"I’m sorry, not to be rude but I think there is a whole lot of misguided misinformation being misunderstood here."
No offense taken, and I hope I didn't come across as rude.
I agree there is some misinformation here, that's why I posted. Let me address some points in your response. Also, you might read the articles that I posted first - lots of key info on vinyl mastering.
"Uh, hello… it is a pretty standard assumption in the audiophile world that vinyl is WORLDS better than CD. The ONLY thing a CD does better that you have listed is separation."
And you might say next that audiophiles assume tube amps are superior to solid state. I disagree that vinyl and tube amps are better than CD and solid state. I contend they both vinyl and tubes "distort" in a manner some perceive as "pleasing", and I perceive as plain "distortion".
You don't credit CD with a better dynamic range? Then you are frankly in denial - I'm looking for a reference for comparative specs now.
And regarding frequency response, did you know that the treble is more accurate on the outer grooves of a record verses the inner grooves? That's why they frequently located ballads towards the center. (Read the articles...) Also, there was a RIAA wear standard about how high frequency response can drop off after a number of plays (Wikipedia article below).
Frankly, vinyl cannot come close to CD when looking at the specs - just admit it. The whole argument is in digital sampling and quantization error, and perhaps the ADCs and DACs themselves, and whether the sound is not "natural".
"The TRICKS to which you refer are done at the recording end of the process. They are present whether the playback end is digital (CD) or analogue (vinyl). Really doesn’t apply in a comparison between the two mediums. And the side-chain compression or broadband de-essing you refer to is just high frequency suppresion for the human voice sibilence that is done in most recording studios."
Epic wrong here -
read the articles. Of course, you can use any processing you want at any time, but as I said, they are
required in the mastering process for vinyl so that the info can fit on the record (without RIAA equalization bass cut, you'd get 5 min per side of LP) and so that the needle doesn't skip out of the groove (sibilance requiring de-essing). Ditto with virtually requiring low frequencies in "mono" - you can't pan left or right.
None of these mastering tricks required for CDs. Just sample directly from the digital or analog final mixes from the studio. Of course, you can "sweeten" the sound however you like at this point too, or leave it as is.
The ‘color’ you attribute to vinyl pales in comparison to the ‘color’ from a medium that cannot even reproduce a sine wave – a fundamental coefficient of sound reproduction. The codecs used in CD can only recreate a stepladder facsimile of an acoustic sine wave. The missing parts must be interpolated and synthesized out of redundant information.
Yes, the CD stores a "stepladder facsimilie" of the sine wave (actually 2 for left/right channels) as sampled from the master as digital bits. After reading this facsimilie back on your CD player (the redundant info helps insure the digital bits are 100% identical to what was sampled at the studio), the DAC (Digital-to-Analog Converter) converts it back to an analog signal, and a smooth wave, ideally, the sine wave from the original master.
The standard CD sampling rate of 44kHz was chosen to provide frequency response to 22kHz. This means the stepladder is fine enough to record/playback to 22kHz.
We are comparing 100% accurate digital bit transmission copy to a sine wave signal causing a wiggle in a cutting lathe to cut a master presser from which plastic disks are created whose surface is scratched by a stylus that is wiggled back and forth and whose wiggles are then converted back in a sine wave? Look at all these physical transitions... with no error checking!
Add to that all of the mastering tricks required, and yes -
I'm saying that vinyl adds a lot more color than CD, and therefore, the CD is a much more accurate sound reproduction of what was recorded in the studio or live performance.
"And the Sunfire Subs from dear old Bob carver are more suited to brutal earth shaking home theater LFE channels than too real music."
You might be right here, I've heard this said several times. I had it tuned great in Hong Kong, but here in San Fran, I can't get it to sound too good. When tuned properly, I liked it better than my REL Strata.
Wikipedia - Gramaphone Record
Uncyclopedia - Vinyl Record
Now, I am definitely not anti-distortion and anti-tube or anti-analog: I play guitar, have 4 tube amps, and I love the sound of analog synths (ex. the French band Air). And violins. I have no issue with any type of "harmonic distortion" in the instruments of the original performances.
But I when I want good, loud,
accurate sound reproduction, with low distortion and little color, it's
digital and solid state all the way. (Leave the sweetener in the bowl...)
