Neil Young prefers vinyl
 

In article ,
JustMe wrote:
Popularly accepted wisdom is that CD *is* better than vinyl.

It's also accepted by anyone with the least bit of engineering
knowledge.

Picks up handbag

Ooooooo!

Puts handbag down again

Well, you might try this test.

Take any LP and transfer it to CD - using the best available equipment.
The CD will sound pretty well like the LP.

Do the reverse. More difficult, but I've heard the results.

Take any CD and transfer it to LP

The LP sounds *nothing* like the CD.

A recording medium should be as transparent as possible. Ideally, it will
neither add or subtract from the source material.

CD gets pretty close to this ideal. LP doesn't.

--
*Some people are alive only because it's illegal to kill them *

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

Neil Young prefers vinyl
 

In message , Rob
writes
Francis Xavier Holden wrote:

I happen to think Neil Young is part of the trinity of the three
great
white men of popular music still alive - Bob, Van and Neil.

Ahem, Leonard Cohen?!

Rob

And Richard Thompson.
--
Chris Morriss

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article qmcpd.325023$%k.291216@pd7tw2no, Spiderant wrote:

A very interesting example. I assume this is Gould's 1981 "digital"
recording [1]. A stunning performance [2].

However, you have to be careful about just what's on the CDs and the
vinyl. There was a digital recording and an analogue recording made at
the same time as a backup in case the very early digital recording was
not good enough.

The first CDs (and *I assume* the vinyl release - can you verify this)
were made from the digital master. I have a fully digital CD.

Recently Sony have released CDs ("A State of Wonder") where the 1981
performance is re-mastered from the analogue back-up recording. I have
one of these as well.

The sound of Gould's humming is very different between the two CDs.

On my "digital" CD I find Gould's humming very disturbing. To me it
sounds so real but so disconnected from the music that I keep thinking
there's someone else in the house - precisely like your experience of
the vinyl.

On my "analogue" CD the humming is just as obvious but it "integrates"
much better with the music and is clearly coming from the performance
soundstage. It doesn't disturb me like the "digital" CD.

Which is better? The hi-fi enthusiasts at "Stereophile" (on the web)
seem to like the "analogue" CD and claim it has better resolution.
I don't hear this in the same way.

However, from my experience with the two CDs, maybe the CD you have is
the "analogue" version and the vinyl is the "digital" version - you may
possibly be comparing apples with oranges in this case.

[1] The 1981 is the recording where Gould's humming is most pronounced.

[2] The Gramophone's reviewers agree but the Penguin Guide's reviewers
unaccountably mark it down for Gould's inconsistent observance of
the repeats. They perfer recordings like Hewitt's which is burnished
perfection as a performance but not musically as satisfying (to me,
anyway).

--
John Phillips

Thank you for your excellent and lucid posting. It prompted me into some
serious comparisons between some of my records and their CD counterparts. I
must say that what I discovered has distressed me immensly. It turns out
that both the CD of Gould's Goldburg Variaions and the vinyl recording are
the 1982 digital recordings. Both list the same engineers (Stan Tonkel,
etc.) and the statement "Mastered from the original digital recording in the
CBS Recording Studios, New York on the CBS DisComputer system."

What disturbs me is that, after playing around (non-scientifically)
switching between my old Technics turntable and my various CD players
(Cambridge Audio D500, Yamaha CD-586 and a Panasonic DVD-RV32--which, to
tell you the truth, I would not be able to distinguish in an A/B test
situation), I still preferred the vinyl version, even with all of it's
obvious noises and other flaws. No matter how I played with the volume
controls (I had to adjust because the CD is recorded at a higher volume than
the record), the record just seemed more open and spacious. And, contrary
to what I would have expected, it was the CD that sounded darker and
murkier. The piano sound on the record sounded more natural, with the notes
more distinct. How is this possible? Digital is digital, right? Maybe my
hearing is shot. It certainly can't be my ancient budget Technics SL-Qd3
turntable with a 20 year old needle.

Please understand that I am not a digitalphobe. As I said before, I have
about 1200 CDs versus about 50 records (I gave away most of my vinyl years
ago). I woudn't even ponder buying a Robert Simpson symphony on vinyl over
CD. Even if I had a prediliction against digital, this would not account
for my sense that the digital record sounded clearer than the digital CD,
even though the CD was recorded at a higher volume and didn't have the noise
floor. This does not make sense to me.

