They don't need to - the medium does it for them ! Or low-level detail is lost.
Are you suggesting that those same engineers for some bizarre reason over-compress the CD releases of that same material? Then they are incompetent !
Or are you commenting on the general 'norms' of CD mastering these days ?
geoff
So much for the 'ideal listening position' !
geoff
Please don't denegrate reggae music like that.
geoff
Sorry, your thumb may be non-standard, the issue is that those that master for grammophone records tend to know what they are doing and master completely different from how those that !!!MASTER FOR CD'S DO IT!!!
A lot of early digital transcriptions ought to be re-done.
What you assert is that nothing happened with AD conversion quality between
1985 and 2011.Kind regards
Peter Larsen
If memory serves, vinyl's dynamic range starts falling pretty rapidly above about 8 KHz.
While CD-4 recordings were made with 30+ KHz carriers on them, those signals were cut at very low levels. Playing them tends to erase them after a few playings, even with the best cartridges and stylii. People I know who have experimented with CD4 tell me that about 10 playings is it.
LP media limitations are well known to create a technological strait jacket that very few people have the patience to try to escape from. There's a reason why the CD blew the LP out of the mainstream music market and that is better sound quality almost all of the time.
The idea that you have put your production people into strait jackets to get the best work out of them is positively wierd and just a little insulting.
One unsaid thing about LP production in 2010 is that it is only for a premium, niche market. I googled the price of the LP, and found that it was over $45 and needs to be special ordered. The CD is being sold by Best Buy for $9.99.
If the CD is poorly mastered, then its buyers have nobody to blame but themselves. Refuse to buy badly mastered CDs! If you stumble into one, try to take it back and make a big fuss! Don't throw out the baby with the bath water!
Here we have a myth supported by very limited evidence.
Any reasonble comparison of the number of new releases on LP and CD makes that look like a fantasy. What I see is a diehard LP fan who has limited his musical tastes to the limitations of his hobby-horse medium.
In terms of sound quality from the best performing hardware, there was no change.
In terms of price/performance, the changes were huge. Therefore, the sound quality of everyday digital gear did improve quite a bit.
That was not the point.
I wonder what format the audio tracks on a Laser Disc were put down as.
Indeed they do and it's not incompetence, it's marketing pressure......'Loud is good' and all that bollox. The majority of people that buy digital music formats play it as background music or in cars or on Ipods etc. so dynamic range is wasted on them. The majority of people that still buy vinyl, sit down and listen to it. Yes CD could be much better than vinyl but in reallity because of the mastering, it's not.
D
If memory serves:
On older LDs, the sound was recorded in FM and also received DBX noise reduction or something like it.
Later LDs had regular Linear PCM tracks like CDs.
Full truth here:
Well the answer is to record the vinyl onto CD and play it back from there !
The different mastering (and noise, distortion, wow, flutter, limited frequency and dynamic response, etc) will all be faithfully reproduced !
geoff
That is exactly what some of us, including myself, are doing. As a matter of fact it is not just copying to a CD -- they are digitized in 24/96 and that digitized material is saved and listened to if conditions permit. For everyday use (such as plaing it in one's car or whatever) that material is downsampled to 16/44 and put on CDs.
And I betcha they sound light ages better than commercial CDs with the same material.
-- ****************************************************************** * KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
And I think that David Glasser and all his colleagues at Airshow Mastering (the only masterers I know personally, so I feel like I can predict their response fairly accurately) would take exception to the idea that they approach their craft with any less diligence simply because their products would end up on a CD or other digital medium. Their Grammies would seem to validate their attention to their craft.
Edwin
Only the technically illiterate believe ANY vinyl requires 24/96 recording. Even 14 bits is overkill for vinyl. So IF you actually find a record with frequencies over 22kHz that you dog really likes, just save it at 16/88 or
16/96 and save yourself a few bytes :-)Trevor.
Reggae, I thought he meant ©RAP. :-)
Trevor.
One would hope so! Most learnt 25 years ago that what is required for vinyl's limitations is NOT required for CD. (Unfortunately the loudness wars are another issue)
Most have been thankfully, but not all are improvements :-(
Trevor.
Depends on many factors. My B&O MMC6000 could still recover the carrier after *FAR* more playings than that. Of course the actual surround signal was pretty crap to begin with on most (all?) CD4 records, just as might be expected from such a compromised system.
Trevor.
Actually no evidence, just opinion.
Trevor.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.