Jump to content

The best 'source' for music? Download 24 bit? Vinyl? Or ?


Recommended Posts

This has been an enlightening read!  Excuse this dumb question, but as a simple music enthusiast, I have read this entire thread and am still a bit lost.  I am new to hi-end audio. I listen to old vinyl because it has better dynamic range than Spotify, and most new CD and vinyl music I buy suffers from compression.  Unfortunately this limits what I can listen to and not cringe.  Help!

Q: To ensure good sound from a favorite song, do I need to go lossless format digital download but then demaster it with some software and then save again in a lossless format before I listen to it? If so, what software is recommended and how do I learn to do it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

38 minutes ago, CDinMB said:

Q: To ensure good sound from a favorite song, do I need to go lossless format digital download but then demaster it with some software and then save again in a lossless format before I listen to it? If so, what software is recommended and how do I learn to do it? 

If you choose to avoid lossy formats that you find almost exclusively on the streaming services, you can choose instead to acquire the CDs, hybrid SACDs, DVD-As, or even lossless download formats.

 

You can go to the Dynamic Range Database, then look up the album (record, disc or download) that has the highest DR rating available.  At that point, you can look up the version of CD that is (bar code or CD number), then look it up on Discogs or Amazon Marketplace, etc., to buy--usually quite cheaply if it is an older disc.

 

At this point, then the tutorials on demastering will help you to fix those old CDs for defects like rolled-off bass and accentuated highs, etc.:

Demastering Part 1 (What and Why).pdf

Demastering Part 2 (How To).pdf

 

If you have questions on a particular disc or track, you can ask for help here or in the demastering thread:

 

Chris

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks! Very helpful! I am checking my digital music and surprised that the stuff I care about looks pretty good.  Not seeing the bass drop off. But that is higher quality and lossless, so I was hoping that to be the case.  Will look at some lesser material next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CDinMB said:

Not seeing the bass drop off.

Look below 50 Hz: almost all stereo recordings that I've examined roll-off those frequencies rather steeply.  There should be fairly flat and rising response going toward 30 Hz.

 

Also look carefully at frequencies between 100-200 Hz.  If there is a dip in response there, it's likely that was placed there by the mastering person because so many people don't have sufficient bass trapping in their listening rooms.

 

You might also look closely at frequencies above 1 kHz.  The response should be monotonically decreasing without humps or dips in response. 

 

If any of the tracks look like they have flat tops and bottoms, run "clip fix" on it, then "Normalize" to reset the maximum amplitude of the track to about -0.3 dB (which is user selectable from the Normalize dialogue).  This will remove odd harmonics that occur at the music peaks that were placed there by the mastering person.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Works well. I made a few added tweaks.  This was Steely Dan Aja, one of my favorites and a song I know well enough to learn the tech.  Given the limitations of 63 year old ears that don't hear anything above 15k and LaScala low end limit, I got the best of the range I had to work. 

Thanks! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Sixsigma post.   It does not matter which format things are in for a large part.  You can make a song HD, try to re-master it. etc.but. if was a poor point source, it will remaster with more clarity as a poor recording.  If you are into vinyl, this is old tech and just accept I like it or don;t.  You can't change the era that things were made!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

http://www.klipsch.com/blog/digital-vs-analog-audio 

 

  • Home
  • Blog
  • Digital vs Analog Audio: An Overview
Digital V  Analog B

DIGITAL VS ANALOG AUDIO: AN OVERVIEW

Dave Gans 
September 18, 2015

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, both digital analog recording have their merits.

We felt it necessary to break down the two recording methods to give you a better understanding - so the next time you’re in a heated audiophile debate, you will have more ammo to hold your position.

DIGITAL VS ANALOG RECORDING PROCESSES

No matter which recording process used, analog or digital, both are created by a microphone turning air pressure (sound) into an electrical analog signal.

An analog recording is made by then imprinting that signal directly onto the master tape (via magnetization) or master record (via grooves) – from which copies can be made into cassette tapes and vinyl records.

Digital recordings take that analog signal and convert it into a digital representation of the sound, which is essentially a series of numbers for digital software to interpret.

After the analog signal is digitalized, the recording can be copied and placed onto a compact disc, hard drive or streamed online.

AUDIO BANDWIDTH

Bandwidth is the ability of a recorded signal to be reproduced at varying degrees of resolution. Think of it like enlarging a low-resolution image versus a high-resolution image. After a certain point, enlarging a lower-resolution image will become pixelated and difficult to see, where the hi-resolution image will resize clearly.

Like images, audio signals can have a limited bandwidth if recorded digitally. Once a digital recording is made, the bandwidth is set in place.

An analog recording is considered unlimited. Therefore, it can move to a higher and higher resolution without losing its original quality.

