Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSN)   In which a record company proves that audiophiles are fooling themselves by passing off digital recordings as analog unnoticed for years   (msn.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, MSN  
•       •       •

1922 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 05 Aug 2022 at 10:30 PM (9 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



70 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-08-05 7:19:33 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2022-08-05 7:41:21 PM  
For the record, the first US digital recording, live and on vinyl:
Virgil Fox - "The Digital Fox" (Full Album)
Youtube c_wLErgOWQM


From whisper to thunder and everything in between, you can't beat Virgil Fox's Heavy Organ.
 
2022-08-05 7:56:41 PM  

felching pen: For the record, the first US digital recording, live and on vinyl:
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/c_wLErgOWQM]

From whisper to thunder and everything in between, you can't beat Virgil Fox's Heavy Organ.


Can't he just beat it himself?
 
2022-08-05 8:06:19 PM  

felching pen: For the record, the first US digital recording, live and on vinyl:
[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/c_wLErgOWQM?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&widgetid=1]

From whisper to thunder and everything in between, you can't beat Virgil Fox's Heavy Organ.


Pete Schwetti would like a word.
 
2022-08-05 8:11:51 PM  
My uncle is a former DJ from LA and he's one of those guys. He's also stone deaf. Your hearing degrades as you age, but he's been to so many concerts in his day he can't hear shiat anymore now that he's in his 70's. But you go over to his house and he has thousands of dollars of audio equipment, and he'll trot out whatever new purchase he has to show off and play it way too loud for you. He's the kind of guy who will spend $800 on speaker cables and $8000 on a record player.

As a general rule of thumb, if I meet someone under the age of 35 who says they can hear the difference between analog and a high end digital recording, I'm inclined to believe them. But if you're an old fark like me? Uh-uh. You can't hear shiat.
 
2022-08-05 8:21:36 PM  
Plug the electrical signal from a good turntable into an A/D converter and burn it to a CD. Then play back both the turntable and the CD into an ABX switch box. Challenge the audiophile to tell you which one is playing each time.

If and only if they can do significantly better than random chance at distinguishing the sources, then you can proceed to the followup question of asking which technology they prefer.
 
2022-08-05 8:36:11 PM  
Do good amps make a good signal? Yes. Are they better than shiatty amps? Yes. Is there a point of diminishing returns with amps? Absolutely.

Do good speakers present the music in a way that is more like what the mixing engineer intended? Absolutely. Are they better than shiatty speakers? Oh my God yes. Is there a point of diminishing returns with speakers? Yes.

Can these things make it possible to tell the difference between analog or digital recordings? LoL no. But they play a critical role in getting the imaging and staging that the mixing engineer actually created through volume and panning.

Are people listening to their music in a way that presents the music that way? Not really.
 
2022-08-05 8:43:19 PM  

felching pen: For the record, the first US digital recording, live and on vinyl:
[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/c_wLErgOWQM?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&widgetid=1]

From whisper to thunder and everything in between, you can't beat Virgil Fox's Heavy Organ.


I have a copy of his "The Fox Touch - Volume One" that was direct to disk (LP) by Crystal Clear Records from 1977.  Haven't listened to it in years but I may fire up the turntable and bring back memories.  Didn't realize that they made a separate digital recording - sort of like Sheffield Labs did a backup analog recording of their direct to disk LP recordings decades ago and used that to release CDs.

As for me all of my MoFi LPs were sourced from the original analog tapes and mastered by the late Stan Ricker, and I haven't purchased any new vinyl in decades.

Wonder if they used the Soundstream digital recorder - that was what Telarc used with their recordings around that time.  There was some ruckus on the audiophile group on Reddit about MoFi but ignored it until now.  May take a peak.
 
2022-08-05 9:53:36 PM  
thats why i use the best monster cables from best buy
 
2022-08-05 10:03:44 PM  
Oh...that's bull shait. Some of the best pressings of "Telcarc" discs....which you play on turn tables.
Are "Digtial" recorded.
This was well before the 'digital music' craze.
In face some of the better performances of classical music on vinyl can be had with the "telarc" "digital" discs.

