hertz, kilohertz, megahertz...it all depends on the recording ?!?

Quiet Earth · « **Reply #20 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:02 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 04:46 pm

I will make this comment, that I really don't think it's the medium, but rather the recording, the artist and the label. I have excellent CDs as well as LPs that certainly can bid against each other over who is superior. I also have plenty of bad examples of both

+1

Napalm · « **Reply #21 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:26 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 12:56 pm

I have one of these:

While not more expensive, this one used with the line-in input is way better with a very straightforward workflow (it produces .wav files):

and if you don't need digital input/outputs then this one is the next best thing (and is under $300):

Nap.

Wayner · « **Reply #22 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:32 pm »

Now to add to the utter confusion, most LPs started life out as a digital recording. Of course, this form has too much gain and dynamic range for LPs, so the cutting engineer doctors the recording up and applies RIAA equalization to it. Then they press the record, I buy it, record it back to the CD format, and yet it sounds better (in many cases) then it's CD counterpart. Off hand one might think that either I'm full of shit, a liar or demented. But I hear the end results and have now 3 formats of the same thing to compare to each other (LP, CD, CD-R). I have no explanation for this, but one weak theory is some kind of comb filtering.

Wayner

srb · « **Reply #23 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:33 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 04:46 pm

Yes, a good D/A converter is required to make good recordings and you can't "red-line" any digital recording like you could with analog.

I'm sure you meant to say "a good A/D converter" !

Steve

Wayner · « **Reply #24 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:34 pm »

Yes, my bad. A/D converter indeed.

Wayner

Napalm · « **Reply #25 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:36 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 05:32 pm

Then they press the record, I buy it, record it back to the CD format, and yet it sounds better (in many cases) then it's CD counterpart. Off hand one might think that either I'm full of shit, a liar or demented. But I hear the end results and have now 3 formats of the same thing to compare to each other (LP, CD, CD-R). I have no explanation for this, but one weak theory is some kind of comb filtering.

The explanation is "personal preferences" for the sound character. Once we admit we like different sound (like warm/neutral/detailed, high dynamic "musicians in my room" vs. laidback "background music" etc,) all falls into place.

Nap.

Wayner · « **Reply #26 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:38 pm »

Not at my house. It's all about detail, sound-stage and presence.

Wayner

srb · « **Reply #27 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:39 pm »

BTW Wayne, at a super low price of just over $100, how do you think the Tascam US-144 Mk II rates if purchased just to use as a USB DAC?

Steve

Wayner · « **Reply #28 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:44 pm »

I think some of you have to realize that CDs have been fooled around with. They have been compressed to that they sound good on any player, including the $19.95 boom-box.

I have a digital recording I made a few years ago of geese flying over my house one fall day. I quickly got out my microphones and recorded the event for about 1/2 hour. Flock after flock flew right over my house and they were all calling to me.

This recording is awesome. It shows the true dynamic capabilities of digital recordings (when done right). Several of my friends have heard this recording and are dumbstruck. I have also done lots of live recordings (with out any special processing) and they are awesome.

That is why I always enjoyed some of the Telarc recordings, as they warn of the impending dynamic casualties you may encounter with an un-monitored volume control.

Wayner

Wayner · « **Reply #29 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:47 pm »

Quote from: srb on 21 Jan 2011, 05:39 pm

BTW Wayne, at a super low price of just over $100, how do you think the Tascam US-144 Mk II rates if purchased just to use as a USB DAC?

Steve

I don't have an answer for you on that one yet, Steve, as I have just installed it and have only fooled with a microphone for a short time. This weekend, I'm going to really get into it. My initial impressions are very favorable, as I like what I hear. You can also use the digital output to go to your own DAC, using the TASCAM as only a USB to S/PDIF converter. O, it also does AES/EBU pro format.

Wayner

Napalm · « **Reply #30 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 05:58 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 05:44 pm

I think some of you have to realize that CDs have been fooled around with. They have been compressed to that they sound good on any player, including the $19.95 boom-box.

The actual result is that they don't sound *good* on anything...... except some 1% of them which are properly mastered.

Nap.

Wayner · « **Reply #31 on:** 21 Jan 2011, 09:51 pm »

Steve, it's the best $115 I ever spent. What a process! I think if you are going to do vinyl archiving this might be the way to go.

Here is Cakewalk capturing the vinyl.

Here is the system

Wayner

robb · « **Reply #32 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 03:31 am »

I thought most LPs were made from master magnetic tapes, and even now many rock/jazz bands are recording on magnetic tape to LPs. Certainly some of the most impressive recordings were made on magnetic tape (think Ampex), and then transferred to LP, and now cd.

rob

Wayner · « **Reply #33 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 12:59 pm »

Robb, they are made from both. But as the digital era started to dominate, many LPs were recorded and mastered (to 2 track) in the digital format. One great LP that shares this process is the now BAND by Canada, Dire Straights-Brothers in Arms. Another and one of the first ever was Frankie Goes to Hollywood-Welcome to the Pleasure Dome. There are still many recording artists that will settle for nothing else then good old magnetic tape.

Wayner

Napalm · « **Reply #34 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 03:09 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 05:38 pm

Not at my house. It's all about detail, sound-stage and presence.

Wayner

Which others might dismiss as bright and shrill.

Nap.

brucek · « **Reply #35 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 05:14 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 21 Jan 2011, 05:47 pm

I don't have an answer for you on that one yet, Steve, as I have just installed it and have only fooled with a microphone for a short time. This weekend, I'm going to really get into it. My initial impressions are very favorable, as I like what I hear. You can also use the digital output to go to your own DAC, using the TASCAM as only a USB to S/PDIF converter. O, it also does AES/EBU pro format.

Wayner

I've had the TASCAM US-144 Mk II for about a year, and use it with my laptop as a USB to S/PDIF converter feeding the DAC in my Bryston SP3. Works great (although I use it for a lot of other things besides that. I also use the Midi output to adjust filters on my subwoofer).

Sounds pretty good to me when I've tested its internal DAC and analog outputs also. It has excellent analog bandwidth.

I also tested it on an XP machine I had around for fun, but it hitched too much and I had to have the latency cranked up. With Vista and W7 it's fine.

brucek

alexone · « **Reply #36 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 06:02 pm »

Brucek,

you already have a SP3???

al.

brucek · « **Reply #37 on:** 22 Jan 2011, 06:13 pm »

Quote from: alexone on 22 Jan 2011, 06:02 pm

Brucek,

you already have a SP3???

al.

haha, whoops, it was on my mind I guess.

I meant SP2.....

brucek