Is... Analog Dead?

[garyrc]

I don't believe that most people understand the degree to which popular music is really destructively mastered. And we are talking only about dynamic range here, which is but one way that mastering engineers (and really--the producers) put their "mark" on the music. It's really stomach turning, IMHO, regardless of how much I'm accused of making a big deal out of it.

 

How come you and I and some others here know this, and the producers don't?  How can the artists stand that being done to their music?

 

One good thing about Blu-rays of newer movies is that they don't seem to compress dynamic range at all. 

[The History Kid]

I feel I should disclaim my statement:

Analog for music all day - every day.

Digital for movies - no question.

[Chris A]

How come you and I and some others here know this, and the producers don't? How can the artists stand that being done to their music?

You're going to get me in deep trouble by saying what I really think about this subject.  Suffice it to say that these producers DON"T CARE and NEVER DID. (I've got proof enough for me that this is true.)

 

I remember about those mind games where people dream about meeting other people of their dreams.  For me, I sometimes ponder the opposite: people that I never want to meet.  Record/disc producers all are on that list, along with a fair share of "big time" artists that really don't care, either.  But surprisingly, not all mastering engineers are on this list, in fact perhaps many mastering or mixing engineers that really do want to produce a quality audio product, but are prevented or afraid from doing so.  I believe that many of these audio engineers got into the discipline thinking that they might mix/master audio works of art--but never took the chance to do so.

 

One of the things that I've talked to some local recording musicians about is whether they would like to record extremely high quality recordings with little or no compression and without editing that significantly curtails fidelity.  These same people all fear what the buying public would do if they tried to do that, and also fear the cost of studio time if they tried. 

 

This is a crime to these musicians, IMHO, that they live in a culture that continues to produce such low quality recordings in the name of "recouping expenses and making money", not even realizing that there is a market for very high quality recordings (and this isn't the ear bud folks buying these recordings). 

 

It's a very sad story where we're currently at, culturally, I'm afraid.  I never pull my punches on this subject--because of that realization.

 

"Now you know how I feel about it." (attrib.  G.S. Patton, Jr.). 

 

Chris

[Shakeydeal]

Send your denon to Peter at soundsmith for the full monte treatment. Then upgrade your phono stage. That should have your digital front end quivering in fear.......

Shakey

[Boxx]

Is analog dead?

 

[garyrc]

One of the things that I've talked to some local recording musicians about is whether they would like to record extremely high quality recordings with little or no compression and without editing that significantly curtails fidelity. These same people all fear what the buying public would do if they tried to do that, and also fear the cost of studio time if they tried.

 

I think we need audiophile versions of each recording, perhaps for a slightly higher price.   The versions for the general (ear bud) public could be from the same master, after running that master through a compressor.   How much could a single album length dub through a compressor cost?  The recording sessions would be the same, with no added cost except for that one dub.   But ... I think that most people would love high dynamic range if they heard it, and that the uncompressed versions would eventually outsell the pinched ones. 

[Wrinkles]

Usually, I do not mind the fire crackling sounds from a scratched record, as long as it is not excessive.

I DO mind how the how album cover images are shrunk so much that their cover art becomes lost and the colors subdued. Sometimes, the album is bought just to hang it on the wall.

I also need a magnafying glass to read the liner notes on the CD inserts.

[Quiet_Hollow]

Not too difficult to make a particular rig sound like listening to tape or vinyl. That's often media related. In fact, I've got a few albums / movies that are transfers from either one, and it is quite audible to tell from which type they came from.

 

A great example, for those of you with access to Netflix on demand, would be to watch Bloodsport back-to-back with any episode of House of Cards. 

Edited September 28, 2014 by Quiet_Hollow

[Shakeydeal]

Not too difficult to make a particular rig sound like listening to tape or vinyl. That's often media related. In fact, I've got a few albums / movies that are transfers from either one, and it is quite audible to tell from which type they came from.

 

A great example, for those of you with access to Netflix on demand, would be to watch Bloodsport back-to-back with any episode of House of Cards. 