I am very distraught at this point. After spending an hour or so yesterday
going between the Bach on record and Bach on CD, I a/b'd my recently
acquired remasterd copy of Neil Young's "On The Beach" with the original
vinyl (yes, I still have one). Again, the vinyl just sounded more open and
natural. Not only that, but the balance between the speakers was obviously
better, with Neil closer to the centre on Vinyl compared to blurred between
the two speakers on CD. Again, contrary to what I would have expected, it
was the CD that sounded a bit warmer but more smeared. Again, this is not
what I wanted to discover. What do I do now, spend a huge chunk of my
income looking for a better CD player?

Sad and disillusioned.

Roland Goetz

Neil Young prefers vinyl
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

Go with 'Option C' (my lifetime philosophy), which equals 'Options A + B'
where A is vinyl and B is CD/DVD or whatever (or vice versa) - IOW, aim
for the best of both worlds. Ignore ludicrous suggestions here that the
formats are mutually exclusive, even if you do have a strong preference
for either one.....

(I've finally got my CDs juiced up with EL34 amps and they are sounding
quite good - for CDs..... ;-)


Thanks Keith. I never even dreamed of becoming an audiophile until I
started getting into CDs. I sometimes wonder if this is simply because, in
the past, all I cared about was listening to the music. Oh sure, in those
days, I always played music with the loudness button pressed in and did all
sorts of stuff to accentuate the lows (I remember how proud I was of the 15
inch woofers in the speakers I built in high school). But since I started
buying CDs, I've gone through probably at least a dozen amplifiers and just
as many CD players. I'm just not getting the impact of the music like I
used to, regardless of whether or not I use the loudness button (which both
my NAD 3020 and my Yamaha AX-596 still have). And it's not bass or warmth
I'm looking for, just clarity in the music. You'd think that with Music
Fidelity's latest headphone amp, Sennheiser 580's and a Cambridge Audio CD
player my CDs would sound at least as good as my almost-antique record
player (see "Bach..." post above). I'm very sad to say that it
doesn't--until I pull the CD player and put in the turntable. Needless to
say, I'm a bit disillusioned at this point.

Roland Goetz.

Neil Young prefers vinyl
 

"Chris Morriss" wrote in message

And Richard Thompson.
--


Ah now you're talking.

Roy.

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

"Spiderant" wrote in message
news:sj4qd.369029$%k.133110@pd7tw2no...

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article qmcpd.325023$%k.291216@pd7tw2no, Spiderant wrote:

A very interesting example. I assume this is Gould's 1981 "digital"
recording [1]. A stunning performance [2].

However, you have to be careful about just what's on the CDs and the
vinyl. There was a digital recording and an analogue recording made at
the same time as a backup in case the very early digital recording was
not good enough.

The first CDs (and *I assume* the vinyl release - can you verify this)
were made from the digital master. I have a fully digital CD.

Recently Sony have released CDs ("A State of Wonder") where the 1981
performance is re-mastered from the analogue back-up recording. I have
one of these as well.

The sound of Gould's humming is very different between the two CDs.

On my "digital" CD I find Gould's humming very disturbing. To me it
sounds so real but so disconnected from the music that I keep thinking
there's someone else in the house - precisely like your experience of
the vinyl.

On my "analogue" CD the humming is just as obvious but it "integrates"
much better with the music and is clearly coming from the performance
soundstage. It doesn't disturb me like the "digital" CD.

Which is better? The hi-fi enthusiasts at "Stereophile" (on the web)
seem to like the "analogue" CD and claim it has better resolution.
I don't hear this in the same way.

However, from my experience with the two CDs, maybe the CD you have is
the "analogue" version and the vinyl is the "digital" version - you may
possibly be comparing apples with oranges in this case.

[1] The 1981 is the recording where Gould's humming is most pronounced.

[2] The Gramophone's reviewers agree but the Penguin Guide's reviewers
unaccountably mark it down for Gould's inconsistent observance of
the repeats. They perfer recordings like Hewitt's which is burnished
perfection as a performance but not musically as satisfying (to me,
anyway).

--
John Phillips

Thank you for your excellent and lucid posting. It prompted me into some
serious comparisons between some of my records and their CD counterparts.
I
must say that what I discovered has distressed me immensly. It turns out
that both the CD of Gould's Goldburg Variaions and the vinyl recording are
the 1982 digital recordings. Both list the same engineers (Stan Tonkel,
etc.) and the statement "Mastered from the original digital recording in
the
CBS Recording Studios, New York on the CBS DisComputer system."

