Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ten Year War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by BACK TO EDEN View Post
    Linda , truth be told , it's not what you call a "fresh" remaster ..... but it's a gorgeous sounding vinyl set ..... furthermore , in today's world of accurate transfers through digital ,,,, triple A and reel to reel are not as "easy" to work with , though they (triple A and RTR) sound significantly more life like ..... people make the mistake that "volume" and "clarity" are somehow superior to the original sound ,,, when more times than not it's a backwards move. Please also understand you can "remaster" without truly remastering , so A will ALWAYS sound like B - no matter how many times you "remaster" as just a digital "cleaning" tool - takes literally seconds to accomplish , hence here you have your remaster.

    Linda , two other points from this read ..... Paul is incorrect , not a matter of taste , a matter of playback ..... what I mean is , as nice as the new product sounds , original pressings are all over it - in terms of EVERYTHING! ,,,,, And proper playback makes this obvious.

    Talking about playback , you can have the EXACT same digital transfer on vinyl as you do CD as you do any other software - and it sound "diffetent" based on the equipment used to transfer it and the playback system / room used to hear it.

    God Bless

    Thanks for your comments! Yep, I agree with pretty much everything you're saying here - except that I have almost zero expertise in listening to original vinyl records, so I haven't really had the chance to develop my own opinion on how they sound in comparison to modern remasters, but I am aware that many (not all!) modern remasters sound like shit.

    I am aware that even two copies of the same mastering can sound very different due to many, many reasons; and that a vinyl and a digital copy from the same mastering can of course sound very different. However, a well-schooled ear will at least in some cases still notice the similarities. And in case of the Ten Year Box vs. the 2012 vinyl box, it is very well possible that ALL included copies (vinyl 2012, MP3 2012, vinyl 2017, MQA-FLAC 2017) sound pretty much the same. The reason why I keek inquiring is that apparently the marketing of the Ten Year War box comes with a lot of false and misleading information. If people buy the box and like it, hey, I am happy to hear they like it. I just don't want any fan to pay such an amount of money just because they believe this is new and better then what they have (as the advertising and articles like the one above are suggesting) when in fact many of them have exactly purchased the same music and sound already since 2012 (vinyl+MP3), 2014 (hi-res downloads) or 2016 (CDs). Again, if a fan is aware of all this but still wants to purchase the new box (maybe because of the artwork or booklet or whatever extra), fine! I just don't want Sabbath fans to be cheated by marketing and bad journalists. And IMHO that's clearly what's happening here.

    Best,
    Linda
    Last edited by Sabbabbath; 12-14-2017, 05:57 AM.

    Comment


    • Linda , I've taken heat here from Joe himself for stating without doubt , that the last 2 WB remasters , though being EXACTLY the same (besides a simple digital "cleaning) - actually sound quite different ...... fact.

      Same in this case , the latest "Ten Year War" , though not a "true" (hope that makes sense) remaster (and it's not) .... has a different sound quality to it overall 'vs' direct comparisons with one and the same.

      Linda , if you would (have Roller , Jeff , Alex) .... someone you trust help you find an original vinyl (or the best original CD , if you are without a table) that you can find (regardless of price , although "Forbidden" is rather insane , and since it was 95 would defeat the purpose) .... order it for yourself , and leave me a PM with your name address and zip , along with product price and shipping price - and I will mail you a check to cover it.


      God Bless

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sabbabbath View Post
        Thanks for your comments! Yep, I agree with pretty much everything you're saying here - except that I have almost zero expertise in listening to original vinyl records, so I haven't really had the chance to develop my own opinion on how they sound in comparison to modern remasters, but I am aware that many (not all!) modern remasters sound like shit.

