The Vinyl Thread

[pappag]

Had to replace the 680 HP's and decided to go with the Groovemasters. Not sure if it will be worth the extra flow, but we shall see.

[skier666]

PMC-05?

Yep, oldie but goodie. Gold contacts, small and two channel with Line and Phono, so I can go back and forth from cd or vinyl.

skier666, your speaker placement kills me

One, I live in a shoebox in SF. Two, I'm usually standing up when playing the records. Three, I want the speakers higher, but I cannot find higher stands to hold the Event Studio Precision 8 Powered Monitors. Four, I'd mount the speakers but they are too big/heavy. Five, my setup is in a tiny room that has concrete outlining the carpet, so there is a balancing issue. I'd like them at ear level, but I don't think that's going to be possible. It also needs to look nice. Any suggestions would be BEYOND helpful.

CD's

Upallnight, I'm in total agreement with you. I've had high bit-rate mp3's made from vinyl rips that sound amazing, but then again that pressing of the vinyl needs to be good as well. Also, some mp3 albums that I've downloaded off the net sound like utter garbage, while others sound like a well mastered cd version....at even the same bitrate. Its all about the producer/engineer at the end of the day.

Personally, I'd love to get an audiophile setup but right now I do not have the space, time, or money to make that feasible. Ideally, one room that I could totally dedicate to a listening room (hopefully built with this in mind) would be heavenly. Or just get a really nice turntable/amp setup to play single tracks or for making recordings. However, since I'm mainly using my records to make mix dnb cds (recording straight from the mixer as PCM onto MD), I'll always need two decks with pitch control to be able to match the bpms. Also, most of my non-dnb vinyl (Metal, punk, soundtracks, etc) are in storage as I don't have the room for it at my current place.

Recording

I have a question about the higher bitrate & sampling frequency. Would it be worth it to make vinyl versions at this rate? I know my PS3 can perform CD Output Frequency to "44.1/88.2/176.4 kHz." Thus, with the right receiver, and speaker combination, hear the difference? I guess I could just play the record though. But in the car, my DVD-Audio deck can play up to 24 bit/192KHz in 2 channel and multi-channel up to 96kHz along with a multichannel digital amp. So maybe it would be worthwhile to make some recordings for the car....hmmmmmm. But can you create a multi-channel from .wav file after recording the vinyl? I wouldn't think so, wouldn't have to be done in the mixdown process before being pressed to vinyl and outputed to cd?

Stylii

Using Ortofon Niteclub, have been for years.

[Greydon Clark]

here's the key issue: walk into any studio these days. are they using pro tools? the music is so dumbed down from the moment it's recorded, that the soul is lost.

individual notes are corrected/manipulated. partial takes are done and spliced together. the artistry that existed way back where a complete take would be done and kept or tossed in it's entirety did lead to true artistry. that is incredibly rare these days.

how many people are recording to 2 track @ 30ips these days? they're out there, but it's a small number.

records are just copies of performances, too.

the mad professor's point is kind of funny...as he's made his career by recording one performance to another medium. even if they're analog formats, ever transfer involves a loss...it's always that way. (witness recordings made from masters vs back-up or safety or 2nd generation tapes.)

how many times can you copy a performance in analog before it loses its soul? if the stuff he is dubbing was originally a digital creation (likely) and never had a soul to begin with, when he copies it to an analog tape (for later downloading by the kids as an MP3), did he add a soul to it, only to have it later disappear? these are terribly important questions.

Well, I’m sure you’re familiar with the works of Jack White and Steve Albini…

Engineers have been cutting and splicing tape for years, but Protools has made it a whole lot easier. However, digital recording has been tremendously beneficial to independent and self financed artists. In the last five years, I’m sure most of my favorite records were recorded on 2” tape, mixed in Protools, and then dumped back onto tape (or some other combination of analog and digital) before they were mastered.

But back to the Mad Professor, every time he dubs something he is adding soul and life to the recording. What you view as loss he views as an addition. And if the source material was captured digitally, it is his job to breathe life into an otherwise dead inanimate sound.

