Skip to main content
Topic: Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience (Read 87618 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #125
IF the labels give us lossless flac of exactly the versions they use for the vinyl pressing all would be fine.
As it is now i can't stop feeling fooled.
Like with many things they recreated very successfull their own market and use the magic of propaganda in people get starting discussing all day long cd <-> vinyl.
It is the same to me when the HighnBitarte version sounds purposely very different to the cd or you get the super dupa deluxe only when buying the itunes version.
Instead of making buying music more attractive it all became worse imho.


Is this to say you believe that their is a version that is used for vinyl that is different from CD? Or you don't know, and don't trust it? I know that this would never happen. The masses get don't care, so the labels will not. My understanding of the assertions of some of the more knowledgeable members on here is that the brickwalled CD master is turned down(with destructive gain/clipping) and put on vinyl. I am struggling with this. I can see it definitely for some labels and artists but not so much for others. Depending on how much pride and control they have when it comes to vinyl release. What do you mean about iTunes? Are you talking about different sounding versions or just the "bonus tracks" and such? I think the latter. In any case you are right.

My understanding was that this is not "technically" possible with vinyl and so therefore, they may not make a whole new master for the LP, but send it out for LP before the final brickwall limiting gain is applied. If not, the squared waves would make the stylus jump out of the groove. But then not all CDs clip like mad, they just have very little dynamic range and the peaks look more like, IDK, a desert cliff with very small variations in the flat top surface, where maybe one sample will hit 0db and the rest of the peak will be between -.1 and .5 db or so.

This master described above can be attenuated a bit with it's heavily limited waveforms and sent to vinyl and pressed? Would that not make the record sound a lot like the CD, and behave similarly in an audio editor, as in have about the same dynamic range from peak to RMS? I'm not talking about tricking TT DR meter. I'm talking about actually listening and watching for indication of dynamic range in the meters and waveforms. Even if it is only 3-5db in peak transients, I have not observed a case where I felt the CD had as much DR or sounded as suffocated, in the loud parts.* With 10 bits of DR in vinyl, of course the CD will have more DR in the unaffected areas. I am trying to wrap my head around and understand what is being asserted in the course of this thread.
*Kanye West - Dark Fantasy(horrible production in the mixing stage it seems) and A Perfect Circle(CDs are limited, but maybe not too much?) releases are the most questionable I have found

In case of filters like all-pass is that to say; because the CD has more bass or certain frequencies, it appears the vinyl has more DR when it is actually just lack of bass(or certain frequencies) to make the waveforms look different?

I have googled and it always seems to lead me back here, where it seems half don't commit to a conclusion and half are insistent on an absolute conclusion. This is important to me, if you couldn't tell.

If you haven't any of the above, for which I don't blame you, this is the meat of my post:
Assuming some LPs are just limited masters turned down and the "dynamic range" I see(and hear) is all analogue playback effect posing as DR, Is there a solid, easy way to test this that I missed? In this case TT DR Meter doesn't cut it, as the sampled LP is just a representation of the analogue playback, which is tricking me. Some records have enough press that I know; NIN Hesitation Marks mentions the LP master on the site because of the "Audiophile" master he put out. I do have all three versions of that album, which would make for an interesting post. Maybe it is relevant, since the CD and Audiophile are just a few dB different in level. Also, we know that there is 3 masters in that case. I digress, other cases it is more likely done the cheap way like, Ludacris or She Wants Revenge--one 12" not special edition or double, 180g etc....
If what I fear is true all or most of the time; What about double LPs or 12" singles? Why do these almost always have a nice lot of more DR, as opposed to just being louder? I think I have an Eminem 12" that sounds just louder, but most serious electronic acts like Daft Punk or Justice, this seems ti be the case
I am off to do some A-B comparisons, no X since I am alone, shocker

EDIT: Too long and repeated sentiments from last post.
end the LOUDNESS war... please?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #126
After doing some reading plenty of people just say "some are just CDs on vinyl" But then I some comes on that seems to know what they are talking about and confirms what I understood(thought I did) which is contradicted all over this site and thread. It's there are technical limitations that force the producer of an LP to be at least to some extent, less compressed, like it would have to be 7 mins per side or be so low that the hiss would make it sound crap. I am sure there are some records out there like that, or just barely get by and therefore are not worth it. I think you have to take it on a case by case, which sucks, how are you going to test CD and Vinyl(rips) without buying them? not cool.

If this is the case, then this would mean 2xLPs can be less dynamic and more loud because they have to put less music on each side, of course why can't anything just be easy? Single 180g special editions with research I think are the safest for now... Hi Res, please enforce a standard like the movie industry! I will buy all your crap again... I love music and sound that much. *Another reason to have a thread that can't be closed or deleted(do they have those?) That is an ongoing source of CD and vinyl samples and anecdotal and scientific observations as to the quality of any given vinyl release. The better the equipment and user the... better.* I will try to start one here or wherever people care... another day, though
end the LOUDNESS war... please?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #127
Anyone tried to analyze a relaese that offers the opportunity to check the special vinyl master?
I googled and Tom Pettys Mudcrutch release from 2008 seems to give a cd by the vinyl version that should have the corresponding master on it.
Comparing this to the standard cd may be intereesting IF they really did.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #128
Anyone tried to analyze a relaese that offers the opportunity to check the special vinyl master?
I googled and Tom Pettys Mudcrutch release from 2008 seems to give a cd by the vinyl version that should have the corresponding master on it.
Comparing this to the standard cd may be intereesting IF they really did.


Yes, twice in recent memory/last year or so. Witherscape's The Inheritance and Iced Earth's Plagues of Babylon..  The CD releases were the somewhat standard DR6 while the vinyl masters (distributed also in digital format) were DR11 and DR9 respectively.
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #129
Just to muddy the waters,wasn't there a recent Nine Inch Nails release that had a 'regular' and 'audiophil' release - the latter with higher dynamic range measurements? Were both versions available on multiple formats?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #130
I think the audiophile version was 24/48 only. I didn't look it up exactly but 3db or alike more dynamics simply don't fit into 16bit anymore 
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #131
I think the audiophile version was 24/48 only. I didn't look it up exactly but 3db or alike more dynamics simply don't fit into 16bit anymore 

Well, NIN isn't really my thing, so I don't know if both versions were released on disc (of any kind) or not.

Anyhoo, here's some Burmese death metal recorded on wax cylinder, so we all know just how lucky we are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDJrHQk4Idc

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #132
My understanding of the assertions of some of the more knowledgeable members on here is that the brickwalled CD master is turned down(with destructive gain/clipping) and put on vinyl. I am struggling with this. I can see it definitely for some labels and artists but not so much for others. Depending on how much pride and control
  CDs are brickwall limited because that's the sound the producer (or somebody) wants.  I wouldn't assume they want anything different from the vinyl.  If they want to make a "high fidelity" or "audiophile" version for vinyl, I'd hope they would make a similar master available digitally.

The artist rarely has the control or the technical expertise to make these decisions.


Quote
Would that not make the record sound a lot like the CD, and behave similarly in an audio editor, as in have about the same dynamic range from peak to RMS? I'm not talking about tricking TT DR meter. I'm talking about actually listening and watching for indication of dynamic range in the meters and waveforms.
It would sound like the CD if not for the technical limitations of the analog recording/playback process.  If the DR meter is fooled, the RMS & peak meters will also be fooled, and the waveforms will look different and fool your eyes. 


You have to use your ears.    But, the problem with that is vinyl sounds different from digital and the difference (which may be preferable to some listeners) may not be due to dynamic range.    It's not unusual for listeners to describe the more-compressed version as more dynamic, because it's more "intense".


Quote
It's there are technical limitations that force the producer of an LP to be at least to some extent, less compressed, like it would have to be 7 mins per side or be so low that the hiss would make it sound crap.
No.  Vinyl does not have to be less compressed.  In the old vinyl days, they were doing basically the same thing and using compression to make the records louder. 