        I am aware that even two copies of the same mastering can sound very different due to many, many reasons; and that a vinyl and a digital copy from the same mastering can of course sound very different. However, a well-schooled ear will at least in some cases still notice the similarities. And in case of the Ten Year Box vs. the 2012 vinyl box, it is very well possible that ALL included copies (vinyl 2012, MP3 2012, vinyl 2017, MQA-FLAC 2017) sound pretty much the same. The reason why I keek inquiring is that apparently the marketing of the Ten Year War box comes with a lot of false and misleading information. If people buy the box and like it, hey, I am happy to hear they like it. I just don't want any fan to pay such an amount of money just because they believe this is new and better then what they have (as the advertising and articles like the one above are suggesting) when in fact many of them have exactly purchased the same music and sound already since 2012 (vinyl+MP3), 2014 (hi-res downloads) or 2016 (CDs). Again, if a fan is aware of all this but still wants to purchase the new box (maybe because of the artwork or booklet or whatever extra), fine! I just don't want Sabbath fans to be cheated by marketing and bad journalists. And IMHO that's clearly what's happening here.

        Best,
        Linda
        Linda , I think its a bit too harsh to call such an article and journalism cheating by any means ! For starters there ain't much coming from the journalist himself , its mainly Andy explaining whatever process with these particular remasters (and I don't really find the point of going into further details on older ones) , I also found Andy's explanation quite useful for the casual fans without going into quite complex technical details , plus he did mention a few particular examples on MOR and 'Back Street Kids' , I believe 99% of the die hard fans would buy such box sets for a thousand other reasons rather than pursing 'the best versions of these albums' to date !

        Again , I've personally bought the albums with no particular expectations or knowing much about those MQA digital versions , so I wasn't listening to them with the idea of them being better ringing in the back of my head , its totally the other way round ! Reading Andy's description resonates perfectly with my exact impressions I've heard from these remasters ! And again they're extremely close to those remasters I own from the 2012 (Vinyl Box Set remasters) , its not that they are day and night better or different , but overall and compared to other remasters and versions I own , they sound the best , its a personal preference and its doesn't necessarily mean everyone should be taking my (or any ones opinion for granted).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BACK TO EDEN View Post
          Linda , I've taken heat here from Joe himself for stating without doubt , that the last 2 WB remasters , though being EXACTLY the same (besides a simple digital "cleaning) - actually sound quite different ...... fact.

          Same in this case , the latest "Ten Year War" , though not a "true" (hope that makes sense) remaster (and it's not) .... has a different sound quality to it overall 'vs' direct comparisons with one and the same.

          Linda , if you would (have Roller , Jeff , Alex) .... someone you trust help you find an original vinyl (or the best original CD , if you are without a table) that you can find (regardless of price , although "Forbidden" is rather insane , and since it was 95 would defeat the purpose) .... order it for yourself , and leave me a PM with your name address and zip , along with product price and shipping price - and I will mail you a check to cover it.

          God Bless
          WOW! Thank you so, so much for this great and generous offer, Doc! It is greatly appreciated! It might all be a little complicate since I live in Germany and not in the US. But again, I do appreciate your kindness! I will think about it a little and PM you sometime next week or so.

          As for the Ten Year War box, well, if two audio recordings are identical, and then one of them undergoes some "simple digital cleaning", then they are really not "exactly the same" at all anymore. :-) If the mastering used for the TYW had been "digitally cleant up" for the TYW release, then it would totally make sense that it sounds different. The reason why I was asking for the sound of the vinyl was that with the digital files, I simply cannot confirm that there's ANY difference (for the 2017 TYW vs. 2014 HDtracks, the latter being sourced from the 2012 remaster), other than super-small mini-differences in wave view which are really too small to account for any significant difference in sound. On the contrary, not only do both versions sound 100% the same to me, but many technical details, including dynamic range values (DR), are the same or extremely similar at least for most songs. While many people may think that even small digital differences may account for big differences in actual sound, in fact the opposite is true: Even small differences in sound are usually extremely visible in wave view, DR values etc. Very small differences visible in the wave forms are more often than not inaudible. Again, I cannot compare the sound of the LPs, but for the digital files, I strongly doubt that there is any significant difference - even a 'little digital cleanup' would produce huge differences on the technical side that are really not there as far as I can see. (See, e.g., the DR values for SBS 2014 vs. 2017 that I will include below in this message.)

