We have a turntable here, and it's nice to just listen to analog sometimes, dont need to put it in annother room either. we also use our in house design kt tube sub amp, and an ATC cartridge as big as a house.
It's great to compare early mastering on vinyl ,makes for a great night on the piss, and provides a learning experience for mastering.

Marty,

Please tell us more about the tube amp in the pic you posted.

Yeah..we have an outhouse but we dont use it much

yeah.and my father walked 20 miles every day to school in the rain

Your father had it easy, mine had to go twenty miles one way to school in the snow at the age of four years old. He did have a dog sled tho'

Digital was developed with the idea that a frequency range from 20-20.000 Hz
was all that was needed for good quality. Because the choosen sample frequency
of 44,1 Khz it was necessary to use a steep filter at 20.000 Hz in the audio content.
It is this steep filtering that causes one of the problems in digital audio.
The frequency band before the cutoff is emphasized. This is caused by the fase
shift introduced by the filternetwork. This is one of the problems with CD's that has
been only partially overcome by the use of fase correction networks as
seen in sophisticated CD players.
At the time of introduction there was simply no better read higher sample freq.
hardware available.

In analogue days everything was pointed to maximum quality. Now people accept
willfully introduced lower quality for the sake of getting more songs on a carrier.

In audio as in photography digital has introduced a remarkable decline in quality
but nobody complains.
Hard discs and the widely accepted Protools stand for a decline in quality.

All this was achieved when researchers did not even have an answer to the simple
question why performance figures of tube and solidstate equipment could not be
compared. THD of 0,3 % in a tube amp was nothing serious. The same 0,3% in a
solidstate amp was impossible to live with. The things we measure in audio do not
represent in any way what we can expect to hear.

buy radiohead's "hail to the theif" on vinyl - amazing - 2 lps spinning at
45 rpm - max real estate - max highs and lows - amazing - no digital sounds
like that.........




be well

- jack

This comment establishes that the Digital Math Scoundrels had it all wrong from Day One, they then attempted to slap a bag on their errors, and the bags, obsolete baggage, and legacy code all still suck.

So what do you do? You ****can all the old error-filled and obsolete digital tech and bring in an entirely new plan, new methodologies, and you push the "tech envelope" to the max with the only goal of getting the best Sound Quality possible.

No one should ever settle for less than *outstanding* Sound Quality. Digital, as it exists today, simply does not give that.

Digital is in need of some serious "Sound Quality" improvements.

Besides the Class Action Lawsuit for fraud, I'm still trying to figure out what would be the most appropriate punishment for the Digital Math Scoundrels.

Clearly, the Digital Math Scoundrels punishment ought to have something to do with CD's and MPfreakin3's.

i think the punishment will be discovered in the longevity of the work created
right now, and what's still in print fifteen years from now...............
tape demands that more of the work be done in the live room............
when the action's out there, imo, there's more to remember.......

be well

- jack

You mean that the Digital Math Scoundrels' awful legacy of leaving so much embarrassing sound quality behind is punishment enough? I think we need to be far tougher on these Digital Math Scoundrel skunks. After all, in some jursidictions it's "3 strikes and you're out," meaning, a long prison term will be imposed on the perps.

Here, the Digital Math Scoundrels have a lot more than "3 strikes" against them...just the CD and MPfreakin3 count as Two Strikes!

And with all the other problems and digital "anomalies," the Digital Math Scoundrels have already crossed way over the line and are therefore overdue to get the most severe punishment known to humankind.

Maybe we ought to make them eat those little silicon pieces of "**** chips" they make and see how long they can survive on that "**** chip diet."

We might combine some "forced labor," such as, working in deep, dark, coal mines in the blistering heat along with keeping them on that strict "**** chip" diet. **** chips and water, and hard work. If any of them ever escaped from that mine and actually lived, you can be sure they would not keep making the same mistakes over and over again and they might reform themselves to produce chips that have better sound quality. Why they might even get those chips up to World Class Analogue Sound Quality Standards someday.

But without the lash, these lazy ass Digital Math Scoundrels will just keep telling big lies, engaging in mass fraud, and laughing at all the "marks" they have conned.

I'm not so keen to can the digital stuff,it's improving all the time,I think Pro Tools, despite being awfully expensive is starting to sound better at last. tho we still use the nuendo here, as i think the interface between digital and analog is great.
Being an old bloke, I think one of the most important things is the interface between the two mediums.AD|DA stuff is important, though you have to hear it, and cant really just go on speck. All audio can sound great,for example certain types of distortion are great for guitar sounds,etc and bono used to sing thru a guitar effects unit!
Valves, or TUBES as you guys call them, are very warm, but you have to be careful when mastering, as they arnt always accurate, and colour the sounds heaps.
At the end of the day, It just comes down to what you like, and the more stuff you have the more versatility.
The amplifier in the pic is spare parts that were lying around the workshop, the big bit is a linear power amp, using 1930's 79 tubes for phase changers, and 807's for output, wired linear,we call it the lounge toy, the sub amp underneath,is linear with two KT66's following a special pre eq circuit, using an 833 chip.
The turntable is a THORENS, and has no rumble or feedback to speak of.
Marty Shields, Martstone Amplifiers Tasmania.

Comparing Mp3 to even CD is kind of a stupid comparison... I mean, Mp3 was developed in the 80's. Of course its not going to stand up increadibly well to the kind of stuff we have now. It was never meant to be perfect, just "pretty good", and for what it was designed to do (make audio take up 1/10th the space and still sound good), it's a pretty bloody amazing feat of engineering and ingenuity.

That being said, it is really fcuking awesome to be able to carry 4000 songs in my pocket everywhere I go. And being able to have someone name bands, and then just be able to check them out online without any fuss or trouble. Mp3 is about efficient distribution, and it works.

Now someone, please explain to me how listening to whatever I want, whenever I want to, wherever, is some horrible corruption of all things good and holy because I've sacrificed a rather acceptable amount of sound quality for the sake of convinience and portability.


EDIT: And the idiot who thought up "128kbps is CD quality" made a gross error in judgement, not dissimilar to the Germans in WW2 going "Enigma will never be broken by the Allies!". I make all "rather acceptable" quality loss claims using the latest LAME encoder at APS bitrates..

What the Analogue Sound Lovers are saying is that the Digital Math Scoundrels have always placed "Sound Quality" on the back burner...Digital is simply an abortion of "Sound Quality," that's a crime against nature, neigh, it's a high crime against all of humanity for the Digital Math Scoundrels to make sound quality "worse." It's just flat wrong for the Digital Math Scoundrels to have done that and then lie about it and say it's just as good as analogue when, in fact, MPFreakin3 and CD's are a far cry from "World Class Analogue."

[bump]

Sorry.

I just had to revive the most hysterically funny thread of all time.

SM.

Hmmm, another one caught on. I'm simply going to have to come up with even more outlandish punishment rituals for the Digital Math Scoundrels.

Good suggestions for the most severe punishment known to mankind for these silly little freaks, the Digital Math Scoundrels, will be implemented faster than the last digital sound bug fix.

Those of them who have been reading this thread would have had more than punishment enough.

Well then "why" did you bump it then?

Look, if you do not have anything positive to add re: the most severe punishment to be imposed upon the Digital Math Scoundrels, then you are not forced to post here.

OTOH, if you *are one* of those sleazy little lyin' freakazoid Digital Math Scoundrels, you can attempt to mount one of those lame ass "weak defenses" of the underlying crimes, which will, undoutedly, then be rejected by the jury composed of "Ear People." IOW, the shoe will now be on the other foot, this time, the "Ear People Jury" can lend the weak ass weasel words defense argument a deaf ear. This is in stark contrast to history, which repeatedly proves that it's always been the Digital Math Scoundrels who are the ones who are really deaf.

if you heard the the new speakers corner vinyl of mancini's charade -
you could hear the amazing promise of analog recording and analog
reproduction circa 1963 and 2005 respectively.......hearing hank mancini
and his orchestra playing in in a beautiful rca room in la with all that
great rca tube gear onto i guess three track 1/2" in 1963 - a better
recorded sound is impossible to imagine.......42 years later......

thanks to probably kevin gray
at rti in la and a great pressing plant in germany, this vinyl is truly
hi - fi , a 3-d extravaganza.....to even begin to compare such a sound
to anything digital would be unfair....................there are no converters
with this leval of imaging, no sampling rate that approaches the density
of this sound

if you haven't heard the speakers corner vinyl, and you like vinyl,
check them out ...........they are cutting things that are quiet
and hi fi to a degree that it is the closest thing to having a personal
1/2" master that i have ever heard.......


be well

- jack

And your logic is ...

Not forced = forbidden?

NO I am not!


Now for the surprising part: I agree with your stance re analog vs digital. I hear the difference and prefer analog and fight against the machine to get as close as possible to that beautiful analog sound. It's become like the search for the holy grail: you know you'll never find it but you keep on trying.

Where I do not agree is your constant blaming the tools of the workman rather than the workman. His tools, in part, may be mathematics, but in this case the workmen obviously were computer scientists and engineers. There never is anything wrong with the mathematics, there very often is incorrect use of it by non-mathematicians.

So if you point your guns at the right target I probably will not post again, except maybe to chime in. As long as you don't, I might bump you if I feel like it and give you a well-deserved kick in the "derrière" for not getting all your facts right.


Cheers, Bob.

Maidsroom,

Are you saying that there's a source for good vinyl? If so, why not post a link or two.

Bob,

It's totally fair to blame the math when that math results in digital crap sound quality.
It is fitting and proper to blame all the sleazebag scoundrels responsible for the current mess that we call "digital," the Digital Math Soundrels at the chip companies and the assbites who came up with CD's and MPfreakin3's head the "most wanted" list of criminals who deserve extremely severe forms of punishment.

I am heartened, however, that you are one of the millions of people who agree that "Analogue Sound Quality Rules."

Johnny,

No.

But maybe, next time the plumber comes to "fix" something at your place and he fouls up, rather than giving him a piece of your mind, go and stand in front of his toolbox, bend over, and scowl at the pliers and hammers etc.

Yes.

Although I would not put it quite in these terms.


If that warms your heart, you're very welcome.

didnt they do some research recently which compared brainwaves for people listening to music from digital & analog playback sources?

digital audio listening induced brainwaves associated with irritability and tension, while analog audio listening produced brainwaves associated with pleasure and relaxation.

wasnt it rupert neve who did that - cant remember where i read it?

makes you think... all i do know is, digital is mega convenient & i use it, but i used to own a thorens td150 deck which was filled with super-high density acoustic putty, weighed a ton & didnt resonate at all... it was fitted with a graphite arm and tasty cart, all setup properly - the sound of that hifi playing a good vinyl cut was phenomenal compared to cd!!... I really miss it (it was stolen)

i also seem to not listen to music as much now i use cd and digital, whereas when i had the old vinyl deck i would listen to music nonstop for day on end.

anyways, go and see jah Shaka's all-valve pa sound system live if you can... heh, I especialy like it when he runs lo freq' osc's thru the system before the bashment starts, the whole f*cking venue foundations just shake

http://store.acousticsounds.com/musi...FTOKEN=9466441

search through this site:

do a search for speakers corner under record labels - all of their stuff is amazing

if you are into jazz, some of the fantasy 12" - 45 reissues are amazing

kevin gray is cutting 2 lp 12" 45 versions of classic jazz titles from the original
2 tracks - analog is all about real estate - these discs sound fat

to correct my earlier post "charade" was not cut by kevin gray, but rather
by someone at Emil-Berliner-Studios in Hannover, Germany........

the vinyl isn't cheap unfortunately, but it's the most hifi thing around, and as
a previous poster mentioned, it's relaxing................

be well

- jack

Maidsroom, thanks for the info you posted on vinyl.

Hmmm, re: the "only bad craftsmen blame their tools argument"... I'm not buyin' it. At least, not in this case.

While it may be true in some facets of life, it's not true when we are comparing "Digital vs. Analogue" audio "Sound Quality." Here, when we compare analogue to digital there are extremely large differences in the "tool sets," the way the two kinds of tool sets are constructed is vastly different, the physics applicable is rather different, the behavior is different, and the resulting "Sound Quality" is very different.

When people do a proper comparison they will use phrases like "warm, intimate, and beautiful image" when describing the Sound Quality of Analogue.

But when describing digital they will use terms like "strange imaging, cold, sterile, brittle, lifeless, and dead-sounding."

Judging from the Sound Quality results produced, we can see that the tool sets chosen make a rather large difference.

And what group of idiots are most responsible for the "strange imaging, cold, sterile, brittle, lifeless, and dead-sounding" nature of digital? Why, it's the Digital Math Scoundrels. Given the serious crimes the Digital Math Scoundrels are responsible for, they deserve some of the most severe punishment known to humankind. Perhaps "Gitmo Torture" would be appropriate for these bastards...they could be stripped bare with only a thinwafer silicon chip for cover and be threatened by those hostile women with their US Marines' attack dogs.

It would not surprise me if he did say something like that.

What I notice is that the "fatigue factor" along with "irritability and tension" happen rather quickly when one is forced to listen to digital audio. But with great analogue, one never seems to tire of listening to the same well-recorded, mixed, and mastered song over and over and over again simply because it *is* associated with "relaxation" or "pleasure."

No question about it---Analogue "Sound Quality" Rules!

All the Digital Math Scoundrels at the chip companies should be forced into exile in Hell. Their "ears" have already been burned to a crisp, so they will fit right in. If they don't fit in, they can bore the other residents in Hell with all their "smart talk" about digital math "anomalies." But I'm quite sure they will give their boring diatribes to other people who are similarily quite deaf.

Johnny B.

Yer a mental.

But I like ya....

I really do.

And I sure do like a whole lotta analog gear.

Good stuff.

Analog.

Best regards,

SM.

I think I'd go insane if I just had my current music collection to listen to... Analogue or not, there's only so many times I can listen to an album before I get bored of it and need to put it away for a few years..

The nihilist,

So you have never had the pleasure of wearing out a vinyl record from repeated plays, all based upon the fact that you loved the songs and the sound so much that you just kept playing it over and over again? I thought most people have had that experience and was something so normal as to more or less be a universal standard around here. This kind of joyous experience is probably more standard for the "Analogue Sound Lovers," but it is certainly understandable why the digital lemmings do not have such experiences as repeated playing of a digital product causes headaches, irritability, fatigue, *and* boredom.


Slipperman,

Not sure how "mental" it is to demand the "Standard of Excellence In Sound Quality," which, of course, for the moment, means "Analogue All The Way."

BTW, I'm glad to hear you love your analogue gear.

I have worn out vinyl albums from listening to them over and over. Then I got bored of them. It happens.

Of course, we are arguing two different points in this thread. You are arguing analogue sound quality, and I am arguing digital as a superior creative tool.