Vinyl down . . . Streaming up

[amirm]

Looks like sales were up again in 2017, setting a record in post CD era. It hit 10 million records in 2017.

http://mixmag.net/read/vinyl-sales-...tal-music-sales-continue-to-drop-in-2017-news

Nielsen Music, the information and sales tracking system, has released its Q3 report and found that this year’s vinyl sales have already surpassed 2016’s numbers with Q4 still to come, according to Billboard.

After analyzing data from album sales in the United States, Nielson revealed that both physical and digital sales have fallen, with the one exception of vinyl sales. CD sales fell 19.9 per cent and digital sales fell 19.5 percent, but vinyl sales increased by 3.1 per cent, with close to 10 million units sold.​

 

[Analog Scott]

Ok, so if it is not always used, what would be your best guess as to how often filtering was/is used for LP cutting since the late 50s on stereo LPs? 99%, 90%, 75%, 50%, 25%, 10%, 1% of all releases?

I have no interest in guessing. I don't care. I am interested in the reality of what went into the actual records that I own and the actual records I might consider buying. Ultimately that's a pretty thin slice of the vinyl pie. I see no value in guessing about records I don't own nor care to own.

 

[Analog Scott]

Looks like sales were up again in 2017, setting a record in post CD era. It hit 10 million records in 2017.

http://mixmag.net/read/vinyl-sales-...tal-music-sales-continue-to-drop-in-2017-news

Nielsen Music, the information and sales tracking system, has released its Q3 report and found that this year’s vinyl sales have already surpassed 2016’s numbers with Q4 still to come, according to Billboard.

After analyzing data from album sales in the United States, Nielson revealed that both physical and digital sales have fallen, with the one exception of vinyl sales. CD sales fell 19.9 per cent and digital sales fell 19.5 percent, but vinyl sales increased by 3.1 per cent, with close to 10 million units sold.​

What about SACD, Bluray Audio or DVD-A? I can't speak for the general sales but it sure seems that there has been a nice surge in the number of audiophile SACDs and Bluray Audio releases.

 

[tomelex]

wrong.

I am not going down this road with you again, the evidence you presented before was not from the person working the lathe.

-------Until you can find a lathe operator that says he never uses any filtering, you have no evidence to the contrary.

-------If someone developed a master tape and applied filtering it to it so specifically the lathe operator did not have to then find someone who said that as well.

Good luck on those!

I will retract my word ALWAYS, just so we do not repeat what went down in another thread.

 

[amirm]

What about SACD, Bluray Audio or DVD-A? I can't speak for the general sales but it sure seems that there has been a nice surge in the number of audiophile SACDs and Bluray Audio releases.

Those are not mainstream formats and hence are not tracked by Nielsen and such. I expect them to be smaller than Vinyl by far.

 

[tomelex]

http://www.mightymediadiscs.co.uk/vinmas.html

" a couple of things generally happen when your audio is cut to a master disc. A low cut filter is used at 40Hz to control and maintain the bass frequency information of the audio. This keeps the grooves from slamming into one another and helps fit your audio into the space provided by the lacquer disc. A high cut filter is placed around 16Khz to help control high frequency information in the audio. The vinyl medium does not “like” a lot of high frequency information."

I believe this is the exact filtering that was talked about in the video and the same exact filtering tomelex was refering to when he incorrectly asserted "vinyl always has filtering to meet the needs of the format itself"

If you read the link you showed above, please read it all, you conveniently forgot to highlight this comment as well from that link:

In terms of rolling off Bass and treble frequencies, don’t go too crazy on that end. Our lacquer cutter’s setup contains the needed EQ to do that job. Just mix according to the guidelines of proper mixing in general and you will be fine

 

[Analog Scott]

I am not going down this road with you again,

Good call on your part. Why lose the same argument twice? What's the point?

the evidence you presented before was not from the person working the lathe.

-------Until you can find a lathe operator that says he never uses any filtering, you have no evidence to the contrary.

