The Miracle of Analog Sound

[JackD201]

I've seen a cart literally jump off the LP by someone who got a tad overzealous with the Telarc 1812. Makes me believe in what RK is saying. The dynamics were there, the arm/cart, even the table and table platform just couldn't handle it.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I've seen a cart literally jump off the LP by someone who got a tad overzealous with the Telarc 1812. Makes me believe in what RK is saying. The dynamics were there, the arm/cart, even the table and table platform just couldn't handle it.

I respect and like Ralph but I don't buy everything he's saying. For one, what about the issues with groove narrowing. That's not a playback issue, but a mastering problem trying to get lows on the lacquer. Then there's the issue of fitting a 30 min movement on one side of an LP. Gotta compress it because there's really a limit to how much can fit on one side of the lp.

Personally it's everything involved in the mastering and pressing process. Does the LP sound like the tape? Then there's something going awry. If you really want to hear what goes on, compare a lacquer to the resultant record. Sadly the LP loses a lot.

 

[JackD201]

Doesn't follow though Myles that they have to dumb down the pressing itself because of the limitations of the imprinted LP? That and resort to EQ as well.

On the flipside, I haven't gotten the needle to jump with my arm/table/rack with either the 1812 or Round Up and my system has far higher output capability.

 

[FrantzM]

microstrip

Please show me how in the world a cutting lathe can have 120 dB of dynamic range .. Please .. I will remain in your debt...

P.S and to add to this explain to me how Digital at 24 bts can't accommodate more than 120 dB ...

 

[mep]

Frantz-The flip side is why can't the mastering lathe/cutter head have a dynamic range of 120dB? If the answer to the question is that we don't have any tapes with 120dB of dynamic range, that doesn't mean the cutter head still isn't capable of cutting that much dynamic range if it was fed from a 120dB source. But really, either way the argument is pointless because we don't have source material either digital or analog that has that type of dynamic range. What I do believe is that the mastering lathe has the capability to engrave a higher dynamic range than the source material we have to feed it.

We have discussed this before, but some people have yet to grasp that because digital can have such a high dynamic range doesn't mean that the recordings you buy are coming anywhere close to using the available dynamic range. I have commented on the irony of digital having such a huge dynamic range potential that is being thrown out the window due to the loudness wars. If you could have recordings that routinely have 50dB-60dB of dynamic range, we would all be in hog heaven.

 

[Bill Hart]

I'm not being coy in asking this question, but when people advocate digital playback as state of the art, aren't we talking about a considerable monetary outlay, e.g. dcs top line stuff with external clock, burmeister, or the like?
I am fully committed to analog, partly because I started using it as a medium when I was a child, and as my record collection has grown, i have incrementally improved the playback equipment as well. If one were to go out and purchase the TT set up, with arm and cartridge, it would be comparably expensive and probably make little sense to anyone but a zealot.
For the 'average' high-end source equipment, call it 10 grand, just to pick a number, how do things stack up?
I think there is also an aspect to 'voicing' the system (call it coloration) for different sources, so would an A-B comparison over the same system be fair? How do folks that run state of the art in both media approach this?
And, FWIW, didn't Elvis have a record player in one of his cars? That could end the entire argument in some circles.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Today i heard the apple of high end audio all full microprocessor controlled class d (a ) amplification .
After 5 cd s on the moon via the devialet dac /amp , i asked for a record , guess what maybe because i am biased , but analogue still soundend way better via the devialet .
Where are the R2R tapemachines as well overhere , i cant take all this high res stuff anymore , smooth and boring nice to impress not to love
I do like music /sounds in dvd s blue rays much more , is that because its dvd audio and fundamentally different??

 

[MylesBAstor]

Doesn't follow though Myles that they have to dumb down the pressing itself because of the limitations of the imprinted LP? That and resort to EQ as well.

On the flipside, I haven't gotten the needle to jump with my arm/table/rack with either the 1812 or Round Up and my system has far higher output capability.

Record companies have limited the LP since Day 1. Just like digital recordings were mastered for boom boxes, LPs were mastered for the worst turntable. Of course everyone knows how RCA yanked Reiner's Pines of Rome off the shelves because the tables of the day couldn't handle it (that's why a 1S is the most desirable and rarest--and can play on today's tables!).

And those 20+ mins sides classical albums are pretty much always compressed sounding. In some cases, they were meant for two LPs; or in some remasterings, the LPs are now spread out over four sides

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I will put the Lathe issue to rest after this:
Assuming the lathe cutting head would be capable capable of movement as small as a 0.1 micrometer then it means that to be able to have 120 dB of dynamic range the lathe should be able of movement of the order of 10 cm ... 4 inches ... we of course assume electronics having that kind of signal ratio likely helium cooled types

I doubt they ever built a lathe with such a range .. Correct me where I am wrong in my reasoning...

