Just got into Vinyl and boy am I happy! - Page 7 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
First ... 5  6  7 8  9 
CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports > Just got into Vinyl and boy am I happy!
AceMineral's Avatar AceMineral 08:48 PM 07-14-2007
Getting a turntable means having to get the Beatles, again.
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
m. zillch's Avatar m. zillch 10:02 PM 07-14-2007
I have the Beatles' boxed set on Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs 1/2 speed mastered in Japan by JVC on "virgin super-vinyl" in near mint condition. Only 3 plays over 2 decades ago were made just for recording purposes and then I put it into room temperature (upright) storage. It currently fetches about 3 times its original purchase price and I hope will go even higher! [No, don't ask, its not for sale.] The cuts are said to be straight from the studio masters and the sleaves each album comes in isn't the album art we all know (you get a full size picture book for that), instead you get a photo of the actual studio master tape holder box including the song breakdowns and little technical notes in the margins by people like George Martin and Alan Parsons.

If anyone cares, "Baby You're a Rich Man" sounds terrible on this version also. Also, about 40-50 seconds into the final extended note of "A Day in the Life" you can here John push his bench away from the piano and it sounds like someone puts down a drinking glass (?) on top of some surface (the piano?)
swifty7's Avatar swifty7 11:41 PM 07-14-2007
LP's sound is so much richer and more defined than cd's, I don't understand how can Pulliam say cd's sound better or has the capability to capture sound they way lp's can. How can 16bit resolution be equal to that of analog(pretty much infinite res). I think he's looking for attention.
PooperScooper's Avatar PooperScooper 07:49 AM 07-15-2007
The analog domain may be infinite but how much of that "infiniteness" can you represent cutting plastic? And then restore it through a vibrating stylus. I don't know the exact answer. I do know I like the sound of well recorded LPs and CDs.

larry
NIN74's Avatar NIN74 09:11 AM 07-15-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by swifty7 View Post

LP's sound is so much richer and more defined than cd's, I don't understand how can Pulliam say cd's sound better or has the capability to capture sound they way lp's can. How can 16bit resolution be equal to that of analog(pretty much infinite res). I think he's looking for attention.


Not correct. 16/44.1 is clearly what it needs to record a vinyl without any loss of any information (except maybe a little distortion made by MC-pickups over 22 Khz).
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 06:28 AM 07-16-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 View Post

Not correct. 16/44.1 is clearly what it needs to record a vinyl without any loss of any information (except maybe a little distortion made by MC-pickups over 22 Khz).

Right. Any issues with CD sound are a result of flawed mastering. The medium itself is inherently much better than vinyl. Again, the proof is easy. Record the output of a turntable onto a CD, then play it back. There will be no audible or measurable difference, because the CD can contain all of the information on the LP and then some.
Chu Gai's Avatar Chu Gai 07:57 AM 07-16-2007
Is the mastering necessarily flawed if its intended primary playback are car stereos, TV, or downloadables?
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 08:07 AM 07-16-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Is the mastering necessarily flawed if its intended primary playback are car stereos, TV, or downloadables?

Perhaps not flawed from the point of view of a record company executive, but certainly flawed from the point of view of a music lover.
Instead of forcing audiophiles to turn to an antiquated technology to get the best mastering, the record companies should release alternate high quality versions on CD.
atdamico's Avatar atdamico 08:11 AM 07-16-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Perhaps not flawed from the point of view of a record company executive, but certainly flawed from the point of view of a music lover.
Instead of forcing audiophiles to turn to an antiquated technology to get the best mastering, the record companies should release alternate high quality versions on CD.

I agree. But I fear that rather than the quality getting better, it may actually get worse. As the CD market continues to dry up as the computer downloaded music market is growing, it may be hard for the companies to invest in, what may be perceived, as a declining market.
Chu Gai's Avatar Chu Gai 08:58 AM 07-16-2007
Things go in circles. It'll come back. After I'm dead.
DOUBTINGTHOMAS29's Avatar DOUBTINGTHOMAS29 10:26 PM 07-16-2007
Good news for us vinyl lovers.

