The Observer view on the vinyl revival: LPs are the antidote to a frenetic digital world

[Justdafactsmaam]

1) You're talking net acoustic separation in-room, at the listener's ears, correct?

2) What are you calling "conventional" stereo? Conventional versus what? I don't understand.

Jim

Two channel stereo without any cross talk cancellation DSP

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I hope we aren't only talking about that lovable obsolete technology that no one can explain the popularity of?

Explain in what sense, and reasons why, conventional stereo only has 5-10 dB of channel separation, please. And multichannel much less.

I suggest you contact Professor Edgar Choueiri, Director of Princeton's Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Laboratory (EPPDyL) and the 3D Audio and Applied Acoustics (3D3A) Lab. He is tenured Full Professor in the Applied Physics Group at the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, and associated faculty at the Astrophysical Sciences Department/Program in Plasma Physics at Princeton University. I think he and his team at Princeton who have done the actual measurements can better educate you on the subject than I can. Let me know if you need his email? I’ll happily post it for you.

 

[Yuhasz01]

I get all the tactile, ritual elements with playing my 1,000 cds.

 

[Angsty]

From the article:

“But this isn’t only about music. LPs are objects. They offer a haptic experience as well as an aural one”

This is not a throw-away line; people are often influenced by multiple stimuli regarding what they like, most of which are not fully conscious or rational.

After recently re-reading “Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman, I am not surprised by the idea that a haptic experience could influence an aural one.

 

[DonR]

From the article:

“But this isn’t only about music. LPs are objects. They offer a haptic experience as well as an aural one”

This is not a throw-away line; people are often influenced by multiple stimuli regarding what they like, most of which are not fully conscious or rational.

After recently re-reading “Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman, I am not surprised by the idea that a haptic experience could influence an aural one.

Visual as well. Physical media offers a connection to the music that digital media lacks.

 

[Keith_W]

Cross talk should be quite popular on ASR given the response to BACCH filters. Vinyl has as much as 30 db channel separation but conventional stereo has 5-10 db channel separation. Multi channel even less. Enjoy

BACCH works the opposite way - rather than increasing crosstalk, it reduces it.

There are VST's and some devices that deliberately increase crosstalk though, mostly for headphone use. With headphones, the effect is less of a "headphone" experience and where everything is hard panned left to right and sounds a bit more natural.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

BACCH works the opposite way - rather than increasing crosstalk, it reduces it.

There are VST's and some devices that deliberately increase crosstalk though, mostly for headphone use. With headphones, the effect is less of a "headphone" experience and where everything is hard panned left to right and sounds a bit more natural.

I should have been more clear. I was talking about the negative responses the BACCH DSP has received. All it took for that was an admittedly biased opinion from Dr. Toole that had no basis in actual auditioning much less controlled testing.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

I suggest you contact Professor Edgar Choueiri, Director of Princeton's Electric Propulsion and Plasma Dynamics Laboratory (EPPDyL) and the 3D Audio and Applied Acoustics (3D3A) Lab. He is tenured Full Professor in the Applied Physics Group at the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, and associated faculty at the Astrophysical Sciences Department/Program in Plasma Physics at Princeton University. I think he and his team at Princeton who have done the actual measurements can better educate you on the subject than I can. Let me know if you need his email? I’ll happily post it for you.

Professor Choueiri is not the one making confused statements ... you are. I suggest that you contact Professor Choueiri and arrange for him to better educate you on the subject. Since you have his e-mail, you can get on that right away.

Jim

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Professor Choueiri is not the one making confused statements ... you are. I suggest that you contact Professor Choueiri and arrange for him to better educate you on the subject. Since you have his e-mail, you can get on that right away.

Jim

These numbers came straight from Edgar. Please cite the specific assertions you think I am getting wrong. I’ll be happy to email Edgar for clarification. Or you can too. Either way I am quite happy to let Edgar speak for himself and the work he and his team have done and the actual measurements they have done. That’s the important thing right?

 

[Deleted member 21219]

Please cite the specific assertions you think I am getting wrong.

I believe @krabapple already did that, when he asked you, "Explain in what sense, and reasons why, conventional stereo only has 5-10 dB of channel separation, please. And multichannel much less."

If a person understands a principle, then they can explain it. If a person cannot explain it, the conclusion is that they do not understand it.

Jim

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I believe @krabapple already did that, when he asked you, "Explain in what sense, and reasons why, conventional stereo only has 5-10 dB of channel separation, please. And multichannel much less."

If a person understands a principle, then they can explain it. If a person cannot explain it, the conclusion is that they do not understand it.

Jim

These were numbers that came from Edgar. The veracity of these numbers does not hinge on my personal ability to explain or account for them. Once again, either of you can easily ask Edgar if you are genuinely interested in their veracity or any further explanation you feel is necessary. Your insistence in trying to make it about me and not about the actual measurements Edgar did leads me to believe that perhaps you really aren’t all that interested.

 

[Travis]

The observation i posted in the OP is factually incorrect and should never have been printed in a respectable newspaper and this is likely the only place it will be pointed out. No one has ever said anything about people's preferences so please don't conflate the two.

You did see the part where it's identified as "Opinion" and an "Editorial" right?

If the one line in the opinion is so upsetting to people they should have left a comment (https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-joys-of-the-vinyl-record-resurgence#comments) or sent a letter to the Editor. That is what Opinion/Editorial pieces are supposed to do, invite discourse. Guess what, it worked, 266 responses.

 

[kemmler3D]

Visual as well. Physical media offers a connection to the music that digital media lacks.

Indeed. Vinyl does sound better, if only because it forces you to pay attention. You can't lift veils and hear new micro-plankton if you aren't focused in the first place. In all seriousness, vinyl has an advantage there.

I would bet good money you could measure the effect on perceived quality of the physical format itself (independently of the actual sound) in a blind test.

 

[DonR]

You did see the part where it's identified as "Opinion" and an "Editorial" right?

View attachment 339188

If the one line in the opinion is so upsetting to people they should have left a comment (https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-joys-of-the-vinyl-record-resurgence#comments) or sent a letter to the Editor. That is what Opinion/Editorial pieces are supposed to do, invite discourse. Guess what, it worked, 266 responses.

Yes, I did see it. The tagline of being an editorial doesn't give them license to print lies.

 

[Travis]

Yes, I did see it. The tagline of being an editorial doesn't give them license to print lies.

It's an "opinion" by one person. They have the absolute license to print any opinion they wish, whether you agree with it or not, or even consider that one line to be "lies." That's sort of a fundamental we have in the US, and the UK (but not as protected in the UK as much as the US). That's what the Opinion/Editorial section of a newspaper is for.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Yes, I did see it. The tagline of being an editorial doesn't give them license to print lies.

Editorial does not give one license to print lies. But there is more to a lie than being factually incorrect. It requires willful intent to deceive. Do you think that is the case here?

 

[Travis]

Apparently, that Opinion piece in the OP was so popular the Music Editor put out his opinion piece at the same time:

Vinyl is back for good and that’s exciting. Don’t let the greed of big labels ruin it | John Harris

Mainstream music’s take-up of the format has led to soaring demand, driving out indie labels and driving up prices, writes Guardian columnist John Harris

www.theguardian.com

I remember his article about the pressing plant from many years ago that was making the rounds.

Vinyl’s difficult comeback | John Harris

The long read: Vinyl is enjoying an unexpected renaissance. Can the creaking machinery of the few remaining record pressing plants cope?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Robin L]

Indeed. Vinyl does sound better, if only because it forces you to pay attention. You can't lift veils and hear new micro-plankton if you aren't focused in the first place. In all seriousness, vinyl has an advantage there.

I would bet good money you could measure the effect on perceived quality of the physical format itself (independently of the actual sound) in a blind test.

Makes no sense to me. I play CDs beginning to end. I pay attention. Sometimes I have to stop play for various reasons, but it's my intention to hear all of a CD when I play a CD. When I had LPs, sometimes I stopped play part way through, or selected tracks for mix tapes. The idea that LPs are superior because one must listen to them beginning to end, totally focused and glued to their seats, fundamentally is absurd.

 

[Travis]

Editorial does not give one license to print lies. But there is more to a lie than being factually incorrect. It requires willful intent to deceive. Do you think that is the case here?

Um close, but not quite. First, a newspaper can intentionally lie about anything it wants, only at the risk of losing credibility with its readership. What is a "lie" will vary with the newspaper, or, more accurately, the social media platform and the readership of that platform. Everyone is familiar with the recent issues in the US about what were called lies, others saying were a criminal offense, no need to go into all of that.

The one-liner, strictly in the legal sense, cannot be a "lie" or "factually incorrect" as it is commentary. It is by definition "commentary" because it is designated as an "Opinion" and an "Editorial." The most protected of all 1st Amend. Speech in the US. That's the first step.

Then you move on to for a lie or factually incorrect statement to be actionable, it has to harm someone (a corporation is treated the same as a person in the US). If the person/company who alleges they are harmed by a statement in a newspaper (print or online), they have to prove that the statement was: 1. false (truth is an absolute defense); and 2. made with malice, which is "knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth."

But let's assume that the statement in the Guardian did in fact harm someone, and they can prove the harm (they lost sales for example, like maybe the statement was about voting machines and the person harmed is a voting machine company maker for example). Again, from a legal perspective, you couldn't even prove that the statement: "the sound of digital music, as every vinyl fan knows, is not, and never will be, half so rich and warm as the sound of an LP, and playing it does not tend to encourage, as spinning a record does, truly serious listening" to be either a lie, or factually incorrect, at least in the US.. The statement is subjective. How can you possibly prove that statement to be false? It's equivalent to a music/movie/opera/Broadway Theater/book reviewer saying what they heard and or saw "was the worst possible thing ever produced in the history of (fill in the blank)." Or even the best [fill in the blank] and you went out and spent money on it and you want to bring an action against the reviewer for the waste of time and/or money wasted on the movie, play, opera, record, or even a piece of audio equipment. Depending on the reviewer and location, a review can actually have a serious financial impact (millions in the case of Broadway musicals and plays). Some past cases have revealed that a reviewer went the extra mile of panning a piece because of spite or some animous towards the artist/producer. Result, "sorry, it's fair comment that is essential to a free and democratic society - regardless of how much of the pan was a result of the reviewer personally hating you."

The courts in US have repeatedly, held, (especially the Federal courts), a statement such as that in the Guardian isn't a statement of fact, and any reasonable person (the courts would say) would know that isn't a statement of fact. The case would be dismissed. In the UK, the case would also be dismissed, under similar interpretations and the attorneys' fees rule in the UK is that the loser pays all the other side's attorneys' fees and costs.

It's not even a close case (from a legal standpoint which is the question you asked).

 

[Leporello]

Makes no sense to me. I play CDs beginning to end. I pay attention. Sometimes I have to stop play for various reasons, but it's my intention to hear all of a CD when I play a CD. When I had LPs, sometimes I stopped play part way through, or selected tracks for mix tapes. The idea that LPs are superior because one must listen to them beginning to end, totally focused and glued to their seats, fundamentally is absurd.

When I listened to LPs I changed records and skipped tracks all the time. My room was scattered with empty record covers and records in their paper sleeves.

Then again, it has to be asked why listening to whole albums is considered particularly virtuous and attentive? Isn't selecting particular tracks actually a more conscious and intentional act?