The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

wrote in message
oups.com...


OTOH I'd say the vast
majority of crappy sounding CDs these days are due to the loudness
wars. (snip)
Scott

That is exactly the situation as I see it. As long as there is pressure
to produce loud, head-banging product, nothing will change.

Iain

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain Churches
writes

"Keith G" wrote in message
. ..

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
APR wrote:
I recently, after reading all the posts debating the various merits
of
of CD and LP, went out and bought the latest and greatest budget CD
player, but now have a problem.

I am having difficulty determining how to change the
what-see-me-jiggit
that should allow me to tailor the sound to suit the different types
of
music I want to play. You know how you can change the cartridge in
your
turntable. In the past I had a couple of turntables with different
cartridges mounted in each, and each cartridge had it's strong
points
that resulted in them giving more enjoyment on a particular type of
music.

Is there any way to achieve the same result with a CD player. I am
not
achieving the same nostalgic satisfaction from the CD player that I
achieved from my old turntables.

Best way is to get a selection of blankets and hang them over the
speakers. Several thicknesses should do what you want - but experiment
with different types of music.


Sadly, this will actually help with many CDs.



The trouble with people like Plowie is they don't seem to be able to
hear
just how *blurry* most CDs are.....


Overbright with limited dynamic seems to be the most common complaint.


Yes.. is that a fault of the digital system as such, or what's put into
it?....

The latter I fear, but it may also the reason for some people making the
assumption that vinyl is technically superior in some way. It may even be
the reason that vinyl is still very much alive and kicking, and the focus of
so much interest.

Iain

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...


Look and listen closely - digital stuff all suffers from the loss
of that final sharpness, be it sound or images....

Alas, no matter how many 'takes' you make, your theory disagrees
with my experience. :-)

Word Insertion Technique noted - 'theory'...??

Your theory is that **all** "digital stuff" is as you describe.

The word theory doesn't come into it, it's a belief based in my own
experience. I consider it would be a 'theory' if I didn't have that
experience.

Thus showing that you don't understand the meaning of "theory". :-)



Nonsense. Go see this Dictionary.com entry:

http://dictionary.reference.com/sear...eory&x=54&y=13


And put me down for a 6, 7, some Bombay Potatoes and a Nan bread, if nothing
else....



Your statement said nothing about it being your "belief". It was simply a
statement presented as being absolutely correct in fact with no exceptions
or qualifications.


(Tip for dealing with simple 'enthusiasts' who are not necessarily
*lexicographers* - try to understand what people mean rather than that which
they might actually say.... ;-)

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Rule 1 of the internet is that when some prat decides to correct another's
spelling or typo he invariably gets it wrong. ;-)

The gentleman's name for the record is John Linsley Hood - or that's the
name on his books. At least one Hi-Fi News article had him as J.L.
Linsley-Hood. Dunno which is correct.


I got the spelling of the name from a German review by Günter
Erhardt. The Germans are usually precise in matters of spelling.

Come to think of it, Dave, surely it would not have been too much
to hope that you, as the owner of the amp, would have got it right in
the first place. Good thing you don't have any Czech or Russian
equipment:-)

Iain

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

Rule 1 of the internet is that when some prat decides to correct
another's spelling or typo he invariably gets it wrong. ;-)

The gentleman's name for the record is John Linsley Hood - or that's
the name on his books. At least one Hi-Fi News article had him as J.L.
Linsley-Hood. Dunno which is correct.


I got the spelling of the name from a German review by Günter
Erhardt. The Germans are usually precise in matters of spelling.

But not in this case, eh? Of course *you* could never have just f**ked up
a spelling.


Come to think of it, Dave, surely it would not have been too much
to hope that you, as the owner of the amp, would have got it right in
the first place. Good thing you don't have any Czech or Russian
equipment:-)

I can just see that Rigonda radiogram having pride of place in your
living room. Valves, after all...

Iain

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch *

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

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

Keith G wrote:

Anybody care to claim 'digital radio' or 'digital TV' is sharper than
analogue?

Digital radio *should* be clearer and more dynamic. Unfortunately
because of the highly limited bitrates on DAB it isn't.

Digital TV... well our analogue signal here is pretty appalling, so it's
a choice of a snowy 4:3 picture with NICAM dropping out... or a clean
and clear 16:9 picture with MPEG (or better still AC3) audio off digital
satellite.

Yes, visual compression artefacts are sometimes irritating. But less so
than constant analogue snow.

Anyone care to claim that 'digital photography' is sharper than 'wet
film'??

Now here I will have to disagree with you. As a keen amateur
photographer (with some pro experience under my belt) I used to use
film... Praktica LTL with 35mm, 50mm, 135mm and 300mm prime focus lenses
in the old days, Olympus OM-101 with 35-70mm, then my last film camera
was a Canon EOS-300V with 28-90mm and 75-300mm zooms.

