"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

A while back I made a reference to a woolly memory of something I had
read in HFW to do with Tim de P's views on bitrates and their vinyl
equivalents and said I would post a reference to it, if it ever
appeared. Well it's popped up out of the blue and is, of course, nothing
like I remembered it.

It's on 2 pages of the April 2004 edition:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article01.jpg

plus the top left paragraph he

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article02.jpg


The 'bitrates' are nothing to do with vinyl it seems - simply Tim De
P's idea of a minimum requirements for digital to come even close.


so Tim de P reckons that digital should be 24/400, eh?
Most people can't hear above 20kHz, and 400kHz would allow signals with
frequency content of up to 200kHz be reproduced perfectly. A bit of a
waste, isn't it? Though 200kHz would better capture the harmonics of a
square/triangle wave.

**16/44 digital can't even reproduce a decent 5kHz square wave. Such a
feat is a doddle for a good vinyl system. Do you think you can hear the
difference between a 5kHz square wave and a 5kHz sine wave? Hint: You
probably can.


24-bit resolution would imply a dynamic range of 144dB. That's pretty
loud!


Now, having said all this, I still have another memory that there are
some pretty impressive figures somewhere that compare vinyl 'information
flow' very favourably with digital bitrates, but I've no idea where from
and have no intention of trying to find out. - I don't need to,


Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as well
(cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The mighty
Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave performance of
this very fine cartridge is exemplary.


Isn't the extra "frequency content" associated with vinyl a byproduct of
the mechanical replay system?

**In poor systems, yes. In good systems, no.



OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....


**Thank you.

Now, let's get back to arguing.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:53:03 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

A while back I made a reference to a woolly memory of something I had
read in HFW to do with Tim de P's views on bitrates and their vinyl
equivalents and said I would post a reference to it, if it ever
appeared. Well it's popped up out of the blue and is, of course, nothing
like I remembered it.

It's on 2 pages of the April 2004 edition:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article01.jpg

plus the top left paragraph he

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit.../article02.jpg


The 'bitrates' are nothing to do with vinyl it seems - simply Tim De
P's idea of a minimum requirements for digital to come even close.


so Tim de P reckons that digital should be 24/400, eh?
Most people can't hear above 20kHz, and 400kHz would allow signals with
frequency content of up to 200kHz be reproduced perfectly. A bit of a
waste, isn't it? Though 200kHz would better capture the harmonics of a
square/triangle wave.

**16/44 digital can't even reproduce a decent 5kHz square wave. Such a
feat is a doddle for a good vinyl system. Do you think you can hear the
difference between a 5kHz square wave and a 5kHz sine wave? Hint: You
probably can.


24-bit resolution would imply a dynamic range of 144dB. That's pretty
loud!


Now, having said all this, I still have another memory that there are
some pretty impressive figures somewhere that compare vinyl 'information
flow' very favourably with digital bitrates, but I've no idea where from
and have no intention of trying to find out. - I don't need to,


Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as well
(cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The mighty
Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave performance of
this very fine cartridge is exemplary.


Isn't the extra "frequency content" associated with vinyl a byproduct of
the mechanical replay system?

**In poor systems, yes. In good systems, no.

In *any* system, definitely yes, since even the mighty Rockport Sirius
III with an Insider cartridge, will still be playing the same tired
old vinyl, which has nothing but noise above 20kHz, despite Trevor's
bull**** claims.

OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....

Neat perhaps, utter ********, definitely.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:53:03 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


so Tim de P reckons that digital should be 24/400, eh?
Most people can't hear above 20kHz, and 400kHz would allow signals with
frequency content of up to 200kHz be reproduced perfectly. A bit of a
waste, isn't it? Though 200kHz would better capture the harmonics of a
square/triangle wave.

**16/44 digital can't even reproduce a decent 5kHz square wave. Such a
feat is a doddle for a good vinyl system. Do you think you can hear the
difference between a 5kHz square wave and a 5kHz sine wave? Hint: You
probably can.


24-bit resolution would imply a dynamic range of 144dB. That's pretty
loud!


Now, having said all this, I still have another memory that there are
some pretty impressive figures somewhere that compare vinyl
'information
flow' very favourably with digital bitrates, but I've no idea where
from
and have no intention of trying to find out. - I don't need to,


Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well
(cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty
Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave performance of
this very fine cartridge is exemplary.


