Why do records sound so much better than digital?

[j_j]

Well, I guess it stopped raining. I did in fact play a very nice old LP the other day when the controversy about the Pink Floyd Anniversary album having a rainbow on it came around.

I even posted a photo of the LP turning on the table with the album cover (original pressing, once with the poster and stickers) behind it. It's not all about the perfection of the medium, no it's not, sometimes it's the music. In fact, I hope MOST of the time it's about the music.

And, sometimes, it's about being on vacation!

 

[pma]

Yes, vinyl is like vacation

 

[Sokel]

Yes, vinyl is like vacation



View attachment 264993

Just posted the exact same play two days ago,different cut I suppose,same masterpiece though:

Sound stage depth?

With other genres it is less significant anyhow, and often poinless since it's simply different tracks mixed together. depth is still crucial, else you get an overcrowded mix

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[pma]

Just posted the exact same play two days ago,different cut I suppose,same masterpiece though:

Sound stage depth?

With other genres it is less significant anyhow, and often poinless since it's simply different tracks mixed together. depth is still crucial, else you get an overcrowded mix

www.audiosciencereview.com

The original with Neumann is from 1972. The vinyl I posted in the bottom photo is a new edition of the same, made from master tapes in 2018

It was a limited edition , together with 192/24 download.

Antonín Dvořák - Symphony No. 9 in E minor from The New World, Op. 95 41:20

1. I. Adagio. Allegro molto 9:21

2. II. Largo 12:18

3. III. Scherzo. Molto vivace 8:16

4. IV. Allegro con fuoco 11:16

Czech Philharmonic Orchestra

Václav Neumann conductor

Numbered limited edition, 180 g virgin vinyl, DMM cutting

Recorded at the Rudolfinum, Prague, 27 February – 1 March, 1972


On two occasions during his tenure as chief conductor of the Czech Philharmonic (1968-1990) did Václav Neumann undertake a major, and beautiful, task – to make a studio recording of one of the best-known and most wonderful symphonies of all time, Antonín Dvořák’s “From the New World”. The first recording was made in early 1972, with the orchestra possessing technical brilliance following Karel Ančerl’s era, yet craving for intensive emotionality and romantic flight – which they were duly afforded by their new charismatic chief conductor. The sheer magic of the recording is further enhanced by its analogue format, the technique that at the time enjoyed its apex, splendidly mastered by the recording team at the Dvořák Hall of the Rudolfinum in Prague. Supraphon has now returned to the legendary recording, present on a vinyl disc, while having made use of the state-of-the art cutting (DMM, Pauler Acoustics) and pressing (Schallplattenfabrik Pallas) technologies. True connoisseurs will undoubtedly welcome the possibility of free downloading of the recording in Hi-Res (24 bit / 192 kHz), thus having been given the choice between listening to the warm vinyl sound and analytically savouring all the details in a digital re-recording from a top-quality tape. The legendary recording deserves the utmost care – and a keen listener.

Antonín Dvořák - Symphony No.9

www.dvorakvinyl.cz

 

[Sokel]

The original with Neumann is from 1972. The vinyl I posted in the bottom photo is a new edition of the same, made from master tapes in 2018

View attachment 265020

It was a limited edition , together with 192/24 download.

As far as I can understand mine is a 1983 production recorded at 1981 and as they say it's a digital recording (a really good one considering the time done).

(of course is playing now as I type!)

 

[pma]

As far as I can understand mine is a 1983 production recorded at 1981 and as they say it's a digital recording (a really good one considering the time done).

First recording we made here in digital was in 1975 in a small church of Lučany village, on the equipment from and with Nippon Columbia. Recording engineer was Miloslav Kulhan, and I had an opportunity to be an "apprentice" of him for some 4 weeks in 1977, during my University studies.

The first digital recording was officially released later

Schubert - Suk Trio - Piano Trio No. 1 / Notturno

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1987 Vinyl release of "Piano Trio No. 1 / Notturno" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

Please also note this Japanese 1976 edition of the same digital recording, one of the first ever

Franz Schubert / Suk Trio - Trio In B-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 99 / Notturno In E-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 148

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1976 Vinyl release of "Trio In B-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 99 / Notturno In E-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 148" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

 

[Sokel]

First recording we made here in digital was in 1975 in a small church of Lučany village, on the equipment from and with Nippon Columbia. Recording engineer was Miloslav Kulhan, and I had an opportunity to be an "apprentice" of him for some 4 weeks in 1977, during my University studies.

The first digital recording was officially released later

Schubert - Suk Trio - Piano Trio No. 1 / Notturno

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1987 Vinyl release of "Piano Trio No. 1 / Notturno" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

Please also note this Japanese 1976 edition of the same digital recording, one of the first ever

Franz Schubert / Suk Trio - Trio In B-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 99 / Notturno In E-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 148

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 1976 Vinyl release of "Trio In B-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 99 / Notturno In E-Flat Major For Piano, Violin And Cello, Op. 148" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

The first one you posted (the 1987 one) has the same recording director with mine.
Must be one of the good ones there as it seems.

 

[Daverz]

As far as I can understand mine is a 1983 production recorded at 1981 and as they say it's a digital recording (a really good one considering the time done).

Neumann recorded 2 complete Dvorak cycles, one analog and one digital. The analog cycle is included in a Supraphon box of Dvorak's symphonic works.

 

[computer-audiophile]

I've been an audiophile for 60 years. But I don't share the basic assumption that vinyl sounds better. The best I've heard are master tapes or digital masters. That said, I still like to listen to records when I want to celebrate music reproduction. That's the purpose of my systems with tube amps and horn speakers or whatever. I play a lot with those and build them myself. Otherwise, I mostly listen to digital files or streaming in the near field with active studio speakers.

