Digital vs. Vinyl (again)

[NorthSky]

Sadly, I've seen too many of the more dynamically mastered CDs, the early first pressings, not stand the test of time and become unplayable. To be perfectly honest, I kinda like the premise that people think CD is now obsolete ... here, second hand stores sell 'em for next to nothing ... so while the cost of vinyl rises accordingly, I've been supplementing my CD collection on the very cheap.

When we buy audio gear (hardware), we gain experience on what is better and not. ...For us, for our own taste.
When we buy music recordings (software), we gain experience @ recognizing the better studio music recordings with the better recording engineers, the best music record labels. That part to me is more important than the gear. Sure I don't want low-end gear from Costco, but solid sound engineering on what I can afford from the level of music passion reciprocity in my life and balanced with my other joys; family, food, roof, animal kingdom of the planet. ...Plus the human race.

I agree; all my CDs prior to roughly the mid 90s are total crap (a bunch of them, several hundreds). And all my good LPs are gone (stolen by the devil himself).
Man, there are some truly bad people in my country!

Anyway, albums now are expensive, more than CDs. But some CDs are quality sound, and SACDs too...the good record labels.
And I think it costs more money to produce LPs than it costs for CDs...so the premium we pay for the LPs today, and not because they are better, because they're not...only few well remastered ones, is the main reason why. Even hi-res music downloads is lucrative business...@ $25 to $40 a pop, depending on the format and the res with higher numbers and attractive letters ... DSD2X and Labido executive edition @ 784kHz (which only the fog over Mexico City has any clue what's really up there and what it does to the human brain...free pina coladas sitting on polluted clouds of soaked gas and oil).

So, the music software is where our real music passion resides and starts from...no matter if it's from analog or from digital.
They both are majestic with the right material (music recordings).

To me there isn't a versus between them; there are ♫ verses.

 

[NorthSky]

I'm more interested with whom he's sitting...

She was the very first individual I looked @ from your picture.
That guy from the foreground you could have cut him off (with that sword right above in this new pic), and I would have been a better man for it.

 

[TBone]

I agree; all my CDs prior to roughly the mid 90s are total crap (a bunch of them, several hundreds).

North, I think you misunderstood my post, what I meant was those early CD are damaged as to be "unplayable". As for sound quality, generally I much prefer the least amount of compression, which many early CD offer. You seem to prefer later remasters, which usually are compressed by comparison, smoother top-ends, louder and more apparent tilted up bottom end. To each their own, if you decide to throw out your "crappy" originals, send 'em to me.

 

[NorthSky]

Oh yes, I love compressed music.

Pinholes, I have few of those...you can see through. I don't buy Pop music, those like from the Biebs.
Check Led Zeppelin first digitally remastered CDs (1994); they sound like metal cans behind the car of a newly married couple.
The remasters of Roxy Music...they sound like rats having a snack in the attic. ...Eating cans of sardines with crackers.

Anyway, the Beatles from my LPs sound more delicious than the CDs. ...Same for Pink Floyd and Miles Davis.
Where do you live so that I can send you my most crappy music recordings, on CDs?

 

[NorthSky]

from a distance, maybe a Capitol pressing. I can't recall many other purple labels in my collection, some Deep Purple originals maybe ...

You are right; a Capitol purple pressing @ center...the Beatles, Pink Floyd, Miles Davis, ....
It's the back cover of that LP sleeve that is the real clue.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

I'm more interested with whom he's sitting...

Yeah really. She's drinking a beer and this dork is listening to a Fisher-Price record player with headphones. WTH?

 

[TBone]

Check Led Zeppelin first CDs; they sound like metal cans behind the car of a newly married couple.

Well, again, to each their own, I've discussed my appreciation for Barry Diaments mastering - many times - on this board.

The remasters of Roxy Music...they sound like rats having a snack in the attic. ...Eating cans of sardines with crackers.

The only Roxy CD remasters I have are "fake" HDCD versions. Thankfully, most of my Roxy collection are the original LPs.

