Vinyl Records. are making a comeback...

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Eagleheart

Damn you, one of the few priest albums I don't have on LP.

I lucked it at Coffs Harbour markets :-)

[79FordEsky]

I was at a clearing sale, and there was 3 boxes with records in them I checked the boxes quickly and saw one or two elvis ones, but they sold for like $70 ish, I wish I bought it as there were lots of elvis ones when the guy was going through them, I was on a budget at the auction as well I would have loved them. They are quite heavy as well when your talking like 300 records.

[Madaya]

Let Madaya have a say. I know a teeny bit about sound reproduction. I've built several amplifiers, from 1 watters per channel to 200+ per channel. I've built loudspeakers, from shoe box size, to 6 foot tall horns. I've employed regular drivers (i.e. speakers) and some expensive European drivers.
For digital zero, that is to say, the sound comes from out of no where, CD's rule. The CD's dynamic range, from zero to 100+dB cannot be mirrored by the old stylus and groove.
But spare a thought for vinyl. How come it is as good as it is? It blows me away, that in comparisons with old material that has supposedly been remastered (and I have a few old vinyls with their CD counterpart), I still tend to favour the vinyl, it has, more presence. Once the music starts, who can hear the hiss, besides, hiss was a part of the stage performance many moons ago, we where just too happy to notice.

[Nikked]

The problem with re-mastering is probably just down to source tape i'd imagine, a mixture of converting analogue tape to digital audio, unmixed down master tape v's tape mastered for the vinyl and the condition of the old tapes in the first place.

Take Led Zeppelin though for a great example of a CD remaster done right...Jimmy Page himself was appalled at the first CD issues of the catalogue, so he went right back to the raw studio master tapes, and done a proper remaster direct to digital. And he has done it for a second time, new remasters to take advantage of MP3...

Of course, not every band has this control, Zeppelin were lucky that they actually owned their recordings. A lot of other bands from that era didn't actually own the tapes, and the record companies just flogged off poor sounding, hastily done CD reissues...

[Flat Top]

i have hoarded a collection of Vinyl First pressings . I have berlin philharmonic, early pavrotti
opera classics. if any one interested let me know??

[Sox]

Originally Posted by Nikked

The problem with re-mastering is probably just down to source tape i'd imagine, a mixture of converting analogue tape to digital audio, unmixed down master tape v's tape mastered for the vinyl and the condition of the old tapes in the first place.

Take Led Zeppelin though for a great example of a CD remaster done right...Jimmy Page himself was appalled at the first CD issues of the catalogue, so he went right back to the raw studio master tapes, and done a proper remaster direct to digital. And he has done it for a second time, new remasters to take advantage of MP3...

Of course, not every band has this control, Zeppelin were lucky that they actually owned their recordings. A lot of other bands from that era didn't actually own the tapes, and the record companies just flogged off poor sounding, hastily done CD reissues...

It gets even more complicated.
Whilst a few bands may have the control and desire to produce a better quality sound for the end user, most of them wouldn't know good sound if they fell over it.

Having outstanding musical talent and knowing quality of sound are two very different things, and in fact rarely go hand in hand.

Being in the audio industry, I know a few musicians, and I swear you'd think they're tone deaf when it comes to listening to quality audio.
Throw them a musical instrument and they make it sing like no one else can...


Whilst I have my preference in regard to CD VS vinyl, the cold hard reality is that the production of either format is generally the weakest link and lets both mediums down.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Take Led Zeppelin...

If your ever chasing reissue Led Zeppelin vinyl keep these guys in mind, I've replaced a few of mine, not because the originals where stuffed, but because I can't stop playing them and don't want to ware them out.....

The best part about these (NOT THE PRICE!) is the sound quality is out of this world, much better than the original, I couldn't believe the improvement when I first played my "new" Led Zeppelin IV......

Best reissues I've found, if you can take the price hit....(they also deal in pre-owned)......

http://store.acousticsounds.com/inde...x=7&search.y=6

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Sox

It gets even more complicated.
Whilst a few bands may have the control and desire to produce a better quality sound for the end user, most of them wouldn't know good sound if they fell over it.

Having outstanding musical talent and knowing quality of sound are two very different things, and in fact rarely go hand in hand.

Being in the audio industry, I know a few musicians, and I swear you'd think they're tone deaf when it comes to listening to quality audio.
Throw them a musical instrument and they make it sing like no one else can...

