LP Sound vs Digital

[Thomas savage]

Not sure how full of testosterone most audiophile males are, but otherwise, yeah.

Tim

umm.. audiophile = low testosterone but high belligerent and delusional factors to compensate

 

[amirm]

I think they use up whatever testosterone they have left to fight in audio forums.

 

[Sal1950]

I like to know that my system is capable of reproducing what the engineers intended me to hear as best as possible.
High Fidelity has always been the goal of music lovers since the beginning and I've been trying since the mid 60s
Then beyond that if I enjoy adding some surround processing or other DSP/EQ effects to make for a more pleasing listening session that's great and mine or anyone else prerogative.

Starting at the most important component, the speakers, within our budget we all tune our system to taste in their choice. That highlights the difference between desire and reality.

 

[tomelex]

I can accept, that I can often prefer the imaging "effect"of vinyl, even LP vinyl, but I absolutely have to accept the less than stellar lows and highs that come along with that cool midrange "effect".

Its the same with SET sound, I accept the sing song "effect" among others but slightly muddier bass is what comes along for the ride with most but not all speakers (but not with headphones, the damping factor for SET is plenty good for good bass).

 

[tomelex]

Here is a good place to learn a bit more about basics of vinyl. Extremely good information, just have to dig for it.

http://www.vinylrecorder.com/index-e.html

 

[Sal1950]

Some good info on mixing for vinyl and understanding why it sounds the way it does.
http://www.resoundsound.com/mixing-for-vinyl-dont-fall-for-these-traps/

 

[TBone]

The following comparison offer very similar LP/CD transfers.

The Getaway, Chris DeBurg. Song: Don't Pay the Ferryman (mastered by Bernie Grundman A&M)

LP(sp9081) Orig.Canadian Pressing

CD(4929), 1991 original Canadian/US pressing, the "real" original CDs issued in EUR were 1984.

Ripped immediately after my last pre-amp modifications (w/no breakin period), rec. a touch hot, with minor right channel clipping evident. This pressing was purchased used, and had to endure a pretty aggressive cleaning regiment. Some tracks may have seen 1 stylus too many. That said, vinyl can prove amazingly durable.

Initial DR numbers, LP=12, CD=11.
on closer inspection ...
LP L=11.68 R=11.35
CD L=11.59 R=10.83

The DR reconciliation process provides some indication of system/ripping accuracy. Generally, most vinyl.rips offer consistently inflated DR values, often related to the particular turntable / arm / cart / stylus utilized ... hence why I don't always trust posted vinyl based DR stats.

plots ...
LP:

CD:

From a comparative SQ point of view, well, why bother ...

 

[RayDunzl]

It's too bad you can't specify the dB range on the left.

Or can you?

 

[amirm]

Can't find any way to do that in the latest version of Audacity (2.1). That stinks! I use scaling all the time when performing spectrum analysis in Adobe Audition.

 

[tomelex]

Wow TBone, very interesting, thank you for taking the time. The last two graphs are typical and telling, the lp is producing its own sound below 50hz and is dying off at the high end as well. That extra stuff at the bottom is part of the "sound" of LP, it adds a sound kind of like the low hush in a large auditorium, that sort of "cave" sound. Great post. If you measure the phase difference between the two you will see vinyl adding information there as well.

As far as SQ, I think it is worth a bother, listen for the imaging, the "size" taken up by the instruments and the space or lack of in between. You still might find that out, best to sync them up as best you can and switch back and forth every 10 seconds or so.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Can't find any way to do that in the latest version of Audacity (2.1). That stinks! I use scaling all the time when performing spectrum analysis in Adobe Audition.

Nope, you can't do that, and it is one of my biggest gripes about Audacity. Has been that way some time. You can do an FFT, and export the spectrum as a .txt file which can be dumped in a spreadsheet where all values even below -144db are shown correctly.

 

[TBone]

Nope, you can't do that, and it is one of my biggest gripes about Audacity. Has been that way some time. You can do an FFT, and export the spectrum as a .txt file which can be dumped in a spreadsheet where all values even below -144db are shown correctly.

yeah, I've done that in the past. Pain without Excel, although I could DL Open-Office ...

 

[TBone]

Since I've Been Loving You,
LZIII, released: 1970.
https://www.discogs.com/Led-Zeppelin-Led-Zeppelin-III/master/4199

dr.db online stats...
DR12: LP(s), 1971 originals.
DR11: (much clipped) Page/Marino remaster(s) CD(s).
DR10: HD Tracks: 24.96.

CD: (SD19128-2 Germany) 1986, mastered by Barry Diament.

LP: (SD7201) orig. Canadian/US pressing.

Initial DR values:
CD=DR12
LP=DR13
on closer inspection:
CD: L=11.77, R=12.77
LP: L=12.04, R=13.22

I chose the above CD because I consider it the closest to LP digital transfer to date. Barry has indicated that he used some eq for this mix (perhaps not enough according to him), sounds quite "flat" to me. As for the LP, unfortunately, most LZ3 orig. pressings have been too heavily rotated, worn to various degrees. Plenty compressed remasters and subsequent digital versions on tap, but ...

The above pressing was rescued from a friends/friend attic and was found in terrible condition, laying flat under a bunch of books/LPs in an attic, for decades. It was also apparently LAST treated, a process I've much experience, good & bad. No history of it's prior playback cutters (tt/arm/stylus shapes), one can only imagine that carnage. It required a very aggressive cleaning process, repeated. Rec. the same afternoon as the above Chris Deburg example, purposely done directly after pre-amp modifications without breakin. Once that circuit hits 100hrs, a re-rec.option exist for comparison.