          Many thanks again!

          Best,
          Linda

          Comment


          • Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
            Linda , I think its a bit too harsh to call such an article and journalism cheating by any means ! For starters there ain't much coming from the journalist himself , its mainly Andy explaining whatever process with these particular remasters (and I don't really find the point of going into further details on older ones) , I also found Andy's explanation quite useful for the casual fans without going into quite complex technical details , plus he did mention a few particular examples on MOR and 'Back Street Kids' , I believe 99% of the die hard fans would buy such box sets for a thousand other reasons rather than pursing 'the best versions of these albums' to date !

            Again , I've personally bought the albums with no particular expectations or knowing much about those MQA digital versions , so I wasn't listening to them with the idea of them being better ringing in the back of my head , its totally the other way round ! Reading Andy's description resonates perfectly with my exact impressions I've heard from these remasters ! And again they're extremely close to those remasters I own from the 2012 (Vinyl Box Set remasters) , its not that they are day and night better or different , but overall and compared to other remasters and versions I own , they sound the best , its a personal preference and its doesn't necessarily mean everyone should be taking my (or any ones opinion for granted).

            I-Man, I totally respect your and other people's opinions about this remaster. When I used the term "cheating", I was not referring to this journalist in particular, but more generally to the PC campain around the TYW box. From what you wrote, I am not sure if you got my main point, since you are still talking about "these remasters" vs. "those remasters from 2012", while both releases you're referring to are, to the best of our knowledge (and if anybody has prove to correct me, please feel welcome to bring it up), from the SAME remaster. Thus, the whole process that Andy describes here took already place in 2012. And the resulting mastering was (be it in pretty much identical form, as Alex and Jeff and I claim, or slightly modified, as you and the Doc claim) already used for earlier releases in 2012, 2014 and 2016. I am not asking the journalist or Andy to give more technical details about the remastering process (I did appreciate the details they mentioned, by the way), I am just asking one thing: why not say WHEN it happened? If it is true that the processes described here took already place in 2012, then it is seriously misleading to describe it like it happened recently (and that's what the journalist does). Honestly, asking a journalist to mention in which YEAR the events they describe happened, should really not be too much to ask if we take journalistic standards any seriously. I don't think I am harsh here at all. I just think that journalism should be different from advertising.

            Again, I am very sorry if it sounded like I do not respect other people's opinions. I did hear you when you said you hear a difference, a small but significant one, and I did hear you when you said you did not EXPECT this result. I do hear you. And I do respect your and other people's opinions. It's just that my ears and especially the comparison of technical details leads me to different conclusions.

            And I hate bad journalism and false promises. That's all. :-)

            To illustrate my point about the technical side of things, see below the dynamic range values for SBS from the 2017 TYW hi-res download release and, below that, from the 2014 hi-res download release. You don't even need to fully understand what these values mean. Just have a quick look: The important thing is that the values are 100% identical for each and every song! (Same goes for Vol. 4; Sabotage has slightly different values for a few songs. I haven't tested DR values of the other albums.) And there is simply no way, technically, for two different versions of an album to have these values identical for every song. It does not happen in practice. On the contrary, even identical-sounding files often differ in these values. And if the process that Andy described in the article had really taken place in 2017 (or 2016 or 2015), then we would DEFINITELY see HUGE differences here (and everybody would hear them too).

            Peace.

            Linda

            foobar2000 1.3.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
            log date: 2017-12-11 22:27:25

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Analyzed: Black Sabbath / Sabbath Bloody Sabbath / 2017 The Ten Year War official hi-res download files
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            DR Peak RMS Duration Track
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            DR10 -0.66 dB -12.75 dB 5:47 34-Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
            DR11 -0.66 dB -14.39 dB 6:15 35-A National Acrobat
            DR11 -2.45 dB -17.20 dB 4:09 36-Fluff
            DR11 -0.66 dB -14.26 dB 5:57 37-Sabbra Cadabra
            DR10 -0.66 dB -12.81 dB 5:42 38-Killing Yourself to Live
            DR12 -0.66 dB -14.50 dB 4:11 39-Who Are You?
            DR11 -0.66 dB -13.92 dB 5:01 40-Looking for Today
            DR12 -0.66 dB -15.27 dB 5:27 41-Spiral Architect
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Number of tracks: 8
            Official DR value: DR11

            Samplerate: 96000 Hz
            Channels: 2
            Bits per sample: 24
            Bitrate: 2959 kbps
            Codec: FLAC
            ================================================== ==============================


            foobar2000 1.3.16 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
            log date: 2017-12-11 22:26:58

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Analyzed: Black Sabbath / Sabbath Bloody Sabbath / 2014 HDtracks official hi-res download files
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            DR Peak RMS Duration Track
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            DR10 -0.66 dB -12.75 dB 5:47 01-Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
            DR11 -0.66 dB -14.39 dB 6:15 02-A National Acrobat
            DR11 -2.45 dB -17.20 dB 4:09 03-Fluff
            DR11 -0.66 dB -14.26 dB 5:57 04-Sabbra Cadabra
            DR10 -0.66 dB -12.81 dB 5:42 05-Killing Yourself To Live
            DR12 -0.66 dB -14.50 dB 4:11 06-Who Are You?
            DR11 -0.66 dB -13.92 dB 5:01 07-Looking For Today
            DR12 -0.66 dB -15.27 dB 5:27 08-Spiral Architect
            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Number of tracks: 8
            Official DR value: DR11

            Samplerate: 96000 Hz
            Channels: 2
            Bits per sample: 24
            Bitrate: 2960 kbps
            Codec: FLAC
            ================================================== ==============================

            Comment


            • Originally posted by IRON-MaN View Post
              Linda , I think its a bit too harsh to call such an article and journalism cheating by any means ! For starters there ain't much coming from the journalist himself , its mainly Andy explaining whatever process with these particular remasters (and I don't really find the point of going into further details on older ones) , I also found Andy's explanation quite useful for the casual fans without going into quite complex technical details , plus he did mention a few particular examples on MOR and 'Back Street Kids' , I believe 99% of the die hard fans would buy such box sets for a thousand other reasons rather than pursing 'the best versions of these albums' to date !

              Again , I've personally bought the albums with no particular expectations or knowing much about those MQA digital versions , so I wasn't listening to them with the idea of them being better ringing in the back of my head , its totally the other way round ! Reading Andy's description resonates perfectly with my exact impressions I've heard from these remasters ! And again they're extremely close to those remasters I own from the 2012 (Vinyl Box Set remasters) , its not that they are day and night better or different , but overall and compared to other remasters and versions I own , they sound the best , its a personal preference and its doesn't necessarily mean everyone should be taking my (or any ones opinion for granted).
              Im one of those diehard fans IRON-MaN, Id buy that box if I could, if they were all 8 track tapes.
              "Without Black Sabbath there never would have been an Ozzy, and without Ozzy there never would have been a Black Sabbath"
              "If there ever was a band whose voice is so significant and distinct, that band is Black Sabbath and the voice is Ozzy Osbourne"
              ________________________________________OzzyIsDio_ (YoY)

              Comment


              • Originally posted by OzzyIsDio View Post
                I’m one of those diehard fans IRON-MaN, I’d buy that box if I could, if they were all 8 track tapes.
                OID , you deserve that set .....


                Originally posted by Sabbabbath View Post
                WOW! Thank you so, so much for this great and generous offer, Doc! It is greatly appreciated! It might all be a little complicate since I live in Germany and not in the US. But again, I do appreciate your kindness! I will think about it a little and PM you sometime next week or so.