Oh, now it has to be the lathe operator. The ever moving goal posts move once again. It wasn't enough to get a direct quote from the guy who recorded and produced actual LPs that had no such filtering now you want the actual cutting engineer. I bet if I got a cutting engineer to say he has cut records with no high or low pass filtering you'd want confirmation from the designers and builders of the lathe itself.

-------If someone developed a master tape and applied filtering it to it so specifically the lathe operator did not have to then find someone who said that as well.

Good luck on those!

I will retract my word ALWAYS, just so we do not repeat what went down in another thread.

The easiest way to not go down that road again is to simply refrain from making assertions of fact that are plainly false. OTOH if you want to make a bet about whether or not I can find a cutting engineer who will attest to having cut records with no low or high pass filtering I'd be happy to take your money.

 

[Analog Scott]

If you read the link you showed above, please read it all, you conveniently forgot to highlight this comment as well from that link:

In terms of rolling off Bass and treble frequencies, don’t go too crazy on that end. Our lacquer cutter’s setup contains the needed EQ to do that job. Just mix according to the guidelines of proper mixing in general and you will be fine

Why would I be concerned about comments from one particular cutting facility that has no track record that I know of in the field of audiophile vinyl? I'm not saying they do bad work. I wouldn't know. I don't think I have any records at all that they have cut. But they have been in the business for all of about 9 years now? They hardly speak for the history of the industry or what other cutting engineers have done or can do.

By the way, I think you might be misunderstanding what they mean by "needed EQ" Think about that one for a bit.

 

[Analog Scott]

Those are not mainstream formats and hence are not tracked by Nielsen and such. I expect them to be smaller than Vinyl by far.

I would bet that at least SACD is up. It sure seems like the number of titles available on SACD has grown tremendously in the past few years.

 

[amirm]

I would bet that at least SACD is up. It sure seems like the number of titles available on SACD has grown tremendously in the past few years.

Not relative to LP. Did some searching and found some data: https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/RIAA-Mid-Year-2017-News-and-Notes2.pdf

First column is 2016, the second, 2017. That is the category for:

300 K unit versus 7.2 million for LP is small putting aside the fact that they are also counting LP singles and such in that bucket.

My sense is that DSD downloads are eating into SACD sales.

 

[tomelex]

Why would I be concerned about comments from one particular cutting facility that has no track record that I know of in the field of audiophile vinyl? I'm not saying they do bad work. I wouldn't know. I don't think I have any records at all that they have cut. But they have been in the business for all of about 9 years now? They hardly speak for the history of the industry or what other cutting engineers have done or can do.

By the way, I think you might be misunderstanding what they mean by "needed EQ" Think about that one for a bit.

I am pretty sure you have found no evidence that there is anything on the web about a cutting engineer who has not used any EQ. That is the point, delivering a master to a cutting engineer does not mean that he cuts without any further EQ. And that is not a moving target or goalpost, if it was, by now you would produce a cutting engineer who cuts records with no further EQ on his part. Can it be done, yes, is there any actual evidence that a cutting engineer does that, none that I have seen, only conjecture on your part over some very dubious block diagrams, and a mastering engineer, who is not a cutting engineer. But I retracted my ALWAYS phrase anyway in a few posts above. I do believe that with the right master, you certainly could cut a record direct from the master to the cutting head amp, however, there is no evidence from a cutting engineer that that is the case. In fact, if you look for evidence on the web, the cutting engineers tend to skip over that part and they just like to show off their lathes. If you use just a master to cut a record, you need to apply the RIAA curve which would be kind of weird in my opinion. Could have happened though.

No, don't agree with your original assertion, as neither you or I have found any evidence from a cutting engineer that he did not use any EQ. Based on my knowledge of this, which involves no actual experience at a cutting station, and you have no experience at an actual cutting station, until something is found concrete, we will have to disagree.

 

[tomelex]

Good call on your part. Why lose the same argument twice? What's the point?




Oh, now it has to be the lathe operator. The ever moving goal posts move once again. It wasn't enough to get a direct quote from the guy who recorded and produced actual LPs that had no such filtering now you want the actual cutting engineer. I bet if I got a cutting engineer to say he has cut records with no high or low pass filtering you'd want confirmation from the designers and builders of the lathe itself.



