Message to golden-eared audiophiles posting at ASR for the first time...

[Blumlein 88]

What specific experiments have you done to validate that you can hear "digital imperfections"? What were the controls?

Judas has moved on from such topics making controls unnecessary.

 

[Phorize]

That's an.... interesting interpretation of the technological advancement in the audio industry (not saying mine is better, just very different).

Yours is objectively better. Just sayin’.

 

[Phorize]

Judas has moved on from such topics making controls unnecessary.

I think Judas is actually Deepak Chopra.

 

[Inner Space]

I think Judas is actually Deepak Chopra.

I thought maybe his kid brother, Shallow-ak Chopra.

 

[Judas]

It's not a question about good vs. bad. If the 50KHz frequency extension is the thing that makes vinyl superior, then 16bit/92KHz digital should be considered flawless to your ears. Technical superiority is one thing, preference is another. Nobody is gonna taunt you for enjoying the sound of LPs, but saying that this medium and digtal playback is pestered by audible artifacts to the same degree is a very bold statement.

If you make a digital recording of an LP, would you expect the recorded file to be "colored" by the fact that it's digital?



That's an.... interesting interpretation of the technological advancement in the audio industry (not saying mine is better, just very different).

Personally I see the vinyl renaissance as a result of the hipster culture mixed with nostalgia and the love for tactile experiences. And most of the digital "improvements" seem more like dumb excuses to keep people with upgraditis happy and get more product out the door. I mean... 32bit/768KHz, seriously? Why? But in no way do I see the link between those two phenomena.

All these arguments have been adequately responded to before except one. There is one new one. "hipster culture". It appears the overwhelming membership to the audiophile culture is comprised of nerdy old white guys. I meet two of those.

 

[Feelas]

All these arguments have been adequately responded to before except one.

Where?

 

[Robin L]

One fantastic thing about the renaissance of the LP is it has kept the pressure on digital to improve.

The pressure on Digital audio to improve is the presence of the smartphone. It required placing a lot of computational power into a very small form factor. Once headphones [hello Beats!] became a species of fashion statement, claims of audiophile superiority soon followed. Thus "Tidal". My guess is that the ability to have more bits/higher sampling rates meant digital record/play had improvements because there was more [unused, but what the hell] headroom, music became easier to post-produce, there would be lower levels of noise and distortion on everything. The LP had nothing to do with those improvements, market forces did.

 

[Judas]

special pleading

noun

1. argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavourable to their point of view.

I was taught to ignore an issue is to concede it." There is no need "beat a dead horse" or to drone on ad nauseam. I think the term in law is res judicata.

 

[Judas]

The inherent part of IGD is due to the velocity of the groove slowing as the stylus meets the deadwax. Linear tracking tonearms do not address this issue. Nothing can address this issue. The reduction of the speed of the groove as the stylus gets to the center of the LP cannot be eliminated. While a linear tracking arm can address the issues of a stylus being less than perfectly aligned, the greater issue is the reduction of the speed of the groove relative to the stylus.

 

[Judas]

The pressure on Digital audio to improve is the presence of the smartphone. It required placing a lot of computational power into a very small form factor. Once headphones [hello Beats!] became a species of fashion statement, claims of audiophile superiority soon followed. Thus "Tidal". My guess is that the ability to have more bits/higher sampling rates meant digital record/play had improvements because there was more [unused, but what the hell] headroom, music became easier to post-produce, there would be lower levels of noise and distortion on everything. The LP had nothing to do with those improvements, market forces did.

Of course you are wrong. But it does not matter. I am satisfied that you concede digital needs to improve and is. I'll take whatever concession I can get.

 

[Robin L]

He's pointing out what I'm pointing out.

What's your point?

 

[SIY]

He's pointing out what I'm pointing out.

What's your point?

Do not feed.

 

[Robin L]

Do not feed.

Okie dokey.

 

[Judas]

We can see alignment can combat IGD. While IGD it is not impossible to combat.

