Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[goat76]

Many inputs on this thread with very different opinions. Recently I restored my Thorens TD-124-Mk2 with SME 3009 and an Ortofon MM system since my son wants to keep this. After several years of listening to CDs and music files wav and flac I tried some vinyl LPs. Wow, music indeed but also short listening time per side and some crackling noise as well some rumble when listening low signal at high volume setting. Further distortion at the inner half of the disc. Used then an old german test LP and digitized it for further analysis. There the rumble content could be clearly seen in the spectrum view as well distortion components. Reading literature from the 1960ies regarding all this, all was known already at that time. Even the cutting itself produced rumble in the laquer foil. So vinyl is an old flawed technology. Nowadays digital is superior compared to vinyl. But I admit that the big cover pages have nice pictures and text. So listening to vinyl is like to taste an old vine. Thought that I will digitize my many LPs. But found that streaming services have most of my music already as files for download. Therefore it is not worth the time needed for digitizing. Especially because it can be only done in real regular time not 5x and more speeded when copying CDs at the PC.

Don't you ever find some of the masters provided by the streaming services to be inferior to some of your vinyl records, or do you find the other technical vinyl-related issues you mention to be larger issues than the sometimes very limited dynamics some digital masters suffer?

 

[rank]

Several tracks on Spotify, and quite a lot on YouTube, though mostly blocked in Australia. All I remember of Troy Tate is that he was sacked by Julian Cope (allegedly) and the Smiths (definitely). I hadn't realised that he released any solo material...

I have his 2 albums, I wanted his singles, they're cheap on discogs, but I had a lot of trouble getting a refund for a Monkees album that the German seller didn't send me. Plus they've since deleted my account.
Julian has a Ritchie Blackmore-esque fluctuating personality, he wrote a song about his ex-manager at the time of the Teardrops. For their compilation (Culture Bunker 1978-82), he had given cassettes with the tape wound in the box...

 

[SSS]

Don't you ever find some of the masters provided by the streaming services to be inferior to some of your vinyl records, or do you find the other technical vinyl-related issues you mention to be larger issues than the sometimes very limited dynamics some digital masters suffer?

Both. Have good and not so good vinyl. Also streaming has different qualities and dynamics. Really depends what you listen to. Mainly I hear music from the past which I like and some new stuff like good blues and country. Never listen to classical music. This is technically a different story where many mistakes can be made during recording and mastering due to the hugh original dynamic of a grand orchstra.

 

[Holmz]

The Troy Tate entire discography is only available on vinyl (not even a cassette so as not to enjoy the crackles and other various noises). Like the first three 12"s of B-Movie on Deram (Nowhere Girl long version can be found on the compilation CD 'Just Say Yesterday (Vol. VI Of Just Say Yes)' with other artists).

Luckily the B-Movie LP with “Nowhere Girl” is still OK after the 40 years or so since I got it.

Maybe I’ll play ABC, B-Movie and XTC…. And do some ABX testing.

 

[goat76]

Both. Have good and not so good vinyl. Also streaming has different qualities and dynamics. Really depends what you listen to. Mainly I hear music from the past which I like and some new stuff like good blues and country. Never listen to classical music. This is technically a different story where many mistakes can be made during recording and mastering due to the hugh original dynamic of a grand orchstra.

The type of music you listen to is usually not affected that much by the “loudness war” treatment. It’s way worse with rock music which can be completely destroyed when it comes to the dynamics, and as that is my main genre I’m thinking about buying me a turntable and pray that a less destroyed master was used for the vinyl release.

 

[SSS]

The type of music you listen to is usually not affected that much by the “loudness war” treatment. It’s way worse with rock music which can be completely destroyed when it comes to the dynamics, and as that is my main genre I’m thinking about buying me a turntable and pray that a less destroyed master was used for the vinyl release.

Seems to be true. On the other hand, some rock music and especially punk needs to be loud. And at live concerts like ACDC or Status Quo as examples are also very loud without much dynamic. Have been with my son to Ramones concert twice. All the time same high sound level. Or, long time ago, Lynard Skynard in a big hall was so loud that we could not bear it. I think it killed my ears.

 

[HammersRocco]

Seems to be true. On the other hand, some rock music and especially punk needs to be loud. And at live concerts like ACDC or Status Quo as examples are also very loud without much dynamic. Have been with my son to Ramones concert twice. All the time same high sound level. Or, long time ago, Lynard Skynard in a big hall was so loud that we could not bear it. I think it killed my ears.

Great point (hope your ears are OK)

What I wonder is where can we take/accept the loudness? Is the one coming from turning up to 11 more valid than the one from pumping and brickwalling the signal?

 

[goat76]

Seems to be true. On the other hand, some rock music and especially punk needs to be loud. And at live concerts like ACDC or Status Quo as examples are also very loud without much dynamic. Have been with my son to Ramones concert twice. All the time same high sound level. Or, long time ago, Lynard Skynard in a big hall was so loud that we could not bear it. I think it killed my ears.

The mastering itself doesn't have to be loud to play it loud. If you want to play it loud you just need to turn up the volume on your amplifier.

The problem with a loud master is that it will start to sound harsh way sooner when you increase the volume in comparison to the same track with the dynamics intact, which in turn will not sound harsh until the loudspeakers themselves start to reach their limit. So even if the more dynamic version needs more volume to reach the same loudness as the dynamically limited version, you will likely be able to play it louder before it starts to sound harsh as long as your sound system is highly capable of playing things loud.

I bet the live concerts you visited were loud but only dynamically limited by the capacity limitations of the PA system used at those venues, and not loud because of any extended use of compression and dynamic limiters.

 

[goat76]

Great point (hope your ears are OK)

What I wonder is where can we take/accept the loudness? Is the one coming from turning up to 11 more valid than the one from pumping and brickwalling the signal?

As long as you have a system capable of playing things loud, the brick-walled version will sound worse than the full dynamic version when played at an equal loudness level. That's why remasters with squashed dynamics more often than not sound worse than the old version with most of the dynamics preserved.

 

[MattHooper]

As I’ve mentioned before, a significant portion of my record collection is taken up by library music, which spans all types of genres from classical to experimental electronic, and none of it was released to the public. Some of it has made its way to digital release, but most of it hasn’t.

And some of those records produces among the best sound I’ve heard from my system.

 

[deweydm]

Fontaines D.C. - Romance, brick walled. But there’s an Atmos mix available. What happens when an Atmos mix is played back on a stereo system? Maybe it depends on the specific Atmos mix?

Switching back and forth between the Atmos stream and the same tracks on LP, with only a stereo setup, and they sound very similar to me.

For the most part, I’ve only listened to atmos playback with a 5.1.2 surround sound set up before. Kinda surprised that Atmos playback with a simple stereo setup sounds good.

Am I missing something?

 

[Galliardist]

As long as you have a system capable of playing things loud, the brick-walled version will sound worse than the full dynamic version when played at an equal loudness level. That's why remasters with squashed dynamics more often than not sound worse than the old version with most of the dynamics preserved.

A LOT of care needs to be taken with this stuff.

Firstly, seriously compressed digital stereo is a thing, as we all know. The bigger the name, these days, the worse it's likely to be. Sometimes it's only the CD, sometimes it's only the streaming version, sometimes it's both, sometimes a 24 bit version on one streaming service is better than 16 bit or lossy on the same or a different platform. (Yes, I've been caught out thinking that albums have been brickwalled everywhere, only to be pointed to a good streaming version - there's an example in this thread).

Secondly, not all remasters are actually bad because the DR meter says so. Sometimes, it's just that bass that was taken out in original release has been put back, or lower crosstalk. Both of those changes result in lower DR, but the actual dynamics are the same. The same thing happens between LP and digital mastering.