The Stravinsky, 1912 overture, Debussy, and Holst. Are some standout recording from that company that released 'digital' recordings on vinyl. (they where mastered digitally and then cut to disc from the digital master.    tape)
Very good discs.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 10:12:37 PM  

optikeye: Oh...that's bull shait. Some of the best pressings of "Telcarc" discs....which you play on turn tables.
Are "Digtial" recorded.
This was well before the 'digital music' craze.
In face some of the better performances of classical music on vinyl can be had with the "telarc" "digital" discs.

The Stravinsky, 1912 overture, Debussy, and Holst. Are some standout recording from that company that released 'digital' recordings on vinyl. (they where mastered digitally and then cut to disc from the digital master.    tape)
Very good discs.
[Fark user image 850x1213]



I love me some Telarc. Everything they did was superbly recorded, even the Erich Kunzel version of 1812, although it was a lackluster performance. The 1958 Mercury recording of Antal Dorati's 1812 (with West Point cannons and Philadelphia carillon) is a great recording of a great performance by comparison.

But Telarc touted their 100% digital recordings for years, and they all sound wonderful. All the Telarc recordings are well worth the time to track down and listen to.
 
2022-08-05 10:14:32 PM  

question_dj: Do good amps make a good signal? Yes. Are they better than shiatty amps? Yes. Is there a point of diminishing returns with amps? Absolutely.

Do good speakers present the music in a way that is more like what the mixing engineer intended? Absolutely. Are they better than shiatty speakers? Oh my God yes. Is there a point of diminishing returns with speakers? Yes.

Can these things make it possible to tell the difference between analog or digital recordings? LoL no. But they play a critical role in getting the imaging and staging that the mixing engineer actually created through volume and panning.

Are people listening to their music in a way that presents the music that way? Not really.


Well, if you're listening to music that's the modern day equivalent of Captain and Tenell.
You probably can't tell the diffrence.
 
2022-08-05 10:19:55 PM  

Ginnungagap42: But Telarc touted their 100% digital recordings for years, and they all sound wonderful. All the Telarc recordings are well worth the time to track down and listen to.


Another worth tracking down is a "Stravinsky Conducts Stravinsky"
It's a little odd hearing his versions as he seems to hold back a bit for the rites of spring and other bits like the firebird kettle drums, and lead into the the finale. But some bits are very good....but hey, he wrote it.
 
2022-08-05 10:21:55 PM  
 "They were completely deceitful," says Richard Drutman, 50, a New York City filmmaker who has purchased more than 50 of MoFi's albums over the years. "I never would have ordered a single Mobile Fidelity product if I had known it was sourced from a digital master."

Oh COME ON. You couldn't spot the difference because there was no difference.
 
2022-08-05 10:26:14 PM  

Thoreny: "They were completely deceitful," says Richard Drutman, 50, a New York City filmmaker


FILM MAKER. PLEASE. I bet the closest this guy has ever got to 'film' is a waxy build up on his bathroom floor.
That's deceitful. MISTER "FILM" maker.
 
2022-08-05 10:45:34 PM  
Ah, people who don't understand nyquist rate, aka audiophiles.
 
2022-08-05 10:53:50 PM  
Give me Furtwangler and the Berlin Phil anytime.

Thanks.
 
2022-08-05 11:00:42 PM  
Never had more than a $200 stereo, and as long as the record sounds all right, I'm okay with them.


/ imho, though, "Straight Outta Compton" sounded like it was recorded through a wall
 
2022-08-05 11:08:15 PM  
Wood says that MoFi decided to add DSD not for convenience but because its engineers felt they could help improve their records. He remembers hearing MoFi's reissue of Santana's "Abraxas" in 2016. "My mind was blown when we got the test pressings back," he said.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-05 11:08:21 PM  

NateAsbestos: thats why i use the best monster cables from best buy


I bought a couple monster cables for my bass rig. I didn't buy them for the sound quality, I bought them for the durability. Going on 20 years and hundreds of gigs with those cables.
 
2022-08-05 11:22:45 PM  

Lsherm: My uncle is a former DJ from LA and he's one of those guys. He's also stone deaf. Your hearing degrades as you age, but he's been to so many concerts in his day he can't hear shiat anymore now that he's in his 70's. But you go over to his house and he has thousands of dollars of audio equipment, and he'll trot out whatever new purchase he has to show off and play it way too loud for you. He's the kind of guy who will spend $800 on speaker cables and $8000 on a record player.

As a general rule of thumb, if I meet someone under the age of 35 who says they can hear the difference between analog and a high end digital recording, I'm inclined to believe them. But if you're an old fark like me? Uh-uh. You can't hear shiat.


Always wore protection
I have 5 turntables.
And a 20 x 16 room with shelves of records.
And tape.
I just picked up a mars hotel on 8 track
 
2022-08-05 11:22:53 PM  

marksman: NateAsbestos: thats why i use the best monster cables from best buy

I bought a couple monster cables for my bass rig. I didn't buy them for the sound quality, I bought them for the durability. Going on 20 years and hundreds of gigs with those cables.


For most set ups. "Monster Cables" are useless. They do have a good build quality.
However. large grade copper cables do have a similar transmission quality of signal. Just like you wouldn't use that super thin magnet wire for your head phone.
Using a larger gauge of wire for larger amperage is useful for signal transmission.
Does it have to be brand name....nope, but having it shielded is a good thing in some cases.
You can pick up large gauged speaker wire by the spool at home depot for cheep.
 
2022-08-05 11:24:02 PM  

question_dj: Can these things make it possible to tell the difference between analog or digital recordings?


Depends on what you mean. Alot of these audiophile types are full of crap and just fooling themselves but you can tell the difference under the right conditions. In my short stint in college (I couldn't afford it) I want to school for sound engineering and they were still teaching analog recording. If you were in a studio and listened to a recording straight off of tape and then a digitized copy of the same recording in the same studio, you'd hear the difference. It's subtle but it's there. But I seriously doubt someone would be able to tell the difference from a vinyl pressed from a digital master run that's been run through a tube preamp versus an analog master on vinyl.
 
2022-08-05 11:29:03 PM  

Billy Liar: Never had more than a $200 stereo, and as long as the record sounds all right, I'm okay with them.


/ imho, though, "Straight Outta Compton" sounded like it was recorded through a wall


That's fine if it works for you. Now, tell me, what processor and LCD screen do you use, if you squint hard enough the resolution doesn't look TOO bad on a 90's style green screen CRT, and your phone?
Do you use one of those fancy touchy screen on your pocket computer, why not use a 80's brick phone.....as long as it makes calls it's okay right?
 
2022-08-05 11:36:03 PM  

vudukungfu: Lsherm: My uncle is a former DJ from LA and he's one of those guys. He's also stone deaf. Your hearing degrades as you age, but he's been to so many concerts in his day he can't hear shiat anymore now that he's in his 70's. But you go over to his house and he has thousands of dollars of audio equipment, and he'll trot out whatever new purchase he has to show off and play it way too loud for you. He's the kind of guy who will spend $800 on speaker cables and $8000 on a record player.

As a general rule of thumb, if I meet someone under the age of 35 who says they can hear the difference between analog and a high end digital recording, I'm inclined to believe them. But if you're an old fark like me? Uh-uh. You can't hear shiat.

Always wore protection
I have 5 turntables.
And a 20 x 16 room with shelves of records.
And tape.
I just picked up a mars hotel on 8 track


Look, it doesn't matter. Your hearing depends on hair cells that degrade over time. The don't regenerate, and that's why humans eventually go deaf if they manage to live long enough. It's a depleting resource. You can't hear something better at 50 than you could at 20. It's a physical impossibility.
 
2022-08-05 11:37:41 PM  

optikeye: Thoreny: "They were completely deceitful," says Richard Drutman, 50, a New York City filmmaker

FILM MAKER. PLEASE. I bet the closest this guy has ever got to 'film' is a waxy build up on his bathroom floor.
That's deceitful. MISTER "FILM" maker.


I found his IMDB page lol. He's definitely using the term 'filmmaker' loosely here. His 3 'films' are a live recording of some really obscure band nobody's ever heard of and 2 short indie movies. And I mean really short, one is 6 minutes long and the other is 3. 3 farking minutes long.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680811/?ref_=tt_ov_dr
 
2022-08-05 11:49:05 PM  

optikeye: marksman: NateAsbestos: thats why i use the best monster cables from best buy

I bought a couple monster cables for my bass rig. I didn't buy them for the sound quality, I bought them for the durability. Going on 20 years and hundreds of gigs with those cables.

