Personally I don't care if anything was sourced from 16bit/44.1Khz. It doesn't make any difference in audible sound quality so why worry?What I DO care about is the DRC. If the music is mastered at high dynamic range compression then...that is unprofessional which means I think most music today is done unprofesionally Even 24bit/96Khz won't help that. Sadly some people think 24bit/96Khz is better, but it will sound just as sh**.
Reading comprehension escapes you.
what's on the disc can hardly be more than Redbook. That's the issue.
Somehow as a moderator I'm not allowed to challenge baseless and silly notions about what constitutes professiomalism in the record industry or how vinyl should be mastered? I don't get to be a regular Joe, ever?I could just as easily let others make the case I made and then shut the thread down because of the growing lack of civility that began once people didn't agree with you. These are people who posess a great deal of knowledge and insight about a topic in which you appear to have great interest.
I don't really read the Hoffman forums unless a Google-search sends me there for something. I wouldn't have crapped myself if they said they were mastered from 24/44.1. I'm surprised they even told anyone that.
The entire point of HA is to improve what makes an audible difference, and ignore what does not.
...That I felt the need to defend our community against your disrespectful insults was yet another issue...
I'm just wondering how much vinyl is pressed using a CD-R when the music was recorded and edited at a higher sampling rate and bit depth.I find it "odd" to do so. The only record company I've thus far got a response from says they think so as well. They stated that they'd never do it. I wasn't asking for an argument about CD vs. vinyl or if I can hear frequencies beyond Nyquist or how well they're reproduced on vinyl.Think of it this way: I invest a considerable amount of my time cleaning up needledrops of material that I feel was overly-compressed for the CD-version. It's important to me in an academic sense. I just want to know. Whether it "matters" or not. It matters (maybe for less of a good reason than I imagine) to the label I asked and it matters to me. That's all.
Yeah, I'm not trying to play that "16 bits is more than enough for vinyl!" flame-fest. That's not even what I'm getting at.So tell me how it's handled. I believe it should be handled at at least 24/48. I don't think I need to be a musician to state that....but enlighten me. Seriously. I'm not above being wrong.I'm not stating that Redbook isn't adequate as a delivery-format. I'm also aware that some labels were said to have used lossy for mastering CDs. That's even bigger crap...but this is still completely unprofessional IMO.
My entire thing is that IMO there's no reason not to use higher than Redbook until it goes to Redbook.
...So you're saying anything less than 24/48 is unprofessional because of? ...of loss in sound quality? (hard to see why else lossy could be relevant)If so, then "CD vs vinyl" relevant to the topic. Because most people here believe there is no loss in sound quality, at least any that's of audible substance. ...I believe what I believe because of the sources below. I'm personally more keen on believing audio engineers of academic merit who give reasoned explanations and arguments, rather than a record label reps who know more about business than science....
If I were to truly insult you I'd call you a hack. You've acted like one here, but I won't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_MontgomeryThe “xiphmont” in the links posted immediately adjacent to the links to the wiki might be seen in retrospect as a handy clue. Quote from: Engelsstaub on 27 February, 2013, 06:00:12 AMIf I were to truly insult you I'd call you a hack. You've acted like one here, but I won't.Although having precisely no desire to get involved in the catfight spirited debate between you two, I will say that it’s almost unbelievably naïve for anyone to think that s/he can be innocent of throwing an insult by framing it in hypothetical terms. The phrase “You can’t have your cake and eat it too” comes to mind.
...You think the cd-r format, and anyhting less than 24/48, is unprofessional and odd, why?...Only sensible answer I can think of is loss in audio quality. So cd vs vinyl seems pretty relevant. Or you're being arbitrary, which is self-defeating. To the second - Those reasons do not include vinyl. Read it again, please with no selective reading lol ...and special emphasis on "no loss in sound quality, at least any that's of audible substance."
"This actually happens all the time" is a pretty sweeping statement and I called bullshit. You can +1 Google-style all day long but until someone can back such a statement up it remains in the realm of bullshit from someone who said it always happens as if they know.
I reasonably asked for any credible indication that this is true in the face of what little I have from just one record co. that claims otherwise.
Nobody has even attempted to back it up. ...until such time as one can reasonably demonstrate this then bullshit it is.
The reasons for using more than 16-bits during production do not apply to cutting vinyl.24-bit production is to 16-bit digital release what 16-bit master is to vinyl release: more than sufficient quality headroom.
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 26 February, 2013, 07:13:20 AMQuote from: Engelsstaub on 25 February, 2013, 10:00:45 PM"This actually happens all the time" is a pretty sweeping statement and I called bullshit.Call it what you will. It is clear that you have even less reliable information to share than we have.Again, sir I beseech thee: Where. Is. Your. Information?!
Quote from: Engelsstaub on 25 February, 2013, 10:00:45 PM"This actually happens all the time" is a pretty sweeping statement and I called bullshit.Call it what you will. It is clear that you have even less reliable information to share than we have.
"This actually happens all the time" is a pretty sweeping statement and I called bullshit.
Shut it down then. Once again: I got nothing but snark from any of these people who you say possess a great deal of knowledge about this topic. In fact, they contributed nothing to demonstrate that pressing vinyl from CD-R is a standard practice in the industry...which is fine.
The reasons for using more than 16-bits during production do not apply to cutting vinyl.24-bit production is to 16-bit digital release what 16-bit master is to vinyl release: more than sufficient quality headroom.There would be no harm in using more though, and as I've mentioned already, there would be circumstances when "more" (bits or Hz) would be detectable in the final output (though not necessarily using human ears as the detector).To clarify: 16-bits really us more than enough to master vinyl, but optimal 16-bits usually uses noise shaping, and that noise shaped around 20kHz might be visible on a spectrogram of vinyl replay. You could avoid that either by not using noise shaping (result would still be better than vinyl = noise floor would be quieter than vinyl), or by staying at 20 or 24-bits. No audible differences any which way IMO; YMMV Cheers,David.
Quote from: Engelsstaub on 25 February, 2013, 10:00:45 PM"This actually happens all the time" is a pretty sweeping statement and I called bullshit. You can +1 Google-style all day long but until someone can back such a statement up it remains in the realm of bullshit from someone who said it always happens as if they know.In the above sentence we see "This actually happens all the time" (in US English idiom meaning it happens very often) transmorgified into "it always happens". Sorry for speaking in my native idiom, what you interpreted is not what I meant to say....Just guessing, but I suspect that doing the lab work or even just interpreting the technical papers would be well beyond your competence with audio technology, as basic chores as they are.