+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59

Thread: Valuable Singles

  1. #21
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    See I don't agree that there is such a thing as a 'digital signature', at least not inherent in the medium.
    Yes, but you can't hear the medium itself without involving the use of the necessary replay equipment - and *that* is what generates the 'signature'.

    Obviously the digital playback equipment will have a signature to an extent, that's unavoidable.
    Exactly! As I've just said, you can't hear any digitally recorded music without the use of the associated playback equipment. That's my point (and the leveller) - and in that respect, I can hear the resulting 'signature' that ANY CD player, or streaming system, playing a digital music file, imbues onto the sound.

    Digital encodes the waveform perfectly, tape and vinyl don't.
    Yet it didn't stop some of the finest music recordings ever produced from happening, made in an all-analogue and valve domain, from mike to desk and onto tape. Quite simply, the best of those recordings, sonically BLOW AWAY anything produced in modern times since - and I could easily demonstrate it!

    Therefore, that strongly suggests to me that not only is digital not 'perfect'/'neutral', 'accurate' (ultimately where it matters most, in terms of what the human ear hears), or whatever other term you wish to use to portray its supposed superiority, but that something else is happening in the overall process, which is REAL (and a genuine part of the musical information, not coloration), but that isn't being accounted for in the judgement process.

    However, that's a discussion for another day...

    When the character of each different recording you play dominates the sound over the character of the replay equipment that's when you know you are close to accuracy...
    As you say, if your vinyl set-up is good enough, then you can easily achieve the above, but I can tell you that most of that is down to experience and know-how, than money!

    now don't get me wrong, you can get that with vinyl too, but at a level of expense and hassle that I don't really want, not when there's an easier, cheaper option.
    Yes, but it'll always sound like digital, and every piece of music played will intrinsically be 'tainted' accordingly. Yes, that also occurs with vinyl, so the reality is that you simply have to 'suck your favourite flavour', as I'm afraid any notion that one or the other is 'perfect', or 100% faithful to anything, when part of a music replay system, is totally misguided. You simply have to choose your compromises.

    Plus, and this is another thing, if when vinyl is done at its absolute best [and I've already mentioned what that constitutes as], there was a significant (and notable) difference in the accuracy of the resulting music signal (i.e. the sound that you end up listening to), then it would ably reveal itself when ripping vinyl onto CD (or creating a digital file from a vinyl recording).

    And any time I've done that, aside from some occasional slight surface noise, which is inevitable even with the cleanest and best condition records, it's almost impossible to tell one from the other [or crucially also a commercially produced CD of the same music] - indeed, I've blindfolded myself and also friends (and Del) and asked them to identify the original recording from the rip (or said commercial CD). All so far have struggled, and therefore inevitably get it wrong!

    Quite simply, that happens because the sounds/recordings replayed are sonically near-indistinguishable.

    So, if in the final analysis [i.e. the sound that we actually hear through our speakers] there is little (almost nothing) to sonically separate two identical pieces of music, recorded respectively in either the digital or analogue domain, then how can vinyl intrinsically be so inferior or less 'accurate' than digital - because ultimately in the circumstances I've just described you'd hear it, wouldn't you?

    Think about that....

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  2. #22
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,778
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marco View Post

    Plus, and this is another thing, if when vinyl is done at its absolute best [and I've already mentioned what that constitutes as], there was a significant (and notable) difference in the accuracy of the resulting music signal (i.e. the sound that you end up listening to), then it would ably reveal itself when ripping vinyl onto CD (or creating a digital file from a vinyl recording).

    And any time I've done that, aside from some occasional slight surface noise, which is inevitable even with the cleanest and best condition records, it's almost impossible to tell one from the other - indeed, I've blindfolded myself and also friends (and Del) and asked them to identify the original recording from the rip, and all so far have struggled, and therefore inevitably get it wrong!

    Quite simply, that happens because both sounds/recordings are near-indistinguishable.

    So, if in the final analysis [i.e. the sound that we actually hear through our speakers] there is little (almost nothing) to separate the two, sonically, then how can vinyl intrinsically be so inferior or less 'accurate' - because ultimately in the circumstances I've just described you'd hear it, wouldn't you?

    Think about that....

    Marco.
    This last bit about copying your vinyl doesn't make sense to your argument. You have the recording on vinyl, with all the inherent flaws, you say you copy it to a CD and then play the CD and they are virtually indistinguishable.

    All this shows is that a digital recording is 100% accurate to the source and that it adds nothing of its own to the sound. Of course it sounds like the vinyl, it's a perfect copy of it! But the vinyl LP you are starting with is far from a perfect copy of the master tape

    Consider:

    basic noise floor of -70dB (A-weighted) if we’re lucky – stylus scraping along a groove in plastic, vinyl has finite grain size
    pops and clicks: scratches and dust
    electrical hum and noise: cartridge produces a tiny signal, and high gain pre-amplification is needed
    rumble: bearings, motor
    warped records cause various problems
    stylus wear
    stylus contamination: dust, dirt, vinyl particles
    stylus misalignment – may vary as arm moves across record
    record wear – the Decca test disc for measuring cartridge frequency response was specified for only 5 plays for the tracks with frequencies above 10 kHz!
    record contamination: dust, dirt, vinyl particles
    fundamental limitations in linearity of vinyl cutting/replay system
    diameter loss: speed of groove decreases throughout LP, increasing noise and distortion and reducing upper frequency response
    pre-echo: adjacent groove modulation
    microphony: sound from speakers feeds back into the pickup
    Channel separation: varies with frequency and typically only 20-30 dB at maximum
    Record may be pressed towards end of life of the stamper, resulting in increased levels of various distortions
    compression (raises the quietest sections in volume to make them audible above the background noise, reduces the loudest sections to economise on groove spacing)
    de-essing (reduce treble response for high amplitude, high frequency sounds)
    mixing stereo bass to mono (otherwise the needle jumps out of the groove)
    off-centre pressing
    motor speed, belt, etc.
    RIAA record and/or playback curves are often only approximate
    cumulative effect of factors above causes imprecise frequency response (arbitrary processing when mastering, diameter loss, etc.)

    None of which means it won't 'sound good' but it is going to be some distance away from playing the master tape on an RTR. Whereas the CD has none of those drawbacks. Not a one. And you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the master tape playing, the same as you can't with your vinyl to CD copy.
    Current Lash Up:

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

  3. #23
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    This last bit about copying your vinyl doesn't make sense to your argument. You have the recording on vinyl, with all the inherent flaws, you say you copy it to a CD and then play the CD and they are virtually indistinguishable.

    All this shows is that a digital recording is 100% accurate to the source and that it adds nothing of its own to the sound. Of course it sounds like the vinyl, it's a perfect copy of it! But the vinyl LP you are starting with is far from a perfect copy of the master tape
    You missed the bit about the vinyl rip sounding near-identical to a commercially produced digital recording of the same music!!

    And THAT is the reality. If you don't believe me, I'll let you hear it yourself next time you're up. I've got loads of albums that were released on both vinyl and CD, and own both. If anything, the vinyl rip is often better than the digital original, simply because one can take more care optimising the recording process (with levels, etc)....

    Consider:

    basic noise floor of -70dB (A-weighted) if we’re lucky – stylus scraping along a groove in plastic, vinyl has finite grain size
    pops and clicks: scratches and dust
    electrical hum and noise: cartridge produces a tiny signal, and high gain pre-amplification is needed
    rumble: bearings, motor
    warped records cause various problems
    stylus wear
    stylus contamination: dust, dirt, vinyl particles
    stylus misalignment – may vary as arm moves across record
    record wear – the Decca test disc for measuring cartridge frequency response was specified for only 5 plays for the tracks with frequencies above 10 kHz!
    record contamination: dust, dirt, vinyl particles
    fundamental limitations in linearity of vinyl cutting/replay system
    diameter loss: speed of groove decreases throughout LP, increasing noise and distortion and reducing upper frequency response
    pre-echo: adjacent groove modulation
    microphony: sound from speakers feeds back into the pickup
    Channel separation: varies with frequency and typically only 20-30 dB at maximum
    Record may be pressed towards end of life of the stamper, resulting in increased levels of various distortions
    compression (raises the quietest sections in volume to make them audible above the background noise, reduces the loudest sections to economise on groove spacing)
    de-essing (reduce treble response for high amplitude, high frequency sounds)
    mixing stereo bass to mono (otherwise the needle jumps out of the groove)
    off-centre pressing
    motor speed, belt, etc.
    RIAA record and/or playback curves are often only approximate
    cumulative effect of factors above causes imprecise frequency response (arbitrary processing when mastering, diameter loss, etc.)
    Yes, but you're missing the point... All of that means HEE-HAW, if ultimately it doesn't translate into a significantly audible difference - and if your vinyl set-up is good enough, it doesn't. That's my point!