(note: rips contain no digital intervention; click removal, limiting, compression, eq. although these options exist, I prefer to rec. vinyl raw.)

---

very interesting, thank you for taking the time.

no problem, figuring this is a science based board, I though these type posts more appropriate than mere "it sounds better" prose. I've got thousands of these examples on tap, many from other rippers/different systems. These rippers are all experienced, they know their stuff, both from a digital and lp point of view, and more importantly, a software pov ... they don't get caught up in silly format arguments littering boards w/fisher-price type comments.

The last two graphs are typical and telling, the lp is producing its own sound below 50hz and is dying off at the high end as well. That extra stuff at the bottom is part of the "sound" of LP, it adds a sound kind of like the low hush in a large auditorium, that sort of "cave" sound.

My 4 1/2 decades worth of experience in such matters paints a different picture. That infrasonic noise is a an analog playback signature (tonearm resonance+). Always a variable, changing from record to record, track to track, cleaning dependent, and obviously very analog-system/setup dependent. The best turntables offer vanishingly low noise floor attributes, the best arms don't ring like a bell (too many do) and when done "right" ... you may be amazed at how much MUSICAL information is hidden down in the depths, now apparent.

... listen for the imaging, the "size" taken up by the instruments and the space or lack of in between. You still might find that out, best to sync them up as best you can and switch back and forth every 10 seconds or so.

In my system, this isn't necessary, the sonic differences are readily apparent through-out the recording chain.

As far as SQ, I think it is worth a bother ...

I don't ... b/c of this continued tripe ...

I do agree that every time I hear people rave about tube gear and vinyl being superior, when I listen to the system, it sounds like I stuffed cotton in my ears. The only time I prefer vinyl, is when it's ripped to digital, and the digital version of the same album was done very poor using early gen ADC's. But today's ADC's are getting so good that rarely do I ever hear vinyl rips that sound better than today's latest high res downloads. I used to have a pile of high res vinyl rips, but most of them have been deleted from my hard drive and replaced with new high res master tape sourced albums. One vinyl rip I do have that will likely not be beat by a high res download is sourced from a very early mono version of Bob Dylan's "times they are a changin" The master tape from this album was pimped out to so many studio's over the years that by the mid 80's, it was worn out. This early vinyl copy is the best preserved copy of this album still in existence. So in this rare case the vinyl rip is superior to the latest high res download I have of the same album. However the guy who made the rip does have a $100K plus rig he made it with.

Mike, Please Stop!

You know NOTHING about vinyl, and little about software provenance issues. Why continually spout your nonsense here on a ripping thread?

By the same token, you claimed to have tossed 300 cds, all replaced by high rez'd versions, then you pondered (@WBF) which was the best version of The Wall.

You really need to ask?

perhaps you tossed this definitive CD (ck36185/183) version away ...

So please, let's pretend my subject-matter-experience has some merit past mere speculation, lets respect the experience of others in which you continually contrive. Again, this is a science based forum, so I'll refrain from preaching why the above LZ3 cut is "so superior" and simply post my research/numbers for others to parse/contribute. Anti-vinyl, anti-CD crap is so ridiculously boring, losing site of the forest from the trees. I have no problem sharing this info, it's not easy, while you simply preach bullshit without anything to back up your silly claims. If this nonsense continues, my contributions stop here.

 

[Blumlein 88]

yeah, I've done that in the past. Pain without Excel, although I could DL Open-Office ...

Gnumeric seems to import the file better than open office calc.

 

[TBone]

Gnumeric seems to import the file better than open office calc.

lotus 123 born, I luv Excel ... still use a lean 16 bit version on my XP machine. Open Office does the trick, but its very buggy, some of the bugs consistent, so maybe easily worked-around, but ... still a pain.

I'll research Gnumeric, thx.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

To wit, I hold in my hands a number of LP rips form high-end systems (cost tens of thousands of dollars). While in some cases there is no digital version, in others there is.

I wouldn't do a "LP Sound vs Digital" that way. I would split the LP output and put one through a low latency AD/DA, then compare . That would indeed be "LP vs digital" sound, instead of what it often actually is, 2 very different mastered medias.
Good luck finding an audiophile who can hear differences there.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Don Hills]

Can't find any way to do that in the latest version of Audacity (2.1). That stinks! I use scaling all the time when performing spectrum analysis in Adobe Audition.

Using 2.1.1, you have two controls for the dB scale of the Analyze --> Plot Spectrum function:

1. Under Edit --> Preferences --> Interface, select the dB range appropriate to the bit depth you want to work with.

2. In the Plot Spectrum display, use the zoom bar and vertical scroll bar to zoom in to the dB range you want.

 

[amirm]

Don, I don't see those zoom bars in my latest version I downloaded yesterday. Online help says they are there but I don't see them!

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yes Don is right other than 144 is the lowest you can go. And if nothing is that low you can't make it work that low.

You can place mouse pointer in the dB scale and either RT click or scroll for zooming in or out. This is not the full control I had in mind and it is rather clunky. But I had forgotten you can do this.

 

[Don Hills]

Don, I don't see those zoom bars in my latest version I downloaded yesterday. Online help says they are there but I don't see them!

That's odd - I just upgraded to 2.1.2 (on Windows 7) and the scroll bars are still there on the Plot Spectrum window.