What disturbs me is that, after playing around (non-scientifically)
switching between my old Technics turntable and my various CD players
(Cambridge Audio D500, Yamaha CD-586 and a Panasonic DVD-RV32--which, to
tell you the truth, I would not be able to distinguish in an A/B test
situation), I still preferred the vinyl version, even with all of it's
obvious noises and other flaws. No matter how I played with the volume
controls (I had to adjust because the CD is recorded at a higher volume
than
the record), the record just seemed more open and spacious. And, contrary
to what I would have expected, it was the CD that sounded darker and
murkier. The piano sound on the record sounded more natural, with the
notes
more distinct. How is this possible? Digital is digital, right? Maybe
my
hearing is shot. It certainly can't be my ancient budget Technics SL-Qd3
turntable with a 20 year old needle.

Please understand that I am not a digitalphobe. As I said before, I have
about 1200 CDs versus about 50 records (I gave away most of my vinyl years
ago). I woudn't even ponder buying a Robert Simpson symphony on vinyl
over
CD. Even if I had a prediliction against digital, this would not account
for my sense that the digital record sounded clearer than the digital CD,
even though the CD was recorded at a higher volume and didn't have the
noise
floor. This does not make sense to me.

I am very distraught at this point. After spending an hour or so
yesterday
going between the Bach on record and Bach on CD, I a/b'd my recently
acquired remasterd copy of Neil Young's "On The Beach" with the original
vinyl (yes, I still have one). Again, the vinyl just sounded more open
and
natural. Not only that, but the balance between the speakers was
obviously
better, with Neil closer to the centre on Vinyl compared to blurred
between
the two speakers on CD. Again, contrary to what I would have expected, it
was the CD that sounded a bit warmer but more smeared. Again, this is not
what I wanted to discover. What do I do now, spend a huge chunk of my
income looking for a better CD player?

Sad and disillusioned.

Roland Goetz

Could you consolidate your three CD players into one superior model and do
the same for the two amps?

I prefer the sound of a £200 turntable over an £800 CD player - I'm no
"digiphobe" either, and I'd still find it worthwhile investing in a better
CD player to get the best I could afford from that medium - but I find vinyl
has the life, energy and projection which CD does not match.

A second-hand Marantz CD63SE or CD63KI Sig might suit your wish for more
openness and should cost between £100-£200 tops, although I'm certain others
have other suggestions.

I'd also recommend you replace that worn stylus immediately, so that you can
enjoy many more years from the records you have left - and from any future
vinyl purchases that you make.

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

"JustMe" wrote in message
...

Could you consolidate your three CD players into one superior model and do
the same for the two amps?

I prefer the sound of a £200 turntable over an £800 CD player - I'm no
"digiphobe" either, and I'd still find it worthwhile investing in a better
CD player to get the best I could afford from that medium - but I find
vinyl
has the life, energy and projection which CD does not match.

A second-hand Marantz CD63SE or CD63KI Sig might suit your wish for more
openness and should cost between £100-£200 tops, although I'm certain
others
have other suggestions.

I'd also recommend you replace that worn stylus immediately, so that you
can
enjoy many more years from the records you have left - and from any future
vinyl purchases that you make.

I'm not convinced that the problem is the amplifiers. I've tried many
different configurations of amps, including the great project kit "Foreplay"
pre-amp avaliable at http://bottlehead.com/. I've also used my Musical
Fidelity X Cans V3 as a pre-amp with my Yammy and the NAD with very good
results. Also, under headphones, I believe my current setup should be
getting me about 90% there. Also, I'm not convinced that I'll hear much of
a difference between the Marantz and the Cambrige Audio. Although I
certainly haven't compared many higher-end CD players, when I went to the
Sound Room, a local (Vancouver, Canada) audio shop and tried listening to
various players (I confess that I don't remember what they were anymore), I
don't think I would have been able to distinguish them. That being said,
I'll keep my ears open.

I'll take that suggestion to replace the stylus right away. In fact, I'm
going to start checking out the second-hand stores for a good belt driven
turntable as, from what other posters have said, direct drive turntables
don't sound nearly as good.

I really just wish that CDs did give me that sense of spatial detail that
vinyl does, however. The music just isn't moving me the way it used to.

Thanks for you response,

Roland Goetz.

