CD versus vinyl LP - CD wins.

[Deleted]

I must admit I haven't purchased a new (or 2nd hand) LP for many years, possibly since I've been married!
I cleared all the chaff from the LP collection when I emigrated, taking the remaining 500ish with me. The CD collection was already larger by that time.

I use a very similar system of CD storage to t'other Chris and those I want at work are taken in a Case Logic folder (holds 50, 4 to a leaf). Again the jewel cases are lurking in the garage.

My intention was to digitise the LP collection, at least the favourites, and slowly replace the rest with CDs. Between the two I've made the poxy dent of approx. 50

Downloads of "discologies" is another option if flac or even mp3 is ok for your needs.

So I'm hanging on to my LPs still, until I finally replace them by one method or another.

I did toy with the idea of flogging off my turntable to fund the above but the emotional tear of having LPs you can't listen to is too much to bear

[madmac]

I've got an old Sony turntable in the living room to play our old LP's on. It's fun, it's nostalgic, but it's also a drag you'll have to turn them over after 30 minutes. So they are used as a rarity more then a sound source. But I'm still glad I haven't sold all my albums when the CD became number one.

So for me I prefer CD or digital.

[Deleted]

Oct 15, 2013 6:55:03 GMT madmac said:

I've got an old Sony turntable in the living room to play our old LP's on. It's fun, it's nostalgic, but it's also a drag you'll have to turn them over after 30 minutes. So they are used as a rarity more then a sound source. But I'm still glad I haven't sold all my albums when the CD became number one.

So for me I prefer CD or digital.

Hi Madmac
It's a shame that we look like closing down, as I feel we could have had many interesting discussions in the digital area. My findings were verified by Martin Colloms, and world famous recording and mastering engineer Barry Diament, who was probably behind several of the recordings in your collection. Unfortunately, most qualified E.E.s refuse to accept such things, or even audible differences between headphone cables, (a catalyst for Frans departure from RG) interconnects of the same length, that expensive USB cables can sound better than the ones that come free with some devices. etc.
That is also just one of the reasons for the split between forums. We value subjective reports, as well as appreciating that test instruments have a place.
However, we believe that the ear of the user should be the final judge, not just what test equipment says.

Kind Regards
Alex

P.S.
It all comes down to Power Supply, Power Supply, and Power Supply !

[madmac]

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe an album is sonicly able to produce better and more frequenties. But as being a bassplayer for 22 years I've seen analog recording been pushed away in favor of digital. So all vinyl that coms out these days is a joke cause it has been recorded, mixed and mastered digitally before the LP got pressed.

Try finding a recording studio which strickly uses analog equipment, it will be VERY expensive. Then look for a mastering room who goes analog all the way. It will be hard to find.

So if one speaks of old recordings, it's partly true that they can be better, but there were also more cheap (bad) recordings around. It's more likely an old LP will sound far whorse that it's (digitally remastered) CD.

When Philips created the CD, they initially put classic music on them and have the best conductors listen to them. They all said it was indeed the best recording of their pieces they'd ever listened to. So digital is without a doubt the - overall - best way to listen to music.

[Deleted]

IMO modern hi-res dig recording is fabulous which is why I stared this thread... and the very best A to D kit does not affect the sound in any way. IMVHO vinyl preservation, as a hobby, is akin to classic sports car owning etc. Very worthwhile, and a lot of fun, but state of the art it ain't.

Not long ago I bought my MF V-LPSii (used with my M-Audio 24/96 soundcard) to give me a pretty good way of backing up my few, good, vinyl LPs... done one or two but ashamed to say I haven't made much progress.

Derek

[Deleted]

I am old enough to remember monaural only vinyl lp's, 45's, and even 78's made of shellac that broke into pieces if they fell on a wooden floor. I am still a fan of monaural recordings, but unfortunately do not have a strictly monaural playback system. I still have my original Rolling Stones "England's Newest Hit Makers" in monaural. And an American firm name of "Sundazed Records" puts out the original monaural versions of such as Vanilla Fudge and Spirit...two of the many modern monaural vinyl LP's I own. The attempt to mix a monaural lp into a stereo one in the 60's was not a great success as what was offered often had the lead singer and bass player coming directly out of the left speaker and drummer and lead/rhythm guitar player directly out of the right speaker and nada (nothing) in the middle. So, to hear how a band sounded as a group either in-studio or live, one went for the monaural version in those days...as at least there was coherence within the small center sound field created in mono. When I put on the Spirit modern monaural version initially, "Fresh Garbage" came on with real dynamism and energy! In mono, no less. The band is really jamming in the mono sound field. I was/am very happy with that Sundazed production.

As to the question of digital vs. vinyl playback....sound wise for me at least, I'll take vinyl, even digitally recreated or modern mixed vinyl. My turntable system gets deeper into the groove than on comparable modern cd's...Tosca's "No Hassle" title for one...and Silversun Pickup's "Neck of the Woods" another. More realistic with a good playback system, is vinyl...

But, then I may re-visit my feelings on this matter after I delve into real high res digital music playback on a real high res digital playback system. I hope my nostalgia for vinyl playback along with real comparison to cd only digital playback systems will not impede on an in-depth comparison of vinyl to real high res digital playback. We shall see...er, hear.

j

[Deleted]

More realistic with a good playback system, is vinyl...

Another member, who is a classical musician thought so too, until he heard my rip of the "Dire Straits-Love Over Gold" CD. It was of course the original release before they remastered it. My collection also dates back to the very first CDs, in fact I had the 1st non commercial Sony CD player on Sydney's North Shore, several days before the CDs were released. I had to borrow some of the stores demo discs.
Alex

[Deleted]

Dec 1, 2013 0:36:31 GMT @sandyk said:

More realistic with a good playback system, is vinyl...

Another member, who is a classical musician thought so too, until he heard my rip of the "Dire Straits-Love Over Gold" CD. It was of course the original release before they remastered it. My collection also dates back to the very first CDs, in fact I had the 1st non commercial Sony CD player on Sydney's North Shore, several days before the CDs were released. I had to borrow some of the stores demo discs.
Alex

I believe I alluded to your point in my last paragraph, Alex...

j

[Deleted]

Hi Johnsan
The key thing these days is that decent PC type playback, or .wav files derived from ripping CDs with an optimised PC , can shit all over most affordable CD players. My very best stuff is ripped to Corsair Voyager USB memory sticks using an external +5V JLH low noise PSU and a modified USB cable without the red +5V wire connected. That also allows me to plug the Corsair into another dedicated +5V JLH PSU for an Oppo 103's USB input, and then play via a DAC that sounds even better than the analogue output of the Oppo 103, then into my SS Class A preamp and 15W/Ch. Class A PA (As seen in the DIY area here in RG) and speakers. Another bonus is that I can DL music videos from VEVO or Youtube, even some guest performances in 1080 from SNL in the USA, and plug the Corsair into my TV's USB port, then via Toslink cable to the DAC.

Kind Regards
Alex




SNL is Saturday Night Live.

[Deleted]

Hey Alex,

Yes, I can follow the flow of your digital "river" and how advanced it is. Amazing...

A few years ago,I remember a customer of mine, a retired engineer, had just bought his first home computer and asked me to show him around the thing, even though I am mainly just barely competent to manage software or DOS. But, I do know what goes where and why, and he was interested in computer music, so I tried. He didn't even know how to open the box at that time, and I showed him where a soundcard would go and how to de-select the on-board audio hardware in the BIOS. He knew nada about it. But, the engineer in him figured things out pretty quickly and with the support of on line engineers from around the world, just a few weeks later he had separate out of the box power supplies and flash drives, WAV files, J-River,etc. I listened very intently to his 10 foot tall Martin Logan speakers with this "on the edge" system, and copied a couple of his technical "finds". I found I really like all the convenience of computer audio and most of the "sound" he had going. I was amazed, but shouldn't have been, with his advancement in this field, as an engineer is just that, and engineer.

