| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 111993 | 2010-08-19 07:51:00 | Record/LP player | Fifthdawn (9467) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1129486 | 2010-08-20 11:10:00 | The problem with audio is that it is so subjective. Each side will fight for why their way is better. vinyl vs CD's tubes vs Solid state the list goes on. Also how people like their music to sound...warm and laid back or bright and in your face, etc. At the end of the day enjoy whatever music you have. |
wmoore (6009) | ||
| 1129487 | 2010-08-20 13:18:00 | ...CD's are compressed and only go up to 44.1hz, 16-bit, vinyl goes up to 192hz...Might I point out that, as an analogue medium, vinyl has no such absolute value as to the highest audible frequency it can carry, and as such your 'up to 192kHz' claim is complete garbage? Next up - standard audio CDs aren't compressed. At all. Whichever website you found that information at is incorrect, I suggest you pick a different source for your research. CDs generally contain uncompressed, 16bit PCM wave files at a 44.1kHz sampling rate. It's also worth pointing out that humans can't even hear sounds that high - we can't even hear sounds above ~20kHz or so, so any sampling frequency higher than that needed to reproduce a waveform up to ~20kHz with reasonable accuracy is a waste of time (note that this *doesn't* imply a sampling frequency of ~20kHz). Next point - CDs preserve the original dynamics of the sound more faithfully than vinyl because there's no mass involved in the read / write head, which has the tendency to suppress the high range to some degree. Some people do prefer the way vinyl sounds, but please bear in mind that it's not as accurate as a digital recording with no moving parts involved (other than the mics / instruments etc). With a really good head and high quality media, vinyl can produce a higher resolution than CDs due to its analogue nature - this resolution is limited by the density and hardness of both the vinyl and the head. If you want to experience really good audio quality, try a source that uses end-to-end 96kHz / 32bit floating point digital audio. Most people can't tell the difference between this and a standard DVD soundtrack, but for those who can it's a treat. And sorry to be the bearer of bad news Goodiesguy, but it beats the socks off vinyl :p. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 1129488 | 2010-08-20 13:51:00 | I don't have time to go shopping for Vinyl as it would require me to travel maybe an hour each way with no gaurantee I would find what I wanted. I have about 50 lps here which I have put through Audacity via a turntable. I spent some time removing snaps crackles and pops from the originals. wmoore also makes a very good point in my view. There is also Youtube where you can often find what you are looking for on the odd occaision you want to hear whatever takes your fancy at the time. |
Snorkbox (15764) | ||
| 1129489 | 2010-08-20 21:49:00 | Might I point out that, as an analogue medium, vinyl has no such absolute value as to the highest audible frequency it can carry, and as such your 'up to 192kHz' claim is complete garbage? Next up - standard audio CDs aren't compressed. At all. Whichever website you found that information at is incorrect, I suggest you pick a different source for your research. CDs generally contain uncompressed, 16bit PCM wave files at a 44.1kHz sampling rate. It's also worth pointing out that humans can't even hear sounds that high - we can't even hear sounds above ~20kHz or so, so any sampling frequency higher than that needed to reproduce a waveform up to ~20kHz with reasonable accuracy is a waste of time (note that this *doesn't* imply a sampling frequency of ~20kHz). Next point - CDs preserve the original dynamics of the sound more faithfully than vinyl because there's no mass involved in the read / write head, which has the tendency to suppress the high range to some degree. Some people do prefer the way vinyl sounds, but please bear in mind that it's not as accurate as a digital recording with no moving parts involved (other than the mics / instruments etc). With a really good head and high quality media, vinyl can produce a higher resolution than CDs due to its analogue nature - this resolution is limited by the density and hardness of both the vinyl and the head. If you want to experience really good audio quality, try a source that uses end-to-end 96kHz / 32bit floating point digital audio. Most people can't tell the difference between this and a standard DVD soundtrack, but for those who can it's a treat. And sorry to be the bearer of bad news Goodiesguy, but it beats the socks off vinyl :p. Very will put Erayd. Goodiesguy if you want to hear some high quality CDs you can't go past anything on the Telarc label far far better than the $9 crap cds you buy from The Warehouse. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 1129490 | 2010-08-21 02:03:00 | Thank you Erayd. Well put and informative. | Scouse (83) | ||
| 1129491 | 2010-08-21 03:06:00 | Thank you Erayd. Well put and informative. Thanks for me too as Scouse says very informative :thanks |
gary67 (56) | ||
| 1129492 | 2010-08-21 04:06:00 | The other small point is I do not have a turntable in my car so Vinyl gets ripped to MP3 format so I can play same in my car. | Snorkbox (15764) | ||
| 1129493 | 2010-08-21 04:50:00 | The other small point is I do not have a turntable in my car so Vinyl gets ripped to MP3 format so I can play same in my car. Which is what I do. And why not? Erayd: I too, found your piece very enlightening, but you made no comparison between records, CDs and mp3s. Snorkbox and I, and many others no doubt, rip to mp3s. Is there as much loss as we are told and if so, are you able to tell the difference when you play those mp3s on your shitty little car stereo? Or most other stereos? Personally, I notice little difference and as long as it sounds okay - and it does - then I'm not too worried about any loss due to the compression - but I am interested in what difference there is and if it is discernible. |
Roscoe (6288) | ||
| 1129494 | 2010-08-21 05:22:00 | I can tell the difference easily when ripping to mp3, mp3's (even most 320kbps) sound like they have had shoe polish put over them and they sound all compressed and funny | goodiesguy (15316) | ||
| 1129495 | 2010-08-21 05:45:00 | I would definitely not be using MP3 if I was recording from vinyl (or anything else) 320k MP3 is the limit for most people where they can't tell the difference but even then, why use something that is designed to be lossy if you want a proper copy? 128k MP3 is definitely bad, if you can't tell the difference there then you should probably get your ears checked. Use a lossless codec, and out of those, FLAC is the best. Also, get a GOOD sound card and turntable. |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||