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

In article sj4qd.369029$%k.133110@pd7tw2no, Spiderant
wrote:

[big snip]

What disturbs me is that, after playing around (non-scientifically)
switching between my old Technics turntable and my various CD players
(Cambridge Audio D500, Yamaha CD-586 and a Panasonic DVD-RV32--which, to
tell you the truth, I would not be able to distinguish in an A/B test
situation), I still preferred the vinyl version, even with all of it's
obvious noises and other flaws. No matter how I played with the volume
controls (I had to adjust because the CD is recorded at a higher volume
than the record), the record just seemed more open and spacious. And,
contrary to what I would have expected, it was the CD that sounded
darker and murkier. The piano sound on the record sounded more
natural, with the notes more distinct. How is this possible? Digital
is digital, right?

Yes, "digital is digital", but this is a bit of a catch-phrase as it does
not tell you how the "digital" is being employed. There are a number of
points that may be relevant:

e.g.s include:

1) Your LP replay system may have a very different frequency response to
your CD system. The cartridge may not have a flat response, there may be a
noticable arm-cartidge LF resonance, etc. The RIAA curve/loading may not be
giving a flat response, etc.

2) Despite coming from the same 'original' digital recording, the signals
may have been processed in different ways before being recorded onto LP or
CD-A.


Maybe my hearing is shot. It certainly can't be my ancient budget
Technics SL-Qd3 turntable with a 20 year old needle.

Why not? Please see (1) above. For all I know, the departures from flat
response with LP replay are compensating for other departures elsewhere in
your system and giving a result you prefer.

Please understand that I am not a digitalphobe. As I said before, I
have about 1200 CDs versus about 50 records (I gave away most of my
vinyl years ago). I woudn't even ponder buying a Robert Simpson
symphony on vinyl over CD. Even if I had a prediliction against
digital, this would not account for my sense that the digital record
sounded clearer than the digital CD, even though the CD was recorded at
a higher volume and didn't have the noise floor. This does not make
sense to me.

I am very distraught at this point. After spending an hour or so
yesterday going between the Bach on record and Bach on CD, I a/b'd my
recently acquired remasterd copy of Neil Young's "On The Beach" with
the original vinyl (yes, I still have one). Again, the vinyl just
sounded more open and natural. Not only that, but the balance between
the speakers was obviously better, with Neil closer to the centre on
Vinyl compared to blurred between the two speakers on CD. Again,
contrary to what I would have expected, it was the CD that sounded a
bit warmer but more smeared. Again, this is not what I wanted to
discover.

In part see (2) above w.r.t. your comments on "Neil closer to the center".
Also note that the level of crosstalk on LP replay systems is often of the
order of 20-30dB (This corresponds to a relative sound pressure level of
only about 10:1 or 15:1 emerging from the speakers.) This crosstalk may
also contain a higher proportion of distortion than on the 'speaking'
channel.


What do I do now, spend a huge chunk of my income looking
for a better CD player?

Sad and disillusioned.

Well, what you *could* do is get hold of a CD recorder, record a couple of
LPs onto CD-RW, then load the results into a computer along with the 'same
recordings' from CD-A and do various statistical comparisons. I suspect you
would find various differences. Having done this, you could consider if you
wished to modify your system in the light of what you find.

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

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

In article sj4qd.369029$%k.133110@pd7tw2no, Spiderant wrote:

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article qmcpd.325023$%k.291216@pd7tw2no, Spiderant wrote:

A very interesting example. I assume this is Gould's 1981 "digital"
recording [1]. A stunning performance [2].

However, you have to be careful about just what's on the CDs and the
vinyl. ...

Thank you for your excellent and lucid posting. It prompted me into some
serious comparisons between some of my records and their CD counterparts. I
must say that what I discovered has distressed me immensly. ...

I'm sorry I distressed you - that wasn't intended.

I am about to go into being the vice-chair of a large meeting. With the
prep. tonight and the meeting over the next few days I will not find the
time to read the group or all of your article carefully for several days.

I see the source is the same for your CD and vinyl. You should note
that although I reported the "same" experience with the CD as you had
with the vinyl, this may, of course not be the case in practice as I
have not heard the vinyl. I was relying on comparing your description
with my experience which may not be exactly the same.

Anyway, in spite of my curiosity in a scientific sense I am still in
favour of trusting my own ears with respect to what I enjoy; I hope
you do so too and will not in practice be too distressed by my questions.

More comment later after my meeting ...

--
John Phillips

Digital Bach sounds better on Vinyl than CD?
 

In article ,
John Phillips wrote:
I see the source is the same for your CD and vinyl.

This is most unlikely. The treatment applied between the master tape and
LP or CD will be different. So a direct comparison of commercial
products is fairly pointless.

--
*I have plenty of talent and vision. I just don't care.

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