Search results

  1. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    From hdtracks Only Ventura highway is RM2006. The general idea is a flat transfer to any media. CD and Audio Fidelity CD (RM2015) are identical at FFT FR. The only possible discrepancy is a non flat transfer or pressing in vinyl (is a 1972 one!)..so I'm in the process of measuring MM cartridges...
  2. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Oh...hdtracks 2013 24/192 not remastered
  3. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Info based on https://gearspace.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/1211245-tracy-chapman-s-debut-album-vocal-guitar-recording-methods.html Microphone technique, models, comb effect, EQ chain and gear https://www.mixonline.com/recording/classic-track-fast-car-tracy-chapman-427573 16 bits...
  4. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Yes T Chapman (1988) is a reference album, using Neumann (1950s!) microphone, and double microphone technique in several tracks, details of the recording are in several magazines. It sounds impressive even with out of phase and comb effect impossible to avoid and all the non linear effects of...
  5. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Thanks for the info, the 540 is probably loaded by 47k and some 150 pF (2' Sommer cable), I compared with 5' cable and no difference in FR, adding extra 150 pF and start to loose HF response. But I don't try to make lab measurements ...I only use a 0.000x thd interface and that's enough for...
  6. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Both comes from same old master mix and have very similar loudness and RMS statistics. But there's an MM capsule that add a non linear response. So I take another good album from Tracy Chapman (1988) to make same comparison between CD and Vinyl (clean, no clicks) and curiously all loudness...
  7. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    By the way this is Chapman CD 1st track An the 540 rip version .. that's the "impressive" difference between digital and analog. No expensive cables other than Sommer (used for AES/EBU) 2' handmade RCA, but any cable with decent shield yields same results. Obs.: Trying to find the capsule...
  8. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    That's the nightmare: to find the peak of the disc avoiding false positive from clicks. Then a decent declick to proper normalization. But there's no necessity to be near 0 dB the digital world has dynamic range to spare -3 to -6 has no effect on rip
  9. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    In detail: same music passage at -10 LKFS and -0.5 dB true peak...very representative of modern music "produced" on digital gear I don't wanna play that...btw that's why Amir test DACs at 0 dBFS and the reason every Ifi DAC suffers. For example Tracy Chapman GH on CD is worst than this example...
  10. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    iZotope RX 7 with BS1770 loudness but any editor with loudness plugin can do. Essentially the loudness model don't take care of dynamic range and use a gain factor (K) that decreases abruptly at low frequency (like our ear). So loudness computation has some frequency weight and then even the...
  11. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Totally agree on vinyl edition sound variation but different takes (same vinyl) with Ortofon Bronze or Black are almost identical so the frequency response is not distorted by the AT capsule. What I see on recent "digital mastering" vs vinyl is that the sound is heavily compressed even for vinyl...
  12. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    Take a -17 LUFS track And apply -15 LUFS target with -1 dB peak Is easy to observe the "brickwalled" sound effect (many extra peaks) destroying the original good dynamic range. Probably this could be a good option to listen music on portable gear or in the car, but no high fidelity in anyway...
  13. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    But even with proper normalization the loudness can be very different!. Using "to each his own" track from America in vinyl and HD we have this statistics last is digital (lower min RMS level!). They are similar in loudness (-1 dB peak normalized) but they sound very different. Vinyl loudness...
  14. R

    Normalization methods for LP digitization

    The simple way is peak level normalization, RMS don't take account the crest factor of music genre And the ear loudness perception curve (i.e.: Fletcher Munson @ 70 dBA). On the other extreme we have BS-1770 that can measure loudness more appropriately. But don't forget it uses a gated method...
  15. R

    Why do records sound so much better than digital?

    Well looking for another thread I ended here, maybe a simple answer is tonality in vinyl. From America ("to each his own" track) a comparison between vinyl first take (AT VM-540 SL-1200) and hd tracks Digital provide extra 3-4 dB below 100 Hz, analog was almost 10 dB high at 10 kHz cymbals...
  16. R

    Shielded cables inside plastic case or plain wires inside a shielded case, or both?

    Plastic case all the shields must be connected at one point to common RCA gnd (probably best at the output), plastic case cheaper and easy for drilling. Metal case better for pro use EMI fool proof (it can protect even the selector), earth at single point. UTP good for minimal crosstalk. For...
  17. R

    Why a completely flat response is what we all want in listening audio equipment

    To clarify things: Audio engineers use FLAT studio monitors (maybe some treble tilt) in nearfield conditions (forget the room!), equalization is about some balance in the mix (put forward some instrument or voice, bass vs drums etc). Then you can use non studio speakers in a reverberant room and...
Top Bottom