 

[BDWoody]

I was taught to ignore an issue is to concede it." There is no need "beat a dead horse" or to drone on ad nauseam. I think the term in law is res judicata.

You're really not engaging in discussion, you are simply making claims, and are unwilling to back up the claims. Here, the dead horse is the stream of similar claims. High on conviction, low on evidence.
If you aren't going to engage with more than that, don't make the claims.

This is where the questions about good faith come in, because it doesn't look like you are actually interested in hearing what is being said. You aren't required to understand or care about sampling theory, but if you are going to make statements about its general inferiority, it would be good to have actual reasons why.

Actually .. this exchange illustrates pretty well why the thread was initially started.

Anyway, I hope you stick around and keep reading, but you're done posting in this thread.
When you've got that level matched blind test showing you can pick out the (properly captured) digital recording of an analog recording over the original, by all means let us know, but until then, you're likely to just get uh-huh as the answer.

 

[Killingbeans]

All these arguments have been adequately responded to before except one.

Yeah... okay. I... that's... well, let's just pretend that's true.

There is one new one. "hipster culture". It appears the overwhelming membership to the audiophile culture is comprised of nerdy old white guys. I meet two of those.

Hipsters and audiophiles are not the same thing

If you draw a Venn diagram you probably get some overlap, but most hipsters just buy the cheap bluetooth TT they can get at the local supermarket. It's the image of being the dude/dudette who listens to vinyl that's the important thing for them. Sound quality is seldomly a part of the equation. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of the records responsible for the profits driving the revival of the medium are being played on the worst kind of cheese cutter turntables you can imagine.

Of course you are wrong.

Earlier in this thread you objected to being called a Troll. This is not really helping your case.

I am satisfied that you concede digital needs to improve and is.

That's not even remotely what he wrote My Troll radar is not very good, but I'm starting to get a few blips.

EDIT: Nevermind. BDWoody was kind enough to stop this circular discussion. Back to topic!

 

[pkane]

Apropos of nothing, I recently did some analysis for an LP pressing factory. They wanted to analyze the difference between the original and the LP-recorded data. I spent some time struggling with the result: the null was very poor.

In the end, it turned out that there was a significant phase modulation by a 0.555Hz frequency on some, and 0.8Hz on others (33 1/3 and 48 RPM). Here's an example of the timing error, in microseconds (Y axis) and time, in seconds (on X) from an actual quality control recording they sent me:

This error shows up not just on playback, but was also present in the lathe control feedback stream recording, in other words, as the data was being cut. And here some of us worry about DAC clocks having femto-second jitter. This error is in the millisecond range! So much for LP accuracy of reproduction.

 

[watchnerd]

I have ABX tested myself between the DSP-based phono stage in my Devialet and the DSP-based Puffin phono stage.

Without cheating and listening to groove noise with the volume cranked, and with volume matched between the two files to within 0.12 dB, I can pass an ABX test, listening to music sections, with 80% confidence......over laptop speakers.

Given the similar architectures, I'm a bit surprised.

FWIW, while I'm probably a decent "trained listener" (recording engineering/mixing, musical instrument playing), physically, I don't hear much above 15kHz, as is typical for my age, so no golden ears.

 

[watchnerd]

This: "The game is all speakers and rooms at this point "

And cartridges.

 

[Robin L]

I have ABX tested myself between the DSP-based phono stage in my Devialet and the DSP-based Puffin phono stage.

Without cheating and listening to groove noise with the volume cranked, and with volume matched between the two files to within 0.12 dB, I can pass an ABX test, listening to music sections, with 80% confidence......over laptop speakers.

Given the similar architectures, I'm a bit surprised.

FWIW, while I'm probably a decent "trained listener" (recording engineering/mixing, musical instrument playing), physically, I don't hear much above 15kHz, as is typical for my age, so no golden ears.

I think the real gold is in knowing how to listen and what to listen for. More about the brains than the ears. Particularly as regards engineering/mixing.