Quote
In case of filters like all-pass is that to say; because the CD has more bass or certain frequencies, it appears the vinyl has more DR when it is actually just lack of bass(or certain frequencies) to make the waveforms look different?
All-pass filtering doesn't change the amount of bass.  The deep bass (and the highest frequencies) may be rolled-off for vinyl, but that's different from the all-pass filtering effect.  The all-pass filtering comes from the cutting head and playback cartridge, and the RIAA recording EQ and complementary RIAA playback EQ.

Ideally, the cutting head and playback cartridge would be complementary, and the RIAA EQ would be complementary and net result would be flat frequency response (like digital).  The all-pass phase-shifting is just a side effect of all this.  The phase shift isn't audible and it doesn't cause any harm, but it will change the shape of the waveform.

All-pass filtering causes different frequencies to be phase-shifted differently.  So the different frequencies are shifted-slightly in time and this causes the peaks at different frequencies to line-up differently.  The resulting overall waveform (containing all of the frequencies) will have some higher peaks and some lower peaks (without affecting the perceived peak volume).  If you measure the new-higher peaks to make your dynamic range measurement, you have just increased the (measured) dynamic range.    If you all-pass filter a highly compressed-limited recording, this "fake dynamic range increase" will be more dramatic with a compressed/limited than with an uncompressed recording.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #133
Just to muddy the waters,wasn't there a recent Nine Inch Nails release that had a 'regular' and 'audiophil' release - the latter with higher dynamic range measurements? Were both versions available on multiple formats?


IIRC the "audiophile" version didn't fare much better when looking at the DR numbers. There was a little bit of whining going on from fetishists in the blogosphere; the ones who demand to see magic numbers.  Thing is is Trent Reznor's style of music has always relied on heavy compression. Even the Broken EP, released in 1992, was very compressed for the time. I don't usually buy the "it's an artistic choice" line but in Reznor's case I believe that's the way he wants it. He's a very hands-on type of artist and likes to control all aspects of his recording process.

I don't think it's known whether the double LP release of Hesitation Marks had a dedicated master or if it used the so-called "audiophile version" that was distributed digitally.
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #134
Sometime ago I wrote an article on Guide to Converting Analog Vinyl To Digital Files Using Windows. Not my best work.  But there is a fun bit at the end comparing a vinyl rip to a CD-ROM rip from what appears to be the same master.  Not a modern vinyl master (or CD) and not the best "controlled" comparison, but something to listen to. Here is the excerpt from the article:

Do you feel you can hear the difference between the LP and CD rips? Do you think you can pick which one is which? I have to stack the deck a little, as starting out from dead silence would be too easy. But once the music masks the noise floor, who knows…

I picked the last 60 seconds of the recording starting with the bass drum ramp up and finale of the three transient hits of the bass drum. I lined up the tracks timing and matched the levels as best as possible. The vinyl rip and CDROM version alternate every 15 seconds. Meaning for the first 15 seconds, you are listening to either the vinyl or CD rip, then it switches to the other rip, every 15 seconds, swap. In fact, you will hear the digital edits for the first couple of 15 second transitions.

24/441 Which is which  (18MB WAV)

Does the recording start with the vinyl rip or CDROM rip?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #135
Is there a format that always is "remastered?"
Nothing technically stops people using bad masters on new/different formats. While obviously the actual digits are different on, say, SACD vs DVD-A vs CD, they can all use the same "master" in the sense that you mean it, so the answer is "no".

Even places like HDTracks carry some releases with heavy DRC.

Is any store, any audio format, any record label brave enough to reject releases on the basis of poor sound quality? Even audiophile re-issue labels have to do the best with what's provided to them, though they are often the best place to look.

Enjoy (and tell people here about) any genuinely improved mastering you find, but don't drive yourself mad looking for it.


