The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 73
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by coolvinny
    It is very hard for me to accurately distinguish between the CD and 320K mp3 records, but the vinyl sounds clearly better. No contest.
    I know it's hard, but if you had to explain the difference with words, how would you do it ? Does it have something to do with realism ? Or the purity of the sounds ? Or that more frequencies are reproduced ?

    Also, did any of you experimented with USB DACs ? Do they really make a difference when your digital music library is mainly comprised of 320k mp3 and FLAC ?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by orri
    I recently did a comparison. I could hear clear difference (not much, but well distinguishable) between lossless and 320k mp3, trying with both ~80 USD headphones and ~160 USD headphones.
    And the lossless sounded better (in both headphones), it sounded more open, clear, and natural. (it was kind of the same type of difference as between lossless and 128k mp3, simply just a smaller amount of difference)
    I used the first track from The Wall (pink floyd) to do that test.

    But a few years ago I also did a test with the same 80 USD headphones, and another pair of more expensive headphone and a 256k mp3 sounded the same as 320k mp3 (and lossless). (don't remember which track I used)

    I guess it depends on the track.
    If the track is much compressed (compressed as in compressor, not digital compression), it probably matters less how much digital compression is used.
    Agreed, with headphones the difference is clear. With good headphones the difference is often painfully clear!

    However in a suitable room with actual speakers, the difference is almost negligible. There are more variables when you're in a room listening through speakers and so the mp3 vs. lossless factor plays a smaller role.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Thank you for correcting me Fep, re standard meaning of "double blind".

    Coolviny and others, I can't understand why are you comparing preamps, cables, and I don't know what, whole systems, rooms, treatments, ...., prices and costs?
    Question is not how good or how expensive system you can make, it's not even about digital vs. analog.
    It's btw vinyl and CD, provided everything else is the same.

    There's not a single charachteristic of vinyl that can not be 100% faithfully recreated (by digital "equipment") and reproduced on CD playback.

    Further, while collecting vinyl is less expensive than collecting guitars, it's much more costly than collecting colorfull rocks, so what's the point of comparisson? Unles them rocks are magic ones, for the corner of an audiophiles listening room, for purifying the sound, or alike. You can carefully place them along speaker and mains cables, too, those with arrows for current dirrection.
    Yes, it is both sad and laughable, after a point.

    Re: comparing sources
    I remember once someone made a mix from 24 tr. (15ips, or 30ips, can't recall it right now) into Pro Tools for FX and processors.
    Than he transfered all individual tracks to HD and run it through exactly the same PT setup.
    Than he edited two mixes together.

    The challenge was to spot the edit point.

    So, I did it, I've heard it middle of the loudest note of the violin solo. So, it's not I can (could?) not hear such things.
    For curiosity part, it was much easier to hear the edit on walkman buds than on high quality headphones.
    On speakers, there was no way to hear it.

    P.S. There's only one thing where vinyl is better. Scratch a CD, it may become unplayable.
    Hamer an LP to pieces, and glue it back together with sanitary silicone, or gaffa tape, and you'll be able to play the better part of it. Sacrifying the needle in process, of course.
    Last edited by Vladan; 01-23-2014 at 01:27 PM.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Vladan the blind test you describe (as I understood it) is very good to test how much "bad" digitizing a recording does.
    So if I understand you correctly you compare two signal paths:

    signal path 1:
    vinyl on turntable playback -> phono amp -> amplifier -> loudspeakers.

    signal path 2:
    vinyl on turntable playback -> phono amp -> ADC -> digital storage format -> DAC -> amplifier -> loudspeakers


    If you use the same equipment in both signal paths. and decent ADC (analogue to digital converter), DAC, and digital storage format, I really doubt people could tell any difference.

    I am though not sure it 16 bit per sample is enough. (probably on most equipment)


    But when people talk or think about the difference of the vinyl sound vs. cd sound, I think they are comparing the different signal paths that starts when the same unmastered recording goes to two different mastering processes, and ends in the loudspeakers (or ears, or even brainwaves since our hearing is not identical).