Yet in spite of all this analog remains a wonderful medium. I am not yet crossed the chasm and declare that CD is superior to analog .. Could be sentiments ... I don't feel missing from my CDs but ..Hey!! Old loves die the slowest .. Still I am on the digital side and am committed to it.

I do agree that there is something magical about analog but I have come to think that it comes mostly from the care and knowledge of the Mastering and recording engineers of the old days. Those who took their craft seriously and respected the notion of Hi-Fi. Nowadays music recording is more about creating some kind of sonic landscape that often has no equivalent in real, live music (Please, note I said "often", not "never"). I have all the Mercury CDs and frankly between these and the LPs it is truly a toss-up. Preferences would have people sway one way or the other but there is no way if one want to remain objective not to take these CDs for what they are .. Sublime and a different version of the LPs .. Different not superior , not inerior. Both LPs and CDs were under the supervision of the late great Lady of recording: Wilma Cozart Fine.

 

[rbbert]

Today i heard the apple of high end audio all full microprocessor controlled class d (a ) amplification .
After 5 cd s on the moon via the devialet dac /amp , i asked for a record , guess what maybe because i am biased , but analogue still soundend way better via the devialet .
Where are the R2R tapemachines as well overhere , i cant take all this high res stuff anymore , smooth and boring nice to impress not to love
I do like music /sounds in dvd s blue rays much more , is that because its dvd audio and fundamentally different??

There may a language problem but I'm not sure what the last part of this post means? Audio from Bluray and DVD-Audio is still PCM, not different from what HDTracks, Linn, Channel Classics, etc. offer. In fact I typically burn 24/88.2, 24/96 and 24/192 to DVD-A to listen to.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I find dvds /blue rays movies quite good to listen to , i dont know much of the format , i thought dvd blue ray was a different format, but maybe its all imagination.

 

[FrantzM]

I find dvds /blue rays movies quite good to listen to , i dont know much of the format , i thought dvd blue ray was a different format, but maybe its all imagination.

Digital, Hi-rez PCM

 

[Keith_W]

I'm not being coy in asking this question, but when people advocate digital playback as state of the art, aren't we talking about a considerable monetary outlay, e.g. dcs top line stuff with external clock, burmeister, or the like?

People can spend as much money as they like, but no amount of money will make CD sound good. I'm afraid it's not the player, it is the medium.

I don't foresee a future where digital will ever improve either. The industry leaders (including some members here) seem to think 16/44 is as good as it gets, and many are trying to prove that high bitrate MP3 is "CD quality". If you think CD quality is not good enough, then the future does not bode well.

 

[FrantzM]

People can spend as much money as they like, but no amount of money will make CD sound good. I'm afraid it's not the player, it is the medium.

I don't foresee a future where digital will ever improve either. The industry leaders (including some members here) seem to think 16/44 is as good as it gets, and many are trying to prove that high bitrate MP3 is "CD quality". If you think CD quality is not good enough, then the future does not bode well.

 

[mep]

Frantz-I have to assume the smiley face is because you think Keith’s post is actually funny because of the position he staked out. While I don’t agree with his dire prognosis for digital, I do agree that digital has a ways to go even though the digital diehards think they conquered the sound quality of analog long ago. And if the ‘war’ was only about which one had the lowest noise floor, digital did win. Unfortunately, there is much more to the story.

Sometimes I wonder if objectivists are all strictly into digital and believe in its superiority over all things analog. Do we have anyone on this forum that loves analog and claims to be an objectivist? I wonder…

I swear that we have some objectivists that will (and do) argue over everything. If we said the sun was hot, they would demand proof. They would want to see a thermal image that proved the sun was really hot. They would demand measurements. They want PROOF. Standing out in the sun on a 100 degree day that so many of us are experiencing right now wouldn’t be enough proof for them because they couldn’t trust their body (any more than their ears) to tell them the obvious truth.

 

[microstrip]

microstrip

Please show me how in the world a cutting lathe can have 120 dB of dynamic range .. Please .. I will remain in your debt...

P.S and to add to this explain to me how Digital at 24 bts can't accommodate more than 120 dB ...

Frantz,

My question was not about the 120 dB dynamic range - it was simply if you did not misunderstand what Ralph was writing.