The easiest way to not go down that road again is to simply refrain from making assertions of fact that are plainly false. OTOH if you want to make a bet about whether or not I can find a cutting engineer who will attest to having cut records with no low or high pass filtering I'd be happy to take your money.

You are careful to use your words, no low or high pass filtering, does that include RIAA as well?

 

[watchnerd]

I thought we already had this debate..

Is new info being conveyed?

 

[Analog Scott]

I am pretty sure you have found no evidence that there is anything on the web about a cutting engineer who has not used any EQ. That is the point, delivering a master to a cutting engineer does not mean that he cuts without any further EQ. And that is not a moving target or goalpost, if it was, by now you would produce a cutting engineer who cuts records with no further EQ on his part. Can it be done, yes, is there any actual evidence that a cutting engineer does that, none that I have seen, only conjecture on your part over some very dubious block diagrams, and a mastering engineer, who is not a cutting engineer. But I retracted my ALWAYS phrase anyway in a few posts above. I do believe that with the right master, you certainly could cut a record direct from the master to the cutting head amp, however, there is no evidence from a cutting engineer that that is the case. In fact, if you look for evidence on the web, the cutting engineers tend to skip over that part and they just like to show off their lathes. If you use just a master to cut a record, you need to apply the RIAA curve which would be kind of weird in my opinion. Could have happened though.

No, don't agree with your original assertion, as neither you or I have found any evidence from a cutting engineer that he did not use any EQ. Based on my knowledge of this, which involves no actual experience at a cutting station, and you have no experience at an actual cutting station, until something is found concrete, we will have to disagree.

Your idea of evidence is clearly self serving. And yes you are constantly moving the goal posts when it comes to evidence on this particular subject. The fact that you would consider a direct email from an actual producer and recording engineer of actual real world records stating in no uncertain terms that his LPs were mastered with absolutely no such filtering amounts to "conjecture" on my part. That is absurd and shows that you simply are not going to be rational about this particular subject. And to now include the RIAA curve as "filtering" is just evidence of your desperation to some how justify the B.S. you tried to pass off as objective facts. The RIAA curve is built into phono cutting and playback. the net result should be zero EQ. There should be no loss of hig or low frequencies when propperly applied. It has nothing to do with low and high pass filters that were cited in the video you referenced. Frankly your attempt to include the RIAA EQ is either evidence of gross ignoprance on the subject of the use of low and high pass filters in cutting records are blatent intelectual dishonesty.

 

[Analog Scott]

You are careful to use your words, no low or high pass filtering, does that include RIAA as well?

Of course I am careful to use my words. That's what people do when they try to communicate clearly and accurately. And no, clearly the low and high pass filters in the video you cited and based your false assertion on had nothing to do with RIAA EQ which is clearly not optional in record cutting nor is it an issue since the net effect in playback is zero EQ and zero loss of audible signal. Trying to conflate the low and high pass filtering cited in the video you posted with RIAA EQ is either an act of gross ignorance on the subject of record cutting or a sad attempt to somehow rationalize a false assertion of fact about the actual use of filtering during cutting.

 

[tomelex]

Your idea of evidence is clearly self serving. And yes you are constantly moving the goal posts when it comes to evidence on this particular subject. The fact that you would consider a direct email from an actual producer and recording engineer of actual real world records stating in no uncertain terms that his LPs were mastered with absolutely no such filtering amounts to "conjecture" on my part. That is absurd and shows that you simply are not going to be rational about this particular subject. And to now include the RIAA curve as "filtering" is just evidence of your desperation to some how justify the B.S. you tried to pass off as objective facts. The RIAA curve is built into phono cutting and playback. the net result should be zero EQ. There should be no loss of hig or low frequencies when propperly applied. It has nothing to do with low and high pass filters that were cited in the video you referenced. Frankly your attempt to include the RIAA EQ is either evidence of gross ignoprance on the subject of the use of low and high pass filters in cutting records are blatent intelectual dishonesty.

