News

Nicely done. Looking forward to it.

...looking forward to this.

Can't wait.

What's the point of using digital files to press an analog LP? Until the industry gets away from this practice and demands the use of original analog tapes for re-mastering, count me out.

You should try recording direct to 24/96 as the source and only then use it to press the vinyl. What is the point of using analog tape that falls short of the file's capabilities?

As someone who owns both the original Vox Turnabout and Athena remaster of this record, count me in. I'm fascinated to hear the differences between the 24/96 side and analog sides. While my bet is decidedly pro analog, I remain objective enough to hear the capabilities or discrepancies in both.

And thank you HalSF for your response to Moodeez1: this project does seems right up his alley. I hope he reconsiders his position and supports this educational effort.

I am just questioning the validity of this process. Both technologies have their pluses and minuses and are far from perfect. My comment is within context of the suggested experiment.

Transfer original tape to 24/96 and do any mastering in the digital domain. Record the digital file to tape. Cut with the 24/96 file and the tape copy of the digital file. Wouldn't this get the volume levels closer to an apples to apples comparison? Just a thought. I guess that only compares cutting from digital and cutting from tape.

...looking forward to this!!!!

How is the Kickstarter project going to work exactly? Is it necessary to make a pledge to buy the LP? Does a pledge result in a corresponding discount off the price of the LP even if it is bought from a non US dealer? Do those who pledge effectively receive a copy to their front door including delivery? I'm only asking because as a non-US participant, the only way I would want to buy this LP is through my regular Australian based dealer who sells amongst other things Analogue Productions pressings. Obviously amongst other things the freight costs are huge compared to US participants.

I am looking forward to getting this Micheal and will support/buy it. Hope it goes so well that you then do another one with AAA on one side and DSD on the other since 24/96 and DSD on one side is not workable.

How much extra for a cassette copy? I enjoy watching the little reels go around!

The only way this will be a valid exercise is if the sides are not in any way labeled in terms of source. Most people refuse to admit it would apply to them, but expectation bias is very powerful.

So this could be an excellent experiment provided it's done right.

I also hope Kevin will be careful to match the levels of the two sides as much as possible to avoid the tendency of a louder source being perceived as sounding better.

For whoever's interested: I think this is a comparable approach with the difference that it's done from a hires digital source on multiple formats

https://www.acousence.de/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=fly...

even if only for purchase. I expect it would not require much additional effort, and it would allow a comparison with vinyl for those who have the option of buying either vinyl from a digital master or a digital file download.

Michael, as you know I recorded Christian Jacob's "Beautiful Jazz" (MD for Tierney Sutton and accomplished jazz pianist) at 96 kHz/24-bit PCM and at 15 ips 2-track stereo reel-to-reel. Paul Stubblebine cut the lacquer masters from the analog tapes and RPI pressed 500 vinyl LPs.

I've been talking to the artist lately and have a couple of boxes of the vinyl LPs and will putting the 96 kHz/24-bit PCM files up on iTrax very soon.

I think your readers might be interested in these two versions. The artist loved both for different reasons. He definitely didn't like the additional cost and trouble staying in the analog domain caused.

If anyone is interested, they can drop me a line.

Mark Waldrep
AIX Records
mwaldrep@aixmediagroup.com

In. I love this kinda shit.

Wow The hornet's nest has been stirred. Love it, i'm definitely in now!

Why not make this project really useful and provide a download of the 96/24 file. This would really be interesting and revealing.

This experiment is truly only useful within the context of this particular setup. There are so many variables, that one really can't make any conclusive absolute statements about AAA vs. ADA except for within ONLY this particular experiment. The analog tape machine, any analog electronics, cables, A/D, mastering process, A/D converter, etc. are just some of the variables that will influence the outcome of this experiment. Even the quality of the master tape and original recording may not allow some of the differences to be observed.

It strikes me as very humorous that folks would want to listen to a 96/24 conversion to vinyl. That really is ridiculous. Any decent music-loving audiophile should have a good D/A converter, so unless someone is comparing a cheap/poor quality CD player/DAC to a relatively high-end turntable, the 96/24 file itself will be much more accurate - it has to be! Unless manipulated for some reason, A 96/24 file available for end-users will be 100% identical/faithful to the master 96/24 file. The transfer to vinyl by nature is worse than the original digital file.

That being said, if the sales of vinyl reissues allows the economics of remastering, then I am all for it. If selling very few digital copies of a remaster doesn't make the project viable, but adding the revenue created by selling vinyl editions makes it economically feasible, then it all makes sense. It just would be nice to have the digital file available, as well.

Theoretically I would much rather my vinyl be sourced form the original analog tape itself, presuming it was originally an all analog chain. Even this prospect gets messy since the entire recording production can have multiple A/D D/A processes regardless of how it was originally captured.

It will be interesting to see if in this particular project if the added 96/24 A/D conversion is distinguishable between the analog master once on vinyl. Please publish the entire signal chain, including manufacturers and models of the equipment of this project, since that is important and essential to correlating conclusions.

In my comment from the prior post i failed to point out the A/D conversion AS WELL AS the D/A conversion for vinyl. It is two steps, not just the A/D. The conclusion should read:

It will be interesting to see if in this particular project if the added 96/24 A/D D/A conversions are distinguishable between the analog master once on vinyl. Please publish the entire signal chain, including manufacturers and models of the equipment of this project, since that is important and essential to correlating conclusions. Certainly the quality of the A/D converter and the subsequent D/A are critical. Unfortunately, we are at the mercy of the mastering folks and their choice of equipment. Too many variables . . .

Unless the analog masters are unplayable or so poor sounding as to render them useless from a frequency response standpoint, I am very strongly against the use of digital files to master to LP unless the recording itself is digital (which creates other issues). The recent Beatles stereo release infuriated me when digital source was used. The mono, which I heard recently was a joyous revelation to my ear. The stereo? Pure stupidity when the master tapes are reportedly in excellent condition. And that is the point. One pass direct to Lacquer is, to me, the ultimate purity and if the analog tape is wonderful and gear capable, a nearly compatible sound is achieved to my subjective ear.

I would hope Mr. Fremer and myself are in full agreement that whether digital or analog, it is the source, the mastering and quality of the vinyl pressing that makes a tremendous difference on playback. This is especially true at 45 RPM. And the icing on the cake is when that playback is achieved with an excellent turntable and state of the art cartridge.

Analog and digital playback are different sonic interpretations. Period. Both have reached an incredible level with digital sounding unbelievable with the right gear. Yet the crossover effect when mastering to vinyl creates a large problem in select cases. Which is that the "language" of both signals are obviously different. And I agree with other posts that the signal chain is crucial whether it is this experiment or any mastering process. The variables as many of you have said are too numerous to create a true control variable when you take into account all individual playback systems.

When you transfer digital to vinyl it potentially takes with it a graininess, harsh treble and either overmodulated or harsh transients due to the technical capability of digital itself when placed on a record. When you hear it in a digital circuit with the possible headroom allowed, it can sound natural. On vinyl, which despite the frequency response and inner groove compression argument that will go on forever, over modulated digital source treble on sub par gear may be fatiguing and possibly unlistenable dependent on personal subjective taste.

If a master analog tape no longer exists than you use the best earlier LP curve backup or even a copy of the original record to keep things as pure as possible. If digital backups were made years ago and the tapes found in horrible condition, of course I won't argue the use of them to vinyl hopefully with a dac worthy of the music.

Ian M. Gordon
CT Audio Society

I thought you were comparing the cost of producing an LP to that of a CD. Of course, you are correct when comparing the cost of producing digital LP's to analog. But my question remains: Why invest in a digitally mastered LP in the first place unless you do not have a top shelf CD player? And, if you do, why......?

yup, a 20 spot would be fine...