Audio myths and misconceptions

[Newman]

Why wasn't this thread titled "audio mists and mythconceptions"?

[Guest Simonon]

I am sitting here this morning before work listening to Gaucho on LP and thoroughly enjoying it. On paper  vinyl performs no where near as well as digital but many people prefer it and I have to say that I "may" be in this camp. Dynamic range, noise floor, stereo separation are all inferior to digital but when I listen to the same album on digital and  good (NM or Mint) LP I prefer the LP.

Digital only advocates will disagree and I accept that and I do also play a lot of digital music but what is it about vinyl that many find so satisfying......me included.

Is it because our ear actually prefers a slightly less edgy sound to the digital format or is it simply the challenge of tweaking ones turntable to get the best performance one deems possible.

I am interested in opinions.

[Newman]

But, Simon, there must be a dozen or more threads covering that ground.... most of them dumped in this very forum. Have you had a look?

[Guest Simonon]

But, Simon, there must be a dozen or more threads covering that ground.... most of them dumped in this very forum. Have you had a look?

Hadnt thought about that good point. Probably more interested in the pysche of this. Has my infinite ear and illusion generator convinced me that it is better [emoji3]

[Satanica]

1 hour ago, Simonon said:

I am sitting here this morning before work listening to Gaucho on LP and thoroughly enjoying it. On paper  vinyl performs no where near as well as digital but many people prefer it and I have to say that I "may" be in this camp. Dynamic range, noise floor, stereo separation are all inferior to digital but when I listen to the same album on digital and  good (NM or Mint) LP I prefer the LP.

Digital only advocates will disagree and I accept that and I do also play a lot of digital music but what is it about vinyl that many find so satisfying......me included.

Is it because our ear actually prefers a slightly less edgy sound to the digital format or is it simply the challenge of tweaking ones turntable to get the best performance one deems possible.

I am interested in opinions.

The biggest difference is often the mastering, in this regard there is no psyche involved. Vinyl is limited to what it can do.

[Guest Eggcup The Daft]

As the person who nominated "Superiority of LP playback" as a myth, I suppose I have to come back and be all controversial at you.

So, to start, let's hear what Jakko Jaksyk has to say about LP mastering. I'm quoting from HiFi News, November 2017:

Quote

The cutting engineer said, "Right we are going to have to get rid of that whole bass frequency". I said, "I've put that there for a reason". He said, "You can't have it, because vinyl won't be able to cope with it, it will send the needle off the record".

Then he takes all this EQ out and he puts a multi compressor on it to stop it going above that level or a limiter to limit that frequency. He said, "You can't have that top-end, because on vinyl it will come back as sibilant distortion". It's a real eye-opener and when you listen to the final thing you think, "it doesn't really sound like the record I made": because you have to screw with it so much to accomodate vinyl.

As a musician and engineer someone who has produced albums, remastered quite a few, and is a member of the current King Crimson, we can take him seriously, I hope.

So, what's on vinyl is unlikely to match what happened in the studio..

 

If the emasculated () sound of LP is your reference, it will also be your preference, and good luck to you.

I don't have a turntable any more, but I'm still guilty of this with some of the recordings I grew up with even though I'm in the "digital" camp for now. Going onto Tidal has been a real eye-opener for me, as I didn't replace a lot of my old favourite LPs and the versions there don't sound as I remember them.

 

I'll ask, in turn, a question that is usually skirted around in this debate. How much equipment, even today, is designed to match LP sound - with those missing elements - and distorts or has other issues when presented with the tougher digital signal?

 

I'll add to that, how many recordings are still made with the first vinyl era in mind - less dynamic choices of microphone, for example, or is the use of microphones that only go up to 18kHz for recording cymbals to tame them for vinyl still common?

 

Is the vinyl revival itself ultimately holding back the pursuit of better sound throughout the industry, in fact?

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by Eggcup The Daft

[rantan]

14 minutes ago, Eggcup The Daft said:

As the person who nominated "Superiority of LP playback" as a myth, I suppose I have to come back and be all controversial at you.

So, to start, let's hear what Jakko Jaksyk has to say about LP mastering. I'm quoting from HiFi News, November 2017:

As a musician and engineer someone who has produced albums, remastered quite a few, and is a member of the current King Crimson, we can take him seriously, I hope.

So, what's on vinyl is unlikely to match what happened in the studio..

