Article: Does Vinyl Really Sound Better?

[DuxServit]

Has anyone compared LP pressings, where (a) there is an original pressing from a pre-digital era (before say 1983) and (b) new recent pressing created from digital files (e,g. remaster from analog tapes) of the same album.

Which would sound better subjectively, (a) or (b) ?

 

[mhardy6647]

Frank Sinatra + smoking jacket + martini + vinyl = I'm on my own personal Mad Men set

Frank Sinatra + smoking jacket + martini + digital = Halloween costume

 

[xr100]

Has anyone compared LP pressings, where (a) there is an original pressing from a pre-digital era (before say 1983)

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, digital delay lines were used in vinyl cutting lathes from some time in the 1970's on. (And you bet today's converters are higher performance.)

The answer to your question is "how long is a piece of string?" because it's not a like-for-like comparison.

If the question is one of the audibility of high quality A/D and D/A conversion, then arranging for them to be inserted in/out of a signal path in a controlled test provides an answer to that.

(b) new recent pressing created from digital files (e,g. remaster from analog tapes) of the same album.

If it's a "digital remaster" then that implies digital processing (aka "DSP") is used in the remastering process?

Ironically, once again digital processes (off the top of my head, e.g. limiting, HP filters, etc.) have been used in the final stages of preparing material for "cutting" to vinyl.

DSP can be extremely high performance but it's implementation-dependent. It's a "can of worms" (and I think I've exceeded my quotient of "attempted brevity but TL;DR anyway" posts for the day! )

 

[Wombat]

I gave up smoking cigarettes around the same time as I gave up vinyl.

Maybe they are complementary. Seemed to work for Frank.

 

[DuxServit]

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, digital delay lines were used in vinyl cutting lathes from some time in the 1970's on. (And you bet today's converters are higher performance.)

The answer to your question is "how long is a piece of string?" because it's not a like-for-like comparison.

But then the question of “Does vinyl sound better“ is an impossible question (a non-question) because for a given LP it’s impossible to known what digital delay lines were used in the old pre-compact disc days.

It seems the digital-delay-lines argument prevents any meaningful comparison between LP to LP (never-mind LP to CD).

 

[watchnerd]

I adopted CD over vinyl when CDs appeared. It was indeed a hallowed wean.

I have kept the vinyl, though. Turntables are not connected-up. Must get a Round Tuit.

groan

 

[levimax]

Has anyone compared LP pressings, where (a) there is an original pressing from a pre-digital era (before say 1983) and (b) new recent pressing created from digital files (e,g. remaster from analog tapes) of the same album.

Which would sound better subjectively, (a) or (b) ?

Yes I have compared , it is not possible to predict which sounds better as there are many more variables besides analog and digital sources with mastering and condition of master tape when transfered being two of the biggest. In my experience they will sound different .... Which is better is a preference. I usually like the originals not because they always sound better but because they are original

 

[xr100]

But then the question of “Does vinyl sound better“ is an impossible question (a non-question) because for a given LP it’s impossible to known what digital delay lines were used in the old pre-compact disc days.

It seems the digital-delay-lines argument prevents any meaningful comparison between LP to LP (never-mind LP to CD).

The "digital delay line" aspect relates to ideas that conversion to/from the digital domain "corrupts," "contaminates" or limits the "resolution" of the signal in a bad way.

The fact is that high quality digital conversion (which today, as this site has established, does not have to be "expensive") can be considered to be transparent.*

The "corruption" (error) caused by transferring to and reading from vinyl, compared to digital, is orders of magnitude greater.

As a crude analogy, digital conversion adds microscopic particles, whilst vinyl is like pouring chilli sauce over the signal, then driving a truck over it for good measure.

(*OK, it can be debated whether it's above/below the "just noticeable difference" level. Vinyl artifacts, however, are unquestionably audible.)

How to find out if vinyl "sounds better" than CD in a fully controlled way? One option would be to use a digital emulation of vinyl, one that does a good job of modelling its behaviour...

I suppose a live feed from an extremely high quality all-analogue signal path (i.e. not first recording to analogue tape or any other medium) could be cut it to vinyl in real time whilst simultaneously capturing to digital?!

Given everything above... Is this really necessary?

(Better test is adding controlled distortion to signals, by which I mean fully mixed music and not single instruments, sine waves, or electric guitars, etc., to see if small amounts result in a perceived improvement in sound quality--and it can--and what amount causes a decrease.)

 

[Frank Dernie]

tasting a steak and kidney pie

My favourite dish. My Mum made a great one and we had it on Saturdays. Mine isn't as good as hers but my children like it. I haven't tried it on the grandchildren yet. The biggest challenge nowadays here is finding ox or calf kidney.

 

[KarVi71]

My personal opinion on the vinyl vs digital, is that vinyl does not sound better.

It can sound very good, surprisingly good even, taken into consideration the limitations to the format.

I enjoy most of my music digitally, but nevertheless I sometimes put on a LP record, and sit down and listen. Even if I have the same album in various digital formats. And even though my digital setup has better sound.
Mostly because this way I'm more prone to listening to the whole album.

The digital world has made me a (sometimes) impatient listener, quick to jump forward to the next tune.

So if I need to relax and unwind, a good record on the turntable can be a good way.

 

[Frank Dernie]

But then the question of “Does vinyl sound better“ is an impossible question (a non-question) because for a given LP it’s impossible to known what digital delay lines were used in the old pre-compact disc days.

It seems the digital-delay-lines argument prevents any meaningful comparison between LP to LP (never-mind LP to CD).

Quite so.
The thing is there is a much bigger difference in SQ between different recordings than there is between different bits of hifi IME.
A good LP sounds better than a good CD because of this and a good CD sounds better than a poor LP.
I don't fret any more, I play whichever the piece of music I want to hear next is recorded onto.
I have a CD with a 1903 recording on it and the SQ of that is poor
I have a boxed set LP of the Brahms double and violin concertos which sound sublime.
One of my favourite CDs is Nimbus Brass Bacchanales recorded and released at the beginning of the CD era when many people claim CD wasn't much good yet but the SQ is fabulous IMO.
The whole CD v LP SQ debate is bollox IMO because "it depends".

 

[Pluto]

the question of “Does vinyl sound better“ is an impossible question (a non-question) because for a given LP it’s impossible to known what digital delay lines were used in the old pre-compact disc days

As someone who had just started in the business around that time, I can inform you that (in the UK at any rate) the earliest delay units were made by either Klark Teknik or AMS and both were totally transparent. They were hugely expensive but obviated the need for specially modified tape transports that provided an additional playback head with about a second of delay prior to the main playback. These transports had a convoluted tape path that added the necessary time delay with the quid pro quo that the tape was not as stable as the best that could be achieved with the manufacturer's standard tape path which was as short and well-supported as possible.

The consensus at the time was that the use of digital delay, combined with unmodified tape transports, resulted in a better product than had hitherto been possible with the cost of the delay line more or less covered by the lack of need for special transports.

 

[xr100]

As someone who had just started in the business around that time, I can inform you that (in the UK at any rate) the earliest delay units were made by either Klark Teknik or AMS and both were totally transparent. (…)

Fantastic post/information; hadn't realised Klark Teknik or AMS delays were used.

 

[Pluto]

Oooh... nostalgia

 

[anmpr1]

View attachment 45868

Frank listens to 3 channel open reel? Mac MX-110. Looks like another tuner underneath. Don't see the Johnny Walker.

 

[captain paranoia]

Fully analog? Potentially, but not usually in practice. But fully lossless?

That comment amused me. Especially when the rest of the article then went on to explain some of the many degradations that the mastering and playback of vinyl imposes, meaning that it cannot be 'lossless'.

 

[Robin L]

That comment amused me. Especially when the rest of the article then went on to explain some of the many degradations that the mastering and playback of vinyl imposes, meaning that it cannot be 'lossless'.

Exactly.

 

[xr100]

Think simply tasting a steak and kidney pie, I would probably love it while not many here would.

The last time I had one was under the age of 10, I think. I must have at least considered them edible (I'm a very fussy eater) but just thinking about "steak and kidney"... eww. I would never eat one now!

They are sold in fish n' chips shops here, the signature menu item of which is, IMO, exceedingly tasty...

BTW the "Hendrix Live at Winterland" CD used massive DSP restoration and sounded like it was recorded yesterday, I hated it.

I had a quick listen to (lossless) digital version of said title but I am not sure if it is the "DSP restored" version that you refer to; it does sound relatively clean, though. How "should" it sound?

 

[scott wurcer]

I had a quick listen to (lossless) digital version of said title but I am not sure if it is the "DSP restored" version that you refer to; it does sound relatively clean, though. How "should" it sound?

Best to just drop it it was more than 20yr. ago, there was an article about using the then recent software for removal of tape flutter, dropouts, etc.

 

[Wes]

A release on vinyl can sound better than a release on CD due to mastering, etc.

Once you have determined the subset of all releases for which that is true, you can then just toss a few $10,000 bills at a vinyl setup (including the vacuum cleaner) and play them or doa needle drop with a good A>D box.