advertisement


Vinyl vs CD - In The Lab.

That's certainly not my experience at all. There are a huge number of CDs that sound utterly superb to my ears, e.g. just about anything by Miles Davis on Columbia.

PS If you always end up preferring vinyl then I'd suggest you have a system bias somewhere, e.g. your turntable has a tonal character that you have attempted to correct with speaker positioning etc which has made the flatter digital replay sound a little unbalanced. It's a trap I fell into for quite a few years!
Funny you mention Miles Davis on Columbia. You probably don't recall some information I posted some years ago about the Columbia reissue of Kind of Blue and how badly it had been mutilated.

It's not that I always end up preferring the vinyl. It is that with a good LP there is almost always a sense of realism - despite there being less detail, more noise and a reduced dynamic range - that digital just doesn't quite produce yet.
 
All, or popular only? To me, the classical world seems to be fine digitally. I prefer CD to vinyl (they sound equally good to me and CD is much more convenient), and I seek wherever possible to obtain CDs of favourites. Side-by-side comparisons have never revealed any significant differences for me. But then classical recording engineers in general seek to reproduce the sound of a concert hall, and perhaps the folk involved take more care.

Some classical vinyl is amongst the most collectable and valuable on the planet, so there is a market still, albeit quite a rarified one. As with anything else to do with vinyl and CD I have no overall preference, some stuff sounds better in either format. I've been lucky enough to hear some of the high-ticket stuff (wide-band deep groove SXLs, blue-silver SAX, shaded-dog Living Stereos etc) and they can sound astonishingly good.
 
Funny you mention Miles Davis on Columbia. You probably don't recall some information I posted some years ago about the Columbia reissue of Kind of Blue and how badly it had been mutilated.

There is a whole raft of versions of KOB, the one I have is in the 70xCD Complete Columbia Albums edition and I believe it is the second and marginally improved speed corrected version (there are at least two, though most wouldn't notice). It sounds fine to me. In many ways I actually prefer it to the highly collectable Classic Records double-vinyl which sounds a bit too fat and warm through my system, though I think it's edged-out by a Nimbus Supercut I also own. To stand comparison with these two very fine records implies there's not a lot wrong with it IMO.

PS Here's a pic of So What (first track).

2jd524g.jpg
 
Compare that with the versions in the earlier thread. It appears to the same Columbia reissue that had been manipulated in such a heavy-handed way.

I disagree with your analysis. You are implying that Columbia have some magic tool that can dramatically expand dynamic range. They don't. Like everyone else they only have compressors and EQ, i.e. if one is to conclude anything from your waveforms it is that the Japanese CD has been quite heavily compressed / limited in the sax break. You may well prefer this, and that's fine (I have no opinion as I've not heard them both).

I also don't think your speed corrected issue is the same as mine at all. Mine looks far quieter overall and shows far less density on the peaks, e.g. look at just how much further sharp drum or cymbal transients extend above the overall sax level in the 'loud' bit. It looks exactly how I'd expect that track to look!
 
Tony, I would agree your copy is just right. It has the 5-7 min section standing out, but without obvious compression. But I agree with Ross that his remaster was not done well ... you can see the dynamics being chopped off, unlike yours, surely you notice that? It might not be very audible but then again it's definitely not necessary.
 
Tony, I would agree your copy is just right. It has the 5-7 min section standing out, but without obvious compression. But I agree with Ross that his remaster was not done well ... you can see the dynamics being chopped off, unlike yours, surely you notice that?

Yes, absolutely - it's the point I'm trying to make above. I think Ross thinks we have the same speed-corrected version, whereas I don't.
 
I disagree with your analysis. You are implying that Columbia have some magic tool that can dramatically expand dynamic range. They don't. Like everyone else they only have compressors and EQ, i.e. if one is to conclude anything from your waveforms it is that the Japanese CD has been quite heavily compressed / limited in the sax break.

I also don't think your speed corrected issue is the same as mine at all. Mine is far quieter overall and shows far less density on the peaks, e.g. look at just how much further sharp drum or cymbal transients extend above the overall sax level in the 'loud' bit. It looks exactly how I'd expect that track to look!
Columbia haven't increased the dynamic range, they've compressed it by amplifying that section. They don't need a magic tool when you can do that on any digital audio workstation. I can do it in Adobe Audition very easily.

Compare the left and right channels in the different versions. You would expect variation between the two channels but not the kind of magnitude we see in the picture you have posted, which looks very artificial.
 
PS If you always end up preferring vinyl then I'd suggest you have a system bias issue somewhere, e.g. your turntable has a tonal character that you have attempted to correct with speaker positioning etc which has made the tonally flatter digital replay sound a little unbalanced. It's a trap I fell into for quite a few years!

^^ with bells on!,

One of the great things about vinyl is the ability to voice the front end in a way that's very difficult with digital without employing EQ. As an example, you can push vinyl into sounding quite CD-like in overall balance with something like a Rega P9 (and presumably the newer models) with a lean cart such as an AT.
But certainly if a system has been built around say a classic LP12 with say a Troika or Koetsu, then switching to CD is always going to provide a stark contrast.

People often ask about buying a TT to sound like CD or vice versa and while this isn't possible, you can certainly close the gap in terms of overall tonality.
 
Very good comments. I think a major selling point of vinyl is that it allows you to roll a sound to your taste without any stigma, as Robert wrote. Without it, you are left just with loudspeakers, acoustics, positioning etc - also huge areas for taste but, just as Tony says, this makes for unequal footing for vinyl and digital in many rigs (and people tend to pick a favourite). Agreed.
 
Compare the left and right channels in the different versions. You would expect variation between the two channels but not the kind of magnitude we see in the picture you have posted, which looks very artificial.

Again I disagree - the waveform on my copy is exactly what I'd expect given the two sax solos are panned very hard left and very hard right. It's obviously not compressed as the cymbal strikes etc rise so high above. The Japanese CD waveform looks decidedly odd to me. Certainly far more processed. Your speed corrected issue is odd too, but in a different way - it looks to have been mastered too loud so the cymbal peaks etc either clip or hit a hard-limiter. I'd argue you have two rather poor looking CD copies of KOB there and I'd advise buying the current issue (assuming the one in the shops is the same as the one in the big box-set). It really is rather excellent.
 
Three 'So What?'s to overload to,

Old Sony CD,

SW_CD.png


Some SACD from somewhere, this seems to be 20s longer than the CD...

SW_SACD.png


An unnecessarily high sample rate recent download,

SW_HD.png


About the same length as the original CD. I need to research the speed correction, was it just for side two? There is nothing in the 192k download above 40k, I smell con.

Paul
 
And apropos of earlier comments about why system optimised for vinyl might lead you astray here is the spectrum of the same section of the same song from three different sources, one is digital, the other two are needledrops from vinyl via two different turntables, although the only significant difference is the cart.

GL_SpecCompare.png


The three traces are not level matched, so you have to look at relative differences. The vinyl clearly has bass and treble rolled off and the LP12 cart has a downward tilt from may be 1kHz up. I've been fixing the roll off with digital magic using a curve derived from this plot and I think the results are a great improvement. The LP12 has an original Linn Arkiv retipped and serviced by EsCo, the SP10 an AT33PTG.

Paul
 
Paul, which do you prefer?

PS Side 1 is the one with the tape speed error.
I think they all sound fine. Looking now at the physical CD it carries no mention of Sony, and is 'Prepared for Compact Disc by Teo Macero'. CBS 460603 2, FWIW.

It's easy to get way too carried away with mastering quality, excepting the RvG Blue Note CDs which should be chucked away.

Paul
 
I think they all sound fine. Looking now at the physical CD it carries no mention of Sony, and is 'Prepared for Compact Disc by Teo Macero'. CBS 460603 2, FWIW.

The CBS 'Jazz Masterpiece' version with the blue border and wrong cover pic? That's a pretty early one! It wouldn't entirely surprise me if it was from a copy master or even a vinyl production master which may explain the rather different dynamic shape to the later versions (which are taken from the 1st gen master IIRC).

PS one thing that is confusing about the 71xCD Complete Columbia box set is that it's not stated which masters have been used, though thankfully it seems they took some real care in selecting good ones even if they were not the most recent, e.g. it has an excellent Japanese mastering of the original mix of Bitches Brew rather than the current rather controversial remix. There are many other examples of very knowledgable and tasteful selections in the box. Tons of info on this set over on Steve Hoffman and it remains the best music purchase I've ever made by quite some distance!
 
That's the one. Has 'Digitally remastered directly from the original analog tapes' written on the front. I'm sure they wouldn't lie...

I'll now have to find some quiet time and have a deliberate listen. I hate doing that. The ATCs are on Wii duty today.

Paul
 
That's the one. Has 'Digitally remastered directly from the original analog tapes' written on the front. I'm sure they wouldn't lie...

Doesn't say 'master' though, e.g. it could well be from the the vinyl cutting master. It's still 'original analogue tapes'! If that's the case I'm sure it will sound great too. I'm just confused as to why it is so different dynamically and I really don't buy Ross's argument that someone has ramped the sax solo level - if that were the case the piano & drums would rise accordingly, which they don't.

When spotting studio chicanery it's often more enlightening to focus on the background instruments as overall compression obviously reacts to high-level transients and tends to really screw with the envelopes of the stuff doing it's own thing out back in the mix. Some examples out there are awful, e.g. long sustained organ or synth notes 'ducking' behind compressed drum hits etc. Really obvious to anyone who's played about with studio compressors etc.
 


advertisement


Back
Top