 

If the emasculated () sound of LP is your reference, it will also be your preference, and good luck to you.

I don't have a turntable any more, but I'm still guilty of this with some of the recordings I grew up with even though I'm in the "digital" camp for now. Going onto Tidal has been a real eye-opener for me, as I didn't replace a lot of my old favourite LPs and the versions there don't sound as I remember them.

 

I'll ask, in turn, a question that is usually skirted around in this debate. How much equipment, even today, is designed to match LP sound - with those missing elements - and distorts or has other issues when presented with the tougher digital signal?

 

I'll add to that, how many recordings are still made with the first vinyl era in mind - less dynamic choices of microphone, for example, or is the use of microphones that only go up to 18kHz for recording cymbals to tame them for vinyl still common?

 

Is the vinyl revival itself ultimately holding back the pursuit of better sound throughout the industry, in fact?

 

ZOMG!

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by rantan

[Satanica]

18 minutes ago, Eggcup The Daft said:

As the person who nominated "Superiority of LP playback" as a myth, I suppose I have to come back and be all controversial at you.

So, to start, let's hear what Jakko Jaksyk has to say about LP mastering. I'm quoting from HiFi News, November 2017:

As a musician and engineer someone who has produced albums, remastered quite a few, and is a member of the current King Crimson, we can take him seriously, I hope.

So, what's on vinyl is unlikely to match what happened in the studio..

 

If the emasculated () sound of LP is your reference, it will also be your preference, and good luck to you.

I don't have a turntable any more, but I'm still guilty of this with some of the recordings I grew up with even though I'm in the "digital" camp for now. Going onto Tidal has been a real eye-opener for me, as I didn't replace a lot of my old favourite LPs and the versions there don't sound as I remember them.

 

I'll ask, in turn, a question that is usually skirted around in this debate. How much equipment, even today, is designed to match LP sound - with those missing elements - and distorts or has other issues when presented with the tougher digital signal?

 

I'll add to that, how many recordings are still made with the first vinyl era in mind - less dynamic choices of microphone, for example, or is the use of microphones that only go up to 18kHz for recording cymbals to tame them for vinyl still common?

 

Is the vinyl revival itself ultimately holding back the pursuit of better sound throughout the industry, in fact?

 

Further to this, I think digital can cause a slippery slope if the system is not up to it.

The bass demands that digital can put on a system can be significantly greater than vinyl and if the system doesn't cope well with those demands the end reproduction suffers.

Then the audiophile puts on the less demanding version of the same record on vinyl and wallah, the system can cope better with the bass demands and overall things might actually sound better in some ways with more headroom.

[rocky500]

22 minutes ago, Eggcup The Daft said:

As the person who nominated "Superiority of LP playback" as a myth, I suppose I have to come back and be all controversial at you.

So, to start, let's hear what Jakko Jaksyk has to say about LP mastering. I'm quoting from HiFi News, November 2017:

As a musician and engineer someone who has produced albums, remastered quite a few, and is a member of the current King Crimson, we can take him seriously, I hope.

So, what's on vinyl is unlikely to match what happened in the studio..

 

If the emasculated () sound of LP is your reference, it will also be your preference, and good luck to you.

I don't have a turntable any more, but I'm still guilty of this with some of the recordings I grew up with even though I'm in the "digital" camp for now. Going onto Tidal has been a real eye-opener for me, as I didn't replace a lot of my old favourite LPs and the versions there don't sound as I remember them.

 

I'll ask, in turn, a question that is usually skirted around in this debate. How much equipment, even today, is designed to match LP sound - with those missing elements - and distorts or has other issues when presented with the tougher digital signal?

 

I'll add to that, how many recordings are still made with the first vinyl era in mind - less dynamic choices of microphone, for example, or is the use of microphones that only go up to 18kHz for recording cymbals to tame them for vinyl still common?

 

Is the vinyl revival itself ultimately holding back the pursuit of better sound throughout the industry, in fact?

 

Michael Fremer comes to mind who has most probably spent more time listening to music and components than say someone like Jakko Jaksyk. 

He seems to have spent most of his life perusing audio and reviewing products.

 

As they say, it is a personal experience and it only really matters to yourself.

[Guest Eggcup The Daft]

22 minutes ago, rocky500 said:

Michael Fremer comes to mind who has most probably spent more time listening to music and components than say someone like Jakko Jaksyk. 

He seems to have spent most of his life perusing audio and reviewing products.

