It amuses me how people talk about cds being this new and exiting technology as if redbook was not a dated 26 year old format.
I am sorry but technology wise 26 years is a life time ago and through out these 26 years cds only got worse.
These days they are so loud and over compressed that they truly sound like ass.
Hello people? How much are you trying to squeeze into redbook?

It's important that people understand that vinyl IS digital.
Its a analog reproduction of a superior digital recording.
Therefore it's more accurate.
Even with the noise floor, surface saturation of vinyl the longer waveforms of the low end will always sound much fuller and present on 24 bit 96k than on the chopped off cd format.
All the dithering 'coda' of the world will never make 1411.2 kbits/s sound like 4608 kbits/s because simply put there is much more there.

I am not even going to talk about mp3. That is just an illusion.

All these years have gone buy and sonically speaking vinyl remains the highest quality format commercially available.
The only reason that you are still listening to over-compressed redbook is because too many people have too much money in the cd game.
Unless the industry quits the flashy ipod campaigns and starts pushing higher quality formats like DVD-A and DVD Blue-ray there is no real reason to convert.

quote:

Originally posted by DOOMBOT Actually, it's not simple. If you intend to play out in a club, lounge or whatever and show up with a bag of records and all you have available are cd turntables you are screwed. Sure, it is simple if you only intend to play at home or gigs where you use your own equipment but if not then don't be upset when you can't play out somewhere because they don't have the equipment that you are used to.

As a DJ, I can understand where you're coming from. However if you are asked to spin out, it's always important for you to check with the promoter in advance as to what type of equipment they will have. And, at least at every event I've been to (Seattle, Vancouver, San Fran), I have not once seen a DJ setup that hasn't included both turntables and CDJs. That's including major clubs, average clubs, and all-ages-hole-in-the-wall venues. Although perhaps it's different in other parts of the world, in which case I would direct you to my first point.

quote:

Originally posted by idoru I really don't understand why people care. Use what you want to use, let other people use what they want to use. You're not better than someone for sticking with vinyl, and you're not better than someone for progressing with technology and using CDJs/Ableton/Timecode Software. Simple.

win.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishkur

Exactly.

quote:

Ish: Yeah, but it's quantized and rigid. Not fluent and natural. It's like the difference between a live drummer and a drum machine. A machine is perfect; it makes no mistakes. And that takes the human element completely out of the music process....the little off-time beats and flaws and errors--they're gone. That doesn't make the drum machine better, especially when the argument is that music is supposed to evoke an emotion and appeal to humanity, so why would you willingly want to strip the music of this esthetic?

Do you even know how the warmth in vinyl arises? Wear from extended play causes higher sounds to be attenuated. The more a part of a vinyl is played, the more it wears. Take a low pass filter with the right settings and the effect is similar. Change the attenuation depending on the part of the track that will tend to get played more, and you can even add variability into the equation.

You're assuming the producer in question is not meticulous. Granted, few producers are thus detailed in their work, but it's possible to make the necessary adjustments needed to create humanity in one's work. It's why there are producers who live record their midi sequences. There is more to production than you seem to think.

quote:

Nope. Wholly and factually wrong. It's not the DJ's job to play records in accordance with the producer's concrete instructions. It is the job of the DJ to kick the producer's sensitive tracking to the curb, tear his tracks apart, and recontextualize them in new forms and modes of his own choosing.

If the DJ is alterring the music, fine. But the disc isn't the disc jockey. The disc is a representation of the artist's intent, and that intent is what the casual listener of a vinyl hears. The DJ is the reinterpreter, and he or she creates their own intent of the song for the dance floor.

quote:

Actually, the exact opposite is happening: Because of the ease of use and shallow learning curve of digital decks versus vinyl, the scene as a whole is now being inundated with very very VERY bad DJs who aren't very creative or interesting and have particularly narrow tastes in music (due to them not being engrossed in the scene for very long). Vinyl at least created a bottleneck of sorts, that whoever wanted to get into the profession had to pay their dues--to at least $1000/month record shopping--and ply their trade to work up their skills before they played out. That weeded out most of the fly-by-nighters who would normally lose interest and give up before they ever worked themselves up to their first paying gig. Now, thanx to the internet and auto-beatmatching plugins, a DJ can conceivably settle on a DJ name this morning, obtain a playlist this afternoon and spin at his first gig tonight.