Why does bandwidth matter? It really depends on what you’re listening to your music with. If you have a pair of overpriced earbuds that cost $8 to make but you paid $200 to cover the company’s advertising budget, then you’re probably ok with any mediocre bandwidth.

On the contrary, if you’ve invested in quality audio reproduction speakers (like the Klipsch Reference Premiere series speakers) – the greater the bandwidth, the greater potential you have for sound.

Digital vs Analog Audio

SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO

The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is the amount of noise generated by the recording’s signal to your speakers. Digital recordings can have a greater signal-to-noise ratio depending on the bit depth of the recording.

What the hell is bit depth, you say? Think of a sound wave in a digital recording format to looking more like a set of stairs, rather than smooth hills

Digital vs Analog Sound WaveThe digital wave must walk up and down stairs, as opposed to smoothly roll over hills. This jump in elevation can create a digital noise.

The smooth analog signal matches the recorded sound wave better than the steps of a digital recording. However, the analog medium (vinyl or magnetized tape) the recording is imprinted on can have tiny imperfections that cause cracking and popping noise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hate to say this...but that's the worst article associated with Klipsch that I've seen thus far. I'm actually embarrassed for Klipsch.  It's grossly misleading.

 

Chris

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris A said:

I really hate to say this...but that's the worst article associated with Klipsch that I've seen thus far. I'm actually embarrassed for Klipsch.  It's grossly wrong.

 

Chris

 

I agree.  That is a miserable article.  That stair step analogy is lame.  It makes analog sound like some liquid silky smooth organic process, whereas digital is sharp and clinical with jagged edges.

 

At this point, I'll explain that I love vinyl,  but, IMO, vinyl can sound excellent despite dragging a semi-precious rock across jagged plastic, not because of it.  Don't get me started about vinyl's limited dynamic range, the need for RIAA equalization, static, dirt, etc. Whenever I get a new, or new to me, piece of vinyl, I give it a Cyastat laced PVA facial, digitize it and never play it again.

 

At high sampling rates, each digital "step" is infinitesimal.   Our brains constantly fill in gaps in visual and auditory information that make the digital steps in a high resolution recording look like a mirror by comparison.  The attached photo shows how smooth and organic a phonograph really is. 

 

The most important factors in producing a quality recording are the performance, the quality of the recording and the quality of the production. The medium, whether analog or digital, for playback is secondary.  As Chris demonstrates frequently, excellent performances and recordings are too frequently ruined by bad "mastering."

 

IMO, one reason vinyl, especially vintage vinyl (after a PVA facial) can sound so good, is that it predates the loudness wars and bad mastering.

 

 

H1000086-SEM_diamond_stylus_travelling_through_LP_grooves-SPL.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DizRotus said:

 

I agree.  That is a miserable article.  That stair step analogy is lame.  It makes analog sound like some liquid silky smooth organic process, whereas digital is sharp and clinical with jagged edges.

 

At this point, I'll explain that I love vinyl,  but, IMO, vinyl can sound excellent despite dragging a semi-precious rock across jagged plastic, not because of it.  Don't get me started about vinyl's limited dynamic range, the need for RIAA equalization, static, dirt, etc. Whenever I get a new, or new to me, piece of vinyl, I give it a Cyastat laced PVA facial, digitize it and never play it again.

 

At high sampling rates, each digital "step" is infinitesimal.   Our brains constantly fill in gaps in visual and auditory information that make the digital steps in a high resolution recording look like a mirror by comparison.  The attached photo shows how smooth and organic a phonograph really is. 

 

The most important factors in producing a quality recording are the performance, the quality of the recording and the quality of the production. The medium, whether analog or digital, for playback is secondary.  As Chris demonstrates frequently, excellent performances and recordings are too frequently ruined by mad "mastering."

 

IMO, one reason vinyl, especially vintage vinyl (after a PVA facial) can sound so good, is that it predates the loudness wars and bad mastering.

 

 

H1000086-SEM_diamond_stylus_travelling_through_LP_grooves-SPL.jpg

 

1 hour ago, Chris A said:

I really hate to say this...but that's the worst article associated with Klipsch that I've seen thus far. I'm actually embarrassed for Klipsch.  It's grossly misleading.

 

Chris

no matter what is said and done...

or what format is used...

sound waves are still analog..

and the best source is being there.

for a live performance.....

 

and the only way to disprove

both formats...is listening to live , analog , and digital ...of the same performance ..and do a/b/c...testing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DizRotus said:

At high sampling rates, each digital "step" is infinitesimal.

 

No exactly true either, as the hardware/software turns it back into smooth waveforms.

 

Been reading some interesting stuff over at Benchmark.

 

Yup, I agree with Chris, this is a rather bad explanation.

 

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...