Skip to main content

Topic: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology (Read 6229 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #125
Quote
Still waiting.

I had forgotten about that.

What sort of format does the audio file need to be? How do you ascertain its not been tampered with? Will an audio file from my phone do the job? Otherwise I have to bring equipment from the studio which will be a pain.

  • Wombat
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #126
Something similar silent as the sample guruboolez posted.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #127
Something similar silent as the sample guruboolez posted.

How long should it be before my point is made?

Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #128
You are engaging in a lot of assumptions. [...] Are you able to prove me wrong?
Talk abou assumptions!  Since yours was obviously the first one, I guess I don't have to tell you the burden of proof actually lays the other way around here, do I?

Quote
My quote so far seems un-refuted;
Oh! Pleaaa-se! As if anyone in full possession of their mental faculties (either on HA or not) could actually give a rat's arse at refuting what, fallacy!

Just so you understand it once and for all and make no more strawman argument out of it: my sheer indignation (also shared by at least another member) is not with us feeling kinda hurt at anyone attacking us with that "mine-is-bigger-than-yours", freudian, penile BS that may stick to you guys in your "industry" - differences between member signatures over and most audiophool fora can obviously attest this last statement. We are obviously not that petty to care about that.

Can't you see (or stop pretendind you cannot) it's down to the way you behaved? I, for myself, was challenging your ethics, not your ad hominem, childish claims.

Quote
I did not say all, but I am am quite convinced that many or most on this otherwise august forum use systems that those in my industry refer to as 'lofi' or 'midfi'.

Quote
Quote
I am certain from previous experience that posters there use lofi gear. I'd be surprised if any of them have a cartridge that retails for over $100.00.
So, at first you were "certain", then you used the "any" pronoun, so as there can be absolutely no doubt you know all HA members' gears. Right...
Why still insisting upon slyly/desperately trying to play it all down?

We may not concur with you cult's beliefs, but you cannot be that naive to believe we're gonna fall for that, can you?

Just concede that, on saying that, you came across as a cocky gearhead - simples. Then you can move on to either reporting back to HQ - for some well deserved decoration - or carry on trying to defend your cult's beliefs as if this forum were a soapbox of sorts for you to try to convert anyone over here. ::)

Finally, at least I can safely say "from previous experience that"  ;) such misuse of this community won't get you too far over here:

No, you're probably not going to be banned (unlike the de facto behaviour towards some of our members who happen to venture into you lot wonderland): you'll either tire yourself or come to terms with the fact that you'll be just another dog barking at the proverbial tree.

Oh! Need the proof for such claim!?

Easy: use the search box up yonder and check out how many placebophiles like yourself have already left this community for good along this decade and a half (bar the occasional Analog Scott lurking in here like a real perve but claiming it is just "once in a blue moon - right...).
A community which couldn't care less about whichever "nom de plume" you lot choose to call it, as we, unwillingly (but usually proudly) end up being you old ladies' favourite talk of the town anyway.
  • Last Edit: 05 December, 2017, 04:20:59 PM by includemeout
Listen to the music, not the media.

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #129
You are engaging in a lot of assumptions. My quote so far seems un-refuted; I did not say all, but I am am quite convinced that many or most on this otherwise august forum use systems that those in my industry refer to as 'lofi' or 'midfi'. Are you able to prove me wrong?

Quote
Posted by Ralph (M) on November 30, 2017 at 10:06:18
In Reply to: Once again made the mistake of looking at Hydrogen Audio forums posted by Analog Scott on November 28, 2017 at 08:37:14:

Cripes! 3 pages of obnoxious drivel.

I am certain from previous experience that posters there use lofi gear. I'd be surprised if any of them have a cartridge that retails for over $100.00.
Ralph, this is pure Dunning-Kruger. You're not posting on the audiomoron site here, everyone can see through your BS excuses.
When you posted that "drivel" on AA, you had no idea it would be picked up and exposed here on HA. You were catering to the beliefs of the elitist prick imbeciles who believe every word you parroted verbatim. "Lofi". You're a poor liar too, regarding whether "any" here have > $100 cartridges, because you demanded in another thread that the poster list their TT setup, including cartridge. Ralph, that's called, you, BUSTED.

Further, you seem to have consistently missed my point regarding preamps, your cleaning of your LP, and surface noise.
I didn't miss anything. You OTOH, missed logic and what a red herring is. Your nonsense about preamps is a diversion from the fact that heroic efforts are needed to keep a lid on surface noise of your inferior medium...new record or not.

Actually the amp is capable of being quite neutral with no 'sound' of its own at all.
Right, "capable of", but with any speaker with a non near flat impedance (the vast majority), the "sound" will be the speaker + amp EQ FR vs simply the speaker, as driven with a "amplifier". It's a special effects processor like any high output impedance "amp".