But, at the same time his friend and another of my customers, had tossed all of his digital playback equipment...Esoteric, etc., (these people have $ to spend on audio)..and went all analog. With his Kuzma "Stabi" turntable system and assorted over the top amplifier and speaker "stuff", I was treated to music as I've never heard...especially the un-compressed scale of it all.

Now, even my modest Audio Note turntable system adorned with Kondo silver litz wiring and AN-VX interconnects and Audio Note preamp and Croft amplification feeding ATC speakers...can give "some" of that magnificence in my living room. My own cd player is a modified Pioneer Elite PD-65 with Rubycons, Tantalums, Audio Consulting transformer analog output section, Superclock some # or other etc., and I find it cannot compete with my turntable system, even though it competes favorably with that Esoteric player...imho.

In my humble opinion then, when at this level, which is not top at all, but very competent, it now lies with the software to determine if it fails or succeeds. And, now my interest in high-er res digital audio is based on just that...the ability to control the software with digital, whilst one is constrained by whoever produced and manufactured the vinyl LP and it's sound and eq-ing technique...London ffrr, as an example.

So yes, I am interested in modern digital audio insofar as one can control the application software and beyond the fringe computer hardware...that's where I'm coming from, Alex. But then, this thread originated with the question of "cd" versus "vinyl lp", not unconstrained digital audio. But, there's no reason NOT to take this thread to other levels!

Mucho regards,
j

A suggestion, Alex: Check my reply on speaker placement in the speaker threads section here on RG. I'm experimenting with a placement technique used by Gamut speaker makers. I'm finding it really puts out a fantastic presentation in-room. j

[Deleted]

Hi Johnsan

I used to love my Half Speed Mastered LPs, and the later Direct Digital recordings,for example, one with Al Marino playing the piano.
but the main turning point for me was when the record companies started to squeeze the life out of the recordings by trying to fit too much on a side. A particularly bad one at the time was a Bette Midler LP. Classical LPs usually didn't suffer the same fate, but I have more of a "middle of the road" musical taste. Perhaps if the record companies hadn't compressed later popular releases so much, I would have stayed with LP, as well as embracing digital. I didn't miss the brush and Permostat etc. ritual though.
Unfortunately, as we now know , perfect sound forever was BS, and CD had a long way to go before it really came into it's own.
Just when they got on top of the game, the guys in suits decided that their recordings had to stand out from the rest via FM stereo etc. That was the start of "The Loudness Wars " The problem with CD is the real time playing from a spinning piece of flimsy polycarbonate, however on a well recorded CD, all the information is there, and begging to be extracted to some kind of memory
In another thread, the Loudness Wars is covered in the brand new instalment of the Blog by world famous Recording and Mastering Engineer Barry Diament. Barry is a good on line friend of mine, and the link to his blog was only received this morning.

Kind Regards
Alex

[Deleted]

I have the ABKCO 2003 vinyl LP copy of the Rolling Stones' "Aftermath UK"...and when the needle hit the groove in the first track...wowee, a phonograph that plays cds! There's something very wrong about listening to the cd version of an old lP on a record player. At least my turntable and phono preamp sound as good or better than my highly modified Pioneer Elite PD-65 when playing digital playback!

The original is so much more....searching for the word...organic?? I guess, if one needs to put it into words. I still don't hear digital recreating everything analog does...but, like I said, I'm willing to learn.

One other point, Alex...digital hasn't even begun to hit it's optimum version, yet. How much money will be spent on buying the next/best-est digital playback system...and how much money will be lost, trying to unload the old tech? 16bit, 24bit, 32bit, now 48bit....and at what resolutions...and from what interface?....USB 3.0, 3.1 ad infinitum? Where and when will the optimum be reached? I believe it will be a never ending phenomena. Well, at least I won't be around to keep pace....at most 20 years. What will it look like in 50?