OK, lets talk about your use of words to prove a point , you are willing to bet me money so we need to be clear about terminology.

you asserted:

Would an explicit claim by a mastering engineer of no use of EQ, limiters, compression and no summing the bass to mono in cutting records suffice as proof? Or would you write any and all such claims off, no matter how explicit as pure advertising fodder and a lie by the mastering engineer?

Your proof:
On 12/3/17 3:10 PM, Scott Wheeler wrote:
> Dear Mr. Boyk,
>
> I hope all is well with you and i am sorry to bother you with this
> question.

No problem.

In the mastering of the Pictures at an Exhibition LP was
> there any use of compression, a limiter or summing the bass to mono?

No compression, no limiting, no summing the bass.

It's refreshing to be asked.
jb


There is a difference between mastering and what happens at the lathe. Your question skillfully did not mention cutting of records and nor did it mention EQ.

So yes, wording is vital. You did not post your question to James Boyk the way your original assertions were stated, so your proof would be that these things were not used on the master tape as far as I read it (which I can accept given the meaning of mastering without specifically stating cutting), and James Boyk is a technically savvy guy, and he knows the difference between cutting a record and a tape master. So, no bets without clear statements Sir.

 

[Analog Scott]

OK, lets talk about your use of words to prove a point , you are willing to bet me money so we need to be clear about terminology.

you asserted:

Would an explicit claim by a mastering engineer of no use of EQ, limiters, compression and no summing the bass to mono in cutting records suffice as proof? Or would you write any and all such claims off, no matter how explicit as pure advertising fodder and a lie by the mastering engineer?

Your proof:
On 12/3/17 3:10 PM, Scott Wheeler wrote:
> Dear Mr. Boyk,
>
> I hope all is well with you and i am sorry to bother you with this
> question.

No problem.

In the mastering of the Pictures at an Exhibition LP was
> there any use of compression, a limiter or summing the bass to mono?

No compression, no limiting, no summing the bass.

It's refreshing to be asked.
jb


There is a difference between mastering and what happens at the lathe. Your question skillfully did not mention cutting of records and nor did it mention EQ.

So yes, wording is vital. You did not post your question to James Boyk the way your original assertions were stated, so your proof would be that these things were not used on the master tape as far as I read it (which I can accept given the meaning of mastering without specifically stating cutting), and James Boyk is a technically savvy guy, and he knows the difference between cutting a record and a tape master. So, no bets without clear statements Sir.

Let's put this in perspective.
James Boyk's label, Performance Recordings is his own private label that exclusively produces recordings of him on piano. He is the artist, the producer and the recording engineer. He is hands on throughout the process. He specifically offers a comparison package of his recording of Pictures at an Exhibition so consumers can compare his digital recorder to his analog recorder on the CD and the LP to the CD. He explicitly states that there was no additional processing added to the chain from the microphone to the recording decks to the cutting of the LP and CD. Of course the RIAA EQ is applied to the signal when cutting the record just as an A/D converter is applied to the analog signal when being mastered to CD. Now do you really believe that he would go through the effort to carefully make such a specific comparison package only to have the cutting engineer secretly using a low and high pass filter, a limiter and sum the bass to mono? Do you really believe a cutting engineer specifically hired to cut a record made for that purpose would do that AND that Boyk wouldn't notice? Really? Do you think that is what happened?

You think somehow I intentionally avoided asking about EQ? I didn't bother because it wasn't even in question. And by the way, mastering an LP is cutting it. There is no difference between mastering and "what happens at the lathe." That is the last part of mastering an LP

So for giggles I will offer you this wager. We go back to James Boyk and ask him again if there was any processing of the signal between the tape head of his analog tape deck and the cutting stylus. Is that inclusive enough for you? If not please feel free to reword the question to your satisfaction. And let's ask him if he was present during the cutting of the record and did the cutting engineer make it clear that he was not applying any processing at all. If the cutting engineer is still around and available to ask we can ask him too. You decide on the question and who needs to be asked.

