+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Recording studios producing for CD ( digital)

  1. #11
    Join Date: Aug 2013

    Location: London

    Posts: 1,499
    I'm Sam.

    Default

    But, think of the practicality of the exercise versus reality...

    Are you intending on buying everything new? Well, then you'll have to research where that vinyl cut came from, is it the original? Is the CD a re-issue?

    If you're NOT buying everything new then would you pass on a cheap vinyl copy because it's post-95? Or would you buy it because it's there and it's cheap? And if you're not buying everything new then you will find CDs can be had for £1 so why worry about having both CD AND vinyl?

    I say just go with the flow and whatever comes under your nose at each moment, make a decision based on how you feel! No need to over-think anything.

    Also, as 90s kids become middle-aged and the druggery of their lives and 9-5s seem more desperate, so they spend their money chasing down rare copies of 90s indy (rare because many indy kids were buying CDs and cassettes to play on their all-in-ones and CD/cassette ghetto blasters) and so prices seem to be quite high these days...

  2. #12
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,771
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Dire Straits 'Brothers In Arms' was a 1985 recording that was famously (mostly) digital and digital recording was already possible well before that date so I am sceptical that it took a full 10 years after that before it became the norm, certainly for any major label recordings, although I am willing to be educated on that.

    Digital cutting lathes were commonplace by 1980 so any vinyl produced after that date will have been run through an ADC even if it was an analogue recording. This will also apply to any re-issues of older stuff too.

    That fact alone should indicate that it is pretty pointless worrying too much about it. In addition whether it was 'mastered for CD' or not is fairly irrelevant to the sound quality.

    The main factors for me would be 1) How well the actual recording process was done I.e how expertly things were miked up, how much attention to detail was paid, number of takes, overall ability of the musicians and the engineer, the quality of the mics, the desk and the studio environment itself.

    2)How it was recorded: analogue tape, digital or a mixture of the two. Personally I think a good digital recording easily tops analogue for clarity and realism but I accept that is subjective.

    3) How well it was mixed

    4) How well it was mastered - too much overall compression added so that it can be listened to in noisy environments or on crap equipment, or minimal compression for good dynamic range.

    After all that which format it goes onto for replay is a pretty minor thing and providing the vinyl pressing has been done competently (which seems rare nowadays) I really don't think it makes any significant difference given a replay system that is equally competent with both vinyl and digital.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  3. #13
    Join Date: Oct 2011

    Location: Bacup

    Posts: 502
    I'm Andrew.

    Default

    Just to reply to a few things. Don't worry I'm not going to go all OCD about this. I always said it would be a somewhat arbitrary date exactly because the overlap would makes it impossible to pin down. Neither will I pass on something just because it doesn't fit with my date rule. Nor will I be researching every album I buy to check it's provenance. There are quite a few albums I already own in both formats because I have bought the CD whilst the records have been in the loft, so I won't be worrying about that either. I will be using my arbitrary guide mostly for second hand stuff, whether it is vinyl or CD. New releases I'll just make a decision based on ' how I feel' like Sam suggests. In the end I won't be losing sleep on my decisions it will just take one major factor out of the equation. Interestingly, no one as as committed themselves to giving a year they might go for if they were me. Actually Macca did say 1990 with his guess, I guess.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •