Doug Sax -LP Mastering guru on LP vs Bluray

BlueFox

hearingimpared wrote: »

Just and FYI every LP I've purchased from new bands also come with a free one-time download of the CD. However I don't remember the formats offered.

That's a good thing considering what albums and BRs cost compared to CDs. It really does not cost them anything, and is good PR for those who don't mind downloading a 'free' CD.

FTGV

I was in a record store on saturday and was quite surprised at the amount of new vinyl they were stocking.Some were new releases but most were older classic rock reissues,in fact they had a good portion of the titles in my late 70's to 1990 ish record collection.I was in the same store about 6 months previously but don't recall seeing any vinyl.

hearingimpared

FTGV wrote: »

I was in a record store on saturday and was quite surprised at the amount of new vinyl they were stocking.Some were new releases but most were older classic rock reissues,in fact they had a good portion of the titles in my late 70's to 1990 ish record collection.I was in the same store about 6 months previously but don't recall seeing any vinyl.

But but but . . . vinyl is dead Freddy!:D

FTGV

hearingimpared wrote: »

But but but . . . vinyl is dead Freddy!:D

Apparently,or so they tell us.Maybe I should be stepping up from the ghetto rig?:D

quadzilla

hearingimpared wrote: »

But but but . . . vinyl is dead Freddy!:D

Vinyl is dead. Long live vinyl!

hearingimpared

FTGV wrote: »

Apparently,or so they tell us.Maybe I should be stepping up from the ghetto rig?:D

LOL!!!!

quadzilla wrote: »

Vinyl is dead. Long live vinyl!

So it seems! Everyone and their grandmothers are churning out turntables again for a few years now.

doctorcilantro

hearingimpared wrote: »

Doc is that Lamontagne LP indeed recorded hot? or did they just make allowances on the two LPs incase it was recorded hot and/or compressed?

Not sure yet as I'm offline until new cart gets here, but I do notice that the new releases are indeed hotter than "older" releases overall. I think there is probably a bit of compression getting into these new vinyl pressings. Then again, if they are using 10 minutes on a side, wouldn't that imply they are trying to avoid compression? I'm not real up on how higher or lower gain translates into the grooves; does that mean the cutter would make wider grooves with more gain (irregardless of compression done at mastering).

mhardy6647

I am just waiting for shellac to come back. 78 rpm mono is where it's at, baby!

doctorcilantro

mhardy6647 wrote: »

I am just waiting for shellac to come back. 78 rpm mono is where it's at, baby!

I actually just bought a 78 on eBay for $5 shipped. Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" to test out my Grado 78 cart given that my table can do 78rpm.

I'll post a sample down the road.

doctorcilantro

doctorcilantro wrote: »

Not sure yet as I'm offline until new cart gets here, but I do notice that the new releases are indeed hotter than "older" releases overall. I think there is probably a bit of compression getting into these new vinyl pressings. Then again, if they are using 10 minutes on a side, wouldn't that imply they are trying to avoid compression? I'm not real up on how higher or lower gain translates into the grooves; does that mean the cutter would make wider grooves with more gain (irregardless of compression done at mastering).

Some more thoughts - recording flat w/o RIAA curve I see very hot levels but of course on the record, they have encoded the audio with RIAA curve to be able to put more music on the LP. So the groove width is a function foremost of frequency (and gain?) - and why you hear about summing bass to mono and put into horizontal cut on the vinyl.

I see hot levels w/o RIAA because you have all that +1kHz midrange boosted. I think capturing this pre-RIAA is sounding really good and capturing a lot of detail, but more experiments to follow.

"Slow motion. Twice in the last couple of months, I've placed a new record on my turntable and thought that it sounded a little funny. Only when the underwater-sounding vocals kicked in did I realize that I was playing it at the wrong speed. It turns out that these double LPs--Grizzly Bear's "Yellow House" and Caribou's "Swim"--were supposed to be played at 45 rpm, the speed usually designated for 7-inch singles and 12-inch dance remixes. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem--45 rpm albums supposedly offer higher fidelity--but neither of these albums had "45 rpm" marked anywhere on the record or packaging. How was I supposed to guess?

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13526_3-20008118-27.html#ixzz0yqfJeS2a"

mhardy6647

doctorcilantro wrote: »

I actually just bought a 78 on eBay for $5 shipped. Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" to test out my Grado 78 cart given that my table can do 78rpm.

I'll post a sample down the road.

Do you have a phono preamp with various EQ curves for pre-LP recordings, Doc? If not, how are you managing the EQ? One is curious.

My late, lamented EICO HF-52 mono integrated had a gala assortment of EQ curves (not that I made much use of them).

doctorcilantro

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Do you have a phono preamp with various EQ curves for pre-LP recordings, Doc? If not, how are you managing the EQ? One is curious.

My late, lamented EICO HF-52 mono integrated had a gala assortment of EQ curves (not that I made much use of them).

Not to get off topic so please see here. I'll probably look into Diamond Cut's RIAA for the 78, and keep using my own for LPs.

quadzilla

doctorcilantro wrote: »

Not sure yet as I'm offline until new cart gets here, but I do notice that the new releases are indeed hotter than "older" releases overall. I think there is probably a bit of compression getting into these new vinyl pressings. Then again, if they are using 10 minutes on a side, wouldn't that imply they are trying to avoid compression? I'm not real up on how higher or lower gain translates into the grooves; does that mean the cutter would make wider grooves with more gain (irregardless of compression done at mastering).

Wider grooves means greater amplitude, so higher gain. But you can also go with higher gain without using a lot of compression. If all you do is use more gain, then everything gets louder by an equal amount, so the net difference is negligable. One thing that an engineer has to consider when creating a vinyl master is how much gain he can use while preventing the grooves from getting too close together, so all albums use at least a bit of compression and limiting. Recording at 45 mainly allows more audio information to be placed on the record within each individual groove due to the higher play back speed, like using a higher tape speed recording/playback, but shortens to total time of playback.

hearingimpared

doctorcilantro wrote: »

Not sure yet as I'm offline until new cart gets here, but I do notice that the new releases are indeed hotter than "older" releases overall. I think there is probably a bit of compression getting into these new vinyl pressings. Then again, if they are using 10 minutes on a side, wouldn't that imply they are trying to avoid compression? I'm not real up on how higher or lower gain translates into the grooves; does that mean the cutter would make wider grooves with more gain (irregardless of compression done at mastering).

Bass passages, loud passages, etc equate to wider grooves. Check out the grooves on Telarc's 1812 Overture LP where the cannon shots and bells are ringing the friggin grooves are almost as wide as your pinky finger.

doctorcilantro

hearingimpared wrote: »

Bass passages, loud passages, etc equate to wider grooves. Check out the grooves on Telarc's 1812 Overture LP where the cannon shots and bells are ringing the friggin grooves are almost as wide as your pinky finger.

Right, so I'm trying to realize how much the groove width is a function of gain vs. frequency. It's frequency much more so than gain because all those fat bass grooves have been cut by an average of what, -10db (when you factor in the curve from 1kHz down to 20hz)?

So if it is mastered really hot, there probably isn't a large change in overall play time as much as this would be dictated by musical content and the presence of frequencies 500hz ? and down ????

hearingimpared

doctorcilantro wrote: »

Right, so I'm trying to realize how much the groove width is a function of gain vs. frequency. It's frequency much more so than gain because all those fat bass grooves have been cut by an average of what, -10db (when you factor in the curve from 1kHz down to 20hz)?

So if it is mastered really hot, there probably isn't a large change in overall play time as much as this would be dictated by musical content and the presence of frequencies 500hz ? and down ????

That makes sense. I can't say I know for sure but I do know for a fact that lower frequencies do have wider grooves. That's a question for a real vinyl guru which I don't consider myself one. Perhaps Ken Swauger, Chuck (madmax) or Rich (SCompRacer). There are others here too.

quadzilla

hearingimpared wrote: »

That makes sense. I can't say I know for sure but I do know for a fact that lower frequencies do have wider grooves. That's a question for a real vinyl guru which I don't consider myself one. Perhaps Ken Swauger, Chuck (madmax) or Rich (SCompRacer). There are others here too.

Lower frequencies do not equal wider grooves. Higher amplitude (gain, volume, whatever) does. Lower frequencies also typically have a lot of gain. If you simply think of the groove on an LP as a physical representation of a sound wave, this makes sense. You could have a 1/2" wide groove at 20KHz, but no stylus would be able to track it.

TroyD

I've got the Telarc 1812 Overature on vinyl...I've only played it a couple times. I don't like seeing the arm jump like that....

That said, this gets back to the same discussion we've been having for years. I DO think that digital, done right can sound better than vinyl. The problem is the application of the technology as well as the thing of 'garbage in-garbage out'.

I'm to the point now where I just wish we'd stick to one flippin' format. Blu-ray probably DOES have great promise....but, faak, I'm not ditching my turntable and thousand-odd LP's nor my SACD setup. So, even if Blu-ray is a panacea....it'll be awhile before I jump on and even then, I'm not willing to re-buy all my current library (even if I could afford it). They can only go to that well so many times before people get tired of it.

BDT

doctorcilantro

It's a shame to find these new releases that look like they have been played on an improperly set up table.

What's the deal. It's not just a little pitting here and there; they literally look played. I'm on my second RCA copy of Ray Lamontagne's album and maybe Soundstage Direct sent me back the same copy after re-shrink wrapping it??? WTF. Who, and, or what, is scratching these LPs and how?

Maybe dust and grit gets in the sleeve with the LP and then scratches the surface in storage/transit?

doctorcilantro

quadzilla wrote: »

Lower frequencies do not equal wider grooves. Higher amplitude (gain, volume, whatever) does. Lower frequencies also typically have a lot of gain. If you simply think of the groove on an LP as a physical representation of a sound wave, this makes sense. You could have a 1/2" wide groove at 20KHz, but no stylus would be able to track it.

Strange, I'm confused. The low frequencies don't have a lot of gain on the LP due to the RIAA encoding. The lower you go the more attenuated it becomes until 20hz is at -20db right? Watching the VU meters or looking at a flat vinyl transfer, the midrange has the most gain, and you have to set the ADC accordingly to avoid clipping at 1kHz + frequencies.

I have heard they can cut the groove horizontally or vertically, and bass is cut horizontally to avoid mistracking....but is that due to gain, or is it first a function of frequency?

I know some of those +18db test tracks are indeed wide IIRC but I forget the frequency they use for the tracking torture test.

jm1

quadzilla wrote: »

Lower frequencies do not equal wider grooves. Higher amplitude (gain, volume, whatever) does. Lower frequencies also typically have a lot of gain. If you simply think of the groove on an LP as a physical representation of a sound wave, this makes sense. You could have a 1/2" wide groove at 20KHz, but no stylus would be able to track it.

I think you have it reversed. If there wasn't a roll off of the low frequencies, your stylus would never track a grove.


RIAA Equalization Curve

doctorcilantro

jm1 wrote: »

I think you have it reversed. If there wasn't a roll off of the low frequencies, your stylus would never track a grove.


RIAA Equalization Curve

Yes, and on my system, when I switch off the RIAA VST on the PC, it sounds like AM radio....no bass at all.

[Deleted User]

Hello,
As I understand the system there are two ways to modulate a record groove. One way is vertically and the other is horizontally. In a record made with the vertical modulation approach the stylus would move up and down keeping pace with the recorded frequency. When the sound got louder it would move further "into" the record and "out" of the record. If the record were modulated horizontally the stylus would move side to side to keep pace with the recorded frequency. When the sound got louder the stylus would have to move further from side-to-side. The first Edison sound system used the vertical system for reproduction. But, once the Edison cylinder was replaced by the flat disc the horizontal method proved better, less noise and better dynamic range (sound familiar?). When people started thinking about two channel records many different proposals were offered. How about two tracks running side-by-side? That would prove problems with short playing times and incompatibility with mono sound systems. How about one side of the record plays the right channel and the other side plays the left channel? Think of it, a record player that played the record vertically with two cartridges on either side. Somebody else had the idea of using a very high frequency to modulate a carrier signal with the difference information. This was not possible with the technology available at the time, but became the basis for FM stereo modulation a few years later. Also, this kind of carrier modulation was used for record based discrete multi-channel sound once records and cartridges got better.
Another potential approach was to use vertical modulation for one of the channels and horizontal modulation for the other channel. This was a good approach since a mono record player could be used to play two channel records. The problem is that horizontal modulation sounds better than vertical so one channel would be lower in distortion and wider in dynamic range. Imagine the arguments that would have happened with audiophiles if that approach had been adopted.
The system that was adopted was kind of a compromise (surprised?). Think of the side-by-side approach, except place the two grooves right next to each other and angle them by 45 degrees from vertical. Scientists and engineers found that when you do this you end up with one channel being traced without effecting the other. You can use a single pickup that has the ability to produce a separate left and right audio channel. The downside to this approach is that the playback stylus has to be exactly like the original recording head or you end up with tracing distortion. But if you made the playback stylus just like the cutting head you'd damage the record groove. So, compromise stylus shapes have evolved to minimize this problem.
So, as both channels are played back the stylus has to move side-to-side and since things are at a 45 degree up and down keeping pace with a wildly undulating groove. When you think about it, it seems impossible that it works as well as it does.
Enjoy, Ken

BlueFox

Kenneth Swauger wrote: »

When you think about it, it seems impossible that it works as well as it does.

Exactly, and then look at all the hoops people jump through for playback. Some of the threads on this board just on LP cleaning have been scary crazy. :eek:

No wonder Doug Sax is saying; 'Enough of this "artifact from the 1960s". Give me Blu-ray'.

doctorcilantro

Yeah, but what kind of material is out on Blu-Ray? HDTracks and elsewhere are still limited in their selections.

Reading about the Strain Gauge system from SS is interesting because many compare it to high quality digital. I think many traditional cantilever systems impart a lot of the distortion (that most seem to like anyway).

His MI carts also have lower mass, higher compliance, and higher internal res. frequency.

[Deleted User]

Hello,
An interesting aside to the history of the phonograph record is that Edison wasn't trying to record and playback sound when he invented the phonograph. The original intent was to build a machine to store incoming telegraph messages. At the time the telegraph was so popular that companies couldn't keep up with the message flow. Edison wanted to build a device that would use some kind of electromechanical stylus to poke "dots" and "dashes" on a moving strip of thin metal. If you were an overloaded telegraph operator you could route some incoming messages to this machine which would store the signal until a quieter time to play them back and "decode" the message.
Edison noticed that the plucking of the stylus in the foil strip sounded like something audible. This led him to invent the first phonograph. So, in a very real way the modern phonograph started off as a digital storage medium.
Cheers, Ken

doctorcilantro

Edison noticed that the plucking of the stylus in the foil strip sounded like something audible

This always blows my mind. I take it, it is not something that theory or abstraction could have fully predicted?

[Deleted User]

The feeling I get is that Edison wasn't much for theory and the reasons behind why something worked. Rather he was a very good observer and relentless experimenter. He wanted to build something that people would want to buy, artificial light, for example. He used trial and error to gradually find the combination of vacuum and filament material to create the light bulb. But, he observed the basic principle of the vacuum tube while working on the light bulb but the importance of it didn't register. He could have discovered electronics and the millions of inventions that resulted. I wonder if he kicked himself for missing that one.

hearingimpared

quadzilla wrote: »

Lower frequencies do not equal wider grooves. Higher amplitude (gain, volume, whatever) does. Lower frequencies also typically have a lot of gain. If you simply think of the groove on an LP as a physical representation of a sound wave, this makes sense. You could have a 1/2" wide groove at 20KHz, but no stylus would be able to track it.

Hmmm . . . I saw a video where not too long ago where Michael Fremer went to a studio and got together with the lathe engineer. I don't remember where I saw it or who the engineer was but it's out there. The engineer pointed out how the bass and low frequency lines were causing the lathe to cut wider grooves.

If I am wrong I'll stand corrected but I always had it in my head that the bass lines caused wider grooves to be cut I could be wrong.;)

BTW thanks for lesson Ken, awesome stuff!

hearingimpared

Kenneth Swauger wrote: »

The feeling I get is that Edison wasn't much for theory and the reasons behind why something worked. Rather he was a very good observer and relentless experimenter. He wanted to build something that people would want to buy, artificial light, for example. He used trial and error to gradually find the combination of vacuum and filament material to create the light bulb. But, he observed the basic principle of the vacuum tube while working on the light bulb but the importance of it didn't register. He could have discovered electronics and the millions of inventions that resulted. I wonder if he kicked himself for missing that one.

Too bad these fellows who are/were like Edison have to die! There are always replacements but Edison was unique in many ways.