For most set ups. "Monster Cables" are useless. They do have a good build quality.
However. large grade copper cables do have a similar transmission quality of signal. Just like you wouldn't use that super thin magnet wire for your head phone.
Using a larger gauge of wire for larger amperage is useful for signal transmission.
Does it have to be brand name....nope, but having it shielded is a good thing in some cases.
You can pick up large gauged speaker wire by the spool at home depot for cheep.


Shielding is only for preamp wiring to eliminate noise in the signal chain. Speaker cables don't pick up noise.
 
2022-08-05 11:50:19 PM  
The very first CD I ever bought was something by Ozzy Osbourne and it was straight from tape to CD.  It was unlistenable due to the hiss throughout.   I'm not sure who thought it was a  good idea, since DG and others had been releasing classical CDs with no issues at all.
 
2022-08-05 11:59:33 PM  
Monster Cable VS coat hangers.

"Audiophiles" couldn't tell the difference.
 
2022-08-06 12:03:22 AM  
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!

The vinyl community needed this reality check, imho.

I've always kinda thought Mobile Fidelity was overrated for the price, like most things considered "audiophile". But in this case I totally see their point: making a DSD copy of the master tape prevents yet another stage of analog flaws (the second analog recorder) from being introduced into the audio chain, while making it easier to correct the flaws of the original.

Now, were they misleading in their advertising? Absolutely. But none of those golden ears whining about their process had a problem with the final product. Until now.

So suddenly all those overly expensive Original Master Recordings sound different?

Bullshiat.

This is what happens when you romanticize a FORMAT. Analog, and especially vinyl, has actually *more* flaws sonically than digital. and is WAY more expensive because you have to compensate for and disguise those flaws. Somehow their $3000 cartridge magically hides all the surface noise on a paper thin early '80's MCA pressing, and they somehow tell you even with all the other frequencies that are also being rolled off it still sounds BETTER than digital?

Again, bullshiat.

Romanticizing analog over digital while ignoring it's obvious disadvantages is why people get sold $35,000 interconnects.

Poorly mastered digital has it's own set of issues, but all formats have their strengths and weaknesses. A combination of analog and digital is probably better than a "pure" analog or digital signal chain in most cases anyway. But all this wailing and gnashing of teeth over whether or not the audio chain was purely analog is ridiculous, because when they sure enjoyed the hell out of those albums when they didn't know it wasn't pure analog, or at least they said they did. Nothing about that sound of those records have changed.

But MoFi needs to stop misleading people.

/btw, Mofi, if you're making DSD masters of the master tapes, why do your SACDs sound so muddy and flat?
 
2022-08-06 12:11:19 AM  
Still not as bad as buying a John Lennon CD with the "ORIGINAL MASTER RECORDING" banner across the top and getting a remix.
 
2022-08-06 12:22:49 AM  
Only MoFi I have is Stan Kenton doing Wagner, a 1982 reissue of a sixties recording. it's a totally farking bonkers album.
Ride Of The Valkyries from "Die Walkure"
Youtube STFx2yW-SBA


I prefer getting og copies but if a reissue is easier to come by, I might bite depending on how badly I want and if the cost fits.
 
2022-08-06 12:26:27 AM  

Rage Against the Thorazine: optikeye: Thoreny: "They were completely deceitful," says Richard Drutman, 50, a New York City filmmaker

FILM MAKER. PLEASE. I bet the closest this guy has ever got to 'film' is a waxy build up on his bathroom floor.
That's deceitful. MISTER "FILM" maker.

I found his IMDB page lol. He's definitely using the term 'filmmaker' loosely here. His 3 'films' are a live recording of some really obscure band nobody's ever heard of and 2 short indie movies. And I mean really short, one is 6 minutes long and the other is 3. 3 farking minutes long.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680811/?ref_=tt_ov_dr


That movie has John waters and David cross in the cast. I'm quite curious now.
 
2022-08-06 12:31:54 AM  

Lsherm: My uncle is a former DJ from LA and he's one of those guys. He's also stone deaf. Your hearing degrades as you age, but he's been to so many concerts in his day he can't hear shiat anymore now that he's in his 70's. But you go over to his house and he has thousands of dollars of audio equipment, and he'll trot out whatever new purchase he has to show off and play it way too loud for you. He's the kind of guy who will spend $800 on speaker cables and $8000 on a record player.