You're bemoaning the loss of talent in the guy who simply strings tracks together and does nothing else. I'm saying to hell with that guy; he's not doing an art anyway. Instead, pay attention to the people that are actually making more out of the music on the decks. You, as someone who in the past has lauded the more creative DJs should understand this point of view.

quote:

harriz: It's important that people understand that vinyl IS digital. Its a analog reproduction of a superior digital recording. Therefore it's more accurate. Even with the noise floor, surface saturation of vinyl the longer waveforms of the low end will always sound much fuller and present on 24 bit 96k than on the chopped off cd format. All the dithering 'coda' of the world will never make 1411.2 kbits/s sound like 4608 kbits/s because simply put there is much more there.

Yes. Vinyl is made from a hi-fi digital master. So are the CDs. Both formats roll off below 20 or so Hz to reduce rumble, and clear out head room for normalisation later in the game. That range can't be heard anyway. Both roll off above 20,000 for the same reason. 44.1 kHz sampling is more than twice the frequency above which has been rolled off, so no loss in fidelity is audible. And to all but the most sensitive human ear, 1411.2 sounds the same as 4608 because any loss is in the supersonic range.

At least Ish brings up valid points about differences in sound. Your hackneyed assertions have been debunked so much that most people just don't mention them these days.

___________________

www.jexmusic.com - My website

Last edited by thoughtlessjex on Aug-27-2006 at 07:51

quote:

Originally posted by harriz All these years have gone buy and sonically speaking vinyl remains the highest quality format commercially available. The only reason that you are still listening to over-compressed redbook is because too many people have too much money in the cd game. Unless the industry quits the flashy ipod campaigns and starts pushing higher quality formats like DVD-A and DVD Blue-ray there is no real reason to convert.

what the hell is over-compressed cd audio??
ipod cd redbook campaigns???
dvd blue-ray audio?

were you drunk when you wrote this??

let's go through some little anecdotal evidence.

vinyls degrade everytime you play them out, what they sound like after you play them a 100 times, crackle crackle, absolute no go'er for an audiophile.

besides, you ever heard of the instant track skip function on cds,
great moving that needle and guessing where to put it back down,

let me take 200 of my fav records, guess i'll have designate a quarter of my room for them lot,

djing, super now i need to carry 3 bags full of vinyls, bit shit when you are djing on your own and somebody steals your unattended bag. bless my laptop

next me sitting in an airplane, excuse me pilot, just checking in my portable vinyl player and 10 vinyls for the flight,
you happen to have a spare power plug for me

come on man nobody should seriously think about vinyl any more,

the future lies in lossless digital media such as flac or alac,

perhaps we will get an upgrade from cd quality to SACD with higher sampling rates, but with current consumer grade audio equipment you will not be able to tell the difference

nobody on a sub 2000 dollar audio rig should be able to tell the difference between cds and clean 320kb/s mp3s,

stop dogging mp3 anyway, over 10 years of quality psycho-acuostic research has gone into mp3 research.

i happen to be an audiophile and people like you make me chuckle.

out of interest what headphones do you currently use?
bet it's a sub 200 dollar can,

quote:

Originally posted by pvdclubber

Nah mate, you've missed the point.

quote:

Originally posted by pvdclubber what the hell is over-compressed cd audio??

The figured that the louder cds are the more resolution they use so they made stuff loud almost clipped.
In their attempt to use every last bit of information peak and rms levels are closer than ever .

quote:

let's go through some little anecdotal evidence. vinyls degrade everytime you play them out, what they sound like after you play them a 100 times, crackle crackle, absolute no go'er for an audiophile. besides, you ever heard of the instant track skip function on cds, great moving that needle and guessing where to put it back down, let me take 200 of my fav records, guess i'll have designate a quarter of my room for them lot, djing, super now i need to carry 3 bags full of vinyls, bit shit when you are djing on your own and somebody steals your unattended bag. bless my laptop next me sitting in an airplane, excuse me pilot, just checking in my portable vinyl player and 10 vinyls for the flight, you happen to have a spare power plug for me come on man nobody should seriously think about vinyl any more, the future lies in lossless digital media such as flac or alac, perhaps we will get an upgrade from cd quality to SACD with higher sampling rates, but with current consumer grade audio equipment you will not be able to tell the difference stop dogging mp3 anyway, over 10 years of quality psycho-acuostic research has gone into mp3 research. i happen to be an audiophile and people like you make me chuckle. out of interest what headphones do you currently use? bet it's a sub 200 dollar can, nobody on a sub 2000 dollar audio rig should be able to tell the difference between cds and clean 320kb/s mp3s,

Mp3?
Don't even get me started....
Ask any respectful engineer and he will tell you that mp3 is a leap back quality wise.
Unless it's Dj mag ''asking'' the engineers at fabric if they can tell the difference..
I noticed Dj mag also sells mp3s at their website but I am sure that is just a coincidence...

The truth is mp3s are sharp and do not support frequencies over 15.5 thousand cycles.
Us human can hear up to 20 thousand cycles.
Entire chunks of data are thrown away so you can conveniently download it and if you can't tell the difference and between that red-book than don't get into post production or mastering.
Save your money, audiophile.
Flac and other compressed stuff are inferior to the already inferior and dated redbook format.
I am not talking about portability and convenience for people on trains and airplanes.
I am not talking about media that exists in cyberspace.
I am talking about sound quality.
Sonically vinyl remains the best at the time speaking.
Are you good at basic math Pvdclubber?
Tell me... what has more resolution 320 kbts/s or 4608 kbits/s?
What is going to sound better?

quote:

Originally posted by harriz The figured that the louder cds are the more resolution they use so they made stuff loud almost clipped. In their attempt to use every last bit of information peak and rms levels are closer than ever .

For the sake of argument, this is more the label's fault than CD. With no compression, CDs can acheive dynamic ranges equal to those of vinyl.

___________________

www.jexmusic.com - My website

OMG you guys are killing me!!!

Before a vinyl or cd gets pressed it must come from a source. That source is called a master. If you're working with hardware in a professional studio then most likely a DAT tape, but for the software afficionados this would be a WAVE mixdown file.

Guess what? A dat has a frequency range of 48,000 Hz and a wav is also capable of achieving those values. This means even the most extreme audiophiles will be pleased. With the one master in hand you are now ready to create some vinyl or cd. Remember regardless of pressing they are coming from the same digital source.

Also that rich bass feeling you get from vinyl is the feedback humming noise from the needle. Sorry to burst your bubble.

quote:

Originally posted by stevieboy32808 OMG you guys are killing me!!! Before a vinyl or cd gets pressed it must come from a source. That source is called a master. If you're working with hardware in a professional studio then most likely a DAT tape, but for the software afficionados this would be a WAVE mixdown file. Guess what? A dat has a frequency range of 48,000 Hz and a wav is also capable of achieving those values. This means even the most extreme audiophiles will be pleased. With the one master in hand you are now ready to create some vinyl or cd. Remember regardless of pressing they are coming from the same digital source. Also that rich bass feeling you get from vinyl is the feedback humming noise from the needle. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Pulse code modulation motherfu*ker!
All DATS are 24 bit and therfore they are substantially superior in quality to the red-book format as the 24 bit format has virtually no audible quantization errors.
Get a clue.