You do need to be careful when mastering onto vinyl. Some people assume that
CD will sound exactly the same when put onto vinyl - but there are always
gonna be distortions. People seem to forget this nowadays. You will probably
not notice a lot of it - but when you get the test pressing back and play
them out over a decent system you could be disappointed. However as long as
you account for this and you have a good engineer then it usually isn't a
problem.
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Widman <chriswidman@hotmail.com>
To: <acid-jazz@ucsd.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: DJ Preference
> For those who don't know, vinyl sounds better than standard CDs for
several
> reasons...
>
> First off, vinyl has a greater dynamic range (75db) and frequency response
7
> Hz to 25kHz resulting in that more detailed, nuanced and "warm" sound.
This
> is probably more noticable on a large or hi fi sound system that can
> reproduce near the full frequency range.
>
> As Keyser has said before, some pre-digital records will never sound
better
> than thier original vinyl form. This is because, back in the day, albums
> were made in recording studios and mastered onto analog (magnetic) tape.
The
> analog tape was then cut onto record. No analogue to digital convertion.
>
> [OT: One of the brilliant things about old blue note records and CD
releases
> is that they were mastered to two track tape! So when you hear the CDs
there
> is no remastering...its just as recorded. one of the first label sounds to
> emphasize the drums & hi-hat properly]
>
> The difference is can be visualized by comparing an actually photographic
> print to a photographic reproduction in a magazine. If you look at a photo
> in a magazine it looks nice, but if you look very close you will see that
it
> is composed of a fine pattern of dots. This is a convienent way to fool
the
> eye just as a CD is a convienent way to fool the ear at 44.1 million
samples
> per second and for all due puposes its probably the best way for most
> people.
>
> And finally to answer Richard's question...
>
> At 12:29 PM 3/30/01 +0000, richard n wrote:
> >Am I right in assuming the common consensus that vinyl has better quality
> >than cds? I am wondering how this can be when, before being pressed, the
> >music on vinyl is *already* in digital form. If you take an audio tape
and
> >convert to cd, its not going to sound better than the original. So why
does
> >digital music converted to vinyl feel better than cds? cheer richard
>
> This is because most producers, who know what they are doing and have the
> resources, use a DAT which has a greater dynamic range than a CD, a
higher
> sample rate 48mhz/sec (this small bit makes a difference) and sometimes a
> greater bit depth. Combine this better than CD quality with a solid
> knowledge of vinyl mastering and you get better sounding records.
>
> The digital sound can also be fattened up by analogue processors that add
> harmonics and other bits before the final cutting to plate.
>
> As far as CD vs. Vinyl, DJs should utilize both, but there are still quite
a
> few establishments that don't have CD decks. I also find it difficult to
> weed through music in your CD collection during a dancefloor set without a
> bit of prep work (I would never show up at a lounge or my radioshow
without
> CDs!). Previewing through all of 12+ tracks and beat matching them seems
> more difficult in the distracting, sensory overload world of the Dj booth.
> There is just something very tactile, easy to organize and reasuring about
a
> 12" record with one tune to a side...;p
>
> Also try finding current DnB on CD!
>
> here is a cool, semi-technical article about vinyl mastering...
> check it
>
> http://www.acousticsounds.com/acoustic/acoustech/
> records.html
>
> peace
> Chris Widman
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Mar 30 2001 - 21:16:58 CEST