New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article , MiNe 109
wrote:
In article , "David Looser"
wrote:


The recent Mudcrutch (Tom Petty's band) lp album featured less
compression and came packaged with a cd of the lp mastering.

My reaction to that is similar to David's. That it is hardly considerate to
expect people to buy an extra LP if they just want less level compression
on the CD they wish to play. Of course, if the LP is free and the LP+CD
package costs the same as the CD alone then the only deterrent is knowing
you have the choice and having space to store the unwanted version.

Given the cynical and unimpressive thinking behind the way the industry
operate, though, it would not surprise me if the result was taken to give
an 'indicator' sic that if fewer people buy the LP+CD combination that
most people 'prefer' more level compression.

I gather that lps can't reproduce digital clipping, so they may well
sound less harsh (though possibly less dynamic) than the equivalent cds.

I am not sure where you would 'gather' that. If the source were clipped,
then that could be expected to have some effect on the LP when one was made
using such a clipped source. Hard to be more precise as the clipped version
might produce a burst of HF that the LP cutting and replay distorts (or
filters) further.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article , David Looser
wrote:


If I were a fan I would be annoyed at being expect to buy an unwanted LP
just to get a better CD. If the record company were brave enough they
should market the two CDs against each other in the same way and at the
same price and see which people want to buy!

Indeed. And to also specify the way the CD versions differ so that people
can decide which to buy on an informed basis. Not just 'buy what is in the
shop' or 'cheaper' perhaps without knowing the alternative exists or might
be better.

Can someone give more details of the CD and CD+LP. Might be worth getting
both simply for comparision purposes. Ditto for the Basie/Charles CD/LP
that Iain mentioned.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain
Churches wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain
Churches wrote:


Indeed - copy an LP to CD properly and none will tell the difference
(snip)


One can, by this very method, make a CD which is often superior to
the commericially released version.

There can be no doubt that CD is a technically superior medium to the
vinyl pressing, but careful comparison of the commercially-released
product, can sometimes give the impression that the reverse is true.

Giving good tools to a poor workman doesn't make a craftsman. I can
only assume there are now many in the industry who haven't been
trained properly.

If this were true, how would you explain the excellent classical and
jazz mastering?. The crux of the matter is, Dave, as we have discussed
before, the responsibility of everyone in the team to give the client a
product which (he thinks) will meet the expectations of his particular
sector of the martket.

That sector of the market didn't demand over compressed and distorted
material - it was conditioned into them

The very low numbers of technical returns
indicate that this is being done.

Why would you return something like a disc unless a better one of the same
thing was available? CDs ain't like LPs...

With the wide acceptance of .mp3 material for portable players and
chronically compressed radio, it is clear that expecations are falling.
"Never mind the quality - feel the width!"

As I said it's conditioned into the listener.

Do you speak from experience of actual hands-on commercial CD mastering
Dave? Have you taken part in the MI questionnaires and surveys? Have
you talked to record label managers, and also members of the public
about this subject?

Here we go again...

There are countless examples, Dave. Please compare the CD with the
double LP of theRay Charles/ Count Basie production "Ray Sings,
Basie Swings", Dave, and then tell me that you truly and honestly
prefer the CD.

As usual you totally missed the point.

No. I understand the point precisely, and agree with your statement
about copying vinyl to CD. But I make the further point that as long as
the public give the indicator that they think "louder is better" CD's
will continue to be produced with a cramped dynamic and clipping, and
there will be a sustained healthy demand for LPs and turntables.

Only because the industry deliberately makes crappy CDs.

And I'm not convinced the public think 'louder is better'. The only way to
be sure of that would be to market two versions.

--
*Middle age is when work is a lot less fun - and fun a lot more work.

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

I recall a discussion I had with the Orban people when I represented them in
the UK some years ago. Orban had noticed that a number of processors were
being sold into mastering houses for CD mastering on the basis that kids
were complaining that the CDs they bought didn't sound like they heard them
on the radio, i.e. compressed to extinction. I have no idea how many kids or
how they complained to the record companies, or whether this came out of the
record companies' own consumer research. No matter, that's what the
Mastering Houses were being told was needed, and so that's what they did.
Orban's competitor, Omnia, brought out a version of their radio processor
specifically for CD mastering allegedly for the same reasons.

If this story is true, and I can't see any reason why it wouldn't be, it
seems that kids have been conditioned, as Dave says, by the Radio into
believing that's what music should sound like. Record companies are
therefore only providing what they believe their customers want.

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

"MiNe 109" wrote in message


The recent Mudcrutch (Tom Petty's band) lp album featured
less compression and came packaged with a cd of the lp
mastering.

Assertion without reliable evidence. BTW, obtaining reliable evidence is no
big thing in this day and age.

I gather that lps can't reproduce digital clipping,

LP's can't reproduce any wide-dynamic range CD, clipped or not.

so they may well sound less harsh (though possibly less
dynamic) than the equivalent cds.

LP's are prone to sound less harsh than CDs because they can't hack it at
high frequencies. This is particularly true for people who have detuned
their systems to compensate for this fact.