    That's the problem with fixating too much on measurements, many of which in the real world are largely meaningless, because the final arbiter is a human pair of ears, not a piece of test equipment.

    Quite simply, if all of what you've stated *really nattered*, in the final analysis, then a commercially produced digital recording, of any piece of music, would automatically sound better than ANY vinyl rip of the same, wouldn't it, with all the flaws of vinyl (as you've indisputably outlined) readily apparent and therefore easily heard?

    Yet that's not what happens if the T/T (and set up thereof) is good enough, together with the vinyl ripped being in pristine condition...

    You need to get your head round that notion, and the reason you're struggling is because (and I don't mean this in a bad way) you've neither owned a T/T good enough to level the playing field in that way, nor have any (or much) experience of ripping vinyl to digital.

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  4. #24
    Join Date: Sep 2014

    Location: brighton uk.

    Posts: 4,737
    I'm jamie.

    Default

    martin as long as YOU are happy who gives a monkeys toss what you listen to music on/through.
    My System
    John Wood KT88 Amp.
    Paradise Phono Stage
    Sony TTS-8000 Turntable.
    PMAT-1010 MK6 Tonearm.
    Ortofon Cadenza Bronze
    Sony X555ES Cd Player
    Yamaha NS1000m Speakers

  5. #25
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    Of course, and that applies to all of us! But that's not the argument

    My point is that many of the *indisputable* technical limitations of vinyl, compared with digital, in the final analysis, when assessed within a replay (hi-fi) system, not in terms of playing 'Top Trumps' with specs or measurements, aren't audibly apparent, given a high-quality T/T, optimally set up, playing pristine condition vinyl.

    And here's the thing: how many believers in 'digital superiority' have *truly* experienced the latter in their system, and therefore heard vinyl at its best?

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  6. #26
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,778
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by karma67 View Post
    martin as long as YOU are happy who gives a monkeys toss what you listen to music on/through.
    Well this is it isn't it? Marco brought up the subject of accuracy, and there's no question of which is the more accurate. And accurate can only be defined by measurement.

    I have many albums (at least 50) on both vinyl and cd, I think there is two were I prefer the vinyl version. That's preference, a completely different thing from accuracy.

    You don't get to decide what you prefer, you don't decide you prefer plain chocolate digestives to the milk chocolate ones, you just do. You can't decide whether or not to be attracted to a women, you can't decide to be happy or sad, and so on. You can't decide what you like, It's already determined for you.

    The confusion comes when people associate what they prefer with what is more technically accurate. That's not how it works. You can prefer the less accurate, the worse measuring, and so on, and there won't be a thing you can do about it. It just sounds better to you. But that it doesn't follow that just because it sounds better to you then it must be the more accurate and it doesn't mean everyone else is also going to prefer it just because you do.

    I don't know why some people struggle with that but they do. So you get 'You must never have heard a top=flight vinyl system'. Well I have. Many of them. Many times. Overall I don't prefer it to its top flight digital counterpart. That's not my choice or decision, just how it is.
    Current Lash Up:

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

  7. #27
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    Marco brought up the subject of accuracy, and there's no question of which is the more accurate.
    ...on paper

    The real question is, how much of that superior accuracy ON PAPER translates into *notably audible* sonic superiority, given a turntable of requisite quality, optimally set up, playing pristine (well-produced) vinyl, when assessed by the human ear, in the context of a hi-fi system?

    I could demonstrate that there's very little - and ultimately that's all that matters!

