Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

You can equally argue that manipulations are not necessary to record
onto CD - but in practice they may be applied for reasons which have
nothing to do with CD as a format per se. So there are two distinct
questions here. One relating to what is possible, or necessary. The
other relating to what people making such things actually do in
practice. You have already indicated that what you might do, or wish
to do, may not be what everyone who produces an LP or CD actually does.



Absolutely they are different issues. unfortunately for we the
audiophile public they are not seperate issues in practice. If an LP
sounds better than it's CD counterpart it doesn't matter to us why.

It should. The point being that if you know *why* the two may "sound
different" then you may be able to shine a light onto those who make them
"different" as a result of ignorance or idiocy.

Should?! This point has been debated at length here and elsewhere.
Nobody knows why the inherent sound of LPs can sound better than CD.
Unless you've been keeping something to yourself...

This, for me, is one of the key problems with the situation we have had in
(UK at least) audio for decades. The magazines tend to publish subjective
views which show no sign of the writers having even the desire to test or
understand what the real reasons might be for what they talk about. This
then is communicated to readers as being, "all magic and a matter of
opinion". As if it were like the weather, something to observe and comment
upon, but not expect to be able to control or do anything about.


I'd agree - but they do throw in technostuff to support claims. They do
often state a control element - whether it's right or wrong I couldn't
say. And the best we get from the technically inclined on this NG is
that technical specification as a guide to sound quality is simply a
dependent variable. Advice, quite rightly, tends towards 'have a listen'.

The reality is that LPs, CDs, etc, are all engineered and created. They are
as they are because that is how their makers made them. If there are
'differences' then they are in a position to examine them, deterimine why,
and deal with any problems.

But they won't bother if they can sell what they can make, and the reviews
and feedback show no signs to them that what they are doing should be
changed in some way.

Consider the possibility: If we and the magazine reviews set out to
identify why a CD "sounds different" to the nominally equivalent LP, then
we could use that knowledge to get them to improve what they offer -
perhaps for *both* formats.


There's no end of products that vinylise and valvify sound. Explanations
for their existence exist: the 'distortion'; the processing involved in
converting analogue to digital and then back to analogue; the CD
standard cannot capture all the sound, sub-LP standard transfer of
master recordings to CD, and a fifth - I'd bundle perception, the aural
experience (lack of understanding/appreciation), marketing, association
and a number of other intangibles that don't spring to mind.

Of course, this presumes we can establish that they *do* sound different,
and identify plausible reasons which can be tested. And to consider that
this may be case-by-case, not a sweeping praise of one format and damnation
of the other. Simply expressing subjective opinions in 'wine tasting' terms
may not help. Indeed, my feeling is that it has impeded both CD/LP
production and equipment for some years now.


It simply does.

Not so. If they differ, there will be a reason. You just have to be
prepared to try and find it, not leave it as a mystery. :-)

You can't fix a poorly mastered CD no matter how much you love the
medium.

Well, that would depend on what way it was "poorly mastered". However if it
is poor, and people can be specific, you can then use this understanding to
apply pressure on the company involved to do better in future.


IMO we the consumes need to support companies that make an
effort to master their releases with due care be it on CD SACD DVD-A
and/or LP.

I would agree. But that process isn't help by blanket and unspecific
praise/complaints on the level of general assertions about the "inherent"
properties of the formats. It can be done by more specific understanding,
based on understanding the engineering of them, and how specific instances
fall short of what is possible.


OK, but I'd prefer to work back from the experience of listening, rather
than forward from the electronic and mechanical components.

Rob