Very interesting. I downloaded some samples and there were very good.
But i realized that the volume is too high and makes them very impressive, so in order to compare them with the same of scopes minimax, i almost doubled the volume of my amplifier. After balancing the volumes i cannot see much difference between ASB samles(mp3) and the same sounds of scopes minimax. Even if they have the 200mhz sharks, is it possible to have the same software?
ASB box
Yes, it sounds more digital in 96khz.
And to be honnest i prefer analog feel in the sound, but there are some questions here!
minimax on 44.1 and a little on 48khz sounds a little more fat(and more centred picture). Is this because it doesn't have the high frequency when it is on 96khz, or it has both highs and centres thus better?
I can see the difference more obvious on 404 for example.
And to be honnest i prefer analog feel in the sound, but there are some questions here!
minimax on 44.1 and a little on 48khz sounds a little more fat(and more centred picture). Is this because it doesn't have the high frequency when it is on 96khz, or it has both highs and centres thus better?
I can see the difference more obvious on 404 for example.
-
hubird
Take a mix.
The relevance of 96 above 44.1 in a perfect mix on cd is about 0.00000179467%, but I must admit the latest 7 could be an 8.
Mixing is about musical (human) choices, choosing the right musical parts for your song is already 95% of your overall eq-ing, without touching the equalizer
cheers.
I more and more tend to gently cutoff the highs, in a subtle way of course, but anyway, and my max stops already with 15kHz
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2005-08-09 18:56 ]</font>
The relevance of 96 above 44.1 in a perfect mix on cd is about 0.00000179467%, but I must admit the latest 7 could be an 8.
Mixing is about musical (human) choices, choosing the right musical parts for your song is already 95% of your overall eq-ing, without touching the equalizer
cheers.
I more and more tend to gently cutoff the highs, in a subtle way of course, but anyway, and my max stops already with 15kHz
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2005-08-09 18:56 ]</font>
-
Joxer the Mighty
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:00 pm
well, there's a huge bandwidth in vinyl sound, not all are created equal...
with all respect - imho your point seems pointless to me
I just put on US3, 'Hand on the Torch' for reference and I must say it sounds as analog as can be (on my gear), but it's a digital recording from 1992 - what rate were samplers back then ?
I guess that it's a matter of knowing one's tools' character and not their numeric specs.
The DAW is a very convenient thing with it's all-under-one-hood paradigm, but it makes people care less about their (original) sound sources and instead tweak every single channel with eq and compression.
That way you superimpose the 'noiseprint' of certain procedures (all digital in this case) over the original sound - and because it's done on most channels that noiseprint becomes more prominent than intended.
Hence the mix sounds digital - of course, what would you expect ?
This sound isn't exactly 'negative' in itself, but subconsciously something IS missing - memory shrieks: digital ! and the whole sh*t is sent through some obscure piece of vintage gear, the more expensive and mysterious, the better.
It doesn't even matter what, a simple tube amp, a tape or a compressor, anything goes
I'm convinced that with more thoughtful choice of sources and less tweaking them, the final result would be better, even on less sophisticated gear.
cheers, Tom
with all respect - imho your point seems pointless to me
I just put on US3, 'Hand on the Torch' for reference and I must say it sounds as analog as can be (on my gear), but it's a digital recording from 1992 - what rate were samplers back then ?
I guess that it's a matter of knowing one's tools' character and not their numeric specs.
The DAW is a very convenient thing with it's all-under-one-hood paradigm, but it makes people care less about their (original) sound sources and instead tweak every single channel with eq and compression.
That way you superimpose the 'noiseprint' of certain procedures (all digital in this case) over the original sound - and because it's done on most channels that noiseprint becomes more prominent than intended.
Hence the mix sounds digital - of course, what would you expect ?
This sound isn't exactly 'negative' in itself, but subconsciously something IS missing - memory shrieks: digital ! and the whole sh*t is sent through some obscure piece of vintage gear, the more expensive and mysterious, the better.
It doesn't even matter what, a simple tube amp, a tape or a compressor, anything goes
I'm convinced that with more thoughtful choice of sources and less tweaking them, the final result would be better, even on less sophisticated gear.
cheers, Tom
Astro, I remember the 80's, but I didn't really think that things sounded better...if my memory is correct I thought the opposite, really...
The fact is that the real issue of vinyl is not frequency response, the opposite, as current 44.100hz cd format is forced to a total silence above the 22.050 hz, while I can ensure you that on a 50.000$ stereo analog system that I had the fortune to hear at home of a guy who was in the classical music international business I've heard some hi q. vinyls that were absolutely astounding for liveness and tonal naturality, that in my experience is reached with the presence of the highest harmonics possible, wich may not be directly heard by the human hear, but interact with lower frequencies bringing further modulation to them while they cross the air from the speakers to our ears.
The real problem with vinyls is dynamics. Expecially in classical music there are some parts in wich the music level is so low, that the hiss becomes incredibly annoying.
But on a medium-high level of gear I have no doubts that a normally compressed genre like disco and similar, will kick ass on vinyl, way more than on cd.
At that point, if you want to output a vinyl, but you want to record on a daw, provided you have superior converters and top notch components, it makes sense to use the highest possible sample rates, if you don't have to mess everything with a downsampling algo, and naturally to use the highest bitrate the converters allow, or superior if a dithering-shaping process to 24 bits is available in high quality...
I know everything is a compromise between different pros and cons, but theoretically that approach is correct.
