Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[Al M.]

Again this is just a fun comparison. I was even too lazy to level match the volume.

Lazy or not, next time please match the volume. As Microstrip pointed out, phone recorders are not linear throughout the volume range. Apart from the fact that requiring that levels need to be matched at playback by the listener introduces its own biases on that end.

This whole video thing is really becoming outrageously ridiculous in its carelessness, both in execution and the way judgments are made.

(I can't comment on the videos themselves since I don't have headphones with me at this point. I don't care trying to judge over phone speakers.)

 

[Rexp]

Again this is just a fun comparison. I was even too lazy to level match the volume.


The OSR

This seems to be the version on Tidal, sounds quite good here, a bit more alive than the digital version in your video but not as good as your vinyl playback.

 

[morricab]

Lazy or not, next time please match the volume. As Microstrip pointed out, phone recorders are not linear throughout the volume range. Apart from the fact that requiring that levels need to be matched at playback by the listener introduces its own biases on that end.

This whole video thing is really becoming outrageously ridiculous in its carelessness, both in execution and the way judgments are made.

(I can't comment on the videos themselves since I don't have headphones with me at this point. I don't care trying to judge over phone speakers.)

Well, good thing the fate of the world doesn’t hang in this judgement or that carelessness might be the end of everything

You just said yourself the recorder isn’t linear, so matching volumes (at what volume?) is a fool’s errand because the different dynamics in the two formats and recordings (they sound like different ones) will effect the recorder differently.

 

[Sule22]

I think the original source matters here. When I listened to digitally recorded albums such as Anne Sophie Mutter’s Carmen-Fantasy then the Taiko blows my vinyl version away, and not by a small margin.

 

[PeterA]

I think the original source matters here. When I listened to digitally recorded albums such as Anne Sophie Mutter’s Carmen-Fantasy then the Taiko blows my vinyl version away, and not by a small margin.

Can you go to the trouble to demonstrate that with two more videos? I am curious to hear those differences now too.

 

[Al M.]

Well, good thing the fate of the world doesn’t hang in this judgement or that carelessness might be the end of everything

You just said yourself the recorder isn’t linear, so matching volumes (at what volume?) is a fool’s errand because the different dynamics in the two formats and recordings (they sound like different ones) will effect the recorder differently.

Ok you're right. At the peaks the volumes aren't that different. The large volume differences at the beginning are misleading. My apologies to Sule22 for being too quick with my post.

If it really is the same recording (is it?), then the vinyl seems dynamically compressed to a serious degree. Of course then it will sound "livelier" and "richer" especially in the beginning, given that the initial volume is considerably louder.

 

[PeterA]

Ok you're right. At the peaks the volumes aren't that different. The large volume differences at the beginning are misleading. My apologies to Sule22 for being too quick with my post.

If it really is the same recording (is it?), then the vinyl seems dynamically compressed to a serious degree. Of course then it will sound "livelier" and "richer" especially in the beginning, given that the initial volume is considerably louder.

That is interesting Al. I understand what you mean about compression, but I do not see how compression leads to "livelier" and "richer". For me it is just the opposite. I also wrote that it soars more. The music rises ands wells more convincingly. I have now done the comparison three times. I hear the bottom video as actually more restricted. There is less dynamic range. It sounds flatter, more recessed, less lively, less rich to me. These are all things I hear from more compressed rock vinyl. Compression makes everything sound louder, less dynamic range. The top video again, sounds much more like real music to me, not compressed relative to the bottom video. Of course streaming a YT video involves compression, and I know you have argued in the past that all analog sourced videos are digital now anyway. And yet, and yet, we all hear the differences between these two. I even hear them on the iphone speakers, they are so pronounced.

I hope Sule22 can make the next set of videos that demonstrate the differences from an original digital source played on both vinyl and streaming to see if our impressions change.

 

[Sule22]

Can you go to the trouble to demonstrate that with two more videos? I am curious to hear those differences now too.

I have been looking for my record for the last hour. It is driving me crazy. I will do a recording as soon as I find it.

 

[bonzo75]

I think the original source matters here. When I listened to digitally recorded albums such as Anne Sophie Mutter’s Carmen-Fantasy then the Taiko blows my vinyl version away, and not by a small margin.

The verity is the Anne Sophie mutter. Rest are Ricci

And not Carmen but both the below have the Sarasate Zigernurwisen which ASM and Ricci also have

 

[morricab]

Just for fun, I recorded a video of my system playing vinyl and another one with digital, same song.

Well, forgetting dynamics for a minute, I think the tone of the oboe and clarinet in the intro are more natural and lifelike in recording 1. The there is just less depth of tone and "hearing into" the instrument with recording 2, although still quite good. Are they the same recording though?

 

[bonzo75]

If it really is the same recording (is it?), then the vinyl seems dynamically compressed to a serious degree. Of course then it will sound "livelier" and "richer" especially in the beginning, given that the initial volume is considerably louder.

You can compress good vinyl recording dynamically more than digital due to the system.

 

[Sule22]

Well, forgetting dynamics for a minute, I think the tone of the oboe and clarinet in the intro are more natural and lifelike in recording 1. The there is just less depth of tone and "hearing into" the instrument with recording 2, although still quite good. Are they the same recording though?

I think they are the same recording.

Here are some Anne Sophie Mutter (all digital by the way)

 

[Al M.]

That is interesting Al. I understand what you mean about compression, but I do not see how compression leads to "livelier" and "richer". For me it is just the opposite. I also wrote that it soars more. The music rises ands wells more convincingly. I have now done the comparison three times. I hear the bottom video as actually more restricted. There is less dynamic range.

Dynamic compression leads to quieter passages, like in the beginning of these videos, being louder than the original.

Of course then these passages will sound livelier, richer, clearer, more nuanced and detailed than if they had the original quieter volume.

You can basically achieve the same effect at home if you play an orchestral record and just for a quiet passage crank up the volume. Then, before it gets loud, you turn down the volume again to normal.

***

The medium where there is a greater difference in loudness between quiet and louder passages is the one with more dynamic range. In this case that would be the second video.

 

[PeterA]

Dynamic compression leads to quieter passages, like in the beginning of these videos, being louder than the original.

Of course then these passages will sound livelier, richer, clearer, more nuanced and detailed than if they had the original quieter volume.

You can basically achieve the same effect at home if you play an orchestral record and just for a quiet passage crank up the volume. Then, before it gets loud, you turn down the volume again to normal.

***

The medium where there is a greater difference in loudness between quiet and louder passages is the one with more dynamic range. In this case that would be the second video.

Al, I do not think I understand what you are saying. What are you describing as being compressed, the original analog recording on LP, the streamed digital file, one or both of the phone videos over YouTube?

I agree that the greater differences in loudness between quiet and louder passages is the one with more dynamic range. I used the digital sound level meter that you gave me to measure the volume levels from my computer. I did not change the volume settings of the videos. I just played them straight at a fixed volume and took the measurements. Interestingly, the two videos are about the same. Here are my crude min and max readings:

Video #1: Low at about 0:20 56dBA; high at about 3:30 79dBA
Video #2: Low at about 0.20 53dBA; high at about 3:30 77dBA

But when actually listening to the music on my computer speakers, Video #1 seems to have a slightly greater dynamic range. I hear the strings swelling and flowing, rising from soft to loud more than in Video #2. Video #1 also seems to have greater nuance, better, richer tone, less flat.

So, the impression is that the first video has more range but, the numbers are very similar, 23 and 24 dBA ranges respectfully.

 

[morricab]

Al, I do not think I understand what you are saying. What are you describing as being compressed, the original analog recording on LP, the streamed digital file, one or both of the phone videos over YouTube?

I agree that the greater differences in loudness between quiet and louder passages is the one with more dynamic range. I used the digital sound level meter that you gave me to measure the volume levels from my computer. I did not change the volume settings of the videos. I just played them straight at a fixed volume and took the measurements. Interestingly, the two videos are about the same. Here are my crude min and max readings:

Video #1: Low at about 0:20 56dBA; high at about 3:30 79dBA
Video #2: Low at about 0.20 53dBA; high at about 3:30 77dBA

But when actually listening to the music on my computer speakers, Video #1 seems to have a slightly greater dynamic range. I hear the strings swelling and flowing, rising from soft to loud more than in Video #2. Video #1 also seems to have greater nuance, better, richer tone, less flat.

So, the impression is that the first video has more range but, the numbers are very similar, 23 and 24 dBA ranges respectfully.

Interesting,Peter; however, it could be the meter is a bit to slow to capture the real peaks. Video 1 could therefore still have a higher dynamic range.

 

[PeterA]

Interesting,Peter; however, it could be the meter is a bit to slow to capture the real peaks. Video 1 could therefore still have a higher dynamic range.

Thank you, Brad. I think these devices are good for general average levels, but I don’t know much about them and it is just what I have on hand. The best judge is always simply one’s ears.

I will be recalibrating my own ears tonight when I attend a performance of Brahms and Schumann piano Trios in a great old building in a big room with about 40 or 50 people.

 

[Al M.]

Al, I do not think I understand what you are saying. What are you describing as being compressed, the original analog recording on LP, the streamed digital file, one or both of the phone videos over YouTube?

The transfer from the analog tape to vinyl appears to be dynamically compressed, which is why the soft passages sound relatively louder. This is not uncommon for orchestral recordings when they are transferred to LP, even though it is certainly not always the case. This compression audibly did not take place, or not to the same extent, with the transfer from analog tape to digital.

 

[PeterA]

The transfer from the analog tape to vinyl appears to be dynamically compressed, which is why the soft passages sound relatively louder. This is not uncommon for orchestral recordings when they are transferred to LP, even though it is certainly not always the case. This compression audibly did not take place, or not to the same extent, with the transfer from analog tape to digital.

Ok, thanks Al. I can understand that as a possibility, but I don't hear it when listening to the two videos. And my crude measurements do not support it.

 

[bonzo75]

(I can't comment on the videos themselves since I don't have headphones with me at this point. I don't care trying to judge over phone speakers.)

Great to know you now believe you can fairly judge on videos, if not using phone speakers