Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Do vinyl editions tend to have higher DR than digital? If so, why? (Read 7905 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Do vinyl editions tend to have higher DR than digital? If so, why?

Hi,

So to my knowledge vinyl sounds no better than a CD file. You can rip songs off of a vinyl disk and turn it into FLAC or mp3 just like with CDs. But the dynamic range database shows the vinyl rips to have the best dynamic range, every single time. I read somewhere that this is because somehow it's harder for the artist to screw up the compression as much. How, and does this make vinyl rips superior to CD rips? And also in this context and with dynamic range we're talking about the loudest part of the track vs the quietest right, so both compression here and dynamic range are directly related to the Loudness Wars?

I want to try a few songs that are known to the most well recorded and mastered songs/albums to see what it's like. I'm thinking of going with Get Lucky from Daft Punk, I heard they did a good job but I don't know whether to go with vinyl rip or CD rip.

Do vinyl editions tend to have higher DR than digital? If so, why?

Reply #1 –
Commonly held was that vinyl makes it more difficult to apply extreme compression due to physical limitations. Someone else will have to confirm or deny the veracity of this idea as I haven’t studied it.

Recently suggested was that other limitations of vinyl might lead measures of DR to be artificially over-reported, for no actual benefit, such as stereo narrowing inflating the mono mean DR:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=102895
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....895#entry846695

Members with more experience of vinyl and the surrounding discussions than myself will offer other/better ideas.

P.S. Please title your threads properly.

Do vinyl editions tend to have higher DR than digital? If so, why?

Reply #2 –
Quote
So to my knowledge vinyl sounds no better than a CD file.
Technically (noise, distortion, frequency response) it's worse.  But what "sounds better" is a matter of personal taste.  Some people do prefer the sound of vinyl.

Quote
You can rip songs off of a vinyl disk and turn it into FLAC or mp3 just like with CDs.
Yes, you can digitally record vinyl.  Of course, the dynamic range measurements for vinyl are done using the digital copy.

If you do it right the digital copy will sound like the vinyl.  Although, you can use noise reduction techniques to make the digital copy sound better than the original vinyl.    And if the vinyl truly has more dynamic range than the CD, your digitized copy of the vinyl can sound better than the CD!  (Assuming you prefer more dynamic range...  Again, "better" is subjective.) 


Quote
But the dynamic range database shows the vinyl rips to have the best dynamic range, every single time. I read somewhere that this is because somehow it's harder for the artist to screw up the compression as much.
If you read this whole thread, it can be different mastering or it can be a "mathematical" result from the vinyl recording/playback process that changes the DR measurement without changing the sound.

With a traditional recording contract, it's the artist doesn't have much say.  It's up to the producer and maybe some executive to approve the overall sound and "loudness".

Quote
How, and does this make vinyl rips superior to CD rips?
If it's mastered differently, it can sound different.  Or, maybe some listeners just like what the analog record/playback process does to the sound.

Quote
And also in this context and with dynamic range we're talking about the loudest part of the track vs the quietest right,?
I believe it usually the difference between the average and the highest peak.  But, it depends on how you define or measure it and how you hear it.  It can get really complicated...  You can have some short-dynamic drum hits or trumpet blasts that "jump out" at you, or you might have a quiet first-half of the song with a loud 2nd half, etc. 

One short duration "high peak" will improve the dynamic range measurement but doesn't always make that part sound louder.  The analog recording/playback process can introduce phase-shifts that cause some peaks to become higher and other peaks to be become lower without changing the perceived loudness.  If some peaks (or just one peak) are higher, you get a better DR measurement.  Somebldy 

MP3 tends to do the same thing...  Some peaks get higher and some get lower without the loudness getting higher.

Quote
...so both compression here and dynamic range are directly related to the Loudness Wars?
Yes.  There is a limit to how loud you can go (with both digital and analog formats).    Dynamic compression is used to make it louder by boosting the average level (and the quiet parts) without boosting/clipping the peaks.    Or, sometimes the peaks are clipped.  Simply boosting the volume into clipping is itself is a (bad) kind of dynamic compression with the quiet & average levels boosted when you cannot boost the peaks any more.