TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Interesting talk about analog/vinyl.... Apart from poor SNR, records cannot approach the fidelity of 16-bit/44.1 kHz digital. While some might prefer the sound of vinyl, there is practically no quantifiable way to demonstrate its superiority over CD. And that discussion is really a side-issue anyway, as Clockwork Angels only makes use of about 20 dB of the 96 dB range of CD audio. That's a recording/mixing/mastering issue... not an analog/digital issue.
False. It is dynamic compressed to peak limiting, I've metered it. You can't do that on vinyl. Plain and simple. So yes it is a Analog/Digital issue.
The vinyl copy will be more dynamic due to the fact the CD master is smashed. A vinyl master matching the CD wouldn't keep a needle on it.
As long as engineers keep blowing CD masters up, vinyl will be the better listening experience. I wish it wasn't that way.
Interesting talk about analog/vinyl.... Apart from poor SNR, records cannot approach the fidelity of 16-bit/44.1 kHz digital. While some might prefer the sound of vinyl, there is practically no quantifiable way to demonstrate its superiority over CD. And that discussion is really a side-issue anyway, as Clockwork Angels only makes use of about 20 dB of the 96 dB range of CD audio. That's a recording/mixing/mastering issue... not an analog/digital issue.
16/44.1 was a good compromise in the 80's when CDs were new and the data space was limited on the 5" disc due to the infrared laser (780nm I think) that was used to read, however this has the terrible side effect of turning signals with a lot of very high harmonic content into noise due to sample errors and decimation filters to reduce digital hash and noise. In other words, cymbals turn into noise rather than the sound of metal, out of polarity information which is what gives sonic space and imaging gets squashed and the sound becomes smaller, and the sound is rendered rather than reproduced.
I remember back in the 90s when Panasonic released the first consumer DVD-A player and it was a technical marvel and the demo disc included with it had an acoustic drum demo and the cymbals once again sounded like metal, not white noise.
In the years since then SACD with it's DSD sampling method won the digital audio SQ wars, but Sony was always ridiculously expensive when it came to licensing it and people didn't think they needed to buy a disc that they already own AGAIN for the purported sound quality when the playback systems weren't really going to highlight that difference anyway.
I'll take vinyl any day; I don't mind the pops and the clicks and the surface noise, or having to put the record into the cleaner and then wipe it with a carbon fibre brush and then repeat that every 25 minutes. The music sounds more alive, but that's only when it was originally recorded to play back well.
To shift gears:
In my opinion, Rush hasn't done anything different since Test for Echo. After that record Alex made a solo CD, Geddy made a solo CD, Neil's family died and he toured the continent on a motorcycle and eventually they made Vapor Trails which sounds like a mashup of the Alex/Geddy solo projects.
While it is novel to have a new Rush record every 4-5 years, they just aren't very good anymore. I like the sound of "Headlong Flight", but it's too much "Bastille Day" and "Bytor and the Snowdog".
Their golden years were 30 years ago. I don't believe that future musicians will hold this record up as an influence in their playing, that honor still belongs to Permanent Waves/Moving Pictures/Signals.
Hmmm... that's not what I meant. I did not claim that vinyl could be pressed with constant brickwall limiting. Even so, that's due a serious limitation of vinyl, not some sort of technical superiority.False. It is dynamic compressed to peak limiting, I've metered it. You can't do that on vinyl. Plain and simple. So yes it is a Analog/Digital issue.
The vinyl copy will be more dynamic due to the fact the CD master is smashed. A vinyl master matching the CD wouldn't keep a needle on it.
As long as engineers keep blowing CD masters up, vinyl will be the better listening experience. I wish it wasn't that way.
16/44.1 was a good compromise in the 80's when CDs were new and the data space was limited on the 5" disc due to the infrared laser (780nm I think) that was used to read, however this has the terrible side effect of turning signals with a lot of very high harmonic content into noise due to sample errors and decimation filters to reduce digital hash and noise. In other words, cymbals turn into noise rather than the sound of metal, out of polarity information which is what gives sonic space and imaging gets squashed and the sound becomes smaller, and the sound is rendered rather than reproduced.
Not going to get into this much further... other than to say that they above seems to represent a misunderstanding of NyquistShannon sampling theorem. In short, humans cannot hear the harmonics of a 20 kHz waveform.... and all the relevant harmonics that are sampled are accurately recreated in the D/A converter (assuming a high quality converter). If bats made up the listening audience, 44.1 kHz would present a limitation... for humans, no so much....
Hopefully the 96/24 version won't be so crushed....