Vinyl Making A Comeback
buddahead's Avatar buddahead 06:32 AM 07-18-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by DOUBTINGTHOMAS29 View Post

Good news for us vinyl lovers.

Vinyl Making A Comeback

Plus this month issue of Sound & Vision has VINYL LIVES on the front cover with a TT also on the cover.WOW BOB
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 06:39 AM 07-18-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahead View Post

Plus this month issue of Sound & Vision has VINYL LIVES on the front cover with a TT also on the cover.WOW BOB

Good to see vinyl supported by those "authorities".
(I haven't believed anything I read in an audio magazine for years.)
atdamico's Avatar atdamico 06:41 AM 07-18-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahead View Post

Plus this month issue of Sound & Vision has VINYL LIVES on the front cover with a TT also on the cover.WOW BOB

As I said in an earlier post, I look at CD, SACD, Vinyl, etc. as all being additions rather than subtractions. I just upgraded my vinyl equipment to a Rega Planar 2 tt and a Pro-ject SE phono stage. I will be doing some critical listening over the next few days to see what differences I hear (if any) between my old $30 tt that I have and my new equipment. I will be listening to a variety of music but I have a few 180 gram LPs that I will pay close attention to.

Funny how everything seems to come around again.
NIN74's Avatar NIN74 09:49 AM 07-18-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Good to see vinyl supported by those "authorities".
(I haven't believed anything I read in an audio magazine for years.)


Instead than trolling and write crap, you maybe should read more and get more knowledge.
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 10:24 AM 07-18-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIN74 View Post

Instead than trolling and write crap, you maybe should read more and get more knowledge.

Obviously, I already have far more knowledge than you ever will.
citrus's Avatar citrus 08:59 PM 07-19-2007
Another way to compare vinyl & cd is to record the vinyl onto a cd yourself & compare that cd to the commercial cd.

For myself, I've found there is a difference in that the engineers have made a mess in their cd by over exaggerating the frequencies "because it is a cd" so that the music comes out harsh & brittle. Too bad the studio mixers now allow too many changes by the producer/director/engineer.

It isn't the medium but the misuse of the medium.

In my days of the vinyl, I got a carbon anti-static mat for the turntable, esl dustbug, anti-static gun, discwasher record cleaner, & anti-static sleeves for each record. When playing, I cleaned each side prior to playing & sometimes prior to placing it back onto the anti-static sleeve.

Of course, there was the "need" to clean the stylus after each side of playing (sometimes only after both sides) with a camel hair brush (artist brush).

Then the balance & anti-skate need to be checked as well & the stylus need to be check every so often with a stylus magnifier.

I definitely don't want to go back to that especially I still see how the records are mishandled at the stores.
atdamico's Avatar atdamico 02:13 PM 07-20-2007
The system I am running for my music consists of:
Anthem AVM30
Sherbourn 5/5210A amp
Vandersteen Model 2CE speakers
Rega Planar 2 with Rega Bias 2 Stylus
Pro-ject Phono Box SE
Marantz CC4000 CD transport

Material: Eva Cassidy Songbird on 180 gram vinyl
Eva Cassidy Songbird on standard CD

This is not a scientific test and I bow to the fact that I well may have been biased towards vinyl, but trying to keep an open mind...


On vinyl, this "may" be the single most enjoyable music experience (at home) I have ever had. Fields Of Joy was nothing short of stunning. On some of the high vocal material, it was so open and airy that you could almost picture her singing in a large hall, that resonated her voice. It didn't echo, but rather than having a particular note abrubptly end, it sort of just diminished. Hard to explain but the sound was very pleasant and not harsh. The louder I turned it up, the better it got. It was never fatiguing. I had the dial up to +5 with 0 being reference level and the music was crisp, clear, dynamic, and engaging. The guitar riffs almost sounded as if the acoustical guitars were in the room. Each note rolled and vibrated and the resonance of the instrument was clear. On CD it was a very enoyable but didn't seem to have the same fullness of sound. This was especially true the louder I turned it up. While on Vinyl it became holographic when turned up, on CD it just got loud. And at reference level it was simply too harsh to listen to at all. I had to quickly turn it down. Notes didn't resonate the same and although pleasant to listen to (at lower levels) it just didn't engage me the same way. Also, it was a blast having an actual album cover to open and enjoy.
Galls's Avatar Galls 07:19 PM 07-23-2007
God damn this vinyl **** is expensive.