You can fix ignorance, stupid is forever. Not everyone over there is ignorant, nor stupid; both are a problem in all aspects of humanity.
The majority are, with rare exception and those are outliers. The entire point of AA is for Dunning-Krugers to congregate in an imbecile echo chamber, with strict rules about barring any rational discussion, blind tests, etc.
I know, I was there for years.
I've also heard countless of your ilks systems. You can't possibly understand how funny this all is. ;)
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #130
what is the frigging point of vinyl in 2017?

Nostalgia, mostly. There is also a certain factor of physicality to the format, you can see the grooves, see the pickup moving across the record, reproducing the music. The big bold cover art also plays a big part.

Was looking at the RIAA sales stats the other day and saw data that suggested that about 4% of the dollars the recorded music folks sell is coming from LPs:  http://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/RIAA-2016-Year-End-News-Notes.pdf  If you factor in the unit volumes, you see that LPs are a means for collecting about twice the money for the same music.



  • Last Edit: 06 December, 2017, 07:51:28 AM by Arnold B. Krueger

Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #131
Quote
Still waiting.

I had forgotten about that.


I hadn't. It counted negatively towards your credibility.  Big claims, no show!

Quote
What sort of format does the audio file need to be? How do you ascertain its not been tampered with? Will an audio file from my phone do the job? Otherwise I have to bring equipment from the studio which will be a pain.

FLAC for the best results, MP3 if you are willing to accept the known compromises.

  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #132
Quote
Still waiting.

I had forgotten about that.


I hadn't. It counted negatively towards your credibility.  Big claims, no show!

Quote
What sort of format does the audio file need to be? How do you ascertain its not been tampered with? Will an audio file from my phone do the job? Otherwise I have to bring equipment from the studio which will be a pain.

FLAC for the best results, MP3 if you are willing to accept the known compromises.

I agree- so again, how long- an entire LP side? MP3 is fine- its just about showing an absence of ticks and pops, right? The LP I was talking about (and is only one of many examples) is a 1960 pressing of an Angel recording of the Four Seasons. My proposal is to put up a Zoom recorder and play the whole thing- but where will the sound file be hosted- on this site?
Quote
Your nonsense about preamps is a diversion from the fact that heroic efforts are needed to keep a lid on surface noise of your inferior medium...new record or not.

Owning the preamp does not take a lot of effort... I dust the LP surface with a dust brush before I play it, I don't handle the LP surface and store them upright. Not particularly heroic...


  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #133
I dust the LP surface with a dust brush before I play it, I don't handle the LP surface and store them upright. Not particularly heroic...
So you claim. Yes, the ritualism seems apt here. The fact is your inferior format features some to a lot of surface noise, new or old vinyl. It absolutely requires fastidious means to keep surface as clean as possible.
For old timers with poor HF hearing and built up tolerance for noises that don't exist in live unamplified music, especially classical, this may be fine.
For others with much higher demands for fidelity to original soundfields, not so much
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #134
^^ Classic Dunning-Kruger

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #135

Quote
In Reply to: RE: Why do you waste your time posting there? posted by John Elison on December 4, 2017 at 22:42:08:

The human ear is far less sensitive than electronic measurement equipment. Therefore, we can measure all sorts of distortion and other things that no human can hear. Everyone knows this. If you think you can hear frequencies that cannot be measured you're delusional.

This is a common myth. IOW, the statement above is false, although if the opening statement were to read something like 'The human ear is **usually** far less sensitive...' it would be more accurate.

We can easily hear some forms of distortion, in particular higher ordered harmonics. The reason for this is that the ear uses higher ordered harmonics on order to sense sound pressure. We have about a 140 db range (although the upper limits will cause damage as you know).

GE proved this back in the 1960s but the implications have been largely ignored to this day. In fact we've had inklings regarding our sensitivity to higher ordered harmonics going back to the 1930s (see Radiotron Designer's Handbook 2nd edition).

The ear converts most forms of distortion to tonality. Most engineers know that the 2nd harmonic of tubes contributes to their 'warmth' or 'richness'. Trace amounts (that can be difficult to measure) of higher ordered harmonics are what make solid state amps sound bright and contributes to harshness.

It is the presence of higher ordered harmonic content in SETs that causes them to sound 'dynamic'. Its my supposition and experience that when audiophiles are using the word 'dynamics' that they are usually talking about distortion and that the two terms can be exchanged without changing the meaning of the conversation. That might sound cynical to some but that's my experience.

we can hear that same distortion, right into the noise floor where instruments have trouble measuring it.

We don't hear it as distortion though. Many people think that's what is supposed to happen, but the ear/brain system converts distortion into tonality.

So the higher ordered harmonics can be in trace amounts that are difficult if not impossible to measure, but we will hear that in the amplifier as brightness and hardness. Its what fuels the tube/transistor debate...

^^ Classic Dunning-Kruger
Agreed
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #136

Quote
Posted by Ralph (M) on November 30, 2017 at 10:06:18
In Reply to: Once again made the mistake of looking at Hydrogen Audio forums posted by Analog Scott on November 28, 2017 at 08:37:14:

Cripes! 3 pages of obnoxious drivel.

I am certain from previous experience that posters there use lofi gear. I'd be surprised if any of them have a cartridge that retails for over $100.00.

Quote
In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein people of low ability suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their cognitive ability as greater than it is.
Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

I attended the University of Minnesota and did the lower division of the EE course before changing my program to something called University Without Walls

^^ Classic Dunning-Kruger
Yes Ralph, we get it
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • jjb70
  • [*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #137
I still have some records even though I have not owned or had access to a record player for probably 30 years when I still lived at my parents house. The reason I kept a few is the cover art. I think vinyl is an inferior music format and don't miss listening to vinyl at all but I do miss the cover art.
If people like vinyl then that is their choice and every one is entitled to their own opinions but there is a world of difference between just liking something and trying to claim it is better in performance terms. A lot of it seems to stem from resentment at the commoditising and accessibility of music in the digital era which has destroyed much of the mystique carefully constructed by high end hifi manufacturers (often more high price than high performance) and magazines.  Sadly the same people seem to be pretty good at creating new mystiques around digital sound to try and persuade us that we need to spend $$$$$$$$$$$$$'s on gear.

  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #138
I agree- so again, how long- an entire LP side? MP3 is fine- its just about showing an absence of ticks and pops, right? The LP I was talking about (and is only one of many examples) is a 1960 pressing of an Angel recording of the Four Seasons.
To make sure I understand you correctly...
You are offering to post a sample of a recording from an LP that you claim exhibits no ticks or pops. I'd say that a 2 minute section is probably sufficient, because in my experience it's extremely rare to find an LP that has no ticks or pops over the course of 2 minutes. If it's from The Four Seasons, please include a quiet section - not just one of the bits where the orchestra is going full tilt. FLAC format please. (And of course we are all assuming that you will be honourable enough not to have put the recording through a declicker before posting it).

  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #139
I agree- so again, how long- an entire LP side? MP3 is fine- its just about showing an absence of ticks and pops, right? The LP I was talking about (and is only one of many examples) is a 1960 pressing of an Angel recording of the Four Seasons.
To make sure I understand you correctly...
You are offering to post a sample of a recording from an LP that you claim exhibits no ticks or pops. I'd say that a 2 minute section is probably sufficient, because in my experience it's extremely rare to find an LP that has no ticks or pops over the course of 2 minutes. If it's from The Four Seasons, please include a quiet section - not just one of the bits where the orchestra is going full tilt. FLAC format please. (And of course we are all assuming that you will be honourable enough not to have put the recording through a declicker before posting it).


Thanks! I was planning a much longer recording, as my claim that started this bit is that I am very used to not hearing ticks and pops over an entire LP side.

I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 

My claim is thus:
many LPs are entirely free of audible ticks and pops if played back properly *and* are also free of scratches.
The things that contribute to proper playback are
* a properly set up tone arm, which is also able to properly track the cartridge, which in turn is in decent functioning condition
* a stable phono section, which does not exacerbate inaudible ticks to the point that they become audible. A preamp that is susceptible to RFI is far more likely to have problems with this since the phono cartridge and cable can often produce RFI on its own, due to the tank circuit created by the two.

So if I can show that I get no ticks and pops, is there then acceptance of my assertions above?

  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #140
I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 
Which one were you planning on using?
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #141
I agree- so again, how long- an entire LP side? MP3 is fine- its just about showing an absence of ticks and pops, right? The LP I was talking about (and is only one of many examples) is a 1960 pressing of an Angel recording of the Four Seasons.
To make sure I understand you correctly...
You are offering to post a sample of a recording from an LP that you claim exhibits no ticks or pops. I'd say that a 2 minute section is probably sufficient, because in my experience it's extremely rare to find an LP that has no ticks or pops over the course of 2 minutes. If it's from The Four Seasons, please include a quiet section - not just one of the bits where the orchestra is going full tilt. FLAC format please. (And of course we are all assuming that you will be honourable enough not to have put the recording through a declicker before posting it).


Thanks! I was planning a much longer recording, as my claim that started this bit is that I am very used to not hearing ticks and pops over an entire LP side.

I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 

My claim is thus:
many LPs are entirely free of audible ticks and pops if played back properly *and* are also free of scratches.
The things that contribute to proper playback are
* a properly set up tone arm, which is also able to properly track the cartridge, which in turn is in decent functioning condition
* a stable phono section, which does not exacerbate inaudible ticks to the point that they become audible. A preamp that is susceptible to RFI is far more likely to have problems with this since the phono cartridge and cable can often produce RFI on its own, due to the tank circuit created by the two.

So if I can show that I get no ticks and pops, is there then acceptance of my assertions above?

That a cartridge and cable can produce RFI on their own would a violation of the law of conservation of energy since they are passive.  So no, I'm not going to agree to a claimed proof of perpetual motion!


  • cliveb
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #142
I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 
Which one were you planning on using?
I assumed that Atmasphere isn't planning to use a declicker at all.
If he does, then that kind of defeats the purpose of posting a recording of an LP to prove that vinyl playback can be click-free.

  • andy o
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #143
My claim is thus:
many LPs are entirely free of audible ticks and pops if played back properly *and* are also free of scratches.
The things that contribute to proper playback are
* a properly set up tone arm, which is also able to properly track the cartridge, which in turn is in decent functioning condition
* a stable phono section, which does not exacerbate inaudible ticks to the point that they become audible. A preamp that is susceptible to RFI is far more likely to have problems with this since the phono cartridge and cable can often produce RFI on its own, due to the tank circuit created by the two.

So if I can show that I get no ticks and pops, is there then acceptance of my assertions above?
My claim is thus:
The vast majority of digital music (playback) is entirely free of audible ticks and pops if played back properly by pressing the "play" button. The end.

Why even defend vinyl by listing all the inconveniences and even cost you have to go through, you're just shooting yourself in the foot. Just say you like it cause it's a romantic or nostalgic thing, what's so wrong with that? People gotta rationalize everything.

Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #144

I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 


IME, yes declickers often leave sonic footprints all over processed tracks, even areas of them that have no clicks.


  • ajinfla
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #145
I assumed that Atmasphere isn't planning to use a declicker at all.
I assume he's aware, unlike the D/Ks at AA slurping his distortion nonsense, we'll be analyzing and looking for stuff like that  ;)


If he does, then that kind of defeats the purpose of posting a recording of an LP to prove that vinyl playback can be click-free.
It remains to be seen whether he posts anything. Notice there has been some "delay".  Christmas could come early.
Loudspeaker manufacturer

  • Atmasphere
  • [*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #146
Quote
That a cartridge and cable can produce RFI on their own would a violation of the law of conservation of energy since they are passive.  So no, I'm not going to agree to a claimed proof of perpetual motion!

The cartridge itself is the source of excitation, the energy coming from the cartridge tracking an LP. If the cartridge is MM, typically the inductances are much larger and so the resonant frequency is much lower (i.e. may be just outside or in the audio passband). So that would not be RFI but it may well be ultrasonic. Some preamps are alright with that and some are not. At any rate for either LOMC or MM low cable capacitance is advised to keep the tank circuit to a higher frequency.
Quote
I assume he's aware, unlike the D/Ks at AA slurping his distortion nonsense, we'll be analyzing and looking for stuff like that  ;)

I expect that. My plan is to post a file directly from the Zoom recorder and it only supports WAV and mp3, so I'm going with the WAV file, 16 bit 44.1KHz. I have the Zoom at home finally so hopefully I can post the soundfile in the next few days.

Again- 2 minutes is enough time to make my point?

  • krabapple
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #147
I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 
Which one were you planning on using?
I assumed that Atmasphere isn't planning to use a declicker at all.
If he does, then that kind of defeats the purpose of posting a recording of an LP to prove that vinyl playback can be click-free.

I think there was sarcasm in play there.   ;)

  • krabapple
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #148

I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 


IME, yes declickers often leave sonic footprints all over processed tracks, even areas of them that have no clicks.

It depends on how declcking is done.  Cliveb made a tool that allows as an option manual, one-at-a time declicking, which you'd have to look hard and tediously to find evidence of afterwards., if it's done carefully. 

  • polemon
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: A day of vinyl -- a reminder of inferior technology
Reply #149

I assume a de-clicker will leave some sort of footprint that distinguishes it beyond the lack of ticks and pops. 


IME, yes declickers often leave sonic footprints all over processed tracks, even areas of them that have no clicks.

It depends on how declcking is done.  Cliveb made a tool that allows as an option manual, one-at-a time declicking, which you'd have to look hard and tediously to find evidence of afterwards., if it's done carefully. 
Hmm, I'm only familiar with the algorithm by Craig DeForest, which is using thresholding and then simply interpolates samples over the length of the click it detects, with added heuristics (which are adjustable). Any other algorithms commonly used in those fields?

It seems most algorithms in DAWs rely on the user kinda narrow down the section where the pops and clicks occur. Automatic detection usually seems to use some form of frequency masking to allow for noise-like sounds to come through.