Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:37:08 -0800, Rockinghorse Winner wrote
(in article ):

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Arny Krueger wrote:

I still remember the first time I ran into someone who had assidiously
avoided the conversion from mono to stereo.


I know someone who maintains that mono is the better sounding mode.

*R* *H*


Yep, there are those. Something about the mono presentation being more phase
coherent and being "clearer" sounding. Never ran across one of this
particular species of luddite who could explain why this would be so,
however.
  #82   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 29, 1:47=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message


On Jan 28, 11:13 am, bob wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:15=3DA0am, Audio Empire
wrote:
On Fremer. I'll admit that his one-note-samba is a bit
tiresome, but on the
other hand, he or someone like him is needed to keep
their fingers on the pulse of all things vinyl because
most reviewers and audio journalists don't
want to. I say read his stuff for the information
therein, and take his "vinyl is IT" philosophy with a
grain of salt.
But he doesn't know anything about vinyl, except for the
pricetags on the gear.


Really? Honestly this is kinda irresponsible posting.
Michael Fremer
produced an instructional DVD on turntable set up.
http://www.musicdirect.com/product/79961


Since this is not a public source, we have no idea about the contents of the
DVD.


"We?" Speak for yourself Arny. I've seen it. It is very informative
source for people who are not well versed in turntable/arm/cartridge
set up.
Here is a preview of the content of the DVD with some quotes from
various knowledgable people who have also seen the DVD,
http://www.needledoctor.com/Michael-...ble-Set-Up-DVD


Is it your position that since Fremer "doesn't know
anything about
viny" that this DVD is loaded with nothing but
misinformation and
would lead to thosewho purchase this DVD and use it to
incorrectly set up their turntables?


Given all of the other faulty information that can be traced to Fremer, the
contents of the DVD need to be checked out by a non-fanboy.


They have been. The DVD has been out for some time now.



If he doesn't know anything he could hardly make
such a DVD without it being pure misinformation.


Excluded middle argument. I don't think that anybody seriously means that
Fremer knows absolutely and totally nothing. "doesn't know anything about
vinyl" relates to the fact that some or much of the information he promotes
about vinyl is completely and totally wrong.


You can contrive whatever alternative interpretation you want. I took
the post for what it actually literally says.


Have you ever visited his website?


Yes, it barely has one month of material.


That is simply incorrect.
http://www.musicangle.com/reviews.php


Have you ever read any of his record reviews?


He seems to affect hyperbole.


What review of what record lead you to draw this conclusion and only
this conclusion?
  #83   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Andrew Haley Andrew Haley is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

Rockinghorse Winner wrote:
* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Arny Krueger wrote:

I still remember the first time I ran into someone who had
assidiously avoided the conversion from mono to stereo.


I know someone who maintains that mono is the better sounding mode.


It certainly can be, depending on the release. It's quite well-known
that the mono versions of the earlier Beatles records are the genuine
article, with the stereo versions something of an afterthought. (The
"Revolution" single is a revelation in its original mono form.) I
suppose the goal is the artist's and the producer's intention: what is
the best way to reveal what they wanted to record? We all know stereo
records that are so clumsily done they sound better in mono. On the
other hand, stereo recordings in a natural acoustic space can sound
far better than mono ever could.

Andrew.
  #84   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:07:00 -0800, Robert Peirce wrote
(in article ):

In article , bob
wrote:

What they should have done is told the truth to their readers about
*why* CD sound quality was sub-par. But that would have been very bad
for business.


I have been reading Stereophile and The Absolute Sound for years. It
took them a long time to figure out what the truth was, assuming they
know for sure today. All they knew was that it wasn't right, something
even I could hear early on. As they have learned more they have
expounded on what they thought was the problem. They may still not be
telling the truth, but if so, it is because they don't know it not
because they are dishonest.


Let;s face it, the reason is not all that obvious. A demonstration between a
well mastered CD and a commercial release will certainly show how the latter
is compromised (inappropriate EQ, poor bass, narrow dynamic range, etc.) but
it won't show WHY.

  #85   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 29, 10:26=A0am, ScottW wrote:
On Jan 29, 8:18=3DA0am, Scott wrote:





On Jan 28, 2:37=3D3DA0pm, ScottW wrote:


On Jan 28, 9:07=3D3D3DA0am, Scott wrote:


In the real world of audio my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC/Soundlabs with my
collection of LPs walks away from your Sansa Clip+ and Altec-Lansin=

g
IEMs If one is looking for an illusion of live music in their
playback.


=3D3DA0Only in placement of the image to be in front of you


No, not only imaging.


which you
obviously require for the illusion to be complete.


Absolutely.


=3D3DA0Many people can be quite satisfied with the illusion headphone=

s (o=3D
r
IEMs) can create.


Sure, so what?


=3D3DA0Not too mention that they are typically more
revealing with better FR, imaging resolution, and noise level than
speakers.


=3DA0"Imaging resolution?"


=A0Ability to pinpoin an instrument in the sound stage (which typically
spans your head). =A0Some would say that is a small stage but the
clarity is akin to a magnifying glass allowing that space to contain
so much information that differentiates location and depth.


OK thanks for clarifying. Whether or not earbuds have greater clarity
as you have defined it, the aural presentation is so far removed from
any illusion of an original soundstage one gets from live acoustic
music that it is a deal breaker if that aural illusion is what one is
persuing.


"noise level?"

=A0Yes. Earbuds provide some modest isolation from outside sounds but
the noise floor of the small amplification required for the earbuds is
far below anything an AC powered amplifier can provide. =A0Your tube
systems are orders of magnitude greater.


You are comparing apples and oranges here. Earbuds are transducers. My
tube amps are not.






I am looking for that. I am all about the aesthetic
experience. That is why I spend the extra money on the stuff I have=




  #86   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 29, 5:09=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message



Depends on how one measures success or failure.


Which in turn depends on the criteria used to judge success or failure.

=A0If one is measuring success by the ability of the equipment to
create an aural illusion of live music the high end gear
wins hands down and the Sansa clip with the IEMs is the
abject failure.


What criteria is being used here - some reliable standard or something
completely subjective?


That is a false dichotomy. When measured carefully subjective opinion
can be quite reliable and consistant. In this case one can quite
reliably conclude that the sansa clip with the IEMs can't come close
to creating an aural illusion of live acoustic music played in a real
space.

  #87   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:30:13 -0800, Rockinghorse Winner wrote
(in article ):

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Kele wrote:

I agree with you; the rips (WAVs) I make from vinyl album to CD-R
sound better than store bought CDs to me. I don't have new music on
album so I can't say that the base on albums can go as low as store
bought late model CDs. I'm curious about that with recent music on a
good vynal playback system. I can hear that my CD-R rips are a little
compressed sounding compared to the album itself, but most store
boughts still fall short of as punchy live sounding. My guess is that
too much compression is applied to current CD music, or the media/
playback is doing it - not sure.


I think the difference is definitely in production. Some CD's I own, like
Buena Vista Social Club, are just spectacular. It seems when the producers
want to make a great sounding CD, they can.

*R* *H*


Indeed they can. Witness the JVC XRCDs. Expensive, but good. The problem is
that for various (perceived) economic and/or political (as in corporate
politics and copyright law, not governmental politics) reasons, the record
companies don't seem to want to give us that which the medium is capable.

  #88   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in message

I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.



It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding except in the
imaginations of those very few people who look on a medium that is hobbled
by relatively massive amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


  #89   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
KH KH is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 137
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On 1/29/2011 6:09 PM, Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 09:11:01 -0800, Dick Pierce wrote
(in ):

Audio Empire wrote:


snip

and that the capacity of the standard CD
digital system is fixed and at a rate that is
considerably short of infinite,


JUST LIKE ANY AND EVERY ANALOG SYSTEM.

it is nonetheless ample in its "finite-ness" to
adequately contain the music that humans can hear.




Yes Mr. Pierce, we all realize how much you know about this subject, but is
your zeal to show-off, you have managed to TOTALLY miss the point here. My
analogy was just that. An attempt to explain the idea that I think Fremer was
trying to get across when he said that analog is infinite. I was neither
trying to explain how digital worked nor making any odious comparisons. Yes,
it was simplistic (as is Fremer's statement) but that's what I was describing
- Fremer's simplistic idea of the difference between analog and digital and
why he might see it that way. Sheesh, doesn't anybody read these posts for
MEANING any more?


I think the the whole point is that Fremer, in making such a statement,
is waxing authoritative on a subject that; A) he knows nothing about, or
at least his knowledge is seriously flawed, or B) he's being
disingenuous about in order to further a personal agenda, or C) he's
writing using terminology he doesn't understand, or is purposely
misusing. None of these scenarios is particularly supportive of his
role as an equipment reviewer IMO.

Your analogy may indeed be apt relative to Fremer's understanding and
use of "resolution". That would put him in Case A above.

But to your question yes, I understood your analogy was about "Fremer",
not analog vs digital resolution. I just don't see the utility of an
analogy designed solely to illuminate the *manner* in which someone
misunderstands such a clearly defined term.

Keith
  #90   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 7:22=A0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in

I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.
It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding except in the
imaginations of those very few people who look on a medium that is hobble=

d
by relatively massive amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


You know I offered to put this claim to the test under blind
conditions and you declined to be subjected to such a test. Until such
a time that you are willing to subject yourself to such a test under
blind conditions I'm going to have to conclude this is pure bias. I'll
make the offer again. Using a high end two chanel playback system we
can play a variety of recordings sourced from various CDs, SACDs and
LPs of my chosing but the LP versions have to be sourced from my
equipment, You, under blind conditions have to identify the LP sourced
samples based on their audible distortion and their inability to
"sound great." You can bring a sample of your own that you consider a
to be great sounding so we can have some reference of you taste in
sound quality. I am willing to bet you will fail miserably in such a
test.


  #91   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 07:51:49 -0800, KH wrote
(in article ):

On 1/29/2011 6:09 PM, Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 09:11:01 -0800, Dick Pierce wrote
(in ):

Audio Empire wrote:


snip

and that the capacity of the standard CD
digital system is fixed and at a rate that is
considerably short of infinite,

JUST LIKE ANY AND EVERY ANALOG SYSTEM.

it is nonetheless ample in its "finite-ness" to
adequately contain the music that humans can hear.



Yes Mr. Pierce, we all realize how much you know about this subject, but is
your zeal to show-off, you have managed to TOTALLY miss the point here. My
analogy was just that. An attempt to explain the idea that I think Fremer
was
trying to get across when he said that analog is infinite. I was neither
trying to explain how digital worked nor making any odious comparisons. Yes,
it was simplistic (as is Fremer's statement) but that's what I was
describing
- Fremer's simplistic idea of the difference between analog and digital and
why he might see it that way. Sheesh, doesn't anybody read these posts for
MEANING any more?


I think the the whole point is that Fremer, in making such a statement,
is waxing authoritative on a subject that; A) he knows nothing about, or
at least his knowledge is seriously flawed, or B) he's being
disingenuous about in order to further a personal agenda, or C) he's
writing using terminology he doesn't understand, or is purposely
misusing. None of these scenarios is particularly supportive of his
role as an equipment reviewer IMO.

Your analogy may indeed be apt relative to Fremer's understanding and
use of "resolution". That would put him in Case A above.

But to your question yes, I understood your analogy was about "Fremer",
not analog vs digital resolution. I just don't see the utility of an
analogy designed solely to illuminate the *manner* in which someone
misunderstands such a clearly defined term.

Keith


Well, I'm glad somebody understood what I was saying! And on reflection, you
are right, It's not really important why or in what way Fremer is wrong in
his outlook on digital. I won't make that mistake again.
  #92   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Robert Peirce Robert Peirce is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 140
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

In article ,
Audio Empire wrote:
I think your experience is pretty common to a lot of audio enthusiasts. Now,
in my case, on the other hand, I was nuts about electronics when I was a kid.
This led me in two directions at once HAM radio and Hi-Fi. I am still, all
these years later, extremely interested in audio, but somewhere along the
way, amateur radio lost it's grip on me. The difference, I think, is the
music. Music held my interest in a way that communication over long
distances, via radio, never could.


Well, now we're talking about something else. I friend of mine and I
put together a pre-amp kit for a high school project. I majored in EE
at college, built a number of kits thereafter and have always been into
electronics. OTOH, I am a bit lazy and that's why fiddling with tubes
never appealed to me as much as solid state, where if it didn't die in
the first 90 days, it probably never would.

I had a Mapleknoll Ariadne TT for a long time, but it just got too
tweaky to stand so I got a VPI which I could pretty much set and forget.
Ditto with tape of all sorts. I think that's why I like iTunes. It
sounds good and I don't have to tweak it.
  #93   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
bob bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 670
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 10:21=A0am, Audio Empire wrote:

Let;s face it, the reason is not all that obvious.


No, the reason is quite obvious, as a little actual knowledge of audio
and a little experimentation would show.

The fact that you have only lately come to this conclusion means only
that you have been way behind the knowledge curve. I first started
lurking at RAHE in the mid-90s, and the view you've espoused at the
start of this thread was widely expressed here even then.

bob

  #94   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 05:06:36 -0800, Dick Pierce wrote
(in article ):

Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 06:22:53 -0800, vlad wrote
(in article ):
On Jan 28, 8:47=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
In the way he meant it - that unlike digital, analog is not confined by a
fixed word length and sample rate, it does, indeed, have infinite
resolution.
...
I realize that this analogy too is flawed,

It is not flawed , it is grossly incorrect, making this analogy
worthless. CD is not a container and analog is not a book.


It was an analogy, have you never heard of an analogy, a simplified way of
describing a very complex situation or process by using another, more
familiar point of reference? It was not supposed to be literal.


