Always 2nd best [Archive] - The Art of Sound Forum

Rare Bird

25-12-2009, 16:41

Ali Tait

25-12-2009, 16:46

Agreed 99% of bought cd's are pretty dire,but there is good stuff out there.Check out anything recorded on the Opus3 label.They use all valve kit from the mic to the mixing desk,and record "live" with no post-recording fiddling.I have a few Eric Bibb albums from them,and they are amongst the best-sounding cd's I've ever heard.

Rare Bird

25-12-2009, 18:29

O yeh issues on say Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab are good but you have a premium to pay, Japanese issue CD's again good but expensive..It's the general everyday CD's you buy from the high street that's crap.

Mike Reed

25-12-2009, 20:22

Why is it that we pay our money & always get second best?

Few examples:

Remember pre-recorded open reel tapes, majority were 3.75ips. You can record you own far superior sound at 7.5ips on better tape like Ampex 456

Cassettes tapes: pre-recorded tape cassettes used poor quality tape in noisy cassette, you could again record your own that sounded better, on better tape like the TDK 'SA'

CD.Shop bought CD are shit, toppy..Burn yourself sounds as good as the original source, no more headaches afer a session.

Hmmm. I'd agree on the first two, but the pre-recorded tapes (both formats)tended to sound dull compared to stuff recorded at home on the same kit, which was, after all, optimised for your own recordings anyway. But they were poor by comparison.

Odd that shop-bought CDs should, conversely, default at the top end, as it were.

This is not my experience with CDs at all, finding them as variable as vinyl was. Possibly you refer to more 'pop' oriented stuff (sorry, but can't think of a better genre title); I have a few and they are not only compressed but pressed at a high level, which isn't just 'toppy', it's plain difficult to listen to on good audio kit.

I have some compilation CDs, copies made on a friend's computer, and find them perfectly acceptable, if marginally inferior to the originals (where I have them). By 'burn', I guess you may mean streaming or whatever (I'm not cognisant with this technology), but I have many, many classical CDs that are either superbly balanced sonically or, more with remasters, a wee bit dull.

Leonard Cohen's ' Ten New Songs' is surely a paragon of CD sound quality, and it's used as my 'dem' CD. Doesn't the sound of your CDs depend, however, on the player you're using (and its DAC, of course), in the first instance at least?

DSJR

25-12-2009, 20:37

I haven't bought many CD's recently, but the bad ones are in the mastering, NOT the CD format itself. I've heard too many good recordings off CD and have a really good player to say otherwise...

Rare Bird

25-12-2009, 22:24

Hmmm. I'd agree on the first two, but the pre-recorded tapes (both formats)tended to sound dull compared to stuff recorded at home on the same kit, which was, after all, optimised for your own recordings anyway. But they were poor by comparison.

Isnt this what i've just said? :scratch:

Hmmm. I'd agree on the first two, but the pre-recorded tapes (both formats)tended to sound dull compared to stuff recorded at home on the same kit, which was, after all, optimised for your own recordings anyway. But they were poor by comparison.

Odd that shop-bought CDs should, conversely, default at the top end, as it were.

This is not my experience with CDs at all, finding them as variable as vinyl was. Possibly you refer to more 'pop' oriented stuff (sorry, but can't think of a better genre title); I have a few and they are not only compressed but pressed at a high level, which isn't just 'toppy', it's plain difficult to listen to on good audio kit.

I have some compilation CDs, copies made on a friend's computer, and find them perfectly acceptable, if marginally inferior to the originals (where I have them). By 'burn', I guess you may mean streaming or whatever (I'm not cognisant with this technology), but I have many, many classical CDs that are either superbly balanced sonically or, more with remasters, a wee bit dull.

No i'm refering to making your own CD's by recording from an analogue source like record, this clearly shows how shit CD mastering on your shop bought CD sounds..I'm not talking of burning CD from CD!

Mike Reed

26-12-2009, 10:06

Isnt this what i've just said? :scratch:

I was, after all, agreeing with you; why the puzzlement, I wonder. I merely indicated one of the main reasons for pre-recorded analogue tape's inferiority to virtually ANY home- recorded stuff, as I was heavily involved with this in the early seventies.

No i'm refering to making your own CD's by recording from an analogue source like record, this clearly shows how shit CD mastering on your shop bought CD sounds..I'm not talking of burning CD from CD!

