LP Upkeep and its Worthiness

[speakerdave]

. . . . digital redbook files through my Bryston DAC which sound pretty damned good . . . .

True that.

[macaroonie]

I don't think the sonic benefits, real or imagined, of vinyl are the driving force behind the resurgence of vinyl. I think there are those who do enjoy the "analog sound", but many are drawn to a nostalgia or access to unavailable music, or even the novelty of spinning big black discs.

I certainly agree with the importance mentioned by some of the convenience of digital... Hell I rarely spin CDs as they are too much bother...

I do play mostly digital redbook files through my Bryston DAC which sound pretty damned good, but I do think good analog often has better spatial information than most Redbook digital files. Of course this is only important if your listening is done in the sweet spot and your speakers image well.


Widget

Ah Widget , you just gave the game away.

All that spatial stuff and other harmonic info at the top end is what suffers in the current digital format. Back to square one , its my assertion that the CD format and its subsequent variations were never going to give ultimate resolution. In fact way back in the archives there is a note about how the Phirrips designers concluded that 44.1KHz would 'do'. Coincidentally that was the highest density that would allow them to get a full album on a CD.

What troubles me greatly is that I can think of no other digital media or processing product or format that has remained as it was in the early 80's. By now the sampling should be at huge speeds , 100 times the CD format is entirely feasible. Then you would start to approach the theoretical resolution that analog has.

So , we have a compromised system that promised a lot and failed to deliver ( in Hi Fi terms ) but of course the convenience factor and background silence is a big selling point.

I could write a book about this stuff but suffice to say I find the general digital experience pretty lacklustre in delivery. Turntables are far from perfect but considering what they are they still seem to manage to convey the essence of the music in a more tangible way.

I had the PA out at a local bash just before Xmas and my boys played their set , after which there was a DJ spinning 45's of ' Northern Soul ' . Well we were all noticing how good the PA sounds on music playback but also just how listenable the records were. I'm sure if it had been CD's we would all have shuffled off to the bar but we stayed till the end.

For anyone considering a TT I would recommend finding a dealer that specialises in such things and go and hear what is possible with Vinyl. Then examine what the tradeoffs are if you come downmarket somewhat.

Just my .02 eurocents

[DavidF]

"....
What troubles me greatly is that I can think of no other digital media or processing product or format that has remained as it was in the early 80's. By now the sampling should be at huge speeds , 100 times the CD format is entirely feasible. Then you would start to approach the theoretical resolution that analog has...."

Right you are, Mac. Still, your comment reminded me of how I thought the quality of vinyl albums on the average was getting worse and worse moving through the 70's and into the 80's. At least here in the US. Whether it was poor mastering, thinner and thinner platters, warped platters, surface imperfections, lack of dynamics, compressed bass, piercing highs, or just who-gives-a-shit-just-get-in-the-stores attitude in general. At the same time prices were really going up.

The CD certainly fixed a few things mentioned above. And it also seems that these limited fixes were good enough to make people forget about the poor state vinyl was in at the time as far as the record companies were concerned. For a while.

[macaroonie]

Right you are, Mac. Still, your comment reminded me of how I thought the quality of vinyl albums on the average was getting worse and worse moving through the 70's and into the 80's. At least here in the US. Whether it was poor mastering, thinner and thinner platters, warped platters, surface imperfections, lack of dynamics, compressed bass, piercing highs, or just who-gives-a-shit-just-get-in-the-stores attitude in general. At the same time prices were really going up.

The CD certainly fixed a few things mentioned above. And it also seems that these limited fixes were good enough to make people forget about the poor state vinyl was in at the time as far as the record companies were concerned.

My spies tell me that the pressings available now are on good weighty blanks. 180g as I recall
But yes you are correct , things got worse as digital was approaching. The record companies have been naughty boys at all levels for years and years. Serves them right that they are getting pumped by file sharing.

Why do CD's scratch as bad as LP's everr did ?

