In article , Iain M Churches wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:14:57 +0300, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:
Please do not give the impression to people that music has to be
compressed
for disc cutting, This definately not the case, especially in the case of
classical
music which rarely needs any treatment whatseover, perhaps a dB or two of
peak limiting but no more.

Were it not the case, then we wouldn't have people claiming that they
can hear low-level detail on vinyl that they can't hear on a CD of the
same performance, now would we?

If they say then can, then we must assume they can. One cannot cannot get
inside aonther listener's head, as it were.

But please do not use compression as an explanation.

It's certain that even moderate quality modern vinyl has more
dynamic range than many people think. However a single figure does
not give the whole story - see for example the noise floor plots in
http://users.bigpond.net.au/christie/comparo/part4.html.

As I understant it, the vinyl noise floor above 1 kHz can certainly take
the dynamic range of a good tape recording. However what puzzles me
is the effect on ambience of the steeply rising noise floor ("surface
noise"?) below 600 Hz or so.

It is my understanding (maybe this is faulty) that the much prized
ambience ("air" etc.) of a recording has a rather large and important
component at low frequencies. While (from a non-expert point of view)
the situation indeed appears to be that good detail above 1 kHz may be
reproduced without using compression, I am puzzled about the effect of
the surface noise on ambience if you do not use compression. This is
especially so as vinyl is often said to be better than CD in this respect.

--
John Phillips