The processes used in stereo mastering and their effect on measured DR have been argued over and tested by ASR members including, again, in this thread. Sometimes people are reporting better sound from vinyl and using DR to justify it ("it's a different master"), when the same master has been used. It's unlikely to be whatever DR is measuring. And of course, preferring the vinyl is a valid response - it's the conclusion drawn that may not be right.

Non-sonic factors come into play as well of course. I had a conversation with someone recenly about this. He's digitised some of his vinyl and did some comparing. The actual vinyl "generally sounded better" to him than CD or streaming. Ripped vinyl sounded the same as actual vinyl... but digital streaming "generally sounded better" than ripped vinyl... though I don't know what music or hardware was used.

 

[Galliardist]

Fontaines D.C. - Romance, brick walled. But there’s an Atmos mix available. What happens when an Atmos mix is played back on a stereo system? Maybe it depends on the specific Atmos mix?

Switching back and forth between the Atmos stream and the same tracks on LP, with only a stereo setup, and they sound very similar to me.

For the most part, I’ve only listened to atmos playback with a 5.1.2 surround sound set up before. Kinda surprised that Atmos playback with a simple stereo setup sounds good.

Am I missing something?

Quick check on my work laptop with cheap unsupported phones, Apple Lossless is brighter than Atmos, but it's not much different dynamically. Of course Apple Lossless may be very different to that "download" in the DR database. Bass in the Atmos mix sounds deeper but somehow wrong (possibly distorted in this case), and the vocal in the lossless sounds a lot more present. I don't think I have good enough stuff to work through this one properly, but I'd guess that Spatial Audio on the Mac may not be good for this test as they say it doesn't work. There is no reason Atmos shouldn't downmix to stereo with code designed to do that, though.

I might investigate that Peter Gabriel album from last year with those awful compressed stereo mixes from last year at some point.

 

[JeffS7444]

Two years since the start of this topic, and I finally have a solid reason for owning a turntable (aside from it's value as a fidget-spinner): A few days ago, I happened upon a good article about drummer Jack DeJohnette. Mention was made of a 2016 album featuring his piano works, and I wanted to check it out. But it's a vinyl-only release, and a sold-out release at that. No CD or digital downloads available, and no plans for a reissue. Ultimately, I found a secondhand copy of Newvelle Season One box set for just a few dollars more than the DeJohnette album alone. It's beautifully packaged, if surprisingly hefty. Sonics are about as good as I've ever heard from the medium, though ironically, liner notes are available only in digital form, which must be downloaded from Newvell's web site.

 

[deweydm]

Quick check on my work laptop with cheap unsupported phones, Apple Lossless is brighter than Atmos, but it's not much different dynamically. Of course Apple Lossless may be very different to that "download" in the DR database. Bass in the Atmos mix sounds deeper but somehow wrong (possibly distorted in this case), and the vocal in the lossless sounds a lot more present. I don't think I have good enough stuff to work through this one properly, but I'd guess that Spatial Audio on the Mac may not be good for this test as they say it doesn't work. There is no reason Atmos shouldn't downmix to stereo with code designed to do that, though.

I might investigate that Peter Gabriel album from last year with those awful compressed stereo mixes from last year at some point.

Forcing Atmos (always on setting) with Apple Music from an iPad over camera connection kit USB dongle to a Schiit Modi3+ DAC. Kinda expected this to sound off somehow with only two speakers, no surround capabilities, but that hasn’t been the case yet. Need more listening.

 

[goat76]

A LOT of care needs to be taken with this stuff.

Firstly, seriously compressed digital stereo is a thing, as we all know. The bigger the name, these days, the worse it's likely to be. Sometimes it's only the CD, sometimes it's only the streaming version, sometimes it's both, sometimes a 24 bit version on one streaming service is better than 16 bit or lossy on the same or a different platform. (Yes, I've been caught out thinking that albums have been brickwalled everywhere, only to be pointed to a good streaming version - there's an example in this thread).

Yes, I know. The files of the different versions must be analyzed in detail before we can say anything about the quality, but sometimes it is fairly easy to hear if a certain version is made from a better or worse master.

Do you remember what the example was with the good streaming version of the album which was brick-walled everywhere else?