[macaroonie]

This makes interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

I was actually trying to hunt down a piece written by Doug Sax on this subject. Failed but this will get you started if you are interested.

M

[Hoerninger]

Think of the carefully produced LPs.
Not only 180 g,but with a well chosen granulate, Royal Sound Stereo (DECCA), Direct Metal Mastering, Half speed mastering, direct to disc come into mind.
____________
Peter

[macaroonie]

Think of the carefully produced LPs.
Not only 180 g,but with a well chosen granulate, Royal Sound Stereo (DECCA), Direct Metal Mastering, Half speed mastering, direct to disc come into mind.
____________
Peter

Ah yes. ECM of course.

[gferrell]

I heard my chosen music media train leave the station back in 1993 when my then-young daughter saw me taking a record out of its jacket and then cuing it up. She exclaimed, "That's be biggest CD I've ever seen!"[/QUOTE]


That is priceless!!!

[fast_mick]

Hi TD,

I have always had vinyl, its a great format and there are many live albums that have never been transferred to CD well. One I play all the time is Fleetwood Mac Live.

Based on your clues my guess is you have bought a Yamaha GT2000L with a Denon 103R cartridge.

I love following your posts on speakers and i bought my Performance Series speakers mainly due to your thread. That was a great recommendation and I have been very happy with them.

I am looking forward to read what you write here and i also suggest to try a suitable SUT. you can get very good used ones for a reasonable cost.


Mick

[Dave_72]

My preferred format is vinyl. Why? Because it sounds more realistic to me. Sure, I could do without surface noise, skips and gunshot pops (which is not too much with my turntable/cartridge setup,) but it's worth listening to it to me. And that's my opinion, and I don't expect it to be welcomed with open arms just reading through this thread.

[4313B]

My preferred format is vinyl. Why? Because it sounds more realistic to me. Sure, I could do without surface noise, skips and gunshot pops (which is not too much with my turntable/cartridge setup,) but it's worth listening to it to me. And that's my opinion, and I don't expect it to be welcomed with open arms just reading through this thread.

My problem with it is that is so 1877. I really want to move away from that century.

[Dave_72]

My problem with it is that is so 1877. I really want to move away from that century.

Ok, lol. Fair enough. It is old tech, but one I'm happy to live with. CD doesn't do it for me most of the time. I do have a fairly good sized cd collection. Anyway, I haven't heard too much sacd and hi res files. So, maybe that will make me more appreciative of digital.

[Titanium Dome]

The truth is, there's a ton of music out there that only survives on analog discs, whether they be 16 2/3, 33 1/3, 45, or 78 RPM discs. That alone makes it worth keeping a TT (or two) around, even if it's only for occasional playing.

Some of this music is very old, and some of it is brand new.

In other cases, the "original" consumer format was an analog disc, then it was duplicated on other media, such as CD, cassette, open reel tape, DAT, SACD, DVD-A, electronic file, and more. Often, the duplication was a nasty, hasty process that made the music worse rather than better, even though the destination format could have produced an equal or better end product. Many recording companies are more interested in quick money than quality music, and they do really awful things like record analog files off a vinyl disc, make a couple of console adjustments, and create a digital file for a CD: newly remastered, new price, new rip off.

I have six copies of Deep Purple's Book of Taliesyn: two LPs, cassette, and three CDs. The LP is notorious for having a recording/manufacturing defect in which every copy had the sound of an abraded record in the actual mix that repeated with every turn of the record on one side. It was/is maddening to hear, and I purchased at least three different LPs in the hopes of finding one that wasn't messed up. All had the same defect. I still have one of the crappy ones on Tetrgrammaton Records, and a little while back I bought an import from Great Britain on Harvest that's supposed to be defect free. The Harvest disc is still sealed, and I'll be opening it for the first time for this exercise.

The cassette version of the album does not have the defect. That does show that a clean copy of the recording was available even in the 70s.

So, when The Book of Taliesyn was released first on CD (in North America by Canada's Passport Records), what did they do? They took the tracks off the defective LP and put them on a CD! Finally, more than a decade after that, the whole thing was remastered at Abbey Road Studios (2000), and a clean, listenable Book of Taliesyn was released. More recently (2011) a version with some additional songs emerged.

So over the course of my deliberate process*, I'll get to hear several versions of the same album, on LP (two) , cassette (one), and CD (three). That allows a nice comparison in which I can have an informed subjective experience, and it will be one of many before this experiment is over.

For those who've already predicted the outcome, this will be a slow agony for you, since I'm in no rush. You'd be better off doing something you enjoy.


-----------------------
* The process will usually include different media of the same music; different methods of "cleaning" the media for better performance; ease of storage, access, and handling (usability); and listening experience. The focus, obviously will be on the LP experience.

[Dave_72]

The truth is, there's a ton of music out there that only survives on analog discs, whether they be 16 2/3, 33 1/3, 45, or 78 RPM discs. That alone makes it worth keeping a TT (or two) around, even if it's only for occasional playing.

Some of this music is very old, and some of it is brand new.

In other cases, the "original" consumer format was an analog disc, then it was duplicated on other media, such as CD, cassette, open reel tape, DAT, SACD, DVD-A, electronic file, and more. Often, the duplication was a nasty, hasty process that made the music worse rather than better, even though the destination format could have produced an equal or better end product. Many recording companies are more interested in quick money than quality music, and they do really awful things like record analog files off a vinyl disc, make a couple of console adjustments, and create a digital file for a CD: newly remastered, new price, new rip off.

I have six copies of Deep Purple's Book of Taliesyn: two LPs, cassette, and three CDs. The LP is notorious for having a recording/manufacturing defect in which every copy had the sound of an abraded record in the actual mix that repeated with every turn of the record on one side. It was/is maddening to hear, and I purchased at least three different LPs in the hopes of finding one that wasn't messed up. All had the same defect. I still have one of the crappy ones on Tetrgrammaton Records, and a little while back I bought an import from Great Britain on Harvest that's supposed to be defect free. The Harvest disc is still sealed, and I'll be opening it for the first time for this exercise.

The cassette version of the album does not have the defect. That does show that a clean copy of the recording was available even in the 70s.

So, when The Book of Taliesyn was released first on CD (in North America by Canada's Passport Records), what did they do? They took the tracks off the defective LP and put them on a CD! Finally, more than a decade after that, the whole thing was remastered at Abbey Road Studios (2000), and a clean, listenable Book of Taliesyn was released. More recently (2011) a version with some additional songs emerged.

So over the course of my deliberate process*, I'll get to hear several versions of the same album, on LP (two) , cassette (one), and CD (three). That allows a nice comparison in which I can have an informed subjective experience, and it will be one of many before this experiment is over.

For those who've already predicted the outcome, this will be a slow agony for you, since I'm in no rush. You'd be better off doing something you enjoy.


-----------------------
* The process will usually include different media of the same music; different methods of "cleaning" the media for better performance; ease of storage, access, and handling (usability); and listening experience. The focus, obviously will be on the LP experience.

You should be good to go with the Great Britain copy on LP. Those US pressings of early Deep Purple were indeed crappy.

[Jan Daugaard]

Some of us continue to listen to surround sound on LPs, in which case the phenomenon is called quadrophony because there are 4 channels.

The quadrophonic LPs are, admittedly, a mixed bunch, and some of them are best avoided in favour of a stereo edition.

There are 3 quadrophonic formats that enjoyed some popularity: SQ, QS and CD-4; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrophony

There is even a new CD-4 decoder in development (no affiliation): http://bit.ly/12VgHeG

Background noise is nearly eliminated on DBX encoded LPs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbx_(no...)#dbx_on_vinyl

To avoid wearing out the best LPs, I record them on my Teac AL-700 elcaset (http://www.thevintageknob.org/teac-AL-700.html).

It is, of course, easier and cheaper to play CDs and other digital formats, but not nearly as much fun ;-)