dagosa, a lot of people like vinyl better than CD, it is making a comeback. But I have a vinyl record of Johnny river’s “Realization”, actually two copies, and older one with lots of plays on it and a newer one with fewer plays on it, and I bought the CD (commercial not home made) of that album not too long ago. I was listening to the CD when just for the heck of it, I put the newer one on the old Miracord, I gotta tell ya, the vinyl did sound better, not that you would notice if they weren’t playing one after the other. BTW, all the other equipment is the same, both plugged into the same receiver.
texasas about that hiss, I see that on tapes, but not so much on vinyl, unless the record is well used or dirty.
I bought a new Sony USB turntable (far better than those ION turntables you see at wally world) but its no match for the Miracord. I use it to make CDs from records that I have that are not commercially available. Its a PITA to do this so if I can find the CD, I’d rather buy it. But CDs are getting hard to find thanks to iTunes etc. I do have an iTunes account for recording that I don’t have and can’t get any other way, but I don’t think they are a match for CD’s either.
BTW, I m not against the newer technologies, they are so much more convenient for casual listening, but I do think that the quality is not as good, especially mp3 and iTunes. But at 70 mph when the ambient noise in your vehicle is 80+dB, you really don’t notice.
Records have the hiss from the master tapes. Low, but it’s there. Also sometimes from needle wear, but that’s more pops/etc. Signal to noise ratio has improved (in some cases) with the digital recordings.
MP3s are another thing entirely, many are over compressed (most?), with major loss in sound quality. But with most earbuds, who cares?
Keith
I agree that LPs can sound very good.
I just don’t feel the performance numbers allow them to be as accurate as the potential for cd. But like texases talks about, if it all comes from the same master, even a CD can sound similar too. But if the master has very good numbers , I think CDs have the Big advantage in being able to handle the additional material that makes. It potentially more accurate.
But unlike most analog, laser has no physical contact so playing wear is not an issue. Mp3, the convenience of playing music for non critical listening. Not bad if you don’t compare it with anything else. Have heard good LPs that seem to sound better.
With an intimate knowledge of the presentation the human mind will insert details and nuances that make the recreated experience so much more lifelike then if you had not attended, the person who loved it will never be convinced otherwise, regardless of what someone else might say. Your mind is your ally in the same way you convince your self one speaker is better...it will be because your mind will do what it has to to reinforce your belief.
My mind isn’t as good at inserting missing details…that’s why I won’t own Bose. My mind can’t fill in the missing detail that’s not real from the Bose. I want close to the live concert as I remembered …Not something that may sound good, but is NOT accurate at reproducing the live recording.
Much of CD’s early problems were the recordings. Many were still using Analog masters…and then analog mixing…then finally a digital press…that’s called a AAD. Then they started doing digital mixing…ADD…and finally DDD (all digital). The DDD’s were far better then original AAD.
Many people still hold onto their turntables. One reason is classical. There are classical recordings from the 70’s and 80’s that are only on vinyl. Such a low volume market…not cost effective to made a CD. Also some recordings from famous conductors are very popular. Again…not popular enough to now make a CD from the master…so people hold onto their vinyl and turntables because that’s the ONLY source available.
Forgot to add something about early CD’s. Another reason they didn’t sound as good as turntables back then…was their D2A(Digital to Analog) Converter. They weren’t fast enough to be truly accurate. The software compensated a little for their slowness. It took about 3-5 years for the first real good D2A converter to come to the market.
Mickey
"My mind isn’t as good at inserting missing details. "
From a cognitive perspective, you are absolutely right. But, at an unconscious level, I have come to believe from personal experience and from my daughter’s who works in neuro rehab, the brain can interpolate at a level that rivals what we take for granted in computers. Interpolation as you know, is the ability to insert missing details based upon the info given.
This was genisus of my experience in loosing 95% of my optic nerve over a years time due to complications from a detached retina, and showing no outward symptoms of apparent vision loss. During vision field test, there were definite holes in my vision as the computer directed tests showed. I was totally unaware as the retinal surgeon and later the vision specialist at Tuffs explained how the visual cortex worked. When surgery ( vitrectomy) became finally necessary, with 95% of the optic nerve gone, the brain stopped interpolating and I lost complete sight in my eye during the " traumatic, for the brain", surgery. In essence, it stopped interpolating.
This is common in hearing as well as people will actually insert words in statements when they are incompletely repeated. It is done in music listening as well. And, it is done unconsciously. If you are focused, obviously you can control it. If you are lost so to speak in an experience, your brain does it as a normal procedure so to speak. It is an evolutionary ability of a survival tool capability that can be enhanced by training that works very well. We are experts at it in the same way we are for example, innate experts in dealing with gravity.
Mike,
I also agree that at the heart of the performance of a digital source is it’s digital to analog conversion. But, again, that is at the discretion of the those in the chain to provide.
I am saying that your experience is perfectly normal and your opinion of the recreation of the performance is acceptable. What I am saying is that, given the technology available to me now, if I choose too, I can recreate a more measurably accurate rendition of the Boston Pops performance then what was played on your excellent equipment. This is on my assumption that you may have used the best of equipment but played witha common, made for the consumer vinyl 331/3 record album. I did not see any where that you bought some audiophile special copy.
Your reference to my speakers has little to do with my assertion. My equipment is capable, even though substandard compared to yours in your opinion, perhaps. Velodyne, AR and Boston acoustics, which are the speakers I am using now as we speak ( they are older models) though no where near as good as your’s…Onkyo receivers and Sony disc players are not either…perhaps, but these components are newer.
But I am absolutely sure that any difference can be made up by the easily measured difference between the performance potential difference of a CD and a vinyl record, NOW as we speak and not back “then”. I hope I was clear enough in that.
Telarc will see to that…they have made excellent CDs of Boston Pops and other classics. I am convinced that, just being careful in my selection of a digital source can easily support my assumption. Please excuse these poorly worded statements…baby sitting grandchildren in Mass. while working with an iPad and pudgy fingers.
But, if I’m wrong it certainly won’t be the first or last time…
Btw, the body’s innate ability to deal with gravity and the willingness to work with and not against it, is often what separates the good golfer from the duffer…if you play golf, I think you might agree. Professionals are more natural in their movements, amateurs less so in dealing with gravity and our body’s inborn tendency to be “experts” in this area. Btw, before I held on to old LPs with the intent of actually enjoying them frequently, I would convert them to digital format.
if I choose too, I can recreate a more measurably accurate rendition of the Boston Pops performance then what was played on your excellent equipment.
That’s YOUR opinion I don’t share. I’ve heard several people claim that…but very few can PROVE it. I’ve done blind tests with many other systems…This has been on going since I’ve owned my speakers over 30 years ago. You can believe what you want…but there’s a difference between belief and reality. Yes you can EQ a speaker…but that’s just a band-aid to the problem. And unless you have a parametric that can EQ down to very finite increments…you may be making the sound WORSE. My first job out of college was working for a sound engineering company that designed and built systems for theaters and large auditoriums. I was programming a sound analyzer on a portable (only weighed about 150lbs) PDP-11 computer. Every single install had to be EQ’d. But what the owner told me…it’s a LOT easier EQing a relatively flat speaker then one that’s not even close. That’s why he only used Altec and JBL speakers. Other speakers from other companies were too hard to tame. EQing is a science all it’s own.
But I am absolutely sure that any difference can be made up by the easily measured difference between the performance potential difference of a CD and a vinyl record,
When I made my statement about the the Boston Pops…it was NOTHING about vinyl vs CD. It was about reliving the live experience. If CD’s were available then…I would have bought a CD. But they were just coming to market and the CD players were well over $3,000.
I agree COMPLETELY that the newer modern CD’s can play more lifelike then older vinyl. Never said they couldn’t…don’t know why you thought I did. But you still need a good system to play the CD’s. If ONLY the CD’s were the answer…then go to WallMart and buy the cheapest boom-box they have. Your Boston Acoustics and Valodyne speakers probably sound excellent. Never said they wouldn’t. I’ve been a big fan of BA for years. The Valodyne woofers are excellent too. One of the best base systems you can buy. It’s all a matter of personal taste. I was single when I bought my speakers…no way would my wife let me spend that kind of money when we first got married.
I have heard several people claim…but not prove what, that CDs or digital source material is not measurable more accurate??? Then a vinyl record ? Is that right ?
The sound is at the mercy of the weakest link; the weakest link is the LP.
I would argue also, that digital sampling is more not less a natural means of sound reproduction and playback then a " nail vibrating in plastic"
Continuity and solid wave forms are an illusion we use to function in the world around us and analog technology is less "continuous not more, then digital " the sampling rates of a needle moving back and forth in a cartridge set up sends signals that are impulses, not continuous messaging as supporters of analog would have you believe. The speed and quantity of information is restricted by the physical properties of the vibrating stylus and the etchings in the vinyl along with pick up in the cartridge.
The amount of information transfer from a CD to a receiver is restricted by a pulsating laser, that does not degrade the source…and the speed of light. So much more information transfer is possible, that it approximates more closely what the sampling rate at the cholera and subsequently to brain, that makes it IMHO, more not less natural. The capabilities of a CD, if realized, in frequency response, signal to noise ratio, dynamic range etc. more closely match the human capabilities then those of the LP. I can bore you with the comparison numbers…but I won’t be bothered. They there and I have posted them before.
Btw, wow and flutter, rumble and what ever other properties turn tables cannot compensate for, are addition unnaturally added sources to the experience. The world IS discrete and not continuous. Continuity is an illusion. The computer, like your own mind work similarly and there will come a time when direct transfer of musical information from computer sources to your brain will make our debates a thing of the past. At that time, Atec 604s will be coffee tables and the lowly digital player will be the ultimate music experience, not attended live. All sounds are realized in the brain…and of course you are welcome to your own.
Remember, my comment was with respect to MY system vs yours and your speakers vs mine and CDs, not a Walmart system, that is just extraneous info. It will always be a matter of personal taste as our minds and experiences are different…but still, the numbers and accuracy as defined mathmatically, are on my side. But like you and I fully agree, and I have always said, ultimately they are never important as what you feel when hearing music. http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/AudioVisualTV/Vinyls/VinylVsCD.html
I have heard several people claim...but not prove what, that CDs or digital source material is not measurable more accurate??????? Then a vinyl record ? Is that right ?
Why are you arguing against something I NEVER EVER said. You were arguing that you could make your system give the same realistic sound as my system…And I said I doubt that…I NEVER ONCE said anything about the source…Vinyl or CD…NOT ONCE. In fact in order for the test to be valid…they both MUST be using the same source material. Either vinyl or CD. Doesn’t matter.
The ONLY argument I ever made AGAINST CD’s was the earlier versions of CD’s. I would argue that a GOOD vinyl record was more musical then the BEST CD’s at the time. The master was still Analog, so you didn’t get all the extended range the CD quality has. And the D/A converter was no where as good as it needed to be (which they are now). Now that everything from the master to the creation of the CD is all digital…AND the D/A converters are a LOT better…CD’s are very very hard to beat. IMHO…vinyl doesn’t even come close…BUT you still need a good system to play the CD’s.
I had the same problem with our 2008 Subaru. After complaining to the dealer and then to Subaru, the dealer found a ground problem. upon following visits our sevice manager has told us that they have fixed many others since our problem.
Just trying to clarify as your original comment stipulated no such hint as " at the time" as it promoted your speakers using an LP sound source and indicated maybe that was my problem. YES you did say your source was an album !!! And, my problem may be my speakers…check your comment. P
My comment is that with a CD, I have no problem with my sound that it’s measurable better then yours with an LP…the rest is to respond to the old LP vs cd arguement That you referred to and my response to THEM…AndNOTHiNG to do with the way you may feel.
I don’t play records. Please check too that I was explicit in saying, all my equipment is newer then yours was back then…I was careful to contextualize everything. I understand that now your intent was a same source comparison. So, how to you feel about the response to the mind and it’s ability to interpolate sound ? Is that born out by your experience ? If you agree you are…
… free to like the sound better on your new Bose speakers I heard your family and friends are surprising you with on your next birthday…coming up soon ? Oops, I spilled the beans and ruined the surprise.
But, when you say something sounds more " musical" it means nothing to me as the comment sounds so subjective and hyped. That’s not me disagreeing, that’s just me saying…I don’t get it without numbers. If you add sounds more musical " to me" I get THAT !
Also Mike " the master was still analog so you don’t get all of the extended range a CD quality has "
Just to add to your reference of analog mastering used now or then. if it was a professional quality open reel to reel, it was fully capable of delivering all the necessary info to a format in CD. IMO, it is the LP that was and is not now capable of rendering what a very good analog open reel recorder is capable…I think we both agree to that.
Just to add to your reference of analog mastering used now or then. if it was a professional quality open reel to reel, it was fully capable of delivering all the necessary info to a format in CD. IMO
It did NOT have t he extended range of a CD…But it did have more then a LP. The extended range of a CD is basically limitless.
But, when you say something sounds more " musical" it means nothing to me as the comment sounds so subjective and hyped.
It’s VERY subjective…but you seem to think that sound can be completely quantitative. If it could be…then every single good speaker company would sound exactly the same…They DON’T. I can show you some GREAT speakers from several different manufacturers…that while they may produce the sound very close to the live recording…they will sound different. You can hear the difference…but you may NOT be able to MEASURE the difference. Even though they may have the same measurable features…they won’t sound the same. Good speaker manufacturers know this. That’s one reason companies like Altec and JBL tested their speakers with Pink noise generators…as opposed to White noise generators. You can play middle C on a Cello and Violin…but they DON’T sound the same.
“It’s very subjective…but you seem to think that sound can be completely quantitative”
If that is the case, I have done a miserable job of communicating. I believe in both…" After three feet you hear MORE of the room then the speaker" and that’s why reviewers with opinions like “musicality” mean little to me because it is theirs.I can only accept first, quantifiers to limit my choices of all speakers. I need quantifiers to help build or buy the speaker…I cannot do it by trial and error. I need predictability that only math can give me. Yet I can not use math alone to build or buy and set the speaker… the final decision before doing so is subjective and personal and can only be done by listening where they will be use.
" After three feet you hear MORE of the room then the speaker"
I don't agree with that one bit...If that was the case..then in a theater..only the first two rows would hear any music...because there's very little if any reflecting sound because of all the sound absorbing material. Maybe with the BOSE speakers...but not all speakers depend on the room...While there is some reflection even with my speakers...sorry..it's NOT most of the music you hear. Gee sound like you have your speakers pointed toward the wall. You speakers don't project any sound INTO the room???
" After three feet you hear MORE of the room then the speaker".
I am certainly no expert on this topic or speakers. As a performing musician, I do know that there are certain auditoriums where I dread having to play. In these auditoriums, it’s hard to hear the instrument or section that has the melody and it is difficult to play the accompanying part at the right level so it will be heard but not cover the melody. In a live recording of a composition for orchestra and chorus, I thought I was underplaying the horn part, but in the DVD that was made, I stood out like a sore thumb. For a number of years, I played next to another horn player that I always thought played too loud. Yet, out in the audience, her part wasn’t heard. The sound of her instrument didn’t center. I do think that the room and speakers have to work together just as the orchestra or band and concert hall have to work together and the performing ensemble must adjust to the hall. I do know that where I have my speakers placed in my living room which has a cathedral ceiling, when I am sitting in my favorite chair listening to an orchestral recording, I can’t pick out which speaker is carrying the sound. I can tell that the violin section is on the left, the cello section is on the right and midway between is the woodwind and brass sections. I did have to experiment to find the best location in the room for the speakers.
"after three feet, you hear more of the room then the speaker " “I don’t agree with that one bit” “only the first two rows would hear any music”
IMHO…Up to three feet, the speaker has done all it can do…it’s now up to the environment. In a theater with lots of absorption, you must be in the line of direct sound from some speaker. Which, even the first three rows usually are. If they aren’t, they hear little. I worked plenty in theaters and on stage, we hear little that the house does and need monitors. The rest of the house is far enough away to receive sound directly and sometimes, the middle rows hear the loudest volume.There are still some reflections in a theater, but theater speakers are a special breed, much different then normal home speakers…unless you live in a theater.
After three feet, the room ( normal living room) is exerting plenty of it’s influence on the speaker system… Beg, borrow or steal a frequency generator and sound pressure meter, both cheap… See for yourself,
Supporting this, it seems to me is that many FR specs are very often measured for speakers at less then that ( one meter) distance from the speaker.
" expecting a good speaker to sound good in a poor room is like expecting a sports car to handle well on ice" It ain’t gonna happen.