Secondly, not all remasters are actually bad because the DR meter says so. Sometimes, it's just that bass that was taken out in original release has been put back, or lower crosstalk. Both of those changes result in lower DR, but the actual dynamics are the same. The same thing happens between LP and digital mastering.

Yes, sometimes the less dynamic version can have the more "correct-sounding" tonality and a more naturally-sounding amount of bass. I have analyzed many different masters and many times it is easy to be misled into thinking a certain master is way better than another one just because it has a higher crest factor, but when making listening comparisons it can sometimes be obvious that the higher dynamic version is bass-shy and "thin-sounding".

The processes used in stereo mastering and their effect on measured DR have been argued over and tested by ASR members including, again, in this thread. Sometimes people are reporting better sound from vinyl and using DR to justify it ("it's a different master"), when the same master has been used. It's unlikely to be whatever DR is measuring. And of course, preferring the vinyl is a valid response - it's the conclusion drawn that may not be right.

Earlier in this thread I was the one who showed how the DR can easily go up 3-4 dB just by applying mono bass, de-esser, and other specific things usually done to the vinyl release to prepare it for both the making of vinyl and the playback (to avoid the needle from jumping out of the grooves and so on). Maybe that is what you refer to?

Anyway...
It's also (almost) as easy to see when there wasn't the same "base-master" used for the vinyl release as the obviously brick-walled digital release, and that is if the difference in DR is way larger than 3-4 dB (which is about as much the DR will "jump" by the usual vinyl preparations) and when the overall tonal balance sounds comparable between the versions. So if the DR for a vinyl release is about 6-10 dB higher than the digital version and at the same time doesn't sound very thin in comparison, a more dynamic master was most likely used for the vinyl release.

Non-sonic factors come into play as well of course. I had a conversation with someone recenly about this. He's digitised some of his vinyl and did some comparing. The actual vinyl "generally sounded better" to him than CD or streaming. Ripped vinyl sounded the same as actual vinyl... but digital streaming "generally sounded better" than ripped vinyl... though I don't know what music or hardware was used.

I believe that may often be the case. Some people are probably dead set on vinyl usually sounding better than other formats which may be based on previous experiences that can be true for certain releases, and that belief may put them into a pre-set mindset that that is always the case with vinyl in general which put them into rest that they can almost always trust their favorite format.

 

[goat76]

Fontaines D.C. - Romance, brick walled. But there’s an Atmos mix available. What happens when an Atmos mix is played back on a stereo system? Maybe it depends on the specific Atmos mix?

I don't use Apple Music, but I can for certain say that Tidal re-routes the stream to the regular 2-channel release whenever a none Atmos playback system is used. I have done the analysis myself by choosing to play the Atmos version of a song and ripping it, and when comparing the digital file to the regular 2-channel release, the two files were identical which wouldn't have been the case if one of them would have been the downmixed version of the Atmos mix.

At least when it comes to Tidal...
If the stream of an Atmos mix will not automatically be re-routed to the regular 2-channel version, an Atmos-compatible playback device, for example, an Apple TV must be used, and then you can let the Atmos mix be downmixed to stereo in a surround receiver.

Switching back and forth between the Atmos stream and the same tracks on LP, with only a stereo setup, and they sound very similar to me.

If you have a way to analyze the Atmos stream, it should be easy to see if it truly is the Atmos version as that should have a reading of at least -18 LUFS (as that is a requirement of the Atmos standard).

For the most part, I’ve only listened to atmos playback with a 5.1.2 surround sound set up before. Kinda surprised that Atmos playback with a simple stereo setup sounds good.

Am I missing something?

I have also heard downmixed versions of Atmos releases sounding way better than the regular 2-channel release. It's not that strange as the regular versions of popular songs are often brick-walled, but thanks to the Atmos standard of a level of at least -18 LUFS there was never any reason to brick-wall it as that would just create a extremely large headroom to reach the required LUFS level without any gain in loudness.