I do not agree with all that Ralph Karsteen writes about audio, but I respect him and I try to understand what he means with his posts. And I think that the dictionary perspective, scrutinizing every word of isolated quoting sentences is killing the WBF debates. YMMV or something similar.

 

[mep]

We need a new acronym to describe what some people feel. MMVFE (My Mileage Varies From Everyone) for example. I’m tired of YMMV because the response that includes YMMV obviously shows that the poster didn’t believe a damn thing that was said.

 

[FrantzM]

mep

Let's get this. If something is stated as an opinion there is no need for a proof when it is stated as a fact thee is a need for proofs to back-up the assertion.

My smiley is indeed that I find funny how the poster opinion of digital is what people would have said about LP 40 years ago... When the TT,arms and Cartridges of the day could not keep up with what was on the LP ...

If the forum were to be about people posting only just their opinions then we will not go anywhere and learn even less... Let'be happy that the exchanges are polite and let's continue to keep them that way but please let us not become a version of everything goes and all systems are great. If "everything is great" then great because a meaningless term .. Let's not debase our forum to that extent. Someone tells me a lathe has unlimited dynamics .. Prove it cause I can't see how.. Educate me on the mechanics of a lathe that would have allowed such to be true so far, I am reasonably certain that lathe dynamic range is not 120 dB not even 90 dB ...

I also understand the hyperbole about objectivists but it is that, an hyperbole. Most objectivists hold subjective views too: There are things they (we) like yet, they (we) can't explain why. I don't see for example anything special in Burmester measurements to explain why I find them sounding so good or so silent (aside from the superlative damping factor) ... even less the Magnepan and their very weird Frequency response. I llike them nonetheless ...etc... I do find myself liking a ot of Speakers with good FR: The Revel Salon for exemple but also the Magicos and the Rockports ... so ...

 

[mep]

While I do not doubt that the cutting lathe has capability for high dynamic range, we got rid of a lot of that so we could get some play time on one side of a disc and increase the highs and decrecase the lows (RIAA curve) to get quieter highs and less wide wiggles and thus longer play time. And so the consumer, the average guy or gal, could enjoy a long concert as possible and not have to buy some crazy expensive cartridge that could physically follow wide undulations in the groove.

It is pure economics. But stating that the lathe has super high dynamic range and yet not be able to use it is like talking about high rez then downcoverting to redbook cd...so what...we have what we have.

By the way, one thing lacking is the original recorded highs in a big way on vinyl. What I mean is I am not counting the harmomic jibberish produced by our cartridges up into the ultrasonics.

For example, a metal mother might be down -5db at 14Khz at the inner grooves, but the vinyl record that lands in your hands might be down-8db at 14Khz, and again, I am talking about the loss of highs in the inner grooves, the outer grooves will be about the same, although actually, the LP we get starts rolling off gently an inch in from the outer groove.



Theres a bunch of distortion mechanisms on LP and despite that they "sound" good. But, I have also heard plenty of folks digital stuff that sounded good too. However, I would argue that if one fixates on the distortion patterns of LP, and likes that sound, then digital aint never going to sound the same, however, some experiments performed when recording an LP to disc and playing back the disk against the recording of the LP, under blind conditions, in some instances revealed no audible diffrence, which suggests to me that digital can replicate LP, but not the other way round.

So, is analog LP transparent, heck no. sounds good, yeah, and is that part of the stereo medium..yeah I think so.

Tom

Where are you getting your "facts" from when you quote the frequency response of LPs in the innner groove? Is this just your WAG or do you have some type of accredited information that backs this up?

 

[microstrip]

(...) I do agree that there is something magical about analog but I have come to think that it comes mostly from the care and knowledge of the Mastering and recording engineers of the old days. Those who took their craft seriously and respected the notion of Hi-Fi. Nowadays music recording is more about creating some kind of sonic landscape that often has no equivalent in real, live music (Please, note I said "often", not "never"). I have all the Mercury CDs and frankly between these and the LPs it is truly a toss-up. Preferences would have people sway one way or the other but there is no way if one want to remain objective not to take these CDs for what they are .. Sublime and a different version of the LPs .. Different not superior , not inerior. Both LPs and CDs were under the supervision of the late great Lady of recording: Wilma Cozart Fine.

Frantz,

I have only one of the old Mercury LPs and I did not find it an exceptional recording - many of my classical LPs show, in my humble opinion and system, better sound. I also have more recent CDs of classical music that I consider better recorded.

But I will be very happy if you could suggest any CD of a big band recording easily available that has better quality that my The King James Version Sheffield Lab Direct Disc LP recording. I posted this challenge long ago and never got a suggestion.