    People might get confused and talk about bit rates and dynamic range etc. to try to guess an explaination for the difference they hear, but there are so many more variables.
    Last edited by orri; 01-23-2014 at 02:05 PM.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Orri, thank you for understanding.

    I'll just add, in my opinion, and many other's, 16bit digital audio, while not covering whole dynamic range of human hearing, it covers more than any previously used media, no doubt about that. 44.1Khz, is covering the whole range, and that's a fact, too.

    Everything else is speculation, room "sound", distortion, modulation, (sympathethic) ringing and other "mallfunctions" of (poorly designed) analog equipment, including speakers, no matter how expensive they are.

    also, the experiment is a proof there's nothing in vinyl a CD can not reproduce. You just have to put it there and it'll come out.
    Last edited by Vladan; 01-23-2014 at 03:06 PM.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by coolvinny
    In the range of a few thousand dollars for a system (nothing like 2bop-or-not's above, which looks like $50K to me)
    Nope. Like buying archtops, buying "high end audio gear" one learns to buy used. I traded audio before coming to dabble in guitars.

    Pic one displays all used gear, except for the open baffle speakers, acquired via audiogon.com. I've been a member there since they began in '97. Prior to that it was usenet...before that it was the newspaper...bah humbug!

    Buying used buys better gear, stretching your dollar, as most hi end gear depreciates within a few years of release. The most expensive component in that pic is an $8k Balanced Audio Technology VK51SE preamp, acquired used for $2900. There's not $10k of gear in that pic. Retail it would approach $25-$30k. Rule 1: Never buy even close to retail.

    Pic 2, same thing, about $10k...all used gear, featuring a pair of Martin Logan CLSiiz electrostats atop Arcici stands, powered by a Plinius SA250Mkiv Class A, user switchable to Class A/B, power amp...Plinius is a perennial solid state favorite.

    I'd be very surprised to learn that any of these vinyl critics have ever heard a decent hi end system within the context of their own listening rooms...no offense intended folks....but I say that because vinyl is so much more dynamic, real, than digital, that it's glaringly obvious:

    Is it real, or is it Memorex - uhhh CD?
    Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 01-23-2014 at 04:10 PM.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Please pardon me for posting again but this needs to be read: http://www.wescottdesign.com/article...g/sampling.pdf .
    Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-23-2014 at 05:09 PM.

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Well, for that matter, maybe better reaad this:

    http://lavryengineering.com/pdfs/lav...ing-theory.pdf

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fep
    Double blind test is when the tester and the one being tested don't know which is vinyl or CD.
    Double blind testing does not apply to what is described here, because if the "tested" is a person and the "tester" also is a person (not the CD or vinyl formats), who is going to break the blind ? Single blind testing is sufficient. However, if we are testing the subjective experience of listening and is testing an intervention such as whether CD vs vinyl listening for a week makes listeners smile more (i.e. psychoacoustics) then a double blind design may be relevant.

    I agree with not bringing any other variables (mics, recording techniques, amplifiers, speakers, room etc) into the comparison. The other issue that is not clarified is what are we measuring ? If the vinyl produces pops and crackles etc and the CD does not during playback, of course it is easy to discriminate (based on undesirables). Then the listener can use conscious or unconscious bias and say vinyl sounds more "natural" or "realistic". We already know some people will prefer one over the other.

    What some vinyl proponents argue (and that can be tested) is that some quality(ies ?) that vinyl encoding/playback technology has can not be achieved by CD encoding/playback technology. Since these proponents also argue that it is not measurable (i.e. by engineering tools) but it can be audible by audiophiles/golden ears, the single blind test is not that complicated: you bring the person (who claims ability to discern this unmeasurable quality in vinyl encoding/playback) into a state-of-the art acoustically treated room blindfolded, play a set of diverse music/sounds and ask them to differentiate among these: A) vinyl playback recorded onto and played on CD, B) CD playback recorded and played on vinyl, C) vinyl by vinyl and D) CD by CD. So we have four choices. If there was something special about vinyl that can only be heard by audiophiles with golden ears, we would predict they would identify A, B, C better than chance, D will be easily identifiable because it won't have pops and crackles at all, but the others will require hearing that special immeasurable but audible quality imparted by vinyl. If they can't score better than chance, the conclusion would be that the CD format can accomplish everything that vinyl can minus the noise.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    You could easily set up a double blind study.

    'Administrator', who is out of view, sets up, level matches and cues up vinyl and CD of the same album/albums, have the tester push buttons that are not identified which toggle between the two sources.

    There are other ways that wouldn't require any additional equipment. You just need the administrator and the tester.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fep
    You could easily set up a double blind study.

    'Administrator', who is out of view, sets up, level matches and cues up vinyl and CD of the same album/albums, have the tester push buttons that are not identified which toggle between the two sources.

    There are other ways that wouldn't require any additional equipment. You just need the administrator and the tester.
    I agree. However, I don't understand the added value of the blindness of the Administrator.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    OP started as a tangent to vintage guitars issue, here's one more tangent. I can only imagine all the flaws in the test these people conducted ...

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptiveca...pick-the-strad
    For personal input, samples provided are obviously different sounding, but I have no idea which would be the Strad. I know, in the mix, and in the band, I'd rather deal with the sharper one (than with the mellower), which says nothing about what my preference, as in "I like it better", is.

    And for the other side:

    http://www.violinist.com/blog/laurie/20121/13039/
    Last edited by Vladan; 01-24-2014 at 03:26 PM.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fep
    You could easily set up a double blind study.

    'Administrator', who is out of view, sets up, level matches and cues up vinyl and CD of the same album/albums, have the tester push buttons that are not identified which toggle between the two sources.

    There are other ways that wouldn't require any additional equipment. You just need the administrator and the tester.
    A double blind study would be meaningless, for it would only reveal one listeners experience in one room - Hint * No two audiophiles rooms are alike.

    Quote Originally Posted by medblues
    Maybe there is no need to choose, let's presume the blind tests ARE actually flawed, those of us with limited disposable money and emphasize real difference (not just enjoyment/GAS etc) still cannot justify spending $ XXXXX for a difference of Y which may or may not be subjectively better based on preference.
    If you are a working stiff, like I was, you can learn to buy and create a very decent home system that, over time, is ZERO cost to you. Ever heard of OPM?

    There's nothing "subjective" about vinyl vs. CD, unless one is listening to a table-cartridge combo that's very poorly setup. Even inexpensive tables like the MMF 7.1 can deliver the goods. It's no Oracle Delphi Mk V w/ SME 345 tonearm, but there are many budget minded turntables today such as the one mentioned that yield excellent results.


  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by 2bornot2bop
    A double blind study would be meaningless, for it would only reveal one listeners experience in one room - Hint * No two audiophiles rooms are alike.



    If you are a working stiff, like I was, you can learn to buy and create a very decent home system that, over time, is ZERO cost to you. Ever heard of OPM?

    There's nothing "subjective" about vinyl vs. CD, unless one is listening to a table-cartridge combo that's very poorly setup. Even inexpensive tables like the MMF 7.1 can deliver the goods. It's no Oracle Delphi Mk V w/ SME 345 tonearm, but there are many budget minded turntables today such as the one mentioned that yield excellent results.

    What if my time is worth money (especially since I feel way behind on my retirement funds) ?

    It is your subjective opinion that there is nothing subjective about vinyl vs cd :-)

    I like to listen to my CDs better than to my vinyl LPs maybe because I have a very average pair of ears. I might still upgrade my turntable in the near future however. It does not mean that the scientists are wrong, I still believe digital technology is good enough to replace analog in this context.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    The Oracle is such a piece of Industrial Art. Remember the precursor to the Mitchell Gyrodec featured in A Clockwork Orange with a young Malcolm McDowell?T

    This is what I recommend as the most basic good playing record player one should buy: http://www.amazon.com/REGA-RP1-TURNT.../dp/B004B3GELG .

    One could also look for its forebears (Planar 2, Planar 3, RP2) used. Parts are still available to keep them spinning.

    Set-up is vital. All bets are off if you do not set it up well. That goes for cartridge overhang, azimuth, vertical tracking angle, tracking force, setting it up on a level and light rigid shelf on spikes and isolated from the environment. A simple IKEA Lack side table with light plywood corner gussets glued in to make it rigid is a cheap serviceable turntable stand for a light turntable like the Rega. Couple it to a decent Dynavector phono preamp in a cigarette box and load the correct impedance for the cartridge. Position your speakers 3 feet from the rear wall, 3 feet from the side walls. Raise the speakers to ear height. Toe them in to face your seating position a little. Sit about 6 to 7 feet away from the speakers.

    Basic set-up of a 2=channel audio system.

    Oh dear me, audiophilia is rearing its febrile head again.
    Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-24-2014 at 05:01 PM.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Digital is about Intelligibility. Analogue is about Fidelity. The former goes for the minimum amount of data to make things intelligible. The latter goes for the maximum amount of data that can be captured and extracted.

    So, while on a great digital system, you can hear a tenor sax that sounds like a tenor sax should, on a great analogue system, you not only hear that it is a tenor sax but a Selmer Mark VI tenor sax with the lacquer taken off!

    All in my humble (possibly deluded) opinion, of course.

    I am one of those kooks who paints the rims of his CD green with a Staedtler deep green marker. Delusional again but to my ears, instruments and voices are better separated in space and you can hear deeper into the recording. The background is darker, quieter. It costs only one buck and a dime and I can paint 50 CDs with one pen. I stop at shaving the rims at a 45 degree angle though. Even that is too kooky for me.
    Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-24-2014 at 05:07 PM.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by medblues
    What if my time is worth money (especially since I feel way behind on my retirement funds) ?

    It is your subjective opinion that there is nothing subjective about vinyl vs cd :-)

    I like to listen to my CDs better than to my vinyl LPs maybe because I have a very average pair of ears. I might still upgrade my turntable in the near future however. It does not mean that the scientists are wrong, I still believe digital technology is good enough to replace analog in this context.
    A 3 in 1, dare I say it (uggggg), receiver that does digital surround sound, complete with am-fm tuner, and every modern function under the sun is "good enough" for 97% of those not in the audiophile community. Heck even tube integrated's aren't bad folks.

    Why spend extra dollars? I'd offer this...if one is not doing critical listening in the sweet spot, a boom box is good enough. If you're sitting down to listen to the maximum playback your system can provide you, a decent turntable matched to a $500-$1k stylus-cartridge combo will reward a listener with superior results than most high dollar digital playback...I've tried Meridian, Wadia, and countless others...some very good, but none even remotely approached the dynamic presentation of vinyl...soundstage depth and width is just one feature of vinyl that is far superior to digital.

    I never needed to read the engineers perspective, for there's no better perspective than having experienced countless components in ones own listening room...there's nothing to debate. In 1971 I bought my first system, Pioneer Quad 4 and Technique speakers, at the Yokosuka, Japan Naval Station. When digital arrived in '79 I thought, how convenient....I still think of it that way.

    To an experienced audiophile, this thread is a headscratching back and forth. I'd like to have heard from more critics with actual vinyl experience...but I get it...fast food is very popular with many. To some, due to a lack of familiarity, sitting down to listen to a 180gr LP requires too much preparation. Others, like me, visualize audio music as an experience, no less so than going out to listen to live music in a club...which last time I checked required drive time...except only better because at home one is in a controlled environment. End rant.
    Last edited by 2bornot2bop; 01-24-2014 at 06:25 PM.

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
    The Oracle is such a piece of Industrial Art. Remember the precursor to the Mitchell Gyrodec featured in A Clockwork Orange with a young Malcolm McDowell?T

    This is what I recommend as the most basic good playing record player one should buy: http://www.amazon.com/REGA-RP1-TURNT.../dp/B004B3GELG .

    One could also look for its forebears (Planar 2, Planar 3, RP2) used. Parts are still available to keep them spinning.

