Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

In rec.audio.tech Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Don Pearce
wrote:
[snip]

I just don't understand why these sorts of CDs need to be mastered into
clipping. I can understand a CD being normalised to 0dBFS, but that
would mean one hit at 0dBFS once per CD, or at worse once per track, if
tracks are mastered individually. There's just no excuse for it.

ahem Anyone in the UK who is interested in this may find the December
issue of 'Hi Fi News' worth a read. Should be out in a couple of weeks.
:-)

Note also that even just one sample of a sequence at or near the 0dBFS
level may mean a reconstructed waveform with an excusion *above* this.


True dat. This article may be old news to some readers here, but it
explains intersample overs (0dB+ levels)

http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/ni...0_0dbfs_le.pdf


Alas, my recent experience confirms that a number of CDs have successions
of samples well within 0.05dB or so of the peak values allowed on CD-A.
Level compression seems much more common, but flat-top clipping seems far
from rare. As you say, this seems utterly insane when many rock/pop CDs
squash the sound into a range of about 10dB - on a medium that should be
able to offer a range over a million times greater!


It's even more discouraging to find it on supposedly 'hi rez' media like
DVD-A

This page shows various digital remasters of 'Roundabout' by Yes over the
years. The DVD-A version doesn't clip, and doesn't have 'flat top' peaks,
but it *has* been compressed to all heck all the same.

http://www.m-ideas.com/sullivan/audition/roundabout.htm

(The last one is just crazy -- and that's from the currently-available
"Fragile" CD from Rhino.)


___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Stephen Worth" wrote in message


No, the LP format has serious basic flaws that have never been resolved.

The CD format is definitely more convenient for storage
and handling than LPs.

The CD format has more than an order of magnitude less noise and
distortion the LP format. The LP format has audible noise and distortion.
The CD format does not.

The LP has 2 significant advantages over the CD:

1. The cover art is much more persuasive

2. You can play a neat game where you cover over the label and try to guess
what piece is recorded by looking at the velocity pattern under a bare
lightbulb. It only works with the classical canon, but with a little
practice you can get quite good at it. As I recall, the easiest one to
guess was the Pines of Rome by Respighi.

Norm Strong

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Here in Ohio" wrote ...
Pretty soon all the record companies will be selling us CDs with
nothing but 60 minutes of white noise on it. It's the next logical
extension of this trend. :-)

(Maybe they'll just provide a DC signal and we can drive a little fan
aimed at our ears with it. At least we'll keep cool, even if it
doesn't sound very good.)

There you go. Radium's "1-bit audio file".
I've taken the advice of "Morbius" and plonked him as hopelessly
clueless and incapable/unwilling of doing his own research.

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Jeff Findley" writes:

(Speaking as a vinyl enthusiast on a student budget, though, I do
really wish someone made an affordable record-cleaning machine!)
Clean the LP really good, record it on a PC as a WAV, then burn to a
CD-R and play the CD instead of the LP.

Yep, that's what I do for anything I'm likely to play regularly --
albeit without the "burn to a CD" stage unless I'm doing it for
someone else, since all my digital audio comes straight off the PC
these days.

The problem is with the first step; I often get second-hand records
that are extremely dusty, dirty or otherwise grotty, and there's only
so much that can be done with a dry brush. I'd like some non-messy way
of wet-cleaning and vacuuming records like the Moth or Nitty-Gritty
machines do. I'm currently keeping an eye on Freecycle for a suitable
vacuum cleaner to convert into a DIY RCM along the same lines:
http://www.teresaudio.com/haven/cleaner/cleaner.html

--
Adam Sampson http://offog.org/

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Here in Ohio" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:39:26 +0000, Serge Auckland
wrote:

Here in Ohio wrote:
On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 19:29:45 +0000, Serge Auckland
wrote:


We can also look at radio as an example of something that people often
listen to in the background. Radio is compressed (for transmitter
efficiency if nothing else), but it isn't always hypercompressed.
No, not always, but here in the UK and in France, stations compress to
eliminate any dynamic range. As I mentioned before, there was a well
known station Chief Engineer who bragged his processor was so wound up
he got less than 1dB dynamic range. His station of course sounded as
you
would expect, but he was happy.

I'm sure I could find some examples of the same thing in my area in
the US too. :-)


Yes, if you're anywhere near Cleveland, you have the Omnia factory
there. They make the fiercest processor currently on the market.In my

I live in one of Cleveland's suburbs.

I was just looking at some of their white papers and it all looks like
really bad news for anyone who loves music. :-(

Hey, Ohio....ever get down to Oberlin for any of their concerts? They have
a new Arts Guide out listing their series for the entire year. Just call or
write the Conservatory and asked to get on the mailing list.

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

In article ,
Here in Ohio wrote:
Nope, that won't wash either - for me the LP is a longer-established
music carrier than the CD and it is my 'norm'. If you say (I don't
necessarily agree) that audible distortion has been removed with a CD
then I would ask what else has been removed with it? I would suggest a
palpable sense of 'realism' for starters - for me, CD is sterile or
even *fake* by comparison...

The distortion isn't "removed" with CD, it is never there in the first
place.

Your "norm" is distorted. That "palpable sense of realism" is just
added distortion.

You're wasting your time arguing with Mr G. He considers vinyl through
home made single driver horns with (at least) the top and bottom octaves
missing - driven by an SET amp with goodness knows how much distortion -
gives perfect results in his tiny but excessively lively listening room.
Of course at his age, his hearing is probably the true limiting factor.
Those who disagree - ie most - have no place on this, his own personal
newsgroup. ;-)

--
*When the chips are down, the buffalo is empty*

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

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
Don, I agree that hitting 0dBFS doesn't necessarily mean clipping,

Yes, and conversely, just because it doen't go to 0dBFS, doesn't mean it's
not clipped.

displaying the waveform on a 'scope looks awfully like clipping to me,
on more than one CD. I estimate from extending the slopes of the
waveform before and after clipping that it can go some 2-3dB into
clipping.

If you have a whole succession of 0dBFS in a row, then yes, you can be
sure you are in digital clipping.

Or almost any flat topped signal, even if it is "normalised" to less than
0dBFS.

If it is happening in a transient, it won't do much to the sound,

Well that will obviously depend on many factors.

but if it is during a note, with each
successive peak clipped, you are deep in alias artifact territory, and
that is a horror.

And all too common.

MrT.

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Stephen Worth" wrote in message
...
There's a very good reason why people collect LP records. They are
very inexpensive, usually about two bucks apiece,

S/H, ... as are many S/H CD's. Except a S/H CD has some chance of still
being playable!
The funny thing is that new vinyl is actually more expensive than CD!

Now add in the cost of a decent turntable/cartridge and replacement
sylii!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(not to mention a record cleaning machine and the requisite fluids)

Where exactly is the saving?????


and there's a wide
variety of music on LP that isn't available on CD.

And vice versa.

Those are valid
reasons to prefer vinyl over CD.

No, those are valid reasons to play whatever you want to listen to at the
time.

When it comes to sound quality, both CD and LP are capable of
reproducing high fidelity sound.

The CD format is definitely more convenient for storage and handling
than LPs.

No doubt about that.
The only benefit of vinyl IMO is the cover art :-)

MrT.

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
...
But all LP systems will display 'euphonic' distortion.

Not so. I find much of the distortion on vinyl records anything but
"euphonic"!

MrT.

Independent View Of LP versus CD
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Here in Ohio wrote:
Nope, that won't wash either - for me the LP is a longer-established
music carrier than the CD and it is my 'norm'. If you say (I don't
necessarily agree) that audible distortion has been removed with a CD
then I would ask what else has been removed with it? I would suggest a
palpable sense of 'realism' for starters - for me, CD is sterile or
even *fake* by comparison...

The distortion isn't "removed" with CD, it is never there in the first
place.

Your "norm" is distorted. That "palpable sense of realism" is just
added distortion.

You're wasting your time arguing with Mr G. He considers vinyl through
home made single driver horns with (at least) the top and bottom octaves
missing - driven by an SET amp with goodness knows how much distortion -
gives perfect results in his tiny but excessively lively listening room.
Of course at his age, his hearing is probably the true limiting factor.
Those who disagree - ie most - have no place on this, his own personal
newsgroup. ;-)



Oh dear......

Do stop your snivelling, Plowie - you're like a snot-nosed little kid
whining that the big boys won't let you have a kick of the ball.....

Dry yer eyes and have a look at this (I fished you out of my ****ter
specially):

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...5705&rd=1&rd=1


Tell me if you think it would be any good for 'out and about'
recording....??

I'm looking at things like the Edirol R-09

http://www.solidstatesound.co.uk/edirolr-09.htm


...but not sure if I want to punt 300 quid on summat that might be a bit
disappointing (or might only be a flash in the pan)....??