[upallnight]

Well, I’m sure you’re familiar with the works of Jack White and Steve Albini…

naturally. they are among the "few" i referenced above.

Engineers have been cutting and splicing tape for years, but Protools has made it a whole lot easier. However, digital recording has been tremendously beneficial to independent and self financed artists.

yep, yep. lots of things are easier and cheaper, but few of them benefit the listener interested in quality recordings.

i realize the folly: if recordings are not even available, what's the point of worrying about recording quality.

availability of music is good. period. recording quality is semantics to a degree -- but having great music with great recording quality is such a treat.

In the last five years, I’m sure most of my favorite records were recorded on 2” tape, mixed in Protools, and then dumped back onto tape (or some other combination of analog and digital) before they were mastered.

But back to the Mad Professor, every time he dubs something he is adding soul and life to the recording. What you view as loss he views as an addition. And if the source material was captured digitally, it is his job to breathe life into an otherwise dead inanimate sound.

yeah. i was just trying to point out that his quote is sort of bullshit and arbitrary. (for what it's worth, i don't view what he does as a "loss", but there is for certain a generational loss when transfering from one recording medium to another in what he does. he may add to it (whether he's adding "soul" is totally arbitrary), but he cannot improve the recording quality -- he's always constrained by the original source, and it always gets worse down the line.

[upallnight]

One, I live in a shoebox in SF. Two, I'm usually standing up when playing the records. Three, I want the speakers higher, but I cannot find higher stands to hold the Event Studio Precision 8 Powered Monitors. Four, I'd mount the speakers but they are too big/heavy. Five, my setup is in a tiny room that has concrete outlining the carpet, so there is a balancing issue. I'd like them at ear level, but I don't think that's going to be possible. It also needs to look nice. Any suggestions would be BEYOND helpful.

hard to say without seeing more photos of the space. also, where you are when you're listening makes a big difference (e.g. are you sitting in the middle of the room? near a wall? standing while doing mixing?).

a small room can actually be quite good (less air to move, hence you can get by with lower power and smaller speakers and reap the inherent advantages).

a couple of things that are important no matter what:
a) make sure your speakers are mounted very securely to whatever it is they're sitting on. good stands aren't all that expensive. it's pretty easy to get good stands, fill them with lead shot, and couple the speakers to the floor. this kills all (bad) vibration. if you need help finding a stand (or someone to do custom stands), let me know and i'm sure i can find a resource.
b) carpet over concrete isn't necessarily a bad thing. in fact, you'd be much worse off without the carpet.
c) where you are in the room really affects your perception of the sound. read this article on speaker setup for some things to consider. (also, it is just one opinion.)
d) putting your speakers out in the room or closer to corners does affect the sound. corners tend to reinforce the bass, but it also muddies the sound and that bass is often "slow". the above article does hit on those topics.

as for whether or not the space turns out to be functional for other stuff or looks the way your spouse wants it to....well, that's another matter altogether.

Upallnight, I'm in total agreement with you. I've had high bit-rate mp3's made from vinyl rips that sound amazing, but then again that pressing of the vinyl needs to be good as well.

the source always matters. nothing further down the chain will ever sound better than the original source.

Its all about the producer/engineer at the end of the day.

agreed. a recording made by someone who cares deeply about it is often reflected in the quality. i'm betting the mixes you make reflect that you want to get the most out of your music.

Personally, I'd love to get an audiophile setup but right now I do not have the space, time, or money to make that feasible.

space? less than you think.
time? can't answer that.
money? it doesn't have to be expensive. if someone can afford the cost of gas to & from tahoe + a season of lift-served skiing, i'm sure they have the $$ for good audio gear. but it's really all about priorities and whether or not 1/2 steps make sense.

but what do i know? i still listen to tube gear.

I have a question about the higher bitrate & sampling frequency. Would it be worth it to make vinyl versions at this rate? I know my PS3 can perform CD Output Frequency to "44.1/88.2/176.4 kHz." Thus, with the right receiver, and speaker combination, hear the difference?

first off, how do you record from an analog source? what is the ADC you are using?

if it's a shitty ADC, there goes your quality and the conversation is moot.

if someone wants to archive some recording at the best possible quality, i recommend recording from an analog source at a high (but not always highest) resolution you can. i say "not always"because let's say you can record @ 24bit/88.2kHz or 24/96. while either one will work for your archival, if you ever intend to play the recording back on a regular CD player (redbook standard), then you'll have to dither down to 16bit/44.1kHz. if you record at a frequency that is a multiple of 44.1, then the recordings tend to just work better. in our example above, if you record at 88.2, you simply toss out every other sample. if you recorded at 96kHz, interpolations must be made and it just results in worse sound.

there are some DACs (like your car) that can play back recordings encoded @ 24/192kHz.

i've heard some really freaking good high bit-rate recordings ...but they are not universally good.

with the right playback gear, you can hear the difference -- your recording will be closer to the source's quality.

however, if you do 16/44 really well and have good redbook playback, it can also be very good.

the reason i mentioned 'archival' is that i believe in storing things once, at the best quality you can.

But can you create a multi-channel from .wav file after recording the vinyl? I wouldn't think so, wouldn't have to be done in the mixdown process before being pressed to vinyl and outputed to cd?

well, most records are 2-channel only. (yes, there are mono records out there before the stereo era & some newer reissues, and, yes, there were some 4-channel records...) so, creating a multichannel mix from a record is impossible unless you're adding something to it. you'll need to do more mastering than simply recording and converting format.

.wav files are basically just uncompressed audio files.

Using Ortofon Niteclub, have been for years.

dj gear has it's place, for sure, and much of it is respectable. for that audiophile setup you're talking about (one day... ) we'll get you into another world of performance. there's alot more in those grooves than you may be hearing today. ;-)

[pechelman]

youve got me brainwashed, uan.

I looked up skier666's speakers just to see how much they were, and the first thing I thought was, oh, thats cheap.

you and your tube gear!

one of these days
as you say, priorities.

[skier666]

Upallnight, thanks for the info. I'm eating all this stuff up!

Listening

Yep, standing while mixing is how where I'm usually listening with the monitors tilted in on each side of the mixing rig. They are separated from the wall a bit (because of the angle), and are basically sitting at each corner of the room but they do need to be higher.

Recording

Funny thing is that Greydon and I have converted a lot of his 7"s onto CD back when he used to live in SF. Its always hard to make a perfect recording due to how is 7" has been produced. Some were loud and clean, some quiet without bass. I usually just compensate by doing some test recordings and adding some low or highend through the mixer.

My current setup to record is using a Sony MZ-M200 to record in Linear PCM straight from the output of the mixer. Its not entering a receiver, basically just a pre-amp. I've been a MD fan forever, as my CD recorders in the past have been so unreliable its ridiculous. I record, then through USB, I open the file in Soundforge, etc, and am able to edit if need be.

dj gear has it's place, for sure

Yep, oh I'm totally aware that I can get better performance from an audiophile setup, but I don't think they make any with pitch control, or am I wrong? I wouldn't need it to mix, but some tracks just need a little kick in the ass when making recordings

[skier666]

youve got me brainwashed, uan.

I looked up skier666's speakers just to see how much they were, and the first thing I thought was, oh, thats cheap.

I bought one at a time

They sound SO GOOD for the music I listen to, for a small room, and for an all-in-one powered speaker. Bass is deep, highs are crisp. But I also had a friend recommend them to me...a friend that listens to the same vinyl dnb recordings, so they might not be for everyone.

[pechelman]

just to make sure, cause i didnt mean to sound that way if I did, but Im not ragging on anything you got, just the ridiculous nature of some of the other equipment uan has turned me on to.

there just needs to a store
somewhere
that has everything id ever want so i could listen to it and make up my own mind what is worth the $. (or in this case, the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$)

[Greydon Clark]

Funny thing is that Greydon and I have converted a lot of his 7"s onto CD back when he used to live in SF. Its always hard to make a perfect recording due to how is 7" has been produced. Some were loud and clean, some quiet without bass. I usually just compensate by doing some test recordings and adding some low or highend through the mixer.

Dude, some of those records are close to no-fi—recorded on bottom of the range 8-tracks with sm-57 microphones and pressed on recycled “root beer” vinyl.

Also, I still owe you a track list…

[skier666]

Also, I still owe you a track list…

I gave up on that decades ago.

[pappag]

Last night's ghetto recording setup at JT's place (once the new needles arrive, I'm gonna go all Kurtis Blow on this joint):







(Picture is some Philips Magnavox stereo system that I got back in 2001. It shows no signs of wearing down and produces some quality sound with some serious thumpage - quite the bargain at $200.)

[skier666]

^^^^^^

The bookshelf system, chairs, plastic tubs......lol

[skier666]

Here's some responses to that Wired article posted earlier in the thread....

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/29/1947253

[Greydon Clark]

I smell a lot of nu-metal coming from that link.

[upallnight]

Here's some responses to that Wired article posted earlier in the thread....

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/29/1947253

there is much wrong (or just misinformed) stuff in those comments... but it's slashdot so you have to accept the many like-minded individuals that pop up to trash the notion that vinyl could ever sound better than some digital source(s).

[tuffy109]

and pressed on recycled “root beer” vinyl.

hahahaha, love that the color meant more than the sound quality.

the wife bought me a usb turntable for the anniversary. i'll let you know how it converts my Radon records

[Greydon Clark]

Dude, straight-edge bands were the worst offenders when it came to spending money on color vinyl and picture discs to document horrible songs that were recorded in horrible studios. Crate Tone and China cymbals are worse than heroin.

[skier666]

I beg to differ. I've got a killer ganja green Brujeria 7" that remixes the macarena into "Marijuana"....the sound quality off this green piece of garbage sounds like .5 Mono.

[pappag]

I have a picture disc from Timewriter that's pretty good. And some pink and white vinyl from some wannabe chick band version of NIN that is pretty horrible. Agree to disagree.

[Flexon Phil]

I unloaded my albums years ago...I had a sweet B&O turntable that is also long gone.

If anyone is a YES fan, I do have "Rick Wakeman: Journey to the Center" of the Earth album that for some reason hung around. If someone wants it, PM me.

For a real treat, find yourselves some "Mobile Fidelity Half Speed Master Recordings", beautiful sound from them.

Album art is also a thing of the past.

[MOHSHSIHd]

Just picked up tonight:




original pressing with reversed album cover image from this one






somone just unloaded a huge collection of jazz, including an early pressing of Kind of Blue in good condition for $20....I know I should have pulled the trigger

[pappag]

I bought Kind of Blue in mint condition for $15 about 10 months ago ... $20 for good is not a deal.

[upallnight]

For a real treat, find yourselves some "Mobile Fidelity Half Speed Master Recordings", beautiful sound from them.

actually, it's been revealed more recently that the owner of mofi back in the day actually had really terrible ears. stan ricker mastered almost all their titles (and he is amazing), but on so many of them he was handcuffed and had to artificially bump up the bass and alter the recording to please the poor ears of his bosses. there are some good MoFi recordings out there, but many are crap.

I bought Kind of Blue in mint condition for $15 about 10 months ago ... $20 for good is not a deal.

what pressing, nick? if you truly picked up a mint original (mono), you did get a steal. i'm guessing a later 2-eye, which are pretty common.

[pappag]

what pressing, nick? if you truly picked up a mint original (mono), you did get a steal. i'm guessing a later 2-eye, which are pretty common.

Quite possible it is not an original pressing.


And as for condition goes, I would never buy any records that weren't mint or near mint.