JBryan Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Anyone watch Wired Science on PBS last night?... http://www.pbs.org/kcet/wiredscience/video/212-audio_files.html Here's another look at the debate from MTV's 'The Week in Rock' 1993 (Neil Young, Peter Gabriel and Michael Fremer add their bits)... Have fun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut-Throat Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 Anyone watch Wired Science on PBS last night?... http://www.pbs.org/kcet/wiredscience/video/212-audio_files.html Here's another look at the debate from MTV's 'The Week in Rock' 1993 (Neil Young, Peter Gabriel and Michael Fremer add their bits)... Have fun I watched it and it confirmed my opinions. Good quality digital sounds good. Good quality analog sounds good. And no one can tell the difference in a blind test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardsweb Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 There is much debate in the audo world over digital and analog; for that matter, tubes/solid state, tape/vinyl, full range/multidriver, conventional/electrostat, etc... As long as there are different people, there will be different opinions. I don't think any one way is the "best". There are just different ways to achieve the same goal. That being "that you like your system." read my signature Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBryan Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share Posted November 8, 2007 Cut-throat said: "I watched it and it confirmed my opinions. Good quality digital sounds good. Good quality analog sounds good. And no one can tell the difference in a blind test. " I agree - nothing was resolved but I did like their explanation of the differences and the attempt at a test was enlightening - flawed as it was (I know I would've failed miserably). Still, I enjoyed that the female singer demonstrated a slightly better ability to differentiate digital and analog signals than the "golden-eared" recording engineers. I also liked the 2 other obviously talented and knowledgeable engineers explaining why their opposing methods were best. Its good to know that even highly-skilled recording professionals can't agree on the best way to listen to music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Potis Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 "I alsoliked the 2 other obviously talented and knowledgeableengineers explaining why their opposing methods were best. Its good toknow that even highly-skilled recording professionals can't agree onthe best way to listen to music. I thought it was interesting that the pro-digital engineer talked about how digital technology made doing his job easier while the pro-analog engineer talked about the *sound*. As a matter of fact, the more the digital guy talked about manipulating the original takes, the more uncomfortable I got. They didn't go into much detail with regard to the test. I assume that they were playing digital masters against analog masters. But that leaves out at least one step in the recording chain which takes us to the final medium used by the customers-- the LP or the CD. Now there are some really terrific sounding CDs but I can't think of any cases where I've got both the LP and the CD and the CD sounds better. Most of the time the LP is much better than the CD. I'd like to see the engineers explain that. And then they took a MAJOR leap from digital to MP3 and the death of the CD. If you guys haven't burned MP3 to CD and given a listen to it, you should. The gap between MP3 and redbook is MUCH wider than the gap between redbook and LP. It's truly horrendous sounding. JP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut-Throat Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 "I also liked the 2 other obviously talented and knowledgeable engineers explaining why their opposing methods were best. Its good to know that even highly-skilled recording professionals can't agree on the best way to listen to music. I thought it was interesting that the pro-digital engineer talked about how digital technology made doing his job easier while the pro-analog engineer talked about the *sound*. As a matter of fact, the more the digital guy talked about manipulating the original takes, the more uncomfortable I got. They didn't go into much detail with regard to the test. I assume that they were playing digital masters against analog masters. But that leaves out at least one step in the recording chain which takes us to the final medium used by the customers-- the LP or the CD. Now there are some really terrific sounding CDs but I can't think of any cases where I've got both the LP and the CD and the CD sounds better. Most of the time the LP is much better than the CD. I'd like to see the engineers explain that. And then they took a MAJOR leap from digital to MP3 and the death of the CD. If you guys haven't burned MP3 to CD and given a listen to it, you should. The gap between MP3 and redbook is MUCH wider than the gap between redbook and LP. It's truly horrendous sounding. JP MP3 is horrible sounding! - No debate there. But that not because it's Digital, it's because it's compressed as hell. Two completely different issues. The point was that if you have a well recorded Digital format against a well recorded Analog format, even the guys that talked about the "Sound" could not distinguish the two in a blind test. - I saw the program and I saw the enigeers guessing when they could hear a difference. And surprise surprise, they were right about 50% of the time with 2 choices. That has been my experience also. Sometimes the emperor really has no clothes on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkalsi Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 I am not taking any sides - but I think its difficult to judge which sounds better when your listening to the music through head phones. -- I am sure I will get laughed at for saying that, but if I was to judge a component (cd player/amp/pre-amp/turntable) - I would definately not use head phones to make my final decision. I do not know how one can judge the bass, the soundstage using head phones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBryan Posted November 9, 2007 Author Share Posted November 9, 2007 