This is the only 'burn' that I know. How would I go about copying my vinyl, or from radio/TV or whatever, onto CD? My computer is nowhere near my hifi, and has no connection to it. I have seen ads. for cheap record-player to CD copying units, but I'm sure you're not talking about these. As I said, Andre, I'm not at all familiar with things digital (apart from CD replay).

I have found as DAVE has said; namely that remasters are very variable, but recordings direct to CD can sound magnificent ( if not quite up to vinyl, possibly ).

On another tack, replacing Naim with valve power amps has helped that rather unforgiving top-end aspect of CDs, but I'm still looking for the CDP that can fully satisfy my half century of analogue upbringing; working on it, though!

Marco

26-12-2009, 11:17

Hi Andre,

No i'm refering to making your own CD's by recording from an analogue source like record, this clearly shows how shit CD mastering on your shop bought CD sounds..

Completely agree! I've recently done precisely that with my laptop and an E-MU sound card through Audacity/Click Repair, using my SL-1210, and the results obtained are WAY better than pretty much any bought CD :)

Marco.

Jonboy

26-12-2009, 14:10

webby

26-12-2009, 14:38

Hi Andre,

Completely agree! I've recently done precisely that with my laptop and an E-MU sound card through Audacity/Click Repair, using my SL-1210, and the results obtained are WAY better than pretty much any bought CD :)

Marco.

Marco, have you compared any of your cd copies with the cd version? Just out of interest.

p.s. Mac users could try an app called Final Vinyl which is free I believe but you'll need a suitable cable to connect your turntable (do you still call them that?).

Kris

26-12-2009, 15:12

Shop bought CD are shit, toppy.

Agreed 99% of bought cd's are pretty dire

Sorry, but I'm gonna have to take issue with this.

99% of my bought CDs are NOT Shit. Maybe only 25% at the very most. So you must be buying different genres to me.

If you're talking about the 'chart' cds type of stuff, then yes, agreed. But it's not the Cd format which is to blame, it's the mastering - as Dave said.

If you look at CDs in general, including classical, jazz, folk, blues etc, then 99% of bought Cds are NOT shit, IMO.

As for cassette, there were many excellent sounding releases, especially the ones made in 1:1 Nakamichi duplicating rooms where they had racks and racks of Naks all recording from the master in real time.

As for pre-recoded Reel to Reel tapes, I agree, mostly crap. But not all. If you want high quality audiophile pre-recorded Reel to Reel tapes, try these babies http://www.tapeproject.com/

Unfortunately, I can't afford them :(

With any format, it's not the format that should be blamed, it's the mastering and physical production of the items.

Rare Bird

26-12-2009, 15:18

Hi Marco,
what card are you using and where from? is it a dedicated card or usb based

Cheers

It's probably E MU 0404 24/192 card!

Rare Bird

26-12-2009, 15:20

Sorry, but I'm gonna have to take issue with this.

99% of my bought CDs are NOT Shit. Maybe only 25% at the very most. So you must be buying different genres to me.

If you're talking about the 'chart' cds type of stuff, then yes, agreed. But it's not the Cd format which is to blame, it's the mastering - as Dave said.

Hi Kris
Yeh i esablished this in a topic i started regarding CD-r made from analogue source sounding better than shop bought. Tis the crap mastering.The whole point of this topic is about second rate offerings from the industry...

Marco

26-12-2009, 15:42

Hi Marco,
what card are you using and where from? is it a dedicated card or usb based

Cheers

Hi Jon,

It's an E-MU 0202 USB (the smaller version of which Andre speaks). See here:

http://www.emu.com/products/product.asp?category=610&subcategory=611&product=15186

It works very well in conjunction with my Sony Vaio lappy (and partnering audio ancillaries) :)

Marco, have you compared any of your cd copies with the cd version? Just out of interest.

Hi Lee,

Yes, and many are much better than the original CD versions! Andre definitely has a point.

Marco.

webby

26-12-2009, 19:51

Weren't records mixed and mastered for the equipment they were to be played on?

For example, I know a lot of 60's records, Beach Boys etc, were mixed to sound good on small transistor radios.

Unfortunately, it seems that records today are made for the way the majority of people listen to them; downloads. Highly revealing audiophile equipment owners are probably a small minority. Sadly, we suffer for it. There ought to be audiophile grade masters.

