An interesting blind test

[DizRotus]

As has been discussed ad nauseum, it is difficult (read impossible) to set up a blind A/B test that will satisfy everyone, whether comparing wires, capacitors, SS vs. tube or CDs vs. vinyl. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to record good vinyl recordings played on SOTA equipment by burning them to a CD and then compare the vinyl to the CD recording of the vinyl.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Id wager that most people could not tell the difference.

[sfogg]

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/abx_testing2.htm

[PrestonTom]

Neil,

Interesting idea. I assume you would record at the out put of the pre-amp.

However it gets more complicated. Many times LPs are bandpassed. This is to eliminate low-frequencies that may cause a rumble. Additionally, LPs do not have the dynamic range or low noise floor that a CD could have. Please don't get riled up here. This is simple physics .... so let's not get into a war over this.

Consequently the engineering of an LP and CD would be different (should be different). The CD could (if the engineer expoited the advantages) have a better bandwidth and dynamic range (if it was good master tape).

So there is a complication. Sure, a CD of an LP (through a pre-amp) should sound about the same. But do LPs and CDs of the same recording sound the same. Probably not. The enginner would have mastered them differently.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[PrestonTom]

Neil,

Interesting idea. I assume you would record at the out put of the pre-amp.

However it gets more complicated. Many times LPs are bandpassed. This is to eliminate low-frequencies that may cause a rumble. Additionally, LPs do not have the dynamic range or low noise floor that a CD could have. Please don't get riled up here. This is simple physics .... so let's not get into a war over this.

Consequently the engineering of an LP and CD would be different (should be different). The CD could (if the engineer exploited the advantages) have a better bandwidth and dynamic range (if it was good master tape).

So there is a complication. Sure, a CD of an LP (through a pre-amp) should sound about the same. But do LPs and CDs of the same recording sound the same. Probably not. The engineer would have mastered them differently.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[DizRotus]

sfogg-

You're a man of few words. Thanks for that interesting article. Too bad it's from 1984, but imagine how much better the digital recording/playback process has become.

[sfogg]

" Too bad it's from 1984, but imagine how much better the digital recording/playback process has become."

That is part of the point. If it was transparent in 1984 with

effectively 14 bits of resolution with non-oversampling A/D-D/As it is

only that much better today with around 20 *real* bits of resolution

and much higher sampling rates.

Shawn

[DrWho]

" Too bad it's from 1984, but imagine how

much better the digital recording/playback process has become."

That is part of the point. If it was transparent in 1984 with

effectively 14 bits of resolution with non-oversampling A/D-D/As it is

only that much better today with around 20 *real* bits of resolution

and much higher sampling rates.

Shawn

And might I add costing a whole heck of a lot less (such that cheap CD players can sound really good).

I read another article where they were doing similar things with AD/DA stages inline

to the signal path and nobody was able to notice when it was in the

circuit. And this is essentially identical to a well implemented CD.

[oldbuckster]

As has been discussed ad nauseum, it is difficult (read impossible) to set up a blind A/B test that will satisfy everyone, whether comparing wires, capacitors, SS vs. tube or CDs vs. vinyl. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to record good vinyl recordings played on SOTA equipment by burning them to a CD and then comparing the vinyl to the CD recording of the vinyl.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Id wager that most people could not tell the difference.

TIC,TIC,POP, your your your probably right right, TIC,POP,right.

[RAPTORMAN]

This topic must have been discuss and talked about in this forum a million times and another million in other forums. Nonetheless, I still enjoy and prefer my analog front end. I only play CDs for background music.

The enjoyment of getting involve with setting up the cartridge/TT etc. etc. and getting great results (Better sonics than a digital playback IMHO) is just more rewarding than throwing a CD in my digital player.

For me the three main indrigients of good sonics are HORNS, TUBES, and VINYL RECORDS.

[maxg]

Another version of the blind test that is much easier to perform is to compare a CD recorded from a vinyl record with a pre-recorded CD and simply see which people prefer.

As ever - whilst all the technical merrits lie with the CD (especially from a digital master) the vinyl recording seems* to prove preferable to an audience that cannot see which disk is which.

To eliminate the copying process improving on the original you can also compare a copy ripped from the CD with a copy ripped from the vinyl record.

* - I have only ever done this single blind with me being the changer and knowing which was which. It would not be difficult to have someone else do the ripping and simply number the disks 1 and 2 for the comparison so that the changer does not know one from another.

[PrestonTom]

Another version of the blind test that is much easier to perform is to compare a CD recorded from a vinyl record with a pre-recorded CD and simply see which people prefer.

As ever - whilst all the technical merrits lie with the CD (especially from a digital master) the vinyl recording seems* to prove preferable to an audience that cannot see which disk is which.

To eliminate the copying process improving on the original you can also compare a copy ripped from the CD with a copy ripped from the vinyl record.

* - I have only ever done this single blind with me being the changer and knowing which was which. It would not be difficult to have someone else do the ripping and simply number the disks 1 and 2 for the comparison so that the changer does not know one from another.

Max,

Your first suggestion, if I understand you, will still have the problem that LPs and CDs are mixed/re-mastered differently when transferred from the original tape. So they would very likely sound different (less bandwidth and dynamic range on the LP). I was careful to say "different" not "better", since that is a result of various preferences of the listener.

Your last suggestion shows your thoroughness. However, unless there is some damage to the CD or some wierd copying program was used. A duplicated CD will be remarkably similar to the original. The first line of error correction (CRC or whatever) will take care of the rest.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[sfogg]

Max,

If you ever try the comparison again try and level match the two if you can. It isn't as easy of a thing to do though between the formats.

