Jump to content

Big 10 Lies of Audio that refuse to die


ClaudeJ1

Recommended Posts

On 11/12/2020 at 1:43 PM, Tony Whitlow said:


No matter the quality of the turntable it is still limited to the actual medium. Surface noise is inherent in every single plastic record. Perhaps you like this noise because it sounds
“warmer”. And I can definitely spell just made a mistake which you’ve probably never made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nah, it's about the blended bass channels to mono below 250 Hz. and the boosted treble at 12 Khz. in the mastering that makes the LPs' sound perception to be "better" when they are cleaned on a $4,000 Vinyl LP cleaner like my friend has when compared to a Redbook CD (gee, could the Mastering be more different on the two Media??).

 

Playing them on Twin VPI tables with fancy tone arms at $13,000 each,  with both Stereo and Mono moving coil cartridges using Nelson Pass Pre-Pre Amps and Pre-Amps to get the necessary gain.

 

So basically, when you spend upwards of $40,000 for the privilege of dragging a rock through a ditch at various velocities, whereby you shave off a few hundred Hz. of High Frequencies each time you play it (nevermind the 180 Gram modern pressings that cost a fortune too), you have to convince yourself it "sounds better" because of all the money you spent.

 

 "Better" means than your $19,000 DAC because you would be deemed a fool for falling for it all vs. the technologically superior Digital Formats, especially when you have spent that king of cash for Digital too, whereby you convince yourself that big piece of bigger,  "pretty" Aluminum Face sounds "better" than the $2,000 DAC it replaced or "better" than the $40 worth of ESS Sabre DAC Chipsets in your Pre-Pro that everyone seems to use in their DACs.

 

But hey, it's all about "my hearing is better than your hearing," so the "high end" hifi keeps on selling for people with more money to spend than a Coke addict.

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

16 minutes ago, Shiva said:

Have been listening to a few John Devore vids as of late.  This one pertaining to vinyl and thought it apropos to the direction of this thread.

This video does NOT pertain to VINYL, it pertains to Turntables!

 

When I heard 1.5 Million Dollar Wilson Speaker System Demo at an Ann Arbor Dealer, they were playing a 5 foot tall, mechanical contraption called a "turntable" which cost $600,000. If it's about mechanical devices, then I'd rather drive a Lamborghini rather than watch a piece of plastic spin at 33 1/3 for that kind of money and invest the rest in a house with a great sound room with all my music on a server, but that's just me.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even for an old retired photographer like me $600,000 is a lot for a turntable. The most I ever spent on a turntable was the Technics I bought from Pete H here on the Klipsch Forum for $650 and even that stressed me out. It is tough when good musical streamers can be had for around $500 these days. Many ways to listen to music and many different mediums and many ways to spend ones $$$$$$. That said who needs a $600,000 turntable??????? None of my pals have $600,000 turntables but I must run with a lower income crowd.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fido said:

Even for an old retired photographer like me $600,000 is a lot for a turntable. The most I ever spent on a turntable was the Technics I bought from Pete H here on the Klipsch Forum for $650 and even that stressed me out. It is tough when good musical streamers can be had for around $500 these days. Many ways to listen to music and many different mediums and many ways to spend ones $$$$$$. That said who needs a $600,000 turntable??????? None of my pals have $600,000 turntables but I must run with a lower income crowd.

Agreed. My TT is only worth about $2,000 and I own over 1,000 LP's that I will clean digitize (on  my $700 cleaning machine) in the next few years. That said, I was the first person in Michigan to buy a Sony CD player in 1983 (or maybe 1982, I can't recall exactly, but Phillips invented the CD. Sony worked with them and beat them to market).

 

I had my eye our for it in the 70's since I belonged to the Audio Engineering Society at the time and read all the argument for the different proposed formats, much like the HD standards for TV back in the 90's. Since Sony was also the first to release a CD player, that is all one could buy back then.