                As for the Ten Year War box, well, if two audio recordings are identical, and then one of them undergoes some "simple digital cleaning", then they are really not "exactly the same" at all anymore. :-) If the mastering used for the TYW had been "digitally cleant up" for the TYW release, then it would totally make sense that it sounds different. The reason why I was asking for the sound of the vinyl was that with the digital files, I simply cannot confirm that there's ANY difference (for the 2017 TYW vs. 2014 HDtracks, the latter being sourced from the 2012 remaster), other than super-small mini-differences in wave view which are really too small to account for any significant difference in sound. On the contrary, not only do both versions sound 100% the same to me, but many technical details, including dynamic range values (DR), are the same or extremely similar at least for most songs. While many people may think that even small digital differences may account for big differences in actual sound, in fact the opposite is true: Even small differences in sound are usually extremely visible in wave view, DR values etc. Very small differences visible in the wave forms are more often than not inaudible. Again, I cannot compare the sound of the LPs, but for the digital files, I strongly doubt that there is any significant difference - even a 'little digital cleanup' would produce huge differences on the technical side that are really not there as far as I can see. (See, e.g., the DR values for SBS 2014 vs. 2017 that I will include below in this message.)

                Many thanks again!

                Best,
                Linda
                Linda , no problem at all , and Germany is also not an issue .... Enjoy hunting!


                OK , are you ready .... now take a deep breath , your not going to accept this , but I will state it any way :

                1) Both sets are slightly different , the sound proves it

                2) Digital cleaning - Will NOT always show up on measurements

                3) Masters with "digital cleaning" differences only , are still identical in the mastering process

                4) 2 , 3 , 4 things can measure EXACTLY the same and sound completely DIFFERENT

                5) Headphones are the worse tool for evaluating sound

                6) Sabbath is awesome ..... had to state something you would like


                God Bless

                Comment


                • Originally posted by BACK TO EDEN View Post
                  OID , you deserve that set .....




                  Linda , no problem at all , and Germany is also not an issue .... Enjoy hunting!


                  OK , are you ready .... now take a deep breath , your not going to accept this , but I will state it any way :

                  1) Both sets are slightly different , the sound proves it

                  2) Digital cleaning - Will NOT always show up on measurements

                  3) Masters with "digital cleaning" differences only , are still identical in the mastering process

                  4) 2 , 3 , 4 things can measure EXACTLY the same and sound completely DIFFERENT

                  5) Headphones are the worse tool for evaluating sound

                  6) Sabbath is awesome ..... had to state something you would like


                  God Bless
                  An 8 track tape set would be serious \m/

                  Measure the same and be out of phase doc?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by OzzyIsDio View Post
                    I’m one of those diehard fans IRON-MaN, I’d buy that box if I could, if they were all 8 track tapes.
                    If they were 8-track tapes, this box would be even much more attractive to purchase than it is now. :-)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BACK TO EDEN View Post
                      OID , you deserve that set .....




                      Linda , no problem at all , and Germany is also not an issue .... Enjoy hunting!


                      OK , are you ready .... now take a deep breath , your not going to accept this , but I will state it any way :

                      1) Both sets are slightly different , the sound proves it

                      2) Digital cleaning - Will NOT always show up on measurements

                      3) Masters with "digital cleaning" differences only , are still identical in the mastering process

                      4) 2 , 3 , 4 things can measure EXACTLY the same and sound completely DIFFERENT

                      5) Headphones are the worse tool for evaluating sound

                      6) Sabbath is awesome ..... had to state something you would like


                      God Bless
                      Many thanks again, Doc!!!