You are reading the words of a recent convert. My parents had a turntable and for my entire childhood I never turned it on once. I am too technical always believing that newer formats and tech must surely mean a better experience as the "developments of today build upon the standards of yesterday."

The truth is that since my girlfriend has a descent stereo and a descent turntable that came with it, after a little experimentation and now I am spending all to much money on vinyl. Going to a stones concert and then the next day doing a comparison between CD and Vinyl left me with no doubt that vinyl should not have diminished. Good thing I live with my girl sometimes for months out of the year.
Galls's Avatar Galls 07:40 PM 07-23-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Right. Any issues with CD sound are a result of flawed mastering. The medium itself is inherently much better than vinyl. Again, the proof is easy. Record the output of a turntable onto a CD, then play it back. There will be no audible or measurable difference, because the CD can contain all of the information on the LP and then some.

Huh? How can you start with less and end up with more?

Do you at least understand the concept that in this analogue dimension digital can never fully reproduce a wavelength.

If so then you need to remember that you See and Hear in frequency and amplitude. In this world analogue always has the ability to provide the best quality, digital cannot. Digital is only more efficient up until a certain point.
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 06:28 AM 07-24-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post

Huh? How can you start with less and end up with more?

Do you at least understand the concept that in this analogue dimension digital can never fully reproduce a wavelength.

If so then you need to remember that you See and Hear in frequency and amplitude. In this world analogue always has the ability to provide the best quality, digital cannot. Digital is only more efficient up until a certain point.

Where did you get "start with less and end up with more"? I stated the fact that CD can contain all of the information on an LP, and that if additional subtleties beyond the LPs capability are present in the studio, CD can capture those also. (This is why most modern studios use direct-to-digital recording.)
Your statement that "digital can never fully reproduce a wavelength" is simply false. The sampling theorem proves that the waveform reconstructed by a DAC is an exact (not approximate) duplicate of the analog signal encoded by the ADC at all frequencies up to half the sampling frequency (which was chosen to be well above the limits of human hearing.)
If some LPs do sound better than their CD counterparts (a claim of which I remain entirely unconvinced), then the use of different masters is the only possible explanation since CD is inherently better from a technical standpoint.
twitch54's Avatar twitch54 08:07 AM 07-24-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

If some LPs do sound better than their CD counterparts (a claim of which I remain entirely unconvinced), then the use of different masters is the only possible explanation since CD is inherently better from a technical standpoint.


With respect to theoretical and technically speaking I agree CD/SACD is/should be superior, but......... there ARE cases when the transfer to vinyl vs CD has been done 'better' on LP. The audiophile quality CD's and LP's are both beautifully produced mediums for the most part, but alot of the 'mass-produced' music on CD today is subpar, IMO.

I am somewhat surprised with all your audio knowledge you have not had the opportunity to experience a really great analog front end.
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 08:15 AM 07-24-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by twitch54 View Post

I am somewhat surprised with all your audio knowledge you have not had the opportunity to experience a really great analog front end.

I experienced several in the days before CD, but none since. Very few of my friends are into audio, and those who are prefer CDs. No local stores have analog setups, so I would have to buy to try, and I am not sufficiently interested to spend the money on it.
(Also, only one store in my area has new LPs at all, and it is very small. I would have to buy those online also. Used ones are sometimes available cheap at garage sales, though)
CharlesJ's Avatar CharlesJ 04:38 PM 07-24-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galls View Post

Do you at least understand the concept that in this analogue dimension digital can never fully reproduce a wavelength.

If so then you need to remember that you See and Hear in frequency and amplitude. In this world analogue always has the ability to provide the best quality, digital cannot. Digital is only more efficient up until a certain point.


I think it is you who doesn't comprehend the issues here. I would suggest more research on your part?
Chu Gai's Avatar Chu Gai 06:28 AM 07-25-2007
Quote:
Do you at least understand the concept that in this analogue dimension digital can never fully reproduce a wavelength.

Nyquist and Shannon say otherwise. Music is nothing more than a complex superposition of sine waves and provided you're sampling correctly at greater than 2x the frequency. Since CD is band limited this is not a problem. You see, there is one, and only one sine wave that can be drawn given those 2 points and a bit. The reconstruction filter or anti-imaging filter takes care of the false images. Perhaps you're thinking of trying to draw a curve given just 2 or more points. Think again.

BTW, got any pics of your girlfriend?
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 06:39 AM 07-25-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Nyquist and Shannon say otherwise. Music is nothing more than a complex superposition of sine waves and provided you're sampling correctly at greater than 2x the frequency. Since CD is band limited this is not a problem. You see, there is one, and only one sine wave that can be drawn given those 2 points and a bit. The reconstruction filter or anti-imaging filter takes care of the false images. Perhaps you're thinking of trying to draw a curve given just 2 or more points. Think again.

BTW, got any pics of your girlfriend?

Correct. Everyone who tries to claim that anolog is somehow "better" than digital needs to read the sampling theorem. (One does not need to understand the math to understand the conclusion.)
QueueCumber's Avatar QueueCumber 12:37 PM 07-25-2007
The "Death of Dynamic Range" issue has been bothering me for quite some time (there was an article of that title that has been around for almost a decade). I'm still not sure WTH can be done about it. I don't feel like getting into LPs, even though I have my collection from when I was younger, as well as my parent's LPs in my listening room.

I love the last three Flaming Lips albums song wise, but they only sound ok in the car.... They sound like total horsesh## on any decent, revealing system. Even the DVD-A versions appear to be sh## pancakes in terms of dynamics (you would think they would know that the people buying those are not interested in bad mastering, but rather good mastering... Idiots).

Why "pay" for a CD copy of bad sounding music, when you can download equally bad sounding music for "free?" I wonder if a very lossy MP3 version of bad sounding music sounds better than the lossless version....

Oh well, I guess if you want good sounding music you have to wait for some of the independant labels to buy rights to release limited number of remastered versions years down the road when no one is buying CDs any more. On that note, I heard a rumor that Mobile Fidelity is trying to get one of the Rush albums to release it with superior mastering.
buddahead's Avatar buddahead 01:02 PM 07-25-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

Correct. Everyone who tries to claim that anolog is somehow "better" than digital needs to read the sampling theorem. (One does not need to understand the math to understand the conclusion.)

The conclusion I get is your not quite right,I can pick many sample's of analog being better than digital.Where it really comes into play is classic music,Say like I have all the Black Sabbath cds.I also have some of them on Albums like Master of Reality.I have not had one person who has heard both on my system even come close to saying that the cd is better,They all say the album blow's the cd version away,This go's on and on with classic albums.Now some of the newer music out now such as the new Dream Theather and Rush cd's ect are mastered better and sound really full and have great sonics.They just release the Jefro Tull Auqalung vinyl on 200gram from the original master that Ian Anderson gave them.A Idiot could hear the difference between the cds and the vinyl,The Vinyl is so far better that it is Breathtaking.So for me I like buying the Albums of old 60 and 70 s classic rock and some classical and for new rock I just buy the CD'S.But anyone with any hearing can easily here how much better Real Vinyl is.By theway Pulliamm do something with your life.BOB
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 01:11 PM 07-25-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahead View Post

Now some of the newer music out now such as the new Dream Theather and Rush cd's ect are mastered better and sound really full and have great sonics.

There are very few CDs where I am sufficiently bothered by compression that I can understand what all the complaints are about. The new Rush happens to be one of them.
PULLIAMM's Avatar PULLIAMM 01:12 PM 07-25-2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahead View Post

By theway Pulliamm do something with your life.BOB

My life is great when I am not at work.
First ... 5  6  7 8  9 

Up
Mobile  Desktop