I then replaced the 300V with a 300D, 6Mpx and the 75-300 from the old
300V fitted it. The depth and clarity of images from this left film
standing (and I'm not talking cheap film here, I always used the likes
of Kodak Supra, Fuji Velvia etc).

I've since upgraded to an EOS-20D, again this is streets ahead of the
300D. As far as photography goes, digital is better.

As to the *sharpness* of LP over CD, even my 'deaf in one ear'
neighbour (who uses CDs all the time) commented on the clarity of the
'analogue sound' from my kit once - and that was before the
Lowthers.....

With audio however... well I was playing some old records - Rega Planar
3, Ortofon cart (can't remember the model no but it's the £55 one),
Pro-Ject Phono Box II, Arcam AVR-250, Mordaunt-Short Avant 7.1 speaker
system - and my thoughts were "I've never heard CD sound this good". In
fact... the pops and crackle are part of the sound with vinyl. It's great!

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

"Glenn Richards" wrote in message
. uk...
Keith G wrote:

Anybody care to claim 'digital radio' or 'digital TV' is sharper than
analogue?

Digital radio *should* be clearer and more dynamic. Unfortunately because
of the highly limited bitrates on DAB it isn't.

Digital TV... well our analogue signal here is pretty appalling, so it's a
choice of a snowy 4:3 picture with NICAM dropping out... or a clean and
clear 16:9 picture with MPEG (or better still AC3) audio off digital
satellite.

Yes, visual compression artefacts are sometimes irritating. But less so
than constant analogue snow.


Sure and watching digital TV is better than watching analogue TV with a Pit
Bull Terrier chewing at your arse at the same time! (Snow? - When did you
last see that? Do you *have* an aerial....??)



Anyone care to claim that 'digital photography' is sharper than 'wet
film'??

Now here I will have to disagree with you. As a keen amateur photographer
(with some pro experience under my belt) I used to use film... Praktica
LTL with 35mm, 50mm, 135mm and 300mm prime focus lenses in the old days,
Olympus OM-101 with 35-70mm, then my last film camera was a Canon EOS-300V
with 28-90mm and 75-300mm zooms.


I never made it past a Nikon F4S, a couple of Contax cameras with a range of
Zeiss T* prime focus lenses and a Rollieflex with the f2.8 Planar lens...



I then replaced the 300V with a 300D, 6Mpx and the 75-300 from the old
300V fitted it. The depth and clarity of images from this left film
standing (and I'm not talking cheap film here, I always used the likes of
Kodak Supra, Fuji Velvia etc).

I've since upgraded to an EOS-20D, again this is streets ahead of the
300D. As far as photography goes, digital is better.


I only got a Leica Digilux 1 with the Vario Summicron lens....

.....made by Canon....!! ;-)



As to the *sharpness* of LP over CD, even my 'deaf in one ear'
neighbour (who uses CDs all the time) commented on the clarity of the
'analogue sound' from my kit once - and that was before the
Lowthers.....

With audio however... well I was playing some old records - Rega Planar 3,
Ortofon cart (can't remember the model no but it's the £55 one), Pro-Ject
Phono Box II, Arcam AVR-250, Mordaunt-Short Avant 7.1 speaker system - and
my thoughts were "I've never heard CD sound this good". In fact... the
pops and crackle are part of the sound with vinyl. It's great!


Well, I'm glad you like it - I don't think pops and crackles *are* part of
the sound of vinyl by I can live with it. Gotta say it - you're another one
with very modest vinyl kit, I don't say it's bad but you won't get the
*best* from vinyl with it....???

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

In article ,
Glenn Richards wrote:
Yes, visual compression artefacts are sometimes irritating. But less so
than constant analogue snow.

The same could be said of DAB against hissy or multi-path FM radio. ;-)

--
*If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?

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

The advantage of vinyl playback systems
 

Glenn Richards wrote:

Keith G wrote:

Anybody care to claim 'digital radio' or 'digital TV' is sharper than
analogue?

Digital radio *should* be clearer and more dynamic.

How so ?


Unfortunately
because of the highly limited bitrates on DAB it isn't.

That's part of it for sure.


Digital TV... well our analogue signal here is pretty appalling, so it's
a choice of a snowy 4:3 picture with NICAM dropping out... or a clean
and clear 16:9 picture with MPEG (or better still AC3) audio off digital
satellite.

Which has nothing to do with analogue per se.


Yes, visual compression artefacts are sometimes irritating. But less so
than constant analogue snow.

When digital fails there's simply no usable picture at all. You totally lose
'soft degradation'.


With audio however... well I was playing some old records - Rega Planar
3, Ortofon cart (can't remember the model no but it's the £55 one),
Pro-Ject Phono Box II, Arcam AVR-250, Mordaunt-Short Avant 7.1 speaker
system - and my thoughts were "I've never heard CD sound this good".

Probably because you never tried hard enough ?


In
fact... the pops and crackle are part of the sound with vinyl. It's great!

It's truly horrid ! Thank goodness for banishing both of those to the dustbin of
history.

Graham