DSD to Vinyl Versus Analog Tape to Vinyl

[kodomo]

Hey Mike,

Excellent referral, thank you very much. I received those first 7 Fone records a week ago, cleaned and played each and before finishing the 7th I ordered half a dozen more, which arrived today. I really enjoyed the well-known jazz covers played by Scott Hamilton and Paolo Birro on "Pure Imagination" and "More Pure Imagination" LPs. Sounds like I sitting there in some piano jazz bar listening live (a glass of Scotch in front of me adds to the effect). I am just cleaning the new arrivals and will start serious listening to those tonight.

Thanks again,

Can you let us know about your favorites and maybe add small reviews for them. I am planning on buying from Fone too

 

[Rensselaer]

Can you let us know about your favorites and maybe add small reviews for them. I am planning on buying from Fone too

As stated, my favourites were the Scott Hamilton and Paolo Birro Pure Imagination and More Pure Imagination (lp 136 and lp 139, each numbered out of 496 total pressings of each). All are well recorded using Neumann U47, U48 and M49 valve microphones, Ampex ATR 102 1/2 inch 30ips reel to reels in a pure analogue process, and as stated, limited productions, but played by persons unknown to me, and I suspect unknown to most. My system is down right now awaiting delivery of some Altec A7s I bought from a guy in Germany (however I must arrange strong men to remove the speakers from the Fed-Ex van at my home as Fed-Ex will not do it) so can't give a recent impression of the other recordings I purchased.

What I can recall is that some of the records arrived with the jacket unsealed, more a folded piece of cardboard around the record so that one must keep the plastic over sleeve to keep them together, the pure analogue recordings (some done by David Manley) sound good, but are not the most impressive performances. Competent yes, but not as exciting as certain well known examples out there. What you get is lovely pure analogue recordings that sound virtually live (in my system) but perhaps not as engaging musically as the best examples?

I would suggest you buy a few samples and have a listen, if you get off on the pure analogue recording sound despite the performance then you buy the rest.

 

[K3RMIT]

I guess the current best thing is what Jonathan Horwich is doing: reel-to-reel analog tape recording, and making copies of the original master.

I own many of his tapes very live sounding. i always get the best he has to offer. it’s very powerful and to me makes my system come alive like very few other albums I own.

 

[Gregadd]

Yes, at this stage the resolution of the modern analog to digital process far e?xceeds the resolution and signal to noise ratio of microphones.

Are not most digital artifacts manifested as noise?

 

[Carlos269]

Are not most digital artifacts manifested as noise?

Modern digital decimation & interpolation techniques and filtering are below the threshold of the noise floor of analog circuits, unless intentionally tuned to be audible. In essence below the noise floor of the analog output stages. Depending on digital modulators and filtering the noise can be Gaussian or uncorrelated in nature.

​

 

[Gregadd]

Modern digital decimation & interpolation techniques and "filtering" [emphasis added]are below the threshold of the noise floor of analog circuits, unless intentionally tuned to be audible. In essence below the noise floor of the analog output stages. Depending on digital modulators and filtering the noise can be Gaussian or uncorrelated in nature.

​

Listen i have here before. I am not qualified for a technical debate.
You seem to concede noise is present but is being filtered out. What is good for the goose is good for the gamder.

 

[sbo6]

Listen i have here before. I am not qualified for a technical debate.
You seem to concede noise is present but is being filtered out. What is good for the goose is good for the gamder.

BLUNT ALERT: Sounds like where you have been is ignorant to the details and to the overall message. And as a result, you generalize / justify away with your last sentence. My 2 cents...

 

[Gregadd]

BLUNT ALERT: Sounds like where you have been is ignorant to the details and to the overall message. And as a result, you generalize / justify away with your last sentence. My 2 cents...

I readily.concede my ignorance when it comes to digital. It is a comlex subject. Analog is far simpler.
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of. It is cured with knowledge. So go ahead. Enlighten me. Why is a filer required? What is being filtered?
Specifically please explain your statement
"Depending on digital modulators and filtering the noise can be Gaussian or uncorrelated in nature. "
As the young people say, Drop some knowledge on me. If you prefer, citing a reference would suffice.

 

[sbo6]

I readily.concede my ignorance when it comes to digital. It is a comlex subject. Analog is far simpler.
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of. It is cured with knowledge. So go ahead. Enlighten me. Why is a filer required? What is being filtered?
Specifically please explain your statement
"Depending on digital modulators and filtering the noise can be Gaussian or uncorrelated in nature. "
As the young people say, Drop some knowledge on me. If you prefer, citing a reference would suffice.

Great to hear, maybe Carlos can enlighten you.

 

[Carlos269]

I readily.concede my ignorance when it comes to digital. It is a comlex subject. Analog is far simpler.
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of. It is cured with knowledge. So go ahead. Enlighten me. Why is a filer required? What is being filtered?
Specifically please explain your statement
"Depending on digital modulators and filtering the noise can be Gaussian or uncorrelated in nature. "
As the young people say, Drop some knowledge on me. If you prefer, citing a reference would suffice.

A low pass filter, or filtering function, is required for both decimation and interpolation. In the case of decimation it is used to eliminate the high-frequency components in the spectrum to prevent this noise from aliasing when the signal is downsampled for conversion. In the case of interpolation, the low pass filter provides a “smoothing” function for the taps between actual samples. In either case this digital filtering perform a roll-off type function in order to achieve greater linearity and accuracy.

My personal observation is that the difference between the “analog” and “digital” sound reside in their high-frequency contours, where digital playback is able to preserve and reproduce more high frequency content and details than analog, where these fine extended high frequency content is often ”consumed” by the stamping process of the medium, the mechanical to electrical and magnetic transducers‘ conversions that take place before the analog signal gets to the amplification stages. Ironically, the same degradation or “consumption” of these high frequency low level details get ”consumed” in real life during live unamplified performances through distance from the source by natural absorption, diffusion and native instrument directivity profiles. In other words, analog may mimic the “real-time” live listening experience more accurately of sound through distance from the source signal degradations, where as digital is more accurate and preserves the original source signal as captured by the local or localized acquisition microphones.

There is much misinformation on the internet and most of what we hear can easily be explained by science and technology. As I have said numerous times, don’t discount distortion or degradation as it sometimes is required to make playback sound more “natural”.

 

[Gregadd]

Great to hear, maybe Carlos can enlighten you.

You use that word ignorant pretty strongly. I thought it implied you possessed knowledge I did not.

 

[Gregadd]

Thank you

A low pass filter, or filtering function, is required for both decimation and interpolation. In the case of decimation it is used to eliminate the high-frequency components in the spectrum to prevent this noise from aliasing when the signal is downsampled for conversion. In the case of interpolation, the low pass filter provides a “smoothing” function for the taps between actual samples. In either case this digital filtering perform a roll-off type function in order to achieve greater linearity and accuracy.

My personal observation is that the difference between the “analog” and “digital” sound reside in their high-frequency contours, where digital playback is able to preserve and reproduce more high frequency content and details than analog, where these fine extended high frequency content is often ”consumed” by the stamping process of the medium, the mechanical to electrical and magnetic transducers‘ conversions that take place before the analog signal gets to the amplification stages. Ironically, the same degradation or “consumption” of these high frequency low level details get ”consumed” in real life during live unamplified performances through distance from the source by natural absorption, diffusion and native instrument directivity profiles. In other words, analog may mimic the “real-time” live listening experience more accurately of sound through distance from the source signal degradations, where as digital is more accurate and preserves the original source signal as captured by the local or localized acquisition microphones.

There is much misinformation on the internet and most of what we hear can easily be explained by science and technology. As I have said numerous times, don’t discount distortion or degradation as it sometimes is required to make playback sound more “natural”.

Thank you for your gracious effort.
There is nothing there I have not read before. Whether I buy into is another matter.

 

[sbo6]

You use that word ignorant pretty strongly. I thought it implied you possessed knowledge I did not.

I don't know what you don't know, but with an engineering background and education I know plenty but I didn't start this diatribe, you both did. have at it in a positive way..

 

[Gregadd]

What I don't know is how a format imat started out so poor is now retry good. I suppose that question not be answered by me in order for me to continue to enjoy digital files[recprdings]..
I. Am just intellectually curious.curious

 

[Atmasphere]

My personal observation is that the difference between the “analog” and “digital” sound reside in their high-frequency contours, where digital playback is able to preserve and reproduce more high frequency content and details than analog, where these fine extended high frequency content is often ”consumed” by the stamping process of the medium, the mechanical to electrical and magnetic transducers‘ conversions that take place before the analog signal gets to the amplification stages.

(emphasis added; sounds like you're referring to LP production)

It might interest you to know that all stereo LP cutter heads have bandwidth well past 30KHz. The Westerex 3D cutter head was the first stereo cutter head made and is bandwidth limited to 42KHz (this is mostly to prevent the cutter from being damaged by errant signals). Later cutter heads have greater bandwidth. Since the mid 1970s, phono cartridges have also had bandwidth well past 30KHz (I've not tested any older than that; not worth it IMO). We use a Grado Gold mounted to an older SL1200 to see if a 'normal' turntable can play the cut we are intending. Just for fun we recorded a 30KHz tone and it played back as plain as day (according to the oscilloscope). Cartridge and phono preamp manufacturers usually don't spec bandwidth past 20KHz but that is very different from saying that they don't have it- and most do.

By contrast, digital is limited to something less than its Nyquist frequency; it simply lacks the bandwidth of the LP. Now some LPs might be rolled off, but its not on account of the media.

 

[Kingrex]

(emphasis added; sounds like you're referring to LP production)

It might interest you to know that all stereo LP cutter heads have bandwidth well past 30KHz. The Westerex 3D cutter head was the first stereo cutter head made and is bandwidth limited to 42KHz (this is mostly to prevent the cutter from being damaged by errant signals). Later cutter heads have greater bandwidth. Since the mid 1970s, phono cartridges have also had bandwidth well past 30KHz (I've not tested any older than that; not worth it IMO). We use a Grado Gold mounted to an older SL1200 to see if a 'normal' turntable can play the cut we are intending. Just for fun we recorded a 30KHz tone and it played back as plain as day (according to the oscilloscope). Cartridge and phono preamp manufacturers usually don't spec bandwidth past 20KHz but that is very different from saying that they don't have it- and most do.

By contrast, digital is limited to something less than its Nyquist frequency; it simply lacks the bandwidth of the LP. Now some LPs might be rolled off, but its not on account of the media.

Don't recording studio use a very high bitrate. Something like 36x512. Not that that is bandwidth. But I though these high values allowed the bandwidth captured, and played back, to be very high. I thought it was the compression of the media to fit on a disc for sale that limited it to 16x44.1. If one were to purchase a download, not a disc, the bandwidth could be very high? Well above 30KHz?

Am I confusing the too? Does the bitrate and frequency response have little to do with each other.

 

[Carlos269]

(emphasis added; sounds like you're referring to LP production)

It might interest you to know that all stereo LP cutter heads have bandwidth well past 30KHz. The Westerex 3D cutter head was the first stereo cutter head made and is bandwidth limited to 42KHz (this is mostly to prevent the cutter from being damaged by errant signals). Later cutter heads have greater bandwidth. Since the mid 1970s, phono cartridges have also had bandwidth well past 30KHz (I've not tested any older than that; not worth it IMO). We use a Grado Gold mounted to an older SL1200 to see if a 'normal' turntable can play the cut we are intending. Just for fun we recorded a 30KHz tone and it played back as plain as day (according to the oscilloscope). Cartridge and phono preamp manufacturers usually don't spec bandwidth past 20KHz but that is very different from saying that they don't have it- and most do.

By contrast, digital is limited to something less than its Nyquist frequency; it simply lacks the bandwidth of the LP. Now some LPs might be rolled off, but its not on account of the media.

Ralph, you do of course realize what the Nyquist frequency of 768 KHz sampling is right? We are no longer in the 44.1 and 48 KHz digital age now.

 

[Atmasphere]

Don't recording studio use a very high bitrate. Something like 36x512. Not that that is bandwidth. But I though these high values allowed the bandwidth captured, and played back, to be very high. I thought it was the compression of the media to fit on a disc for sale that limited it to 16x44.1. If one were to purchase a download, not a disc, the bandwidth could be very high? Well above 30KHz?

Am I confusing the too? Does the bitrate and frequency response have little to do with each other.

Ralph, you do of course realize what the Nyquist frequency of 784 KHz sampling is right? We are no longer in the 44.1 and 48 KHz digital age now.

I do. My understanding is that these scan frequencies are high so that a brickwall filter no longer be employed. So you really only need a filter to get the harmonic distortions from creating problems. Pretty neat!

But regardless it seems unlikely that anyone would be able to tell much of a difference of bandwidth at 40KHz...

 

[Carlos269]

I do. My understanding is that these scan frequencies are high so that a brickwall filter no longer be employed. So you really only need a filter to get the harmonic distortions from creating problems. Pretty neat!

But regardless it seems unlikely that anyone would be able to tell much of a difference of bandwidth at 40KHz...

Ralph, you fail to take into account that what you have described is an atypical format of direct-to-disc. The origin of almost all “analog” vinyl records is from magnetic tape storage……The frequency response of magnetic tape is between 30 Hz and 15 kHz and the dynamic range of magnetic tape is 55dB, Check-Mate.

 

[Atmasphere]

Ralph, you fail to take into account that what you have described is an atypical format of direct-to-disc. The providence of almost all “analog” vinyl records is from magnetic tape storage……The frequency response of magnetic tape is between 30 Hz and 15 kHz and the dynamic range of magnetic tape is 55dB, Check-Mate.

If you have a good set of heads, a 1/2" machine running 15ips can do 26KHz. 30 IPS can do better than that, although bass is a problem. I agree that if there is a rolloff, tape can be one of the reasons however. A few dubs down the road is all it takes!

Not really trying to play chess here, just pointing out facts. One of those latter thingys is that most LPs cut today are cut from digital masters. Its pretty rare these days to see a project that was done all analog!