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article , Arny Krueger
scribeth thus
"MiNe 109" wrote in message


The recent Mudcrutch (Tom Petty's band) lp album featured
less compression and came packaged with a cd of the lp
mastering.

Assertion without reliable evidence. BTW, obtaining reliable evidence is no
big thing in this day and age.

I gather that lps can't reproduce digital clipping,

LP's can't reproduce any wide-dynamic range CD, clipped or not.

so they may well sound less harsh (though possibly less
dynamic) than the equivalent cds.

LP's are prone to sound less harsh than CDs because they can't hack it at
high frequencies. This is particularly true for people who have detuned
their systems to compensate for this fact.



Not wishing to get too involved in the PVC -v- CD debate but some years
ago Derek Scotland of Audiolab demonstrated a system to me that was disc
based. What I do remember of it was just how good it was!..

It seems that it had a lot to do with the pressing which was made it
seemed somewhere where they could do this properly. He dismissed most
all UK pressing plants of not being much more capable than turning out
kiddies **** pots;!..
--
Tony Sayer

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

Not wishing to get too involved in the PVC -v- CD debate but some years
ago Derek Scotland of Audiolab demonstrated a system to me that was disc
based. What I do remember of it was just how good it was!..

It seems that it had a lot to do with the pressing which was made it
seemed somewhere where they could do this properly. He dismissed most
all UK pressing plants of not being much more capable than turning out
kiddies **** pots;!..
--

I would agree with that last sentiment. It was poor pressing quality which
caused me to largely stop buying LPs even before CDs became available.

David.

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Not wishing to get too involved in the PVC -v- CD debate but some years
ago Derek Scotland of Audiolab demonstrated a system to me that was disc
based. What I do remember of it was just how good it was!..

It seems that it had a lot to do with the pressing which was made it
seemed somewhere where they could do this properly. He dismissed most
all UK pressing plants of not being much more capable than turning out
kiddies **** pots;!..

Don't think anyone would deny that vinyl can sound good or give great
pleasure. It certainly did for me. The snag comes in when you get a chance
to compare it to the source. There it falls over - whereas CD doesn't.
Of course if you are used to the sound of a favourite piece on vinyl, it
could well be the true(r) sound of the source is a disappointment -
especially with jazz brass etc where a bit of extra 'zing' can excite.

--
*There are 3 kinds of people: those who can count & those who can't.

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

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message


It seems that it had a lot to do with the pressing which
was made it seemed somewhere where they could do this
properly. He dismissed most all UK pressing plants of not
being much more capable than turning out kiddies ****
pots;!..

Well, in the days of, European, even British pressings of many titles were
sold in the US with the promise that they sounded better and were better
pressings than the usual US product. I tried a few and that seemed to be the
case.

I then spent a year in Germany as a guest of Uncle Sam, and pretty much
could only buy European and British pressings. When I returned home and
compared them to the comparable US-pressed LPs, they were generally
superior. When I sold off my LP collection in the mid-1980s, I obtained
premium prices for the European, and British pressings. The only LPs that I
could sell for more on the average, were the direct cut LPs.

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
And I'm not convinced the public think 'louder is better'. The only way
to be sure of that would be to market two versions.

...and the public are told the difference between the two and given open
choice. Not market one as an 'audiophile' version at elevated price or
only on special order. And also to ensure all else is the same save for
the differences in level compression. So, not one version on LP or
SACD or DVD-A and the other on cheaper CD.

The problem here - as previous discussions have shown - is that some of
those making the CDs *presume* that they have an 'indicator' that 'louder
is better'. But this may show that those making the presumption haven't
actually done properly controlled tests to determine this. And may
simply have misinterpreted what data they have. They have formed
a belief system.

[snip]

And what often seems to be the case is the entire production team is
happy with the recording which then goes off to a mastering house to have
this extra compression etc added. With the talent then saying 'digital
isn't as good as analogue' or whatever when they hear the commercially
released CD.

Of course some form of mastering may well be necessary when compiling the
actual CD - the tracks may have been recorded in different studios etc -
but these shouldn't be more than small adjustments.

It was all very different in LP days when mastering was an essential part
of the operation.

--
*A journey of a thousand sites begins with a single click *

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

New page on LP cartridge measurements, etc
 

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Not wishing to get too involved in the PVC -v- CD debate but some years
ago Derek Scotland of Audiolab demonstrated a system to me that was disc
based. What I do remember of it was just how good it was!..

It seems that it had a lot to do with the pressing which was made it
seemed somewhere where they could do this properly. He dismissed most
all UK pressing plants of not being much more capable than turning out
kiddies **** pots;!..

Don't think anyone would deny that vinyl can sound good or give great
pleasure. It certainly did for me. The snag comes in when you get a chance
to compare it to the source.

Well...

Digital is very good except some types of radio;), but this was very
impressive and I really thought it was a CD at first!.

Mind you it was tied up to some very, very good equipment for
replay:))..

There it falls over - whereas CD doesn't.
Of course if you are used to the sound of a favourite piece on vinyl, it
could well be the true(r) sound of the source is a disappointment -
especially with jazz brass etc where a bit of extra 'zing' can excite.

No, this was a piece I've never heard before....
--
Tony Sayer