The analogy is completely innappropriate, does not in any way
analogously describe the reality of the basic, fundamental
properties of physical systems, is misleading and starts from
a wholly incorrect premise.

That it is an analogy does not excuse the fact that it is,
indeed, grossly incorrect.



Sigh - but the analogy is to show HOW FRAMER SEES THE PROCESS, not ow *I*
see it! How many times do I need to explain that?. I just put it in analogous
terms. IOW, I'm the messenger.

  #95   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 5:06=A0am, Dick Pierce wrote:
Audio Empire wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 06:22:53 -0800, vlad wrote
(in article ):
On Jan 28, 8:47=3DA0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
In the way he meant it - that unlike digital, analog is not confined b=

y a
fixed word length and sample rate, it does, indeed, have infinite
resolution.

=A0 ...
I realize that this analogy too is flawed,


=A0 It is not flawed , it is grossly incorrect, making this analogy
worthless. CD is not a container and analog is not a book.


It was an analogy, have you never heard of an analogy, a simplified way=

of
describing a very complex situation or process by using another, more
familiar point of reference? It was not supposed to be literal.


The analogy is completely innappropriate, does not in any way
analogously describe the reality of the basic, fundamental
properties of physical systems, is misleading and starts from
a wholly incorrect premise.


Your analysis of the analogy is completely incorrect since the analogy
was not intended to help understand "the reality of basic, fundamental
properties of physical systems." One has be aware of what an analogy
is being used for before one can make any kind of meaningful
assessment of the merits of that analogy. The analogy in question was
designed to help understand what Fremer was trying to say and what he
was thinking. Of course in audio it is better to divide and conquor
than to try to understand other peoples' points of view. Bteer to make
Fremer an enemy of audio and brand him a nut job who knows nothing
about audio other than price tags than to try to see his point of view
and learn something from it. What is the problem with that? I guess
it's more fun to ridicule than to learn.


That it is an analogy does not excuse the fact that it is,
indeed, grossly incorrect.


What is incorrect is you understanding of what the analogy was being
applied to.



  #96   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 11:38:30 -0800, Robert Peirce wrote
(in article ):

In article ,
Audio Empire wrote:
I think your experience is pretty common to a lot of audio enthusiasts.
Now,
in my case, on the other hand, I was nuts about electronics when I was a
kid.
This led me in two directions at once HAM radio and Hi-Fi. I am still, all
these years later, extremely interested in audio, but somewhere along the
way, amateur radio lost it's grip on me. The difference, I think, is the
music. Music held my interest in a way that communication over long
distances, via radio, never could.


Well, now we're talking about something else. I friend of mine and I
put together a pre-amp kit for a high school project. I majored in EE
at college, built a number of kits thereafter and have always been into
electronics. OTOH, I am a bit lazy and that's why fiddling with tubes
never appealed to me as much as solid state, where if it didn't die in
the first 90 days, it probably never would.

I had a Mapleknoll Ariadne TT for a long time, but it just got too
tweaky to stand so I got a VPI which I could pretty much set and forget.
Ditto with tape of all sorts. I think that's why I like iTunes. It
sounds good and I don't have to tweak it.


I had one of those once. I used to know the (then) old guy who ran the
company - can't pull-up his name off the top of my head. I still have the
prototype of the floor-mounted turntable stand that he was going to market .
It has a sheet-lead top on it and I still use it to hold my Gyro SE.

You're right, they were tweaky. The only way I could get mine to work
properly was, ultimately, to use two pumps. One for the air-bearing platter
and one dedicated to the air-bearing arm. Trying to proportion the air from a
single pump to both hold the 'table platter up and make the arm
"frictionless" was futile. And the noise of those aquarium pumps! Had to put
them in another room and run plastic hose to the turntable!

  #97   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:06:48 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 10:21=A0am, Audio Empire wrote:

Let;s face it, the reason is not all that obvious.


No, the reason is quite obvious, as a little actual knowledge of audio
and a little experimentation would show.

The fact that you have only lately come to this conclusion means only
that you have been way behind the knowledge curve. I first started
lurking at RAHE in the mid-90s, and the view you've espoused at the
start of this thread was widely expressed here even then.

bob


I mean the reasons WHY CDs are made to a lower standard than they should be
is not all that obvious. Again, doesn't anyone here read for content anymore?
Like Scott ) said in another thread: "I guess
it's more fun to ridicule than to learn."

  #98   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Rockinghorse Winner[_6_] Rockinghorse Winner[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Andrew Haley wrote:

Rockinghorse Winner wrote:
* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Arny Krueger wrote:

I still remember the first time I ran into someone who had
assidiously avoided the conversion from mono to stereo.


I know someone who maintains that mono is the better sounding mode.


It certainly can be, depending on the release. It's quite well-known
that the mono versions of the earlier Beatles records are the genuine
article, with the stereo versions something of an afterthought. (The
"Revolution" single is a revelation in its original mono form.) I
suppose the goal is the artist's and the producer's intention: what is
the best way to reveal what they wanted to record? We all know stereo
records that are so clumsily done they sound better in mono. On the
other hand, stereo recordings in a natural acoustic space can sound
far better than mono ever could.

Andrew.


Doesn't mono also convey space? I've always thought it has ambience, it has
'air.' True, it doesn't have directional info, but live performances, what
with the echoes and such, renders directional info far more dispersed than
stereo recordings impart.

*R* *H*
--
Powered by Linux |/ 2.6.32.26-175 Fedora 12
"No spyware. No viruses. No nags." |/ 2.6.31.12-0.2 OpenSUSE 11.2
http://www.jamendo.com |/
"Preach the gospel always; when necessary use words." St. Francis
  #99   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jan 29, 10:26=A0am, ScottW
wrote:
On Jan 29, 8:18=3DA0am, Scott wrote:





On Jan 28, 2:37=3D3DA0pm, ScottW
wrote:


On Jan 28, 9:07=3D3D3DA0am, Scott
wrote:


In the real world of audio my
Forsell/Koetsu/ARC/Soundlabs with my collection of
LPs walks away from your Sansa Clip+ and
Altec-Lansin= g IEMs If one is looking for an
illusion of live music in their playback.


=3D3DA0Only in placement of the image to be in front
of you


No, not only imaging.


which you
obviously require for the illusion to be complete.


Absolutely.


=3D3DA0Many people can be quite satisfied with the
illusion headphone= s (o=3D r IEMs) can create.


Sure, so what?


=3D3DA0Not too mention that they are typically more
revealing with better FR, imaging resolution, and
noise level than speakers.


=3DA0"Imaging resolution?"


=A0Ability to pinpoin an instrument in the sound stage
(which typically spans your head). =A0Some would say
that is a small stage but the clarity is akin to a
magnifying glass allowing that space to contain so much
information that differentiates location and depth.


OK thanks for clarifying. Whether or not earbuds have
greater clarity as you have defined it, the aural
presentation is so far removed from any illusion of an
original soundstage one gets from live acoustic music
that it is a deal breaker if that aural illusion is what
one is persuing.


Scott, it's quite clear that you use loudspeaker reproduction as your
absolute standard. I seriously doubt that you listen to as much live music
as I do- for example during the weeks that I'm recording festivals, I listen
to up 24 hours or more live music in a single week. Furthermore, when I
listen to the recordings that I make, I am listening to recordings where I
had the opportunity to listen to the very same live performance that is on
the recording. I serious doubt that you have this level of familiarity with
live music and the live performances that are on the recordings that you
listen to.


  #100   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jan 30, 7:22 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in

I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.
It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding
except in the imaginations of those very few people who
look on a medium that is hobbled by relatively massive
amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


You know I offered to put this claim to the test under
blind conditions and you declined to be subjected to such
a test.


I don't recall any such thing, but I'm not saying that it never happens. Why
not repeat the offer and we'll see whether its a reasonable offer.





  #101   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Rockinghorse Winner[_6_] Rockinghorse Winner[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Scott wrote:

On Jan 26, 6:20=A0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:


I would like to presume that music company executives aren't total idiots
and use customer surveys, focus groups and blind preference testing to gu=

ide
their audio production efforts. If that is the case, then rioting against
current music production norms is futile, as they are simply being good
business men and giving the custormers what they want.



I wouldn't presume that at all.
It really boils down to this "That's still a motivation for some
producers. If their record jumps out of your iPod compared with the
song that preceded it, then they've accomplished their goal."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...Id=3D122114058
From a business POV that is not totally idiotic but from a QC

standpoint it is.

OTOH even from a business POV some would argue that it is shortsighted
and somewhat less than smart.

"Bob Ludwig thinks that's an unfortunate development.

'People talk about downloads hurting record sales," Ludwig says. "I
and some other people would submit that another thing that is hurting
record sales these days is the fact that they are so compressed that
the ear just gets tired of it. When you're through listening to a
whole album of this highly compressed music, your ear is fatigued. You
may have enjoyed the music but you don't really feel like going back
and listening to it again.'"

I think you would be hard pressed to find many folks who think music
company execs are anything but idiots these days. Clearly they are not
motivated by a passion for the art. There was a time when they were.
Sad.


Leonard Chess and Ahmet Ertegun they are not.

*R* *H*
--
Powered by Linux |/ 2.6.32.26-175 Fedora 12
"No spyware. No viruses. No nags." |/ 2.6.31.12-0.2 OpenSUSE 11.2
http://www.jamendo.com |/
"Preach the gospel always; when necessary use words." St. Francis
  #102   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jan 29, 1:47 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message


On Jan 28, 11:13 am, bob wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:15=A0am, Audio Empire
wrote:
On Fremer. I'll admit that his one-note-samba is a bit
tiresome, but on the
other hand, he or someone like him is needed to keep
their fingers on the pulse of all things vinyl because
most reviewers and audio journalists don't
want to. I say read his stuff for the information
therein, and take his "vinyl is IT" philosophy with a
grain of salt.
But he doesn't know anything about vinyl, except for
the pricetags on the gear.


Really? Honestly this is kinda irresponsible posting.
Michael Fremer
produced an instructional DVD on turntable set up.
http://www.musicdirect.com/product/79961


Since this is not a public source, we have no idea about
the contents of the DVD.


"We?" Speak for yourself Arny. I've seen it. It is very
informative source for people who are not well versed in
turntable/arm/cartridge set up.




Here is a preview of the content of the DVD with some
quotes from various knowledgable people who have also
seen the DVD,
http://www.needledoctor.com/Michael-...ble-Set-Up-DVD


Needle Doctor = dealer

Link = advertisement.

Come on Scott, is it really true that you can't tell the difference between
an advertisment and an independent evaluation?

Is it your position that since Fremer "doesn't know
anything about
viny" that this DVD is loaded with nothing but
misinformation and
would lead to thosewho purchase this DVD and use it to
incorrectly set up their turntables?


Given all of the other faulty information that can be
traced to Fremer, the contents of the DVD need to be
checked out by a non-fanboy.


They have been. The DVD has been out for some time now.


I notice the absence of an actual link that supports the above claim.

If he doesn't know anything he could hardly make
such a DVD without it being pure misinformation.


Excluded middle argument. I don't think that anybody
seriously means that Fremer knows absolutely and totally
nothing. "doesn't know anything about vinyl" relates to
the fact that some or much of the information he
promotes about vinyl is completely and totally wrong.


You can contrive whatever alternative interpretation you
want. I took the post for what it actually literally says.


It's quite clear that you also take advertisements for independent
evaluations.


  #103   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Scott" wrote in message

On Jan 29, 5:09=A0pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message



Depends on how one measures success or failure.


Which in turn depends on the criteria used to judge
success or failure.

=A0If one is measuring success by the ability of the
equipment to create an aural illusion of live music the
high end gear
wins hands down and the Sansa clip with the IEMs is the
abject failure.


What criteria is being used here - some reliable
standard or something completely subjective?


That is a false dichotomy.


When measured carefully
subjective opinion can be quite reliable and consistant.


That is of course completely untrue since published subjective reviews
typically have each author using different words to describe the sounds they
hear. If the reveiws were reliable and consistent then they would use the
same words. Words have meaning and different words have different meaning.

The point here is that there are no generally agreed-upon standards for the
words used in subjective reviews. Virtually every subjective review is
therefore inconsistent with all other subjective reviews, and therefore
these subjective reviews are neither reliable nor consistent.

  #104   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
bob bob is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 670
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 8:06=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:06:48 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 10:21=3DA0am, Audio Empire wrote:


Let;s face it, the reason is not all that obvious.


No, the reason is quite obvious, as a little actual knowledge of audio
and a little experimentation would show.


The fact that you have only lately come to this conclusion means only
that you have been way behind the knowledge curve. I first started
lurking at RAHE in the mid-90s, and the view you've espoused at the
start of this thread was widely expressed here even then.


bob


I mean the reasons WHY CDs are made to a lower standard than they should =

be
is not all that obvious. Again, doesn't anyone here read for content anym=

ore?

Ah, I see. The subject had been the relative technical merits of CD
and vinyl (and Stereophile's dishonest coverage of that question). Not
sure when or how it switched to, why aren't producers making good-
sounding CDs, but I missed the switch. Frankly, I don't find the
latter question so interesting. To pick up a point I think Arny made
earlier, record companies are businesses, so it's reasonable to assume
that they think this helps them sell CDs. And they might very well be
right about that, despite the grumbling of the tiny audiophile market.


Like Scott ) said in another thread: "I guess
it's more fun to ridicule than to learn."


Well, of course it is. But then I've never learned anything from
him.

bob

  #105   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:19:56 -0800, ScottW wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 11:37=A0am, Scott wrote:
On Jan 30, 7:22=A0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in


I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.
It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding except in the
imaginations of those very few people who look on a medium that is hobb=

led
by relatively massive amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


You know I offered to put this claim to the test under blind
conditions and you declined to be subjected to such a test. Until such
a time that you are willing to subject yourself to such a test under
blind conditions I'm going to have to conclude this is pure bias. I'll
make the offer again. Using a high end two chanel playback system we
can play a variety of recordings sourced from various CDs, SACDs and
LPs of my chosing but the LP versions have to be sourced from my
equipment, You, under blind conditions have to identify the LP sourced
samples based on their audible distortion and their inability to
"sound great." You can bring a sample of your own that you consider a
to be great sounding so we can have some reference of you taste in
sound quality. I am willing to bet you will fail miserably in such a
test.


How long are the "samples"? I think this could be a very difficult
test with some samples of relative short duration which has fairly
high recording levels.
But play a track through from silent lead in to exit which includes
very quiet passages which don't completely mask the noise and I think
I'll be able to pass that test more often than not.
That doesn't mean I don't think vinyl can sound great, but greatness
is in the ear of the beholder.

ScottW


Assuming the LP is quiet enough, this could be done. I have a recently
re-mastered British Decca pressing of De Falla's 'Three-Cornered Hat' ballet
with Ansermet and Le Orchestre de la Suisse-Romande - a very famous recording
known for it's great sound (the London CD release a number of years ago,
sounds terrible by comparison). This pressing is so quiet that I suspect that
it would make a digital vs analog shoot-out very interesting. The problem
with most LPs, however, is that most have at least a few ticks and pops, even
records in very good shape. That makes it easy to tell analog from digital
even if otherwise they sound identical or even if the LP sounds significantly
better than the CD of the same performance.



  #106   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 18:56:38 -0800, Rockinghorse Winner wrote
(in article ):

* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Andrew Haley wrote:

Rockinghorse Winner wrote:
* It may have been the liquor talking, but
Arny Krueger wrote:

I still remember the first time I ran into someone who had
assidiously avoided the conversion from mono to stereo.

I know someone who maintains that mono is the better sounding mode.


It certainly can be, depending on the release. It's quite well-known
that the mono versions of the earlier Beatles records are the genuine
article, with the stereo versions something of an afterthought. (The
"Revolution" single is a revelation in its original mono form.) I
suppose the goal is the artist's and the producer's intention: what is
the best way to reveal what they wanted to record? We all know stereo
records that are so clumsily done they sound better in mono. On the
other hand, stereo recordings in a natural acoustic space can sound
far better than mono ever could.

Andrew.


Doesn't mono also convey space? I've always thought it has ambience, it has
'air.' True, it doesn't have directional info, but live performances, what
with the echoes and such, renders directional info far more dispersed than
stereo recordings impart.

*R* *H*


"Good mono can be like listening to a musical ensemble through an open
window." J. Gordon Holt.

  #107   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 4:22=A0pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jan 30, 7:21=3DA0am, Scott wrote:


OK thanks for clarifying. Whether or not earbuds have greater clarity
as you have defined it, the aural presentation is so far removed from
any illusion of an original soundstage one gets from live acoustic
music that it is a deal breaker if that aural illusion is what one is
persuing.


=A0 =A0A deal breaker for you, not necessarily everyone.


I agree if one is deaf or at least near deaf in one ear and simply
can't hear directionality. Then it *may* not be a deal breaker.
otherwise it absolutely is. No way anyone who can hear
stereophonically will hear anything like an illusion of real
instruments playing in a real soundspace.


  #108   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 6:56=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message







On Jan 29, 10:26=3DA0am, ScottW
wrote:
On Jan 29, 8:18=3D3DA0am, Scott wrote:


On Jan 28, 2:37=3D3D3DA0pm, ScottW
wrote:


On Jan 28, 9:07=3D3D3D3DA0am, Scott
wrote:


In the real world of audio my
Forsell/Koetsu/ARC/Soundlabs with my collection of
LPs walks away from your Sansa Clip+ and
Altec-Lansin=3D g IEMs If one is looking for an
illusion of live music in their playback.


=3D3D3DA0Only in placement of the image to be in front
of you


No, not only imaging.


which you
obviously require for the illusion to be complete.


Absolutely.


=3D3D3DA0Many people can be quite satisfied with the
illusion headphone=3D s (o=3D3D r IEMs) can create.


Sure, so what?


=3D3D3DA0Not too mention that they are typically more
revealing with better FR, imaging resolution, and
noise level than speakers.


=3D3DA0"Imaging resolution?"


=3DA0Ability to pinpoin an instrument in the sound stage
(which typically spans your head). =3DA0Some would say
that is a small stage but the clarity is akin to a
magnifying glass allowing that space to contain so much
information that differentiates location and depth.


OK thanks for clarifying. Whether or not earbuds have
greater clarity as you have defined it, the aural
presentation is so far removed from any illusion of an
original soundstage one gets from live acoustic music
that it is a deal breaker if that aural illusion is what
one is persuing.


Scott, it's quite clear that you use loudspeaker reproduction as your
absolute standard. I seriously doubt that you listen to as much live musi=

c
as I do- for example during the weeks that I'm recording festivals, I lis=

ten
to up 24 hours or more live music in a single week. Furthermore, when I
listen to the recordings that I make, I am listening to recordings where =

I
had the opportunity to listen to the very same live performance that is o=

n
the recording. I serious doubt that you =A0have this level of familiarity=

with
live music and the live performances that are on the recordings that you
listen to.-



I listen to live music almost on a weekly basis. My most frequent
haunting ground would be Disney Hall which is claimed by many experts
to be the finest concert hall in the world acoustically. I have the
privilidge of listening to world class musicians there and in many
other venues around the world. I know what world class live acoustic
music sounds like.

I have also listened to a wide variety of music on my i-touch using my
Grado SR 80s. I have listened to a number of alleged contenders for
best ear bud using well mastered rips of excellent music.

There is no mistaking one for the other. They are miles apart.

My system with my best sounding LPs actually does come remarkably
close to the same quality of sound I have the pleasure of hearing in
Disney Hall and some of the other great concert halls of the world.
But my standard is what I have heard in those halls not my speakers. I
have asserted this as my standard on any number of these threads.
There is no reason for you to speculate.

  #109   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 6:57=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message







On Jan 30, 7:22 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in


I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.
It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding
except in the imaginations of those very few people who
look on a medium that is hobbled by relatively massive
amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


You know I offered to put this claim to the test under
blind conditions and you declined to be subjected to such
a test.


I don't recall any such thing, but I'm not saying that it never happens. =

Why
not repeat the offer


I did repeat the offer

and we'll see whether its a reasonable offer.-


It is a reasonable offer and you snipped it.

  #110   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 7:19=A0pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jan 30, 11:37=A0am, Scott wrote:





On Jan 30, 7:22=A0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:


"Rockinghorse Winner"
wrote in


I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.
It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding except in the
imaginations of those very few people who look on a medium that is ho=

bbled
by relatively massive amounts of audible noise and distoriton as bein=

g
beneficial.


You know I offered to put this claim to the test under blind
conditions and you declined to be subjected to such a test. Until such
a time that you are willing to subject yourself to such a test under
blind conditions I'm going to have to conclude this is pure bias. I'll
make the offer again. Using a high end two chanel playback system we
can play a variety of recordings sourced from various CDs, SACDs and
LPs of my chosing but the LP versions have to be sourced from my
equipment, You, under blind conditions have to identify the LP sourced
samples based on their audible distortion and their inability to
"sound great." You can bring a sample of your own that you consider a
to be great sounding so we can have some reference of you taste in
sound quality. I am willing to bet you will fail miserably in such a
test.


=A0How long are the "samples"?


That has yet to be determined since Arny has not taken up the offer.

=A0 I think this could be a very difficult
test with some samples of relative short duration which has fairly
high recording levels.
But play a track through from silent lead in to exit which includes
very quiet passages which don't completely mask the noise and I think
I'll be able to pass that test more often than not.


I have every intention of including quit passages. Silent leads
however are of no importance. I would insist that all samples be
samples in which there is a recording being played back.


=A0That doesn't mean I don't think vinyl can sound great, but greatness
is in the ear of the beholder.


It's in the ear and mind of the beholder. I believe that when biases
are eliminated LP playback at it's best, even with some of the most
demanding source material can and does offer SOTA sound quality and
can't be identified as vinyl simply by ear.




  #111   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Scott[_6_] Scott[_6_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 642
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Jan 30, 7:20=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message







On Jan 29, 1:47 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message


On Jan 28, 11:13 am, bob wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:15=3DA0am, Audio Empire
wrote:
On Fremer. I'll admit that his one-note-samba is a bit
tiresome, but on the
other hand, he or someone like him is needed to keep
their fingers on the pulse of all things vinyl because
most reviewers and audio journalists don't
want to. I say read his stuff for the information
therein, and take his "vinyl is IT" philosophy with a
grain of salt.
But he doesn't know anything about vinyl, except for
the pricetags on the gear.


Really? Honestly this is kinda irresponsible posting.
Michael Fremer
produced an instructional DVD on turntable set up.
http://www.musicdirect.com/product/79961


Since this is not a public source, we have no idea about
the contents of the DVD.


"We?" Speak for yourself Arny. I've seen it. It is very
informative source for people who are not well versed in
turntable/arm/cartridge set up.
Here is a preview of the content of the DVD with some
quotes from various knowledgable people who have also
seen the DVD,
http://www.needledoctor.com/Michael-...ble-Set-Up-DVD


Needle Doctor =3D dealer

Link =3D advertisement.

Come on Scott, is it really true that you can't tell the difference betwe=

en
an advertisment and an independent evaluation?


Is it really your belief that dealers can not make independent
evaluations? Did you read the review? Maybe you missed this quote
"It's awesome" =96 Bob Weston (recording engineer, record producer, bass
player in Steve Albini's band Shellac)"





Is it your position that since Fremer "doesn't know
anything about
viny" that this DVD is loaded with nothing but
misinformation and
would lead to thosewho purchase this DVD and use it to
incorrectly set up their turntables?
Given all of the other faulty information that can be
traced to Fremer, the contents of the DVD need to be
checked out by a non-fanboy.

They have been. The DVD has been out for some time now.


I notice the absence of an actual link that supports the above claim.


How on earth could you notice that when the link provides a review
with the following quote?
"=85a product that should have been around long before August 2006. It
provides easy-to-follow, practical advice for obtaining the tools and
knowledge necessary to complete competent setup of most turntables=85a
resource that will allow many to recapture the hands-on nature of this
hobby and have their record-spinners making fine music in no time." =96
Bill Brooks, Soundstage, August 2006"

It's 2011 Arny. 2006 is five years ago.



If he doesn't know anything he could hardly make
such a DVD without it being pure misinformation.


Excluded middle argument. I don't think that anybody
seriously means that Fremer knows absolutely and totally
nothing. "doesn't know anything about vinyl" relates to
the fact that some or much of the information he
promotes about vinyl is completely and totally wrong.

You can contrive whatever alternative interpretation you
want. I took the post for what it actually literally says.


It's quite clear that you also take advertisements for independent
evaluations


It's quite clear you didn't read the content.

  #112   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Andrew Haley Andrew Haley is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

ScottW wrote:

Without having each producer step forth and reveal their motives, we
can only speculate.


Rick Rubin has been asked about the notorious Vlado Meller, and
his answer was simple: people prefer recordings that way.

Michael Fremer: Can't you control the mastering guy? "Vlado, lay off!"

Rick Rubin: The difference is though, I wish I had examples here to
play for you. If I knew we were going to talk about this I'd go
through the library and find examples. Ultimately, if you listen on a
car sound system or in the mainstream place where most people listen
to music--cars, boomboxes sound systems you get at (chain stores), and
if you "A/B" the less compressed version to the more compressed
version, you pick the compressed version.

MF: Even in a good car stereo?

RR: Even in a good car stereo. We do shoot-outs all the time. I master
with as many as five different mastering engineers mastering the same
album and then we "A/B" them and it's interesting, Vlado wins nine out
of ten times, and he claims it's not him. He's got technology in that
room that's a 2 million dollar mastering suite that other people don't
have.

MF: "So I'm going to use it godamn it, even if it's not better!"

RR: All I'll tell you is that my whole job in life is to A/B things,
that's all I do, and for some reason, I don't know that what he's
doing is necessarily the best, but I haven't heard anything to beat it
and we try.

http://www.musicangle.com/feat.php?id=38

Andrew.

  #113   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Audio Empire" wrote in message


I mean the reasons WHY CDs are made to a lower standard
than they should be is not all that obvious.


It is the human condition. Some people do mediocre work, and some people
march to a different drummer when they work. Just because you don't like a
recording doesn't mean that it is substandard to everybody.

Audiophiles want every recording to have full dynamic range (the "music
first" market), but there is a big market for "music and..." which relates
to mobile and other casual listening.

The people who make and sell recordings are most concerned about getting
their investments back, hopefully with some profit. I'm under the impression
that most attempts to bring recordings to market simply lose money.

There is also music that has artistic and cultural interest, but can't get a
first rate technical job for one reason or the other, such as many live
performances.


  #114   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
David[_22_] David[_22_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"ScottW" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 5:06=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
Without having each producer step forth and reveal their motives, we
can only speculate.
I think it's generally because most music is optimized by the
producerrs for playback on lousy systems in lousy environments. The
number of "audio enthusiasts" is shrinking.


I don't suppose anybody watched the film 'Once' on BBC2 last night?
Was a sort of love story where the main carracter wanted to record some
music. After a day in the recording studio with their in-house engineer,
the engineer then said 'right if we're all happy last go give it the car
test'. They all then proceded to jump into his car and listen through his
car stereo while going for a drive.
It just reminded me of this thread. )

Anyway I have been thoroughly enjoying this thread and was ignorant to the
reasons why I have always thought vinyl sounds better than CD in the vast
majority of recordings.
I shall never slag off CD again, but I'll still not bother with it unless I
know it has good production.
What are the Linn CDs like BTW?

D


  #115   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
David[_22_] David[_22_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I think the difference is definitely in production. Some
CD's I own, like Buena Vista Social Club, are just
spectacular.



It seems when the producers want to make a
great sounding CD, they can.


That says it all. No LP can truely be great sounding except in the
imaginations of those very few people who look on a medium that is hobbled
by relatively massive amounts of audible noise and distoriton as being
beneficial.


The thing is Arny, and to get back onto the topic of the thread, the
production of most CDs nowadays is awful.

I know you have a couple of turntables but have you actually bought a vinyl
LP recently and compared it to the same CD? I have bought the CD of most of
the LPs I've bought recently as they are so cheap in comparison and usable
in the car etc.
Invariably the LP will have a much better production with a much wider
dynamic range.

Go out and buy a recently released LP, you might be surprised.

D




  #116   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Sebastian Kaliszewski Sebastian Kaliszewski is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 82
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

Scott wrote:
On Jan 28, 7:16=A0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Audio Empire" wrote in message



I don't really understand your seeming fascination with
the relevance of market size. The average "Joe" doesn't
care about quality at all (in much of anything) beyond
the concept of "adequate". Therefore any product which
caters to a market where quality (real or imagined) is
important, is going to be, by definition, a niche market.
Ferrari and Porsche occupy a niche market in the
automobile world. Laphroiag and Aberlore, as well as
Woodford Reserve and VanWinkle's occupy a niche market in
the whisky world. More people drink Budwieser than drink
Pilsn Urquell, and more people own Panasonic receivers
than own Audio Research equipment. These are all catering
to niche markets. It really doesn't matter what the hoi
polloi are doing or buying, or otherwise consuming.

I understand why someone wants to pay the big bucks to own a Porsche, or =

a
Ferrari. They are wonderful cars with great handing and performance. Thei=

r
cost is justified by the advanced technology that it takes to makes them =

do
what they do. 12 cylinders cost more than 6. Dual clutch drive trains cos=

t
more than mass-produced lightweight automatics. All wheel drive costs mor=

e
than FWD. =A0Turbochargers and superchargers cost more than natural
aspiration. Ultra wide 200 mph tires cost more than average width 120 mph
tires.

I don't understand why someone would want to pay big bucks for retro
technology with vastly reduced performance and built-in inconvenience,
except for reasons of pure emotion such as sentimentality.


I don't understand why you don't understand since it has been
explained to you numerous times on numerous threads including this
one. If you don't understand the value of better subjective sound
through better mastering and euphonic colorations then I don't know
what more to tell you. You don't get it. that is fine. there are
people who never get the better experience one gets with a Kolbe steak
over a Big Mac. But the *idea* is, in my opinion, pretty easy to
understand even if you haven't personally experienced it.


So much for Audio
Research electronics and Linn turntables. My Sansa Clip+ and Altec-Lansin=

g
IEMs (total cost: less than 60 dollars) =A0sounds as good if not better, =

and
does so both in a campsite on Lake Superior or in my listening room.



Previously in this thread you challenged my ability to make any kind
of judgment on digital audio based on the incorrect belief that i had
no digital player in my system. Well back at you. I'm pretty sure you
don't have any ARC amplification nor a Linn TT so It's kinda hard to
take this claim seriously. Besides that, "AL IEMs?" Really? If that is
your standard of excellence then I don't know what to say. You are
using a system that has such extreme inherent limitations in it's
ability to create an illusion of an original live acoustic performance
that I can not see how you can form any meaningful opinions about the
quality of various components or masterings available on CD or vinyl
as they pertain to creating an illusion of live acoustic music in
playback. If that really is your standard of excellence then any
discussion between us on such matters will be saddled with a complete
lack of common ground. With my system I can go to Disney Hall, listen
to the L.A Phil and come home and listen to well recorded orchestral
works on vinyl and hear a great deal of common ground and then make
meaningful evaluations of the various components, recordings,
masterings etc in terms of how close they come to creating an illusion
of live music in my listening room. With AL IEMs or any other such
transducer the sound is so far removed from any sort of convincing
illusion of live music that the differences between the sort of things
we are discussing here (LPs v, CDs, different masterings, Tubes v.SS
etc) simply don't have the same frame work.


There are recorings which work on IEMs / headphones. And then the
illusion is ways beyond the capabilities of any normal high-end stereo
system.


Using the analogy of cars
that we find in this post. It would be akin to trying to evaluate
different racing tires using a tractor.


Excellent sound with utter convenience is hard to beat, especially at one
100th =A0or one 1,000th of the price.



Indeed it is but one can not get excellent sound with what you are
using compared to the ARC/Linn equipment driving high end loud
speakers correctly set up in a good listening room if one is using
live acoustic music as a reference.



Of course it can. It will suprass it by many lenghts -- All given proper
recording.

You can't even get in the ball
park. You can't even get in the same state the ball park is located
in.


180 degree opposite (with proper recording).



The big downside to the Sansa: no
bragging rights, just good music. I could show it to you in my hand and y=

ou
might not notice it!

High-end audio is supposed to be about getting the best
sound from recorded music that's possible.

Those days passed several decades ago when the high end audio business
turned into a freak show of non-sonic so-called improvements and expensiv=

e
gear that any honest technical analysis would say is either vastly
overpriced, mediocre or even abject failures.



Depends on how one measures success or failure. If one is measuring
success by the ability of the equipment to create an aural illusion of
live music the high end gear wins hands down and the Sansa clip with
the IEMs is the abject failure.


Sorry, but you're completely wrong on that front. With right recording
the aural illusion of live music created by such IEM's and just properly
made digital source (well, analog will do as well) is big ways above
anything some high end stereo setup in good listening room could ever
aplay. To even get into a shoting distance one needs something like 8-10
track played in some 3D arangement (and properly recoreded as well... on
that 8-10 tracks, of course).




And if vinyl,
SACD, DVD-A or hi-res downloads provide that and the
commercial CD, aimed at the mass market doesn't because
their marketing priorities are different, then that in no
way diminishes the importance of these "niche" products
that you seem to so offhandedly dismiss.

That's just it, vinyl, performs more poorly while SACD and DVD-A perform =

at
the same subjective level as the humble CD.


Unfortunately this is something that matters on an academic level at
best but in real world application using real world CDs and LPs and
SACDs this simply is not true with the vast majority of commercial
titles that are avialable on multiple formats. so if we want to talk
about the real world this claim is simply incorrect. Of course this
may not be easily discernable using s Sansa Clip+ and Altec-Lansing
IEMs


They are like Porsches and
Ferraris that are matched or outperformed on a road course by my Mercury
Milan. Of course in the real world of cars, Porsches and Ferraris can eas=

ily
walk away from my humble Milan. No Porsches and Ferraris that get their
doors blown off my a 6-cylinder FWD mass-market sedan exist except as
classic cars and that gets back to sentimentality. =A0That much reason st=

ill
rules the world of automobiles.


In the real world of audio my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC/Soundlabs with my
collection of LPs walks away from your Sansa Clip+ and Altec-Lansing
IEMs If one is looking for an illusion of live music in their
playback. I am looking for that. I am all about the aesthetic
experience. That is why I spend the extra money on the stuff I have.


In the real world, gived proper recoring, your $$$$$ equipment stands no
chance against simple (but good) IEMs. Unless you plug some good
headphones / IEMs into your system.

Simply, try artificial head recording, for once


Yes, I'know selection of those is so limited that they could be deemed
virtually unavailable. But you talk here in absolute terms...


rgds
\SK
--
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity" -- L. Lang
--
http://www.tajga.org -- (some photos from my travels)

  #117   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:27:00 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 8:06=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:06:48 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 10:21=3DA0am, Audio Empire wrote:


Let;s face it, the reason is not all that obvious.


No, the reason is quite obvious, as a little actual knowledge of audio
and a little experimentation would show.


The fact that you have only lately come to this conclusion means only
that you have been way behind the knowledge curve. I first started
lurking at RAHE in the mid-90s, and the view you've espoused at the
start of this thread was widely expressed here even then.


bob


I mean the reasons WHY CDs are made to a lower standard than they should =

be
is not all that obvious. Again, doesn't anyone here read for content anym=

ore?

Ah, I see. The subject had been the relative technical merits of CD
and vinyl (and Stereophile's dishonest coverage of that question). Not
sure when or how it switched to, why aren't producers making good-
sounding CDs, but I missed the switch. Frankly, I don't find the
latter question so interesting. To pick up a point I think Arny made
earlier, record companies are businesses, so it's reasonable to assume
that they think this helps them sell CDs. And they might very well be
right about that, despite the grumbling of the tiny audiophile market.


Like Scott ) said in another thread: "I guess
it's more fun to ridicule than to learn."


Well, of course it is. But then I've never learned anything from
him.

bob


The original post in this thread was about the possibility that many people
prefer vinyl to digital (specifically, CD) because the record companies put
out product that is compromised in quality to the point where it very often
doesn't sound as good as it could or should sound. We know the technical
reasons: overproduced, and overly signal processed. So the question becomes
"what are the record companies' motives for producing such mediocre work."
Some people here have made very interesting suggestions on this, including
Arny's theory that it's a business decision. It might well be. If so, I'd
love to see the logic behind it.

Back in the late 1950's when stereo first hit the market, the major labels
such as RCA Victor, Columbia, Mercury, British Decca, and EMI/HMV made stereo
records aimed at people who are likely to have component audio systems. They
did this knowing full well that most of the records sold would be sold to
people listening on cheap radio/phono consoles, and so-called "portable"
players. The fact that only a relatively few record buyers had good equipment
didn't keep the majors from aiming their product at that market, yet I never
heard anyone with lesser equipment complain that these early stereo LPs were
"too good". With this in mind, I really don't understand why record companies
would think that putting out sub-par product would somehow advance sales, and
would love to hear some justification for it.

  #118   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:29:52 -0800, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Audio Empire" wrote in message


I mean the reasons WHY CDs are made to a lower standard
than they should be is not all that obvious.


It is the human condition. Some people do mediocre work, and some people
march to a different drummer when they work. Just because you don't like a
recording doesn't mean that it is substandard to everybody.

Audiophiles want every recording to have full dynamic range (the "music
first" market), but there is a big market for "music and..." which relates
to mobile and other casual listening.

The people who make and sell recordings are most concerned about getting
their investments back, hopefully with some profit. I'm under the impression
that most attempts to bring recordings to market simply lose money.

There is also music that has artistic and cultural interest, but can't get a
first rate technical job for one reason or the other, such as many live
performances.



As I just said to Bob in another post. Back when stereo was new, the major
labels produced the best product they could given the technology (which.
apparently, wasn't so bad, as many of these early stereo records are still
highly sought after, commanding big prices). They produced their product to
high standards, knowing full well that the vast majority of their sales would
be to people with mediocre playback equipment and worse. I don't remember, in
those days, any listener using a cheap console radio-phonograph or a
so-called portable record player complaining that these records were "too
good". So, I'd really like to hear the reasoning behind any business decision
that produces CDs compromised to make them somehow "better" for casual or
mobile listening.

Of course, I want it understood that I'm not lobbying here for the record
producers to clean up their act, I'm merely noting that CDs which don't live
up to the medium's potential seems to be the norm, these days and that the
idea of quality seems to have gone out of the equation.

  #119   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:27:37 -0800, Scott wrote
(in article ):

On Jan 30, 4:22=A0pm, ScottW wrote:
On Jan 30, 7:21=3DA0am, Scott wrote:


OK thanks for clarifying. Whether or not earbuds have greater clarity
as you have defined it, the aural presentation is so far removed from
any illusion of an original soundstage one gets from live acoustic
music that it is a deal breaker if that aural illusion is what one is
persuing.


=A0 =A0A deal breaker for you, not necessarily everyone.


I agree if one is deaf or at least near deaf in one ear and simply
can't hear directionality. Then it *may* not be a deal breaker.
otherwise it absolutely is. No way anyone who can hear
stereophonically will hear anything like an illusion of real
instruments playing in a real soundspace.



Not unless they listen exclusively to recordings made binaurally. Then, ONLY
headphones or earbuds will give the illusion of real instruments playing in
real space. Of course, that requirement restricts the repertoire somewhat.
8^)

  #120   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default LP vs CD - Again. Another Perspective

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:31:04 -0800, Sebastian Kaliszewski wrote
(in article ):

In the real world, gived proper recoring, your $$$$$ equipment stands no
chance against simple (but good) IEMs. Unless you plug some good
headphones / IEMs into your system.

Simply, try artificial head recording, for once


OK, but how many true binaural recordings do you own? How about not many to
none? This is a very special case. Of course a recording can be optimized
for headphone listening, but talk about your niche markets! The vast majority
of modern recordings are made with speaker listening in mind. Perhaps with
the young migrating almost exclusively to iPod listening, pop record
producers ought to start thinking about recording with that kind of listening
in mind - in other words binaurally record all pop albums to sound their best
on earbuds! 8^)

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another perspective Edward M. Kennedy[_2_] Car Audio 0 December 25th 07 09:53 PM
fm tuners (another perspective) michael High End Audio 9 March 22nd 05 01:59 AM
A Different Perspective on current events paul Pro Audio 2 July 4th 04 01:26 AM
'Billion' in perspective. Ron Marketplace 5 September 13th 03 03:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"