Rare Bird

26-12-2009, 20:35

Lee it's more to do with the levels CD's are Mastered, they leave no headroom for transient peaks hence the harshness.

Marco

26-12-2009, 20:37

Weren't records mixed and mastered for the equipment they were to be played on?

I think you're right, Lee - certainly when it comes to commercial material.

On the very rare occasions I buy chart CDs the recording/production quality is invariably shite and makes for a not entirely enjoyable listening experience.

However, the majority of everything else I buy on CD sounds either good or quite often excellent - that doesn't mean though that if I spend enough time on it I can't produce even better results myself by copying vinyl albums of the same music onto CD :)

The problem is to do it right involves a rather lengthy and time-consuming process!

TBH, the tapes I make up on the CR-7, from either vinyl or CD, often end up sounding just as good as the original recordings, and the process is a heck of a lot quicker than digitising records.

Marco.

Rare Bird

26-12-2009, 20:42

The problem is to do it right involves a rather lengthy and time-consuming process!

TBH, the tapes I make up on the CR-7, from either vinyl or CD, often end up sounding just as good as the original recordings, and the process is a heck of a lot quicker than digitising records.

Marco.
Doesnt you Sony CDP have a scanner that scans the whole disc for the highest level point? Mine does, maybe try setting the max acceptable cassette deck recording level accordingly see what happens

Marco

26-12-2009, 20:53

Nope, matey, the X-777ES unfortunately doesn't have that facility... I just adjust the recording levels using my experience ;)

The CR-7 makes stunningly good copies using NOS TDK 'SA', as does digitising vinyl through the E-MU, but by the time you've set the levels putting an album through Audacity and then Click Repaired the results afterwards (taking out any 'noise' between tracks), you've often lost the will to live!

Bear in mind that I'm the fussiest bastard in the whole of fussy-land when making recordings of any description!! :eyebrows:

Marco.

Jonboy

26-12-2009, 21:04

There ought to be audiophile grade masters.

Try this site

http://www.cherryred.co.uk/esoteric/index.php

Rare Bird

26-12-2009, 21:11

Try this site

http://www.cherryred.co.uk/esoteric/index.php

Hi John
I have a lot of Esoterics,they are ok.

Marco

26-12-2009, 21:43

technobear

26-12-2009, 21:54

Hi John
I have a lot of Esoterics,they are ok.

I see they have some Camel - including Stationary Traveller - tempting :hmm:

webby

27-12-2009, 00:04

Ok, someone please enlighten me. What's the difference between a master that goes to vinyl and a master that goes to cd? Is it the compression used?

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 04:32

Btw, Andre, I've got one of these for your Christmas:

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/5370/ufocar.png (http://img33.imageshack.us/i/ufocar.png/)

Should I deliver it to the usual address? ;)

Marco.

:lolsign: Dave Lee Travis (DLT) Radio One DJ bought that car.Was a modified Zephyr 'Zodiac' with Ford 'Escort' engine.

http://ufoseries.com/magazines/century4.html

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 05:07

Ok, someone please enlighten me. What's the difference between a master that goes to vinyl and a master that goes to cd? Is it the compression used?

The original Master tapes are the tapes that were created in studio from the mulitrack tapes the band recorded each of their individual instruments onto (each channel per instrument)When the engineer has finished farting about with the Multi-track tapes, ie: takes things out, thngs in bit of Eq here & there, the masters will be created, other copies of these masters would have been made to distribute to various pressing plants if need be, copying a master from a master analogue way can cause slight signal quality loss due to the obvious ie tape hiss.Copying an analogue master to create a digital master gives a master which can be copied again & again with no audiable degrade which is again obvious.

Remastering is making a new master from an old master, adding what ever effects, output levels, compression etc etc t before pressing the product from it, which ever it be record or CD..All digital recording taken from Analogue should have been technically Remasterd.

A lot of old albums don't have the original master tapes at hand so have to be remasterd from what ever source they can get hold of, some will boast Remaster taken from original master tapes, some very lucky engineers can masters straight to digital from the original analogue multi-track tapes, taken directly to digital master, this will create what they call a new mix, also bypassing the sound barrier of analogue master tape.. the latest king crimson albums have new mix for 2009, you can hear the clarity & lack of noise the 2004 remasters had..These particular issues are how remastering should be done, they are flawless.Remastering is great as long as you don't get some deaf, unproffesional engineer in which i'm sorry to say their seems to bee too many.