Time marches on...j

[Deleted]

Johnsan
Obviously there is a problem when an LP recorded from a digital source can sound better than when played on your average CD player.
The Sunday before last I took along my Oppo 103 and USB memory sticks to a an E.E friend. The Oppo 103 completely blew away his much loved Pioneer player that was apparently very well reviewed when released, and that was when just playing CDs via their coax SPDIF outputs. When we played from the plugged in Corsair Voyager USB memory stick, there was a further huge jump in SQ. Barry Diament reports that 24/192 of his recordings sound identical to the microphone feeds, but as you say, digital is going even higher in resolution with new DSD formats. It took a long time for vinyl playback to get to it's present refinement. Digital is still in it's infancy, and still not fully understood.
I am still fighting a battle with some closed minded people (mainly E.E.s and software people) who refuse to believe , that despite the digital checksums being the same, 2 copies of a CD, or even digitally stored ones can sound a little different.
The PSU area with digital is very critical for best results, just as it is with analogue.
I now have verification of my reports from not only Martin Colloms and Barry Diament, but many forum members, as well now as my friend who is a well qualified E.E. with broad industry experience.
Unloading the old tech is always a problem, just as it was with VHS, Beta, mini disk recorders, DAT recorders etc.
I still have a Sony DAT player taking up space in a cupboard.

Regards
Alex

[Deleted]

Yes Alex, the problem is that the engineers at ABKCO made their digital LP a more realistic version than their SACD copy of same. All things being equal...they really aren't.

But, don't quote me on that....j

[Deleted]

SACD is just another spinning disc with the same old problems.

[Deleted]

Alex,I think you and I have just had one of the best "banters" that I've seen on the board....I'll think of something to keep it going...but, goodnight tonite, though....j

[Nigel]

Quote from Steve Hoffman (A Mastering Engineer) about what sounds closest to the master tape. Makes interesting reading.

12-01-2007
Steve Hoffman

Start Quote

What sounds just like the master tape: CD, Vinyl, SACD or an Open Reel tape copy?
First, let me say that I love records, compact discs and SACDs; I have a bunch of all three formats. Nothing that I discovered below changed that one bit.

I did these comparisons a few years ago. Since I spilled the beans to an interviewer on mic last year I continually get quoted and misquoted about this subject. I'll try to set the "record" straight in this thread. Please note I'm typing on a whacked out computer not my own with a tiny monitor and no spell check.... There could be a (gasp) typo or two...

A few years ago, mainly out of curiosity (and nothing else) I got the chance at AcousTech Mastering to compare an actual master tape to the playback of a record lacquer and digital playback. Also did the same test using DSD (SACD) playback as well later on in the day. The results were interesting. The below is just my opinion. Note that we cut the record at 45 because the lathe was set for that speed. A similar test we did using the 33 1/3 speed yielded the same result.

FIRST COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE LACQUER AT 45 RPM with DIGITAL PACIFIC MICROSONICS CAPTURE.

We had the master tape of the Riverside stereo LP Bill Evans Trio/WALTZ FOR DEBBY at AcousTech and decided to do this little comparison. Since the actual master needs a bunch of "mastering" to make it sound the best, I set the title track up as if it was going to be mastered (which in a sense it was, being cut on to an acetate record).

We cut a lacquer ref of the tune with mastering moves while dumping to the digital computer at the same time with the same moves.

Then, after a break, we sync'd up all three, first matching levels. Simultaneous playback of all three commenced and as Kevin switched, I listened. (We took turns switching and listening). First thing I noticed:

The MASTER TAPE and the RECORD sounded the practically the same. We honestly couldn't tell one from the other during playback. This was of course playing back the tape on the master recorder with the mastering "moves" turned on. The acetate record was played back flat on the AcousTech lathe with the SAE arm and Shure V15 through the Neumann playback preamp (as seen in so many pictures posted here of AcousTech).