Records can have a particularly high sound quality when they are direct cuts. No tape recorder in the signal path. I have a few of them. I show a picture of one of them (I already showed it in another thread about Contemporary Classic)

 

[pma]

I've been an audiophile for 60 years. But I don't share the basic assumption that vinyl sounds better.

It is no longer about what "sounds better". It is about music and some recordings simply do not exist in digital, like the first image I posted here, issued in 1951. Still it has its good artistic value. The music is not only about SINAD.

 

[computer-audiophile]

It is no longer about what "sounds better". It is about music and some recordings simply do not exist in digital, like the first image I posted here, issued in 1951. Still it has its good artistic value. The music is not only about SINAD.

I had referred to the title of the thread. Was on topic to that extent.

It's a whole other question as to what is not available as a digital recording. For example, the direct cut record I showed is also only available on vinyl. SINAD I did not mention. The question was, or is, sound.

 

[Sal1950]

It's not all about the perfection of the medium, no it's not, sometimes it's the music. In fact, I hope MOST of the time it's about the music.

How can it truly be about the music if you have no interest in hearing it reproduced in the best possible manner?
That's how you'd show you really cared about the music.
Now if you said you just enjoyed having expensive toys to play with, you'd be correct.

It is no longer about what "sounds better". It is about music and some recordings simply do not exist in digital, like the first image I posted here, issued in 1951. Still it has its good artistic value. The music is not only about SINAD.

How many of them do you have?
Then divide that number into the total cost of your LP playback rig
How much is it costing you per, to hear a few scratchy, noisy, distorted old records?
Solid evidence please.

 

[JP]

a

How many of them do you have?
Then divide that number into the total cost of your LP playback rig
How much is it costing you per, to hear a few scratchy, noisy, distorted old records?
Solid evidence please.

Why does that matter?

 

[Sal1950]

a


Why does that matter?

Not if he's very rich I guess.
Otherwise cost always matters.

 

[pma]

How many of them do you have?
Then divide that number into the total cost of your LP playback rig
How much is it costing you per, to hear a few scratchy, noisy, distorted old records?
Solid evidence please.

Wow, a bit rough push, why?

The number of valuable records from 1950's to the mid of 1970's would be about 50. Collected by my parents and me. It is the music content of them that is important, to me. Mostly classical music and jazz music.

 

[Sal1950]

Wow, a bit rough push, why?

The number of valuable records from 1950's to the mid of 1970's would be about 50. It is the music content of them that is important, to me. Mostly classical music and jazz music.

Naw, not rough at all, just a honest question.
Thanks for what sounds like a very honest answer

 

[Frank Dernie]

Reading the groove optimally requires a very low effective mass stylus (mostly cantilever!), preferably with a high quality line contact needle on the end of it.

There is more to it than that though isn’t there?

On the mechanical side the linearity of the magnetic circuit effects the accuracy too, as does setup - it only being “correct” at 2 radiuses of the LP at all others the edge of the stylus reading 1 flank of the groove is not perpendicular nor tracing the groove in phase with the other flank anyway.

At the bass end a cartridge isn’t accurate at frequencies lower than ~2x the natural frequency of the effective mass on the cartridge compliance, the precise value depending on the suspension damping.

A parallel tracking arm resolves the issue of the stylus spending most of the disc at a skew with the groove but the vast majority have a very high lateral effective mass which makes the bass very wrong indeed.

Then there are the electrical characteristics usually mentioned.

 

[JP]

Not if he's very rich I guess.
Otherwise cost always matters.

If someone can’t afford to do something they should probably consider not doing it. Otherwise who cares? It’s not like we’re talking about ill-informed decisions. Perhaps he can afford something you can’t. And someone else can afford something he can’t. The world continues to spin.

 

[Frank Dernie]

How can it truly be about the music if you have no interest in hearing it reproduced in the best possible manner?

I actually think for most music lovers it is about the music Sal, not the SQ.

I enjoy and prefer good quality playback but I’d rather listen to a beautiful performance of a piece of music I love on a modest system than a fabulous sounding recording of music which bores me - like at most HiFi shows.

My wife is a professional musician but she is quite content to compare performances on her small laptop since the musicality of the players is every bit as evident without super high sound quality - talking about their system being “musical” being on of the HiFi enthusiasts most laughable myths IMO.

I have some dire sounding recordings I still listen to for the music and it is still the case that the sound quality of the recordings themselves varies more widely than the Hi-Fi systems most people listen on.

I keep my LPs and record players despite not playing them often, and acknowledging the SQ compromises inherent in them.

 

[Sal1950]

If someone can’t afford to do something they should probably consider not doing it. Otherwise who cares? It’s not like we’re talking about ill-informed decisions. Perhaps he can afford something you can’t. And someone else can afford something he can’t. The world continues to spin.

True enough,
The point of this thread was sound quality and the OP making an ill-conceived, ridiculous post about a vinyls SQ.
Miles away from a collector of 50 rare recordings.

I enjoy and prefer good quality playback but I’d rather listen to a beautiful performance of a piece of music I love on a modest system than a fabulous sounding recording of music which bores me - like at most HiFi shows.

Frank, your trying to twist the point.
Who cares about listening to music you don't like?
For the vast majority of folks who ended up here, they want to listen to the music they love on the best rig they can afford.
Not the 70 yo housewife who loves 60s rock and listens on a cheap Bose radio all day.

And the point of HiFi shows is to highlight a systems capability, something best done with SOTA quality recordings, so that's what they use.
Boring or not, what would you use, some 75 year old LP full of scratches and noise?
Just the nature of the beast.