 

Initially, all you could buy was Telarc Digital Classical Recordings, but I still have the very first Jazz CD I got, which was Bob James and Earl Klugh "One on One." Compared to the vinyl is sounded clearer since all I could do was clean with a brush and solution back then and there was still dust with ticks and pops noise from the LP. Most of the Popular LP pressings were shit back then with noise and warps. So personally, since I was also the first Digital Photographer in Michigan (according to Kodak), I said goodbye to dust forever by never shooting film again one I got digital, similar to dust on LP's. Why people are going back to that part of it makes not sense to me now that we can use the latest formats on Blue Ray for Audio and get 130+ db signal to noise ratio and Redbook CD is still as good as any of the "Hi-Rez" formats, which are ALL better than Vinyl is beyond my technical brain.

 

So, It has to be an EMOTIONAL decision, which seems to be a major part of Audio.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still enjoy listening to vinyl but I would not pretend to say it is technically superior to digital alternatives. I will admit that I prefer a warmer analog sound like my tube amp exhibits and vinyl often excels at. That said with a good DAC digital is continuing to sound better and better every day to these old ears.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Fido said:

I still enjoy listening to vinyl but I would not pretend to say it is technically superior to digital alternatives. I will admit that I prefer a warmer analog sound like my tube amp exhibits and vinyl often excels at. That said with a good DAC digital is continuing to sound better and better every day to these old ears.

"Warmer" besides raising the room temperature, means the Euphoric Distortions that come from certain Tube Amps that have a little (or a lot in some cases) of even Order Harmonics, that I must admit, I liked also when I set up a Tube top end on K402's with TAD drivers on top of my Jubilee Bass bins for several days until I went back to a Pass Class A F3 Clone. All good!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

Why people are going back to that part of it makes not sense to me now that we can use the latest formats on Blue Ray for Audio and get 130+ db signal to noise ratio and Redbook CD is still as good as any of the "Hi-Rez" formats, which are ALL better than Vinyl is beyond my technical brain.

 

So, It has to be an EMOTIONAL decision, which seems to be a major part of Audio.

 

Emotional, or artistic, or... all that isn't necessarily bad, I agree with you on this one!

 

There are amazing recordings straight to lacker, what a challenge is that for the musicians and the conductor, and the technical crew behind the scenes, and what a pleasure it is for the music lover to own such a unique vinyl record: https://www.nso.co.uk/latest-news/chasing-dragon-records-direct-vinyl-disc-air-studios-recording-session-espana

 

Sally Mann, I'm sure you've heard of her, is a photographer using an analog, large format camera (and technique) that is over 100 years old. The dust and the scratches are part of her 'art'. Would her art be better if she used some hi-rez digital camera back? I don't think so. https://www.sallymann.com/sally-mann-a-thousand-crossings-press

image.thumb.png.98a29f92badfa94d4a54d32a7638cb6d.png

Of course, my two examples are quite exceptional and do not apply to the large majority of analog music and photography on the market. Still, today, three vinyl records have been delivered to my home: Ella Fitzgerald's The Lost Berlin Tapes, Diana Krall's Turn up the Quiet and Anouar Brahem's Barzakh. Due to corona, delivery took almost a week, and I've been longing for them all week. What a pleasure it is, adding these to my collection, going through the whole ritual, getting out of my seat to turn the record to the other side. Yes, I've been listening to these recordings for quite a while in streaming, but still decided to spend my money on the vinyl record (and not the cd). One reason was 'ritual' and emotional, another was curiosity: I was simply curious about how the Brahem vinyl record would sound compared to the digital file. It sure sounds different, so now I have 2 versions of the same composition. Isn't that great!?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Claude, there’s no point arguing with those who prefer the surface noise generated by dragging a semiprecious stone over dusty and bumpy plastic that is incapable of reproducing the lowest notes without the stylus jumping out of the groove.  Then send the signal generated by the cartridge through the RIAA equalization circuit before  extolling its superiority over using 1s and 0s to reproduce exactly what is on the master tape, whether recorded digitally or in analog.

 

To tell someone they are wrong to prefer something in audio is akin to telling someone their spouse, or romantic partner, is flawed and should not be their preferred mate.

 

You and I agree that high quality class D chip amps best meet our needs.  We have both experienced various topologies, tube and solid state, some better than others, before settling on digital class D amps.

 

IMHO, music recorded on vinyl can sound very pleasing despite the limitations described above, not because of them.  That said, I won’t tell someone their partner is unattractive, or that they’re wrong to prefer vinyl or tubes.  Nevertheless, if someone were to tell me they preferred wax cylinders to vinyl, that would be too much.

 

@ClaudeJ1

 

H1000086-SEM_diamond_stylus_travelling_through_LP_grooves-SPL.jpg.07003d41401c4e6b5ba5ebe0ef1f5bb5.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably most LP lovers are from the era that LP's were the popular media. Since most music in the 80's and beyond are digital it is what people born in the 70's and beyond are use to. To me there is just something I love about pulling a LP with it's artwork and putting the vinyl on a turntable and listening to it that is appealing.  Probably has more to do with nostalgia than anything else. Most of my music collection, that is not mp3's, is on vinyl. I do have many CD's but they do not get a lot of play.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, henry4841 said:

Probably most LP lovers are from the era that LP's were the popular media. Since most music in the 80's and beyond are digital it is what people born in the 70's and beyond are use to. To me there is just something I love about pulling a LP with it's artwork and putting the vinyl on a turntable and listening to it that is appealing.  Probably has more to do with nostalgia than anything else. Most of my music collection, that is not mp3's, is on vinyl. I do have many CD's but they do not get a lot of play.  

My main complaint about vinyl from the 70's, which was the top of my musical era in terms of acquisition (started on vinyl as a Pre-teen, then cassette as a teen, back to vinyl, then the first in Michigan to get a Sony CD player in early 80's), was the shitty recycled crap they used for production. Yes I own several of the Sheffield Labs LP's along with a few of the 45 rpm direct cut records of the era, some more than 1 copy......................however, this was RARE and expensive tech. limited to a handful of "house artists" much like the AIX Digital Catalog.

 

The thing that really gets me is that with sound recording and distribution technology of Blue Ray Movies (some using old flat Analog Master Tapes for those Movie Soundtracks) sound really good. Those standard formats (24/96, etc.) are readily available to everyone!..................YET the stupid shitheads "in charge" have created the dreaded "Loudness Wars" that Audiophiles complained about since the 90's. IOW, unlike trying to create the best Vinyl Technologies possible in the last century, with their technical LIMITATIONS, the very best of that, is not even as good, specs-wise, as the worst of the Digital Standards like Redbook CD. Let's not even compare to Blue Ray Standards, which are even beyond what is required for great sound. The Mainstream Delivery Media are now DOWNLOADS that are 128 Kilobit MP3 derivatives, which are deemed "good enough" for the Teen Age Market (where most of the money is), where you have Dynamic Compression of the Music in mastering to where "EVERYTHING IS LOUDER THAN EVERYTHING ELSE" mentality coupled with further Bit Compression and the Lowest "acceptable" Bit Rate possible that a Greedy Corporation like Apple and others can possibly get away with. The smaller the file the faster those millions of downloads at $1.29 each can occur from the servers...................Cha Ching!! It's probably what saved Apple from the brink of bankruptcy by a futurist leader like Steve Jobs.

 

When I met the President of PONO years ago, I warned him that charging a premium price for the music on his otherwise excellent player, would kill the deal, and result in market failure. We all love being right once in a while, but I wish that were not the case. Finding the best sound possible has always made the quest difficult and expensive, regardless of Analog or Digital preferences. Yet today, the technology allows for 130 db signal to noise ratios that 99% of music does NOT take advantage of at all, except for companies like AIX. Blows my mind.

