On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 16:17:11 +0000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Evan) wrote: > > Ok, as a fellow audiophile I have too put my word in. > First lets look at the prices of top of the line components. For all > the interchangable and truly customizable setup the phonograph has > the most options, with many different types of cartridges, arms, > motors, pre-amps etc. YOu can easlily get a $100,000 phonograph. The > most expensive CD player I have seen (please post others) was $45,000 > NAim. Secon: Todays recordings are in a digital world. Everything is > recorded digitally. But at 24-bit "picture" of the wave at a 96KHZ > bandwidth. This is compressed t oa 16-bit 44.1KHZ CD image. However, > when the master for the record is made lasers are used to create and > exact picture of the wave captured by the microphone with the > accuracy of the 24-hbit recording. Or in true analog recordings a > true reproduction. Giving you with vinyl a more spactious sound with > much mroe depth and dynamic constrast without drowing out the other > instruments because of there relation to vinal. That is the danger > with 24-bit mixes going to a CD somthing that you hear (viloins in a > metal song) on the 24-bit recording which are identifiable could be > lost by the compression of the CD. With a vinyl done right you wont > lose the highs and clarity of ALL the channels. The negatives to > vinyl I will try to explain this the best I can from what I know feel > free to correct thes section and repost if you know I am wrong. With > the records you loose your bass response and bass curve because the > tone arm and catridge with its mass can absorb the low frequencys as > they pass by the needle for the same reson that there low. When the > frequency is lower that means there is less cycles per second and the > tone arm moves with the notes rather than the needle because it has > time too. Thats why customizing a turntable is such an important > thing to get the right balance and match for the other components to > create and accurate reproduction in sound. The positives of CD. Cost > However in terms of more accurate spatious dynamically efficient > sound, records will produce the beswt sound so long as there is good > equipment. If I was to go to Best Buy to build a listening system for > records vs cds. The Cd would most definatly win. If I wen't to > classic stero with a good turntable and hi-fi recording, and used > there B&W 802Ds (If you don't know B&W you might not wan't to be a > part of this conversation) on Krell amplifiers, not to mention the > really sweet Denon reciever and krell preamps. (No subs required but > available for when you want to absolutly make yourself deaf with zero > distortion equally represented sound or if your a movie fan) That > system even with the Naim $45,000 Cd player with a standard formant > CD the record is going to win hands down. > > Also with tube amps and preamps vinyl would also beat the CD in terms > of tone quality. > > What would out do vinyl is the 24-bit 96K recording or even and > HD-Audio AES/EBU interface would win. So long as that is the original > audio quality level. Eventually with HD-DVDs or Blu-Ray whichever > wins the vinyl audio will be lost to digital. But still not a true > replacment to the tone provided with an all analog recording combined > with a all analog tube system.
Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, but imho that's bunch of bullshit, equipment shaggery, etc.. Please read up a bit on technical information instead of audiophil myths. A good place to start would be here: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Category:Vinyl and the forums for discussion: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php One of quite some threads: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=7993 And this one for later on ;) http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=45644 Happy reading, Best Regards, Philipp -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