 

As they say, it is a personal experience and it only really matters to yourself.

In for a penny, in for a pound.

 

Michael Fremer has built the latter part of his career in part around the idea that there is something inherent in LP playback, that actually improves digital. He is effectively a supporter of the very emasculation I'm pointing out.

 

Jakko Jaksyk is a performing musician at the pinnacle of his area of the profession and has been trusted by some of the best to produce proper playback of their recorded music in digital form.

 

Trust who you want to handle music most effectively, I suppose. I'm biased.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by Eggcup The Daft

[frankn]

But, when the musicians are being recorded the limits are not in place. Also often (almost always?) now recordings are made via digital recorders (Sonoma and such) again making the recording very well sampled in its frequency response. 

It is when it is being mastered for the vinyl format that the limits are put in place. 

Master editing for vinyl, CD and DSD are different (if done properly) - starting with the same recording. 

If it is a recent recording - why do many acclaimed mastering engineers still prefer the vinyl option?

why do top musicians prefer to use studios that record through Analouge mixing desks when They can have any option they want?

 

your comments about mastering from recordings made from the eara when vinyl was the only option make sense. 

 

[Guest Simonon]

But, when the musicians are being recorded the limits are not in place. Also often (almost always?) now recordings are made via digital recorders (Sonoma and such) again making the recording very well sampled in its frequency response.  It is when it is being mastered for the vinyl format that the limits are put in place.  Master editing for vinyl, CD and DSD are different (if done properly) - starting with the same recording. 

If it is a recent recording - why do many acclaimed mastering engineers still prefer the vinyl option?

why do top musicians prefer to use studios that record through Analouge mixing desks when They can have any option they want?

 

your comments about mastering from recordings made from the eara when vinyl was the only option make sense. 

 

 

 

Very well thought out comments and this makes me wonder about modern recordings. I have some modern digital recordings that have massive amounts of compression which is painfully evident when played on my system, in the car and my phone using some very expensive headphones. I suspect this compression is because of the requirement to suit modern playback equipment and listener demographics e.g. 18 to 30 age group with an Iphone using headphones, a home cinema system, sonos etc. To cut a long story short I purchased one of these digital albums on vinyl as well and preferred it much more because this compession and over the top bass had been toned down.I do wander how many albums are still mastered to sound like vinyl which probably comes down to the age of the artists, sound engineer and listener age demographic that are most likely to purchase the album. Remember playback technology devices are very much determined by age demographic and many modern recordings are probably mastered to suit. This explains why some sound like crap on my system which was built in the 60s.

Maybe the vinyl revival is keeping the compression monster away in a number of cases.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Simonon]

But, when the musicians are being recorded the limits are not in place. Also often (almost always?) now recordings are made via digital recorders (Sonoma and such) again making the recording very well sampled in its frequency response. 
It is when it is being mastered for the vinyl format that the limits are put in place. 
Master editing for vinyl, CD and DSD are different (if done properly) - starting with the same recording. 
If it is a recent recording - why do many acclaimed mastering engineers still prefer the vinyl option?
why do top musicians prefer to use studios that record through Analouge mixing desks when They can have any option they want?
 
your comments about mastering from recordings made from the eara when vinyl was the only option make sense. 
 

The Soundcity documentary on Netflix and Youtube ( I think) gives many of these answers. Required viewing and my favorite.

[Guest]

On 09/12/2017 at 11:05 PM, Simonon said:

I have heard on the grape vine about your system and unique approach to the power supply. Have you got any pictures on a thread somewhere? as I am fascinated by unique systems that look outside of standard convention.
I spent a number of years working on large -48v Dc power systems at large telecommunications sites so I can appreciate battery systems. Your approach sounds interesting.

Yes, there are threads, plenty of reading.

Any specifics, please PM me

matt

 

 

[Guest Eggcup The Daft]

23 minutes ago, frankn said:

your comments about mastering from recordings made from the eara when vinyl was the only option make sense. 

 

I was actually remarking on modern recordings made using techniques that come from the first vinyl era - not on recordings from that era.

 

As far as musicans making the choices they do in the studio and "preferring analogue" - I happen to believe that there is a similar dichotomy there to the audiophile one. I've heard a couple of musicians talking about how when they go into the studio, they are attempting to "make a record", something that sounds "like a record" and is different from "recording a performance". In other words, they are in the same trap as everyone else.