                      As you expected, f course I have to disagree with 2) and 4): there is no 'digital cleanup' that will not be measurable some way or other. The nature of digital files is that any information stored on them is digital (and thus measurable); and information that is not stored digitally on the digital medium is simply not there and will of course be indaudible. The only way digitally identical files will sound different is if they are played on different equipments, or different rooms, or stored on different material/media. If all these conditions are identical for both files the files are digitally identical, there is no way they could sound different. Everything else would be magic, and I do not believe in magic. :-)

                      I cannot prove 100% that 1) is wrong, though I strongly suspect it is, for the reasons stated.

                      3) probably depends on how we define 'mastering', but I guess you're right.

                      5) I mostly agree, except that good headphones are much better than bad speakers. :-)

                      6) Nice consensus!!! :-D

                      I wish you all a great day, enjoy the Sabbath!

                      Comment


                      • Linda, a comparison of vinyls would be a complete failure in my opinion due to analogue source in question. Even 2 LPs virtually totally identical taken from the same pressing will give you quite substantially different looking files, when trying to digitize and compare them. As you know, that LPs are pressed from physical matrixes, that have a tendency to wear out and since the very beginning you have already a factor, which distorts every basis afterwards. And there are several father & mother matrixes , that are done for every pressing from the original metal matrix.

                        My personal opinion this is a land of complete speculations. Those who hear every tiny different detail in absolutely identically looking digital files will have a point here, as no two similar files can be achieved from the same pressing! So it's almost impossible to trace the source of mastering from my perspective here and compare any different presses to one another. You can use only ears here and this is not a factor to really measure anything except for tastes.
                        http://vk.com/barghestboots

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BACK TO EDEN View Post
                          OID , you deserve that set .....
                          Thanks BTE, I hope to get it On Amazon.
                          "Without Black Sabbath there never would have been an Ozzy, and without Ozzy there never would have been a Black Sabbath"
                          "If there ever was a band whose voice is so significant and distinct, that band is Black Sabbath and the voice is Ozzy Osbourne"
                          ________________________________________OzzyIsDio_ (YoY)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sabbabbath View Post
                            If they were 8-track tapes, this box would be even much more attractive to purchase than it is now. :-)
                            I buy everything with the Sabbath stamp on it Linda, Im a fanatic.
                            "Without Black Sabbath there never would have been an Ozzy, and without Ozzy there never would have been a Black Sabbath"
                            "If there ever was a band whose voice is so significant and distinct, that band is Black Sabbath and the voice is Ozzy Osbourne"
                            ________________________________________OzzyIsDio_ (YoY)

                            Comment


                            • The article posted by Iron Man is quite interesting. I enjoyed the read.

                              But let's keep something in mind. And I say this as someone who LOVES my set and with all my heart appreciates Doc buying it for me ...

                              This is a product. It's going to be hyped. They want to give people who already own something a reason to buy that same something again.

                              I don't know why ... but sometimes I feel that many people presume audio is any different than anything else. It's marketed. Period.

                              To me what makes this set are the extras. The Tour Book, Press Promo Cartoon Book and Poster alone would set you back the price of this set if you were to buy them in original form. And they are reproduced beautifully. Add to this the hardcover book, which is absolutely fantastic with amazing picture quality, and having Mint copies of the original UK album covers with inserts, inners, poster for MoR and so forth and you have a fantastic package.

                              Audio, however, I agree with Doc. Anybody who thinks this approach beats original pressings (or even many analogue repressings) just hears music differently than I do. Detail is important, but feel and frequency extension is every bit as important. Digital is "chopped off" sound, IMO. Doesn't mean it can't be great, but it is different than analogue. And vinyl is an analogue medium best served by analogue mastering.

                              Andy Pearce is definitely a great engineer. And he understands important factors like not using digital noise reduction, but he worked in digital. We can sugarcoat this any number of ways, but this set is digitally remastered. And, IMO, digitally remastered should be attached to CD; not LP.
                              "It is not opinion that Ozzy peaked on Sabotage, it is a measurable fact."
                              -WTB

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Jeff View Post
                                The article posted by Iron Man is quite interesting. I enjoyed the read.

