Final word from Mikey Fremer: USB Stick better than Vinyl.

Andre Marc · Nov 15, 2012

Mikey Fremer says the Beatles USB Stick beats the new Vinyl. It should. The vinyl is just the stick through a Benchmark DAC
into a cutting machine.

"If you have the Apple USB stick and a really great DAC, you're buying this box for the book and for "the thing."

Shaffer · Nov 15, 2012

Andre Marc said:
Mikey Fremer says the Beatles USB Stick beats the new Vinyl. It should. The vinyl is just the stick through a Benchmark DAC
into a cutting machine.

"If you have the Apple USB stick and a really great DAC, you're buying this box for the book and for "the thing."

I'm sorry, did you read the entire piece? I'm asking, because your post furthers an alternate impression on multiple levels.

Felix

Andre Marc · Nov 15, 2012

Shaffer said:
I'm sorry, did you read the entire piece? I'm asking, because your post furthers an alternate impression on multiple levels.

Felix

Yes, I did. His statement speaks for its self..

What did I get wrong?

Ultimately, he says the new box is NOT terrible..but not as good as he expected, as with most things.

"As a record producer friend said to me this evening "It wasn't produced the way you wished it to be, but sometimes
the end result is better than you might have expected, even if it's not as good as you wanted it to be."

Shaffer · Nov 15, 2012

Andre Marc said:
Yes, I did. His statement speaks for its self..

More appropriately, anyone can read MF's entire post for him/herself.

What did I get wrong?

To start from the top, the claim in the title of the thread was never asserted in the piece. I really don't want to introduce more negativity into the forum. It's just that it seems like the thread was meant to tap into some sort of audio-political swordplay, but this is really only about the records.

Felix

Soundminded · Nov 15, 2012

Andre Marc said:
Mikey Fremer says the Beatles USB Stick beats the new Vinyl. It should. The vinyl is just the stick through a Benchmark DAC
into a cutting machine.

"If you have the Apple USB stick and a really great DAC, you're buying this box for the book and for "the thing."

Do you think that comes as a bit of a disappointment to Mikey Fremer? After all this cheap stick you buy for a few dollars beat out his $150,000 record player. What other recordings does it beat the record player out on? I wonder if he tried making the vinyl sound better by demagnetizing it. Would someone phone him and suggest that to him please?

Andre Marc · Nov 15, 2012

Soundminded said:
Do you think that comes as a bit of a disappointment to Mikey Fremer? After all this cheap stick you buy for a few dollars beat out his $150,000 record player. What other recordings does it beat the record player out on? I wonder if he tried making the vinyl sound better by demagnetizing it. Would someone phone him and suggest that to him please?

Now to be fair, the stick cost almost as much as the whole vinyl box. Secondly, it is not the table that suffered by comparison..it is the media.

I have no doubt LPs source from the original analog masters would sound dandy.

audioarcher · Nov 15, 2012

Andre Marc said:
Now to be fair, the stick cost almost as much as the whole vinyl box. Secondly, it is not the table that suffered by comparison..it is the media.

I have no doubt LPs source from the original analog masters would sound dandy.

Exactly, How could the new vinyl box set that is another generation removed from the master tapes compared to USB stick possibly sound better? Every step further away from the original is more degraded.

rbbert · Nov 15, 2012

audioarcher said:
Exactly, How could the new vinyl box set that is another generation removed from the master tapes compared to USB stick possibly sound better? Every step further away from the original is more degraded.

Well, numerous posters on practically every audiophile board (except this one) are indeed claiming the LP's sound better than the stick

Shaffer · Nov 15, 2012

rbbert said:
Well, numerous posters on practically every audiophile board (except this one) are indeed claiming the LP's sound better than the stick

Heh, you mean folks listened for themselves and posted individual opinions before being told what to think? What kind of audiophiles are those?

I've never heard the stick and can't really comment. Hell, I don't even own a DAC, period, which is supposed to make the stick playable, not to mention owning a good DAC. Batting a zero all around. The LPs are said not to be limited like the stick. There may be other factors, as well. Who knows? It would just be so much more refreshing if similar discussions were held by folks who put something on the line by doing their own legwork.

Felix

Phelonious Ponk · Nov 15, 2012

audioarcher said:
Exactly, How could the new vinyl box set that is another generation removed from the master tapes compared to USB stick possibly sound better? Every step further away from the original is more degraded.