 

[Ken Newton]

Anyone recognize from the bottle on the table what brand of beer she's drinking? Being a hipster, it's almost certainly some boutique/microbrew label.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

This being an audio science forum, someone here could probably demonstrate that the kid down at the bus stop with a good pair of IEMs plugged into his iPhone is getting better fidelity than an audiophile whose source is a record player. But who would put the effort into demonstrating something so freaking obvious?

Tim

 

[NorthSky]

Well, again, to each their own, I've discussed my appreciation for Barry Diaments mastering - many times - on this board.
The only Roxy CD remasters I have are "fake" HDCD versions. Thankfully, most of my Roxy collection are the original LPs.

1. We must have different pressings...Led Zeppelin (I live in Canada...that could have played a role).
2. Now we are on the same wavelength; HDCD remasters from Roxy Music albums. ...Awful.

Anyway I don't listen to that stuff anymore; I'm into Opera, Jazz, Classical and World Blues...mostly.
Sure, I live in a digital world right now when it comes to spinning music inside a machine. But I spanked more LPs in my lifetime than CDs and I have only love for analog, and a greater appreciation for multiverse music as diversified as there are music mediums that are apt to it...that includes digital and vinyl verses. ..With all the right notes, the right tempo, the right impact from the drum kit, the right emotion from the solo piano, the right frisson from the female opera singer and cello player, the right timing and coordination between all the musicians and the master recording mixing music engineers. I'm a real sucker for artists with an essential soul that speaks directly to my membranes.

* Edited to make it more comprehensible in the analog domain.

 

[TBone]

early cds...
Led Zeppelin 19126 b.diament
Led Zeppelin II 19127 b.diament
Led Zeppelin III 19128 b.diament
Led Zeppelin IV 19129 j.sidore

As for Houses & Physical I've still not done the required homework. Had an original Physical CD which rotted, couldn't be ripped.

Sure, I live in a digital world right now when he comes to spinning music inside a machine. But I spinned more LPs in my lifetime than CDs and I have only love for analog

yes North, your passion certainly shows. As does mine, near every non-audiophile visitor (99% of my acquantances), after seeing the cd player & turntable sitting side by side, tend to always ask the same inevitable whats better question. It really is predictable. Watching that same confused angular stare, after I claim; "within this system, vinyl sounds best when played back on my cdp" or "I can prove vinyl superior by playing you a ripped cd." ... is priceless.

the fact is, of my rare "audiophile" friends who have big musical libraries, they're mostly into vinyl. Digital bores 'em, not nearly as tangible. One was originally big into vinyl pre-digital, went full stock all digital for well over a decade, and since returned to vinyl/cd full stock and barrel. Balance is the key ... you really can have the best of both worlds.

North, I'd like to thank you b/c it was one of our prior conversations and your prompting, that led me to build/acquire my Steve Earle collection. Exceptional artist/music ...

 

[NorthSky]

Cool, I'm going to give you my Led Zeppelin numbers...

Steve Earle, excellent!
_____

• Led Zeppelin: Atlantic A2 82632 (remastered)
• II: Atlantic A2 82633 (remastered)
• III: Atlantic A2 82678 (remastered)
• IV: Atlantic A2 82638 (remastered)
• Houses of the Holy: Atlantic A2-19130

I have the faked remastered ones. They are truly awful, and back then just few years ago I thought that remaster meant better. I didn't know that they meant 'total crap', easy money for the record label, for the artists, for this audio music industry full of deceptions. Their financial gain my emotional lost.

Then when you read that the vinyls sound so much better than those crappy CDs you don't need to believe, you just need to listen. The measurements would show it too, without a shadow of a doubt. Vinyl won here, big time. The CDs I have are a total digital disgrace.
And it's my fault; I'm the one who bought them, and the people who digitally remastered them they just did ... their job. It's not the CD's fault, it's my fault and mine only to have purchased such crappy sounding digital remastered CDs. The industry is not to be blamed, only the suckers who buy that crap. In this hobby you'd better do your research or they'll dry you up real fast of everything you thought that you knew and didn't.

How many copies does it take before you get a satisfying one? It depends; you might be lucky in life with your timing, or it can takes three-four-five copies before finally one sounds good.
But today we don't have that anymore; the first copy was taken good care of in sound quality, and the price is right. Just don't buy from most record labels out there, buy only the best and pay more too for it by the best in the business...dedicated sound lovers.

It is amazing all the garbage they are selling out there to kids and people like me. There should be laws for selling contaminated products that poison people's life and kill them mentally.
It's easy to recognize them; they are the ones who can only criticize. ;-)

 

[TBone]

They are truly awful, and back then just few years ago I thought that remaster meant better.

I've rid my Marino/Page CD except IV ...

Remaster, Black Dog ...

notice the abundant hard limiting / clipping, not my idea of a "high fidelity" transfer, no matter what format.

Joe Sidore Orig...

Compression (DR.dB):
Remaster = L9.4 R10.4
Original = L12.7 R13.2 which is considerably higher.

 

[TBone]

And it's my fault; I'm the one who bought them, and the people who digitally remastered them they just did ... their job. It's not the CD's fault, it's my fault and mine only to have purchased such crappy sounding digital remastered CDs. The industry is not to be blamed, only the suckers who buy that crap. In this hobby you'd better do your research or they'll dry you up real fast of everything you thought that you knew and didn't.

No, it's OUR fault. As a group, audiophiles have long been complicit, buying music like candy without question, applying the usual fluffy prose describing equipment without proper reference to any mastering used, good or bad. No friggin wonder opinions hover all over the place. It's only relatively recently audiophiles have become aware of compression/loudness-mastering practices, and many still wish to ignore the issue, or perhaps they don't care, or simply don't get-it (they may even prefer compression, louder = better). Worse, the vast majority of reviewers fail to mention provenance issues, yet they'll discuss wires, cables, coils, caps, chips, output stages, ground boxes with little stones, magic pebbles, cryo'ing, and how all CD sound like crap, and/or DSD and LP are heaven sent ... as if any of those variables sound more noticeable over mastering ... (big sigh)

 

[NorthSky]

Well said.

 

[krabapple]

I've rid my Marino/Page CD except IV ...

Remaster, Black Dog ...
View attachment 2021

notice the abundant hard limiting / clipping, not my idea of a "high fidelity" transfer, no matter what format.

not sure that's a showcase for 'abundant hard limiting/clipping'. Thats pretty mild processing compared to years after.

And are you sure those peaks are actually clipping (i.e., 'flat topped', two or more consecutive samples at 0dBFS), and not simply single samples at 0dBF (which is not 'clipping')?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Compression isn't necessarily a bad thing. It can be applied to very good effect, and even when it is used too broadly, squeezing out some dynamics, the resulting recordings can sound good. A great example, I think, is Jorma Kaukonen's Blue Country Heart. It has been pointed out to me, on WBF I think, that it is pretty compressed. But the acoustic instruments still come though beautifully, with more than enough dynamic range to make the attack of notes jump the way they're supposed to. It's just that the overall volume is higher and the dynamics are squeezed a bit. But the dynamics in that kind of acoustic music are largely about attack, and that's preserved, so it still works. I think we run the risk of going too far in the other direction and declaring compression a universal evil. It's not. And it's impact needs to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

I have those old Diamet Led Zep CDs. They're very good. You just have to turn them up.

Tim

 

[krabapple]

And reverse the channels on Houses of the Holy.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

And are you sure those peaks are actually clipping (i.e., 'flat topped', two or more consecutive samples at 0dBFS), and not simply single samples at 0dBF (which is not 'clipping')?

I can't speak to the question of whether the red lines in the figure are clipped, but you can most certainly clip single samples.

 

[TBone]

And reverse the channels on Houses of the Holy.

Again, another generalization, it depends on which pressing you refer.

And are you sure those peaks are actually clipping (i.e., 'flat topped', two or more consecutive samples at 0dBFS), and not simply single samples at 0dBF (which is not 'clipping')?