You won't get the magic of vinyl unless you are listening to a rekkkid on a good rig.

 

However, I have heard some digital copies of vinyl that sound pretty damn good.

 

Shakey

[thebes]

From my profile:

 

 

Music: classical including renaissance, baroque, classic, romantic, impressionist, neoclassical, modern, postmodern. jazz, jazz fusion, choral, folk, new age, Celtic, blues, world, pop, dance, AOR, and many other genres.

 

I listen to CDs, SACDs (mostly multi-channel SACDs), DVD-As, and Blu-Ray music discs, about in order here in terms of frequency.  My CDs and DVD-As are ripped to FLAC (lossless) and played back over HDMI to my preamp's DACs (Burr-Brown).  From there into the active crossovers (one for the Jubs, one for the center Belle, and directly to the surround Cornwalls). 

 

My FLAC library is on foobar2000, where I've taken the time to analyze all tracks using the Dynamic Range Meter plugin, which tells me crest factor for each track, and ReplayGain, which tells me average loudness for each track.  I often sort on DR ratings (highest first) for the 13,000+ tracks that I've ripped to FLAC, and play the highest DR tracks, then switch to the lowest DR tracks for grins (don't ask--it's awful).  I often sort by genre first and DR second so that I can pick my mood of music.  All this is displayed on my fairly large flat screen TV using foobar2000 so that everyone gets to see all information about each track being played. 

 

Everyone that reads this display asks the question, "what does all the columns of numbers on the right side of the screen mean?".  When I explain it to them, they typically are mesmerized by the DR ratings and how the music sounds. 

 

It's a really entertaining "party trick". 

 

Er, em.  When I want music.  I select a vinyls, slid it out of its sleeve, place on record player, run a micro duster over it and let is spin.  My approach seems simpler somehow.

[Kent T]

Vinyl for me. Too much of my favorite music hasn't seen digital or ever will. And I find it more involving and palpable. Second to vinyl is open reel tapes. Half track Stereo if you please. I like good digital, but hate the excessive compression/limiting abuse and the noise reduction abuse on material which often didn't need it. 

[Don Richard]

But surprisingly, not all mastering engineers are on this list, in fact perhaps many mastering or mixing engineers that really do want to produce a quality audio product, but are prevented or afraid from doing so. I believe that many of these audio engineers got into the discipline thinking that they might mix/master audio works of art--but never took the chance to do so.

 

I think some of the compressed music is made that way because: 

 

The "powers that be" realize that most people who buy music do not own a system capable of reproducing a recording with full dynamic range.

 

It sounds better on the radio when compressed.

 

Some genres of music sound better when slammed.

 

The record company execs are idiots.

[Rick J B]

Vinyl, like tubes, can't be explained by specs, but the ear knows and recognizes a good thing when they hear it.

[tromprof]

Send your denon to Peter at soundsmith for the full monte treatment. Then upgrade your phono stage. That should have your digital front end quivering in fear.......

Shakey

 

It is also the expense. The single most expensive item in my basement system, besides speakers, is my phono cart. Add on the turntable itself and the phono preamp the is a lot of coin tied up in producing a quality sound. A superior (IMO) sounding digital system is much less costly. 

[thebes]

I

Spotify is worth every penny.  All the remastered versions that sound WAY better than the original cd release.

Well is see a potential problem with your audio nirvosa right there.

 

Remastering is a tricky business.  Whose doing it?  The original producer, the musicians, the original sound studio, some post-mix churn factory in Malaysia.  It could be some guy whose compressing the hell out of it, or punching up the base enough to turn a ballad into a dance-hall beat?  It's a very tricky slope in vinyls, and I would suspect that with the hundreds of thousands of badly recorded cd's out there, remastering them is even more of a land mine.

[Chris A]

Vinyl, like tubes, can't be explained by specs, but the ear knows and recognizes a good thing when they hear it.

 

...for me analog recordings are a medium of convenience (and nostalgia) only--and only for those recordings not available without remastering on digital format.  And many times, analog records are a LOT less preferable to my ears. YMMV.