" with a copy ripped from the vinyl record."

How do you rip a song from vinyl? With a razor?

Shawn

[sfogg]

Tom,

", will still have the problem that LPs and CDs are mixed/re-mastered differently when transferred from the original tape. "

I think Max means to plug a phono pre-amp into a CD recorder and record the vinyls playback to CD. IOW to see if a CD recorded from vinyl sounds the same as the vinyl. The problem of different masters wouldn't apply here.

The problem of trying to match levels during the comparison however would.

Shawn

[rplace]

TIC,TIC,POP, your your your probably right right, TIC,POP,right.

From that comment I am guessing you have never heard a properly cleaned LP. The ticks and pops come mostly from dirt, mold and static. You clean them once, if they are new or used, and unless you handle them like a lunk head they are dead quiet.

[maxg]

Max, If you ever try the comparison again try and level match the two if you can. It isn't as easy of a thing to do though between the formats. " with a copy ripped from the vinyl record." How do you rip a song from vinyl? With a razor? Shawn

Shawn,

You are very adept at confusing me. I dont know the proper verb. Take the output from the phono stage into the line in on the soundcard and hit record in your favorite audio program (@ 44.1 / 16 bits into a WAV file).

Then repeat the above from your CD player connected in the line-in in exactly the same way (so that there are no issues over high speed ripping from the internal CD player)

You now have wav files on your hard disk from each source "ripped" using as similar a method as possible.

I have no idea how to volume balance this process - I merely adusted the volume each time so that the display did not show squared off peaks.

Using your audio program again copy (convert?) these wav files onto an audio CD - one each.

Playback on your main system and compare the results.

That is about as far as I can get.

[sfogg]

Max,

Sorry to confuse you. 'Ripping' a CD usually means digitally extracting the data from the CD directly in the CD-ROM drive in your computer. With a high speed drive one can usually 'rip' an entire CD in a few minutes.

That was why I was confused as to how to 'rip' vinyl.... the dang thing doesn't fit in my CD-ROM drive.

Why are you copying from a CD back to your computer?

I thought you were basically recording a vinyl track onto your computer then burning a CD. From there comparing that CD against the actual vinyl playback.

Comparing a store bought CD against the vinyl doesn't tell anything useful about the formats themselves as you have no control over if the mix between the two was the same or not. Likely it wouldn't have been if they are remotely current.

Shawn

[Colin]

If I remember my statistics, you need 30 observations for each independent variable: which means 30 tests, not merely 10. Also since a venerable Stereophile magazine test conducted at one of their shows found that certain golden ears really can tell differences between amplifiers (while the general public clearly can not!), then the tests should be made with multiple informed, knowledgeable and trained listeners. In other words, more listeners should be involved. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Harmon kardon has conducted this kind of research, into sprkrs (http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/Loudspeakers&RoomsPt2.pdf)

Start at the top, around the middle it starts to get real interesting.

(not about the source, or digitial verus analogue though)

[maxg]

Max, Sorry to confuse you. 'Ripping' a CD usually means digitally extracting the data from the CD directly in the CD-ROM drive in your computer. With a high speed drive one can usually 'rip' an entire CD in a few minutes. That was why I was confused as to how to 'rip' vinyl.... the dang thing doesn't fit in my CD-ROM drive. Why are you copying from a CD back to your computer? I thought you were basically recording a vinyl track onto your computer then burning a CD. From there comparing that CD against the actual vinyl playback. Comparing a store bought CD against the vinyl doesn't tell anything useful about the formats themselves as you have no control over if the mix between the two was the same or not. Likely it wouldn't have been if they are remotely current. Shawn

Why am I copying a CD back to my computer?

I have no idea! Oh yes - the second test.

Comparing a pre-recorded CD to a CD "ripped" from vinyl incorporates the possibility that the copying process might have a beneficial effect on the playback of the CD. There have been various threads in this forum that claim a copy of a CD sounds bettert than the original - something I too have found on ocasion - especially to black CDR's for some unknown reason.

What I therefore wanted to do was to compare copies. A copy of the Vinyl on CDR and a copy of the CD on CDR. At the same time, just to kill to birds with one stone I dont want to use the internal CD drive to rip my CD on as we then have very different pathways, speeds of rip and so on and so forth.

It therefore seemed to me that if I were to "rip" the CD in exactly the same way as I "rip" the vinyl - as in via the aux in port I am eliminating further variables in the system.

Of course - the choice of CD player as source will have an effect but this is part and parcel of the problems of attempting to compare the 2 platforms.

In summary - it is all very confusing, I have a headache and have lost the plot on what we are doing.

[sfogg]

"There have been various threads in this forum that claim a copy of a CD sounds bettert than the original - something I too have found on ocasion - especially to black CDR's for some unknown reason."

Level mismatches in the comparison are likely the reason for that. A couple of tenths of a dB difference is all it takes to throw off a comparison. When you record (not rip) to the computer the levels will change.

Shawn

[JBryan]

In the last month or so, I've received 2 'back-handed' compliments from friends who, having not noticed that I was playing a record, said that they didn't realize that a record was playing and that it sounded "great... just like a CD". They were referring to not only the sound but also the fact that they didn't hear any pops or ticks.

The second fella to say that had a pretty nice TT but still had problems with static and noise (or he was just more keen to his gear). I suggested a different technique for cleaning his records (he has a VPI 16.5) and sent him home with a static gun and extra ground wire for the TT bearing and he reported that the noise was greatly reduced but still there.

My next suggestion will be for him to replace his MM cart with a decent MC and upgrade his preamp. In addition to more fidelity, each improvement to a vinyl setup often results in a darker background and quieter records.