Of course. And in this case the vinyl is a generation removed from the digital remaster captured on the stick.

Tim

microstrip · Nov 15, 2012

Soundminded said:
Do you think that comes as a bit of a disappointment to Mikey Fremer? After all this cheap stick you buy for a few dollars beat out his $150,000 record player. What other recordings does it beat the record player out on? I wonder if he tried making the vinyl sound better by demagnetizing it. Would someone phone him and suggest that to him please?

For the music and audio lovers the real disappointment it that the LPs were sourced from the 44.1kHz masters and there is no possible access to the 192kHz/24 files. All else is just forum noise ...

Gregadd · Nov 15, 2012

Once digital always digital.

Phelonious Ponk · Nov 15, 2012

Shaffer said:
Heh, you mean folks listened for themselves and posted individual opinions before being told what to think? What kind of audiophiles are those?

I've never heard the stick and can't really comment. Hell, I don't even own a DAC, period, which is supposed to make the stick playable, not to mention owning a good DAC. Batting a zero all around. The LPs are said not to be limited like the stick. There may be other factors, as well. Who knows? It would just be so much more refreshing if similar discussions were held by folks who put something on the line by doing their own legwork.

Felix

Limited how?

Tim

Shaffer · Nov 15, 2012

Phelonious Ponk said:
Limited how?

Tim

Dynamic compression, as per Sean Magee.

Felix

Robh3606 · Nov 15, 2012

Dynamic compression, as per Sean Magee.

Sure that's not mixed up?? Why would you limit dynamics on a digital source?? The vinyl I can understand.

Rob

mep · Nov 15, 2012

Robh3606 said:
Sure that's not mixed up?? Why would you limit dynamics on a digital source?? The vinyl I can understand.

Rob

I agree-it doesn't make sense.

rbbert · Nov 15, 2012

Shaffer said:
The LPs are said not to be limited like the stick.
Felix

According to interviews printed back in 2009-10, as with noise reduction there are only scattered instances of peak limiting used across the entire 13 CD set, and none on the mono CD's. Although those may be audible (more probably not), that is not going to affect the overall sound quality (perceptions) of the LP's.

audioarcher · Nov 15, 2012

rbbert said:
Well, numerous posters on practically every audiophile board (except this one) are indeed claiming the LP's sound better than the stick

I have not heard the new LP's but do have the USB stick. It could be that they like the sound character of their vinyl setup better than their digital setup. Any number of things could cause that. Maybe their digital setup is harsh sounding. Who knows maybe I would prefer them too. I'm not willing to buy the whole box set to find out. I don't have all the LP's so I might pick up one or two of the new issues one of these days.

Shaffer · Nov 15, 2012

rbbert said:
According to interviews printed back in 2009-10, as with noise reduction there are only scattered instances of peak limiting used across the entire 13 CD set, and none on the mono CD's. Although those may be audible (more probably not), that is not going to affect the overall sound quality (perceptions) of the LP's.

Rhetorically speaking, if it's audible, how could it not influence an audiophile's perception of a recording? I'm not a mastering engineer and I certainly don't know enough about the practice to discuss intelligently. I'm willing to bet that most of us fall into a similar mold. We, as audiophiles, have a single means of arriving at an opinion - listening. As such, any discussion that does not involve a listening experience is moot by definition.

Felix

rbbert · Nov 15, 2012

Shaffer said:
Rhetorically speaking, if it's audible, how could it not influence an audiophile's perception of a recording? I'm not a mastering engineer and I certainly don't know enough about the practice to discuss intelligently. I'm willing to bet that most of us fall into a similar mold. We, as audiophiles, have a single means of arriving at an opinion - listening. As such, any discussion that does not involve a listening experience is moot by definition.

Felix

As an example, if there were half a dozen individual peaks in a given song (totaling anywhere from a fraction of a second to perhaps a couple of seconds) that were limited by 1-2 dB, do you think that would be audible? And supposing that if you knew just where to listen and were able to notice that, do you really think that would significantly affect your opinion of the overall sound quality? That's the kind of limiting that was done on the USB Apple files, and not all tracks had compression or limiting.

Final word from Mikey Fremer: USB Stick better than Vinyl.

Member Sponsor

New Member

Member Sponsor

New Member

New Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

VIP/Donor

WBF Founding Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads