Vinyl vs Digital and 24 bit vs 16 bit from vinyl. Reply #250 – 2009-07-28 16:24:22 Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2009-07-28 12:26:04Quote from: analog scott on 2009-07-28 10:23:03But the thing that spawned this current exhange was the assertion that one would likely be more artsy (or flakey) and less "scientific" (or smart or rational) to have a preference for vinyl.It probably helps to take a step back. This is really about music and media. Supposedly, we listen to music beause we like music. Alternatively, one might like a particular medium, less so than want to enjoy the music.If your primary interest is music, then of course you want to listen to the most accurate form of the music which is of course live music. Since that is often difficult or impossible, us music lovers fall back on listening to music via some medium.Comparing and contrasting the LP and CD mediums, let us first agree that both mediums force us to resort to the process of micing and mixing, which in and of itself dramatically changes the sound of the music. This problem is common to both the LP and the CD, and sequel mediums, which are now common. Most newer mediums behave more like the CD than the LP as typically used.Now, actualy comparing just the 2 mediums, we should agree that the CD medium can deliver a near-perfect or functionally perfect presentation of whatever we miced and mixed. The LP medium is highly sonically instrusive, and that is not an opinion, it is a scientifically provable fact.Therefore, if your interest is primarily listening to music, and not primarily listening to the sonic and experiencing the other non-sonic properties of the medium, then the CD is the logical, scientific choice.Where is the data in the form of bias controlled listening tests to support this hypothesis? this would require that we have the original musicians in the original venue as a reference. Then we would have to be choose a listening position in the concert hall as our reference position given the fact that the sound changes with any changes in listener position. then we have to find the best possible microphone/recording/playback/listening room combination that creates the best illusion of that sound from that one listener position. THEN we can take that recording, master it to CD and LP and THEN we can do a bias controlled comparison using the live music as a reference. Not terribly practical is it? Never been done quite like that has it? The problem with your hypothesis is that it assumes that transparency in every step of the process of recording and playing back music is going to lead to a better result. this might be true if the process were designed to be a literal reconstruction of the original and if every other link in the chain were perfect. But the assumption fails to hold up in the real world where we have a recording and playback system that is designed to create an aural illusion and there are many undisputed less than perfect links in the chain that create inherent problems in that aural illusion. given these obvious problems one can not make any of the assumptions you make and must actually do the hard work and conduct the actual listening tests.