Isn't the extra "frequency content" associated with vinyl a byproduct
of
the mechanical replay system?

**In poor systems, yes. In good systems, no.

In *any* system, definitely yes, since even the mighty Rockport Sirius
III with an Insider cartridge, will still be playing the same tired
old vinyl, which has nothing but noise above 20kHz, despite Trevor's
bull**** claims.



Really!! When did YOU do the tests? or is it just hearsay once again. Back
in those olden days of quadraphonic you needed a cartridge with an upper
range of around 40-45kHz. Mon dieu, the 'humble' Grado Reference cartridge
response is 10Hz - 60kHz and that's not approaching that of an Insider
cartridge! Though I note you don't even mention which Insider cartridge
model in your example so I guess its just hearsay once again - the Insider
Gold cartridge far exceeds the specifications of the Grado Reference as
you'd expect if you knew about hi-end cartridges. Hint, light years away
from any commercial AT cartridge.....

Why should vinyl be bandlimited to 20kHz? there is no real need to, I
suspect its because it suits your own reasoning as CD is bandlimited.
Come on Stewart.. you've only just discovered the way that cutter heads are
cooled ;-)

Iain is sending me some of his recordings. Would you be so kind to send me
an example of your recordings?




OK Mr Wilson, that was rather neatly done - I have to admit that....

Neat perhaps, utter ********, definitely.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

--
*If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

**Direct cut, of course. Commercial LPs were all pretty much crap.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

**Direct cut, of course. Commercial LPs were all pretty much crap.

They certainly were until digital mastering arrived. Then perked up
somewhat. Not much point in direct cut after that.

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:31:18 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

Just where are you going to get the source material to cut on this disk?
Or are you restricting it to direct cut?

**Direct cut, of course. Commercial LPs were all pretty much crap.

Name one single vinyl disc, direct cut or half-speed mastered, with
50kHz content. Once you've failed to do that, tell us how, even if it
had been true, this would have any relevance to music lovers. I've
only ever heard a couple of direct-cut discs that had even halfway
decent *music* on them.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote:

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...


**16/44 digital can't even reproduce a decent 5kHz square wave. Such a
feat is a doddle for a good vinyl system. Do you think you can hear the
difference between a 5kHz square wave and a 5kHz sine wave? Hint: You
probably can.

What definition of 'decent' are you using here? Just been looking at some
reviews that show 1kHz squarewaves and these show all sorts of ringing,
rounding, droop, etc. Some of which is reported as cutter produced.


Vinyl only has (at best) 70 - 78 dB of dynamic range, which equates to
12 - 13 bits resolution, and I am sure vinyl is bandwidth limited as
well (cuts off at 16kHz?).

**Nope. In fact, a good vinyl recording can go well past 50kHz. The
mighty Dynavector 10D-II can operate to 60kHz. The square wave
performance of this very fine cartridge is exemplary.

At what level, and at what distortion? I'd also wonder what the cut
squarewave might look like after a few dozen playings...

I don't have info on the 10D/II to hand, but I'm looking at squarewaves for
the 20A/II and DV100R. No idea how similar these are, but the results do
show a wide bandwidth, albeit with an overshoot and ultrasonic ringing. Not
clear how much of this is due to the cutter or a matching resonance with
the preamp, though.


Isn't the extra "frequency content" associated with vinyl a byproduct
of the mechanical replay system?

**In poor systems, yes. In good systems, no.

Depends what you mean. The dynavectors I just mentioned seem to have THDs
similar to most others. i.e. order of 1% around 0dB/1kHz and rising with
both frequency and amplitude, as well as worse as you approach the inner
groove. Hence I would expect them to produce some ultrasonic components due
to nonlinearity. (This is one reason we have to treat squarewave tests with
care as the distortion may be making the shape look 'sharper' than a linear
response sweep would confirm if filtered to remove distortion products. My
experience is that these sorts of things in cartdidges are subject to the
same sort of 'pass the parcel' tweaking as the distortion, etc, in FM
receivers. You can make some measures look nicer by allowing others to
degrade, or by choosing specific circumstances with care.)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:14:33 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


At what level, and at what distortion? I'd also wonder what the cut
squarewave might look like after a few dozen playings...

Worth remembering that a square wave recorded on vinyl will be - in
physical groove terms - a triangular wave, which may not be too bad
from a tracking point of view.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com