|
turntables vs. cd players (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| sym |
| quote: | Since we are discussing the vinyl and CD medium in respect to dance music, I confined my reasons to only that.
Electronica is produced digitally. Which means, the original signal is digital. Whatever limitation of that digital recording is then sent to a mechanical device that cuts the vinyl and represents that digital signal into an analog signal. If that digital signal is a 44.1kHz (standard, although there are much higher sampling rates can be created) then the analog representation is recreated from a 44.1 signal.
A record playing system (recording from an analog source) has the potential to reproduce frequencies well above the CD's upper limit. However, in actual practice LP reproduction is limited by many other factors, including the quality of vinyl, stylus compliance, and the condition of the record. Even on the outer grooves, a dust partticle or groove deformation only 0.025 millimeter in diameter will cause the same loss of high-frequently resolution as that designed into the CD standard. On the inner grooves, the dust particle need be only 0.011 mm in diameter to produce the same loss.
No one can argue with the statement that the original recording is the best recording. In the recording industry, the original recordings are the master tapes. From the master tapes, all the vinyls and CDs are created. Now in the electronica world, if the original recording (digital) was produced at 24bit 96kHz and copies onto CD and vinyl, theoratically CD and vinyl would sound the same. Now let's look back at paragraph #2, the upkeep of vinyl is expensive and those dust particles will more than likely get into your vinyl degrading your sound quality. Vinyl has more distortions than CDs because of that. Those cracks and pops found in vinyl are non-existent in CDs. See my point?
Vinyl may sound better recorded from an analog source, but when it's being recorded from a digital source it loses. |
Well said. I don't know though... something about those cracks and pops... :) |
|
|
| Trypsin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ray_Finkle
I think that both will be around in the future.
Why do you need gigs and gigs of storage on a dvd when you're just gonna put one song on a cd right? So either route will offer no disadvatages. |
Aces! Good to see a fellow goon!
YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS
...and as for techno being digital now, remember that a lot of the bigwigs use old synth like moogs and roland 505s and 808s, all of which are analogue. But yes, the vast majority of productions thesed days are done on computers. Or at least the final mixing/editing is done digitally in one form or another. |
|
|
| hapamoto |
| i chose to start w/ vinyl because none of my dj friends had cd's and all the clubs around here use TT's anyway, however i did recently (back in march) pick up a dual cd deck and i like it, not as much as vinyl because to me, you have more control w/ vinyl but thats probably because its what im used to.. i do feel that if you only plan to be a bedroom dj then go w/ the cd's because of the points expressed early in this thread about cd's being cheaper (just burn them) and they are obviously more space efficient (i live in a small apartment and my tt & cd setup takes up basically a whole wall in my living room. however, if you do ever plan to become a dj that spins at clubs and whatnot, i'd suggest u learn TT's as well.. I should start buying more CD's though because i haven't bought any singles yet.., of course i burned a few but i refuse to play them live out of respect for the artist plus that is cheese.. part of being a good dj (again this is my opinion) is being able to have the good new tracks as well as hard to find tracks, for example, i have most of the songs off the Ayumi Hamasaki - M. EP burned on cd but i won't play it @ a party because that belittles the next dj who actually either got it when it was available or who just paid a load of money for it.. some people will disagree w/ my philosophy.. but who gives a . |
|
|
| Eugene |
Turntables vs. CD's is a never-ending debate.
I prefer vinyls, because 99% of Trance releases are available on vinyl only, and although you can burn CD's with MP3's, you'll be compromising sound quality if you do so. |
|
|
| xtr3m |
Great posts, Scottaculous.
But talking about analog vs. digital: is human ear really capable of noticing the difference between the 44kHz sound and, say, 96kHz? |
|
|
| Dj_Andrew_K |
well my advice is this :
if you want to be a professional dj, start vinyls
if you want it as a hobby only, go for cds
vinyls costs a lot but are obviously better...
anyway, now that RIAA is after all mp3s etc, I think original releases on vinyl are the best option.
whatever you decide, enjoy :) |
|
|
| gho |
The question of vinyl to cds today is based only around price. TTs are a lot cheaper than the CDJ1000 if you are talking about the same control you get on both (But vinyl feel is better). But, quality discussion off, as a non pro dj I just can't afford vinyl! That's the only point. How can anybody expect me to pay 35 R$ (Brazilian money) for each vinyl with only 2-3 tracks tops!!! It is ludicrous!!!! You have to be really rich and also have a way to import everything because they are made here too! That's the point for choosing cds at first for every starting dj, not just in Brazil.
If I was someone big in the market and was getting well paid of course I would change to vinyl. |
|
|
| gho |
The other problem with vinyl I think is: IMG has anyone here ever tried to lift alone a case packed up with 50 vinyl on each hand?!?!??!?! Vinyl stores should sell slaves as well to carry their products off!
Something else, you can only get what has just being released otherwise it is sold out and there isn't provable going to be a next release so you just have to play it on cd if you want the track bad enough!
to sum it up, start with cds and if you can manage to build a structure change to vinyl. |
|
|
| Trypsin |
| quote: | Originally posted by gho
Vinyl stores should sell slaves as well to carry their products off!
|
I'd buy some if they came with palm fronds to wave over your head to cool you off when you're mixing... and pitchers of ice cold beer to hand to you when you need a drink.
Oh yeah, and some cute female ones to give you head in between mixes. |
|
|
| Scottaculous |
| quote: | Originally posted by xtr3m
Great posts, Scottaculous.
But talking about analog vs. digital: is human ear really capable of noticing the difference between the 44kHz sound and, say, 96kHz? |
Thanks for the feedback. To answer your question, that number 44.1 is the number of times a second a track is sampled from the actual soundwave. 44.1 is inadequate to many audiophiles with high quality but to the average listener with average equipment, the difference is unnoticable. Generally. (Some people's ears are sharper than others.) |
|
|
| u4ea |
Hey DJ Qub,
A few days ago, you mentioned that you had seen an MP3 mixer with a CD Mixer-like interface. Just in case you are still interested, that piece of hardware is called the DMC-1, it is manufactured by Numark, and runs a program called PCDJ exlusively. Its pretty cool, I'm a bedroom DJ, it saves alot of money and space, and you'll still feel the challenge of DJing. It isn't like spinning on TTs, but its almost identical to CD mixers.
The DMC-1 connects to your PC via serial. Hopefully, you'll have 2 sound cards (or a soundcard with 2 channels like the SB extigy), so that you can run 2 seperate channels into your external mixer. I just upgraded my mixer...the one in the pic couldn't handle what I was trying to do...finally got a mixer with 3 band eq's/kills, much better.
Here's a pic if you are interested. Sorry, I know I post this pic alot, but many people ask about it :)
 |
|
|
| Scottaculous |
| Hey, cool setup. Great example of mp3 DJing. |
|
|
|
|