As a general rule of thumb, if I meet someone under the age of 35 who says they can hear the difference between analog and a high end digital recording, I'm inclined to believe them. But if you're an old fark like me? Uh-uh. You can't hear shiat.


trialpha: Ah, people who don't understand nyquist rate, aka audiophiles.


CDs sample digital audio at rate that allows frequencies up to 22.5kHz.  Good luck finding a 35 year old that can hear 22kHz, but there was a kid (16 years old?) in electronics shop who could hear 22kHz (or whatever point you stopped measuring your amplifier) and demanded we turn it off.

Not sure where the cut off is now, but when they were released the idea was to record out to 20kHz, and then resample the thing out at 80kHz (or more) by adding a lot of zeros and then filtering everything above 20kHz (you'd have a godawful screech at 23kHz if you didn't, almost as loud as everything else you were playing).  This was asking a lot for 1980's tech, and I suspect that the high frequencies suffered as engineers took a few liberties with the sound below 20kHz to get the filters to work.

I'm fairly sure that kid (back in the day) really *could* hear the difference, although I really doubt that vinyl really had all that much audio between 16kHz and 20kHz.  DAT (digital audio tape) had a nyquist frequncy at 24kHz, which gave quite a bit more room and much fewer people could hear the difference.

/presumably some seriously large IIRs (for the 80s)
//don't remember much about IIRs.  I mostly remember more about FIRs from my DSP class that used abacii
///that and FIRs make more sense now as you can just throw a really big FFT at them and be done with it.  So at some point I relearned FIRs and the IIR knowledge long slipped away.

/[bonus slashie] It would be hilarious to teach a dog to hear the difference (if it is there, they'd hear it.  You couldn't).  Especially more fun having the dog hear what the "audiophile" can't.

//[double bonus slashie]  gamers are quickly becoming the new audiophiles.  And just as willing to claim how much better 240Hz is over 144Hz framerates (I'll concede the whippersnappers can see well over 60Hz [I don't think I can], but I really doubt over 144Hz).
 
kab
2022-08-06 1:10:22 AM  
In the world of audiophiles - where provenance is everything and the quest is to get as close to the sound of an album's original recording as possible - digital is considered almost unholy.

media2.giphy.comView Full Size
 
kab
2022-08-06 1:14:27 AM  

trialpha: Ah, people who don't understand nyquist rate, aka audiophiles.


Conversely, people who believe that sample rate is the primary cause of most complaints.
 
2022-08-06 1:40:42 AM  

Ivo Shandor: Plug the electrical signal from a good turntable into an A/D converter and burn it to a CD. Then play back both the turntable and the CD into an ABX switch box. Challenge the audiophile to tell you which one is playing each time.

If and only if they can do significantly better than random chance at distinguishing the sources, then you can proceed to the followup question of asking which technology they prefer.


This experiment has been done a billion times, because it's the kind of experiment that can be done by a kid for a science fair project and still be fully rigorous.

The results are universally the same as the famous actual primary-school science fair where the kid tested a bunch of "aura readers" by having them stick their hands in two boxes and guessing which one had a human hand under it (which should have meant there'd be an aura there).  No one can tell.  Not "a small minority", literally not one single "audiophile" can actually distinguish even most early-MP3 quality audio from a record unless there's a major defect in the record player that makes obvious static noises that give it away (and even that can be tripped up if the CD-quality recording was made of a vinyl record, as some older songs had to be by necessity).

Because I'm a fan of massive overkill, instead of digging up one of the many, many sufficiently rigorous tests done by various tech/entertainment magazines, I have found y'all an actual journal article that's been released from paywall hell that some grad student actually got university funding to do at some point.

Anything past a bit rate of 80 kbps has a discrimination rate of ~50%, with the absolute highest scorers only managing 60ish and only for specific instruments.  Anything past 128 has a discrimination rate of 50%, period, for anyone tested under any conditions, ever, including self-professed audiophiles confident in beating the test.  This is under conditions where the person is stuck in a farking soundproof room with all sorts of noise-minimization shiat going on.

MP3s in the very, very early days could drop to a compression rate that'd potentially be audible, but the reason that study stopped testing past 128 is that 128 is the 'standard' for 'low quality' recordings for things like streaming on spotify (where the lowest allowed bitrate is apparently 96, they list their range as 96-160).

// "Discrimination rate" means the number of times the correct choice is picked out of two choices, in this context.  You may recognize a discrimination rate of 50% from such classic highly-tuned expert methods of telling one sound from another as flipping a coin, rolling odds-or-evens on a die, or using a random number generator to fetch a one-bit number.

// A CD-quality bitrate is 1411 kbps, by the way.  There isn't a snowball's chance in hell of telling that from a master with just your ears, and the only reason you might be able to tell vinyl from it is the much higher artefacting and lower quality associated with vinyl records.

// If you like your expensive audio equipment because owning arbitrarily expensive shiat makes you happy regardless of its utility, more power to you; I have a binder full of like 17 characters' life stories from goddamned D&D campaigns, I cannot demand with a straight face that your hobbies be useful or cost-effective or whatever.  What you don't get to do is run around telling people your hobby gives you literal magical powers, fark off.
 
2022-08-06 1:53:44 AM  
defended MoFi on the popular message board moderated by mastering engineer Steve Hoffman.


https://rateyourmusic.com/discussion/music/fake-steve-hoffman-forum-thread-titles/
my son asked me for a merzbow box set. I got him the Beatles box set instead. He's going to thank me for it once he hears all those different remasters!
 
2022-08-06 6:33:53 AM  

optikeye: Billy Liar: Never had more than a $200 stereo, and as long as the record sounds all right, I'm okay with them.


/ imho, though, "Straight Outta Compton" sounded like it was recorded through a wall

That's fine if it works for you. Now, tell me, what processor and LCD screen do you use, if you squint hard enough the resolution doesn't look TOO bad on a 90's style green screen CRT, and your phone?
Do you use one of those fancy touchy screen on your pocket computer, why not use a 80's brick phone.....as long as it makes calls it's okay right?


Yardbirds - You're a better man than I
Youtube 6Jj2R69qRxU
 
2022-08-06 7:06:12 AM  

Billy Liar: optikeye: Billy Liar: Never had more than a $200 stereo, and as long as the record sounds all right, I'm okay with them.


/ imho, though, "Straight Outta Compton" sounded like it was recorded through a wall

That's fine if it works for you. Now, tell me, what processor and LCD screen do you use, if you squint hard enough the resolution doesn't look TOO bad on a 90's style green screen CRT, and your phone?
Do you use one of those fancy touchy screen on your pocket computer, why not use a 80's brick phone.....as long as it makes calls it's okay right?

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/6Jj2R69qRxU]


Yeah,....well I don't even OWN a MONITOR.
I just tape a RS232 to my forehead and rub my eyes REALLY HARD until the sparklies spell something.
 
2022-08-06 7:29:12 AM  

Rage Against the Thorazine: question_dj: Can these things make it possible to tell the difference between analog or digital recordings?

Depends on what you mean. Alot of these audiophile types are full of crap and just fooling themselves but you can tell the difference under the right conditions. In my short stint in college (I couldn't afford it) I want to school for sound engineering and they were still teaching analog recording. If you were in a studio and listened to a recording straight off of tape and then a digitized copy of the same recording in the same studio, you'd hear the difference. It's subtle but it's there. But I seriously doubt someone would be able to tell the difference from a vinyl pressed from a digital master run that's been run through a tube preamp versus an analog master on vinyl.


Analog recording is still taught because it's a technique that brings a sound to a recording. Tapes have hiss, and a lot of people find it pleasing.

For instance, Adrian Quesada mixed The Suffers most recent album. There is a track that he bounced the digital recording to tape, and then bounced it back to digital, in order to introduce the tape hiss into the recording.

So being able to work with analog equipment in a modern recording studio is an important skill. But it doesn't change the fact that modern music is recorded and mixed digitally, and utilizes analog technology to add different dimensions and texture to the final product.

But ain't no motherfarker out there can tell the difference, on reference equipment, between a digital or analog source pressing on a goddamn LP.
 