The fact is that the real issue of vinyl is not frequency response, the opposite, as current 44.100hz cd format is forced to a total silence above the 22.050 hz, while I can ensure you that on a 50.000$ stereo analog system that I had the fortune to hear at home of a guy who was in the classical music international business I've heard some hi q. vinyls that were absolutely astounding for liveness and tonal naturality, that in my experience is reached with the presence of the highest harmonics possible, wich may not be directly heard by the human hear, but interact with lower frequencies bringing further modulation to them while they cross the air from the speakers to our ears.
The real problem with vinyls is dynamics. Expecially in classical music there are some parts in wich the music level is so low, that the hiss becomes incredibly annoying.
But on a medium-high level of gear I have no doubts that a normally compressed genre like disco and similar, will kick ass on vinyl, way more than on cd.
At that point, if you want to output a vinyl, but you want to record on a daw, provided you have superior converters and top notch components, it makes sense to use the highest possible sample rates, if you don't have to mess everything with a downsampling algo, and naturally to use the highest bitrate the converters allow, or superior if a dithering-shaping process to 24 bits is available in high quality...
I know everything is a compromise between different pros and cons, but theoretically that approach is correct.
-
marcuspocus
- Posts: 2310
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Canada/France
if you need such a disk, it's ok - if you need fidelity it's probably just crap
a digital production doesn't magically turn into analog because it's cut into some material.
pick an arbitrary (original) funk record from the 70s (quality pressing) and compare it to a (digitally remasterd) reissue.
that's why I mentioned the 'Blue Note' record above. Verve and Blue Note are labels where they use the advantages of digital technology, but still achieve an 'analog' sound image.
Imho it's not WHAT they use, but HOW it's applied.
on a vinyl player the stylus interacts with the cartridge, which interacts with the tonearm, which interacts with the chassis, wich interacts with the floor of room...
the cartridge's electromechnic interacts with the input stage of the preamp
for a vinyl cutter basically the same rules apply...
on playback those delicate signals require extremely precise amplification, but finally it's all in vain if your speakers and (or) the room can't keep up with the output
as Alfonso writes, if everything is properly in tune the result IS stunning - but then who can afford this ?
or who will care ?
yet I'm absolutely convinced that frequency response has (close to) nothing to do with it.
we all know by experience that phase fidelity is much easier to detect (f.e. moving stereo image due to a few samples delay) than frequency content (otherwise atrac or mp3 wouldn't be possible).
there definetely is the advantage of avoiding interacting alias frequencies by increasing the sample rate.
A 'quality' anti-alias filter will (obviously) improve much in this context, but it's not a simple thing and no cheapo either...
That's why (a certain part of) industry favours higher sample rates - in million quantities such a thing really counts
but at the end all your fidelity will be eaten up by a pair of crappy cones...
cheers, Tom
a digital production doesn't magically turn into analog because it's cut into some material.
pick an arbitrary (original) funk record from the 70s (quality pressing) and compare it to a (digitally remasterd) reissue.
that's why I mentioned the 'Blue Note' record above. Verve and Blue Note are labels where they use the advantages of digital technology, but still achieve an 'analog' sound image.
Imho it's not WHAT they use, but HOW it's applied.
on a vinyl player the stylus interacts with the cartridge, which interacts with the tonearm, which interacts with the chassis, wich interacts with the floor of room...
the cartridge's electromechnic interacts with the input stage of the preamp
for a vinyl cutter basically the same rules apply...
on playback those delicate signals require extremely precise amplification, but finally it's all in vain if your speakers and (or) the room can't keep up with the output
as Alfonso writes, if everything is properly in tune the result IS stunning - but then who can afford this ?
or who will care ?
yet I'm absolutely convinced that frequency response has (close to) nothing to do with it.
we all know by experience that phase fidelity is much easier to detect (f.e. moving stereo image due to a few samples delay) than frequency content (otherwise atrac or mp3 wouldn't be possible).
there definetely is the advantage of avoiding interacting alias frequencies by increasing the sample rate.
A 'quality' anti-alias filter will (obviously) improve much in this context, but it's not a simple thing and no cheapo either...
That's why (a certain part of) industry favours higher sample rates - in million quantities such a thing really counts
but at the end all your fidelity will be eaten up by a pair of crappy cones...
cheers, Tom
-
marcuspocus
- Posts: 2310
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Canada/France
But there are many records of the 70's and 60's that sound great.
I don't see the need of digital tech since the master tapes were analog. But surelly there must be a high end turntable to listen to real music.
As my job is near classical orchestras, nothing can sutisfy me as a real live performance, but analog master tapes and vynil is much closer to natural feeling than digital sources.
About classical full orchestra with chorus for example it is difficult for any $$$$$$$$$$ system to handle, but i preffer vynil, if heard on high end system. with disco and more electric sound i enjoy it much better on vynil as well. So in that case of production the samlerates probably should be the highest can be achieved, because there is not downlampling waiting in the nexr corner to hit.
I don't see the need of digital tech since the master tapes were analog. But surelly there must be a high end turntable to listen to real music.
As my job is near classical orchestras, nothing can sutisfy me as a real live performance, but analog master tapes and vynil is much closer to natural feeling than digital sources.
About classical full orchestra with chorus for example it is difficult for any $$$$$$$$$$ system to handle, but i preffer vynil, if heard on high end system. with disco and more electric sound i enjoy it much better on vynil as well. So in that case of production the samlerates probably should be the highest can be achieved, because there is not downlampling waiting in the nexr corner to hit.