Vinyl conversion to digital - because "ripping" just doesn't sound right.

[audio2design]

One issue is that some audiophiles who try to record records then play them back on euphonic DACs and then claim they don't sound the same. Well duh! You need to playback on a technically accurate DAC.

 

[LtMandella]

I just read through this thread and note that nobody has mentioned Sweet Vinyl/Sugar Cube audio.

For me their price is a deal breaker because I don't want to sink thousands of dollars into digitizing my LPs. So I will use one of the above methods.
But they seem to be going after quality and convenience. They claim their click and pop remover are "wavelet based" whatever that means. But I did linger in their suite at Axpona and liked what I heard and would get my wallet out if the prices were more reasonable.

https://sweetvinyl.com/

so just an update for those considering doing this. After a lot of experimenting I have settled on using an IFI phono preamp, a new nude stylus Audio Technika Moving Coil cart, and digitizing to DSD files using Korg MR1. From what I can hear, the DSD rips have greater dynamic range than PCM. Maybe it is the headroom of the DSD encoding vs. PCM. The rips really sound lovely. I do clean all the LPs with a generic ultrasonic cleaner that has a little add-on LP holder/rotator to rotate the records through the ultrasonic bath. WOW what a difference the ultrasonic cleaning makes!! Even brand new previously unplayed LPs drop vinyl scraps and dirt into the bath when ultrasonic cleaning. Unbelievable the reduction in surface noise!

 

[LtMandella]

My high mass turntable sits in a separate room well down the hall from my listening room. Good vinyl sounds extremely clean and clear. Your posts make me wonder if it would have sounded different put in the listening room with my speakers.

I did an experiment once using my TT and Pioneer RT-909 reel to reel. I connected the phono preamp output to the line in on the reel to reel. Started recording, then dropped the needle on an LP. THEN I turned off the turntable motor, leaving the needle still in the LP groove, and the reel to reel still recording. Walked around the room, clapping, shouting, heavy footfalls, a bit of stomping, and singing.
Guess what? Playing the tape recording back, I could hear almost all the noises I had made while the needle was in the groove and the LP was not spinning! I could hear the claps, the shouts, the stomps, not so much the heavy footfalls.
That was it for me, convinced me to digitize the vinyl monitoring only through headphones...

 

[JP]

the DSD rips have greater dynamic range than PCM

I'm guessing no controls?

 

[Sal1950]

From what I can hear, the DSD rips have greater dynamic range than PCM. Maybe it is the headroom of the DSD encoding vs. PCM.

Either DSD or 16/44 Redbook PCM is more than capable of capturing the entire dynamic range of an LP and then some.
Your hearing what you think you should hear.

 

[LTig]

I did an experiment once using my TT and Pioneer RT-909 reel to reel. I connected the phono preamp output to the line in on the reel to reel. Started recording, then dropped the needle on an LP. THEN I turned off the turntable motor, leaving the needle still in the LP groove, and the reel to reel still recording. Walked around the room, clapping, shouting, heavy footfalls, a bit of stomping, and singing.
Guess what? Playing the tape recording back, I could hear almost all the noises I had made while the needle was in the groove and the LP was not spinning! I could hear the claps, the shouts, the stomps, not so much the heavy footfalls.
That was it for me, convinced me to digitize the vinyl monitoring only through headphones...

Yep, but it also means that the ripped recording no longer sounds like the LP. Some people might be disappointed ...

 

[watchnerd]

That was it for me, convinced me to digitize the vinyl monitoring only through headphones...

It's your choice, but acoustic feedback of the speakers playing music being picked up by the cartridge/tonearm is what creates part of the slight extra reverb that makes LP sound like LP.

I find headphone rips to sound less like LP, and more like sub-par digital.

 

[watchnerd]

From what I can hear, the DSD rips have greater dynamic range than PCM.

Highly unlikely, unless something got screwed up or you're comparing different reference levels.

The dynamic constraint on LP is the LP itself (about 13-14 bits DR max) -- both DSD and PCM have excess headroom for capturing LP.

 

[LtMandella]

I'm guessing no controls?

sorry, not sure what you mean

 

[JP]

sorry, not sure what you mean

Was the comparison, at a minimum, level-matched to less than 0.1dB and done blind?

 

[LtMandella]

Either DSD or 16/44 Redbook PCM is more than capable of capturing the entire dynamic range of an LP and then some.
Your hearing what you think you should hear.

Except that I didn't, and I don't, wish DSD sounded better. It is a huge hassle to rip to DSD instead of 24x96. Makes any digital cleanup impossible later without conversion to PCM. But the sweeter sound is unmistakable, especially in high amplitude vocal and treble. I did about 20 A/B comparisons - ripping the same LP and doing much careful listening and track comparisons- before I decided to archive in DSD

 

[Digby]

Haven't checked the whole thread, so don't know if has been mentioned already, but yes, ripping doesn't sound right, the word you're after is transcription.

 

[LtMandella]

Haven't checked the whole thread, so don't know if has been mentioned already, but yes, ripping doesn't sound right, the word you're after is transcription.

thank you, I stand corrected, although at my age, a little wobbly.

 

[Digby]

It was more directed at the OP (not sure if he has been around recently?), if it helps though, that's great. No need to stand to attention, please take a seat .

 

[DVDdoug]

I call it "digitizing".

But the sweeter sound is unmistakable, especially in high amplitude vocal and treble. I did about 20 A/B comparisons -

It's possible that there is a difference... Maybe there was something wrong with your setup.

But you didn't do a proper blind, level-matched, ABX test. Even in a controlled listening test there is always some probability of thinking you're hearing a difference and "guessing" correctly. ABX tests are "statistical".

"CD quality" is generally considered better than human hearing. They guys who do ABX tests will tell you it's usually impossible to hear the difference between a high-resolution original and a copy downsampled to 16/44.1 (in a proper blind ABX test). And it's certainly good enough for digitized vinyl since vinyl obviously worse than human hearing.

 

[LtMandella]

I call it "digitizing".

It's possible that there is a difference... Maybe there was something wrong with your setup.

But you didn't do a proper blind, level-matched, ABX test. Even in a controlled listening test there is always some probability of thinking you're hearing a difference and "guessing" correctly. ABX tests are "statistical".

"CD quality" is generally considered better than human hearing. They guys who do ABX tests will tell you it's usually impossible to hear the difference between a high-resolution original and a copy downsampled to 16/44.1 (in a proper blind ABX test). And it's certainly good enough for digitized vinyl since vinyl obviously worse than human hearing.

The increased "scratchiness/harshness" in the high amplitude vocals and treble of the PCM transcriptions was unmistakable. Something was going on that transcribing to DSD fixed. The recorder was the same (KORG MR-1), everything else the same. I aimed to have the recording levels equal. I just listened to about 10 of the DSD transcriptions a couple nights ago, they are pretty breathtaking. I won't be trying PCM again...

 

[Sal1950]

The increased "scratchiness/harshness" in the high amplitude vocals and treble of the PCM transcriptions was unmistakable. Something was going on that transcribing to DSD fixed. The recorder was the same (KORG MR-1), everything else the same. I aimed to have the recording levels equal. I just listened to about 10 of the DSD transcriptions a couple nights ago, they are pretty breathtaking. I won't be trying PCM again...

Either something in your recording chain is modifing the response of one or both of your test recordings, or your hearing things. Your claims of PCM and DSD sounding obviously different in archiving vinyl are ridiculous.

 

[LtMandella]

Yeah I think the most likely explanation is that there is _some_ characteristic of the recording device when recording to DSD vs. PCM that accounts for the difference in what I hear. But I am not an EE or expert recording engineer so I have little knowledge of what that might be. I did a lot more than two track comparisons.

One of the most clearly different results was on the Springsteen song "She's the one". There is a background guitar track that sounds mostly like mid frequency hiss in the PCM transcription (and pretty much every streamed version I have heard") but sounds actually tonal in the DSD transcription and the LP.
You must know the track if you are a guitarist?

 

[mhardy6647]

^^^ One of my favorite Bruce Stringbean songs -- but the LP, and every reproduction of the original track I've heard to date sounds terrible anyway (which is really too bad -- it's a great song).

 

[LtMandella]

^^^ One of my favorite Bruce Stringbean songs -- but the LP, and every reproduction of the original track I've heard to date sounds terrible anyway (which is really too bad -- it's a great song).

It is one of the tracks I use consistently to test system components (except speakers). Precisely because it is not the sweetest sounding recording in the world. I have a couple LPs where is pretty good. But the streams generally do suck.