MajorFubar said:
splasher said:
I think almost all albums are...usually recorded at very high sample rates and bit depths so I don't think you would notice any of the issues associated with digital mastering.
They are, but that's not the reason why records cut from a digital might sound different to the CD or download. They'd still sound just as different (or not) if the master they were cut from was 16/44.
I didn't say otherwise.
MajorFubar said:
splasher said:
Pro Tools has been used since the mid eighties and I don't think there are many tape based studios left.
ProTools wasn't around until the early 2000s, in fact the first number 1 song to be recorded on it was Livin The Vida Loca.
Pro Tools has been around since 1991 and was born out Sound Designer that pre-dated it. My point was merely to suggest that probably more albums from "back in the day" had a digital flavour than perhaps people realised.
MajorFubar said:
?
splasher said:
The vinyl will be an analogue reproduction of the high res master whereas the CD will be down-sampled to 16bit/44.1kHz so in theory should sound more natural between the clicks and pops.
No the theory (which is actually a theorem) very clearly states that 16/44 will sound exactly the same as anything higher unless your ears have the frequency response of a bat, irrespective of whether you burn it to a CD or cut it to a lacquer.
I didn't say "the theory", and no-one says "in theorum". I'll have to defer to your knowledge of Nyquist-Shannon (I didn't think it covered bit-depth) but again, my point was for the OP not to worry about the master not being analogue.
I think it's time I packed the forum in. I had assumed that a shared interest would create a level of inclusivity but there's too much ignoring the spirit of what's said in favour of finding a detail to contradict. No hard feelings meant, just time I went and sat at another table in the metaphorical pub of life.