This is very true. After all, we're talking about two different passions/interests.

The people who invest in high end audio gear, and have extensive knowledge in it, are rarely musicians. Their passion is the gear, the quality of the sound, what is possible in sound reproduction. Same as the guys who put huge audio systems in their car, go to shows and put it in competitions etc. They aren't about the music. The music they play is chosen to stretch the legs of their system, to get the most out of their equipment.

Musicians on the other hand... most of them dont have any money to buy anything half decent. They're more interested in the creation of art.

A few generalisations there obviously...

[Fev]

The Newtown Festival is on very soon with heaps of markets for clothes, music etc - if anyone is looking for something i'd reccommend heading down to the markets. There's bound to be records on sale. Great bands on at this one too. Definitely seeing Gay Paris and Snowdroppers (for probably over the 20th time now) - so much blues rock goodness

http://www.newtowncentre.org/festival/

[Flat Top]

good vinyl gives a spacial effect digital doesnt. Best are recorded in analog . I have classical only and also have CD etc but can beat the vinyal for effect. (mind you the decl cost $4500.(and thats cheap!!!) trev

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by GT0132

Yeah that Sin after Sin album of Priests one of their best Nikked. I've got everything by Priest on vinyl from Sad Wings to Defenders of the Faith, but if I wanna listen to any of those much prefer to get out the ipod.

I can't get into the psychology of vinyl....the feeling and all that stuff....If the drums , bass and guitar rock that's all that matters. Agree what Stefan says about early AC/DC...However a lot of that could be to do with the equipment used. I find the older amps rather than the new AV Receivers have a much fuller sound. I have a Yamaha 7.1 receiver and find, while its great for movies, I find it lacks in the music department compared to my old Luxman 2 channel amp..

Little bass ? That is what I find is lacking . In movie mode , it rocks but put a CD on and it is insipid .
Where can I find these good quality turntables ? Any I have come across have been low end !

[Sox]

Originally Posted by GREGL

Little bass ? That is what I find is lacking . In movie mode , it rocks but put a CD on and it is insipid .
Where can I find these good quality turntables ? Any I have come across have been low end !

We're a dealer for Rega turntables and Ortofon cartridges.

Send me a PM if you want any info.

[zilo]

A vinyl analogue recording will easily surpass the frequency response of a compact disc which has a defined and absolute frequency at which it cuts off.

The harmonics generated by the sub and supersonic range from a good mechanical stylus create the "fullness" that "purists" talk about....and is consistent with an actual live acoustic experience.

As for the Digital to analogue converters, well when I studied engineering we learnt that no matter how close you made the steps in a staircase you could never make as smooth a ramp as a perfect sine wave out of square waves.


Every time I played my Elton John album with the 30khz 4 channel pilot signal I wondered to myself how a CD would process that supersonic signal if I recorded my vinyl to CD.

Well the answer is it doesn't decode 4 ch on the burnt CD...

Neither did the Deep Purple Machine Head album in 4 channel mix....

Or the Pink Floyd dark side of the moon.....


.

[87xfdriver]

I've still got my three crates worth of vinyl. I doubt I'll ever be able to part with it. Got Sabbath, Rainbow, and Zeppelin. Pity I never got into some of the older Australian bands a little more back then like Coloured Balls, Chain, and Carson Boogie. They'd be cool vinyl to have.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by 87xfdriver

I've still got my three crates worth of vinyl. I doubt I'll ever be able to part with it. Got Sabbath, Rainbow, and Zeppelin. Pity I never got into some of the older Australian bands a little more back then like Coloured Balls, Chain, and Carson Boogie. They'd be cool vinyl to have.

I have Lobby and the coloured balls, including "heavy metal kid" on vinyl.

Got "towards the blues" by chain in a box somewhere too.

yes...I copied to inferior CD so as not to wear them out...LOL

[Sox]

Originally Posted by zilo

A vinyl analogue recording will easily surpass the frequency response of a compact disc which has a defined and absolute frequency at which it cuts off.

In theory yes, in practice no.

CD has a theoretical maximum upper FR of 22.05kHz.
Vinyl has a theoretical maximum upper FR of ~40kHz.

The difference between the 2 is that all CD players can reach their upper limit easily and ruler flat with ultra low distortion.
Even very cheap CD players.