 

[Galliardist]

Do you remember what the example was with the good streaming version of the album which was brick-walled everywhere else?

I'll see if I can find it.

Earlier in this thread I was the one who showed how the DR can easily go up 3-4 dB just by applying mono bass, de-esser, and other specific things usually done to the vinyl release to prepare it for both the making of vinyl and the playback (to avoid the needle from jumping out of the grooves and so on). Maybe that is what you refer to?

Anyway...
It's also (almost) as easy to see when there wasn't the same "base-master" used for the vinyl release as the obviously brick-walled digital release, and that is if the difference in DR is way larger than 3-4 dB (which is about as much the DR will "jump" by the usual vinyl preparations) and when the overall tonal balance sounds comparable between the versions. So if the DR for a vinyl release is about 6-10 dB higher than the digital version and at the same time doesn't sound very thin in comparison, a more dynamic master was most likely used for the vinyl release.

I checked back, and yes, it was you, and it was good work.

While not always the case, it's also possible for the same master to be used for vinyl and then further compressed for commercial digital release. I've seen mention made of different masters for each purpose, but it's not impossible to just brickwall the commercial digital release from a good studio base master, after all. I haven't come across a mix with obvious differences in, say, position of instruments in the few comparisons I've heard of vinyl against digital recently. (I don't have a turntable so don't live with this on a daily basis). Whereas with some early MQA versions on Tidal (Trilogy by ELP comes to mind) there were such differences to suggest a different master.

 

[deweydm]

I don't use Apple Music, but I can for certain say that Tidal re-routes the stream to the regular 2-channel release whenever a none Atmos playback system is used. I have done the analysis myself by choosing to play the Atmos version of a song and ripping it, and when comparing the digital file to the regular 2-channel release, the two files were identical which wouldn't have been the case if one of them would have been the downmixed version of the Atmos mix.

At least when it comes to Tidal...
If the stream of an Atmos mix will not automatically be re-routed to the regular 2-channel version, an Atmos-compatible playback device, for example, an Apple TV must be used, and then you can let the Atmos mix be downmixed to stereo in a surround receiver.



If you have a way to analyze the Atmos stream, it should be easy to see if it truly is the Atmos version as that should have a reading of at least -18 LUFS (as that is a requirement of the Atmos standard).



I have also heard downmixed versions of Atmos releases sounding way better than the regular 2-channel release. It's not that strange as the regular versions of popular songs are often brick-walled, but thanks to the Atmos standard of a level of at least -18 LUFS there was never any reason to brick-wall it as that would just create a extremely large headroom to reach the required LUFS level without any gain in loudness.

Differences with Apple Music playback while toggling the Atmos setting between always on and off aren’t subtle. Seems like not just an over all dramatic difference in level, but also larger relative differences in volume between instruments with Atmos always on. Using another release, where the lossless version is mastered very loud too that’s also available in Atmos, Spoon - Lucifer On The Sofa. Subjective impressions though. Haven’t captured waveforms.

Haven’t found anything from Apple yet that isn’t a little vague about how Atmos playback to stereo devices is handled, but it’s supported. From https://support.apple.com/guide/ipad/play-spatial-audio-ipad3e893078/ipados “Always On: Plays Dolby Atmos on any headphones or speakers. The Music app will attempt to play Dolby Atmos tracks on any headphones or speakers connected to iPad.”

Not sure exactly how AM is rendering the Atmos mix when output is going to the lightning to USB adapter, but I’m pretty confident it’s not just reverting to the lossless stereo file.

 

[krabapple]

A lot of the now-320 pages may actually not be getting to the root of explaining any vinyl renaissance at all, in fact.

The mystery of the vinyl renaissance is deep....as deep as the cosmos.

How deep is that? Fathomless. It's turtles all the way down.


(alternatively, the 'mystery' was solved within a day of the first post, and the rest has been just:
Arguments, agreements
Advice, answers
Articulate announcements
Babble, burble, banter
Bicker, bicker, bicker
Brouhaha, balderdash, ballyhoo
It's only talk )