Thread 127327864

Imagine paying money for compressed, de-mastered versions of songs with the original dynamic range greatly reduced. It's like paying for a painting but it has been cut up and put togheter again with some pieces left out in order for it to fit the frame better.

All modern analog recordings were originally recorded on analog magnetic tape. Magnetic tape has a form of "sampling" by virtue of the recording media. Magnetic tape is composed of millions of microscopic magnetic "dipoles" and these dipoles individually "record" a "bit" of the waveform amplitude at that instantaneous moment. And then, the playback head gap determines the "resolution" of how finely you can "resolve" those magnetic dipoles and what magnetic field each of them have. Those of us who actually understand what is happening with analog don't have the same fascination for that antique technology.

Not many even cherished 80s recs were done using full analog chain. Even early to mid 1980s. artists and producers were recording to and mixing/mastering in digital: think Sony PCM-1610 or DASH multtrack recorders.

The evolution of analogue systems moved forwards to remove distortion created by the hardware and get to get as clean a signal path as possible. Digital systems provide that clean signal path but then we realised it was the distortion and saturation of analogue that give it that pleasing warmth/3D like sound (whatever). It all boils down to this fact: IMPERFECT analog circuits imbue an essential "organic" quality to music reproduction (literal errors) that are lacking in "sterile" digital chains that are more transparent and closer to the original SOURCE MATERIAL (no matter is it analog or digital).

Ironically, many vinyl presses in the 80s had a digital delay unit placed in the chain - the output that was pressed to vinyl while the mastering engineer adjusted the input signal in realtime during cutting. Even those warm "analogue" 80's presses everyone cherishes so much were converted to 16 bit digital during the cutting process.

Your cherished 80s "analog warm recordings" are literally converted to digital during the cutting process

>>127327870
I own very few records from the 1980s and forward. I have mainly stuff from the 60s-70s. Quality in music production peaked around the mid 70s and began to decline around mid-late 80s when digital tech became popular

>>127327881
>music production peaked around the mid 70s

There is a reason if you want to reproduce whole classical music orchestra with hundreds of instruments: it is done with digital equipment and the end product is going to be digital and preferably CD with Hi-Fi equipment to reproduce the orchestra sound. There has been studies done on this. You literally cannot capture all the instruments on vinyl so that they would be audible: instruments disappear when they are reproduced on vinyl because it cannot retain as much information as digital. It's a totally different thing if you prefer vinyl. The analogue warmth and peculiar sound is due to imperfections and distortions, not because it is somehow superior: it is inferior format in terms of retaining captured sound, CD with high quality speakers will always sound much better without distortions, imperfections and unnatural bass response of vinyl.

There are known technical limitations in vinyl response, but the format is found to be "pleasing" by selected audience and they swear by it that it has some magic to it (inferior format when compared to CD)

For example, if vinyl was somehow superior, why extremely accurate classical recordings are never done on vinyl? It's not for subjective reasons or some preference, the CD format has not been used for classical music in the first place by an subjective reasons, but for linearity and accuracy in reproduction.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180917223601/https://www.emusician.com/how-to/mastering-vinyl

For example if you buy vinyl and CD version of the same classical orchestral arrangement, you will not be able to discern and hear all the instruments that are clearly audible on CD. Vinyl might sound more pleasing when you are listening some sort of 70s music with 4 different instruments and it adds to "warmth" and harmonic distortion, but that only means it is less accurate.

>>127327895
I know the format itself is inferior but it all boils down to that the mastering is a lot more dynamic with vinyl if it's a good press. You can literally see at the waveform if it has clear peaks and valleys of if it looks like more like a rectangle with little differences between the high and low points

>>127327904
There's a lot of downright retarded misinformation about this stuff out there. What sounds best is usually down to mixing and mastering more than the medium. Vinyl, CDs, SACDs, digital downloads/streams, fucking cassette tapes... They can all sound good with a competent engineer controlling what goes in. It's garbage in garbage out that causes problems, not the medium. Audiophile forums, especially the stevehoffman forum, and private trackers, especially redacted, have people discussing which version sounds the best. Personally I strongly prefer digital and avoid vinyl rips. But there are good reasons to want a vinyl rip instead sometimes. I'll give an example:

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/lindas-favorite-digital-versions-of-all-black-sabbath-albums.905049/
> A great album with many bad masterings. My overall favorite is the 1986 West German Intercord CD. However, there's one major problem with that release: the drop-outs during Iron Man. There is no easy solution. The 2009 Sanctuary is an only slightly changed copy of the rather bad-sounding 1996 Castle, none of those two is good. The 1987 Japan 33PD-353 IMO is better than the Japan SHM-SACD, and neither of them has the drop-outs on Iron Man, but otherwise they simply do not sound as good as the Intercord. The 1991 Japan TECP-23893 seems to be a relatively subtle remaster of the 33PD-353, and I like it a tad better, but again, clearly not as much as the Intercord. The 2012 Pearce (available on HDtracks, 2016 WB/Rhino CDs and various official streaming and download releases) sounds surprisingly good, and the drop-outs have almost disappeared, but it is too bright-sounding (plus, as all the 2012 Pearce remasters, it has the low end summed to mono). Bottom line, I love the Intercord, no other digital release comes close, so I guess I'll have to live with the drop-outs.

After reading this I downloaded the pbthal vinyl rip because I know that tape was pristine when they cut the original UK vinyl.

>>127327904
If you've ever listened actually dynamic music (Rock music isn't actually dynamic) with classical instruments ranging from dynamic markings from pianississimo to fortississimo, you would never listen to a vinyl

Something like Horn section reproduced on vinyl recording drowns all the subtle nyances of all other instruments - it's literally unlistenable experience for anyone who has been to a classical concert - with CD all the range of instruments are clearly audible

Vinyl might sound good with some sort of basic distorted drums, bass, guitar, vocals type of studio performance for rock music - if we actually start to talk dynamic music we must listen to CDs.

>>127327919
Well thanks for proving my original point

>>127327919
No engineer can adjust some cassette tapes to reproduce 100 instrument classical orchestra. No matter how good sound engineer he is. The format has limitations

Only CD is good enough for such format for 100 classical instruments. Cassette maybe might be able to reproduce 20 of those instruments out of 100, while CD is 100% reproduction.

>>127327919
I got the Japanese SACDs for all the other early Sabbath albums. Basically with all this autistic rambling what I want to say is a nice clean vinyl can sound better than a CD or a SACD or 192khz FLACs or what the fuck ever if it was mastered with care but all those digital versions were botch jobs. Most shit about audio fidelity is memes. You probably can't tell the difference between a FLAC and a mp3. But you can tell when an album is too loud and mastered in a shitty way.

>>127327928
It sounds fine on FM radio and that shit cuts at 16khz. Capitol developed the XDR format specifically to put classical music on cassette tapes and have it sound good. With that said those kinds of techniques do not exist in cassettes made today therefore they are inferior to the old ones. It also has worse degradation than vinyl meaning you need to get even luckier to find a specimen in good condition.

>>127327955
Have you actually listened old classical music vinyls? They're terrible and not because of degradation

They are unlistenable. If the orchestra has horn/brass section it drowns out everything. It's a joke

>>127327864 (OP)
I download all my music for free. movies too. to hell with the (((industry)))

>>127327870
Unc out here dropping knowledge

>>127327864 (OP)
Paying money?