advertisement


Vinyl is not obsolete, Will CD become obsolete ?

If you care to go onto the Linn forum and search their archive ( there is a search engine ) Linn answered the same questions being asked here. They wrote that their 24bit masters were completely different from their 16bit recordings from their studios. Also analyzed graphs were put up showing the difference.Linn had a problem in the early days but this has now been fixed so that 24bit means you are getting 24bit
Unlike say HDTracks Linn’s 24bit comes straight from the studio HDtracks are taken from DVD-Audio and SACD copies. I stopped down loading from HDtracks as it proved not to be reliable. Talking Heads from HDtracks in 24bit was taken from a surround mix rather than stereo. So some of the music is loud while other bits that should be at the forefront are well at the back of the mix. Another reliable online 24bit site is iTrax well worth a look as it contains a lot of information on 24bit recordings. http://itrax.com/Pages/PostSignUp.php
 
The only reason I can see to downconvert a 24 bit to 16 bit and compare it with the original 16 bit recording is to see whether there is a difference in mastering which is normally quite audible.

The reason is to investigate whether there is any audible difference (presuming you mean "compare with original 24-bit recording"). If there is not, you might as well save your disk space (and money in the case of HD Tracks).

Tim
 
No. King Crimson has fanatic followers. Fanatics will buy everything, and buy it over and over again if there's a sniff of it being 'better' somehow. You can sell a King Crimson fanatic the album on LP, then again on CD, then again on hi-res and once again with all of the above bundled with a booklet, some additional art and hundreds of hours of outtakes.

If you have an album that costs £10, and you are trying to sell the same people the same album for £30, make it an outstanding master. The trouble is, no one is going to pay a £20 premium for 'an outstanding master', but if they are told they are 'Master Tape Quality Studio Special 24/192 Audiophile Limited Carlos Fandango Edition', they will.

I've no doubt the premium-cost Supreme Balls-Out Super Special Version sounds great, and better than the CD master. But it's more likely sounding great because it's the premium-cost Supreme Balls-Out Super Special Version, not because of a greater bit depth or a higher sampling rate.

I think you're missing my point. The issues I'm talking about contain CD and DVD-A versions of the albums, which are of the vintage to have been recorded on analogue gear.

The production team are making the best digital master they can for both elements within the same release. They have access to the same analogue master for each. I can't see any motivation for them to produce different digital masters for each, beyond the simple mechanics of one having to be 16-bit for the CD master, the other 24/96 for the DVD-A master.


They're not selling the two separately.
 
Check your hearing. Bet you can't hear anything above 15 kHz, and you'll be lucky if you can hear that high.
I believe that statement could be a bit exaggerated.
When I was young I could hear a 20 kHz tone. It was sometimes annoying because I could even hear some old motion detectors (don't know the frequency, but at this rates, it was more feeling than hearing).
Now, I don't know if I still can hear a CRT monitor typically at 18kHz (they were also annoying). ...but I'm pretty sure I can do more than 15.

What I can agree is that frequencies above 16 or 17 don't bring significant sound information to music.

Michael
 
I don't know if I still can hear a CRT monitor typically at 18kHz (they were also annoying)

Actually 15.625kHz in areas using 625 line 50 field telly - lower in the 'States.

Most people now exhibit a notch at those frequencies.
 
The production team are making the best digital master they can for both elements within the same release. They have access to the same analogue master for each. I can't see any motivation for them to produce different digital masters for each
Usually there is a "final mix". This is then mastered for vinyl and for digital. Very often, completely different people do the mastering for vinyl and for digital! Sometimes this is even sent out of house to specialist mastering engineers.

Normally there isn't a DVD-A at all. The "digital master" would usually be used for radio, online streaming services, official online videos, downloads and CD. Often the digital master is great, sometimes it isn't.

The vinyl master isn't used for interweb or airplay ... it's a sector to itself and the vinyl mastering engineers can and do act on different priorities. Evidence for this can also be found in DR Database.

When DVD-A comes into the frame, I would say the situation is far closer to the vinyl mastering than the usual digital mastering.

This doesn't prove anything and it's just a typical scenario not a rule; but I hope at least it explains why I think assumptions are not safe.
Darren
 
I can't fathom why you're addressing my point with comparisons between vinyl and digital masters, when the point we're discussing is between CD and Hi-Res DVD-A versions within one retail package....
 
I tried to explain it. Anyway, don't get hung up on that point, just have a look at the DR Database link. You mentioned Donald Fagen, there's an example of the contemporary CD and DVD-A scoring differently for DR. This is tangible evidence that the mastering is different.
Darren
 


advertisement


Back
Top