Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[matthias]

I agree with this. But the comparison I am trying to draw is between the sound on video of the digital I hear in the room versus the sound on video of the analog I hear in the room. I agree that once they both are digitized, both have a sonic signature of digital.

The digitally-recorded track I hear in the room is natively digital. The analog-recorded track I hear in the room is not digital until it is ADCed by the iPhone.

Nothing to be sorry about, Brad. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong!

Ron,
you can't be absolutely sure about the provenance of the vinyl, it might be digitally recorded and converted to analog.

Further, even if you have a pure analogue LP and you playback it via the best LINN LP12 turntable system for example it gets converted to digital and reconverted to analog anyway. More and more manufacturers offer preamps with analog inputs where the signal gets converted to digital.

Matt

 

[microstrip]

Given the broad use you describe, doesn't it seem odd that so many people objected to the title of Peter's thread?

People objected to an appropriation of the word with a strict close minded perspective, and particularly to his view that everything that was not his strict preference was "artificial" .

I often entered the thread because I felt his posts misrepresented the 99.99% remaining audiophile world.

 

[Al M.]

People objected to an appropriation of the word with a strict close minded perspective, and particularly to his view that everything that was not his strict preference was "artificial" .

I often entered the thread because I felt his posts misrepresented the 99.99% remaining audiophile world.

This is a rather accurate assessment of the situation, in my view.

(If the 99.99 % is a slightly smaller number is debatable .)

 

[tima]

People objected to an appropriation of the word with a strict close minded perspective, and particularly to his view that everything that was not his strict preference was "artificial" .

I often entered the thread because I felt his posts misrepresented the 99.99% remaining audiophile world.

Yes, some people did object. Mostly ankle-biters who had no alternatives or contributions other than to play the like game. I did not see his thread as some sort priggish elitism, but some audiophiles who are highly sensitive people like to strike out from a distance.

I don't think Peter's intent was to represent anyone other than himself, much less 99.99% of all audiophiles. From the perspective of reference, natural sound draws from experience with live acoustic music. Then, there are other references. In that sense there is a dichotomy that some see as black and white but is actually self-created. Some are unable to describe or even know what their reference is so they turn that into "natural sound vs me" and whine about the title. But there is nothing inherent in Peter's account that claims that or anything else about others.

Re that 99.99%: people who come to WWF (here) looking for consensus or agreement are perennially disappointed. This forum is not designed or built for consensus. It is built for conflict which generates more revenue.

 

[Rexp]

Here's an example of a poor recording of vinyl playback despite the use of fancy mics and a mic preamp, kinda reminds me of the dull sound of most digital releases.

 

[Al M.]

Here's an example of a poor recording of vinyl playback despite the use of fancy mics and a mic preamp, kinda reminds me of the dull sound of most digital releases.

Sounds far more pleasant than most iPhone videos, but a bit dull indeed.

What makes you think that most digital releases sound dull? That is not my experience at all.

 

[Rexp]

Sounds far more pleasant than most iPhone videos, but a bit dull indeed.

What makes you think that most digital releases sound dull? That is not my experience at all.

We probably hear things differently.

 

[Al M.]

We probably hear things differently.

And/or have different digital set-ups.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron,
you can't be absolutely sure about the provenance of the vinyl, it might be digitally recorded and converted to analog.

Further, even if you have a pure analogue LP and you playback it via the best LINN LP12 turntable system for example it gets converted to digital and reconverted to analog anyway. More and more manufacturers offer preamps with analog inputs where the signal gets converted to digital.

Hi Matt,

One cannot be sure in every case, but for a given LP, especially ones recorded prior to 1983, it is not difficult to nail down an extremely high confidence provenance. I can be sure of the titles that I personally focus on.

The LP12 converts vinyl playback to digital?

I would never, ever use an analog input pre-amp that converts a full range analog signal to digital.

 

[morricab]

Hi Matt,

One cannot be sure in every case, but for a given LP, especially ones recorded prior to 1983, it is not difficult to nail down an extremely high confidence provenance. I can be sure of the titles that I personally focus on.

The LP12 converts vinyl playback to digital?

I would never, ever use an analog input pre-amp that converts a full range analog signal to digital.

Mofi fooled a lot of people for years using digital to make vinyl. Have you ever ripped vinyl to a hard drive. If you use at least 24/88.2 it will faithfully capture your vinyl or tape sound…and it will sound different and usually better than a cd version of the same recording. Is that due to the playback gear, the vinyl mastering…both? In this case often more is more and the straight digital file usually sounds worse.

Try ripping some LPs and tapes with a high quality ADC and then play it back through the Baltic. Compare that with the same recording off of Qobuz or Tidal and with the original.

 

[bonzo75]

Mofi fooled a lot of people for years using digital to make vinyl. Have you ever ripped vinyl to a hard drive. If you use at least 24/88.2 it will faithfully capture your vinyl or tape sound…and it will sound different and usually better than a cd version of the same recording. Is that due to the playback gear, the vinyl mastering…both? In this case often more is more and the straight digital file usually sounds worse.

Try ripping some LPs and tapes with a high quality ADC and then play it back through the Baltic. Compare that with the same recording off of Qobuz or Tidal and with the original.

Even if you assume MoFi fooled 100% of people (let's not turn this in a discussion of those who could hear and those who couldn't), Ron's point still holds true, unless someone was buying only mainly MoFi and no other label, which is a rare case in the vinyl world. A large part of any MoFi fan's collection would be non-MofI. Those who have some knowledge of vinyl, would be buying pre-digital era,not necessarily first presses or expensive collectibles, but still pre-digital era, with a mix of classic records/speakers corner type reissues. The ones who cherry pick pre-vinyl era ED1 quality stampers would be the experts on one end, and those who buy without any knowledge of differences or distinction, including mainly modern pressings including those where the label is saying it is digitally mastered, would be the least knowledgeable on the other end.

Regarding rips - I have rips from high quality LPs as well as have tried the reverse. A digital recording compared, using the dac it was recorded, to a vinyl set up playing the digitally recorded LP version of that. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...digital-step-in-the-process.35221/post-817555

 

[Ron Resnick]

Mofi fooled a lot of people for years using digital to make vinyl.

Even if I could fool myself, and I am sure I can, I would rather not fool myself.

Have you ever ripped vinyl to a hard drive.

No, never. It never occurred to me. Just not my thing. (This is an admittedly obnoxious personal pet peeve of mine, but I dislike the expression "ripping" to describe copying one format to another format. "Ripping" sounds to me like a euphemism for sedentary audiophiles to pretend they are doing something athletic.)

Try ripping some LPs and tapes with a high quality ADC and then play it back through the Baltic. Compare that with the same recording off of Qobuz or Tidal and with the original.

Thank you for the suggestion.

 

[Gregadd]

Stay out of the digital domain if you can. Something is either subtracted or added with every conversion. That includes digital and analog.
Ideally you would want the original sound conversated to storage medium then converted back for playback.

 

[DasguteOhr]

well, many people use dsp or room acoustics correction converters today. this is the same principle as the preamp converts the analog signal to digital and then back. that can be very successful, I wouldn't shut myself off from new technology. it can be a good way to get room acoustic problems under control. I first try to set it up the loudspeaker in the room or tune the loudspeakers, but there are now really good systems, for example trinnov.

Trinnov | Digital Room Correction, Monitoring and Immersive Sound Solutions

Since 2003, Trinnov develops innovative digital room correction and immersive sound solutions for studio monitoring, cinemas, high-end home-theater and HiFi

www.trinnov.com

 

[PeterA]

 

[Kingrex]

Even if you assume MoFi fooled 100% of people (let's not turn this in a discussion of those who could hear and those who couldn't), Ron's point still holds true, unless someone was buying only mainly MoFi and no other label, which is a rare case in the vinyl world. A large part of any MoFi fan's collection would be non-MofI. Those who have some knowledge of vinyl, would be buying pre-digital era,not necessarily first presses or expensive collectibles, but still pre-digital era, with a mix of classic records/speakers corner type reissues. The ones who cherry pick pre-vinyl era ED1 quality stampers would be the experts on one end, and those who buy without any knowledge of differences or distinction, including mainly modern pressings including those where the label is saying it is digitally mastered, would be the least knowledgeable on the other end.

Regarding rips - I have rips from high quality LPs as well as have tried the reverse. A digital recording compared, using the dac it was recorded, to a vinyl set up playing the digitally recorded LP version of that. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...digital-step-in-the-process.35221/post-817555

I have had a couple people send me digital files of albums they ripped. Do they sound good, sure. Could I tell them from the album. Not sure. I don't have the album to test. Would they sound the same???? Lets just say, anyone listening to the rip would be listening to my vinyl rig on a WAV file. I hope I have a good vinyl rig.

 

[morricab]

Even if I could fool myself, and I am sure I can, I would rather not fool myself.



No, never. It never occurred to me. Just not my thing. (This is an admittedly obnoxious personal pet peeve of mine, but I dislike the expression "ripping" to describe copying one format to another format. "Ripping" sounds to me like a euphemism for sedentary audiophiles to pretend they are doing something athletic.)



Thank you for the suggestion.

I used to do it because I would have many things on vinyl that I didn’t have on digital. If I wanted to hear them away from home then burned on a cd was the best way at that time to do it. It was noted very early on by a lot of people that the burned rips (a couple of violent words there for you ) sounded better than commercial cds. Some disk materials also sounded better than others (like black cds and gold ones).

 

[bonzo75]

I have had a couple people send me digital files of albums they ripped.

Fremer? He posts some online

 

[Kingrex]

Fremer? He posts some online

Astrotoy and one other.

 

[hopkins]

Nice sound, but on this other video below, maybe a hint that there is too much of a good thing ? Very difficult to tell from a video. This is certainly a system I would be curious to listen to.