[Dan Kolton]

I probably have between 500 and 1000 CDs.  Also note that it is hardly possible for the same material on vinyl and CD to have been recorded identically even when using the same mike feed.

[bummrush]

  About the only thing i an say i you are thinking just because you have a good dac  or cd player,is that a lot of the time the differences with cd ,just arent groundbreaking,sure there is a difference between players,but alot of the time its not the kind of difference you might be looking  for,you get alot more differences say between a pre amp then a couple different cd players,yes theres a difference, but not like different pre amp or even amps,with cd you kinda get what you get with what some say is a flawed system to begin with.

[Wayner]

I probably have between 500 and 1000 CDs.  Also note that it is hardly possible for the same material on vinyl and CD to have been recorded identically even when using the same mike feed.

Dan,

They were both from the same master. If your music was recorded digitally, it's going to go to the cutter with a quick analog conversion and that's it. There are no seperate masters for digital and vinyl. There is but one  master.

If you want to compare CD to vinyl, get Dire Straights, Brothers in Arms. I think this was one of the first CDs recorded in the DDD format, and quickly put to vinyl.

Wayner

[Dan Kolton]

Wayner,
I'd like to know whether the CD and vinyl use the same amps, wire, etc.  Just exactly what do you mean by "master"?  From my understanding, the mike feed ends up at the cutter head in real time and the metal master is cut.  Isn't this the master used to stamp the vinyls that we buy?  Isn't the same mike feed digitized to make CDs?

What I'm saying is that there is a difference in the chain after wherever the cutting head feed and digitizer feed split from the mike feed.  I'm sure the difference is minimal, but then so is the difference in what I hear from my speakers from the vinyl or the CD.  In the case of "Discovered Again", I don't know what was used for the single cut on my CD either. 

[Wayner]

The recording process is not like that. They record the band (or orchestra) on either digital or analog format, usually many, many tracks and then mix it down to 2 tracks (stereo). That is the master. This master is then used to produce either a vinyl LP or CD, taking care to preserve the original content of the music. It is not the LP or CD's producer's job to alter the original work. That is up to the final mixing engineer making the 2 track master and (the band or producer). After a period in the mid 1980's, most modern rock music was being recorded in the digital domain and produced in many different playback formats, from cassette to LP to CD. This is the process (in simple terms).

Wayner

[rcag_ils]

Frank builds outstanding equipment, I don't question them, I used a upgraded Pas 4i with Ultra 550, with Radio Shack cable, nothing fancy.

Most of the time I listen to CD, easy to operate and all, I have about 60 CDs, mostly classic rock (older recording mastered for Lps), some jazz.

I have 600 to 700 Lps, I listened to some of my favorites once in a great while.

Now the theory......

A. the DAC is so high tech, it amplifiers the deficiency of the old recordings, therefore, they sound bad, but actually the recording is bad to begin with.

B. Lps are inherently bad, loaded with distortion, we like them because we grew up with them, and we are so used to the distortion and all the bad things that they come with, therefore, they sound good to us.

So, after I listened to some CDs for a long period of time, some CDs do sound better than the other, but in general, they all sound so, so, or just OK.

Then I put on an Lps, and it sounds more involving, and real, it even make it sound like I have a different amp and preamp.

But I need to learn to like CDs, because it just an illusion that Lps sound better than CDs, actually, technically, it's the other way around, CDs technology reveals the deficiency of the Lps.

Did I finally get this right?

[Wayner]

To your point A, the DAC plays what it is feed. To point B, There are some damn fine LPs out there.

Wayner

[srb]

When I had a turntable and was able to compare the same album on LP versus CD, I though the analog LP sounded a bit "better".  But in the end, I preferred the CD because the lack of LP noise made the total experience more enjoyable.
 
Provided you have a DAC that can decode it, many people find that 24/96 masters sound closer to analog than their 16/44.1 counterparts.  Some people will argue that the 16/44.1 redbook standard is enough to render an analog sound, but I tend to believe that when it's converted back to analog by even the best of equipment, it falls a little short of replicating the analog event.
 
Steve
 
 

[martyo]

But I need to learn to like CDs, because it just an illusion that Lps sound better than CDs, actually, technically, it's the other way around, CDs technology reveals the deficiency of the Lps.

I think regardless of which ever is more accurate or whatever, you know what you like when you hear it. I think of it as we are attempting to create an allusion of real music happening. When the allusion works, it's magical, but there can be different characteristics of the allusion that make it work or not work for each of us.

BTW, my worst sounding Cd's are from the rock/pop of the 60' and 70's.

[charmerci]

Wayner,
I'd like to know whether the CD and vinyl use the same amps, wire, etc.  Just exactly what do you mean by "master"?  From my understanding, the mike feed ends up at the cutter head in real time and the metal master is cut.  Isn't this the master used to stamp the vinyls that we buy?  Isn't the same mike feed digitized to make CDs?

What I'm saying is that there is a difference in the chain after wherever the cutting head feed and digitizer feed split from the mike feed.  I'm sure the difference is minimal, but then so is the difference in what I hear from my speakers from the vinyl or the CD.  In the case of "Discovered Again", I don't know what was used for the single cut on my CD either.

The recording process is not like that.
Wayner

Actually Wayne, in this case Dan is right. Discovered Again WAS recorded Direct-To-Master disc - as they say in the Sheffield Lab insert. Btw, it's an amazing recording.