 

On your comment above, I have to mention that I always try to quality my opinions.  Your statement is subject to the judgment of the person who is doing the listening and reporting.  Whether I trust their judgment to make such statements to substitute for my own judgment is the issue, and your comment as it stands doesn't help.  Note: I've learned this lesson the hard way--it gets expensive, too.

 

The tube amps that I've heard that sound good are typically push-pull (i.e., having greatly reduced even order harmonics over a single-ended triode amplifier--and I really don't prefer the sound of an Aphex Aural Exciter). Their cost was at least 3x that of comparable SS amps--for instance the JFET amps from First Watt.  I also don't prefer the "magic" of high output impedance tube amps used on fully horn-loaded loudspeakers, either.

 

Chris

Edited September 28, 2014 by Chris A

[Rick J B]

 

Vinyl, like tubes, can't be explained by specs, but the ear knows and recognizes a good thing when they hear it.

 

...for me analog recordings are a medium of convenience (and nostalgia) only--and only for those recordings not available without remastering on digital format.  And many times, analog records are a LOT less preferable to my ears. YMMV.

 

On your comment above, I have to mention that I always try to quality my opinions.  Your statement is subject to the judgment of the person who is doing the listening and reporting.  Whether I trust their judgment to make such statements to substitute for my own judgment is the issue, and your comment as it stands doesn't help.  Note: I've learned this lesson the hard way--it gets expensive, too.

 

The tube amps that I've heard that sound good are typically push-pull (i.e., having greatly reduced even order harmonics over a single-ended triode amplifier--and I really don't prefer the sound of an Aphex Aural Exciter). Their cost was at least 3x that of comparable SS amps--for instance the JFET amps from First Watt.  I also don't prefer the "magic" of high output impedance tube amps used on fully horn-loaded loudspeakers, either.

 

Chris

 

 

The simplest test I have for any equipment is: will I enjoy listening to it all day? Its hard to put into words but I'll try, SS + digital is dry and artificial compared to the organic sound of vinyl and tubes. Tubes have a sweetness to them that SS doesn't in my experience. Its hard to quantify and describe but I know the type of sound that makes me smile and want to hear more. Its easier for me to obtain that with tube gear and a turntable than it is with SS and digital sources. 

 

It seems to me that as complex as our auditory system is, that different things are going to strike people in different ways. What I find pleasing may be finger nails on a chalkboard to the next guy. I dunno, it just is what it is. 

[Chris A]

Its hard to put into words but I'll try, SS + digital is dry and artificial compared to the organic sound of vinyl and tubes. Tubes have a sweetness to them that SS doesn't in my experience.

I believe that understand your point of view, even though I consider what you say to be opinion.  I can't fully agree with the statement as is without limiting its sweeping nature, since JFET amplifiers are also "SS", and they don't sound dry, and neither do high quality CDs, SACDs, DVD-As, Blu-Ray music discs, and downloaded 24/96 digital music files in LPCM format. 

 

Also, "sweetness" is to me synonymous with a large amount of lower even-order harmonic distortion - a form of distortion that creates a very opaque sound when playing anything but simple, thin instrumentation or pure tones: it falls apart on orchestral music--especially string orchestras--as sounding opaque and canned.

 

Here is an excellent article written by Nelson Pass that may help to clarify why many SS amplifiers sound "dry": https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=73904

 

Chris

Edited September 28, 2014 by Chris A

[Quiet_Hollow]

As always, the analog/digital argument defaults to the wrong topics (media & amp topology). 

 

at this point, I'd like to ask Schu to rephrase the title of this thread to "Are vinyl records dead?" ...because it's clear, that's what people are really discussing.

 

The lack of participation from the 78, R2R, and cassette crowd (is there even one?) is a clear indicator that no one is really making any serious plugs for analog as a storage format.  

[The History Kid]

R2R

Ummm...I've been mentioning Reel-to-reel in almost all of my posts.

However, I'd agree...Vinyl is simple to store, but reel-to-reel is a pain.