Tape vs Vinyl record vs digital - Nathan Davis "The Hip Walk"

[Jean.Francois]

Hello,

It’s been a while since I wanted to add a test of an album including a magnetic tape in comparison with vinyl and a digital source. It’s done with this album, and I’d like to thank Julien for making it possible to carry out this test using his magnetic tape of the album and his Revox PR 99 mk3 as player.

For this review, you will find 3 versions tested: Vinyl record AAA, Tape reel-to-reel, Tidal Max Flac 24 bits 96 kHz.

The comparison was made in analog listening for the vinyl record and the tape, and the samples were digitized with an ADC using an ES9822Pro in DXD 32-bit 384 kHz format.

To make your own comparison, simply listen to the samples, because even digitized, they retain the characteristics of the different media.

Otherwise, technically, tape is far superior to vinyl, not only in terms of background noise, but also in terms of stereo separation, as shown in the graphs below, where the bass of the vinyl record is in mono, unlike the tape and digital versions.

You'll find more details and measurements, and above all samples, here.

Enjoy listening

Jean-François

 

[DSJR]

Interesting - thanks.

My mastering engineer pal's boss told me back in the early 90's that in his digital transfers, he used to add a couple of dB at 40Hz (no idea of the eq shape I'm afraid) and although not much, he felt that many recordings transferred back then benefitted from it. I have two CD copies of a 70's album by Camel and the very slight difference in 'push' lower down is audible to me (the latter mastering was almost certainly done flat as the engineer (also from this establishment) only tweaked where necessary I remember.

I wonder how different the playback electronics and general bass eq is, of the PR99 compared to the usual mastering machines as used by very busy facilities as well as a typical prosumer B77HS 2 track which is related to the 99 model. Mastering machines were calibrated each tape at 15kHz and the heads were only replaced when this frequency could no longer be lined up to the lower frequency tones each master came with.

 

[restorer-john]

Hello,

It’s been a while since I wanted to add a test of an album including a magnetic tape in comparison with vinyl and a digital source. It’s done with this album, and I’d like to thank Julien for making it possible to carry out this test using his magnetic tape of the album and his Revox PR 99 mk3 as player.

View attachment 358864

For this review, you will find 3 versions tested: Vinyl record AAA, Tape reel-to-reel, Tidal Max Flac 24 bits 96 kHz.

The comparison was made in analog listening for the vinyl record and the tape, and the samples were digitized with an ADC using an ES9822Pro in DXD 32-bit 384 kHz format.

To make your own comparison, simply listen to the samples, because even digitized, they retain the characteristics of the different media.

Otherwise, technically, tape is far superior to vinyl, not only in terms of background noise, but also in terms of stereo separation, as shown in the graphs below, where the bass of the vinyl record is in mono, unlike the tape and digital versions.

View attachment 358865


You'll find more details and measurements, and above all samples, here.

Enjoy listening

Jean-François

To me, your posts are simply a tease and really only clickbait to send people off-site.

If you want to start a discussion and bring content worth discussing, join your own threads and discuss. Otherwise you bring little value to ASR IMO.

 

[Jean.Francois]

Interesting - thanks.

My mastering engineer pal's boss told me back in the early 90's that in his digital transfers, he used to add a couple of dB at 40Hz (no idea of the eq shape I'm afraid) and although not much, he felt that many recordings transferred back then benefitted from it. I have two CD copies of a 70's album by Camel and the very slight difference in 'push' lower down is audible to me (the latter mastering was almost certainly done flat as the engineer (also from this establishment) only tweaked where necessary I remember.

I wonder how different the playback electronics and general bass eq is, of the PR99 compared to the usual mastering machines as used by very busy facilities as well as a typical prosumer B77HS 2 track which is related to the 99 model. Mastering machines were calibrated each tape at 15kHz and the heads were only replaced when this frequency could no longer be lined up to the lower frequency tones each master came with.

Thank you.
A small addition, on the tape used, there weren't the test signals found on a master tape, which is a pity because we can't guarantee that the qualibration is perfect. But it does allow us to make a first level comparison.

 

[Jean.Francois]

To me, your posts are simply a tease and really only clickbait to send people off-site.

If you want to start a discussion and bring content worth discussing, join your own threads and discuss. Otherwise you bring little value to ASR IMO.

Hello,

I'm participating and replying to comments.
My goal is simply to share and exchange on the tests I do, because I find that to get the most out of your system, you need to have the best possible edition of an album.
I can't duplicate everything I write (it would take too long) but I try to highlight the main points in synthesis.
I don't make any money with my site, I'm just trying to share my passion and the tests that take up a lot of my time.

 

[MAB]

Thanks for your posts. I find them useful and informative in a way many of the technical discussions and arguments here lack. The recording matters.

 

[Jean.Francois]

Thanks for your posts. I find them useful and informative in a way many of the technical discussions and arguments here lack. The recording matters.

Thanks!

 

[rank]

To me, your posts are simply a tease and really only clickbait to send people off-site.

If you want to start a discussion and bring content worth discussing, join your own threads and discuss. Otherwise you bring little value to ASR IMO.

I am for freedom of speech. Limitless.