Comparing vinyl sound to hi-res digital remaster

[magiccarpetride]

Whilst in quite a few cases a marketing angle in undeniable, there remain other cases where electronics
developments, has created the ability to interpret the original master tape in a better way, giving rise to
achieving a better sound for the buyer.

That has always been my understanding regarding the motivation for remastering a CD that's already been on the market. The rationale has been that the initial stab at transferring the master tape into digital format was less than perfect, and since the equipment and the skill set has been improved, let's take another stab at doing the analog-to-digital transfer.

Of course, con artists are everywhere, and some shady businesses will take this opportunity as an attempt to make a quick buck, but I still believe that in majority of cases, remaster is an attempt at a more faithful transfer from analog to digital. Call me naive.

Whilst it is lovely having sometimes improvements like this to earlier recordings, it is though indicative
of a music industry in trouble, stifling new artists by way of excessive copyright and no longer talent scouting.

Yeah, that's the truth (sadly). Why risk anything by scouting for talent when they can milk the cash cow that is risk-free and guaranteed to bring huge profits.

If we compare the 1960's and 1970's to now, there is no comparison. Music flourished, now
it does the opposite.

Again, you're bang on. Some people would no doubt disagree and insist that music today is as good as it's ever been, but, to cite Seinfeld "not from the footage I've seen".

[magiccarpetride]

It's nothing to do with it being 'hi res' - it is just good quality recording, production and mastering. You could play the same file in 16/44.1 and it would still retain all those qualities.

True, and I'll go even a step further -- you could crunch the same file down to lossy mp3, and it will still sound impressive. I've heard mp3 files that sounded better than hi-res files, all due to quality mastering.

[Firebottle]

I am one of the few on the planet to hear this system so feel quite lucky.

I have a feeling it is going to raise the digital bar to another level.

New Chord CD player via Dave perchance?

[Dunluce978]

I have had analogue and digital now for a long time and I always considered that vinyl on a good system still sounded better. Recently though the developments in DACs have brought me to the conclusion that the gap has narrowed so much that I'm now about to offload all my vinyl and associated equipment. I'm building a second DDDAC NOS Dac with updated components and if it sounds even slightly better than the existing DAC then I'll be more than happy to go all digital.

Don't get me wrong, there is something nice about playing vinyl, the album covers and the romance of the turntable, cartridges and all the other adjustments and tinkering, however it's also nice to switch on, select a playlist and sit back, be lazy and enjoy the music

[Jimbo]

New Chord CD player via Dave perchance?

Indeed you are correct. Listened to BLU ii CD player which massively upscales to DAVE and I must say it did raise the bar. After an extensive listening session I can honestly say that this new piece of technology brings Digital and what is available on CD to another level. Not quite the jump when I first heard DAVE but significant.

Main improvements were in soundstage both depth and width - astounding. Also Bass quality and precision much improved.

Overall impression was that digital at this level is like listening to Analogue from Mastertape. Cant really compare it to vinyl as it is far quieter and has much more the analogue tape experience. You could listen to this system all night with absolutely no fatigue and certainly you are not aware of any digital negatives.

Super smooth, super detailed, glorious Bass and huge soundstage. Wonderful stuff.

My last thought --- will digital eventually evolve to sound almost exactly like the best analogue on mastertape. If it does that is no bad thing.

[JohnMcC]

I'm interested in this because I finally bit the bullet and bought Peter Gabriel's remastered "So" on vinyl last week and was blown away by the quality of the sound and the quality of the vinyl - silent, completely silent until the music starts, then wonderful dynamic range, huge detail. So I decided to check it out against a high-res download which I bought and which - I'm guessing - is the same basic mix. And I'm quite sorry to say the download just edged it in terms of detail . . . but the vinyl is (and I hate myself for being poncey) more musical?

On the other hand I bought a remastered 2010 pressing of "Court of the Crimson King" this week, because it's had quite a few recommendations on here, and it's poor. Three or four clicks and pops on side one (after cleaning) and I'm not sure it sounded any better than my old original pressing from 1969. So I just don't know. Some will sound better on vinyl, some as high res downloads.

[Firebottle]

Indeed you are correct.

If I decide to update my CD replay kit I might well go down this route, after all one might as well get the best.

[sq225917]

I have quite a few albums of the dam issue on multiple formats. It's a total crap shoot which sounds better. Vinyl is full of distortions from the physical process, these are undeniable, but they may be harmonious. Similarly some digital sounds digital, for want of a better phrase. Rarely, they sound identical.

I favour neither beyond the other.

[Stratmangler]

I'm interested in this because I finally bit the bullet and bought Peter Gabriel's remastered "So" on vinyl last week and was blown away by the quality of the sound and the quality of the vinyl - silent, completely silent until the music starts, then wonderful dynamic range, huge detail. So I decided to check it out against a high-res download which I bought and which - I'm guessing - is the same basic mix. And I'm quite sorry to say the download just edged it in terms of detail . . . but the vinyl is (and I hate myself for being poncey) more musical?

On the other hand I bought a remastered 2010 pressing of "Court of the Crimson King" this week, because it's had quite a few recommendations on here, and it's poor. Three or four clicks and pops on side one (after cleaning) and I'm not sure it sounded any better than my old original pressing from 1969. So I just don't know. Some will sound better on vinyl, some as high res downloads.

Where did you get the download of So?
There's a download code for it when you buy the record, and you have a choice of MP3 or 24/96000 Wav.
The recent vinyl release is a half speed cut, and the source for the cut is a recent 24/96000 ADC transfer from the analogue stereo master tape.

I too find the vinyl a more engaging listen, and that's despite its faults.

[Jimbo]

[QUOTE=Firebottle;862886]If I decide to update my CD replay kit I might well go down this route, after all one might as well get the best.

[/QUOTE

I often think along the same lines Alan, do I buy another small family car or Steves system!

It is certainly something that makes a sonic impression on the brain which is very hard to forget and even though I listen to it regularly I always get goosebumps!

I feel what he has put together finally answers any questions regarding digital vs vinyl