 

PWK was right when he said he made speakers for the 1% of the market that cares about reproducing the musical illusion as close to live music as possible, and his home made recordings of Symphonies proved that to me when he played several of them for me. He used 15 IPS 2-channel Master tapes, with a Mono Center Belle between his Khorns to do it right. If any of you have purchased the DVD's of the "Klipsch Tapes" from the mid 1950's, you will be amazed at how good that even THAT "inferior technology" could sound when mike right with FULL DYNAMICS. Heck I even tried going with DBX Dynamic Range Expanders for my Vinyl to try and get that sound, but it had it's own anomalous behaviors...............................But this philosophy of proper and best execution still and will continue to be at ODDS with the REAL WORLD, unfortunately. It has been with us from the beginning and will continue since the mainstream creation and distribution of music only cares about the other 99% of the market that makes them the most money. Thank God for Jazz and Classical music since they are the least corrupted of the available music vs. any thing processed into the equivalent of Music Chicken McNuggets for FM radio which I can barely stand anymore in my car even.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ILI_MeloManiac said:

Sally Mann, I'm sure you've heard of her, is a photographer using an analog, large format camera (and technique) that is over 100 years old. The dust and the scratches are part of her 'art'. Would her art be better if she used some hi-rez digital camera back? I don't think so.

Of course, I know of Sally Mann's work. I prefer her older stuff that had her kids in the images. The stuff you posted is crap compared to her older work, just because it's on a big piece of film, I'm no longer impressed with the image CONTENT. I've also been to several NYC galleries and witnessed far too many shitty pictures being passed of as ART, like the example you put forth here. Just because she uses an 8x10 camera with a big piece of film (had one myself) doesn't make the picture any better. Let me qualify my judgement if I may.

 

As Technical Editor of several Pro Photo magazines in the 90's and 2000's, national speaker on photography, I also spent about 20 years as a Judge for International Photo Competition. So I got to see some incredible work by Pro Photographers all over the world. I also converted to Digital Black and White printing and personally know Jon Cone, who pioneered modern Black and White Digital printing. I interviewed him for an article I wrote 17 years ago and own a few of his large Pano Prints made from a Cirkut Camera.

 

One of my good friends use to Teach Yosemite workshops with Ansel Adams. He was also West Coast Rep. for Sinar and taught Large Format photography to Commercial Photographers. I converted him to Digital photography about 18 years ago. He no longer uses his Darkroom (I sold all my film cameras and darkroom stuff in 1999 when I went full Digital, evolving from 1986 as part of the evolution. He even bought a 16x20 Black and White printer from me as well as a 4x5 film scanner to Digitize all of his film images. He knew Ansel well enough to tell me that, had he lived, he would have been shooting digital, but he passed away before the technology evolved to be BETTER than any film process, regardless of format size (I also used to use 20x24" film on giant process cameras in the 70's and 80's, and owned a few of those too, before they were relegated to scrap metal).

 

I also helped develop the world's most advanced Solid State Sensor, the Foveon X3, now owned by Sigma. It's tiny APS-C sensor creates a file that rivals 5x7 inch film in resolution, with even greater printable dynamic range. This has cause ALL lens makers to upgrade their optics for this greater resolution.

 

But digital technology, now in iPhones and their market copies from others, are the primary source of image making. Like their compressed JPG files from miniature sensors, their quality is amazing on one hand, and terrible if you are a pixel peeper. Again 99% of the worlds images are made on those "good enough" cameras rather than the 1% on real cameras. Such is the advancemet of technology where we can create more crap faster and more frequently than ever to share on Monitor Displays rather than real Prints. What a world!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ILI_MeloManiac said:

OK, let's have some fun: 

 

Here is some CD rot:

I have about 1,500 CD's that have NONE of that, so your example is a very rare one. Besides, so many people have copied those bits onto a Music Server these days and sales of CD's are about 1% of what they were for those who want to have the literature about the artists, which are way worse than the amazing art and text that came with LP's in their heyday.

 

Moving bits forward with technology is a perfectly good way of keeping the quality of Redbook CD's alive with no degradation at all. In fact, I just bought a 2 Terabyte Solid State drive that is wafer thin, about the XY dimensions of a cigarette pack that will hold 2,000 CD's without any data compression at all for only about $330. No more excuses for modern technology's benefits fare outweigh all else about it.

 

BTW, Dr. AIX, with over 500 young and old participants, just STATISTICALLY proved that there is no AUDIBLE quality difference between Redbook CD and any of the, so called, "hi rez" formats......................even those that HE mastered using 24bit/96 Khz. in the original masters, then downgraded to aven a 320 bit MP-3 file (which only a very few could detect via the best headphones).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ILI_MeloManiac said:

And this is what your offspring are going to inherit of your digital collection after you have passed away:

BULLSHIT. They will inherit a tiny Solid State Drive (or two) with JRiver software on a laptop,  if they even want my music, since they already have theirs. I also plan on digitizing most of my LP's since they don't even own a turntable (my son is also a Software Engineer). Your point is very weak, sorry. Myth #12 at play here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, henry4841 said:

Probably most LP lovers are from the era that LP's were the popular media. Since most music in the 80's and beyond are digital it is what people born in the 70's and beyond are use to. To me there is just something I love about pulling a LP with it's artwork and putting the vinyl on a turntable and listening to it that is appealing.  Probably has more to do with nostalgia than anything else. Most of my music collection, that is not mp3's, is on vinyl. I do have many CD's but they do not get a lot of play.  


Not only were LP’s a popular media, they were the Only media for the “serious” audiophile of the day. Sure there were cassettes available but for the most part not of ‘phile quality vs. vinyl. I’m sure there were recorded RTR tape masters available but not likely to be found at your local Peaches record emporium. And don’t forget there are some us, still alive mind you, that were born prior to 1970. And while growing up with vinyl and just selling for pennies on the dollar a reasonably large collection, Much prefer the CD format, Swiss cheese and all — . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

BULLSHIT. They will inherit a tiny Solid State Drive (or two) with JRiver software on a laptop,  if they even want my music, since they already have theirs. I also plan on digitizing most of my LP's since they don't even own a turntable (my son is also a Software Engineer). Your point is very weak, sorry. Myth #12 at play here.

 

Some LPs do have collectible value, me thinks. Your solid state drive may well have emotional value for your son, but it will never have collectible value. Unless it has Porsche design... 😉

 

Here's another one: our monthly subscription to hi-res streaming service, that's money down the drain too, and the digital download files we buy on Qobuz... There's a legal vacuum on that, I think when the owner dies... So money down the drain too. And this is supposed to be a  'legal' copy! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ILI_MeloManiac said:

 

Some LPs do have collectible value, me thinks. Your solid state drive may well have emotional value for your son, but it will never have collectible value. Unless it has Porsche design... 😉

 

Here's another one: our monthly subscription to hi-res streaming service, that's money down the drain too, and the digital download files we buy on Qobuz... There's a legal vacuum on that, I think when the owner dies... So money down the drain too. And this is supposed to be a  'legal' copy! 

It's not about a "collectible value" like a classic car. I did some pictures of several in classic car dealer showroom in Daytona Beach. Like a Camaro that sold for say, about $4,000 when new now sells for 10-15 times that as a used (with analog wear) "collectible." It's also "driveable." So yes, the beauty is the "BITS" can be moved forward to the latest technology of the day, without degradation.

 

My friends at General Motors Photo Dept. tell me that they are still working on digitizing all their film images going back to the last century. That's millions of scans to go.

 

So yes, the value of a Solid State drive full of music is the fact that you can PLAY IT, the collectible VALUE aspect, if any,  is in the eye (or should I say EAR) of the checkbook holder or inheritor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

My friends at General Motors Photo Dept. tell me that they are still working on digitizing all their film images going back to the last century. That's millions of scans to go.

 

Analog images of public and historical value are digitized in order to allow public access and selling. However, the analog original will be stored in saltmines deep underground under stable conditions for generations to come... 

Would you scan your Picasso/Van Gogh and then destroy the original? 

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...