2022-08-06 9:08:03 AM  
Best quote I ever heard about audiophiles
"They are listening to the equipment, not the music."
 
2022-08-06 10:06:42 AM  

optikeye: Ginnungagap42: But Telarc touted their 100% digital recordings for years, and they all sound wonderful. All the Telarc recordings are well worth the time to track down and listen to.

Another worth tracking down is a "Stravinsky Conducts Stravinsky"
It's a little odd hearing his versions as he seems to hold back a bit for the rites of spring and other bits like the firebird kettle drums, and lead into the the finale. But some bits are very good....but hey, he wrote it.



I have the entire Stravinsky Conducts series on compact disc. Some of my favorites!
 
2022-08-06 10:16:16 AM  

darkman2000: Best quote I ever heard about audiophiles
"They are listening to the equipment, not the music."


Well, aren't you just a little bit superior.
 
2022-08-06 10:31:55 AM  
Obviously. It's like what else is new?
 
2022-08-06 10:33:38 AM  
The reason you bought MFSL vinyl albums back in the day will be readily apparent to anyone who holds one and compares it to a late 70s factory pressing. They were fresh pressings on heavy (dunno if they were officially 180 grams or whatever) virgin vinyl, with much higher quality sleeves and jackets.  It wasn't because of the mastering.
 
2022-08-06 10:54:49 AM  

drewogatory: The reason you bought MFSL vinyl albums back in the day will be readily apparent to anyone who holds one and compares it to a late 70s factory pressing. They were fresh pressings on heavy (dunno if they were officially 180 grams or whatever) virgin vinyl, with much higher quality sleeves and jackets.  It wasn't because of the mastering.


I have quite a few of first gen CD's that are 'laser rotted' like you can hold them up to the light and there's spots you can see through. Totally unplayable.

Meanwhile, I have vinyl that's pushing close to 100 years old...(45's from the 30's) that are still playable.
The temporary nature of digital media is probably a good thing, a world a 100 years from now, where all Back Street Boys, Tayler Swift, Beyonce..and Adele. Are snapped away into dust. And Elea Fitzgerald, Pearl Bayley, Patsy Cline and Dolly Parton survive. Would probably be a better choice for our historical records.
 
2022-08-06 11:07:35 AM  

drewogatory: The reason you bought MFSL vinyl albums back in the day will be readily apparent to anyone who holds one and compares it to a late 70s factory pressing. They were fresh pressings on heavy (dunno if they were officially 180 grams or whatever) virgin vinyl, with much higher quality sleeves and jackets.  It wasn't because of the mastering.


Yup...there some albums in the late 70's in the "oil crisis" that where paper thing. Like if you held them at a 45 degree angle...they'd visibly bend.
And so thin they'd actually stick to the platter of the turn table with a kinda vapor lock and trying to pick them off was like trying to pull up slightly thick Saran Wrap from the platter.
 
2022-08-06 11:17:42 AM  
This is my "rescue" turntable. It still works..and came with a collection of radio station sized LP's that last 45 min a side.
Perfect for radio, which this was designed for Korean/Vietnam War zones. It's about the size of a washing machine with direct drive motor with a shaft in the base. You could have a mortar blast near the tent and that thing wouldn't skip a beat.
The pickup head/tone arm has a bread board preamp on the back to feed a main amp. And.....it came with a collection of oversized LPs that are 50's radio Armed forces "RA RA HATE COMMIE" radio plays...and a scattering of stuff like "GunSmoke" and other radio dramas.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-06 11:24:05 AM  
I can tell the difference between the early AAD and ADD cds if the AAD has pre-emphasis turned on and I used my very old CD player.  I expect most new CD/DVD/etc players are ignoring it completely.  I used to have an early CD player where I hooked up extra LEDs to the error rate signal.  I've been tempted to do the same with the current one since I now have full schematics but I'm not sure I want to risk the heard to replace old device.

The odd thing about being able to tell about the pre-emphasis is that I could see how it could be misinterpreted as a digital vs analog thing.  On my amp, I can select the amps A/D converter or the CD players.  The amp doesn't care about the setting and new CDs sound the same with digital vs analog input but some of the CDs from the late 1980s do sound different and since that is what I heard when they were new, that is the sound I prefer.
 
Displayed 50 of 70 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.