Inside One Of the Last Vinyl Record Manufacturers 382
jonerik writes "The Nashville Tennessean has this look at Nashville's United Record Pressing, one of the last vinyl record manufacturers left in the U.S. Although LPs and 12" and 7" singles make up a tiny portion of the American music market at this point, the article reports that United's business is booming, thanks to consolidation within Nashville's record pressing business community, steady orders for the jukebox market, techno, dance, reggae, and rap orders, and this year's 25th anniversary of Elvis Presley's death. 'Elvis has been good to us. I can't complain,' says Cris Ashworth, the company's owner."
Market (Score:5, Insightful)
The Demand for vinyl from the DJ industry (techno, trip hop, rap, and the like) shouldn't be slowing down too much, Especially with new prime time hits buy groups like the Gorillias (Produced by Dan the Automator).
Obviously doesn't reflect the UK market... (Score:5, Interesting)
From here [independent.co.uk]
All my friends are DJ's. I see a lot of vinyl...
Re:Obviously doesn't reflect the UK market... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Obviously doesn't reflect the UK market... (Score:2, Informative)
For a list of a bunch of record pressing plants, check out indiecentre.com [indiecentre.com].
DJs (Score:3, Informative)
Re:DJs (Score:2, Informative)
Re:DJs (Score:4, Informative)
The difference is the interface. The tactile involvement of vinyl is the biggest key. It's just not the same scratching with a mouse on a screen. There's just something that feels right and easy with two turntables and a crossfader in front of you. There has been progress with some of the newer simulated turntables that plug into a USB port of a computer, but it still doesn't come close to what is needed to spin at a professional level.
It's just a matter of time before hardware designers come up with a proper interface to allow the flexibility and style required for a DJ. Until then, Technics turntables and vinyl record producers still have a place in the world.
Re:DJs (Score:2)
Re:DJs (Score:2)
Actually, there are CD decks designed for DJs that have large rotary dials on them that you can use to similate scratches, and using various beat timers and sliders you can do a whole lot of things perfectly (without as much talent) using CDs.
So that "Matter of Time" you said it would take before hardware designers come up with the proper interface has already come and gone -- but at seveal thousands of dollars for a single CD deck, they're out of reach of most trunk-based DJs that do the dance clubs and private parties.
Re:DJs (Score:2)
Re:DJs (Score:2)
Re:DJs (Score:2)
There's one scheme where the DJ has turntables and records, but all the records have is timecode, which is used to address music stored elsewhere.
Re:DJs (Score:3, Interesting)
Decent DJ quality direct drive turntables typically go for more like $250 each. The cost difference between turntables and CD decks really isn't that great.
Re:DJs (Score:2)
Anyway (and this is a real misconception), DJs don't use LPs - they use 12" singles (1 or 2 tracks per side, either 45 or 33).
I want to see Evatone Soundsheets return! (Score:3, Insightful)
MPAA should take notice... (Score:5, Funny)
Much harder to rip? (Score:2)
easier than that (Score:3, Funny)
Some candle wax
Heat wax
Poor onto plate
Put vinal in waxy plate
Allow to cool
Peal off
Maybe not a perfect copy, but it's the easiest way I know to play Iron Man backwards.
Re:easier than that (Score:2)
Re:MPAA should take notice... (Score:3, Informative)
Hint: use the tape recorder output connections on your amp (consult you manual or figure it out). Already set at the correct levels. Few (good) turntables can be plugged direct into your soundcard. RIAA equalisation and pre-amplification are required for the best sound.
Yeah, I did find it quite amusing that the article had to explain what an LP was :)
Laser-read LPs (Score:2)
It's not very hard to imagine something that can do this and play in real time also being able to do it at 2x or faster and output PCM digital audio files.
in dash portable LP Player (Score:2)
Re:MPAA should take notice... (Score:2)
Re:Movies on vinyl? (Score:2)
OMG. I heard about those. That was an electrostatic contact storage system wasn't it? Did it even beat the quality of VHS? I can't really imagine it being competitive with Laserdisc on quality.
I'm glad Vinyl is making a comeback. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm glad Vinyl is making a comeback. (Score:2)
I remember vinyl (Score:5, Interesting)
Nowadays you just stick a CD into a $50 player sitting on the table and get just as good a sound, and you don't have to worry about dust nearly as much.
I don't miss LPs.
I do miss the cover art, though. Cover art is why I still have about 50 of them.
Re:I remember vinyl (Score:5, Funny)
Hanging the turntable from the ceiling from chains and springs, so you and your friends could dance without making the needle skip.
Hey, nothing that a 500 pound piece of marble can't fix. :)
Re:I remember vinyl (Score:4, Funny)
Thats a paddlin
>> Spending $300 (so years ago) on a direct drive turntable+needle
Thats a paddlin
>> Hanging the turntable from the ceiling from chains and springs
Thats a paddlin
>> stick a CD into a $50 player sitting on the table
You better believe thats a paddlin
Re:I remember vinyl (Score:2, Funny)
And what's this "friends" thing anyway ? Isn't that, like other circumvention devices, prohibited under the DMCA ?
You will hear from our lawyers !
Re:I remember vinyl (Score:4, Insightful)
Hardware compatibility... (Score:3, Insightful)
Meanwhile... I can't just upgrade the motherboard in my 3-year old case, because the case is an AT, and all the new MB's are ATX. Want to bet that as soon as I buy an ATX case, the manufacturers will move to a new "improved" standard?
Re:I remember vinyl (Score:2)
I am not going to take sides on sound quality directly, I really don't know, I really don't have time to scout for rare LPs and I really haven't listened to a good LP playback system, but my mom does have an antique wind-up Victrola
The one thing I've noticed is that LP proponents people ignore playback degradation and scratches. Being a contact medium, LPs do suffer some small amount of wear every time it is played. I read rumors of a laser-based pickup but I haven't looked it up to confirm.
Another thing is that sometimes the mastering / digitizing equipment is substandard so analog recordings don't transfer as well as they could have. There are so many variables that an apples to apples comparison is practically impossible. Any bandwidth, sample rate or sample depth issues are practically moot with SACD and DVD-Audio, so it becomes an issue of how well the mastering effort was handled.
Then there is the portability issue. The big cover art is often nice though.
Re:I remember vinyl QWZX (Score:2, Interesting)
However, the death of the record should be near as DVD players start to come out with DVD-Audio and SACD compatibility. I just got a DVD-Audio player, which supports 24-bit samples, sampling rates up to 192 KHz, and up to six surround sound channels (CD's and records are just two stereo channels).
Basically, no human being can realistically say that the record is better than DVD-Audio (and probably SACD too).
Unfortunately, those in the electronics industry think that DVD-Audio and SACD have to fight some sort of a stupid format war. So most consumers will have to chose one player type over the other. A few smart companies, like Apex and Pioneer, know that they can just make DVD players that play both formats.
Re:I remember vinyl QWZX (Score:2, Insightful)
I was actually suprised when I first realized it, listening to both the vinyl and cd versions of a friend's band's new release. The vinyl version sounded remarkably better. Neither sounded as good as the 2" analog tape master, of course.
Look.. (Score:2)
I still have the 10 disk "Eye of the Beholder" game on these.
Re:Look.. (Score:2)
i didnt remember it taking that much.. more like 4 or something like that..
but anyways.. we held a little lan/booze/ps2 party last weekend, and my friend brought a c64.
c64 pron-intros... mmm...
Vinyl writers? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Vinyl writers? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Vinyl writers? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Vinyl writers? (Score:4, Informative)
Vinyl market is not dying (Score:4, Informative)
They be hoe-sellin' it? (Score:3, Funny)
How fitting... (Score:5, Funny)
When all else fails... (Score:4, Informative)
Elvis you say... (Score:4, Funny)
I have a hard time believing that, seeing as he's been working at the 7-11 on the corner of my neighborhood for the last 6 years. The most good he's ever done for me is push the button on the QuickPicks machine, winning me $5.00.
business is booming. (Score:2)
punk (Score:3, Informative)
Vinyl Re cord? (Score:2)
Here I go recycling an old post... (Score:2)
-S
PRESS RELEASE! HOLY COW! hi-tech! (Score:4, Funny)
It has been a long time since music aficionados flocked to the record stores for vinyl records. With the advent of digital media such as CDs, CD-Rs, and the internet, it is possible to get the music you want quickly and easily, without having to leave your home. Furthermore, fans can make their own mixed compilations of their favorite music.
The vinyl industry here in Nashville is trying to capture that magic. Engineers are hard at work on the LP-R, and the LP-R drive. LP-R stands for Long Play Recorder, and is a throwback to the lingo vinyl enthusiasts used.
"We were gonna try for 7"-R, but saying 'seven-inch-arrr' just wasn't catchy enough," Buckaroo Banzai said. "Instead, we're going for the behemoth of vinyl, the LP!"
Here at the test labs of the Hong Kong Cavaliers, the press was introduced to the world's first LP-R drive. Fitting in the 5.25" bay of a personal computer, and expanding to a full-sized drive at the touch of a button, the LP-R drive can take blank LP-R media and burn LPs on the fly!
"We've only got it recording at 2x speed right now, but pretty soon we're gonna introduce the same technology we used to make splat-proof watermelons, and up the burn rates to 52x," one engineer stated.
The industry is buzzing with talk of LP-RW drives, and even a portable unit codenamed "the iLPod." Fan reaction has been phenomenal, with one fan exlaiming: "Holy CRAP! i've been waiting for this for YEARS! vinyl sounds so warm and smooth, and i can't WAIT to burn all my mp3s onto LP-Rs! Hell, even 32kbps mp3s sound MAGICAL!"
Another fan bared her breasts in support of the Hong Kong Cavaliers.
Pearl Jam and Vinyl (Score:3, Interesting)
The fan club singles they release every year are also only put out on vinyl. An interesting note: it was a trip to the Library of Congress that sealed this decision: vinyl, unlike tape and CD is impervious to time and will not break down if it is protected from damage, unlike magnetic and optical formats (tapes and CDs)
I have no idea who presses the Pearl Jam vinyls. I do know that PJ's album "Vitalogy" was the the last vinyl album to enter the billboard top 100 list.
Re:Pearl Jam and Vinyl (Score:2)
Re:Pearl Jam and Vinyl (Score:2)
Hmmm - I have a little trouble believing this one. I know that magnetic media fade, and I don't doubt that CD-R and CD-RW could possibly degrade after time. But to say that grooves etched in vinyl are more permanent than pressed aluminum discs encased in plastic? Other than intense electromagnetic radiation (e.g. a microwave
Vinly Records Back in the Charts (Score:2)
In the UK things of course are going back.... In 1992 'The Wedding Present' made a big thing by releasing a limited edition single every month for a year - these were vinyl only releases. They all entered the top 40 purely on vinyl sales. Ten years later, vinyl-only releases are starting to make an impact on the charts again. Nukleuz records - purveyors of harder dance music - are now probably the biggest vinyl producer in the UK and sveral of their releases are charting purely on vinyl.
Cool "vinyl" in new zealand (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Cool "vinyl" in new zealand (Score:2)
In the world of obscure and difficult music, vinyl has always been the medium of choice. I'm still an enthusuastic music buyer, and I'd say 7 out of every 10 things I buy are on vinyl.
You can argue about frequency response and "warmth" and ripping all you want, but the simple fact is CDs and CD players just aren't cool. Records and record players are.
Getting the appeal of vinyl is like getting the appeal of modern art or classic cars. You do, or you don't. It's not something you can reason out and justify.
If you're remotely interested in what I have to say, I've been through this argument before on my website [thecatflap.co.uk].
Viable Backup Media? (Score:3, Interesting)
They holdup well with reasonable care. Many jukeboxs are still playing records from the 50's. They are not effected by magnetic field. They also take stratched better the cd's and dvd's.
I would love to backup a gig to a 45.
If you think and 45 is a gun, your too young to understand this post.
Re:Viable Backup Media? (Score:2)
- It's hard to do (have you seen the process involved in making vinyl?)
- It's an analog medium (perhaps you've heard of it - it's not the same as digital)
What would be cheaper and more effective would be printing out reams of paper in a format like the bar code, then saving that.
DJs? What about independent music in general? (Score:2, Interesting)
Everyone's mentioning DJs as the primary consumers of modern-day vinyl. What about the independent music industry in general?
I have a friend in a band whose fourth record, a LP, was just released last week (Mara'Akate [maraakate.com]). It will also be released as a CD, but their three previous records were vinyl-only (and have all sold out).
In addition, take a look at any indie record store. For instance, look at Insound [insound.com]. They sell a TON of vinyl. These are new releases too.
Collecting of new vinyl is strong as well. That is, in addition to collecting old stuff like Led Zeppelin. Take a look at some of the vinyl auctions at Skylab [skylabcommerce.com]. People pay $20 for a seven inch pressed two years ago.
For some information about pressing vinyl (including a list of companies who do it) in the independent music world, check out Indie Centre [indiecentre.com].
I know DJs search thrift stores and garage sales for their vinyl, and hip hop artists routinely release new record, but I think that the indie rock (including all of the sub-genres you can imagine) is what's REALLY keeping vinyl alive (and quite well).
Finally... someone mentioned those Evatone [evatone.com] sound sheets (the flimsy, paper-thin records formerly included in magazines and happy meals...)... they were still being pressed as recently as five years ago.
Not the last.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Check out The Scratch Free Press [scratchfree.ca] for just one of many great examples of people still pushing the vinyl thang.. It is very far from being dead.. Here's a google on Vinyl Mastering [google.ca] and Vinyl Pressing [google.ca]
Vinyl (Score:3, Informative)
Since cassettes came out, Vinyl has always had somewhat of a cult following. From audiophiles who liked the 'warm' vinyl sound better than hissy cassettes to the punk-rock scene, and of course nowadays, hip hop and techno dj's..
Sure, there's new digital equipment that lets you mix and even scratch .. but nothing better than putting your finger over the record, adjusting the pitch control and mixing a perfect beat.. As far as scratching goes, you can see the influence this has made in a lot of today's music. From rock bands with dj's (limp bizkit, incubus, linkin' park) to even jazz artists (courtney pine, herbie hancock). The turntable has turned into an instrument with the help of turntablists like q-bert, dj shadow, kid koala, etc.
As far as record pressers go, there's plenty of places out there cutting vinyl for hip hop/club/and techno producers. There's also a lot of independent places that do it for a lot less..
Recently, Vestax introduced a Vinyl cutter for under $10,000 [hollywooddj.com] (about 8400).
Overall, I'm glad vinyl is still around after all these years. I doubt it will go away anytime soon.
Breakage in the production line (Score:4, Insightful)
After all, the RIAA subtracts an 11% 'laquer breakage' allowance from artists' royalties. They don't do laquer any more, but I wonder what the breakage is for vinyl, or even for CDs.
I know, pointless barb, but I'd like to see a lawyer go after this one. No doubt the padding would appear somewhere else.
analog (Score:4, Informative)
Frequency Response: digital music *must* filter out everything above half its sample rate (plus or minus a few hertz for data). Conventional CD's filter out everything above 22kHz. some people can hear a 25kHz pitch, some cannot. but nearly everyone can hear the interaction of 24 and 25, which can manifest itself within their hearing range. recording techniques improve this situation, and higher sampling rates are coming, but this is still a fundamental limit.
Dynamic Range: analog music naturally compresses from the quietest to the loudest portions in much the same way the human ears work. when you go to a really loud concert, does the sound clip? no, your ears compress the sound. digital music can emulate this with algorithms, and some of them are quite good, but again, all decent analog equipment does this as a side effect, and no digital recorder will ever get this excatly right (although digital recordings can best the 96dB range that good tape machines can offer, does anyone listen to music in a *totally silent* environment?)
Simplicity: no processing is required to record/play analog. the medium is a physical imprint of the sound waves in the room as a function of time. all you need is a magnet and some energy.
Of course, analog media is not as convienient as modern digital media, but since I have a home with the space in my home, I will keep listening to my big, bulky, dusty records because they just sound better.
Re:analog (Score:5, Informative)
First, farnsworth's post asserts that some people can hear a 25kHz pitch. Yeah. Right. Maybe if they're six months old. The reality is, there are probably a handful of adults on the planet who can hear a 25kHz pitch, and I doubt any of them live in the noise-drenched environments of western civilization. Most adults are lucky if they can still hear anything out past 18kHz, especially if they listened to a lot of loud music at any point in their lives.
It's also vital to note that even then, the sensitivity of our ears to sound at high frequencies is extraordinarily low. In other words, a sound at 20kHz would have to be phenomenally loud for us to hear it compared to a sound at, say, 5,000Hz, where our hearing is much, much more sensitive. Few musical instruments produce loud sounds at or above 20kHz as a result - at least, not intentionally. There could be harmonics at frequencies in excess of 20kHz (for example, perhaps cymbals produce such harmonics), but by their very nature, those harmonics are going to be soft in relation to the rest of the signal - and again, most adults don't stand a snowball's chance of hearing them anyhow, even if they were deafeningly loud, which they're not.
Worse, vinyl doesn't stand a snowball's chance of reproducing such ultrasonic information with any kind of accuracy. The format was never designed to record high frequency signals - engineers have enough trouble squeezing 60Hz - 15,000Hz out of them reliably, let alone with any kind of fidelity when compared to CDs. I have no doubt that LPs produce a fair amount of ultrasonic signal, but again, most of that is going to be unintentional - clicks and pops, surface noise, electrical noise, and harmonic distortion generated by the stylus and cartridge as they vibrate. Any "real" ultrasonic information on the record would be swamped by all the fake ultrasonic garbage. You also seem to be assuming that the master tapes contain such ultrasonic information. They don't. The usable frequency response of even the best analog tape decks used historically for studio recording typically topped out at around 25kHz. Beyond that the levels fall off so rapidly as to be useless, and even there, the levels are going to be pretty low. And this assumes the deck doesn't employ filtering beyond around 22kHz, to eliminate unwanted ultrasonic noise that can impinge on the bias signal. Many do. Older or lower-quality equipment (and/or tapes) won't even make it to 25kHz (except for all the hiss!).
Even if the decks can record 25kHz sounds, in order to get them onto the tape the microphones would have to be capable of picking up such ultrasonics to begin with, which of course they can't. 99.9% of the microphones used over the past 60 years to record audio in the studio or concert hall are lucky to have a usable frequency response out to as far as 20kHz - most begin a pretty severe rolloff at 15kHz, and by 20kHz only a handful manage to maintain a flat response, with performance dropping off rapidly thereafter. Anything they're picking up beyond 20kHz is going to be so faint as to be inaudible once it passes through the gauntlet of noise and distortion inherent in the vinyl format. Here's a sales listing [digitalvillage.co.uk] for the legendary Neumann U87, a mic that's been the studio standard for vocal recording since the '60s - the Beatles used this mic, and singers & engineers continue to choose this mic over all others even to this day. Its frequency response tops out at 20kHz. So much for recording ultrasonics. And the instrument probably most likely to produce ultrasonics - the cymbal - is typically recorded using a mic like the Shure SM57, which has been a standard for recording percussion since its introduction over thirty years ago. Its frequency response tops out at a measly 15kHz. What ultrasonics?
Of course, it's all utterly inconsequential compared to the trashing of the original waveform caused by all of vinyl's other numerous limitations, including the damage done in the crucial 50Hz-5,000Hz range where human hearing and perception is so much more sensitive, and accuracy therefore so much more important. You're lucky if you can get a flat 50Hz - 15,000kHz response out of vinyl. Most signal above and below those limits is likely to be noise (rumble and hum below 50-60Hz, clicks, pops, hiss and harmonics above 15,000kHz).
Next, you make the ludicrous assertion that, "analog music naturally compresses from the quietest to the loudest portions in much the same way the human ears work." Eh? Human hearing most certainly does not "compress" the audio signal, and even if it did, what could possibly be "natural" about adding an external layer of compression to the signal? The only time our hearing "compresses" is when a really loud sound (think thunderclap) happens nearby - IIRC, the hammer will be temporarily pulled away from the eardrum, but that's a reflex that lasts only moments. With a dynamic range well in excess of 90dB (far greater than vinyl's pathetic 60dB under absolutely ideal circumstances), CD's and DVD's don't need to utilize any compression, unless they're recording the sound of a jet taking off six feet away or something. Nor do vinyl records magically compress the natural dynamic range of recorded music into their paltry 60dB of dynamic range (more like 40dB for virtually all consumer vinyl) - that compression is done by mastering engineers. You could perform the same signal-degrading compression before mastering the sound to a CD if you wanted, but what kind of an idiot would do such a thing?
Finally, this statement of yours the kicker: " Simplicity: no processing is required to record/play analog. the medium is a physical imprint of the sound waves in the room as a function of time. all you need is a magnet and some energy." No processing, eh? Apart from the already mentioned compression, of course, to get the natural dynamic range of music shoehorned into vinyl's pathetic dynamic range. And then there's the RIAA equilization, required before one can even attempt to squeeze high fidelity performance out of vinyl. Here's the standardized curve [tanker.se]. Looks pretty processed to me. Bass frequencies are cut by almost 20dB at 20Hz (they have to, otherwise the needle would pop out of its groove trying to reproduce bass), while at 19kHz treble frequencies are boosted by almost 20dB in an attempt to drown out all the vinyl noise. Then it all has to be reversed on playback. That's some serious processing.
I suppose this would also be a good time to mention that, if you want to put more than about 10 minutes worth of material onto a single side of a vinyl LP, you're going to have to further compress (or eliminate) any loud, low bass. The grooves can't be made wide enough to handle it. And of course, de-equalizing that RIAA curve on playback is an imprecise science, leading to all sorts of frequency response irregularities and phase issues. Whoops!
Ah yes, the wonderful, "naturally" compressed, unprocessed sound of vinyl. To summarize:
* Loud tics and pops caused by stray dust and wear, resulting in a *negative* signal to noise ratio - i.e. the noise can become louder than the music! (with N'Stynk, I suppose this would be a blessing in disguise . . . or simply redundant.)
* Rumbling caused by the turntable's motor and the friction of the stylus as it passes through the groove
* Wow and flutter, caused by speed irregularities in the turntable's drive system and by any imperfections in the geometry of the disc
* Phase irregularities caused by the RIAA equalization and the subsequent need for the preamp to de-equalize the signal
* Frequency response irregularities caused by the RIAA equalization / de-equalization process
* The inability to reproduce loud bass accurately (the cutter making the wax master would pop out of its groove if it tried to reproduce the kind of bass CDs can handle effortlessly)
* The tendency for the turntable, platter and even the disc to function as microphones, picking up room reverberations and - particularly - the sound being produced by the speakers, smearing and distorting the audio in numerous ways
* Cartridge / tonearm misalignments, causing inaccurate stylus pickup, accelerated record wear, or both.
30dB of stereo separation, vs. CD's 70+dB of separation
* A theoretical maximum of 60dB of dynamic range for virgin vinyl of the highest quality (and only at certain frequencies - obviously, not in the low bass) vs. around 90dB of dynamic range from even the cheapest CD players, across the entire spectrum
* In practice, roughly 40dB of usable dynamic range across the majority of the spectrum
* A relatively flat frequency response from only around 60 Hz to 15 kHz, with severe rolloffs beyond those limits
* The need for mastering engineers to severely compress and re-equalize the signal in order to steer clear of the format's limitations relative to CD, which requires no such distortion-educing compensation
* Pitch and frequency errors caused by the speed difference between the cutter used to produce the wax master and your turntable
* The tendency of the media itself to wear out as its played, and to be damaged during routine handling with audible results
You're clearly uninformed from a technical standpoint. If you prefer the "sound" of vinyl, that's your business. But don't try to cloak your preference in technobabble you obviously don't begin to understand
You are the one who is uninformed (Score:3, Interesting)
FACT: most people can hear up to at least 30 kHz. No, they cannot hear a pure sine wave at that frequency. But they can hear a difference if such frequencies are or are not present in the music. Moreover, almost all music contains such frequencies. No, not as pure sine waves. And it is not even the harmonics that cause the effect. Rather, because to duplicate the waveform transients, you must have the high frequencies. (Think Fourier.)
Yes, such transients are reproduced on vinyl. No, they are not reproduced on CD.
There are various controlled studies demonstrating these things. Since you are such an authority, I shouldn't need to give you references, but since I'm so magnanimous, I'll give a few anyway:
91: 3207 [1991].
Your final star'ed points are just dumb. You don't give any references, because of course you don't have any. Get a good turntable/arm/cartridge. The reverse of most of what you say is true. E.g. your claim of 60dB dynamic range is nuts: the range is over 100 dB. You are confusing the noise floor of a high-hiss record with dynamic range--but you can hear 20 dB into that noise, and a good record need not have high hiss. Vinyl has poor bass??? It's much better than CD. And so on.
Re:You are the one who is uninformed (Score:3, Informative)
> FACT: most people can hear up to at least 30 kHz.
FACT: Nobody can hear up to 30kHz. People *might* be able to hear harmonics of sounds above 20kHz, provided those harmonics fall within the range of human hearing, but they won't be able to hear the actual pure tones themselves (as you yourself indicated). Since any medium - such as CD - that records sounds up to 20kHz will also record the harmonics of tones above 20kHz, provided they fall within the range of human hearing, what exactly would we be missing? And apart from percussion or certain electronic instruments, what instruments are out there generating gobs of ultrasonic information, anyhow? And what microphones are capable of picking up such information? And what analog tape decks are capable of recording such information? And - here's the kicker - how many speakers are capable of reproducing such information? The answer to each of these questions is, vanishing few. Many tape decks filter out or fail to record tones much beyond 20kHz. Few microphones can pick them up to begin with. And most speakers are lucky to maintain a flat frequency response even out to 20kHz, let alone to 25 or 30kHz. You'd practically have to live in a laboratory to record and then accurately reproduce ultrasonic information. A 50-year-old format like the vinyl LP certainly isn't ideal for such a thing, given its noise, distortion, dynamic range, separation and phase issues. Only the high quality analog tape decks found in professional studios or digital recording formats utilizing higher sampling rates than 44.1kHz could hope to accurately record and reproduce such audio.
>Yes, such transients are reproduced on vinyl.
Maybe on audiophile grade, quarter-speed mastered vinyl played back on a $5,000 turntable equipped with a $1,500 cartridge run through a $2,000 preamp they are. Poorly. With oceans of harmonic distortion and waves of crashing high-frequency noise. Assuming, of course, the original performance was picked up using microphones and mic preamps capable of dealing with much of anything beyond 20kHz (such mics cost in excess of $2,000, and the preamps aren't much cheaper) onto tape decks capable of recording much of anything beyond 20-25kHz. None of which is likely, outside of studiously recorded audiophile sessions.
>Your final star'ed points are just dumb. You don't give any references,
>because of course you don't have any.
You must really enjoy looking like a boob. Hey, if you want to play the (in your case, irrelevant and apparently unavailable on the web) references game, I'd love to! (Actually, one "reference" you posted is available on the web - marketing material from a stereo company plugging their overpriced audiophile gear. You should have provided us with a link to the guy selling $10,000 tinfoil hats to protect us from government mind control rays, too.) Here are my bullet points, plus any references I could dig up (though much of this should be obvious to anyone with a brain in their skull):
* Loud tics and pops caused by stray dust and wear, resulting in a *negative* signal to noise ratio - i.e. the noise can become louder than the music! (with N'Stynk, I suppose this would be a blessing in disguise . . . or simply redundant.)
Well, this one is obvious. Whenever a tick or pop is louder than the music (happens a lot with vinyl, and even with tape during quiet passages), the signal to noise ratio goes negative.
* Rumbling caused by the turntable's motor and the friction of the stylus as it passes through the groove
Another obvious point. Many turntables even include rumble measurements in their specifications, though that's for the platter only and doesn't take into account additional noise caused by the friction of the stylus dragging through the groove.
* Wow and flutter, caused by speed irregularities in the turntable's drive system and by any imperfections in the geometry of the disc.
Another spec that's included for most turntables and even analog tape decks. Hard to see how this one is, "just dumb", unless you're so ignorant you've never looked at the specs for a turntable or tape deck.
* Phase irregularities caused by the RIAA equalization and the subsequent need for the preamp to de-equalize the signal.
Another obvious point. Anytime you process the signal to emphasize or de-emphasize certain frequencies, you're going to introduce phase discrepancies. Here's a $2,000 preamp from Daniels Audio [danielsaudio.com] that attempts to compensate for the phase issues. Notice I say "attempts". Even a manufacturer of $2,000 stereo components won't claim to be able to eliminate such issues. And who knows what issues all that additional processing is going to introduce.
* Frequency response irregularities caused by the RIAA equalization / de-equalization process
Again, a no-brainer. If the frequency response curve used to produce the wax master doesn't precisely match the frequency response curve in your preamp (and it never will), certain frequencies are going to be emphasized upon playback while others will be de-emphasized. Here's a big page detailing the design issues faced by folks trying to build the RIAA de-equalization circuits for a preamp [euronet.nl]. Notice the difficulties he's having making the response curve come close to the RIAA ideal. Even by the end, he's off by more than a quarter dB at many frequencies, including some smack dab in the middle of the most sensitive range of human hearing.
* The inability to reproduce loud bass accurately (the cutter making the wax master would pop out of its groove if it tried to reproduce the kind of bass CDs can handle effortlessly)
For references, please see this [planetdnb.com], this [aardvarkmastering.com], this [futurediscsystems.com], or this [djprince.net].
* The tendency for the turntable, platter and even the disc to function as microphones, picking up room reverberations and - particularly - the sound being produced by the speakers, smearing and distorting the audio in numerous ways
I should think this one would be obvious. Lots of turntable manufacturers sell heavy weights to sit on top of a record while it's playing. If you don't believe this is true, jump up and down next to your turntable while it's playing, or set it on top of a speaker pumping out a lot of bass. You'll get an "extreme" demonstration of the effect, but the truth is it's happening all the time.
* Cartridge / tonearm misalignments, causing inaccurate stylus pickup, accelerated record wear, or both.