    It makes sense too, when you think about it. When have you ever heard a top-flight vinyl system, assembled by someone who knows what they're doing, being trounced [as suggested should happen by the disparity in 'measurements prowess' between both formats], simply by a 'competent' digital one?

    And of course if only measurements mattered, then you wouldn't need anything more than 'competent', would you...?

    And accurate can only be defined by measurement.
    Yes, but only by knowing *exactly what* to measure with the correct apparatus, otherwise much could be missed, which is one of the reasons why I believe there is so little disparity in the digital recordings I make from vinyl, versus commercially produced digital ones.

    Either the claimed superior accuracy of digital (on paper) is being hobbled by the equipment needed to reproduce the music, or there's something else going on that as yet hasn't been considered.

    And I think, if you scroll back, you'll find that it was you who initiated the discussion on 'accuracy', by describing your reasons for preferring digital to vinyl. If you'd simply said 'I just like how it sounds better', then I'd have said nothing, as that can't be argued against, but that's not what happened!

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  8. #28
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    The confusion comes when people associate what they prefer with what is more technically accurate. That's not how it works. You can prefer the less accurate, the worse measuring, and so on, and there won't be a thing you can do about it. It just sounds better to you. But that it doesn't follow that just because it sounds better to you then it must be the more accurate and it doesn't mean everyone else is also going to prefer it just because you do.

    I don't know why some people struggle with that but they do. So you get 'You must never have heard a top=flight vinyl system'. Well I have. Many of them. Many times. Overall I don't prefer it to its top flight digital counterpart. That's not my choice or decision, just how it is.
    You're completely missing the point here, and obviously haven't either read or understood what I've written, as little of the above formed part of my argument.

    In terms of the bit in bold, my point was that if you've never OWNED (not simply heard) and lived with a T/T that 'levels the playing field' in the way I've described, and crucially digitised music with it, and gained considerable experience with both over many years, then you'll struggle to grasp the significance of the results.

    Many people have tasted great pizza, over the years, but only those who've successfully made their own from scratch, and which is as good as any restaurant can produce, can fully appreciate *exactly why* that is!

    I trust you appreciate the analogy?

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  9. #29
    Join Date: Jun 2014

    Location: Chorley Lancs

    Posts: 14,590
    I'm Steve.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marco View Post


    Yes, but only by knowing *exactly what* to measure with the correct apparatus, otherwise much could be missed, which is one of the reasons why I believe there is so little disparity in the digital recordings I make from vinyl, versus commercially produced digital ones.


    Marco.
    I've followed this debate with interest, though the term "unstoppable force meets an immovable object" comes to mind for some reason

    I personally prefer what i hear when I play my records, but as I have no technical nouse whatsoever, and even less patience, coupled with many less-than-pristine records which are not audiophile jobbies, I cannot explain why I prefer my vinyl. I just do.

    Reason I've highlighted part of Marco's post is that it reads to me like spending fortunes on t/t, arm, cartridge, audiophile pressings, coupled with painstaking set up, can produce vinyl rips virtually indistinguishable from a shop-bought CD. Have I got that right, or am I missing something?
    I just dropped in, to see what condition my condition was in

    T/T: Inspire Monarch, X200 tonearm, Ortofon Quintet Blue. Phono: Project Tube Box CD: Marantz CD6006 (UK Edition); Amp: Musical Fidelity A5 Integrated.
    Speakers: Zu Omen Def, REL T9i subwoofer. Cables: Atlas Equator interconnects, Atlas Hyper 3.0 speaker cables

    T'other system:
    Echo Dot, Amptastic Mini One,Arcam A75 integrated, Celestion 5's, BK XLS-200 DF

    A/V:
    LG 55" OLED, Panasonic Blu Ray, Sony a/v amp, MA Radius speakers, REL Storm sub

    Forget the past, it's gone. And don't worry about the future, it doesn't exist. There is only NOW.

    KICKSTARTER: ENABLING SCAMMERS SINCE 2009

  10. #30
    Join Date: May 2020

    Location: Suffolk

    Posts: 246
    I'm Ray.

    Default

    The problem with cds is the compression or I should say the over compression that is used on many pop/rock albums in the last 20 years. But then a lot of early digital conversions of analogue recordings were not done well.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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