TurnTables Sound better than Digital !!! - Really ???

[arj]

I am not a Digital Signal Processing guru, so I wouldn't agree or disagree with the claim of lower order harmonics "affecting" us. However, I have two questions.

(1) How much (what %age) of total music lies in those lower order harmonics?

I would believe it is not a measure of the % of music but the impact it can have. to give an example from the lower bass, any song from Eric Claptons Unplugged OR the famous Livingston Taylor 'Grandmas hands" have a 20-25 Hz deep thump.(I have measured both). You will not hear it in most systems, but when you do hear it in any system, the songs get transformed and you will never be able to hear it any system which cannot do that after that..it is just a drum/foot stamp and that too a periodic thump..But Huge impact.

(2) What prevents recording equipments from capturing those harmonics in a 24/96 or 32/192 digital recording?

I would be glad to hear any convincing answers.

Unfortunately nothing prevents them and when they do it sounds Great (eg the HD recordings today) but unfortunately they do not exist in many cases . from what i could find the 20-20khz human hearing which is technically right but practically wrong.

While its true that human hearing thru the ear is in that range, the impact of music is via Impact as well. it is the chest thumping tactile feeling below 50 Hz and something called Bone conduction above 15 khz which bypasses the ear .In fact many instruments and their harmonics extend well past these extremes..and thats why live music very often adds a better experience

Lps are the only ones other than True HD content which can do that..but there is very little "True HD" content around..maybe when it all comes this love for LPs might reduce.

But till it comes in I am all for LPs as no Hindi cd can reproduce the music of hindi fils of the 60-90's like LPs can. The music industry has ruined the content itself due to the half baked knowledge on digital.

 

[Dr.Bass]

Hiten, I'll buy that. HOWEVER, please tell me WHY those harmonics can't be recorded in a high bandwidth high resolution digital stream such as 24/96 or 32/192? WHY the notion that digital can't have those harmonics?

If you talk just about data, yes digital can have the higher order harmonics if the space allocated is enough. But having data and consuming data are two different things. While consuming this data there needs to be some device that will reconstruct all this digital data into meaningful analogue entity. Any errors in this reconstruction process is extremely damaging to the final result. Analogue errors are much less damaging than digital errors. Remember the good old VHS tape on which we used to watch movies ? Even if the tape is half as good the movie was still watchable in a meaningful way (with all the distortion in video and audio), what happens when a DVD/VCD is damaged or skipping ? It becomes instantly non consumable. Digital distortion is very very unkind and more the processing more is the possibility of a distortion. Enjoying the natural flow of music while the harmonics are kept intact and in place is achieved very easily in analogue medium. Why cant it happen in digital, it possibly can but it is rare. One reason could be people who are involved in DSP are not really serious about how "music" sounds at the end of their algorithm.

 

[ynotbubba]

Seems like one more round of Cd vs Vinyls.

Let me contribute:

 

[Dr.Bass]

Dr Bass, thank you for your detailed reply. However I have two issues:

1) If your sample for this poll is predominantly made up of vinyl-philes (at times, even I count myself as one, though not consistently), you will perhaps get an opinion with more subjective content than is ideal. Perhaps the more objective way would be to measure the frequencies on a new disc of high quality pressing, and then do the same measurements on the same disc after it has been played 15-20 times. And of course, along the way, listen for differences also. That should put this matter to rest. I don't have the equipment (and perhaps the ears) to do it myself. if you come across any such test do post the link.

2) But why bother at all if the wear is uniform? I feel that we can look at a somewhat crude analogy here - if water flows for many years over a rock face, it becomes smoother and but does not lose its basic shape. Similarly, the wear on a record groove should be disproportionate more on the finer undulations than those pertaining to the sub-20khz notes. Eventually, the wear will (over a long time and if not played and maintained perfectly) impact the basic notes also. And theoretically, since the tracking force is not zero, and the hardness of the surface not infinite, there must be some wear.

On both counts you are right.

For #1, I think audiophiles are a finicky lot. Especially analogue guys are very particular, so they buy multiple pressings of each album and compare and keep sometimes couple of them. Many of them even have multiple TTs and tonearms to have a taste of different flavours of analogue. If this issue was anything glaring and audible it would have been well under discussion. Moreover analogue guys normally have good systems and analogue has a very long history so almost everything about analogue playback has been investigated and discussed in these forums many times over.

For #2, correct but what is the point ? We chose vinyl over digital purely going by our ears. If there is a degradation in the vinyl after playing a few times but our ears dont detect that (even with all these high end audiophile systems being used) why bother ? Theory vs practical ?

 

[ranjeetrain]

That is good thinking!

One more question, if scientists come back tomorrow and say they made a mistake and humans can actually hear only upto 10khz, will you switch to mp3 or downgrade your system to roll off everything above 10khz ?

Sorry, my intention is not to poke you. Just wanted to understand why should we allow any scientist to decide which medium should we use to listen to music ? Going by science it would turn out that even 24/192 is useless because it captures all those additional information beyond 20khz which we cannot hear!! Wouldnt it be rather rational to just listen to some high quality setups (both analogue and digital variety) and say "I like digital/analogue" ? Arent all arguments over after that ? No scientist or even the highest rated audio guru can even dare to convince you otherwise.

First of all, I didn't say we should allow scientists to decide what medium we should use. It's the vinyl-lovers that are coming up with FR charts and stuff to convince the digital lot I said, "If I can hear". So, I am firmly in the camp of "hearing-based-decision-makers".

About 10k, again, NO, that won't be the case for ME. If I go to audition a speaker I choose the speaker that sounds the best, not the one that says 10-100KHz

I form the science behind something as a starting point. I see kids jump in the water from a 30 feet high cliff and I know its safe. I don't need a scientist to tell me it is safe to jump in water from 30 feet height. I haven't read a scientific paper on it neither have I done any computer simulation. But I see it happen all the time and need to no science to guide me about it. However, if I wanted to fly in an air balloon that can take me 3000 feet high in the sky, I'd definitely do my research before taking the flight. I'd see if breathing would be easy there, would I need a mask, would there be any harmful rays etc.

So, you see, you can't completely ignore science. Science is for the betterment of human life, not the other way round. I will all the time, no questions asked, let be the science my guiding light. However, I reserve the right to make my decisions based on what my senses suggest are better for me.

 

[jls001]

2) But why bother at all if the wear is uniform? I feel that we can look at a somewhat crude analogy here - if water flows for many years over a rock face, it becomes smoother and but does not lose its basic shape. Similarly, the wear on a record groove should be disproportionate more on the finer undulations than those pertaining to the sub-20khz notes. Eventually, the wear will (over a long time and if not played and maintained perfectly) impact the basic notes also. And theoretically, since the tracking force is not zero, and the hardness of the surface not infinite, there must be some wear.

In the absence of more definitive knowledge, the best we can do is:
1) keep the stylus clean
2) not use worn stylus
3) ensure to the best of our knowledge, capability and availability of tools a correct tonearm setting (tracking force, vertical tracking angle, antiskate force, alignment on the headshell optimised to nulls, azimuth)
4) ensure TT is level
5) ensure our records are spotlessly clean.

Purely going by logic, the smaller undulations ought to be the first casualty and the the first to wear off, and sonically the first casualty ought to be loss of "micro-er" details.

If we stick to the above "rules", the records ought to last for many years.

 

[Dr.Bass]

First of all, I didn't say we should allow scientists to decide what medium we should use. It's the vinyl-lovers that are coming up with FR charts and stuff to convince the digital lot I said, "If I can hear". So, I am firmly in the camp of "hearing-based-decision-makers".

Not sure if hardcore analogue guys really even bother about whats going on in digital. While it is true for most digital components that the best compliments are generally "it sounds very analogue".hyeah:

Anyway, if you have heard well setup digital and analogue systems and decided to pursue digital, nothing like it! Hope you have lots of fun through this journey.

 

[ranjeetrain]

While it is true for most digital components that the best compliments are generally "it sounds very analogue".hyeah:

LOL. I'll give you full marks for that hyeah:

But here is the other part of the story. When people say "it sounds analogue", it is indeed a compliment. The compliment of being a predecessor or ancestor. Ever wonder why someone looks at a kid and says "hey, he looks exactly like his dad" or "hey, she looks exactly like her mom"? Why do people do that? Why don't they say, "hey you look exactly like your son/daughter"?

See where I am coming from? It is a human tendency to compare something new with something old. It's a casual way to approve something new by comparing it to something old.

Some other random thoughts while we are on the topic:

Trust me, I know what music should sound like. I have practiced with my band. Where all instruments are playing around me. Environment where you are singing, you know how your voice sounds like. You know how other friends voices sound like. You know how professional singers sing, what does it sound like. Unamplified environment with all real sounds.

When I say digital can sound as good as analogue (again, this is just by convention and to give people a point of reference) I mean it. And it is not because I am an arrogant stubborn rantist who goes on Internet to just kill time. I am saying what I have experienced.

With today's technology, digital is no way inferior. In fact, it offers many advantages. Fortunately, I warmed up to digital pretty early. Two decades ago if I said on an audio forum "digital will rule the future", people would look down upon me, probably I would even earn a ban as a troll. But look around today, some of the best sounding systems are all digital.

Peace to all. Whatever your medium, enjoy your music. Forget your medium and your gear

 

[Hiten]

Hiten, I'll buy that. HOWEVER, please tell me WHY those harmonics can't be recorded in a high bandwidth high resolution digital stream such as 24/96 or 32/192? WHY the notion that digital can't have those harmonics?

A well mastered CD and these days SACD is always preferred to vinyls. At the start of digital revolution lots of CD album were badly mastered and dynamic range compressed. So if one has vinyl and cd of same album and if he/she finds CD sound superior its only logical to listen to CDs. Also vice versa. Luckily most of the music I like is on vinyls.
Record wear : A diamond stylus on moving vinyl will definitely wear out weakest material first. That's why development of lighter straight tonearms and cartridges with almost 1 to 1.5 gms of tracking force. So these days vinyls lasts longer and besides classic albums are easily available. I have seen some old audio cds in my little collection developing pinholes and scratches and spots. But they play nicely.

I think vinyl media can take little bit of abuse from everyone.
Vinyls have survived the test of time
so I will not worry unnecessarily about records wearing out.
Regards

 

[ranjeetrain]

A well mastered CD and these days SACD is always preferred to vinyls. At the start of digital revolution lots of CD album were badly mastered and dynamic range compressed. So if one has vinyl and cd of same album and if he/she finds CD sound superior its only logical to listen to CDs. Also vice versa. Luckily most of the music I like is on vinyls.
Record wear : A diamond stylus on moving vinyl will definitely wear out weakest material first. That's why development of lighter straight tonearms and cartridges with almost 1 to 1.5 gms of tracking force. So these days vinyls lasts longer and besides classic albums are easily available. I have seen some old audio cds in my little collection developing pinholes and scratches and spots. But they play nicely.

I think vinyl media can take little bit of abuse from everyone.
Vinyls have survived the test of time
so I will not worry unnecessarily about records wearing out.
Regards

A lot of truth in your post. One of the most honest posts in this thread. As a matter of fact, if we discount the poorly mastered CDs of early days of digital era, digital sounds as good as it can get. Mastering techniques have improved so much that even after multiple rounds of processing, signals still remain true to their analogue form. This is all because of the additional buffer people are building in audio engineering process. And digital processing immensely benefits from these technological advances.

Not to mention, digital is free from wear. A track stored digitally is either there or not there. There is no way of part corruption, assuming media is on solid state storage and no on a disc you need to spin.

Digital systems are also a lot more immune to RF/EMI and other interferences that haunt every high end setup.

Digital allows me to play my favorite music by tapping over my phone screen without me having to leave my recliner. That won't happen with analogue. Analogue wants me to work before it rewards me with good sound. Not just work, rather work hard.

And finally, only digital will allow you to have an intelligent DJ play tunes for your mood :clapping:

 

[sann]

no Hindi cd can reproduce the music of hindi fils of the 60-90's like LPs can.

+1 :thumbsup:

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Analogue errors are much less damaging than digital errors. Remember the good old VHS tape on which we used to watch movies ? Even if the tape is half as good the movie was still watchable in a meaningful way (with all the distortion in video and audio), what happens when a DVD/VCD is damaged or skipping ? It becomes instantly non consumable. Digital distortion is very very unkind and more the processing more is the possibility of a distortion.

Analogue errors are not necessarily kinder than digital ones. Wait until one of your LPs gets a really bad scratch: you'll discover a very unkind analogue error that is unlistenable to.

Otherwise, you are both right and wrong. You are right about those digital artifacts: it is easier to watch a picture that is generally blurred than one that has out-of place rectangles on it. Otherwise, I think you are getting somewhat confused with the kinds of "distortion" which analogue and digital systems suffer. Whilst it is said that analogue systems handle overload more gracefully, if this happens it is a recording engineer's error. Your stylus will jump off the record, but yes, it will take more than the digital overload, which will just go to noise. Either way is a technical error, not part of the music. A clipping amplifier is one of the unkindest (possibly fatal) things that speakers can experience: analogue error.

Enjoying the natural flow of music while the harmonics are kept intact and in place is achieved very easily in analogue medium. Why cant it happen in digital, it possibly can but it is rare.

You'll have to ask a scientist. Some of them are called recording engineers :lol:

A worn lp sounds a bit like a highly compressed MP3. True, I'd rather listen to the worn lp.

 

[Dr.Bass]

Here is an excerpt from the latest issue of "The Absolute sound" magazine. TAS guys are talking to the mastering engineers Tony Hawkins and Ray Staff at AIR studios, London:

But first it is worth considering, briefly, why vinyl refuses to die, and indeed
flourishes. I asked Ray whether analog was superior to digital, and he replied
that there is good analog and bad analog, and good digital and bad digital...
and unfortunately what the public hear is mostly bad digital (you assume that
Ray excludes his own work from this entirely accurate description), with the
additional proviso that listening to hopelessly compressed and compromised digital
files (otherwise known as MP3s) through a phone on small earpieces is bound
to destroy the sound. But even on a decent hi-fi, 16-bit CDs sound ersatz and
completely devoid of any sense of space and acoustic, and SACDwith its fake
ambienceis (at best) simply a way of trying to make digital sound more analog,
and therefore more natural. Ray did say that digital editing tools enable him to
do things with tapes (and acetates) that analog could never do (which those who
are into off-the-air performances are well aware of) and that the advent of 24-bit,
higher-resolution sound makes a big difference. Certainly if your DAC has the
ability to process and play higher-resolution downloads (as opposed to upsampling
and then compressing/converting them back to 16-bit) the difference in sound is
marked. But even these files cannotyetequal the flow, natural timbre, body, and
presence of high-quality vinyl, which is in essence why people still buy black discs.

This was exactly what I wanted to say but I know a magazine excerpt would sound more authentic especially when coming from a top quality studio and their mastering engineers.

 

[Dr.Bass]

As long as one has heard high quality digital and high quality analogue playback systems and chooses one of the mediums (based on any reasoning), it is no more debatable. Unfortunately that doesnt happen most of the times.

 

[malvai]

^^ good one Dr. Bass, the non-belivers would not even consider an argument like this coming from the likes of you and me!

In fact, some would scoff at the words!

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Well, I've had the pleasure of listening to both at Dr.Bass's house. Of course, for a long time in my own home too, but my equipment is a leeeetle bit downmarket from his . I admire his practical attitude that, while much of the music that he wants to listen to is still on CD, he's going to own and use a CD player as well as his TT setup. Choice is a great thing!

What will the next generation of music recording/playback bring us, and how will the economics of the music industry allow it to happen?

 

[Ariyahoor]

analogue simply doesn't sound better. that's it

 

[omishra]

analogue simply doesn't sound better. that's it

It depends on what your music tastes are. Yes it takes price and pain to get good sounding analogue setup, crappy system can be just disgusting as you may have experienced.

In the end you have to listen analogue through ear, doesn't that sound better? Or you listen digital directly?

 

[Ariyahoor]

It depends on what your music tastes are. Yes it takes price and pain to get good sounding analogue setup, crappy system can be just disgusting as you may have experienced.

In the end you have to listen analogue through ear, doesn't that sound better? Or you listen digital directly?

Uh no. actually I got some good analogue sources with good MC phono cartridges and phono-stages and ... but after all, playing a 24/192 Flac via a good DAC > Preamp > power > speaker will sound much cleaner than analoguehyeah:

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

I was listening to a snippet of an interview with Paul Simon, waaay back in 1988, in which they briefly discussed the three then-available formats, LP, CD and cassette. He had nothing good to say about cassette, but in comparing CD and LP, mentioned that vinyl was selling into, and being bought by, audiophile market, and because of that, it was possible to get extremely good vinyl pressings. Could it be that the golden age of vinyl actually started after CD had already dominated the market?