Until you reach a certain level of digital playback quality using redbook cd's, a very reasonable vinyl system with records that have been cleaned and taken care of will provide a far higher level of liquidity, transient response, separation of notes & instruments and proper tonal balance. While the CD may win several categories in terms of "absolutes", the LP wins in most categories in terms of "natural presentation". If your results with LP differ from what i've stated here, chances are, you were using gear that was pretty horribly designed, pretty horribly set-up or a combo of the two.
Several people were completely blown away when they heard how good a $150 direct drive linear tracking turntable that came complete with a "reasonable" MM cartridge off of Ebay could sound when teamed with a good quality but used $200 preamp with built in phono section. After hearing a system that i put together for a friend, the same comment of "I don't remember records ever sounding this good" was repeated by two different people at two different listening sessions. These were the first words out of their mouths after hearing less than one full song. All of this with records that had never seen a VPI, Nitty Gritty or Sota record cleaning machine.
Part of the reason for this is that Linear trackers will place the stylus in different areas of the groove than a pivoted arm will. One can take worn LP's that are somewhat "noisy" on a standard pivoted design and play them on a Linear tracking design and instantly drop the noise floor quite noticeably. Obviously, the shape of the stylus being used has something to do with this, but the fact that tracking error is reduced and the cartridge now rides more uniformly in the center of groove has GREAT benefits. Sean
> |
Rockinroni, if I recall correctly, you said that even an entry level system will outplay a CD system. So why doesn't my so called entry system not outplay my CD system? Because it has nothing to do with the playback system - it is more a question of taste. Just don't try to justify your subjective taste (a redundancy of course, taste is always subjective) with objective reasons.
I thouroughly enjoy my vinyl playback system and the quality of sound is wonderful, if the recording is good. I also enjoy my CD playback system and the quality of sound is wonderful, if the recording is good. The differences between the two are not greater than the differences in different concert halls or the orchestras playing in them. Some halls are quieter (along with the audiences) than others, but I do prefer the quieter ones.
As to the original poster's query, do as others have suggested, ignore the shortcomings of vinyl (noise etc.) and if you can't, play CDs. Of course my advice to those who wonder what to do about the shortcomings of CDs (lack of life etc.) is to ignore that and if you can't, play vinyl.
Salut, Bob P. |
Viridian, agreed. However, even though dynamic range is an engineering choice, the choices are still limited by the medium and technology. There is a wider dynamic range available with digital than vinyl. |
Rocky, you hanv't heard my modified Wollensak 8-track player, so them's fightin' words. Step outside - 8-tracks don't suck, they rule! Peppy, I will stand by my statement that LP has a greater dynamic range than redbook CD. True, it is gained at the quiet end of the spectrum where digital is simply not recording sounds. Likewise, bandwidth into the ultrasonic and phase response will also be better with the analog media than with CD replay. |
Rockinroni said, "Your rig is entry level, you will not be able to retrieve the lower 2 or 3 octaves on this turntable." If the lowest octave is 20-40Hz, then the turntable in question can't retrieve info any lower than 80-160Hz. Roni was being kind, if a component can't reproduce anything from the upper bass downward then it's not a true hi-fi component let alone entry level high end. Thanks for clearing things up, Roni. |
But then Rockinroni said that a Systemdek with Rega arm at 700$ would outperform a CD and obviously reproduce the notes below 120HZ.
I am glad that we cleared that up!
Bob P. |
Viridian, listening into 20db of noise (I guess this is like the cocktail party effect) to hear music is not my idea of gained dynamic range.
Salut, Bob p. |
Rockinroni...Shure my Shure finds lots of LF on LPs (my subwoofers are flat to 20 HZ). What I said was that these LF sounds are monophonic because of the way LP's are mastered so as to enable "entry level" pickups to play them. This is not necessarily bad, but it is different from digital sources where there is no reason to blend LF. Being different they will sound different. Better or worse is an opinion.
I agree with you that a good LP played with a good pickup and (as sean says) a linear tracking arm can sound really good. Problem is that when the music gets quiet that surface noise intrudes.
Isn't that where we came in? |
This will greatly reduce or elimimate clicks and pops if the record is not scratched or damaged by incorrect cartridge alignment. Eevn if the record is not mint it will sound a lot better after cleaning with a RCM and a cartridge that will reduce surface noise, once you have done these thing you will then understand why LP's sound way better than CD's.
Steve... |
Bob, I would never argue with you about sensitivity to audible noise, this seems to be a personal reaction and is quite subjective. However,you may not like it, but the terms "dynamic range" and "signal to noise ratio" have meanings, though you are free to make up your own definitions and language to suit what pleases you. For the record, dynamic range is defined as "The difference, in decibels (db), between the softest and loudest possible sounds that a component can produce.". Once again, the issue of non-recognition in a digital system below the least signficant bit is side-stepped.
Marty |
I will clear this up for you. If you read my posts you will find out I said;
"You do not have to spend a fortune to get good analog sound, that is mostly free of noise (pops & clicks).
A used Systemdeck and a atcoc9 with a Rega arm will sound fantastic ($700 range).
There are many sub 1k rigs that will get you most of the way there." Like the rig you have,inpepin.
Anyway this thread is going in the trash.
So I will sum it up for you losers and say it plain.
lp's rule and have more fidelity even with a pop here and a click there. cd's suck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
cd's are for lazy clones that are willing to settle for pasteurized music. A Fact some are not willing to explore or admit. The only thing they lose is the music, to bad so sad.
Marty sorry about the 8 Track shot. |
Rockinroni:
Boy, you are some piece of work!
So, your signoff is that people who prefer CD's are "losers" and "lazy clones." Why not just say ... 'our mothers are ugly' ... as well? Thanks for elevating the level of the discussion.
Regards, Rich |
Viridian, I have a better idea of what you mean by dynamic range and signal to noise ratio, but even accepting that definition does not yield more than about 80db range for vinyl, while CD has at least 100db. And these figures I have measured using LP's and CDs. The direct to disc recordings (organ) has about 80db. BTW its surface noise is at about -70db. Pinned the needles at +10db!
Salut, Bob P. |
Rockinroni, can we hope that you are abandoning this thread? If so, that should really clear things up!
salut, Bob P. |
Bob, measureing dynamic range at home is fraught with difficulties. One tends to end up measuring signal to noise ratio even when using a scope. An interesting working of the maths can be found at http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/iandm/part12/page2.html , as the author quite rightly points out, the results are the theoretical limits of the media and practical applications will yeild much lower actual dynamic range in both media. He clearly shows that the limit on lp replay is about 110db as opposed to 96db in redbook compact disc replay. Interestingly, this coincides with my subjective evaluations. But don't get me wrong; the compact disc has much to recommend it, both technically and aurally. |
Veridian, yes, but I am talking about actual measurements and what the recording industry is (or has) actually done with the "theoretical limits". It is much easier to exploit the CD limits than the LP limits, hence the LP's contain less dynamic range as witnessed by my measurements. I might be off by 2-3Db, but that doesn't invalidate my findings.
I still love my record collection, it is just different from my CD's, not necesarily better. |
Kevin- In addition to what has already been said about cleaning records, aligning the cartridge and maybe upgrading your table/cartridge, a DBX 3BX running through the tape loop would yeild pretty good results with your current table/cartridge noise issue. If you upgrade, the 3BX becomes less of a factor as the noise floor of the upgraded table/cartridge drops.
Also, as someone mentioned earlier, there were several "tick & pop" eliminators manufactured such as the Burwin TNE 7000 and a couple of models from SAE. Again, if you upgrade, there won't be much of a need for this kind of signal processing. (My TNE has been in storage for 15 years, but I still have occasion to use the 3BX.)