    Set-up is vital. All bets are off if you do not set it up well. That goes for cartridge overhang, azimuth, vertical tracking angle, tracking force, setting it up on a level and light rigid shelf on spikes and isolated from the environment. A simple IKEA Lack side table with light plywood corner gussets glued in to make it rigid is a cheap serviceable turntable stand for a light turntable like the Rega. Couple it to a decent Dynavector phono preamp in a cigarette box and load the correct impedance for the cartridge. Position your speakers 3 feet from the rear wall, 3 feet from the side walls. Raise the speakers to ear height. Toe them in to face your seating position a little. Sit about 6 to 7 feet away from the speakers.

    Basic set-up of a 2=channel audio system.

    Oh dear me, audiophilia is rearing its febrile head again.
    If I only had a dollar for every Rega Planer 3 with RGB300 tonearm that's been sold. There's a $500 combo on the used market that will yield very decent results. Speaking of cheaper tables...how many VPI HW 19 mk iii's circulate daily on the used market?

    Lest' Jabber's table-tonearm remarks makes you feel a bit intimidated - A professional, here in Seattle, will charge one $50-$75 for a typical cartridge install-table setup...Imagine that....not much different from an archtop setup, depending upon the luthier.

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by GuyBoden
    I'm only selling my recording on eight track cassette in glorious mono.
    A friend of mine had Mono. All he wanted to do was sleep . . .

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
    Digital is about Intelligibility. Analogue is about Fidelity. The former goes for the minimum amount of data to make things intelligible. The latter goes for the maximum amount of data that can be captured and extracted.

    So, while on a great digital system, you can hear a tenor sax that sounds like a tenor sax should, on a great analogue system, you not only hear that it is a tenor sax but a Selmer Mark VI tenor sax with the lacquer taken off!

    All in my humble (possibly deluded) opinion, of course.

    I am one of those kooks who paints the rims of his CD green with a Staedtler deep green marker. Delusional again but to my ears, instruments and voices are better separated in space and you can hear deeper into the recording. The background is darker, quieter. It costs only one buck and a dime and I can paint 50 CDs with one pen. I stop at shaving the rims at a 45 degree angle though. Even that is too kooky for me.
    I'll believe you...my wife can smell beer over the telephone.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    This whole discussion is kind of meaningless. Vinyl is over. If you still enjoy it, go ahead and enjoy it. Records are cool. There's a little bit of ritual involved in playing one. I like them. You can roll a joint on the album cover.

    For the other 99%, the convenience of having digital music in a portable format outweighs a loss of quality that it may take a "blind listening test" to perceive.

    Like it or not, this is the future.
    Last edited by Gilpy; 01-28-2014 at 12:28 PM.

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilpy
    This whole discussion is kind of meaningless. Vinyl is over.
    Now that's hilarious. That's exactly what was said in 1979, at the release of digital. And that same mantra has been repeated, and proven incorrect, at various times over the past 35 years...amidst the resurgence of vinyl pressings and sales. To make such a statement today can only suggest one is either out of touch with reality, or the marketplace. But hey, it's the internets...I get it!

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    Like I said, enjoy your vinyl, I still do. Any resurgence of records is a tiny niche in the market.

    Try buying a vinyl record at Wal Mart or Target. Or playing one on your phone or in your car. Records are inconvenient, and that's why they're not coming back, any more than the reel to reel tape recorder.

    For most people, buying, playing, maintaining, and owning the equipment to enjoy vinyl is just a huge pain in the ass. For others, like you, it's fun and rewarding. That's great!

    When I was a kid, we'd buy an album and sit in front of the stereo and play it to death. Listening to music was an activity in itself. I don't think I'm out of touch with reality to suggest that an awful lot of people don't do that anymore.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    Gobblygook man. Since the late 80's, vinyl has not been about music for the masses. Audiophiles, like myself, could care a hoot about the perception of vinyl by non vinyl enthusiasts.

    You lost me at Walmart. I'd never step foot in a Walmart. I don't believe in their shady business practices.

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    You completely miss my point, which is: for the vast majority of music listeners today ("audiophiles" excepted!), the analogue versus digital debate is moot.

    Very little new content is available on vinyl. Most listeners will never have an opportunity to compare the two.

    I'm sorry that you seem to take every post you don't agree with as a personal attack and respond by ridiculing the other person's opinion. You might consider that there are other knowledgable people in the world and that their statements might have some validity.