Vinyl will always sound *different* than digital, right?

[John Dyson]

I just saw this thread. I would say vinyls will never sound the same as CD. It's similar but not the same.

Let's just ignore vinyl quality and assume you can create a vinyl disc that sounds the same as cd (in theory).

Even then, the audio from vinyls will be subjective to the turntable, the environment and even the cartridge, tone arm etc... Dust trapped in the groves will affect the sound, the design on the cartridge will affect. Moving coil vs moving magnet (difference in mass). The perfect turntable doesn't exist.

for CDs, it's way less susceptible to such things.. for bits it's just 1 and 0s.

My hearing is beyond believable (does that make me a liar?). Anyway, I have really been fooled by vinyl rips. Admittedly, the LF noise was very low for a turntable. Must have been done on exotic equipment. A correspondent sent the examples for me to evaluate. There was almost no vinyl distortion, and the levels were close to the correct digital levels. The *only* way that I figured it out was by looking at the spectrum. Then, when I listened more carefully (really carefully), I could hear it. This is not normal rumble. It was about 10-20dB less than normal for vinyl. Maybe not -20dB, but pretty good.

John

 

[BDWoody]

I know that there are arrogant children everywhere, so afraid of their own self image..

Ummm. Just no

This isn't going to be where you show up and act like this.

Maybe this isn't the right place.

 

[Ageve]

Here is an example of a modern vinyl release.

It looks like it's just the CD master (with added processing needed for vinyl). It might look better (and have a higher DR rating), but it's not.

Adele 21, CD (level decreased to match the vinyl recording):

Vinyl (recorded with my Asus Essence ST soundcard). The clipping is still there, but if you zoom out, it will look "better" or "more dynamic":

Another example from the same record:

 

[sq225917]

Except one can successfully capture the vinyl sound on CD by just recording the playback. My goodness, man, you missed the whole point.

Of course, one can ALSO simply process the CD and make it sound like vinyl. Nonlinear processing does actually work if you think hard about how to do it, and do it right. Many don't.

I never said you couldn't.

I've missed the point?

Please don't point your assumptions at me.

And if your memory isn't up to it Post #154 in this thread.

Cheers

 

[dorakeg]

My hearing is beyond believable (does that make me a liar?). Anyway, I have really been fooled by vinyl rips. Admittedly, the LF noise was very low for a turntable. Must have been done on exotic equipment. A correspondent sent the examples for me to evaluate. There was almost no vinyl distortion, and the levels were close to the correct digital levels. The *only* way that I figured it out was by looking at the spectrum. Then, when I listened more carefully (really carefully), I could hear it. This is not normal rumble. It was about 10-20dB less than normal for vinyl. Maybe not -20dB, but pretty good.

John

Thanks for the reply. I think we can conclude that the sound from vinyl is very dependent on the equipment used to play it, esp. mechanical aspect of it. There are tiny tremors in the ground all the time... ITs just that we don't feel it. However, we can detect it using senstive equipment liek seismometer... So, if the turntable is extremely sensitive, I believe the cartridge may pick it up these tiny vibrations as noise. Since it will also affect the signals pickup from the vinyl, I see it as distortion. A well constructed one will have to be well damped against such "noise".

On the other hand, not so much for CDs. Even the cheapest players have no problems extracting the data from a CD (Assume good condition). Its mostly about converting the bits into audio which most players have no problem with it.

 

[j_j]

I never said you couldn't.

I've missed the point?

Please don't point your assumptions at me.

And if your memory isn't up to it Post #154 in this thread.

Cheers

Ok.

 

[j_j]

Here is an example of a modern vinyl release.

It looks like it's just the CD master (with added processing needed for vinyl). It might look better (and have a higher DR rating), but it's not.

Adele 21, CD (level decreased to match the vinyl recording):
View attachment 239733

Vinyl (recorded with my Asus Essence ST soundcard). The clipping is still there, but if you zoom out, it will look "better" or "more dynamic":
View attachment 239731

Another example from the same record:
View attachment 239732

The fact that the clipping is extended to the LP is frankly astonishing, isn't it?

 

[Mulder]

I sometimes wonder if people understand how a vinyl record is made today. A few years ago I visited a vinyl press not far from where I live. I walked around and looked at the presses etc. Then I asked if they produced the engravings themselves. "No", was the answer, "we send a USB stick to Germany where they do the engraving". I was a little amused by the answer, because basically all vinyl records today are just analogue copies of digital originals. Of course, the mastering may still differ between an analog copy and a CD. But the very notion that vinyl is technically better becomes just silly when you know what the manufacturing process looks like.

 

[Ageve]

The fact that the clipping is extended to the LP is frankly astonishing, isn't it?

Yes, the vinyl version was surprisingly good at reproducing the clipping. It's a bit funny, and sad. Some audiophiles will probably prefer it to the "digital sounding" CD.

I was a little amused by the answer, because basically all vinyl records today are just analogue copies of digital originals. Of course, the mastering may still differ between an analog copy and a CD. But the very notion that vinyl is technically better becomes just silly when you know what the manufacturing process looks like.

I think it's been digital since the mid 1980s, at least. It makes the process much easier and more reliable.

 

[MattHooper]

I sometimes wonder if people understand how a vinyl record is made today. A few years ago I visited a vinyl press not far from where I live. I walked around and looked at the presses etc. Then I asked if they produced the engravings themselves. "No", was the answer, "we send a USB stick to Germany where they do the engraving". I was a little amused by the answer, because basically all vinyl records today are just analogue copies of digital originals. Of course, the mastering may still differ between an analog copy and a CD. But the very notion that vinyl is technically better becomes just silly when you know what the manufacturing process looks like.

