LPs anyone? [vynil records to the younger set ;) ]
I have a reasonably large collection of LPs, some from when they were sold (!) and also lots picked up along the way out of I guess nostalgia. I finally bought a turntable - plugged into a pair of amplified speakers - and was blown away by the rich sound.
First record listened to: Michael Rabin. Maybe a mistake, I wondered why I was fooling with this... :o
Anyone else with needle and threadlines?
I listen to the same recording on LP played through my old Marantz stereo and on spotify played through a modern active speaker system and wonder why they call it progress.....
I suspect progress and profit are sometimes interchangeable...
My husband is an avid vinyl collector, as am I. I love going through old bins at shops to find (cheap!) vinyl treasures. I was also gifted a huge collection of opera on vinyl, which I listen to on occasion. I love my mp3s for their portability, but if I can listen to a proper record on our stereo system I’m all for it. .
I have over 4000 lps and have been an avid collector since I was 12 years old.They spin on a Linn lp12 with a lyra Kleos cartridge and amplification is a PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium HP integrated amp.I love collecting Telefunken Das AlteVerke baroque albums with Nicholas Harnoncourt and the old Deutsch Grammophones from the early sixties, the heyday of recordings.It really is fun digging through bins looking for "treasures".About three weeks ago I received an email from a retired history professor who wanted to give away about 200 albums or they would be going to the landfill.About half of them are fantastic Phillips , Telefunken, London Full Frequency and Decca records.One of those was a Phillips of Henryk Szeryng and Ingrid Haebler playing Mozart Sonatas K454 and 481.Absolutely stunning imagery and dead quiet noisefloor.And to think this would be at the Erb Street dump right now..
Quality Analog sound, like a good cartridge on vinyl, running through that Marantz tube amplifier to big speakers is better than digital, but expensive. At the low price end, digital is better than a cheap turntable connected to a transistor amp and cheap speakers. Which is why digital has taken over most of the market.
I was always deeply allergic to the snap, crackle and pop. Binned my collection, but it was only about 50 records. I miss 1 or 2 of them, but not enough to buy a turntable for.
Like Gordon, a large proportion of my LPs (2000+) suffered from extraneous noise of one sort or another. A man with a van carried them all away a few years ago. The ones I missed I've been able to recover from CD or online and play them through the same 1980's Quad/Spendor system, and the only sonic differences I can detect are on the positive side. Next to go are the 2500 CDs, now all ripped to mp3. I know some people can tell the difference but happily I'm not one of them. Having been a disc junkie for half a century I'm finally clean!
Recovering missing stuff can be fun. A friend of mine recorded an Astor Piazzolla compilation cassette for me in about 1980. That got digitally transferred just before it wore out, but the quality was terrible. Since then I've tried to recreate the exact compilation from digital recordings. I'm only one track short of perfection!
I'm with Gordon here - the extraneous noises bothered me too much (they still do). But I had some favourite recordings which have never appeared on CD so I invested in a good quality sound card and some de-clicking software and converted my favourite LP's to digital. No deterioration, minimal extraneous noise.
Good points Joel.Digital is definetely more convenient.Lps take up a lot of space and its tiresome cleaning them.However I love the ' fleshiness' of vinyl especially with the 8 EL34s and 6 12au7 tubes of the PrimaLuna amp.Baroque performances are especially satisfying when the amp is set in the triode configuration.For the large orchestral works I put the amp in the ultralinear mode which gives a big spacious feel.
There is something wonderful about planning to listen to an LP. Its not the 'instant gratification' of a streaming or even a CD player. You turn everything on, pull out the LP sleeve, place the record on the turntable and turn it on, position the stylus and lower. After a few crackles you are treated to beautiful music, rich and satisfying - something to drink a glass of wine to. How much more that is like the effort to go to a live performance, the connection with the musicians - the whole ritual and grandeur of classical performance. OK, your efforts are admittedly artificial but the whole experience signifies a conscious planning, physical effort and mental immersion in the event. The very process of making the music happen creates a musical event.
I don't think I have a dog in this fight since I have some problems with my hearing (constant ringing, for example, and some hearing loss), so the "warmth" and other features ascribed to vinyl are probably lost on me.
Great posts Elise and Paul! I dont think tube amps are " warmer" than solid state.I bought the PrimaLuna for the bandwidth and its superior construction.Im 55 and this is the last amp I'll ever own.I had my Linn LK 1 and LK2 for 24 years.Lets see if Im so lucky to go another 24.So true about the liner notes.I have the LaSalle Quartet on Deutsch Grammophone playing Webern Schoenberg and Berg quartets .It actually comes with two thick booklets along with the 5 lps.Superb recordings and you educate yourself at the same time.
"Warmth" of tube amps; An electronics engineer, not me, could explain it better, but there is a buffering effect, like a spring, to the tube that the solid-state does not have. Transistors leak a little. A friend of mine does a good business rebuilding Tube amps for the electric guitar crowd.
I too have plenty of nostalgic associations but that's all they are - a phantom of the mind rather than a property of the object itself. I kept a few purely for that reason but have hardly played them since the rest went.
Your friend has an interesting job Joel.I had my phonostage built for me by Dan Santoni, who owns DTS audioelectronics.Its fascinating to listen to him explain the " nuts and bolts" of how amps , preamps, phonostages etc. work.As Paul Deck commented on the "proven absurdity of the hi-fi world", Dan Santoni has helped steer me clear of over- priced crap components.
The record in space is aboard Voyager. It has left the solar system as we know it. Grumiaux is playing the e major gavotte. However the Voyager recording is not on vinyl -- it is etched into gold.
Do any of you have direct to disc lps? How about Mercury Living Presence 35 mm recordings?
How do they do those living stereo reproductions? Actually play the records with a turntable and digitize the cartridge signal?
I find a big difference between CD and SACD on my fairly high-end player/receiver/speaker combo. The SACD restores all the warmth and bloom and naturalness that the LP has, except that it does so in a pristine fashion.
I would like to check out those SACDs Lydia.You're not the first person Ive heard to say that.
OK Peter, now I see. When I typed "living stereo reproductions" into Google, the first thing that came up was a boxed set of 60 CDs of albums recorded on that label. The boxed set is about $1000 new.
I bought a number of SACDs for the surround sound rather than the faster bit rate (or whatever). I haven't done a one-on-one comparison but I doubt my old ears got much benefit from the latter. The novelty of surround sound also wore off so those discs are going with all the rest. Of course the vintage RCA Living Stereo SACDs aren't in surround sound but even the ordinary version of that 60-disc set sounds very impressive. I actually think it's the simpler microphone placement that makes a lot of 1950's and 1960's recordings sound so good, and modern vinyl cuts and pressings offer much improved tracking and quieter surfaces as compared with the original LPs.
I think you're right Steve.Why I enjoy the golden era of recording(late 1950's to circa 1975) was not what the recording engineers did but what they DIDN'T do.The Living Stereo set up was usually done with two or three mics only and very minimal doctoring.When our orchestra recordrd the Brahms Serenade in D Major I counted 12 mics over the violins and 3 out in the hall.Its on CBC SM5OOO series and sounds compressed and over manipulated.
"I actually think it's the simpler microphone placement that makes a lot of 1950's and 1960's recordings sound so good." There's no doubt that minimalist miking contributed to the "characteristic sound" of the recordings made during that era. Whether they sound truly "better" than what modern recording techniques give is a matter of taste -- taste that is undeniably influenced by what we remember hearing when we were younger (i.e., nostalgia).
I own a fairly decent vinyl player and needle (Rega Planar series) that goes through a SS amp. I typically only buy vinyl copies of my absolute favorite recordings. 99% of what I listen to is on digital. To be honest, I find vinyls to be inferior in terms of sound quality even to Spotify digital, but it's just fun to have the physical copy. On really transparent, accurate equipment, you can definitely pick out the "superiority" of the digital formats, but then again, many people in my experience find really accurate playback to sound "unnatural", and prefer a less-precise but more pleasant sound.
I beg to differ with you Paul in regards to the nostalgic concept.As a full time professional violinist I actually play or have played the pieces that I listen to on the stereo.Its just nice to sit back and listen to other people do the work.My time line of "golden memories" is perhaps a decade or less( i.e we played the Sibelius 7th about 5 seasons ago).
I really don't care that much about the problems of the quality of sound of all of those old LPs (and I've got a couple hundred of them, not to mention several old 78's).
"Vinyl stll gives a lovely depth and width to the soundstage that becomes more noticeable with better cartridges."
Those hi fi salesmen sure pulled a fast one on me eh? I wish we lived closer Paul.I would give you a good demo so you could hear what the gobledegook is all about.
It could just be that I can't parse the language. Maybe you can help me out here. What are "accurate textures"? When I tried to look it up, I noticed that "an unprecedented level of revealed texture" is a phrase that appears in the Lyra sales literature. That's
I thought texture would be pretty obvious Paul.The sound of a wooden violin has a different texture than a brass trombone.An oboe sounds " reedy" like compared to copper timpani with plastic heads.
I have been led to believe that, when vinyl sounds better, it's because of the 'mastering' of the recordings.
Okay so "texture" seems to be the same thing as "timbre." Do I have that right, Peter? And what's your calibration standard for the "correct" sound of an oboe surrounded by a 100-piece orchestra? How do you know which cartridge makes the oboe sound most like an oboe should?
The difference between your sonic mediums won't really come into play until you have listening equipment that's good enough. Get good headphones and you'll start to really notice the differences between MP3s at different bitrates.
When the CD came out we were able to compare the same recordings done on CD and LP, what was obvious is the CD recordings were equalized different to emphasis the highs, people equate brighter sound with better quality, there wasn't any improvement to the CD, probably sounded worse on a really good stereo, so they changed the equalization to a non flat response to compensate, annoying.
Sorry Paul.I wasnt referring to any notes from Lyra or any other company.These terms are pretty standard for any stereo equipment such as soundstage , separation timbre etc.
Paul's presumably listening on a cheap stereo with hearing aids, no???
Pro tip for those buying stereo systems: A disc like the Miracle Makers makes for a great comparison. If you can clearly hear the differences between the violins, you're listening to a fairly decent set-up. If there aren't significant differences, thumbs down.
I use a circa $150 Grado cartridge, better than most $500 cartridges according to reviews, Grado make cartridges costing thousands of dollars but their cheaper models use the same technology, the are not moving magnet like most non Moving coil cartridges, but a third system invented by Grado, not exactly sure how it works but they sound great for LPs.
Yes...very nice cartridges.I just bought a set of Grado headphones...
Oh, don't worry. I'm sure the cartridge matters. After all that's the thing with the moving parts! I understand that the needle has to track the groove accurately and respond quickly and all that. Speakers / headphones have moving parts, too, so Lydia is safe. Speakers -- we can't escape those yet. But it's kind of funny that we invent increasingly sophisticated cartridges to "extract more information" (reasonable language) from a medium that amounts to scratches molded into a piece of plastic. You do wonder how accurately that can be done, but I understand it's a pretty sophisticated technology.
I hope James T can answer your question Paul .He seems to understand the technical aspects better than my artsy fartsy explanations.
This is all very interesting - but I think we have to be careful of the age-old trap (and I do mean age old ;) ): some people have much more sensitive hearing than others and while there may be no difference between a wax-cylinder recording and one on a CD for some, it may be torture for someone else.
Must be nice to play your cheap violin and listen to music on your cheap stereo, all the while thinking that you have the best!!
Oh Peter, there's one thing we can agree on: There's always something more expensive. A reasonable business model in such things is to simply offer the most costly model. (Wasn't that Shure's marketing plan in the 70s?)
Coming from one of our troll kings thats a little ripe. You're welcome to be happy using cheap equipment, but when you start to insult people's intelligence for liking good violins and good stereo equipment, thats where you enter the troll territory, that and your incessant self promoting of crappy planetary pegs..
I've heard of wow and flutter but never groove "rattle", or its antonym "hugging" to "create thicker and longer-lasting sound". It's dangerous to underestimate the subtlety of human hearing but I'm sure Paul is correct that stylus mistracking (as it's more normally called) would have absolutely no detectable influence on tempo or rhythm, although it may appear to make time pass more slowly. In my experience mistracking is most noticeable when listening to operatic voices, and compounded when the groove is overmodulated as was frequently the case in earlier days. Violins aren't nearly so badly affected unless the stylus is practically worn out or has a large ball of crud adhering.
James just a little point. Your comparison: "$3000 and $3500 violin is unlikely to be big, if not non-existent altogether, luck of the draw aside. However, the difference between a $100 carbon fiber bow and a $600 wood bow can be quite large", is not actually fair.
FYI The Needle Doctor is a good place to see a grand overview of cartridges from $29.00 to $16000.00.
The vacuum tubes inside the cartridge wouldn't have to do anything... they just need to visibly glow. This creates a placebo effect of "warmth." If you don't believe me just ask the marketing guys at McIntosh. An orange LED would probably suffice.
@Lyndon, I'm not trying to insult anyone's intelligence for liking expensive violins, bows, stereo equipment, wine, or anything else where judgment is largely subjective. I'm glad there are individuals, perhaps such as you, who can hear these small differences because I am handicapped in that way.
The thing I learned working in the stereo business for years, is that 90% of people have very poorly developed hearing and will pick the loudest, bassiest and brightest speakers over the more accurate one with flat frequency response and low colouration, I assume you are part of that 90%, so enjoy your music and please leave the rest of us with ears alone.
There are hidden joys to be found sometimes in the old LPs, joys that the purchaser was not intended to notice but which today would be ironed out long before the product reached the retail shelves.
James, for me it's an issue of timescale. If a cartridge can faithfully report information from the LP grooves at frequencies exceeding 10 kHz (events on a 100 microsecond timescale), then I don't see how it can fail to faithfully report a rhythm comprising events (e.g., individual notes) with rise-times and decay times that are -- well I don't know what they are but it's hard to imagine they would be less than 10 milliseconds (1/100 s). That's what I meant when I asked about the envelope of a typical soloist's martele.
I'm going to assume you're talking about frequencies as it applies to sampling and not harmonic frequencies. This doesn't REALLY make sense because it's analog and not digital, so it's not really "sampling" the groove. I think we're talking past each other anyway. Let's say you buy a really shitty cartridge where fulcrum barely absorbs any vibrations from the stylus, causing it to freely vibrate even for only a little sound. this can make sound linger that's not on the vinyl.
So I don't have a turntable any more, but if I did, I think the first new vinyl album I'd want to get would be
Just find the cover image, blow it up, and frame it! My facebook home page has an album cover as the main picture.
James if you're going to hear a 5 KHz overtone in your music, then doesn't the vibration of the needle have to have a component at that frequency? Doesn't the shape of the groove have to have that component too? If you made an LP groove with a pure 10 kHz sine wave, presumably your cartridge would report that information, right? And if there's no issue in the rest of your system (including your ears) then you'll hear that sine wave coming out of your speakers. That means your cartridge can respond to features in the LP groove on a 100-microsecond timescale. Simultaneously failing to respond on a 10-millisecond timescale seems improbable.
Im curious James as to the order you would upgrade a stereo system.Do you start at the cartridge and work your way back? I understand the "weakest link" idea but where do you concentrate your stereo bucks? How important is the tonearm in the chain? I have a 34 year old Linn Ittok LV11 in great shape.I wont upgrade until I can do an A,B comparison.The Linn Ekos SE is $3800.00.Ouch! What would a " better" tonearm do?
What's next? A $2000 spindle?
Thanks very much for that James! I have Revel f206 speakers which are relatively uncoloured with a good midrange so there will be no upgrade in that department for a while.
Actually Paul Linn does an upgrade on the spindle called "Cirkus".It replaces the spindle and bearing on the old Linn lp12s with one that is twice as thick and the spindle is a little longer.It was $500.00 the same price as your headphones.
I have a quite nice Linn digital setup in my living room, for the opposite end of this technology. :-)
Is that a type of bit streaming Lydia?
A friend of mine sold his Linn Sondek for £400 about 10 years ago, the price he paid for it, thinking he'd done well. At the time we were unaware that its price had trebled since he bought it.
For me Gordon I have no real strategy for the order since everything I own is slightly used.Whatever comes up on CanuckAudiomart or its American equivalent I take interest in.
I don't have the money to follow a strategy. I just know roughly what the strategy is.
My neighbour has an Arcam amp.Very nice stuff!
Yes, in fact the friend who sold the Sondek had Arcam separates, but the Solo has never given me much joy - there are various CD formats it can't read, for example, and the buttons/logic become moribund quite quickly.
I you don't like the functionality of the ipod, Gordon, you can probably find a cheap used laptop that you can dedicate to music, podcasts, and the like.
I have a friend who can give you a huge long spiel about his time spent working next to a superfi shop and getting to know the owners and spending time in their listening rooms during spare moments. By superfi, I mean people who will refloor your room and replaster your walls as part of the installation. Their speciality was to work out a hifi system that would sound exactly as though a string quartet was in the room with you and point out how bad it sounded compared with people's idea of what a superfi system should sound like. The superfi sound is a mythical sound. It's a very nice sound but it doesn't correspond to any reality.
Thanks for that Gordon and J.I am of the opinion too that if it ain't broke dont fix it.I had the bearings checked out on the Ittok and they're just fine.Just be happy with what I have.
Is that the turntable that uses a jet engine motor???
For that price you would think so! It has a vacuume pump built into the platter that sucks the vinyl into it.Not sure why...
Peter, I don't know why one would ridicule anyone for spending the equivalent of one year's college tuition on a phonograph tonearm. As Lyndon would surely say, if you want to listen to music with your $10,000 dog-crap setup, by all means go for it -- just don't blame those of us with ears for wanting something better.
Nah, it takes more than that.
if I ever get a hold of any of Paul's violins, those planetary pegs will be the first thing to go!!
My turntable is relatively cheap with a $150 grado cartridge, a Fisher 500C tube receiver I restored from the 60s and custom high end audiophile speakers I designed when I had access to a full anechoic chamber and test equipment back in the 80s at the speaker store I worked for.
Can you describe your speakers Lyndon?
I use top of the line Audax drivers, a 8 foot transmission line cabinet, 4 1/2 feet high, with an 8"special polymer plastic woofer midrange, with a pole piece instead of a dust cap. and a 10" woofer only, in the low bass both the 8" and the 10" work together, giving the equivalent of one 14"woofer, the treble is Audaxs titanium coated soft plastic 1" dome tweeter which unfortunately is no longer made, I recently had to shop ebay for genuine replacement diaphragms, Frequency response in the anechoic chamber was 40-20,000hz +- 2 db
Thanks for that! Have you ever tried tube rolling with your amp? I have PrimaLuna's proprietary 12au7s but was thinking of trying Mullards or Mazda Ciftes in the front two positions of the amp.
"The thing I learned working in the stereo business for years, is that 90% of people have very poorly developed hearing and will pick the loudest, bassiest and brightest speakers over the more accurate one with flat frequency response and low colouration, I assume you are part of that 90%, so enjoy your music and please leave the rest of us with ears alone."
Those are decent speakers Scott.You could try selling them on American AudioMart if you want.
Back to the OP...Elise, you are in the Toronto area I think.Are there any used vinyl record stores that you have had good experiences at and would recommend?
Lyndon you can have my gear pegs when you pry them from my cold, dead hands. LOL
Its become evident that geared pegs are more than just an obsession for you, Paul!!
It's called evangelism, Lyndon.
I think OCD would be the correct term
You spent a decade (or two?) of your life building clavichords and you're calling
At least I have a constructive obsession, not a destructive one like you!!
Hahaha! But let's not hijack Elise's thread any further. Where were we? $2000 tone-arms? Talk about obsession.
Whose buying a $2000.00 dollar tonearm Paul?
I don't know but I think Paul's been buying $200 violins.
I might be willing to spend $2,000 on a tonearm - maybe more if it was pernambuco.
Lyndon, unfortunately during my childhood I played on a violin that was, essentially, irredeemable except perhaps as an
The IKEDA IT-407CR1 tonearm retails at $7400. A $4000 tonearm would obviously be a mid-level device at best. Of course, whether any of that is a reasonable expenditure is a matter of personal taste and perception as well as budget and conscience.
The Clearaudio TT 1MI tonearm sells for $32,000.00 (check the Needle Doctor).The IKEDA wouldn't even be mid -level....
When people spend large amounts of money on playback hardware I do hope it does not impede their listening to and enjoyment of the music itself.
It enhances it Trevor!
"Wow, this here Mendelssohn E Flat Major Octet sure is gorgeous, but ... argh ... it be even better if I only had that $7400 tonearm..."
Wow Paul...you're really hung up on this tonearm obsession.Whose buying a $7400.00 tonearm?
I'm not hung up on the tonearm. I'm kind of shocked, however, that people would spend $7400 on one, not to mention $32000. And for what? Have there really been blind tests of these tonearms against one another? I hypothesize that the only difference is the expensive ones look really snazzy. And I'm not the first one to bring up tonearms here. You did, actually. Frankly it wouldn't even have occurred to me that people spend serious money on tonearms. I thought turntables came with tonearms. At least mine did. I thought it was pretty fancy that you could adjust the counterweight in case you put on a different cartridge that had a different mass. It also came with a wire so you could ground the turntable against the receiver. Do you have to buy that separately now too? Starting at, say, $200, I suppose? You know ... gold connectors and all.
The Ittok came with the turntable.I brought it up once about twenty posts ago ,received some good advice and concluded with " if it aint broke dont fix it".Like a dog with bone you just keep running with it.
Cleaning your records seems like a totally great idea! A clean record should sound better. But hopefully your cleaning kit didn't cost thousands of dollars ... oh ...
Glad you approve.I use 7/8 distilled water , 1/8 isopropyl (99% pure so it says) and three drops of perfume/ dye free laudry detergent.Im ignorant about chemicals.Is isopropanol similar to isopropyl alcohol? I know this is your department Paul.
I vaguely recall using an anti-static brush.
Peter your formula sounds fine. For the concentrations you're using, liquid laundry detergent and dish detergent will not be significantly different. Both contain anionic surfactants which can leave residues but only if you're really lax about rinsing. Liquid Tide is actually a little milder pH-wise than Dawn Ultra (according to data in their SDS's which are available online). Laundry detergent is designed to produce very little suds, which is also a plus for what you are doing. Keeping the detergent very dilute is a good call. Look how much they tell you to use for a whole load of laundry -- not that much, and you'd want to use way less than that for cleaning records which are, after all, probably already 99% clean.
Excellent advice.Thanks Paul.The First product evaporates instantly when applied.Would that be some sort of ether?No idea...
Peter, ethers have characteristic strong odors. Also "first product" not sure what you mean by that. Is there some kind of sequence of different solutions you have to use? Water containing a surfactant (such as butyl cellosolve) for good surface wetting can evaporate quickly.
The brand name is actually "First" put out by the Nitty Gritty company who make record cleaners.It has a strong odor.
Yuck! I wouldn't want strong solvents like ether, acetone, or chloroform near my LPs. They can swell and deform the vinyl, in addition to leaching plasticizers from the material and leading to premature wear and failure. Not to mention the risk to your health handling them all the time without ventilation or PPEs. Dilute isopropanol (as in your formulation) is not a threat to your vinyl surface because it's primarily aqueous. I just did a quick search for the SDS (formerly known as MSDS) for this product but could not find it. Is "First" still marketed?
Yes its still marketed.For static on records you can get a static " gun" called the Zilty Zerostat .Check out the Needle Doctor again.
Those static guns are overpriced BS. People used them in the lab for a long time too until they discovered the convenience and clear superiority of the polonium device. The purpose of the static "gun" is to create a tiny discharge that ionizes some of the air in the vicinity of your object so that static charges can dissipate to ground. This is what the polonium device does -- but it does it continuously and evenly.
I never got the hype for the carbon fibre record cleaning brushes - they might look good, but end up pushing the dust around and leaving a lot of it on the record. Discwasher brushes, which preceded them, and are still available, are superior in my experience, even dry.
I dont own one myself.Ive heard other people with the same sentiments as you.The NRD2U500 sounds interesting...
If you don't have qualms about adding a radioactive device in your home. I think the risk, even minute, would outweigh the likely benefits for me.
Whatever the hardware, surely the big difference is that vinyl records are analogue, so there's no limit (especially on very high frequencies, which help with tone colour and placement etc.) and digital, which has a cut-off frequency.
Unless you're content with listening to recordings made in the 70's or earlier, the arguments for (pure) analogue over digital, even if we believe them, are moot, as you're likely to be listening to recordings originally made digitally.
Were recordings really made digitally in the 70's J? What about the early 60's? Was there digital technology back then?
Digital mastering came out about 1980, I believe.
Yup: "CDs were introduced in 1982, the audio industry underwent one of the largest disruptions we’ve ever seen: the adoption of digital audio. Along with the advent of digital audio, the 1980s ushered in numerous advances in sound technology, which advanced the mastering engineer’s role even further."
Digital technology and sampling were certainly known about in the 70s. The extent of its use I couldn't tell you. It wouldn't have sprung out of nothing in 1982. That sounds like conjecture. I studied electronics from 1978-1981 and the theory behind the 44Khz (or rather 2:1) sampling rate was well enough known to teach to undergraduates in 1979.
LPs mastered digitally first hit the market around 1980, I remember it quite well.
"If you don't have qualms about adding a radioactive device in your home. I think the risk, even minute, would outweigh the likely benefits for me."
Yes, interesting, Lyndon. Just because it was vinyl didn't mean the process was analogue from start to finish. I apologise if someone already said that. It would be kind of amusing - audiophiles spending all that money because all they really like is the sound of the friction between the sapphire and the plastic!
" Sapphire and the plastic"...perhaps thats the appeal of vinyl with its " fleshed out" textures.
yeah, can't remember what styluses are made from, lol!
"Sapphire and the plastic" - great name for a jazz band...
"LPs mastered digitally first hit the market around 1980, I remember it quite well. " So you think the article with the 1982 date is wrong?
Elise , how about "Plastic Sapphire"?
1982 was the date for the first CDS, digitally mastered LPs predate that.
Peter - Sonic Boom, Paramusic - there are quite a few if you look on Google maps. They are disappearing though - one big one, Jane's closes today.
Ah, the first commercial digital (to-vinyl) were released in Japan in 1972. Later the same year the first multi-track recording - was Smetana Quartet performing Mozart's String Quartets K.458 and K.421. [Wiki]
The concept of digitizing an analog signal for storage and transmission originated long before the process was applied to LPs. Questions about sampling rates, bandwidth requirements, and so on, were discussed in the electrical engineering literature going back decades before. Digital data storage is important for stuff like signal averaging.
Yup, but the question was about commercial digitized recordings - in particular LPs (since that's where we started out ;) ).
Classical LP's are even more rare than record stores - check ahead before you make the trip. This article promotes one which is currently closed (unsure if that's permanent; it might be a regular event for them with travel):
The 2:1 sampling rate theorem goes back to Shannon and Nyquist, but the exact dating seems to depend on semantics.
Thank you J and Elise for that info re: buying lps in T.O.
An interesting comment prints on the receipt from Kops:
I was always good at choosing the wrong thing.
Quite a lot of my "LP's" (I'm 70 yo..) are re-issues of 78 rpm "shellacs".
Oh, and I forgot Sammons & Tertis playing Mozart, with which my parents successfully nudged me towards the viola..
I still have a turntable on my wish list, but 2 days, coincidentally, found a JVC cassette deck player on my street and started listening to my old tapes. Most of them are still in good condition, despite beyond "best by age"..... and yes, good old analogue sound with Dolby effect hit me immediately. My 2nd hand speakers suddenly sound at their best and the dynamic range, colours and shades are all there.
I recently bought a 'moe-noe' LP by mistake. It's easy to do - it was described as 'High Fidelity', not 'Stereo', although there was a stereo edition. The transition to stereo, like the transition to digital recording, was fairly rapid, but as recordings, one can go through that again and again.
I've noticed J that one can buy very expensive cartridges that are mono only.Some audiophiles say that mono is the ultimate in clarity.Who knew?
When the 2 versions were still available (erly '60s), the mix was quite separate: in mono I believe one had to help some things to "stand out", and use closer mics to avoid too much reverberation. The stylus motion is only horizontal so the cutting angles are different from stereo, and a mono cartridge will ruin a stereo groove by not allowing vertical motion (the two channels are cut on opposite walls of the V-shaped groove).
Peter, Linn's digital product is basically a giant storage device that you can rip CDs to, using uncompressed audio, and it has organization and playback. I use Linn speakers in my living room, where bookshelf speakers are more convenient. (For a bigger space, I have Sonus Fabers.)
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.