                                But let's keep something in mind. And I say this as someone who LOVES my set and with all my heart appreciates Doc buying it for me ...

                                This is a product. It's going to be hyped. They want to give people who already own something a reason to buy that same something again.

                                I don't know why ... but sometimes I feel that many people presume audio is any different than anything else. It's marketed. Period.

                                To me what makes this set are the extras. The Tour Book, Press Promo Cartoon Book and Poster alone would set you back the price of this set if you were to buy them in original form. And they are reproduced beautifully. Add to this the hardcover book, which is absolutely fantastic with amazing picture quality, and having Mint copies of the original UK album covers with inserts, inners, poster for MoR and so forth and you have a fantastic package.

                                Audio, however, I agree with Doc. Anybody who thinks this approach beats original pressings (or even many analogue repressings) just hears music differently than I do. Detail is important, but feel and frequency extension is every bit as important. Digital is "chopped off" sound, IMO. Doesn't mean it can't be great, but it is different than analogue. And vinyl is an analogue medium best served by analogue mastering.

                                Andy Pearce is definitely a great engineer. And he understands important factors like not using digital noise reduction, but he worked in digital. We can sugarcoat this any number of ways, but this set is digitally remastered. And, IMO, digitally remastered should be attached to CD; not LP.
                                Thanks for another great post, Jeff. However, if we talk about limitations of digital audio, we should maybe keep in mind the many limitations of vinyl LPs (NOT analog per se) too. If I understand correctly, the music stored in a vinyl record needs to be compressed and EQed and frequencies cut due to limitations of the format. Thus, the sound of LPs is also necessarily "chopped off" in many ways. Nevertheless, I have experienced, like you and the DOC, that original LPs (and possibly any vinyl record?) tend to sound warmer and more 'alive' than digital copies of the same recording. So I can easily agree with both of you that something is 'missing' from digital recordings that is 'present' on vinyl. Anyway, Jeff, what do you think of Reel-to-Reel vs. vinyl? Some articles I read would imply that an AAA Reel-to-Real should (other things being equal) sound even much less "chopped off" than an AAA vinyl of the same recording.

                                Also, do you agree or disagree with the Doc that "Digital cleaning Will NOT always show up on measurements" and that digitally identical audio recordings can sound different? And can you confirm or falsify that the TYW Just curious for your opinion.


                                Originally posted by AlexBarghest View Post
                                Linda, a comparison of vinyls would be a complete failure in my opinion due to analogue source in question. Even 2 LPs virtually totally identical taken from the same pressing will give you quite substantially different looking files, when trying to digitize and compare them. As you know, that LPs are pressed from physical matrixes, that have a tendency to wear out and since the very beginning you have already a factor, which distorts every basis afterwards. And there are several father & mother matrixes , that are done for every pressing from the original metal matrix.

                                My personal opinion this is a land of complete speculations. Those who hear every tiny different detail in absolutely identically looking digital files will have a point here, as no two similar files can be achieved from the same pressing! So it's almost impossible to trace the source of mastering from my perspective here and compare any different presses to one another. You can use only ears here and this is not a factor to really measure anything except for tastes.
                                Thanks for your great post too, Alex. You are of course right. I think my asking for a comparison of the LPs was naive. The reason why I asked nevertheless was that I was (still am) pretty puzzled about the fact that several people still seem to believe that the 2017 vs. the 2012 box are sourced from different, if somewhat similar, masterings, or at least sound different. I simply don't hear those differences on any of the digital files I have checked, plus the huge digital similarities suggest that there hardly COULD be any notable difference. I was just wondering if this contradiction might be due to the fact that the people who purchased the vinyl box have listened to the LPs, while I have only listened to the digital files. But then again, both IRON-MaN and the Doc have confirmed they are referring to the digital files too. So the puzzle persists even for the digital files, regardless of how the vinyl records sound.
                                Last edited by Sabbabbath; 12-17-2017, 08:30 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X