And, much as I fear weighing in on the LP vs CD lunacy, it's notable that, from a strictly sonic (the music only) standpoint, most "experts", including CDP makers, have concluded that analog sounds better. (Many CDP makers strive to sound like analog and claim their product "sounds almost like analog" while exactly zero turntable makers attempt to "sound almost like digital".) I suspect alot of folks take issue with this fact because they mistakenly think that "sounds better" is an all-encompassing phrase which means that "analog is always better at anything and everything all the time" which, of course, is not true.
LP's are more work and they are not as convenient to play as CD's. And, if one prefers to listen to numbers on a page(something I gave up doing 20 years ago), CD's can sometimes have a "better" S/N ratio and dynamic range. CD's can also sometimes be quieter between tracks or in quieter passages. CD's don't have "ticks and pops". CD's are getting better. Etc, etc, etc. (BTW- Analog is getting better, too- ALOT better.)
Obviously, many have had great experiences with analog and find it to be worth the effort. Your mileage may vary. If you need help, there are alot of very knowledgeable folks here for you.
And, yes, for the record, I do have a fairly good CDP and a whole bunch of CDs that I listen to and enjoy frequently.
Regards
Jim |
Jim nice post, but alas your information has fallen on deaf
ears.
You will notice Twl and others have not even bothered to engage these lost souls.
Rich nice of you to finally chime in with your two cents
"Why not just say ... 'our mothers are ugly' ... as well? Thanks for elevating the level of the discussion."
Now that second post of yours has really helped this discussion.
Thanks, because your first post was obliviously from the point of view of someone whom has given up on lp playback. This is an example of the kind of audiophile to whom I referred to from time to time in my other posts.
It did not even merit a response.
At first you try to help, but when you see the people whom you are trying to guide to the light fear the light, and are not of the light,then I no longer am willing to flog a dead horse. |
As a strong proponent of analog, who can also recognize the value of CD's in some cases, I can only say that I am reminded of this phrase when reading your posts Rockin, "with friends like this, who needs enemies?"
Why do so many of these threads spiral down into name calling? I maintain that many a barb is tossed out here that would not be dared, eye-to-eye, across the table. From BOTH sides on the issue.
There is no right or wrong, here. You like what you like. A person can say why they like analog better than CD or CD better than analog. And we can agree to disagree. Does this make any of us bad guys or in need of saving? If I were a moderator (are there any here?), Id close and delete this thread. |
Rockinroni:
My comments still stand. There was no forwarding reason to refer to those who prefer CD's as "losers" and "lazy clones.' And it is hardly about "fear of the light " ... I just decided differently and your response is name calling. Enjoy the music and the equipment ... save the noble causes for those who are truly noble.
Regards, Rich |
well said Rich, I agree with you, I just get tired of some people who misquote others so they can try to justify their opinions. Sorry for the unprofessionalism on my part. |
Hey Guys, this is some pretty funny stuff. I posted on this thread back on 6/18. Back then we were talking about records and turntables. I came back after six days and it's like a blood bath.
Records are cool. Been listening to em' for 35 years. But, don't kid yourselves, digital is coming into it's own. And I now often find myself listening to my CD rig more often than my analog rig.
At the least, be willing to accept both formats for whatever their virtues may be. And they both have their goods and bads. Keep an open mind.
Your mind is like a parachute. It only works when it's open. |
Ease up guys relax!!!!!!
How do you get past hiss and pops??
Well you can try having a Boa constrictor near by for the hiss to be common and train your ears to it...
the pop well why not do the same with a corn poper pot in the kitchen.......
At first you fell in love with music then you'd like to improve the experience and then it gets complicated.....
Sometimes is hard to stay in topic isn't it....
go back to the music and enjoy |
Sol322 .
I know you meant well but these types of smart aleck, alcoholic comments only serve to further exacerbate the problem. As you can tell by now. |
