Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how CDs, in the abstract, can really be different from records, in that, surely you could apply a suitable filter to a CD decoder to make the output sound exactly like a record. Especially given modern computing power. It's just that, I assume, people have chosen not to.
same reason even the best CRT emulation shaders on a 4k screen still don't look as nice as a SNES game in a good CRT TV
Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
381–390 of 410 posts
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#382Is anyone working on a reasonably priced turntable to play vinyl discs without degrading them? In the mid '80s, Finial Technology announced such a turntable, and had a working unit at CES in 1986. It had a stylus that contained laser interferometers that could very accurately and precisely measure the distance from the stylus to the grove walls. It kept the stylus near, but not touching, the groove, getting the audio…
I can't find back the paper in question but I've found this which is in the same spirit: https://www.cse.huji.ac.il/~springer/DigitalNeedle/index.htm...
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
CD quality isn't that good (sample rate is fine, bitrate isn't) and it definitely has compression artifacts at the low end but that's a nitpick. That said, the biggest problem with the CD is that good CD transports are few and far between and pretty much all CD players have garbage-tier DAC implementations. edit: to be clear, a CD will have far more resolution and technical capacity available than a vinyl ever will,…
You'd have to come up with a good source to convince me that 16bits per sample is not good enough for consumer audio (or that you could tell the difference even in perfect conditions. So might be able to hear it, the vast majority of people won't) but beyond that it doesn't really matter in this discussion because vinyls have a much worse fidelity. If you sample vinyl audio at more than 16bits you'll just be sampling…
I bought some half decent speakers by my standards around a year ago (Creative T40s for what its worth).
As a test I tried some MP3 tracks at various bitrates sitting on my hard drive to see if I could guess the difference. Most of the time I thought the 192kbps sounded better than the 320kbps.
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that if we’re pursuing sheer audio fidelity, CD quality is objectively superior to vinyl in every way. However (as others mention), many vinyl listeners are not after objective sound fidelity perfection: For them, the flaws are part of their “retro” charm. However, one note about CD quality — it may not be as perfect as you think! A peer-reviewed meta-analysis has shown that humans can hear the difference bet…
16 bits per sample can provide 96dB dynamic range [0]. If you were listening to music at that volume, it would generally be considered unsafe, and you would potentially have hearing loss beyond 37 minutes [1] 16 bits is plenty. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_bit_depth [1] https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise/default.html
First: Bits per sample just describe how many discrete amplitude values (2^bits) are possible at each sample of a recording. The waveform is quantized to these values.
To understand quantization in the context of dynamic range, imagine how many bits per sample are needed to recreate a very quiet sound without loss, and then check how many bits you need to extend that to reach very loud sounds in the same recording file.
For example: How much precision would you need to accurately record the sound of a pin dropping (10db)? 4 bits? 8 bits? 10 bits? 12 bits?
Let’s be really absurd and say we can use 4 bits — just 16 discrete values — to represent a pin dropping sound (10db) cleanly and indistinguishable from the real thing. This is so obviously impossible, given how terribly quantized the waveform would be, but let’s be generous and assume it works.
Now, for the same audio file to reach all the way up to 110db (not uncommon for bass drum hits in an orchestra for example) is an extra 100db of dynamic range, which is 100,000x the amplitude, which is a little over 16 bits in addition to the original 4. So, rounding down, we’d need 20 bits to represent 10db sounds (with quantization down to only 16 discrete amplitudes) and 110db sounds in the same recording.
I think it’s extremely obvious that even 20 bits in this example is far from sufficient. In fact, even 24 bits would be insufficient if 8 bits per sample are not good enough to record a pin dropping at 10db!
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not the problem of a medium (be it a vinyl or a CD). You can put the same crappy mastering to a vinyl.
I thought vinyls needed to be specially mastered to prevent the needle from basically being pushed to the adjacent grove by an amplitude that's too high on the track.
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure about hobbyists, and the price point. Lasers are cheap, tracking for them is less so. To accurately read these grooves with sufficient resolution, you need 2 lasers (LPs are stereo), both looking at 45 degree inclination from different angles, and focused at the same point. That kind of accurate spatial + temporal sync ain’t trivial to accomplish. CDs/DVDs are much easier to implement. They don’t need simila…
> Even if you’ll manage to accurately focus both lasers, another problem is interference between left and right channel lasers. Would aiming the lasers at slightly different spots and putting the channels back together in software work?
The technical problem is already solved, but the product costs $15k: https://diffuser.fm/laser-turntable/ As you see from the description, they did it with 5 lasers instead of 2.
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
CD quality isn't that good (sample rate is fine, bitrate isn't) and it definitely has compression artifacts at the low end but that's a nitpick. That said, the biggest problem with the CD is that good CD transports are few and far between and pretty much all CD players have garbage-tier DAC implementations. edit: to be clear, a CD will have far more resolution and technical capacity available than a vinyl ever will,…
You'd have to come up with a good source to convince me that 16bits per sample is not good enough for consumer audio (or that you could tell the difference even in perfect conditions. So might be able to hear it, the vast majority of people won't) but beyond that it doesn't really matter in this discussion because vinyls have a much worse fidelity. If you sample vinyl audio at more than 16bits you'll just be sampling…
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#388Is anyone working on a reasonably priced turntable to play vinyl discs without degrading them? In the mid '80s, Finial Technology announced such a turntable, and had a working unit at CES in 1986. It had a stylus that contained laser interferometers that could very accurately and precisely measure the distance from the stylus to the grove walls. It kept the stylus near, but not touching, the groove, getting the audio…
My very limited understanding after talking to someone who was interested in this stuff, is that people are concerned with quantizing of the signal, which will happen with that laser solution. I’ve heard this is why audiophiles also use magnetic tape. To be clear I heard this second hand and am not directly familiar.
Distortion here means both extreme distortion (e.g. clipping) which is what people often think of when they hear the word "distortion", or the more technical definition of any alteration of the input signal. The pre-amps, compressors, and so on will all add their own distortion to the signal. However this is desired distortion. Tape offers some of this, although I'm not familiar with what its exact characteristics are.
Clipping (when the input signal amplitude exceeds the limits of the storage medium or output device) is a type of distortion that can sound great or absolutely awful.
Digital clipping sound awful. The max amplitude is all 1's in the digital storage medium. When a signal exceeds this, for the duration of it exceeding every sample will have that same value of all 1's. The waveform will basically have the top lopped off. There will be sharp "corners" where it starts to clip, and where it stops clipping. Those corners create "pops". It makes that part of the recording unusable.
Analog clipping can be a very sought after sound though. The max amplitude on tape is when all of the poles of the magnetic material are aligned. This isn't perfect though and it's not instant, so you get a slower compression of the signal and some variation. The waveform will look like its top has been squeezed downward. This can sound amazing.
The quality on youtube is pretty bad (spotify or elsewhere is better), but this song has a great example. You can hear his voice distort in many places, but it sounds wonderful (particularly starting around 2:20 - 2:40 and 3:10). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAGS8UL9b6A
Re: Vinyl set to outsell CDs for first time since 1986
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't need tens of kilograms of plastic to enjoy music What brand of computer, MP3 player, or phone are you using that isn't made of plastic and filled with minerals that come from strip mines and processed with chemicals like cyanide?
The marginal negative environmental externality of one more digital song is very low. That of a record is essentially constant.
Steaming music continues environmental damage for as long as the server is on.