Most vinyl systems can barely reach much above 20kHz, and those that can are rapidly falling.

The distortion at those high frequencies is also very high.

Reality is, only the very best turntable rigs (above $15,000) will maybe reach 30kHz, and even then the distortion is very high.

We need to consider how much musical information is at these frequencies. The short answer is, bugger all.

The pressing also has a lot to do with how much high frequency information is on the disk.

Lastly, how high does our hearing typically go, that can be a little over 20kHz in young people, however as we age our hearing steadily declines.

My own hearing is very well looked after and it's good to 16kHz.
I've tested many people older and some have an upper limit of as little as 8kHz.

The harmonics generated by the sub and supersonic range from a good mechanical stylus create the "fullness" that "purists" talk about....and is consistent with an actual live acoustic experience.

Complete Nonsense.
This is nothing more than distortion.
Some people like, some don't.

If we compare it to the master tape, its not there.

As for the Digital to analogue converters, well when I studied engineering we learnt that no matter how close you made the steps in a staircase you could never make as smooth a ramp as a perfect sine wave out of square waves.

This only effects higher frequencies, from ~10kHz onwards. Modern techniques help with this, oversampling, etc.

If you did a spectral analysis as to how much musical content exists above 10kHz, you'd know how redundant your statement is.

Every time I played my Elton John album with the 30khz 4 channel pilot signal I wondered to myself how a CD would process that supersonic signal if I recorded my vinyl to CD.

Well the answer is it doesn't decode 4 ch on the burnt CD...

I'll give you this one, it's impossible for CD to capture anything above 22.05kHz.

But who cares, the 4 channel mixes from old vinyl is complete garbage anyhow, as is all modern multi channel audio mix.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by zilo

yes...I copied to inferior CD so as not to wear them out...LOL

Yet the inferior CD is capable of making an exact duplicate of that vinyl.

Ironic isn't it...

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Sox

Reality is, only the very best turntable rigs (above $15,000) will maybe reach 30kHz, and even then the distortion is very high..

But most good quality units will surpass the Cd limit of 22khz and that was the point being made.

Originally Posted by Sox

We need to consider how much musical information is at these frequencies. The short answer is, bugger all..

That bugger all is important to some people...so just your opinion.

Originally Posted by Sox

Lastly, how high does our hearing typically go, that can be a little over 20kHz in young people, however as we age our hearing steadily declines..

I can easily pick a CD over vinyl....even with my hearing.

Originally Posted by Sox

My own hearing is very well looked after and it's good to 16kHz.
I've tested many people older and some have an upper limit of as little as 8kHz..

You must be mid to low twenty something?

Originally Posted by Sox

Complete Nonsense.
This is nothing more than distortion.
Some people like, some don't..

How wrong you are there my friend.

Originally Posted by Sox

If we compare it to the master tape, its not there.

This only effects higher frequencies, from ~10kHz onwards. Modern techniques help with this, oversampling, etc..

Yep...I hear the virtues of modern digital oversampling and bit correction every time someone's digital phone starts sounding like Dr Who and the Daleks.

Hardly an improvement.

Originally Posted by Sox

If you did a spectral analysis as to how much musical content exists above 10kHz, you'd know how redundant your statement is..

Are you serious or did you just make a typo?

Originally Posted by Sox

I'll give you this one, it's impossible for CD to capture anything above 22.05kHz..

I already knew that mate, that's why vinyl is better.

Originally Posted by Sox

But who cares, the 4 channel mixes from old vinyl is complete garbage anyhow, as is all modern multi channel audio mix.

Surely you aren't suggesting that all those people with home theatre surround sound systems have wasted their money?

Originally Posted by Sox

Yet the inferior CD is capable of making an exact duplicate of that vinyl.

Ironic isn't it...

Nope...not an "exact" copy, no 30khz pilot tone copied...which was the point of my comment....no 4 channel decode without the pilot tone.

I hope you understand that point.

[zilo]

Sox, just so that you understand a bit more about 4 channel vinyl have a read of this, it's from Wiki but describes the 30khz carrier that most medium quality turntables were able to get from vinyl...

CD-4 (Compatible Discrete 4) / Quadradisc


Compatible Discrete 4 (CD-4) logo



Quadradisc logo



An RCA Quadradisc recording. The color fringes around the reflections are caused by the ultrasonic signal that contains the difference information used to separate the four channels.


Compatible Discrete 4 (CD-4) or Quadradisc (not to be confused with compact disc) was introduced in May 1972 as a discrete quadraphonic system created by JVC and RCA. Record companies who adopted this format include Arista, Atlantic, Capricorn, Elektra, Fantasy, JVC, Nonesuch, A & M, Reprise and Warner.
This was the only fully discrete quadraphonic phonograph record system to gain major industry acceptance.
In the CD-4 system, the quadraphonic audio was divided into left and right channels, which were recorded orthogonally in the vertical plane of the disc groove, which is the case with normal stereo. The audio frequencies (20 Hz to 15 kHz), often referred to as the sum channel, would contain the sum of the left front plus left back signals in the left channel and the sum of the right front plus the right back signals in the right channel. In other words, when observing the audio frequencies only, the record appeared to have an ordinary stereo recording. Along with this audio, a separate 30 kHz carrier was recorded on each groove wall. The carrier on each side carried the difference signal for that side. This was the information that enabled a combined signal to be resolved into two separate signals. For the left carrier it would be left front minus left back, and for the right carrier it would be the right front minus the right back. These audio signals were modulated onto the carriers using a special FM-PM-SSBFM (frequency modulation-phase modulation-single sideband frequency modulation) technique. This created an extended carrier frequency range from 18 kHz to 45 kHz for the left and right channels. The algebraic addition and subtraction of the sum and difference signals would then yield compatible and discrete quadraphonic playback. CD-4 was responsible for major improvements in phonograph technology including better compliance, lower distortion levels, pick-up cartridges with a significantly higher frequency range, and new record compounds such as Q-540, which were highly anti-static. A typical CD-4 system would have a turntable with a CD-4 cartridge, a CD-4 demodulator, a discrete four-channel amplifier, and (ideally) four full-range loudspeakers. Some manufactures built the CD-4 demodulator into complete four-channel receivers.
Simply put, CD-4 consists of four recorded signals (LF, LB, RB, RF) and the following coding matrix, similar to FM broadcast stereo multiplexing.

The CD-4 encoding/decoding matrix:

• (LF+LB)+(LF-LB)=2LF or left front
• (LF+LB)-(LF-LB)=2LB or left back
• (RF+RB)+(RF-RB)=2RF or right front
• (RF+RB)-(RF-RB)=2RB or right back

There was also a similar FM radio system called Quadracast. But CD-4 (and quadraphonic audio in general) failed due to late FCC approval of FM quadraphonic broadcasting, the improvements CD-4 engendered spilled over into, and substantially improved, the production of conventional stereo LP records.
The CD-4 record track is broader than a conventional stereo track, so maximum the playing time is lower than a conventional stereo record

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Musicians on the other hand... most of them dont have any money to buy anything half decent. They're more interested in the creation of art...

Good point, but still a generalisation.

Most studios have good playback equipment (obviously) and there are musicians that can afford the high ends stuff...


But this doesn't effect what they hear...going back to this point.

Originally Posted by sox

Being in the audio industry, I know a few musicians, and I swear you'd think they're tone deaf when it comes to listening to quality audio.
Throw them a musical instrument and they make it sing like no one else can...

Its not the fact that they are "tone deaf", its probably more the opposite...

The whole connection between what their guitar tone is at the amp, then how it is produced on the medium are one in all. Most albums are mixed down so that the sound can come though 2 speakers and still sound decent, and in a studio situation, there is the constant challenge of ego's combating each other...the guitar player wants his guitar this loud...drummer wants this etc...

To summarise, its not that they don't care about quality audio, they care about how their sound is reproduced, and if it sounds good on a xxx-system they are happy.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by zilo

But most good quality units will surpass the Cd limit of 22khz and that was the point being made.

I didn't deny that point, however redundant it may be.

That bugger all is important to some people...so just your opinion.

Nope. Fact.
Look up the FR of instruments.
The vast majority of humans do not hear above ~20kHz. Fact.

I can easily pick a CD over vinyl....even with my hearing.

Sure, so can I.
Though it has absolutely nothing to do with vinyl's supposed superior HF response.

You must be mid to low twenty something?

Not even close.

How wrong you are there my friend.

Nope.
Your words were -

The harmonics generated by the sub and supersonic range from a good mechanical stylus create the "fullness" that "purists" talk about....and is consistent with an actual live acoustic experience.