It's pretty clear that people sometimes cut clipped CD/digital masters to vinyl, and anyone saying this is impossible because of square waves etc etc etc is just wrong. Didn't they notice people have been cutting synthetic sounds (often containing square waves) to vinyl for decades?
Assuming some LPs are just limited masters turned down and the "dynamic range" I see(and hear) is all analogue playback effect posing as DR, Is there a solid, easy way to test this that I missed?
Yes, you get both versions and examine the waveforms. Find some clipping in the CD version, zoom in on the same part in the vinyl version, and look for clipping there. If the same flat top is present in the vinyl version (usually visible as a skewed / diagonal - it doesn't look exactly the same as the CD waveform, but it should still be a fairly clear straight line that has no place in most music recordings) then you know the CD master was used for the vinyl. If you find there's no flat line, and even better you find that the peaks (which were chopped off in the CD version) are clearly present in the vinyl version, then you know a different master was used.

Poor playback equipment, different EQ (either in the masters or the playback), and an inability to find exactly the same moment of both recordings, can make this comparison quite difficult - but often it provides a conclusive answer one way or the other.

Cheers,
David.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #136
Just to muddy the waters,wasn't there a recent Nine Inch Nails release that had a 'regular' and 'audiophil' release - the latter with higher dynamic range measurements? Were both versions available on multiple formats?


IIRC the "audiophile" version didn't fare much better when looking at the DR numbers. There was a little bit of whining going on from fetishists in the blogosphere; the ones who demand to see magic numbers.  Thing is is Trent Reznor's style of music has always relied on heavy compression. Even the Broken EP, released in 1992, was very compressed for the time. I don't usually buy the "it's an artistic choice" line but in Reznor's case I believe that's the way he wants it. He's a very hands-on type of artist and likes to control all aspects of his recording process.

I don't think it's known whether the double LP release of Hesitation Marks had a dedicated master or if it used the so-called "audiophile version" that was distributed digitally.


"NOTE: The standard mastered version is in no way inferior to the Audiophile Version - we wouldn’t release something inferior as the default. And vinyl purists rest assured, the vinyl edition was mastered to sound the very best for that format. The Audiophile Version is merely an alternate take on the mastering, which some people will appreciate. It’s meant to give a slightly different experience, not denigrate the standard version. Listen to each and come to your own conclusions." -nin tumblr

This doesn't really tell us too much. except for the Audiophile version is good enough for me. As at first I was pissed because it was still brickwalled and loud, it is amazing what just a few db can do to a mix. I am going to compare all three. I am not even a big NIN fan, but a big industrial fan, and all industrial has gone the way of the rest. Luckily it's hayday was the old days, and there is tons of music I still haven't yet even heard from those days.

In regard to Broken, you are right. I didn't like him back in the day for being too commercial but I did like Pretty Hate Machine and some Downward Spiral. I have listened to this one a bit recently and I don't really like it now and didn't back then either. I assumed because of it's date it wasn't smashed. I think this is the reason I never liked it. Ironically, Pretty Hate Machine is a very dynamic record--too dynamic in places--because that is from when Trent "didn't know what he was doing." The record made him a star and a very rich man. It's songs are still the ones that get the most response live. Lucky for us he "fixed it" in 2010  The vinyl release of that remaster has several spots where remixing was done(shakers here, samples there) I wonder if it is an indication that it is a different master. It seems like the changes are in parts where vinyl noise would be distracting.

Thanks DVDdoug, I have learned most of the answers to this on another thread and from Ian Shepard's video. I don't get the all pass filtering stuff, but that is my own ignorance about all-pass filtering. In any case I have a had my bubble burst. A bubble I was living in since 2008. I have gone back to several of my vinyl rips to realize that there is indeed little difference in dynamic range. They just sound different. Often times low-mid is often pervasive on CD which clouds out high hats and such. I think I all too often mistook that for fidelity and DR. I think I will have to retrain my ears to truly detect DR and fidelity. I have been taking it on faith for many years. Belief is a powerful thing.

About Motown, I read about that and know there was heavy compression on those records, as well as all recordings from the time have less range because of technology. But an IEEE article, the same one which gave me the belief that records just could not hold that kind of level, said it was these limitations that kept Motown and every one else in check for so long...
I think maybe they are just as heavily compressed, which I never minded, but maybe the brickwall limiting, clipping, waveform distortion is what wasn't possible?

Edit: Broken is heavily compressed for it's day, yes, but looking at it next to modern NIN(or anything else), I would take it any day.
end the LOUDNESS war... please?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #137
Quote
Yes, you get both versions and examine the waveforms. Find some clipping in the CD version, zoom in on the same part in the vinyl version, and look for clipping there. If the same flat top is present in the vinyl version (usually visible as a skewed / diagonal - it doesn't look exactly the same as the CD waveform, but it should still be a fairly clear straight line that has no place in most music recordings) then you know the CD master was used for the vinyl. If you find there's no flat line, and even better you find that the peaks (which were chopped off in the CD version) are clearly present in the vinyl version, then you know a different master was used.



I Think I have found an example of this on the track I already had up when I read your post. I will post a screen shot when I have time. It looks exactly as you describe. The nerve of this industry... BTW it can be a challenge to find the exact moment in time, but I have fixing clicks and pops enough to find them fairly easily.
end the LOUDNESS war... please?


Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #139
Thanks, David.

Thanks for this post as well:
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php...st&p=875447

Anyone tried to analyze a relaese that offers the opportunity to check the special vinyl master?
I googled and Tom Pettys Mudcrutch release from 2008 seems to give a cd by the vinyl version that should have the corresponding master on it.
Comparing this to the standard cd may be intereesting IF they really did.

Yes, twice in recent memory/last year or so. Witherscape's The Inheritance and Iced Earth's Plagues of Babylon..  The CD releases were the somewhat standard DR6 while the vinyl masters (distributed also in digital format) were DR11 and DR9 respectively.

Why are people continuing to cite DR numbers in a CD vs. Vinyl comparison when they have been shown to be bogus for this purpose?

http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=102895

Many modern CDs are just pathological examples of this. A low pass filter, a high pass filter, proper sub-sample interpolation, and an all pass filter - all these things will raise the peak-to-average ratio compared with calculating it for the raw samples. Yet the sound doesn't change at all - it's subjectively the same signal. TT DR is measuring numbers, not sounds.

I think the easiest way to compare like-for-like with an "objective" "DR" tool is to run the CD version through an all-pass filter first and use that as the baseline against which you compare the vinyl version. Or just assume, if the CD looks clipped, that there's 3-4dB more energy in the clipped peaks just waiting to burst out the moment you fiddle with them.

Here are links to other relevant topics...
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=66401
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=68641
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/index.php?showtopic=80679
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #140
Why are people continuing to cite DR numbers in a CD vs. Vinyl comparison when they have been shown to be bogus for this purpose?


Both of the "vinyl mixes" I cited earlier were included with limited versions of the CDs. I wasn't referring to a needledrop.

The Witherscape release includes a copy of the vinyl mix at 320 Kbps MP3s as CD data and the Iced Earth special edition has a lossless copy on the DVD.
The Loudness War is over. Now it's a hopeless occupation.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #141
Still trying to figure out the uploading of audio. I'm sure I will soon, but here are some pics of a CD and vinyl comparison that I really had a hard time finding "clipped" spots, as in 5+ samples in a straight line. the rest is a very compressed track, without a lot of brickwall clipping. The kind that make it really hard to spot CD masters on vinyl.

Also, without audio samples, I can't go into it too much, but suffice to say these two versions sound very different. To the point that an ABX would be a waste of time because it is so obvious. The vinyl is more pleasing to me. Again, without risking TOS #8, I would have to say just more midrange in the CD seemingly drowning out high hats. Does anyone have any insight into this, and before I try to use Relife(I'm on Mac), is there DSP beside eq'ing that would give me more listenable results on CD versions? EQing is seldom a good fix IME.

Thanks, 2bDecided for the advice, again. I am interested in possibly a faster way of "testing" my vinyl rips for "same master" syndrome. I am pretty ignorant to all-pass filtering, for all my time hobbying with Pro Audio. So if the answer is in there, it flew over my head.

Note: On second track the Right channel is on top to better see against the top track's Right channel. AND, the vinyl is out of phase with CD (common occurrence) IDK why.
--PM me if you know how to use Dropbox on here without getting "dynamic page" error. I have a paid premium DB account and image shack is free(and 280px max, I think.)