The flat digital playback of my mastering sounded different. NOT BAD, just different. The decay on the piano was different, the plucks of Scott's bass were different, the reverb trail was noticeably truncated due to a loss of resolution. Non unpleasant, just not like the actual master tape. This is slightly frustrating to me because it confirmed the fact that when mastering in digital one has to compensate for the change (which I do with my usual "tricks"). The record however, gave back exactly what we put in to it. Exactly.

Please note that an actual record for sale would have gone through the manufacturing process and the lacquer would have been processed to a MASTER, MOTHER, STAMPER and VINYL with increased surface noise, etc. but the sound of the music remains intact for the most part. A remarkable thing since records have been basically made the same way for over 100 years.

SECOND COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE LACQUER AT 45 RPM with DSD MASTER (SACD MASTER).

So, using the same master tape of WALTZ FOR DEBBY, we compared the before mentioned acetate that we cut on the AcousTech lathe (manufactured in 1967 and modded by Kevin Gray) with a DSD playback of the same tape with the same mastering and levels.

Result? The DSD/SACD version sounded even MORE different than the compact disc digital playback compared to the analog master. More not-like the sound of the actual master tape. The resolution was fine and we could hear the notes decay, etc. just like analog but the TONALITY was a bit off. It was not telling the truth when compared to the master tape or the acetate record.

THIRD COMPARISON: MASTER TAPE with ACETATE RECORD with OPEN REEL TAPE COPY AT 15 ips:

We made a dub of the tune WALTZ FOR DEBBY to an Ampex ATR-100 at 15 ips non-Dolby, +3 level and played it back with the actual master tape and the acetate record. Both of us thought the open reel tape copy sounded inferior to the acetate record when compared to the master tape; weaker transients, a more "blurred" sound that would never be noticeable unless played back with the actual master tape to compare it to.

So, what does this mean to you? Probably nothing. What did it mean to me? I found it interesting. The CD playback had more accurate tonality than the DSD/SACD playback. The DSD playback had more front to back resolution than the CD playback. The tape copy sounded slightly lackluster. The acetate record playback beat them all in terms of resolution, tonal accuracy and everything else when compared directly with the analog master in playback. This is not wonderful news in a certain sense; vinyl playback is sometimes a pain in the butt and knowing that CD's are not capturing everything in perfect resolution drives me bonkers.

Regarding the lowly phonograph record:

Remember, a record groove is a true "analog" of a sound wave; not a SAMPLE but the real deal. Even the electrically recorded 78's I have from the 1920's have a wonderful sound with a lifelike convincing midband (which is where the "heart" of the music lies). Read what Kevin Gray wrote in this essay:

www.recordtech.com/prodsounds.htm

www.recordtech.com/faq.htm

Of course records have their problems (could be noisy, warped, bad cutting, etc.) as well but for the most part they will be a damn miraculous representation of the actual master recording for not much money.

[Deleted]

Quote from Steve Hoffman (A Mastering Engineer) about what sounds closest to the master tape. Makes interesting reading.

12-01-2007
Steve Hoffman

Hi Nigel
CD and high resolution PCM has come a long way in the last 7 years.
These days, we have the arguably more famous Barry Diament, whose mastering and recording efforts may be seen in most good CD collections, reporting that his 24/192 PCM files are indistinguishable from his microphone feed.

Beat that !!!

Kind Regards
Alex.
P.S.
Happy New Year from Downunder, where it's now 33 minutes into 2014.

[Nigel]

Happy New Year, Alex. Hope you had a good evening. All the best for 2014.

[Deleted]

I have started rebuilding my LP collection and am buying 180gram LP's from Poland.
I personally have never heard a CD sound as good as these admittedly expensive discs.
My CD player and Turntable are both rega and the CD player cost more, but vinyl sounds better!

[Deleted]

This is good.  From NewYorkerCartoons  :-)

derek

[jc]

I like that! Despite it though my record deck is back up and running...