD's that sound very close to the real thing.



Again. I am quite skeptical of such claims.


There is nothing like listening, I guess.




An odd guess. It seems you arte assuming that I am not listening to CDs
of piano recordings. I suggest you listen more carefully if you really
believe sustained piano notes sound "solid."



Try recording the output of
the phono stage onto CD's. Voila, all the magical "complex" signals

that
you claim can only be heard on vinyl are preserved!



Been there, done that. Didn't seem to happen so well.






But, if you cannot hear the
complexity of the decay of a sustained note on a real live piano

maybe
you simply aren't picking up on the substantial differences between

a
live piano and the recording and playback of a live piano.


So you are saying that you cannot observe the complex amplitude decay

of
piano music on CD's?


I am saying that IME it is often reduced or lost on CDs.




Here is a good one for you to try out:

Emil Gilel's Beethoven Sonata #8 (Pathetique) on DG 400036-2. This is

an
early 1980 digital recording. You can easily find it at the local
library. Check out track 1. Listen to the solid frequency stability

of
the big chords. See if that sounds like a real piano in your

experience.

I'll keep an eye out for it. I don't have high expectations though. I
have heard nothing but awful sound from that label in that era.










That was
a reminder of why I like digital so much. As someone who owns a

grand

piano, I can say without any doubt that the CD sounds so much

better
than vinyl on piano music.


Opinions abound. The person who started this thread clearly

disagrees.
It seems she does speak from considerable experience with live

music.


That's my point, in case you missed it. Opinions abound. and I

speak
with considerable experience from listening to a live piano.



And yet you think the decay of a sustained note is solid. I'm

afraid
that there is more to it than just experience.


The frequency is solid.



The tone is not. That is what we percieve.


Not sure what solid decay means, since I never
used that term...



You said sustained notes. They decay as they are sustained.
decay:2 : to decrease gradually in quantity, activity, or force








In fact, I
just did.



And to the OP, someone *could* have said "But you have not

heard a
decent CD rig and decently recorded CD's!" But of course, we

won't

resort to that.


Of course not. You believe they all sound the same don't you?

Does
anybody believe all turntable rigs sound the same?


No, some CD rigs sound bad because of poor speakers. And then

there
are
poorly recorded/mastered CD's. Of course, the competent CD players

sound
very similar, but you know that.


I don't know that. I know some people believe that and some believe
otherwise. I have not spent much time c0omparing CD players myself.










BTW, none of Yundi Li's music is available on vinyl. Only on

CD's.


Only CD? Can't get it on MP3?

You can make mp3's out of CD's, of course. What exactly is your

point,
or do you have one?




That it can be had on more than just CD. Wasn't it obvious?


It is a rather, shall we say, pointless point then.


No.


You can of course
make cassette tapes, MD tapes out of the CD.



You can also legaly down load music on line in the form of MP3s. It is
a different medium in which commercial music can be aquired and used.



I guess according to your
logic, when someone releases a movie on DVD, it is simultaneously
released in divx, mpeg4, vcd, realmedia, windows media formats

already.

In some cases they are released on vcd. Most of those others would be
pirate copies. I am not talking about pirated copies but legal releases
on various formats.



To make it easier for you to grasp, Yundi Li's music is not released

in
vinyl. So is a lot of new classical music.



I guess *you* didn't get *my* point.



Scott Wheeler


  #36   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chung wrote:
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT,
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people

who
live
with live music.

Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into

the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car

CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche

market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way,

many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.

This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound

like......


What does Chungs inability to recognize that a sustained note from

a
live piano is not solifd but cmplex and constantly changing in

tone?
Does it make my true statement a false one? Where is your logic?


Well, you choose to mis-interpret Chung's statement in a way that you


could attack Chung's ability to listen. Despite the subsequent
clarification by Chung. One would think that this is a display of

your
tendency to argue on semantics, and to burn the strawman.

The statement that "many classical music lovers do not spend much

time
with live music" is patently false.



Absolute balony. One need only look at concert ticket sales to see
this.




Most classical music lovers I know
of play instruments, attend concerts and recitals, and a lot them

have
children who play classical music.


Well that is a sound scientific rebutal of my claim. Not.




Out of curiosity, do you consider the jazz music market a "niche

market
that barely impact the commercial scene overall"?



Unfortunately, yes. Are you aware of the sales being done in the music
industry?








Unfortunately for Wheeler, he doesn't get to write history books,

and
the plain *facts* of the matter are that CD sales in the first two
years were below predictions, until the word began to spread among
classical music lovers that this new medium simply did not suffer

from
wow and flutter (which, contrary to Wheeler's bizarre opinion, are
horribly destructive of solo piano music), and had such low

background
noise that all kinds of musical subtleties became noticeable,

which
had previously been swamped by surface noise. It was the classical
market which dragged CD out of the red in the early years, and
everyone but you is well aware of this - ask any record store

owner
who was in business in the '80s, or of course go straight to RIAA
sales archives.



Fortunately for audiophiles Pinkerton does not get to rewrite

history.
The *fact* is that CD sales took off exactly when portable CD

players
and car CD players became widely available at affordable prices.
Fortunately for people who enjoy CDs the success of that medium was
driven by somethging more than a niche market like classical music.




Certainly portable players and car players helped to boost

volumes,
but note that they did not become widespread (especially car

players),
until well after CD was firmly established.



Wrong.


You are wrong, CD displaced vinyl several years before the widespread


use of portable players and car players.



Now you are ridiculously wrong. Lps were never displaced by CD in the
first place. They were displaced by cassettes and for the very same
reason. Portability and car play.



As early as 1989, CD's already
outsold vinyl LP's by a ratio of 2.7 to 1.



In 1989 Cd was still not the dominant medium for music consumption.
Nice try. Funny, It had been on the market for six years by then.
Funny, when it did become the dominant medium it was when car players
and portable CD players did become common and affordable.



In 1989, portable and car CD
players were not in widespread use. For home audio, CD became the
dominant medium as early as in the mid-to-late 80's.



Guess again. Actually dont guess, just look at sales.



Of course, for
mobile audio, CD did not replace cassette until mobile CD players

became
popular in the mid-90's.


Sorry Stewert. You don't know what people were doing with their
cassettes. We can look at sales. Sales support my claim not yours.




Wouldn't you call a medium that outsold vinyl LP 2.7 to 1 "firmly
established"?



Seems you are now trying to change the subject.


Scott Wheeler
  #37   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 23:54:39 GMT,
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Heads up now, what really launched CD into
the mass market was *classical* music listeners, i.e. people

who
live
with live music.

Stewert gets his facts wrong again. What really launched CD into

the
masss market was the availablity of portable CD players and car

CD
players. The classical music listeners are very much a niche

market
that barely impact the commercial scene over all. By the way,

many
classical music lovers do not spend much time with live music.

This comes from a guy who has just attempted to tell someone who
*owns* a grand piano, what sustained notes from it sound

like......


What does Chungs inability to recognize that a sustained note from

a
live piano is not solifd but cmplex and constantly changing in

tone?

As I suspect you well know, Chung is referring to the cyclic pitch
instability always *added* in some degree to the recorded note, *as a


result of* the inevitably imperfect pressing of vinyl, versus the
granitically-stable presentation of sounded note and its audible
harmonics, in all their 'complexity', by CD.


No. I am simply going by what he said. I have experienced CD recordings
of painos in which the sustained noted do indeed sound solid by the
defintion of the word solid. They were bad because of that solid sound.



I've heard records where
sustained notes varied by as much as a semitone per rotation, due to

bad
pressing -- and never due to the interaction of the note with its
overtones. You will *never* hear that sort of artifactual pitch
instability added by CD playback.

So please stop trying to obfuscate -- you aren't fooling anyone.



I am not trying to do either. Maybe you should stop misrepresenting my
intentions.


Scott Wheeler
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
Turntable report Jenn Audio Opinions 5 April 17th 05 07:10 PM
What are they Teaching Michael McKelvy Audio Opinions 199 October 15th 04 07:56 PM
TURNTABLE anyone? Ken Drescher Marketplace 0 August 16th 04 04:17 AM
Need a working TURNTABLE? Ken Drescher Marketplace 0 June 17th 04 01:58 PM
>>>>> TURNTABLE BONAZA <<<<< Ken Drescher Marketplace 11 September 20th 03 12:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:36 AM.

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"