Iron Butterfly

[oldtimer]

2 hours ago, Tony Whitlow said:

So? What comes out of the speakers is a natural wave!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Something gets lost in the translation.

[Jeff Matthews]

1 hour ago, oldtimer said:

Something gets lost in the translation.

It definitely does!  I used to stubbornly defend CD's over vinyl, too.  I still listen to magnetic music because I agree, vinyl is inconvenient and unless you keep it meticulously protected, will scratch and degrade the experience.

 

On CD, though, you can definitely hear the garbage.  I don't know what else to call it, but it's evident.  It is quite prominent in the soft passage of Rush's "La Villa Strangiato," for example.  Hi-hats don't sound like hi-hats. 

 

If you listen critically, it's to be found everywhere in analog music that was digitized.  I don't know enough modern music to know if it suffers the same fate.

[polizzio]

There is a reason why the music industry went with compact disc and digital files approx 35 years ago, and abandoned vinyl albums.  Like they did with 78 rpm records, 8 track tapes, and cassettes previously. Mass music sales today are via digital files, not some stone age recording method and its shortcomings.

 

So lets talk about a live music performance. Audible sound decibel range in the 60s to 100 db or better at a live musical performance. So to record this to vinyl we have to compress it to a max of 60 db, plus the noise of the recording medium/contact of the needle in playback. 

 

Higher quality digital recordings = equals little or no compression in dynamic range, and no noise from the recording medium itself.

 

So if you are a musician today, would you want your music recorded and shared on vinyl records, or digital files? 

 

How many professional bands or singers today sell or market their music on vinyl records?  

 

Gee, you would think a real musician would know this sort of stuff. 

[ClaudeJ1]

12 minutes ago, polizzio said:

There is a reason why the music industry went with compact disc and digital files approx 35 years ago, and abandoned vinyl albums.  Like they did with 78 rpm records, 8 track tapes, and cassettes previously. Mass music sales today are via digital files, not some stone age recording method and its shortcomings.

 

So lets talk about a live music performance. Audible sound decibel range in the 60s to 100 db or better at a live musical performance. So to record this to vinyl we have to compress it to a max of 60 db, plus the noise of the recording medium/contact of the needle in playback. 

 

Higher quality digital recordings = equals little or no compression in dynamic range, and no noise from the recording medium itself.

 

So if you are a musician today, would you want your music recorded and shared on vinyl records, or digital files? 

 

How many professional bands or singers today sell or market their music on vinyl records?  

 

Gee, you would think a real musician would know this sort of stuff. 

Truer words were never spoken. I think they are doing the "vinyl thing" to be different, nostalgic, and esoteric.

 

Just like some photographers want to make platinum, palladium, tintypes, albumen, and silver prints, when carbon or color pigments from Inkjet Printers  on archival papers are far superior and more REPEATABLE in every way. 

[polizzio]

And Claude I can respect that, for the sake of nostalgia. But don't try to defend it as a superior recording to a digital format in this day and age. It just doesn't fly.

[oldtimer]

56 minutes ago, polizzio said:

There is a reason why the music industry went with compact disc and digital files approx 35 years ago, and abandoned vinyl albums.

For the sake of accuracy, the reason was cost.  The music "industry" is not your friend.  No recording medium is perfect, that much is clear, each has its pros and cons.

[Dave A]

7 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said:

It definitely does!  I used to stubbornly defend CD's over vinyl, too.  I still listen to magnetic music because I agree, vinyl is inconvenient and unless you keep it meticulously protected, will scratch and degrade the experience.

 

On CD, though, you can definitely hear the garbage.  I don't know what else to call it, but it's evident.  It is quite prominent in the soft passage of Rush's "La Villa Strangiato," for example.  Hi-hats don't sound like hi-hats. 

 

If you listen critically, it's to be found everywhere in analog music that was digitized.  I don't know enough modern music to know if it suffers the same fate.

Audacity is your friend and it makes a real improvement. Chris A writes about audacity on the forums and if you think it does not work try this. Save an original copy and then get your Audacity fixed copy and play them back to back. People that come over here to buy speakers are always shown this because I want them to understand good sound is more than just a pair of speakers.

[kevinmi]

3 hours ago, polizzio said:

How many professional bands or singers today sell or market their music on vinyl records?  

I seem to buy a whole bunch of new music on vinyl. Of course it's from obscure artists like Mark Knopfler, David Gilmour, Van Morrison. You know mostly unknown people. Google Jack White/White Stripes and see what he built in Detroit.

[Jeff Matthews]

4 hours ago, polizzio said:

There is a reason why the music industry went with compact disc and digital files approx 35 years ago, and abandoned vinyl albums.  Like they did with 78 rpm records, 8 track tapes, and cassettes previously. Mass music sales today are via digital files, not some stone age recording method and its shortcomings.

 

So lets talk about a live music performance. Audible sound decibel range in the 60s to 100 db or better at a live musical performance. So to record this to vinyl we have to compress it to a max of 60 db, plus the noise of the recording medium/contact of the needle in playback. 

 

Higher quality digital recordings = equals little or no compression in dynamic range, and no noise from the recording medium itself.

 

So if you are a musician today, would you want your music recorded and shared on vinyl records, or digital files? 

 

How many professional bands or singers today sell or market their music on vinyl records?  

 

Gee, you would think a real musician would know this sort of stuff. 

Yes, except there seem to be trade-offs.  Convenience and cost are trade-offs for quality.  The audible flaws are very noticeable if you listen for them.  Give it a try if you really want to be in the know.  I still listen to .wav and .mp3 anyway, so I've come to compromise.

[Dave A]

3 hours ago, oldtimer said:

For the sake of accuracy, the reason was cost.  The music "industry" is not your friend.  No recording medium is perfect, that much is clear, each has its pros and cons.

Well and the idea that most of these people who want music today and download think iPhones and earbuds are audiophile quality. Klipsch forum members are a tiny fraction of popular music purchases and most buyers not only don't know what good music sounds like they don't care.

[Bosco-d-gama]

CD’s met the need for a highly durable audio medium while offering pretty good musical quality. Users got a nearly indestructible recording that rarely failed. As to the comparison to analog music I would aver that high end equipment will evidence the finest and the worst of any source feeding the system. As for myself I am now limited by my own elderly hearing. Getting old truly sucks 🥺.

[oldtimer]

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 11:36 AM, Bosco-d-gama said:

Users got a nearly indestructible recording that rarely failed.

At first.  Then the news came out that the material used degraded over time.  Mallette has 78's that sound very close to live.