Again, this has NOTHING to do with the RIAA EQ which has to be applied to any record for the thing to work correctly.

I will bet $1,000.00 against your $100.00 (10 to 1 odds) That there was no EQ (other than RIAA) summing of the bass, limiting, compression or any other processing applied to the transfer of the signal from the tape heads to the cutting stylus.

Are we on?

 

[tomelex]

Let's put this in perspective.
James Boyk's label, Performance Recordings is his own private label that exclusively produces recordings of him on piano. He is the artist, the producer and the recording engineer. He is hands on throughout the process. He specifically offers a comparison package of his recording of Pictures at an Exhibition so consumers can compare his digital recorder to his analog recorder on the CD and the LP to the CD. He explicitly states that there was no additional processing added to the chain from the microphone to the recording decks to the cutting of the LP and CD. Of course the RIAA EQ is applied to the signal when cutting the record just as an A/D converter is applied to the analog signal when being mastered to CD. Now do you really believe that he would go through the effort to carefully make such a specific comparison package only to have the cutting engineer secretly using a low and high pass filter, a limiter and sum the bass to mono? Do you really believe a cutting engineer specifically hired to cut a record made for that purpose would do that AND that Boyk wouldn't notice? Really? Do you think that is what happened?

You think somehow I intentionally avoided asking about EQ? I didn't bother because it wasn't even in question. And by the way, mastering an LP is cutting it. There is no difference between mastering and "what happens at the lathe." That is the last part of mastering an LP

So for giggles I will offer you this wager. We go back to James Boyk and ask him again if there was any processing of the signal between the tape head of his analog tape deck and the cutting stylus. Is that inclusive enough for you? If not please feel free to reword the question to your satisfaction. And let's ask him if he was present during the cutting of the record and did the cutting engineer make it clear that he was not applying any processing at all. If the cutting engineer is still around and available to ask we can ask him too. You decide on the question and who needs to be asked.

Again, this has NOTHING to do with the RIAA EQ which has to be applied to any record for the thing to work correctly.

I will bet $1,000.00 against your $100.00 (10 to 1 odds) That there was no EQ (other than RIAA) summing of the bass, limiting, compression or any other processing applied to the transfer of the signal from the tape heads to the cutting stylus.

Are we on?

How timely, actually, I have already asked him myself. Not as specifically as you put it though. Should have though.

 

[Sal1950]

There has been a resurgence of interest in vinyl record production, with sales continuing to rise year on year. During the 135th Convention a panel of vinyl mastering engineers discussed the dos and don’ts of lacquer cutting and vinyl quality control.

And a good thing that resurgence was for a dying high end audio industry. Look at the first 40 pages or so of each months Stereophile whose content is most built on editorials by Mikey Fremer and Art Dudley, all proclaiming that the pinnacle of today's music playback gear is via the LP. Then as you peruse the rest of the mag that editorial position will combine to at least 50% of the total content. It was this convincing of the audiophile market that brought in the money that I believe has saved Stereophile, TAS and a whole surrounding industry of manufacturers from the bankruptcy court. It has completely boiled down to the hippster market section that you see it everywhere. Just today I saw a new commercial on TV for something, showing a mom enjoying playing a LP on a little $59 record player, a real push at how KOOL it is to play vinyl.. it's everywhere now.................
In the big picture I guess it's a good thing that so many people are making a living producing and selling products to this market.
BUT, it's all based on a snake-oil lie. Well mastered Redbook on a $200 CD player can supply better sound than the most expensive analog rig ever made. I don't mean to insult any of the analog members here, it does have it's endearing qualities like the whole cleaning, etc ritual. Also it does have a sound all it's own, not more accurate but pleasing to some. But I can do without the Rice Krispies thank you.
I just hate to see a whole generation of mis-guided people growing up to believe that dragging a rock thru a ditch will provide them with the SOTA in sound reproduction.

 

[Sal1950]

It sure seems like the number of titles available on SACD has grown tremendously in the past few years.

Only because that audiophool arm of high end marketing has a large portion of the masses convinced that DSD sounds better than PCM