OT_The sound of "quality" audio digital formats-misery

bluenite

Standard Member
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Points
12
This is not a typical question. I'm rather a personal lover over the sound quality of digital files at all.
I'm from vinyl LPs generation used on gramochassis with midrange amplifiers, or tape decks. Sound was analog, cracked, full of noise. But there was something differente then todays digital files that doesn't exist today. I personally realized it quite recently when I heard one of my favorite recordings that I once owned on the vinyl LP. I'm not talking about 128-bit mp3, but about flac or ape files, which should be the same as the "original" master. Only theoretically. Indeed, when I heard that record and it was on Denon's high-quality devices, I thought I had a bad hearing. Maybe it will be true, we're all aging. Even it was not just my impression. It was jazzrock music of the 80's, irrelevant. Dynamics flat, bass like a well, the worst it was with cymbal/gentle drums or percussion depths (treble) that were virtually not there. For years I have been listening to music from digital sources, limiting mp3 to maximum. But it is really a misery where the "medium" quality of listening has come. Although I had the ability to hear super-quality devices differently from those who have invested high amounts, the subjective impression of the sound is almost the same.
I remember from the past analog sound processors that modified the sound of recordings. Are they sure today, will anyone share the experience, if this sound can be "improved"?
thx for replies
Peter
 
Er yes or possibly no??:confused::confused:
 
I'm not talking about 128-bit mp3, but about flac or ape files, which should be the same as the "original" master. Only theoretically. Indeed, when I heard that record and it was on Denon's high-quality devices, I thought I had a bad hearing. Maybe it will be true, we're all aging. Even it was not just my impression. It was jazzrock music of the 80's, irrelevant. Dynamics flat, bass like a well, the worst it was with cymbal/gentle drums or percussion depths (treble) that were virtually not there.

If it was taken from the master then the CD would have been virtually indistinguishable.

It could have been a poor recording to start with but I suspect that you are either listening to a CD mastered from a very poor copy of the original or a new remastered version where the engineer has destroyed the dynamics using compression to make it sound nice and loud. This will cause the artefacts that you have described making it unpleasant to listen to.

HB
 
This thread may be worth a read, info in here about dynamic range ad HB says there has been a trend of compressing recordings so they are always loud and sound goid(ish) on radio.

Especially good recordings
 
The problem with an unidentified recording and reissue thereof on unspecified equipment, coupled with comparison to memory, is that we cannot possibly make a sensible comment. Perhaps if you gave details, and tried a side-by-side comparison, we would be able to add something useful.
 
I personally realized it quite recently when I heard one of my favorite recordings that I once owned on the vinyl LP. I'm not talking about 128-bit mp3, but about flac or ape files, which should be the same as the "original" master. Only theoretically. Indeed, when I heard that record and it was on Denon's high-quality devices, I thought I had a bad hearing. Maybe it will be true, we're all aging. Even it was not just my impression. It was jazzrock music of the 80's, irrelevant.

The title is not irrelevant.
Lots of classic albums were never properly remastered for digital and sound weak or neutered compared to the original vinyl.
For example, the entire catalogs of,
Jimi Hendrix
Led zeppelin
Rolling Stones....and many more.

Vinyl is still the best way to listen to these recordings.
For Zeppelin in particular the difference is striking.

Another standout example is Rolling stones Gimme Shelter from the Let it Bleed Album.
Every digital version of this song sounds weak and flat compared to the power it has on the original Vinyl Album.
Probably because it was originally mono and it loses a lot when split out to Stereo as most digital versions are.
 
Last edited:
I am not a vinyl listener but I find that some of the early music that was recodprded for cd is still some of the best I listen to, even on free Spotify. Best example is hot house flowers by wynton Marsalis, one of the original ddd recordings and it so good. There is also a bit of a trend for "guest producers" remastering old stuff, again good example if Steven wilson's re master of the jethro tull back catalogue that are very good. Finally there is a bit of a back lash to the compressed music of late in some of the further reaches of metal, haken's latest album (and their earlier mountain) are very good and so is the latest avenged sevenfold stage album. There are some jets out there but they need to be searched for.
 
I found this an interesting link given on a previous thread:
Album list - Dynamic Range Database

Some albums are awful but in my collection of early CDs, 1980s, they will simply tank many of today's releases. But my Technics seperates were sold decades ago and only lately I bought a new CD player to use with headphones. I doubt however that I'll go back to vinyl, simply don't have the room with all the AV equipment.
 
I think if varies, but I don't think the problem is the Format, and by that I mean Vinyl vs CD, rather I think if there is a problem then the problem is the content.

I have a very old worn copy of Super Session on vinyl, despite all the background noise, it sounds pretty good, but because the album has seen better days, I bought it on CD. The CD is just lifeless compared to the vinyl.

I also have a vinyl copy of Django Rheinhart - Solos/Duets/Trios Vol 2, and it sounds impressive. I got the chance to buy the same album on CD but Vol-1 and Vol-2, again dull and lifeless.

I also have Hendrix - Valleys of Neptune on both vinyl and CD, and there is very little difference between them.

So, the point is, it is not the format it is the content. Either format can sound good and either format can sound bad. What determines how it sounds is the nature and the mix of the content that is put on the format.

The Michael Jackson - Thriller album has been re-issued several times, and each time it is produced with a bit more compression and a bit higher average volume. Modern copies are literally TWICE as loud as the original, and that compresses all the dynamics out of the music.

If we assume that a given Digital File and Vinyl Album are cut from literally the same Master, then they should sound the same. The problem is, they are not necessarily cut from the same Master. Frequently the mix for Vinyl is different from the mix for digital. With the assumption that Digital is mixed for the consumer market and vinyl is mixed for the Audiophile market.

One mix is aimed at your Grandfather who has years of experience listening to music on a variety of equipment, and the other is mixed for your Grandson who has never heard anything but digital files on ear-buds.

For what it is worth.

Steve/bluewizard
 
Last edited:
I am not a vinyl listener but I find that some of the early music that was recodprded for cd is still some of the best I listen to, even on free Spotify. Best example is hot house flowers by wynton Marsalis, one of the original ddd recordings and it so good. There is also a bit of a trend for "guest producers" remastering old stuff, again good example if Steven wilson's re master of the jethro tull back catalogue that are very good. Finally there is a bit of a back lash to the compressed music of late in some of the further reaches of metal, haken's latest album (and their earlier mountain) are very good and so is the latest avenged sevenfold stage album. There are some jets out there but they need to be searched for.
Thank you. I've just ordered Wilson's remasters of Aqualung and Thick as a Brick, from HMV 2 for £10. Bring back memories of seeing Tull in 1969.:thumbsup:
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom