I think it's worth keeping in mind that there is a difference between someone like Gelder whose job it is to work and struggle with mastering all day long, listening for the most minute issues...and the results we as consumers can experience.
As I've mentioned (and others as well): I have vinyl records and CDs made from the same original masters (of course the LP recieved a tweaked master for pressing), and the sonic advantages for the digital version were to my ears very subtle at best. Both sound fabulous, and virtually all the sonic information seems there on the vinyl version. So, did that particular engineer find it frusterating to master for vinyl? Sure. Does his job experience mean that the end result on vinyl is doomed to sound "terribly different or much worse" from the digital version? Not necessarily.
From another highly regarded mastering engineer,
Bob Ludwig:
HQ Interviews... Bob Ludwig, Mastering Engineer of The Whole Love - Thanks so much for taking a few moments out of your seemingly never-ending schedule. And without further ado...Wilco HQ: In layman terms, what does it
wilcoworld.net
HQ: In addition to mastering The Whole Love, you approved the vinyl test pressings. What do you listen for when approving these?
BL: The first priority is that the vinyl sounded as close as possible to my high resolution mastered files. As I sold my lathe years ago, I worked with Chris Bellman from Bernie Grundman Mastering in Hollywood to be sure he would cut it as I would have cut it and indeed I’m 100% satisfied.
The test pressings, being that that are cut from high resolution files, sound a little better to me than the CD does which is how it should be.
Much heralded mastering engineer Bernie Grundman talked about mastering for vinyl in a youtube interview. He pointed out that when mastering generally, especially for the digital world, they have to consider how it is likely to be listened to, which very often in noisier backgrounds, doing other things while listening etc. So they have to try to master for a similar loudness to everything else likely being played. On the other hand with
vinyl, due to the nature of the medium, people tend to listen more intently to vinyl, not as some playlist mixed in with everything else, so "
We tend not to do a lot of processing when it comes to vinyl." "We prefer to let the dynamics that were naturally built in to it speak. We want it to be dynamic...and we want to enhance the quality of it too." "...if we can improve the quality, spectrum balance, all these things that help it communicate better." He said you make test cuts and....sometimes...if you don't get exactly what you wanted out of the test cut, you have to do some modifications.
Then you choose the right way to solve it and still get most of what you want.
So not all mastering engineers seem to share as dim and hopeless a view of what you can do on vinyl as Van Gelder. And there isn't some across-the-board severe "fidelity reducing" technique that happens with every vinyl album. Depending on the nature of the content, the result can be very close to the original master. Some content is more challenging to press, but a good engineer does his best to maintain high sound quality as much fidelity as possible, so the differences from the original aren't so obvious as they could be.
So...as always...yeah apples to apples digital is more capable and accurate. But in terms of real world results and all the variables, the difference isn't always necessarily dramatic in favor of digital.