Of course, what we should get out of that are CDs that sound more like vinyl. So we go, round and round, because what we get far too often is a CD that still sounds "digital".

 

Why?

[Guest]

 That will keep you busy for a while 

 

I do tend to rabbit on

between big away jobs at the moment, Invoicing

 

This message was sent via battery powered 24v PC 

[Nigel]

Is this thread supposed to display a list of untrue myths ? 

I can't see it, and can only recall the power cable one. 

Was it AudioCritic that contained a list of snake oil topics ?

[Guest Simonon]

Is this thread supposed to display a list of untrue myths ? 

I can't see it, and can only recall the power cable one. 

Was it AudioCritic that contained a list of snake oil topics ?

Please give us some more but be prepared to possibly cause controversy [emoji3]. Remember if you are an electronics engineer or technician you are probably not trained in the level of physics required ( which part of physics is yet to be determined ) Please forgive my sarcasm and I do intend to post some more once my bomb shelter is completed[emoji44]

Heres a myth........lifting your expensive speaker cables off the floor improves the sound due to the capacitive effects of the floor.

I have read about this one and observed people doing it.

To me it is a myth.......comments please

 

[Newman]

Simon, Simon, Simon.... I know you are posting these questions with a faint smile....

 

But your 'lifted cables' gave me a flashback -- to the day I was invited to an audiophile's den. His door was half way along the side wall, and I had to duck to get in, under the speaker cables running exactly half room height from the front to the back of the room. Without his warning, they would have had me by the neck!

 

My den is a rat's nest of cables. On the floor.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2017 by Newman
Final para added

[Nigel]

How much capacitance uF is in the floor? Yes cable lifters came from Ye Olde Snake Oil Company.

It doesn't matter how many people "believe" that they have witnessed a difference in something, just one person who can explain WHY, is all that is required. For example the power cable one, no-one can explain why and there are clear arguments why an expensive AC power cable CANNOT achieve a difference. 

[audio_file]

2 minutes ago, Nigel said:

there are clear arguments why an expensive AC power cable CANNOT achieve a difference.

Are you suggesting that only an affordable one can achieve a difference? ;p

[Steve M]

On 12/6/2017 at 11:30 AM, rocky500 said:

This is just my view but I am all for having a separate section that the Experts can post in if that helps keep them out of the other sections a bit more and they can all post great info that people can read if they want to.

I love reading what they say, but in the end it can be too much info for what I am looking for out of this hobby.

 

As Newman pointed out, I have been disillusioned in my travels, there is something of a personal effects generator. And others where you can read electronics 101, or speakers 101 etc, you can sit down and do so many tests and measurements to really try and nut out what is going on. In reality, I just turn off a bit from all this. Roll my eyes a bit and just get back to reading some more subjective reviews. Not that any of this info is incorrect in any way, it is just not in my interest to get so deep in this past time I do for a little bit of relaxation. I get more enjoyment out of it on the simple side of it.

Someone close to me is an expert in world affairs and I dare not ask him a simple question on any of it unless I have lots of time (like what do you think of this?), as I end up getting a history lesson that delves into the past 1000 years and deviates around widely just so he can come back to the original question.There is no simple answer from him until I understand the whole history.  Again my brain was not looking for such in an depth view and turns off a bit here and there.

Others may be interested to go into this depth but not to many that I know, it is a select group. 

 

To me, this is how it goes, I have some spare time to listen to some music, which I find very enjoyable. 

Over this time I have read some forums of friendly personal subjective reviews and thought of trying some of this gear.

It is been so much fun and I think the journey in itself, has been just as much fun. New gear (2nd hand mostly now I am aware of depreciating stereo items) has enabled me to listen in new way each time. Nothing along the way has really been bad in any way, just different which adds to keeping me interested.

I like reading what the experts have to say, but sometimes it really can just be too much info and breaking it all apart for me that is not what I am after. Just me here as I do not know what others are looking for.

 

I think 99% of the population would also roll their eyes at some of the technical stuff that is dissected on Audio forums. It is not because any of it is incorrect, but most don't care as it is just a small pastime thing they do.

 

Heres an example and I know it is way out there, but I think it may get a little over the top but just to try and put some perspective on it in my eyes.

Going to a restaurant and enjoying a meal and then posting subjectively about it, is really mostly all I would be looking for on a forum.

Others may want to break it all down, read books on cooking 101, food 101, ingredients 101 etc, go there and do some DBT tests to sample, break out the test tubes etc, realise their are all this brain illusions that could sway the preference.

 

Now don't get me wrong as the forum is fantastic with all the different views and experienced people with their knowledge and with them taking the time to pass it on but some of us treat this hobby lightly and just a small thing in their lives and are just looking for a tiny bit of guidance.

 

Now as I have seen before some here will want the urge to break apart my post here and add many many points of error I have just posted, but you may have missed the point I was trying to make in this post.

 

I can read about (lets put the boogie one in here) personal experiences of how power cables made a big difference to them.

Now I have some disposable income these days, I might buy a few and try them out. I just plonk them in and go about my normal listening. Maybe I hear a little difference maybe I don't or I am unsure, It really does not matter as nothing got any worse. I had a few good listening sessions, so all is well in my world. They look nice and they do no harm and they may also be a slight chance they could have a slight benefit in being shielded. From interference or the birds nest of wires I have behind my stereo with all the interconnects and power running past one another. So I keep them. No big deal to me if they technically do not improve anything.

I move onto USB Enhancement devices and might buy a few over time (from reading subjective views mainly) and just plonk them in again. The fun is also in the shopping and trying new stuff. Just in my nature.

 

I find those sites geared towards the technical side mentioned earlier nice very very occasionally, but really is not what I am looking for in this hobby.

Much rather go to some other sites where they are so friendly with each others view and post their subjective thoughts on what they hear in their own stereo.

 

That is just me, but I would rather try and keep it light for me, so if we could separate the ones that want to delve full on or dissect it down and those that want to post about how they thought the "power cable" made their enjoyment better, then put me down as a big YES.

 

WARNING: You might have to put up with a few more big ranting posts from me as I have some spare time as I have been tasked at the moment to show people through a Villa and if you know the climate right now, the phones are not ringing like they used to.

 

This is an inspired piece of writing by Rocky500 that explains why we all like to hang out on Stereonet ...both those who like to trust their ears and the technically inclined.

 

Personally, I like Stereonet because it has a reasonably balanced population of somewhat emotive gut instinct people and those who like to get to the bottom of things with the science and quantifiable explanations. Although, I do find that the former sometimes get shouted down by technical explanations - which in my experience doesn't explain everything (well not yet anyway). There are so many ways to bake the audiophile cake to produce a musical result for each individual's needs that, depending on your perspective it can be an 'artform' or a 'science', both approaches are valid and an amalgamation usually produces the best result, ime. I also tend to think that this is a rich and diverse hobby that needs to be looked at from many angles. Like most artistic ventures there is a combination of the required technique (to guide the process) and the need for expression (to produce a satisfying end result). Its a bit like cooking fine food, you can be like Heston Blumenthal and break it down to the science and get a buzz out of explaining it or be like a super-taster and just savour the result.

 

My own habits when trying to assess a component is to go to sites like DIYAudio.com for technical merits and to go to sites like Stereonet for user/listener reviews. If you are smart you would never rely on just one, as neither site explains everything. DIYA has 100,000+ users all very clever at building things and getting to the bottom of explaining circuits and how they work, but have you noticed how there is very little discussion about 'how things sound'. I like that site as I like to tinker with equipment, but I think music and sound discussions are kind of passively discouraged and seen as something airy-fairy that requires no traction, like it has no application in making good music ...sometimes to the loss of the discussions I feel.

 

Anyway the upshot is, here on Stereonet we can accommodate all points of view and it doesn't have to be an authoritative site, just one for discussing all things audio.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve.

[Newman]

Cables can make a sonic difference alright. If you heroically mis-design or mis-apply them.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, audio_file said:

Are you suggesting that only an affordable one can achieve a difference? ;p

Yes, I can make them as expensive as you like, the more expensive the better the SQ

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, Simonon said:

Please give us some more but be prepared to possibly cause controversey . Remember if you are an electronics engineer or technician you are probably not trained in the level of physics required ( which part of physics is yet to be determined ) Please forgive my sarcasm and I do intend to post some more once my bomb shelter is completed
Heres a myth........lifting your expensive speaker cables off the floor improves the sound due to the capacitive effects of the floor.
I have read about this one and observed people doing it.
To me it is a myth.......comments please

controversy is spelt w/o the E before the Y 

 

How on earth does a timber floor have capacitance to speaker cables ? For starters doesn't form part of the electrical Cct .

 

I love it