On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 09:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

The CD you make at home should sound exactly like the LP since it's been
made using the same turntable, etc.

Trouble is, it will. And without the romance of expensive antique
hardware, you'll notice how ropey it sounds.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
And whilst I would rather have a non compressed format, a decent MP3
will be no worse than a vinyl transfer in most cases.

The CD you make at home should sound exactly like the LP since it's been
made using the same turntable, etc.

Exactly, but that will probably be quite different to an MP3 made from a CD
track.

Of course many long since disposed of their turntable etc but not
LP collection then decide to digitise some of it using something bought
off ebay and wonder why it doesn't seem to sound quite as good as they
fondly remember...

Which is why I said the turntable/cartridge and record quality is far more
important than the choice of soundcard these days.

MrT.

Geoff wrote:
Glenn Richards wrote:
wrote:

My middle-aged PC (Athlon 700 / 256Mb / 30 Gig) has no sound card
and I want to buy one. I also want to transfer some of my favourite
vinyl to CD. Can I do this with a basic soundcard + software or
would I do better to buy a more advanced soundcard maybe with its
associated software?

Sound card - pretty much anything if you just want to get pings and
chimes when you get new emails.


Unless they otherwise unobtainium, the novelty of LP-CD transfers will wear
off after approx 3 LPs. Especially if you subsequently hear a real CD of
the album.

That is true if one of the following circumstances exist.
1. Your TT gear sucks
2. You are near deaf
3. You are so consumed by anti analog biases that it takes over your
judgement.

Scott

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Mr.T MrT@home wrote:
And whilst I would rather have a non compressed format, a decent MP3
will be no worse than a vinyl transfer in most cases.

The CD you make at home should sound exactly like the LP since it's been
made using the same turntable, etc.


It will be close but if you want real transapency move up to 24/96 or
higher.


If it doesn't, you're doing something
wrong.

Or not.


Of course many long since disposed of their turntable etc but not
LP collection then decide to digitise some of it using something bought
off ebay and wonder why it doesn't seem to sound quite as good as they
fondly remember..

The better the playback equipment the better the digital copy. No doubt
about that.

Scott

Laurence Payne wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 09:09:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

The CD you make at home should sound exactly like the LP since it's been
made using the same turntable, etc.

Trouble is, it will.

Trouble is it won't. If you go 24/96 and do it right it will. But that
isn't trouble. It's great.


And without the romance of expensive antique
hardware, you'll notice how ropey it sounds.

What a load of crap.


Scott

wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Mr.T MrT@home wrote:
And whilst I would rather have a non compressed format, a decent MP3
will be no worse than a vinyl transfer in most cases.
The CD you make at home should sound exactly like the LP since it's been
made using the same turntable, etc.


It will be close but if you want real transapency move up to 24/96 or
higher.

That depends on what you will be doing with the recording:- If just
copying off vinyl and burning a CD, as the CD is 16/44.1, there's no
point recording it at any higher resolution just to come down again
immediately. If however you will be applying de-clicking, de-crackle and
noise reduction (preferably in that order), then there is some reason to
record at a higher resolution, process, then dither down to 16 bit and
SRC to 44.1 later.

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........

S.



If it doesn't, you're doing something
wrong.

Or not.


Of course many long since disposed of their turntable etc but not
LP collection then decide to digitise some of it using something bought
off ebay and wonder why it doesn't seem to sound quite as good as they
fondly remember..

The better the playback equipment the better the digital copy. No doubt
about that.

Scott

"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........

Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?

wrote:
Geoff wrote:
Glenn Richards wrote:

Unless they otherwise unobtainium, the novelty of LP-CD transfers will wear
off after approx 3 LPs. Especially if you subsequently hear a real CD of
the album.

That is true if one of the following circumstances exist.
1. Your TT gear sucks
2. You are near deaf
3. You are so consumed by anti analog biases that it takes over your
judgement.

Scott



Scott, I disagree:

1) My TT gear definitely does not suck (EMT 948 and AEG TRS9000)
2) I am not near deaf
3) I enjoy playing vinyl

But: the quality of my CDs generally (with one or two exceptions out of
many hundred of CDs)is better than all my vinyl. Even when I have the
same recording on CD and vinyl, I enjoy the CD more. Quieter, less
distortion, no pops.

If you don't find the same, then that's your opinion and privilege to
hold such opinion, but it is far from universal.

S.

Richard Crowley wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote ...

I have deliberately avoided the argument as to whether even 16bit is
excessive for vinyl.........

Didn't think there was any argument?
Is ANY vinyl capable of SNR in excess of 16 bits?


Not as far as I'm concerned, but there will be some who feel that even
24/96 doesn't do justice to the essential beauty of vinyl.....

S.

On 25 Oct 2006 09:07:24 -0700, wrote:

And without the romance of expensive antique
hardware, you'll notice how ropey it sounds.

What a load of crap.

I wouldn't have put it that strongly. But, yes, vinyl can sound
pretty bad.