I agree with your last sentence.

Someone may still prefer the vinyl version though. Even with a digital master the vinyl will tend to sound different, to one degree or another.

 

[Multicore]

Yep, snap crackle and pop.

Digital can do that. There are VSTs for it.

The OP's question is like: Will film always look different from digital photography? A: No. It took a while for digital to be able to emulate film but it was eventually accomplished.

Vinyl is like waxed cotton over coats, obsolete for most practical purposes except what it says about you.

 

[MattHooper]

Vinyl is like waxed cotton over coats, obsolete for most practical purposes

If someone gets far more joy from their love of driving an old sports car, suggesting they could drive a newer, more reliable Honda Civic isn't a substitute for that goal, "practical" or otherwise.

We have to evaluate "practical" with respect to someone's goals.

except what it says about you.

Don't all our choices say something about us?

If you have the choice between listening to an album on vinyl or listening via a CD, or via your ripped CD collection, or via just streaming, doesn't your rational for any of those choices "say something about you?"

 

[levimax]

If you have the choice between listening to an album on vinyl or listening via a CD, or via your ripped CD collection, or via just streaming, doesn't your rational for any of those choices "say something about you?"

If you have all the above choices and chose different ones on different days what does that "say about you"?

 

[MattHooper]

If you have all the above choices and chose different ones on different days what does that "say about you"?

"undogmatic?"



(I kid...)

 

[Robin L]

If you have the choice between listening to an album on vinyl or listening via a CD, or via your ripped CD collection, or via just streaming, doesn't your rational for any of those choices "say something about you?"

It says I no longer have the physical space for my once large LP collection. I gave up the vinyl option on account of moving into a much smaller space. It also says that I'm spending time listening to You Tube links, like the Wes Montgomery track I'm now hearing thanks to someone making a post here at ASR. There's a lot to say in favor of the ease of access of modern digital formats. Have to say, my current gear sounds better than any previous collection of electronic gizmos for listening to music.

 

[levimax]

Speaking of "sounding different" the new Giles Re-mix of The Beatles Revolver is up on the streaming services today. I listened to a few of my favorites and compared to my CD's and Vinyl. No doubt there is a very audible difference (ABX is 100% and easy). I think most songs sound better, especially I imagine if you never heard them before, but it is also a fairly substantial revision of history. I am glad I can listen to both..... just like having vinyl and CD and streaming choices. One thing for sure the "source" has a lot more to do with sound quality differences than 60 SINAD vs 120 SINAD.

 

[j_j]

Well, I have a good table and setup, and lots of LP's. That's because there is no way in (censored) I will ever have all those on CD or anything else. Yes, I could digitize them, sure, I could stick around the house, ride gain, clean LP's, etc, for months, but nope, I'll just play what I want to hear.

And most of the time nowadays it's CD's. My cassette deck has died (rubber belts rotted), and I can't find any one to replace them.

 

[Mulder]

Someone may still prefer the vinyl version though. Even with a digital master the vinyl will tend to sound different, to one degree or another.

Yes. Of course. Nobody can object to someones subjective preferences. Everyone has their own subjective preferences when it comes to music and audio. The problem arises when you generalize and claim a universal truth based on these very subjective preferences.

 

[j_j]

Yes. Of course. Nobody can object to someones subjective preferences. Everyone has their own subjective preferences when it comes to music and audio. The problem arises when you generalize and claim a universal truth based on these very subjective preferences.

Very true, there is no arguing preference as long as the preference sticks to the individual who expresses it. The universal truth thing is extremely annoying.

As to LP's, I will yet again remind us all that some distortions enhance the fairly weak illusion that stereo creates. LP's have learned to use this, and CD's by and large are just evolving in that direction. Not all nonlinearity is necessarily bad.

 

[Multicore]

If someone gets far more joy from their love of driving an old sports car, suggesting they could drive a newer, more reliable Honda Civic isn't a substitute for that goal, "practical" or otherwise.

We have to evaluate "practical" with respect to someone's goals.

We could argue about the meaning of the word practical but in the context of a vinyl vs digital discussion on ASR I think we can skip that as it's all been said before. Speaking personally, practical has mostly to do with convenience of use and costs including costs of quality, see below.

Don't all our choices say something about us?

If you have the choice between listening to an album on vinyl or listening via a CD, or via your ripped CD collection, or via just streaming, doesn't your rational for any of those choices "say something about you?"

Yes, of course, all our choices say something about us. 100%. That's the point. What interests me is what do they say?

For example, I find the convenience and low cost and of digital absolutely persuasive so I listen to my vinyl collection only for music that I don't have on a handy digital source. Right now I'm listening to the Golden Palominos release that came out today on Bandcamp. Fantastic! A link just arrived in my email. Compare that with: I need to be with my LPs to listen to them, while I can listen to my digital anywhere, and even in my room with the LP collection and turntable it's a kinda PITA.

I think what this says about me is that I am more interested in music than in audio gear and record collecting. Actually I kinda hate my collection because it has come to present such big management problems that I find burdensome. And the audio gear is just an expensive means to an end. Some people I know are into vinyl and collecting per se. Some of them are also into fancy gear to play it on per se. None of that interests me. That all seems like mostly a drain on time, money, and living space.

So what interests me about people who like to wear a Barbour, drive a Triumph Stag, or collect and play LPs is why these things appeal to them. It isn't a judgement, it's curiosity. What exactly do these choices say? Iow, clearly people are investing in these interests so what's their ROI?