vinyl sounds very close to cd??

[smuggs]

after 16 days i now have

paul simon greatest hits- paul simon, still crazy after all these years don mcclean,american pie(mint)

bruce springsteen lucky town dirty dancing soundtrack queen 2(black cover) carpenters the singles

david bowie-stationtostation

now i have my first new one love-foreverchanges was faulty print they made me swap it i went for kings of leon because of the times and after listening to the vinyl and cd they are far closer then the others.

so my main questions is are all modern lp's close to cd because all old ones have few crackles between tracks or an old type sound sorry bad with words. but this kings of leon is almost cd sounding and the music very close.

 

[Anonymous]

That's due to the mixing on the master record, so if something has been mastered for cd it is rarely remastered for vinyl. It also depends upon the target audience the album is intended for.

 

[shooter]

Your absolutely right here and the mastering of any LP is a very important stage.

Lp's are mastered either from a reel (analog) or a CD (digital).

If it's from the analog source the frequency range is larger then the cd range.

Let's say (but it can be greater) for analog it's 10hz to 30khz and for cd it is 20hz to 20 khz.

If you master the LP with digital information then thats all you will get. Thats why some LP's sound the same as CD, because they are.

 

[fatboyslimfast]

Hi Shooter,

Regarding your 2nd point, it's very rare that LPs are mastered from CDs - normally if they are mastered from a digital source, it's either a digital tape or hard disk, and normally at 24/96 resolution, if not 24/192.

Granted, it's still digital, but certainly has the potential (in the first 20 or so plays of the vinyl, before the top HFs have gone) to have a higher resolution than a CD.

My last paragraph there is also relevant to the OP - new vinyl deteriorates with each playing. For the first 20 or so playings (assuming a good stylus and correct tracking weight) the frequency response will drop to around 18Khz, then over the next 20 or so down to 15Khz, and so on.

Some 60s records that were well-played at the time on heavy-tracking styli (some Dansette-suitcase-style players were using tracking forces well in excess of 10g!) can be limited to around 8KHz, giving the "old sound" that the OP describes.

 

[shooter]

Your absolutely right, digital tape or DAT would be preferred to a standard CD as the bit rate is higher thus giving us a better end result. I'd be interested to know what frequencies are achievable with DAT. As we know the ceiling for CD is 20Khz if DAT is say 25Khz all well and good and your right the longevity of those higher frequencies in a digitally mastered disc is lesser than an analog one. Digital still doesn't touch analog which can if it wanted to reach over 100khz of continuous noise. This is very rare indeed if at now a-day's but it does show the limitations of digital.

 

[fatboyslimfast]

IIRC, DAT had a native sampling rate of 16bit/48KHz, which would give a frequency response of up to 24KHz so slightly above CD.

However, most studios would either record onto Analogue 2"/30ips or HDD systems at 24-bit / 96KHz or above. Some are now using 32-bit 192KHz.

Anything remastered from old analog tape will be done to HDD using at least a 24-bit 96KHz sample rate, giving at least 48KHz of potential frequency response.

A lot of audiophile recording companies (Linn / Naim etc) offer downloads of these hi-res files from their website. They are more expensive than CDs, but you get what you pay for etc...

 

[shooter]

fatboyslimfast:A lot of audiophile recording companies (Linn / Naim etc) offer downloads of these hi-res files from their website. They are more expensive than CDs, but you get what you pay for etc...

If there was some more mainstream material in there i could be interested but it's a bit eclectic for me.