M83 - Midnight City (2011) CD on bottom. Vinyl on top(sometimes zoomed vertically.)





Audio samples to follow...
EDIT: Maybe I'm just tired, but I searched for 15 mins and can't find where to upload audio samples... apologies
end the LOUDNESS war... please?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #142
There is a sub-forum called Uploads.  Below the text box there a window to attach a file to your post.

Quote
To the point that an ABX would be a waste of time because it is so obvious.
That's almost always the case with analog vs. digital.  Sometimes people do hear an "obvious" or "night and day" difference between two speaker cables or between 44.1khz/16-bit and 96kHz/24 bit and that's when the TOS #8 red flags all come out! 

Unless you are comparing a digital copy of the analog with the direct analog (which requires a hardware ABX box).  In that case, the digital copy may sound exactly like the analog.  But a CD or MP3 almost always sounds different from the vinyl, and hopefully nobody will challenge you (or me!) about that.

The same is true with speakers.  Nobody here will ask you to prove that two speakers sound different.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #143
The better sound quality of the record can be caused by a cartridge whose frequency response is far off from flat. Then it basically applies an EQ to everything played and you may like this EQ better. They could be different masters, but it's something to keep in mind with all recordings of vinyl. I, and I'm sure people more qualified than me, will surely take a look when you post the samples.

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #144
It's not just the cartridge, there is also RIAA equalization to contend with.
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #145
Which should, theoretically, be evened out during playback, unless you plug your phono outs directly into your recording device. But of course, "in theory there is no difference between theory and practice." 

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #146
There is a sub-forum called Uploads.  Below the text box there a window to attach a file to your post.

Thanks, trying to upload attachments directly to this topic. Not seeing any option to do such in the Add Reply UI. On Mac with all three browsers. greynol is helping me so as to not derail topic. But ideas are appreciated as to what I am not getting.

It's not just the cartridge, there is also RIAA equalization to contend with.

In Audacity RIAA curve is +7db in low end dropping off to -a lot around 400k is this because of the cartridges "eq" which would be low on bass and REALLY high in treble/mids? A flat/accurate vinyl playback set-up would sound a lot more like the CD than mine?
If I have this right it would explain the SH.TV topic that was referred to over there about "audiophiles" not liking flat, but preferring the common "brightness" that most carts color playback with. Maybe this is what I am experiencing, mistaking this coloration for the "breathing room" that proper headroom provides.
end the LOUDNESS war... please?


Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #148
Lucky for us he "fixed it" in 2010  The vinyl release of that remaster has several spots where remixing was done(shakers here, samples there) I wonder if it is an indication that it is a different master. It seems like the changes are in parts where vinyl noise would be distracting.

NIN - Pretty Hate Machine 2010 Remaster vinyl was what I am speaking of above. No need to waste my bandwidth on audio samples. The proof is pretty conclusive in these pics. There are are some I am not really sure about. Mostly because the CD version is not Clipped for more than a sample at a time. Making the only way to really know being:
1. Label/artist/engineer confirms(not guaranteed)
2. Digital version of vinyl master is made available for comparison
3. Listen - This is where opinions come in. I suspect my ears will become more keen on real and "fake" dynamics as they did with recognizing a compressed CD. Still wondering if I should start a topic dedicated to information we have about masters and comparisons for different releases.

Here is NIN - Head Like a Hole 2010 CD-Vinyl.

end the LOUDNESS war... please?

Modern Vinyl "Masters" vs. CD--My Experience

Reply #149
You need to match the volumes of the two files when you compare. The waveform scales differently and your ears perceive differently dependent on what level they're each at so it's important to do. Just ReplayGain scan both and subtract one track gain value from the other and adjust the louder one down by that value in Audacity.

Your vinyl recording certainly sounds pretty different from the CD. I can't really say much as to what causes the difference besides that it is the sum of all frequency transformations the record has gone through. To pinpoint what does it the most you could try a different phono cartridge or a different preamp. To measure the amount of error your phonograph introduces you could get a test disc and record it to see how it alters the sounds. They each would require some expense, but the test disc sounds like it could even be fun if you care enough to justify the expense.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020