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 05:43

Here's the stage from master recording to master disc in which all will be pressed from modern style

xUGRRUecBik

IReDh9ec_rk

Where as below all CD are made from a Glass disc

O3FQzwNzUE4

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 05:57

Specialist cutting:

j9xzK_THzE8

:respect:

webby

27-12-2009, 09:05

Great videos Andre, thanks.

So, if I have it correct, records and CDs are cut from the same master yes? Which is what I would have thought to be honest.

So when say Marco makes a CD burn of a record and claims that it sounds better than the CD version, it is actually his playback device (turntable) that he's recording. Therefore, he's getting an exact CD copy of the record being played, yes?

Or do I have it all wrong?

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 09:14

Great videos Andre, thanks.

So, if I have it correct, records and CDs are cut from the same master yes? Which is what I would have thought to be honest.

Yes/No/Depends :lol:

So when say Marco makes a CD burn of a record and claims that it sounds better than the CD version, it is actually his playback device (turntable) that he's recording. Therefore, he's getting an exact CD copy of the record being played, yes?

Or do I have it all wrong?

No Myself & Marco have directly burned a CD from a Vinyl Record, it's a direct A to D conversion with nothing added (At least i did), this is the whole thing in prooving CD isnt a bad format afterall it's just the Sound Engineering involved before pressing that is the problem

Marco

27-12-2009, 09:24

Hi Lee,

In a way, yes... The difference of course is that when I do it I'm in charge of the recording levels and so can adjust them in order that they're not boosted to hell just to sound loud on a car stereo or some portable boom-box - and this makes a huge difference when playing back the recording on a revealing high-resolution system :)

Much of the ear-bleeding fatigue factor of some CDs is thus reduced in the process, although if the recording has been badly produced in other ways you'll still hear this.

Also, if records are produced from old all-analogue masters (which is often the case with a lot of the stuff I listen to) then I can obtain their effect on the CD copy I make from the vinyl (record), and thus maintain greater continuity of the analogue 'signal'. In effect, CD copies I make from analogue masters on vinyl turn out as 'AAD', as opposed to 'ADD' (using the old terminology which used to appear on CDs), applicable if a digital process had been used at that stage instead of my T/T, and this often results in superior sound quality.

Of course, simply playing those recordings on my T/T without any digital process being involved whatsoever is even better......but that's bugger all use if I want to play them in the car, hence why I bought the E-MU sound card (primarily) in the first place ;)

Marco.

webby

27-12-2009, 10:04

Right, but you're still using the T/T to play the record aren't you? So you're recording your T/T which has it's own sound, playing that record, which is then converted to digital and burned to a CD.

I must admit, I know little about what we're discussing here, but I'm just trying to get a grip on it, so sorry if I'm posing stupid questions.

Also, those videos Andre posted just make me wanna play records again!!

Marco

27-12-2009, 10:17

Right, but you're still using the T/T to play the record aren't you? So you're recording your T/T which has it's own sound, playing that record, which is then converted to digital and burned to a CD.

In my case, yes. Look at it in the same way as a 'needle drop' (some of which have been posted elsewhere) only on CD instead of a downloadable file :)

The bottom line is that the CDs I record from my vinyl source often end up sounding much better than shop-bought CDs of the same albums!

Marco.

Rare Bird

27-12-2009, 10:24

Which is this topic

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4543

jandl100

27-12-2009, 11:05

the pre-recorded tapes (both formats)tended to sound dull compared to stuff recorded at home on the same kit, which was, after all, optimised for your own recordings anyway. But they were poor by comparison.

I've bought quite a few pre-recorded cassette tapes since being reintroduced to that excellent recording format. I mean, at 20p each in Oxfam charity shops I just can't resist! :eyebrows:

I agree that played back with the Dolby B re-equalization, as intended, they usually sound muffled and compressed.

I have found that an excellent way around this is to play back without Dolby re-equalisation, but going via my Behringer DEQ2496 equalizer where I can dial in the treble cut required for each tape by ear - it only takes a few seconds to tweak the treble cut and can make pre-recorded cassettes sound very listenable indeed. :)

Yep, I know that Dolby processing isn't that simple and is dynamically windowed, and also that the Behringer introduces A/D and D/A stages, but even so I find it a fine way to play the little beasts back. :cool: