|
Interesting articles on the vinyl vs. digital debate (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zoso |
To avoid the flame war, I will say this: I bedroom DJ only, and it's all I will ever do, as I mix because I simply love it. It breaks the monotony of an office/desk job. It takes away the stress of haggling for money over the phone (I collect past due loans for a bank). It lets me contstruct my own little musical journey using my favorite producers tracks. I use a cheap set of Numarks, and thus far I use vinyl only. Eventually I will add a CDJ so that I can add that challenge to myself and so that I can probably get tracks I would otherwise be unable to locate. HOWEVER: nothing will ever replace my love for the feel and sound of my vinyl collection.
Regardless of how you choose to mix and what medium you employ, if you are damned good people are going to notice. Use what makes you happy, and I think that happiness and energy will flow to the audience. I think that DJing now is more about a show. People pay to see a certain show that they are already expecting to see. They have preconceived notions. So, in order to sell tickets and make a profit, these superstar DJs give those people exactly what they want: a show. This is nothing more than the free market at work. If people want (i.e., vote with their dollars) to see DJs that only spin vinyl on Tech 12s, then that is what they/we'll see. However I would argue that this is not the trend now. People want 6 or 8 hours shows of hands-in-the-air epic trance complete with a VJ show, fireworks, circus performers, strobe lights, lasers, etc. I think that if they get all that, they don't care if you're mixing on a laptop or a Fisher Price kid's record player. |
|
|
| thoughtlessjex |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevėsto
forget about the convenience, economics, etc. harriz and I are arguing one specific point with people that act smarter than they are ... that vinyl is still the best sound quality format available, even to this day. especially when the volume is turned way up where every detail is magnified. especially when you take certain drugs that makes your hearing much more accute. especially when you mix 2, 3 or more tracks together with an analog mixer. these are the times the unbroken waveform really stands out. |
As I've already said, and you have obviously ignored, the aliasing of 16 bit depth at 120 dBSPL is -85 dBSPL (0 dBSPL is the average threshold of audiability). That means you can add maybe another 75 dBSPL of gain before the aliasing becomes audible, and that would only be between 1 kHz and 5 kHz. Furthermore, you can convert a CD's signal to analoge before you mix. Any DJ worth his salt will likely be using a top class DAC for his mixing, and even harriz has implied that those ones will have sound that is within acceptable parameters.
You've used the consumer level technology used in reading CDs as the evidence for your assertion that CDs are low quality, and that's a logical fallacy. You have failed to prove yet that CDs themselves lack anything in audible sound quality. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| I think it all just comes down to personal preferance with this ongoing debate. For someone starting out in 2006, i'de say CDs would be your best bet. As digital stores are becoming larger and larger, with more and more tracks being released digitally, going CD just makes sense. And it's less expensive, and CDs take up less space than vinyl. That's just a given really. Sound quality wise...it depends. I prefer digital, because I find the sound to be cleaner (none of that popping, crackling noise) but when I had vinyl, they did sound good but I wouldn't say they sounded good 6 months down the line (it was probably dust, but I tried hard to keep as much dust away from them and I did clean my styluses and replace them). With digital files, I know they wont degrade, nor do I need to clean my CDs that often, as they don't get too dusty or scratched up in cases. I can tell you a few times I had to buy new records after some became warped or I accidently dropped them. Never have to worry about this with CDs. I am really not an expert in sound quality though so I can't get into the technical debate, although I do understand some of it. |
|
|
| DOOMBOT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spirit5
I can tell you a few times I had to buy new records after some became warped or I accidently dropped them. Never have to worry about this with CDs. I am really not an expert in sound quality though so I can't get into the technical debate, although I do understand some of it. |
I don't mean to just pick a part a small part of your post but you should be very careful with pretty much all platforms of music, whether it be vinyl, cd or whatever. CD's scratch and will skip badly if not taken care of. I honestly find I can handle records a bit tougher then I can with cd's but that is just from my own personal experience. |
|
|
| harriz |
| quote: | Originally posted by humilis
There's no AUDIBLE differences between 96 and 44,1kHz (if there is, the most of the audible differences will come from crappy DA-converters or bad sample rate conversion when downsampling). Between 16 and 24bits there is, but it depends on what are you listening to. And I don't know any record, which needs those extra bits :) |
I never asked wether or not it matters or wether or not you can hear the differences in resolution, we will let everybody decide for their own, my question is this:
If your final product is 24 bit 96.000 will it or will it not be a higher resolution product than if your final product is 16bit 44.100 .
A. Yes a sample of 24bit 96.000 is a higher resolution sample than a 16bit 44.100 sample
B. No a sample of 24bit 96.000 is not a higher resolution sample than a 16bit 44.100 sample.
Answer. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DOOMBOT
I don't mean to just pick a part a small part of your post but you should be very careful with pretty much all platforms of music, whether it be vinyl, cd or whatever. CD's scratch and will skip badly if not taken care of. I honestly find I can handle records a bit tougher then I can with cd's but that is just from my own personal experience. |
True but I have plenty of CDs that are scratched and have no problems with skipping on my CDJ 1000 MK2s. They are delicate, but the scratching doesn't totally ruin it, and with CDRs, if you scratch it, you just make a new one. You don't need to spend another $9.99 + 5.00 shipping like you do with record stores online, or more than that..to replace scratched or warped records. For the price of one or two records, you can get a whole pack of 50 CDRs (for like $17.99 to 19.99). |
|
|
| DOOMBOT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spirit5
True but I have plenty of CDs that are scratched and have no problems with skipping on my CDJ 1000 MK2s. They are delicate, but the scratching doesn't totally ruin it, and with CDRs, if you scratch it, you just make a new one. You don't need to spend another $9.99 + 5.00 shipping like you do with record stores online, or more than that..to replace scratched or warped records. For the price of one or two records, you can get a whole pack of 50 CDRs (for like $17.99 to 19.99). |
True. :) |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by harriz
I never asked wether or not it matters or wether or not you can hear the differences in resolution, we will let everybody decide for their own, my question is this:
If your final product is 24 bit 96.000 will it or will it not be a higher resolution product than if your final product is 16bit 44.100 .
A. Yes a sample of 24bit 96.000 is a higher resolution sample than a 16bit 44.100 sample
B. No a sample of 24bit 96.000 is not a higher resolution sample than a 16bit 44.100 sample.
Answer. |
whats more
A 24 * 96000
B 16 * 44000 |
|
|
| DJ Intrigue |
| quote: | Originally posted by DOOMBOT
I don't mean to just pick a part a small part of your post but you should be very careful with pretty much all platforms of music, whether it be vinyl, cd or whatever. CD's scratch and will skip badly if not taken care of. I honestly find I can handle records a bit tougher then I can with cd's but that is just from my own personal experience. |
Good point. I've actually had a few cds already that needed to be replaced because they formed a few cracks around the center hole that got worse with each continued play and eventually lengthened onto the playing surface making them unreadable. This was just from normal use mind you, so yeah, cd's are just as fragile at times. |
|
|
| UWM |
| A pissing contest of epic proportions. |
|
|
| sandstorm03 |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
A pissing contest of epic proportions. |
:D |
|
|
| Clovis86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
A pissing contest of epic proportions. |
Meanwhile zee mp3 kids are hard at work tracking down vbr vinyl rips :stongue: |
|
|
|
|
