How good would a real time dupe of a 15 IPS reel tape of Dire Straits' "Brothers In Arms" or Joe Jackson's "Body And Soul" be?
I
think BIA is a 16 bit recording, but a v.good one at that. I have each the CD & LP, in various flavours. My Jackson B&S CD is a perfect example of why CD has such a terrible reputation, basically un-listenable in my system. As I stated in a post above, Cowboy Junkees Trinity Sessions, a DAT based 16bit recording, received critical acclaim for it's "CD" sound quality. The TS LP is "virtually-identical" to the CD.
Which brings me back to subject of digital recordings on LP. Within my system, I consistently hear digital characteristic on LP. Basically, I hear it as a measure of limited dynamic capability and dimensional space, in which better analog LPs offer a much wider / layered presentation with superior instrumental impact. With CD, even stellar CD like Cafe or Trinity, they seem stunted in comparison. I'm not implying that these CDs are NOT excellent sounding recordings(*), I'm implying that they contain a sonic signature that I find consistent.
(* Although if I use Nardis (FIM HDCD) to illustrate 16/44 "limited" dynamically capability, one could make an argument pro CD)
As an example; last night I re-visited Tracy Chapman's 1988 recording, which if memory serves, is also a 16bit master. This LP, on release, was critically acclaimed by many audiophiles. Even though by CD standard it's relatively dynamic, it still comes across as dynamically stunted compared to native analog based LPs. I have others examples (Jennifer Warnes, Eva Cassidy) ...
Another interesting example is Allison Krauss New Favorite, which (IIRC) was recorded originally in DSD and then down-converted to 16/44 for CD. This CD received plenty of accolades for sound quality, and it does sound quite decent within my system, but it's not sonically competitive to Cafe or Trinity. I gather that since both Cafe & Trinity were recorded and played back "natively" at 16/44 (48?), I
think (admittedly a generalization) the potential negative effect of digital conversion must be considered.
Even with certain recorders, native sounds better. The Alesis Masterlink for example, offers choices of 16 or 24 bit recording. You can record at 24 bit and the unit will down-convert to 16/44 CDR, or you can just record and playback at 16/44. I was not aware of this, but Marty DeWulf @ Bound for Sound once sent me a Alesis based LP-CDR that contained both versions, and I was not made aware of the que. In the end, I found the 16/44 native copies superior, even though they sounded more "crisp" they lacked the hazy & dynamically soft personality of the down-converted copies. Once heard, it remained consistent ... and the thing that I find even more interesting is that my "hazy & soft" character description is consistent with many SACD players I've heard, and furthermore ... consistent with players that offer higher sampling rate choices (ie: Cary).
Patricia Barber's Companion offers an interesting story. From what I've learned, when it was being recorded at 24/96, the recorder stop working, so they recorded 1 song at 16/44. I know that particular song, since it was presented to me as a test (which song?).
tb1