This is complete and utter nonsense.
Any harmonics generated by any source is a form of distortion. Fact.

It is not consistent with a live acoustic performance at all. Not even close.

A good source will not add anything to the recording.

Are you serious or did you just make a typo?

Absolutely 100% serious.
Have you done a spectral analysis of various types of music?

I have, many times.

Surely you aren't suggesting that all those people with home theatre surround sound systems have wasted their money?

Not at all. A HT system is a great thing for movie soundtracks.

Multi channel music however, is dreadful. Always has been.

Nope...not an "exact" copy, no 30khz pilot tone copied...which was the point of my comment....no 4 channel decode without the pilot tone.

I hope you understand that point.

Absolutely.
However you mentioned the CD copy with no reference to 4 channel vinyl in that post.

And in that case, you have an exact audible copy.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Sox

I didn't deny that point, however redundant it may be.

Nope. Fact.
Look up the FR of instruments.
The vast majority of humans do not hear above ~20kHz. Fact..

Err...sounds like you are confusing linear frequency response with zero frequency response and extrapolating one from the other.

It's obvious to everyone reading this thread that I can easily make even you hear 20khz if I crank up the gain.

Originally Posted by Sox

Sure, so can I.
Though it has absolutely nothing to do with vinyl's supposed superior HF response.

Not even close..

Sorry...that's just your opinion, not fact.

Originally Posted by Sox

The harmonics generated by the sub and supersonic range from a good mechanical stylus create the "fullness" that "purists" talk about....and is consistent with an actual live acoustic experience.

This is complete and utter nonsense.
Any harmonics generated by any source is a form of distortion. Fact..

If you consider harmonics to be distortion then we live in parallel universes my friend.

Originally Posted by Sox

Absolutely 100% serious.
Have you done a spectral analysis of various types of music?

I have, many times..

Irrelevant observation in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Sox

A HT system is a great thing for movie soundtracks.

Multi channel music however, is dreadful. Always has been.

Absolutely..

Sounds like all you've heard is the digital variety.

To use your words...nonsense.

Originally Posted by Sox

However you mentioned the CD copy with no reference to 4 channel vinyl in that post.

And in that case, you have an exact audible copy.

Clearly you missed the point by not paying attention to what I posted.

let me highlight it...

"Every time I played my Elton John album with the 30khz 4 channel pilot signal I wondered to myself how a CD would process that supersonic signal if I recorded my vinyl to CD."

[poppa smurf]

alright ......who left the door open to the geeks holding pen!!!!!!

gonna take all bloody night to round them back up again.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by zilo

Err...sounds like you are confusing linear frequency response with zero frequency response and extrapolating one from the other.

I'm not confused at all.

It's obvious to everyone reading this thread that I can easily make even you hear 20khz if I crank up the gain.

Of course, but why would you? To prove a redundant point?

You tell me how relevant a persons hearing is at 20kHz, 20dB (or more) below reference?

Sorry...that's just your opinion, not fact.

It's a fact.
Run your vinyl through a decent 16/44 AD converter.
Get back to me with the results.

If you consider harmonics to be distortion then we live in parallel universes my friend.

I didn't say that.
I said any harmonics generated by any source (meaning playback source, CD, vinyl, etc) is a form of distortion.

That is a fact.

Irrelevant observation in my opinion.

How is it irrelevant?
You asked if I was serious about the musical content above 10kHz.

I am serious, and can prove it with spectral analysis.

If you can't prove otherwise, then why bring it up?

Sounds like all you've heard is the digital variety.

To use your words...nonsense.

ALL multi channel music is flawed.
It's scientifically not necessary.

Stereo can capture and reproduce everything required for a realistic high fidelity illusion of music.

Clearly you missed the point by not paying attention to what I posted.

let me highlight it...

"Every time I played my Elton John album with the 30khz 4 channel pilot signal I wondered to myself how a CD would process that supersonic signal if I recorded my vinyl to CD."

I didn't reply to that statement in the way you described.

I replied to this statement of yours.

I have Lobby and the coloured balls, including "heavy metal kid" on vinyl.

Got "towards the blues" by chain in a box somewhere too.

yes...I copied to inferior CD so as not to wear them out...LOL

You made no reference to multi channel here...

[GasoLane]

I don't really give a toss if it's hertz or hurts. It's giving the rest of us a headache.

Closed.