Digital can be as BAD as Vinyl.

[Ambio]

In 1984, and the famous designer, Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn Sondek, decided to thrash out the difference by engaging in a scientific way. I don't know why he would want to do that unless he was pretty sure of what he was hearing.

Anyway, the experiment started using Linn LP-12 turntable, arm and cartridge, Naim NAC 32 pre- and NAP 250 power amplifiers and Linn Isobarik loudspeakers. I guess Linn did not make any pre or power amp at the time. And of course, they used a double blind test. I know the dreaded word. But I can start another thread to show how our hearing get tricked when you see something. Later on that...

Wait..IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER - This message is meant for newcomers who are now at the crossroad whether to vinyl would give them better sound or not and not to those already made up their minds. But they are free to join even if they are trolls. Vinyl sounds different but not better.

So the DBT started but Tiefenbrun objected because he claimed that undriven transducers (digital alarm watches, telephones, headphones, or other loudspeakers) in the same room audibly degrade the sound quality. Audiophiles, need to take note of this before taking your DBT. Maybe, that the reason why we fail DBT. And also take note, Tiefenbrun advocates to use single speaker not pairs.

Anyway, what supposed to be digital vs vinyl turned out to beother DBT, including the digital alarm. As expected, he just got 50% wrong. This must be consoling for the audiophiles as he got 50% correct!

Then the final test came. Of course the watches and headphones were out of the room. Now the problem is how to you compare vinyl and digital? A vinyl can never sound like digital due to the inherent weakness. So the device a plan to make digital to sound like vinyl. Basically, they are downgrading digital to vinyl's standard.
And Tiefenbrun got better results this time. He was wrong only 45% of the trials.

So guys, my assertion is vinyl sounds different and not better and if you want vinyl sound you can make digital to sound like that. You can find many plugins that add vinyl effect to digital recordings.

DIGITAL CAN SOUND AS BAD AS VINYL . You can do it without buying a turntable. Better is just an illusion and got a lot to do with the successful marketing by the high end manufacturer.

 

[prepress]

IMHO Vinyl sound is not only those pops and crackles, which we add by using plugins. Vinyl has a wast dynamic range which is not in digital/CD.
And, adding those plugins doesn't mean that now the digital will sound like Vinyl quality or compete to Vinyl.

Vinyl is Vinyl
CD is CD

 

[Ambio]

Not sure about the dynamic range part. I thot it was about 60dB only. it is not vinyl is vinyl or cd is CD but about understanding better and different sound for the newcomers. I will check on the plugins because I remember, you can add in more than pops and clicks. Rumble and wow comes to the mind. I can remember because I only did many quick experiment when I was think of starting a vinyl collection.

I realize while they are nice for being different I preferred digital. It got nothing to do with SQ. However, I am open to new ideas.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

... Vinyl has a wast dynamic range which is not in digital/CD. ...

Google would be your friend, but you might start here: Hydrogen Audio Wikki Myths (Vinyl)

They have several other pages on the Vinyl topic --- including one about the advantages

 

[arj]

I guess we had all agreed it is the mastering and not the format . Take a well maintained dire straits brothers in arms recording on cd and lp the difference will be the other way around ie the cd sounds pretty hollow. Even in my setup which is better at digital. This is not to day cd format is better. .just that in this format the cd mastering sucked. There are so many cd recordings which are sublime.

 

[Ambio]

I guess we had all agreed it is the mastering and not the format . Take a well maintained dire straits brothers in arms recording on cd and lp the difference will be the other way around ie the cd sounds pretty hollow. Even in my setup which is better at digital. This is not to day cd format is better. .just that in this format the cd mastering sucked. There are so many cd recordings which are sublime.

Care to explain how this is relevant to the OP? How did the mastering changed to affect Ivor's perception to the extend he couldn't distinguish the two?

Thanks.