I am not taking any sides - but I think its difficult to judge which sounds better when your listening to the music through head phones. -- I am sure I will get laughed at for saying that, but if I was to judge a component (cd player/amp/pre-amp/turntable) - I would definately not use head phones to make my final decision. I do not know how one can judge the bass, the soundstage using head phones. The HPs were used more for isolation than anything else although a nice set can bring out some nuances in the recording that may get lost through conventional speakers. I think the real flaw of the test was the short duration of the samples as well as the quick changes. Even if the differences weren't subtle, I know I'd be confused as hell after a few changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmusic Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 IMO both sources have their strong points and weak points, I think it comes down to a matter of personal prefrence. As for the HP they do a real good job of isolating the backround noise out of the equation. Jay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsear Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 For as many various studies that have been designed and executed to pin down a source preference the result is frequently the same. People can't discern enough of a difference enough of the time to show a preference for either. So you can devise your system around plynths, vinyl, and an array of expensive support baubles or you can devise it around a simple digital source. There are styluses alone that cost that of a good digital player and vinyl still scratches and warps. From the standpoint of convenience and over all cost to own it would seem that digital should prevail. Thus one does not see LPs available at the local outlet. Dare I suggest that there's a culture of vinyl snobbery keeping an archaic albeit good mode barely alive. T'is fine by me but I for one tire of hearing about the superiority of records. One can spend $5k and keep a large collection of delicate LPs that will wear out or one can spend $5k and keep a larger selection of digital work they can drop kick and still use. Both can have a group of friends visit and wow them with sound but only the vinyl guys can inspire them with ritual. As great a klutz as I am I'm necessarily relegated to the world of digital and my guests can ritualize a glass of brandy instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DizRotus Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 Well put Oscarsear. Of course you know it's the Bruins' fault that Charlie Weiss still has a job. Navy did its part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFObuster Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 For as many various studies that have been designed and executed to pin down a source preference the result is frequently the same. People can't discern enough of a difference enough of the time to show a preference for either. So you can devise your system around plynths, vinyl, and an array of expensive support baubles or you can devise it around a simple digital source. There are styluses alone that cost that of a good digital player and vinyl still scratches and warps. From the standpoint of convenience and over all cost to own it would seem that digital should prevail. Thus one does not see LPs available at the local outlet. Dare I suggest that there's a culture of vinyl snobbery keeping an archaic albeit good mode barely alive. T'is fine by me but I for one tire of hearing about the superiority of records. One can spend $5k and keep a large collection of delicate LPs that will wear out or one can spend $5k and keep a larger selection of digital work they can drop kick and still use. Both can have a group of friends visit and wow them with sound but only the vinyl guys can inspire them with ritual. As great a klutz as I am I'm necessarily relegated to the world of digital and my guests can ritualize a glass of brandy instead. Nothing to add to that......well put....and I'm ritualizing a glass brandy myself, right now..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldbuckster Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 All the debate in the world won't change Vinyl People from singing the praises of Records, nor will it change the use of CD's by non-vinyl people, We both think we're right, neither side will budge .............. One day both forms will be gone, then there will be some tears !!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 In my recording expierience over many many years, Ive made bad analog recordings and bad digital recordings. I cant tell the difference between them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 well, you can't make a nice popcorn bowl out of a warped CD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 "I watched it and it confirmed my opinions. Good quality digital sounds good. Good quality analog sounds good. And no one can tell the difference in a blind test. " is this a CD vs record compare? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBryan Posted November 10, 2007 Author Share Posted November 10, 2007 "is this a CD vs record compare?" The formats weren't compared so much as the processes although CDs and records were mentioned often. In fact, the pro-digital engineer said (in so many words) that the CD was a 'dead' format and had been obsolete for years - much less was his opinion of the LP which had lost all relevance and viability once digital recording began 30 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted November 10, 2007 Share Posted November 10, 2007 "The formats weren't compared so much as the processes " yeah....a lot of folks don't know what codes on CD's like AAD, ADD, DDD mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 I'm surprised that no-one has made a device to play a record made into a popcorn bowl for $100,000.00 JJK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted November 11, 2007 Moderators Share Posted November 11, 2007 In my recording expierience over many many years, Ive made bad analog recordings and bad digital recordings. I cant tell the difference between them. Now that is funny. Travis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.