This is also informative - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_multitrack_recording

[Wayner]

I wasn't talking about that particular recording, but generalizing on the entire process. Yes there are direct to disc recordings, but still result in a second generation recording in the case of vinyl and with digital, who cares.

Wayner

[Wayner]

Well Brian, that's up for debate. I think the history of the CD is interesting. I really wonder if the inventors thought that the word length or rate was adequate. However, as time and technology have moved forward, as well as the quality and speed of D/A converters, the ordinary 44.1/16 CD is proving itself to be quite revealing, when used with a decent transport and one of Frank's DACs.

That said, any quality playback system, regardless if it is digital or analog, will soon reveal the limitations of the source material. If you have a crappy recording, no chip or cartridge is going to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. There are some poor CDs out there (along with their vinyl cousin) that certainlty can make some people wonder about the playback capabilities of their system. I good recording will confirm that the DAC is awesome and some of the CDs are not.

Again, I must stress, just because it was recorded in the digital domain does not automatically make it a good recording. It takes skill from the musicians, recording engineer, mastering editor, and on and on to produce a quality recording, regardless of format.

Wayner

[rcag_ils]

Again, I must stress, just because it was recorded in the digital domain does not automatically make it a good recording. It takes skill from the musicians, recording engineer, mastering editor, and on and on to produce a quality recording, regardless of format

That doesn't really answer my question.......

Do the older recordings from the pre-CD era always sound more superior in Lp format than in CD format, even if it has been digitally remastered on CDs?

I do not follow digitally recorded materials by new artists. These may sound good on CDs, but I don't like the music.

Asking whether you're using the Ultra DAC correctly is bizarre. There's a digital input,  two analog outputs, and an on switch

Now, maybe I should reword my question......did I purchase the Ultra DAC wastefully?

[WGH]

Do the older recordings from the pre-CD era always sound more superior in Lp format than in CD format, even if it has been digitally remastered on CDs?

I suppose it depends on the engineer and the condition of the master tapes (and which "master" was used).
One example where the digital releases surpass the original AAA vinyl is the latest remastered Beatles catalog.

I just got a clean vinyl record of Bossa Antigua by Paul Desmond featuring Jim Hall (RCA Victor 1965) and it has such a magical purity of tone that a CD might not compare very well to the record, unfortunately I don't have any recordings on both mediums to do a comparison.

[martyo]

My experience has been that other than pop/rock, most Cd's I buy are pretty good sounding. Older music, such as late 50's and early 60's jazz Cd's are very good.

[Dan Kolton]

I wasn't talking about that particular recording, but generalizing on the entire process. Yes there are direct to disc recordings, but still result in a second generation recording in the case of vinyl and with digital, who cares.

Wayner
Logged


Wayner,
I was referring to that specific recording.  My point was that, even in this instance, there is no direct comparison of analogue vs digital recording, but it's probably as close as you can get.  These sound very close using my equipment.  Of course I'm aware that most recordings are not made this way!
Dan

[Anji12305]

Sorry if this was mentioned in an earlier reply; you may also be noting the not-so-subtle effects of compression on CD.
If the original tape was used to master the CD, you should have a faithful replication of the original dynamics as captured in the booth.

If the disc was remixed, there are manipulations (good and bad) that may be performed on the tracks.

Queen's recently released Greatest Hits was remastered and released in 2009.  The dynamics of the first track (1975) are in stark contrast to the relentless, flat and droning second track (1980).  Compression was clearly employed on the second track to sound louder on car radios.

My suspicion is that you may be comparing "limited" tracks on LP (where distortion components kicked in a limiter during recording at signal overload) to compressed tracks on CD (where the dynamics are compressed together to make the overall volume apparently louder).

I strongly doubt it's the DAC.

FWIW - I don't own any vinyl, for good or bad.

[Wayner]

I wasn't talking about that particular recording, but generalizing on the entire process. Yes there are direct to disc recordings, but still result in a second generation recording in the case of vinyl and with digital, who cares.

Wayner
Logged


Wayner,
I was referring to that specific recording.  My point was that, even in this instance, there is no direct comparison of analogue vs digital recording, but it's probably as close as you can get.  These sound very close using my equipment.  Of course I'm aware that most recordings are not made this way!
Dan

OK, my fault. I mis-read.

Wayner

[oneinthepipe]

Now, maybe I should reword my question......did I purchase the Ultra DAC wastefully?

Not if you want to listen to CD-format music through your system. 

However, if you prefer music on LP and are able to obtain the music and either enjoy or don't mind spinning, storing, and maintaining vinyl and maintaining and replacing styli, there doesn't seem to be any need for a CD-format source.

Nothing sounds better to me than good music on vinyl (I don't have the greatest table and cartridge, but I have a good phono preamp!).  However, after the music (depending on the music) puts me in a semi-conscious trance, I have to get up and attend to the LP, which tends to be a mood-killer, IMO.  From my computer, however, the music will play on (depending on the playlist, etc.), and the source, through one of the DACs, is good, even if it is not quite as good as an LP. 

[konut]

What is your preamp? What is your amp? What interconnects are you using? Remote possibility there is some type of mismatch that prevents you from realising the full potential of the Ultra DAC.