 

[arj]

No I can't explain but can very well understand it..not surprising either
There are good and bad cd and vinyl recordings but taking one instance comparison to generalise it is sending a wrong message all. I don't have a great lp or digital setup but there are some albums in prefer on lp nd some on cd or my computer setup.
I personally just don't want newbies to get the wrong impression that an lp is a downgrade. It is another medium with some fantastic music available and not to get swayed by threads and get biased. I personally had a bias for a long time till I heard it for myself and is now an integeral part of my setup with my cd transport and computer transport.
That's all.
It jus appears you have had some pretty bad experiences with LPs . That does not mean that all CDs are by default better.

I suppose if they are both mastered well and played back with good equipment it has to be difficult to distinguish as you are hearing g the mastering and not the medium. And that is only possible if both mediums are very good.

 

[Ambio]

No I can't explain but can very well understand it..not surprising either .

That's not helpful. This thread is about Ivor and his inability to prove what he believed he could. I think it is OT. Until now you are not discussing anything about OP.

.

I personally just don't want newbies to get the wrong impression that an lp is a downgrade. .

Where did anyone say that it is a downgrade. Is it because I said that the digital version downgraded to meet the vinyl specs. Specs wise a vinyl is not even close to the master tape. That's the fact. You cant avoid the reality.

I suppose if they are both mastered well and played back with good equipment it has to be difficult to distinguish as you are hearing g the mastering and not the medium. And that is only possible if both mediums are very good.

Care to explain what mastering means in the context of OP. It is the same analogue signal converted to digital and played back using the same equipment and same source. Let just stick to these for now.

 

[greenhorn]

Care to explain what mastering means in the context of OP. It is the same analogue signal converted to digital and played back using the same equipment and same source. Let just stick to these for now.

Ok, I'll bite.
In my experience, all recordings have suffered progressively more and more with the loudness wars
Loudness war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(in case you didn't know already)

My taste lies in easy listening pop music that came out in the 60's. Most of it is available on CD's as well, but when they were mastered for CD's, they had become muzak
Elevator music - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and an unfortunate casualty was that the cd versions sucked, because the music was remastered with that purpose in mind.

Example
LP45??Paul Mauriat??????La Reine De Saba?Original??AT28E Body???DL103/???DL103C1? - YouTube

Paul Mauriat - La Reine De Saba - YouTube

This is the same song, one was ripped from an LP, and the other from a CD. Both are on youtube, so I figure we should be looking at a fair comparison here.

And the difference is obvious.


To me, vinyl is a means, not an end in itself. I do not think it is a superior format. Heck, I've got a Vinyl recordings made on some high end chrome tape that was donated to me by FM rajiv that sounds better than their modern CD versions. Conversely, a lot of records that are made from recent recordings sound just as lifeless as the CD's.

The difference comes from the recordings themselves. For some reason, If you're into older music, the vinyl versions sound better than the CD versions. And Vinyl gives you a means to access those recordings.

Heck, I download LP rips from blogs that share them. I tried the izotope vinyl plugin to make my CD MP3's sound like vinyl.

Didn't work for me. Sure, it sounded like i was listening to a record, but the actual LP rips sounded much better.

Maybe if we got the studio master and transferred them directly to CD, we might have better results, but for these songs, the LP versions are superior.

 

[Ambio]

@greenhorn, please stick to the OP. There wasn't any mastering involved there. I am sure when they started the experiment they used the best of vinyl recordings. This post is about the ability of CD to sound exactly like the vinyl to the extend the Linn Sondek fame designer couldn't tell the difference. Have you even heard about this experiment before this? Why no one talks about it?

If CD can be made to sound like vinyl then why aren't the producers produce CD to sound like how the experiment was done? Why they make CD to sound like CD? And most importantly what happened to the awful sound of digital that Ivor was so sure of and hated?

I am not saying which format you should listen to. I putting forward the experiment and asking where did the harsh digital sound disappeared to?

Maybe, there wasn't such sound at all. They are just different sounding. One is closer to live sound. But you must also understand marketing. It is a competition. Life or death to vinyl.

Now, vinyl is making a come back which got to do with shrinking market of physical media. That's business. Please understand high end is not a big market for music industry. Sound research is not made for audiophiles but for studios, for professionals. We are non existent to 99% percent of the population. How many audiophiles are there in your neighborhood?

 

[greenhorn]

@greenhorn, please stick to the OP.

I am. In the OP, you made a statement

if you want vinyl sound you can make digital to sound like that. You can find many plugins that add vinyl effect to digital recordings.

.... You can do it without buying a turntable.

My point was that you cannot simply abstractly separate vinyl as a medium, and the music that is recorded onto it for the purpose of argument. I've already said that It's not the medium that's superior. It's incredibly hard/impossible to get CD's of artists i listen to - mantovani, caravelli etc on CD which sound as good as the vinyl versions. Ideally if we could get a CD with the same mastering as the LP, then what you said may be true, but in practice, it's not the case.I'm giving you the practical reasons why I prefer vinyl here and you continue to support the argument that you have made in the OP. Is the purpose of this thread a monologue on your point of view on vinyl ?

If CD can be made to sound like vinyl then why aren't the producers produce CD to sound like how the experiment was done? Why they make CD to sound like CD?

Commercial concerns. Target demographics.

I am not saying which format you should listen to. I putting forward the experiment and asking where did the harsh digital sound disappeared to?

at least for me the harsh digital sound is in the early days of digital - late 80's and 90's CD's. perform the same experiment with a 90's remastered CD with simulated vinyl noise, and the original LP, folks would be able to distinguish them easily

Maybe, there wasn't such sound at all. They are just different sounding. One is closer to live sound. But you must also understand marketing. It is a competition. Life or death to vinyl.

You misunderstand vinyl sound to be an intrinsic property of the medium alone. My point is that there is more to it.

Now, vinyl is making a come back which got to do with shrinking market of physical media. That's business. Please understand high end is not a big market for music industry. Sound research is not made for audiophiles but for studios, for professionals. We are non existent to 99% percent of the population. How many audiophiles are there in your neighborhood?

Perhaps. All the more reason to stick to music that was actually made with a more audiophile demographic in mind

 

[Ambio]

I am. In the OP, you made a statement


My point was that you cannot simply abstractly separate vinyl as a medium, and the music that is recorded onto it for the purpose of argument. I've already said that It's not the medium that's superior. It's incredibly hard/impossible to get CD's of artists i listen to - mantovani, caravelli etc on CD which sound as good as the vinyl versions. Ideally if we could get a CD with the same mastering as the LP, then what you said may be true, but in practice, it's not the case.I'm giving you the practical reasons why I prefer vinyl here and you continue to support the argument that you have made in the OP. Is the purpose of this thread a monologue on your point of view on vinyl ?


Commercial concerns. Target demographics.

at least for me the harsh digital sound is in the early days of digital - late 80's and 90's CD's. perform the same experiment with a 90's remastered CD with simulated vinyl noise, and the original LP, folks would be able to distinguish them easily

You misunderstand vinyl sound to be an intrinsic property of the medium alone. My point is that there is more to it.


Perhaps. All the more reason to stick to music that was actually made with a more audiophile demographic in mind

Ok. You are responding to the last two paragraph of mine. I need time to respond to you as I first need to understand them. And you are saying Ivor could not tell the difference because of this? In case you have missed, the experiment was conducted in 1984. The bad sounding era of digital according to audiophiles.

 

[Nishanth]

So guys, my assertion is vinyl sounds different and not better and if you want vinyl sound you can make digital to sound like that. You can find many plugins that add vinyl effect to digital recordings.

How can you come to the conclusion that vinyl sounds different and not better from the test? From the test done all that I can conclude is that the Sony PCM-F1 adapter did not introduce any clearly audible difference in the sound quality when introduced in the analogue chain. For me the only thing that this test proves is that the Sony PCM-F1 or the use of a AD/DA Converter will not degrade the sound quality of the Vinyl source.

 

[Ambio]

?... For me the only thing that this test proves is that the Sony PCM-F1 or the use of a AD/DA Converter will not degrade the sound quality of the Vinyl source.

that means you accept digital doesn't degrade the sound quality of a vinyl? In fact, the difference was detectable under the experiment. Despite that, the respected vinyl designer couldn't detect it. Is it amazing considering the digital technology in use at the time. that was in 1984!

 

[Ambio]

Let me just clarify the purpose of the OP. it meant to tell newcomers to the world of high end that don't rush to vinyl if you are not satisfied with the digital sound. Try to perfecting the digital setup. Go out and listen to live unamplified sound. Pay attention to the vocals. You will be amazed how accurate digital can be.

Some newcomers rush to vinyl when the digital doesn't sound right. I am asking you to pause and compare that to live sound especially acoustics and see how close that is. Rest is your choice.

 

[sann]

Digital can be as BAD as Vinyl

Mr Ambio the OP, could you please explain the title you have given to this thread? looks like you are declaring to the world that vinyl is BAD (subjectively or technically?) and sometimes digital can be as bad (subjectively or technically?)

I have seen some of your posts in last few days, and it looks like you are trying to construct an attack on vinyl as a medium, but my dear fellow FM, vinyl as a medium has proven itself against time, and is well above and beyond such debates.

~Happy Listening
-sann'

 

[Ambio]

Mr Ambio the OP, could you please explain the title you have given to this thread? looks like you are declaring to the world that vinyl is BAD (subjectively or technically?) and sometimes digital can be as bad (subjectively or technically?)

I have seen some of your posts in last few days, and it looks like you are trying to construct an attack on vinyl as a medium, but my dear fellow FM, vinyl as a medium has proven itself against time, and is well above and beyond such debates.

~Happy Listening
-sann'

Technically. It is not an attack. please see my previous post.

 

[Nishanth]

that means you accept digital doesn't degrade the sound quality of a vinyl? In fact, the difference was detectable under the experiment. Despite that, the respected vinyl designer couldn't detect it. Is it amazing considering the digital technology in use at the time. that was in 1984!

There was no clear audible difference to pick one over the other, but as you said there was a difference in sound. So die hard Vinyl supporters would say that the fact that there was a difference in sound proves that the introduction of a digital equipment in the analogue chain would degrade sound quality.

Most of the Vinyl lovers that I know of have a problem with the standard audio CD and not much with the associated equipment like DACs in the digital chain. Infact some Vinyl fans have been using digital gear to convert their collection into digital formats and claim that the process preserves the sound quality of the Vinyl. So if you want to prove to a Vinyl supporter that Digital is superior then you should first prove the superior sound quality of a standard audio CD when compared to a Vinyl.

 

[greenhorn]

And you are saying Ivor could not tell the difference because of this? In case you have missed, the experiment was conducted in 1984. The bad sounding era of digital according to audiophiles.

Yes. The premise of the argument (and the one that you are also trying to disprove) is

Vinyl sounds better than digital.

and towards that end, the experiment was conducted with the the CD and LP version of the same, and with simulated vinyl noise added to the CD version ending up being better than the LP version. No contest here - LP does have it's fair share of problems. I'm not going into the issues with early CD players.


But the experiment misses one of the implied things in the statement.

Music on vinyl sound better than digital.

If I wanted to buy, say a willie nelson or a mantovani CD, what I'd get is a CD made off a very recent master that god knows was remastered how many times, and compressed to within an inch of what the CD will allow.

On the other hand, the same in record format, is either an old record, or a reissue is probably made from an older master, much closer to the original, with little compression.

And THIS is what sounds better.

 

[Ambio]

There was no clear audible difference to pick one over the other, but as you said there was a difference in sound. So die hard Vinyl supporters would say that the fact that there was a difference in sound proves that the introduction of a digital equipment in the analogue chain would degrade sound quality.
....

Please read the complete report. You mean to say vinyl lovers are more discerning than Ivor Tiefenbrun. The slight detectable difference was heard by the digital experts but missed by the vinyl guru. They were so confident that it wouldn't be detectable that they took the gamble.