Subject: RE: Vinyl quality vs. digital sound
From: James Brody (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Oct 21 2004 - 19:45:34 EDT
There are good quality vinyl recordings and bad ones. There are good CDs
and bad ones. Let's speak of a recordings of the classical orchestra, in
particular the Fritz Reiner recording of the Bartok Concerto for Orchestra
from the 1950s. On a good quality stereo system, the LP sounds better than
any conventional CD. Massed strings and the brass choirs sound very
realistic and the timbre of woodwinds can sound very lifelike. On any of
the CD versions, the strings sound cramped and brittle and the brass choir
sounds like fingernails on a blackboard.
The SACD version, same recording, starts to approach the clarity and realism
of the vinyl recording. It's not a question of specifications and numbers
but a question of the original recording and of course, listening. For the
electroacoustic composer, we start in the digital domain and end there, even
if we are using prerecorded sounds. A well recorded electroacoustic piece,
put together with care by the composer and well mastered will sound good (as
the composer intended) in the digital medium.
Just random thoughts...
[mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of John Nowak
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Vinyl quality vs. digital sound
On Oct 21, 2004, at 5:15 PM, Rick Nance wrote:
> It's not an issue if you believe that 20KHz is a number that matters.
> There is some evidence that differences up to 100KHz are detectable.
There is also "evidence" that we never landed on the moon and that Stalin
was truly a man of the people. I say rubbish!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:04 EST