• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Why do records sound so much better than digital?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,194
Likes
16,916
Location
Central Fl
DSOTM and Machine Head are both very obvious examples of this, wherein the actual sound quality of the LP is better, not because the CD is digital, but because the master tapes were kaput by the time they were brought out for transcription.
Funny, most people love the 5.1 of DSOTM
Wait till you hear what Steven Wilson does with the 50th Atmos release, SOTA
But you got to have the gear.
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,484
Likes
4,111
Location
Pacific Northwest
There appears to be hundreds of albums available in lossless digital at Apple Music
Search Amir's reviews for gear recommendations, that's what he does.
What's missing?
...
The digital copies of many of these vintage recordings are flawed. They've been processed in a heavy-handed way with EQ, heavy dynamic range compression squashing the life out of the music, and other excessive and unnecessary processing. This is disappointing since a lot of it is great music that deserved to be preserved better.

Of course there are exceptions to this and I very much enjoy listening to them.

For the rest, I am glad that I did my own high quality digital copies of my old vinyl. It's not that the vinyl is perfect; its flaws and limitations are audible, yet less offensive than what is sometimes done in modern digital versions.
 

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,282
Likes
4,789
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.
Funny, most people love the 5.1 of DSOTM
Wait till you hear what Steven Wilson does with the 50th Atmos release, SOTA
But you got to have the gear.

I've heard it. I have the gear, for pete's sake. I BUILD the gear. But the audio quality of what remained to work with is actually quite awful, sorry.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,194
Likes
16,916
Location
Central Fl
The digital copies of many of these vintage recordings are flawed. They've been processed in a heavy-handed way with EQ, heavy dynamic range compression squashing the life out of the music, and other excessive and unnecessary processing. This is disappointing since a lot of it is great music that deserved to be preserved better.
The issue of compression is probably true.
I know many of the same across the many genre
OTOH in most cases that I'm aware of, I would much rather listen to the digital compressed release, than live with all the SQ inadequacies of vinyl, surface noise, inner groove distortion, rice krispies, mono bass, etc; not to mention the ridiculous inconvenience of use and high cost. Thankfully the loudness wars may be on the way out, or at least minimalized.

I've heard it. I have the gear, for pete's sake. I BUILD the gear. But the audio quality of what remained to work with is actually quite awful, sorry.
ROTFLMAO
 

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,282
Likes
4,789
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.
The digital copies of many of these vintage recordings are flawed. They've been processed in a heavy-handed way with EQ, heavy dynamic range compression squashing the life out of the music, and other excessive and unnecessary processing. This is disappointing since a lot of it is great music that deserved to be preserved better.

Of course there are exceptions to this and I very much enjoy listening to them.

For the rest, I am glad that I did my own high quality digital copies of my old vinyl. It's not that the vinyl is perfect; its flaws and limitations are audible, yet less offensive than what is sometimes done in modern digital versions.

That's often the case because there would be no high frequencies if there wasn't sledgehammer-level EQ shoved at things, and terrible noise problems without multichannel compression being used, thanks to master degradation. I've heard some number of the "original" captured to 24/96 PCM, and you know, for what was left most of it came out pretty well, considering where it started.

Tape is NOT forever, by any stretch of the imagination. It degrades slightly per play until the oxide comes loose, then you get "one more try" and it's gone. LP degrades more per play, but usually only warps when stored, which can be overcome. Lose some this way, lose some that way. Comme ci, comme ca.

But no, not "high quality" any longer. Absolutely.
 

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,282
Likes
4,789
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.

So, show me these clean master tapes, ok? Just show me. Using DSOTM as an example, the "time" sequence. Show me a clean modern version, bearing in mind I have indeed heard more than you appear to realize, in a quiet, treated 7.0.4 listening room with all full-range mains.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom