Analogue Floyd

[Marco]

Agreed!

Where's the "Shock/horror" smiley?

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

Where's the "Shock/horror" smiley?

Marco.

I thought it more amusing to await the predicted response as above

[Haselsh1]

Martin says "Unless mics capable of exceeding 22KHz were used in the recording there is no advantage to higher sampling rates, 44.1Khz captures the waveform in its entirety. You hear a difference with 'high rez' then you are hearing different mastering."

Digital does not capture at all it 'samples' it. And, it samples in slices or chunks which then give back a facsimile of the original analogue waveform. It is not the original waveform it is an impression of it. To reproduce an analogue waveform requires an analogue replay system otherwise it is only a facsimile of that waveform which of course is re-assembled by a chip on a board. And then of course if information is missing, it just makes it up and slots it in. Not with analogue though.

[Marco]

I thought it more amusing to await the predicted response as above

Lol... I'm afraid the notion that an analogue signal can be digitally manipulated (to buggery), as indeed happens during your average vinyl ripping process, and come out the other end 'fully intact', is fanciful in the extreme.

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

Lol... I'm afraid the notion that an analogue signal can be digitally manipulated (to buggery), as indeed happens during your average vinyl ripping process, and come out the other end 'fully intact', is fanciful in the extreme.

Marco.

Theoretically it can... but my ears beg to differ (thought you'd like that) and it's not an Nth degree thing it's bloody obvious. I've sometimes wondered if people who have ripped their vinyl to digital, especially if they've used a poor front end and phono stage, realise how much they are missing out on...

[Marco]

Theoretically it can... but my ears beg to differ (thought you'd like that) and it's not an Nth degree thing it's bloody obvious.

Haha... Ditto, mine. And probably like you, have done it often enough in order to get a very good handle on what's happening sonically. Anyway, you know what they say about theories!

I've sometimes wondered if people who have ripped their vinyl to digital, especially if they've used a poor front end and phono stage, realise how much they are missing out on...

Indeed, but I guess you could argue that if the vinyl front end is so poor, the digitisation process [I'm primarily thinking here of the noise reduction software available] helps ameliorate some of the nasties from the turntable (and perhaps also the record itself)!

Here's another one to consider, by extrapolating this further.... As poor as vinyl rips can often be, in comparison with the original, if you've got a good (properly set-up) turntable, phono stage, pristine records, a decent soundcard and the wherewithal to produce a reasonably faithful facsimile of the original vinyl source, it can sound MUCH better than your average commercially produced CD of the same album.

What's your view on that? For me, if you take the time to do it right, the results are a no-brainer. Only genuine 'audiophile' quality releases on CD can stand comparison.

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

Haha... Ditto, mine - and probably like you, have done it often enough in order to get a very good handle on what's happening sonically. Anyway, you know what they say about theories!



Indeed, but I guess you could argue that if the vinyl front end is so poor, the digitisation process [I'm primarily thinking here of the noise reduction software available] helps ameliorate some of the nasties from the turntable (and perhaps also the record)!

Here's another one to consider, by extrapolating this further.... As poor as vinyl rips can often be, in comparison with the original, if you've got a good (properly set-up) turntable, phono stage, pristine records, a decent soundcard and the wherewithal to produce a reasonably faithful facsimile of the original vinyl source, it can sound MUCH better than your average commercially produced CD of the same album.

What's your view on that? For me, if you take the time to do it right, the results are a no-brainer. Only genuine 'audiophile' quality releases on CD can stand comparison.

Marco.

That's not been my experience. Sound cards, A2D's etc all vary as do their analogue sections and I've only tried a couple of different digital solutions so I can't speak as to what's possible with high end A2D converters etc. Ripped versions sound grey and lifeless compared to the original straight from vinyl to me.

[Marco]

Ripped versions sound grey and lifeless compared to the original straight from vinyl to me.

Indeed - no argument there... But so can a lot of commercially produced CDs - and worse in many other ways, too!

Also, a major advantage of doing your own rips is that YOU are in charge of the levels, and therefore how 'loud' the recording produced is, rather than some misguided studio engineer!

That, together with the fact that, with a vinyl source, you're dealing with an uncompressed format in the first place, means that the final results achieved can be markedly superior to those of any commercially produced CD.

That's what my ears tell me anyway

Marco.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Indeed - no argument there... But so can a lot of commercially produced CDs - and worse in many other ways, too!

Also, a major advantage of doing your own rips is that YOU are in charge of the levels, and therefore how 'loud' the recording produced is, rather than some misguided studio engineer!

That, together with the fact that, with a vinyl source, you're dealing with an uncompressed format in the first place, means that the final results achieved can be markedly superior to those of any commercially produced CD.

That's what my ears tell me anyway

Marco.

But looking at the actual recording techniques reveals

A study of the original desk used for TDSOTM which was the TG12345 - I am unsure of which edition of desk, it can be seen there was the availability of 2.1 and 7.1 compression used
to mimic valve compressors the Altec EMI RS124 and the Fairchild 660. On which tracks and how it was used Alan Parsons comments

" What generally tended to happen was either no compression or compression on everything except the drums, because I totally hate—with a vengeance—compressing drums. So, although [producer] Chris Thomas wanted to compress everything, I talked him into compressing just the instruments and vocals, but not the drums". http://www.premierguitar.com/article...he_Moon?page=2

To a degree (- as you do not have access to the individual tracks , but if on all but the drums as Alan reveals ) you can recover- if indeed you can spot the tracks with compression the original sound by expanding
at the mirror image of the compression rate at 1:2 However it will be a matter of using a suitably equipped piece of equipment usually a mastering processor.

Also of interest is Alan's comments on Page 1 of the above article “Never be frightened to add bottom end.”

[Jimbo]

But looking at the actual recording techniques reveals

A study of the original desk used for TDSOTM which was the TG12345 - I am unsure of which edition of desk, it can be seen there was the availability of 2.1 and 7.1 compression used
to mimic valve compressors the Altec EMI RS124 and the Fairchild 660. On which tracks and how it was used Alan Parsons comments

" What generally tended to happen was either no compression or compression on everything except the drums, because I totally hate—with a vengeance—compressing drums. So, although [producer] Chris Thomas wanted to compress everything, I talked him into compressing just the instruments and vocals, but not the drums". http://www.premierguitar.com/article...he_Moon?page=2

To a degree (- as you do not have access to the individual tracks , but if on all but the drums as Alan reveals ) you can recover- if indeed you can spot the tracks with compression the original sound by expanding
at the mirror image of the compression rate at 1:2 However it will be a matter of using a suitably equipped piece of equipment usually a mastering processor.

Also of interest is Alan's comments on Page 1 of the above article “Never be frightened to add bottom end.”

Many of the Floyds albums certainly on vinyl had very deep bass which was not limited or curtailed as it was on many albums of the time. It was almost a production trade mark. Listen to the Wall vinyl version original pressings and the drum and cymbals after the helicopter bit are astounding.

Must admit when I saw them perform the Wall at Earls Court in 1979 the bass was magnificent but controlled. Their live production using quadraphonic was truly wonderful considering it was pre digital age DSP etc. I remember Rick Wright running up and down the piano in one part (not on the album) and they sent it round Earls Court in quadraphonic and it was like a train coming round and whistling past you. I was 16 and this stayed with me all my life. Sorry I digress but the Floyd at the height of their powers were indeed the best band I have ever seen, never mind the atmosphere they captured with all the visuals and pyrotechnics. Amazing days!