The Return of Vinyl

[robbie]

I prefer vinyl because most times I can get two brand new LP's for a few dollars more than one CD.

 

[Thracozaag]

Originally Posted by iammatt

The umpteenth installment of this argument would be more fun to follow were it in English and not audiogeek.

Reminds of attending a Star Trek convention once (yes, I admit it), and overhearing a heated argument on why Kirk, was, indeed superior to Picard.

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

Perceptual Discrimination of Very High Frequency Components in Musical Sound Recorded with a Newly Developed Wide Frequency Range Microphone
...
Preprint Number: 6298 Convention: 117 (October 2004)
Authors: Ando, Akio; Hamasaki, Kimio; Nisiguchi, Toshiyuki; Ono, Kazuho
E-lib Location: (CD 117Papers) /tmp/117/6298.pdf

It's customary to post references that support one's position. From this paper's conclusion:

Thirty-six subjects evaluated 20 kinds of stimulus, and each stimulus was evaluated 40 times in total. The results showed no significant difference among the sound stimuli, but that the correct response rate for three sound stimuli was close to the significance probability (5% level).

They found someone who got a little bit above statistical significance and retested her:

This subject evaluated 20 times over six kinds of sound stimulus. As a result, no significant difference was found among the six sound stimuli. Therefore, it is concluded that this subject could not discriminate between these sound stimuli with and without very high frequency components.

Their conclusion:

From above results, we can still neither confirm nor deny the possibility that some subjects could discriminate between musical sounds with and without very high frequency components.

Which is about right: you can never prove the negative ("Supra-aural signals are not audible."), but all it takes is one reproducible case to prove the positive --- find one person who can reliably tell the difference.

You may want to actually read the paper, too:

http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/publica/labnote/lab486.html

--Andre

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by Thracozaag

Reminds of attending a Star Trek convention once (yes, I admit it), and overhearing a heated argument on why Kirk, was, indeed superior to Picard.

Picard: "Stop or I will say 'Stop' again."

Kirk: "Ur women. I haz dem."

--Andre

 

[Thracozaag]

Originally Posted by Andre Yew

Picard: "Stop or I will say 'Stop' again."

Kirk: "Ur women. I haz dem."

--Andre

 

[Artisan Fan]

My apologies, I posted the wrong study from the AES.

I'm trying to post another study that is more relevant but the vbulletin is not working for me. I've reported this to j bbut we can't fully figure it out.

 

[Artisan Fan]

I'm able to post a shorter summary...

Does High Sampling Frequency Improve Perceptual Time-Axis Resolution of Digital Audio Signal?

As a result of the experiment, we found that widening the frequency band improves perceptual time-axis resolution of a digital audio signal. Adoption of higher sampling frequency will be helpful from the viewpoint of improving the time-axis resolution.
Preprint Number: 4562 Convention: 103 (August 1997)

 

[A Y]

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

I'm able to post a shorter summary...

Does High Sampling Frequency Improve Perceptual Time-Axis Resolution of Digital Audio Signal?

As a result of the experiment, we found that widening the frequency band improves perceptual time-axis resolution of a digital audio signal. Adoption of higher sampling frequency will be helpful from the viewpoint of improving the time-axis resolution.
Preprint Number: 4562 Convention: 103 (August 1997)

We've been over this before, too. If a narrow impulse response is what you want, there are any number of ways to do it without increasing sample rate. For example, having a wider transition band on your reconstruction filter, like Wadia and Pioneer do. Or you can do an adaptive filter like Meitner did with his BiDAT in the 90s. Or you can do what HDCD does with complementary filters for the downsampling and the reconstruction.

BTW, you should note that AES preprints are not peer-reviewed articles.

--Andre

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

I'm able to post a shorter summary...

Does High Sampling Frequency Improve Perceptual Time-Axis Resolution of Digital Audio Signal?
This sounds like the title of a Phillip K. Dick novel.

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

Perceptual Discrimination of Very High Frequency Components in Musical Sound Recorded with a Newly Developed Wide Frequency Range Microphone

And this one like a Borat movie.

 

[Artisan Fan]

BTW, you should note that AES preprints are not peer-reviewed articles.

These studies are interesting but all that one needs to do is listen for themselves to good hirez or vinyl and CD and decide for themselves.

 

[skalogre]

Originally Posted by Artisan Fan

These studies are interesting but all that one needs to do is listen for themselves to good hirez or vinyl and CD and decide for themselves.

BEEEEEEEEEEP!

That is called deciding based on personal preference, not technical superiority of the format.

 

[RJman]

Originally Posted by Andre Yew

Kirk: "Ur women. I haz dem."
Is that the first LOLKirk?

 

[Thracozaag]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

This sounds like the title of a Phillip K. Dick novel.


And this one like a Borat movie.

Early candidate for post of the year.

 

[Mr. Checks]

Finally got time to do a bit of listening this weekend, as follows:

(Technically backward but sonically superior vinyl analog format):
Beethoven quartet Op 18, #4 (Budapest SQ, Library of Congress session)
Beethoven Pathetique sonata (Kempff on DG)
Bach Goldberg (Leonhardt on harpsichord)
Horowitz various encores (a-flat polonaise and Schumann Traumerai)
Bach assorted (Segovia)
Bill Evans, Explorations and Village Vanguard
Schubert Sonata Op 960 (Kempff)
Sibelius 2 (Barbirolli on Chesky)

(Technically innovative but sonically unsatisfying CD format):
Schubert 8th (Wand)
Beethoven Concerto #5 (Tafelmusik)
Schubert 6 moments (Curzon on London)
Beethoven c-minor quartet (Cleveland Q on Telarc)

(Promising but failing-in-the-marketplace SACD format):
Beethoven 5 and 7 (Kleiber on DG)
Schubert Sonata Op 894 (Volodos)
Chopin 4 Ballades and Scherzo #1 (Rubenstein)

That's what I call a good weekend.

 

[Artisan Fan]

Originally Posted by skalogre

BEEEEEEEEEEP!

That is called deciding based on personal preference, not technical superiority of the format.

Personal preference is fine, but there is a case to be made that vinyl is superior to CD as I have tried to do here. It has proven difficult to translate my professional recording experience to the text on a message board unfortunately.

Suffice it to say that if you were at a well-executed recording session you would be able to listen to an LP made from a master tape and hear a noticeable improvement over that done using state of the art converters in a 16/44.1 digital format.

I've noticed this on several sessions over many years. On one recording we did in the old (BMG) RCA Studio A, the musicians also felt the master tape had better captured the tonality of the instruments. They also felt the later analog to SACD releases to best capture the session, in spite of some stellar mastering we did on the earlier redbook (16/44.1) release. This title was McCoy Tyner's "New York Reunion" CD and SACD. Both are still available in case anyone wants to judge for themselves. Listen for the echo off Joe Henderson's saxophone on the Monk cut "Ask Me Now".

It's very difficult using today's audio metrics to fully quantify all that goes in a recording.