Again, an obvious issue. Good luck getting it right! [nac.net]
* 30dB of stereo separation, vs. CD's 70+dB of separation
See this [www.foon.be], or the specs for the cartridges themselves here [audio-technica.com]. You'll be lucky to find a preamp that can come close to the 70-90dB of separation even a cheap CD player can provide, let alone a pickup.
* A theoretical maximum of 60dB of dynamic range for virgin vinyl of the highest quality (and only at certain frequencies - obviously, not in the low bass) vs. around 90dB of dynamic range from even the cheapest CD players, across the entire spectrum.
References to this abound. If you don't believe me, take it from an expert [georgegraham.com].
* In practice, roughly 40dB of usable dynamic range across the majority of the spectrum
See the reference above.
* A relatively flat frequency response from only around 60 Hz to 15 kHz, with severe rolloffs beyond those limits.
This one has been covered already.
* The need for mastering engineers to severely compress and re-equalize the signal in order to steer clear of the format's limitations relative to CD, which requires no such distortion-educing compensation.
Again, see the references above.
* Pitch and frequency errors caused by the speed difference between the cutter used to produce the wax master and your turntable.
That's another obvious fact to anyone but a blithering idiot.
* The tendency of the media itself to wear out as its played, and to be damaged during routine handling with audible results
Well, duh. On to dissect the remainder of your post:
>The reverse of most of what you say is true. E.g. your claim
>of 60dB dynamic range is nuts: the range is over 100 dB.
>You are confusing the noise floor of a high-hiss record with
>dynamic range--but you can hear 20 dB into that noise, and a
>good record need not have high hiss. Vinyl has poor bass???
>It's much better than CD. And so on.
Oh my. There doesn't seem to be anything left to dissect. I've already covered these points up above. Vinyl is *lucky* to hit 60dB of dynamic range with audiophile pressings played back on incredibly expensive equipment. No "confusion" with vinyl's truly outrageous noise floor is necessary. And the dynamic range decreases drastically as the length of the record increases - a problem digital formats don't suffer from. And as for vinyl's bass performance, I think half the links I posted up above note how crappy vinyl is at capturing loud, low bass.
Next time, you might want to learn something about a subject before you proceed to open your mouth and cram your foot down your throat.
Re:You are the one who is uninformed (Score:3, Funny)
Oh. Wait.
What I meant to say was, Hitler liked LPs, so you're full of it.
Re:analog (Score:3, Interesting)
Is is possible that this interest in complete audio "clarity" (i.e. removing all distortion) is misguided in the first place? (I distinguish "complete clarity" - the apparent end goal of digital audio - from "apparent clarity", which I'd define as the level that we've had with analog tape (studio) and vinyl since the 60's, if not the 50's.)
I am seriously interested in this question; my reasoning is as follows:
In the universe I live in, there's _plenty_ of misc. noise going on around me _all_the_time_ (at the moment I can hear the fan of my computer, the ventilation system, the cars outside, some wind, a little rain on the road, some electrical hum, and the noises I make breathing, shifting, and typing).
In order to avoid as much of this noise as possible, one must more or less lock oneself in a recording studio (shielded ventilation, sound-proofing, headphones, etc.). These environments are great for recording in, but this is because they are in no way like real life environments; in fact, they are very unlike real life environments, and thus (for most people) rather uncomfortable compared to real environments. (Just ask anyone stuck in an inside office with no windows or ventilation.)
What concerns me is that the goal of perfect audio clarity seems to me to have the implicit side-goal of reproducing the audio sterility of the recording studio along with the musical (or other) sounds that we want to hear. This environmental "non-sound" (though "extremely low noise" might be a better way to put it) is increasingly apparent in pop recording, esp. with the popularity of using mixing and misc. effects to create sounds that are simply not performable in the real world, even if they are originally based on (pieced-together) recordings of real instruments/people. The pieced-together nature of this work, esp. when designed to have some resemblance to recordings of live performances, tends to become more apparent the greater the "clarity" of the audio reproduction.
Because of this, I wonder if the distortion/warmth/whatever you want to call it of analog audio may smooth the path between the underlying sterility of studio-created recordings and the noisy environments (disregarding the most isolated and expensive of audiophile set-ups) that is our typical experience of music, whether it be at home, in the car, in a park on a boom box or walkman, inside a store, at a rock show, in a place of worship, or in a grandly appointed concert hall.
Another way to put this is to ask whether engineering the reproduction of perfectly "clear" audio may be incidentally depriving that audio of some natural "timbre" that we expect of sounds produced/performed in real world environments.
And if this is the case, do the imperfections of analog-reproduced audio perhaps act as a some sort of substitue "timbre", therby enabling the sounds that they "distort" to be perceived as more a part of our surroundings, and therefore more familiar and welcome?
(A perhaps interesting side question is to ask whether the advent of "perfectly clear" audio may result in increasing efforts to "dirty up" recordings in order to remove a listener-alienating aural sterility; I've already heard anecdotes to this effect, but I don't follow the audio industry closely enough to distinguish B.S. from actual common practice)
end of consumer analogue audio and components (Score:2, Insightful)
Now most people just go out and buy a bookshelf system for a couple hundred dollars, or a few hundred if it has a DVD player, and let it go at that. The speakers suck so the reproduction is probably far below cassette tape. We might buy a decent set of speakers, but that doubles the price of the system. People get used to that low quality sound, so just download the songs from the net and listen to music on the computer, thus bypassing all music related sales.
Perhaps not as bad as I say, but I get a better sound out of my computer and my amplified speaker system than any bookshelf system I have seen.
Vinyl Shortage in Europe + Digital Mixing (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I'm a vinyl junkie, I spend over $5000 a year on hard to find vinyl, and I DJ a few weekly events. Of course all this is funded by my day job as a software developer (I was working at napster until recently). I wrote a digital mixing application for linux about 6 years ago, back then mp3 wtill wasn't really standardised so I used Raw CDR audio, or Mpeg Layer 2. The UI on any digital mixing application sucks compared to vinyl, Final scratch is close but has too many shortcomings (where's the vorbis support?).
The other somewhat dubious advantage of vinyl is that the music industry's lawyers see to be more tolerant of short run vinyl bootlegs of tracks which could never get released legally - Usually mashups of Britney Spears vs Nirvana over a 4 to the floor beat. If that was put out as an mp3 or CD they'd probably be more aggressive, but vinly tends to only go to DJ's who can make a decent argument about promoting music. I'm not saying litigation is uneard of, but It's very rare.
why I dig vinyl (Score:2)
Elvis? (Score:2)
Thank you... thank you very much...
Actually, I know a lot of people who will go out of their way to get old 8-tracks or records of older artists. I could never figure this out when the same material is available on CD. For owners of vintage cars, having a 8-track is still somewhat of a cool thing, but record players don't fit in here.
No more scratched records EVER! (Score:2)
Disclaimer: I'm the guy in the upper left corner.
i still get vinyl pressed... up the punks! (Score:2)
honestly, being a vinyl person is something you just get or do not get. i guess it's like "why bother with Linux when you can run ******". There are reasons it is better to you, even though it may not be the simplest thing out there. you might as well use AOL since it installs itself while you are at it.....
CDs are just MP3s waiting to be ripped.
p.s. yes, as a label and somebody that plays in bands i support MP3 file trading 100%. i used to leave a machine running Napster with a lot of our music up on it. it's easier than kids trying to rip vinyl when i can make the MP3 right from the DAT.
Underground Dance (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides, digital cannot reproduce the rich fullness of broken-in vinyl basslines, especially at high volume. Needle wear, and even the initial recording process produce extra curves in the recorded sounds, whereas digital picks up every single square corner of the wave accurately and completely, which gives it that "clear but cold" sound which so many audiophiles complain of. Vinyl adds some smoothing to the process. Worn midrange-highend also adds a bit of character (not too worn, mind you, there is definately a cutoff point), as the slight distortion not only gives the impression that the sound is louder than it really is but helps clarify it amongst the heavy low-end.
That, and it's just not as much fun to spin a plastic controller wheel to align beats as it is to actually spin the platter with your hand. Vinyl is a truely interactive medium. A CD turntable is just that: a CD player with advanced fast forward/rewind, but a turntable is like dragging a bow across a string, you are actually the generating vibrations, not some DAC in a black box.
It is for these reasons I believe vinyl will never die. However, I don't believe it will ever be anything but a niche market.
Vinyl Video (Score:3, Interesting)
I just went and say the exhibit at the ICA [ica.org.uk] tonight. This stuff is pretty cool. The basic premise is that there was a missing link in home recording and this product really should have existed at some point. The images, music and cover art of the vinyl is super nice.
Just today (Score:3, Insightful)
final scratch (Score:4, Informative)
Re:final scratch (Score:3, Informative)
Out of the 4-5 DJing friends I have, not one is spinning digital media. Mixing CDs doesn't appeal to them, and neither does using ipods or similar.
You need to be able to mix the music correctly, if you want to advance from school-disco gigs. Mixing on anything other than decks is always going be awkward. You need to be able to touch the record to advance/halt it the 0.05 ms required to get the beats in sync. It's an art form, and facinating to watch.
For dance music, there will always be vinyl. Perhaps the title of this topic should be "major RIAA artists stop using vinyl". Those in the "underground" scene couldn't care less.
Re:final scratch (Score:4, Informative)
The only reason that vinyl is still alive is because most dance/underground/techno is released on vinyl FIRST. That's why.
Re:final scratch (Score:3, Informative)
Fair point, but it's not the same as a pair of decks. It doesn't have the hands-on feel to it, and it certainally doesn't hold the same mystique for the fans of the art.
Plus, let's hear some scratching on those CDs... ;-)
The only reason that vinyl is still alive is because most dance/underground/techno is released on vinyl FIRST. That's why.
Not strictly true, the whole scene is dominated by vinyl, not just the releases. Fans don't get excited by someone pressing buttons!
Don't get me wrong, I love all the new tech here, I for one have never owned any vinyl, despite being old enough to have had it available. The apps like Atomix [atomixmp3.com] and Trakor [nativeinstruments.de] really interest me as all my media is digital, but when I show them to my DJ friends, they are curious, but uninterested. DJs get the girls, nerds don't.
Re:final scratch (Score:2)
Re:Last??? (Score:5, Informative)
Vinyl still has a massive hold on the DJ industry, but it's slipping... Just my 0.02.
Re:Last??? (Score:2)
In some genres of Dance music, like Drum 'n Bass, it's also not uncommon for releases to be ONLY on Vinyl, with no CD pressings available. Makes it tough to get MP3s of the new stuff.
Re:Last??? (Score:2)
Re:Last??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Audiogalaxy was the place to get MP3s though, they'd have the latest acid techno tracks ripped within a day of release. None of the other music services come close in terms of content.
Not Slipping (Score:2)
Re:Last??? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is something I think I know a little bit about. For years the family business has been a DJ/Karaokee business, and quite a profitable one, too. The fact that I also keep in close contact with other DJs and KJs in the area also helps me keep an eye on what other people are doing. MP3s, MCGs, and CDs played back through professional decks occupy almost all of the DJ scene. I don't DJ personally, but I do help maintain the equipment which can be a job all it's own.
With high end CD decks, it's possible to do anything that can be done with a record, and in fact it can be done better. Can it be done cheaper, easier, and without figuring out a bunch of controls with vinyl? Sure it can. But with a CD you won't be damaging your source material when you use it and you can also do some pre-production mixing that is beat-perfect without the risk of live-show error (which is both bad for your reputation and embarassing.)
If you want the best in professional CD decks, there's no shortage of sources, but if you want some high quality MP3 and MCG players, I recommend taking a look at these guys [cavs-usa.com]. They can supply you with both the hardware and legal copies of karaokee songs for use in your shows. As for music, it's possible to simply rip the music you paid for the proper way, assuming you're doing it legal. (Of course you ARE, aren't you?)
If you want to keep up to speed with what's going on in the DJ Business, also try the DJ magazines...
Re:Last??? (Score:3, Interesting)
The whole point of live performance is that something is being created on the fly that will never happen just that way again. This applies to a musician OR a DJ. I'd much rather go see a DJ mixing and matching as s/he goes. Darn, some things won't be perfect. But some things will be done so amazingly well that I'll remember the mad mix skillz of that DJ for the rest of my life.
DJs create music. Anything else is just a jukebox.
Re:Last??? (Score:5, Informative)
You're obviously not getting out to the dance/Hip Hop clubs then...
For years the family business has been a DJ/Karaokee business
Ah, wedding singer type DJs. They don't even mix the music. They cue up one track after another. Winamp can do that. I know people who would kill you for calling that DJing.
With high end CD decks, it's possible to do anything that can be done with a record, and in fact it can be done better.
Try telling that to Grand Master Flash. I'm sure anyone who has seen him live would agree that you can't do what he does on a CD deck.
simply rip the music you paid for the proper way, assuming you're doing it legal.
Most professional DJs (e.g. those with a club residency) don't buy the music. They get given it for free on white labels. It's a great promotion for the song, so I doubt the record industry is going to come after you for promoting their material... ;-)
Re:Last??? (Score:2)
You know, you get some, and you buy some. I've found that a large percentage of the "given" stuff isn't worth a crap. They're trying to promote a lot of up and coming artists and a lot of them won't ever be up.
Yes, there are a lot of DJ shows that I do agree aren't quite really being a DJ. They are nothing more than being a jukebox. Some shows require more work than others, and that's why some shows simply charge more.
If you're only going to be paying $100 for a night, don't expect anybody to be coming and doing any live mixing at all. Instead, you can expect some pre-mixed stuff and a few CDs of whatever type of music you happen to want played.
On the other hand, if you want lights, requested mixing, and a bunch of other stuff, well, that can be done too but the gig is going to cost a whole hell of a lot more.
You can say waht you want about the DJ business, but it is a business and ultimately it's about making money. As I said before, the business has been quite profitable so they're doing something right. They're profiting AND using more expensive equipment. I know some vinyl DJs that aren't doing that well.
(I would tell a little story about one very popular DJ in my area that I know who loves vinyl, tried to move to MP3s here lately, but was too stupid to figure out how to do it so he gave up... but I'll keep the details of that whole thing to myself...)
Re:Last??? (Score:2)
If you're talking about club DJs (dance music, not hiphop/top 40), then you're wrong. There are two reasons why they all use records. Any respectable club out there will have technic sl-1200 turntables and a pioneer djm?00 mixer. A lot also have the cd systems as well, but they will _always_ have the turntables. Also, and maybe more importantly, most underground dance music only comes out on vinyl.
Re:Last??? (Score:2)
Re:Last??? (Score:3, Insightful)
All of the above have problems though for any DJ who plays house, pop, any form of techno/dnb/IDM/trance etc. I'd say my experience here in Toronto is that a small minority of DJ's use CD decks like the pioneer CDJ-1000. Those who do complain about their inability to get new records. You have to understand that in dance music most remixes come on vinyl and the underground releases "white labels" which often contain tracks with uncleared samples or bootleg remixes. The sorta stuff trendy clubbers and raves go nuts for.
Absolutely 0 (zero) scratch artists use digital machines. Their haptic [reference.com] interfaces aren't nearly as robust as vinyl. The basis of urban/electronic music is sampling. The catalog of vinyl records out there is huge and most of all they're cheap! To this day most hip-hop is produce like so: Sample a record into an Akai MPC, re-arrange and have an MC rap on top of it. Sure you could get your hot James Brown beat on a CD in some greatest hits or remastered disc but this is music from the ghetto. "Real" hip-hoppers are poor and even when they make their millions and are dripping with ice and fat chains they still use records. Vinyl is cultural. All of these new digital products definitely have their creative niches though. Ming & Fs [mingandfs.com] use CDJ-1000's exclusively so they don't have to get acetate pressings of their records while they do extensive touring. Lots of people use traktor and final scratch to play their own new material that they aren't yet ready to commit to a a short run of records.
I guess my point is that even though CD/MP3/OGG/Whatever units are more economically and technologically advanced vinyl is cultural. An analogy would be between a string section in an orchestra and some of the more advanced MIDI keyboards we have today. To the untrained ear a synthesized string pad sounds the same as a performed one. But classical music is an instituition. There are professionals who've trained for decades to play their instruments. Telling them to replace their Strad with a Korg Trinton keyboard would be laughable. DJ's are no different, scratching and mixing is no less challenging. I have the unique position of being both a classical viola player AND somebody who likes to play a few records. I dunno what DJ Scene you're from but here in Toronto which is home of a very vibrant urban/electronic/dance music scene a large majority of DJs use vinyl.
Re:not the last pressing plant around (Score:2)
Re:In Soviet Russia... (Score:2)
Come on try harder....
Re:Burp QWZX (Score:3, Interesting)
Digital distortion, on the other hand, often results in odd-order distortion, and is ugly.
Your attitude is about as reasonable as theirs.
Re:Burp QWZX (Score:3, Informative)
Digital music has exactly zero distortion. I have tried this, output a sine wave and link it back to the input on a Sound Blaster. Doing a FFT on the result shows no harmonics at all above the noise floor, which is 100+ dB down.
You are right in that tube amplifiers do introduce a coloration, but this is mostly in frequency response. I have recently done a search, both over the web and in my dead tree files, for tube circuits to build. All of the schematics I could find, from the simplest single-tube amplifiers to a 10 tube per channel RIAA phono pre-amp, have worse performance, from the frequency flatness point of view, than very simple solid-state amplifiers. This is because tube amplifiers have very high output impedances and they interact with the following stage input capacitance.
About the even-odd harmonics, the worse culprit in solid-state is the output AB-class stage. If the bias level on the output stage is not adjusted exactly to spec (in most amps it isn't adjustable at all), third order harmonics can be very high. Of course, some people debate this point endlessly, but I'm not certain that second-order harmonics are intrinsically more pleasing to the ear than third order. I think it's more the absolute level of the distortion that matters.
Re:Burp QWZX (Score:2)
One note on cd's. Remember that one of the biggest selling points of cd's was not their _absolute_ quality, but the "average" quality. In other words, someone with a cheap cd player and a cd from Walmart could achieve a level of sound quality that was very good. Vs the huge disparity in analog stuff, both recordings and equipment. So you have a situation where the most common 90% of cd's sound as good as the upper 10% of analog.