People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

>> ^schlub:

People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.


No kidding!!

I got to the bit where they were talking about transferring the recording from PC onto the disc and was thinking....hang on.......your reducing the information by quite a huge amount of the original recording, by going from digital to analogue....what?

WHAT? I dont get it.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Really interesting. Didn't know it was quite that complicated.

I must have missed where he said "refuse to buy into the digital revolution". What I heard him say was "some say they sound better then digital CDs and MP3s".>> ^schlub:

People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

I missed that bit...the only thing I heard about a computer was when he said "a computer monitors the cuting and adjusts the spacings between the grooves".

Also don't confuse digital audio as being superior sounding to analog audio. It has taken many years for digital audio to compete the the sound quality of analog audio. Some audiophiles argue that it still isn't as good. But just because it's "digital" doesn't automatically make it sound better then analog. The real advantage that digital has over analog is that it does not degrade over time or from copy to copy.

Personally I think if you have a really good system I don't think you can tell the difference between a really good analog recording and a digital one except that over time the analog recording will degrade. I think the reason vinyl is making a comeback is that people who grew up with it miss the ritual, the touch, the smell, of taking a record out and putting it on the turntable and placing the needle on the record.
>> ^charliem:

>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

No kidding!!
I got to the bit where they were talking about transferring the recording from PC onto the disc and was thinking....hang on.......your reducing the information by quite a huge amount of the original recording, by going from digital to analogue....what?
WHAT? I dont get it.

Oh dear...

How do you think the artists voice is transferred to the LP in the first place? Do you believe they do it straight from an analogue circuit through the mic to the LP, or would it be stored somewhere first....say....in a digital format?

If the conversion from analogue to digital is what 'ruins' the quality....then how can the quality be possibly restored by putting the digital signal onto an analogue format? Surely the missing information doesn't just appear out of quantum strangeness.....

Think about it for a minute.....and if your argument doesn't change, then perhaps you need to redress the way in which you consider yourself to think critically.

>> ^Grimm:

I missed that bit...the only thing I heard about a computer was when he said "a computer monitors the cuting and adjusts the spacings between the grooves".
Also don't confuse digital audio as being superior sounding to analog audio. It has taken many years for digital audio to compete the the sound quality of analog audio. Some audiophiles argue that it still isn't as good. But just because it's "digital" doesn't automatically make it sound better then analog. The real advantage that digital has over analog is that it does not degrade over time or from copy to copy.
Personally I think if you have a really good system I don't think you can tell the difference between a really good analog recording and a digital one except that over time the analog recording will degrade. I think the reason vinyl is making a comeback is that people who grew up with it miss the ritual, the touch, the smell, of taking a record out and putting it on the turntable and placing the needle on the record.
>> ^charliem:
>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

No kidding!!
I got to the bit where they were talking about transferring the recording from PC onto the disc and was thinking....hang on.......your reducing the information by quite a huge amount of the original recording, by going from digital to analogue....what?
WHAT? I dont get it.

I understand when converting from digital to analog that quality is lost. But I never said anything about converting digital to analog...just analog vs digital.

I was mainly adressing the comment you made that "they were talking about transferring the recording from PC onto the disc" which is not what they said. It's what you assumed...and you could be right and you could be wrong. You also said "would it be stored somewhere first....say....in a digital format?" that is also an assumption...it could be coming from a digital format, it could be coming from an analog format...we don't know...they didn't say.

Believe it or not but it's not unheard of for an artist to provide master analog tapes when they know they will be putting their music to vinyl. It's also very common for reissues of of older recordings to be done using the orginal master analog tapes.>> ^charliem:

Oh dear...
How do you think the artists voice is transferred to the LP in the first place? Do you believe they do it straight from an analogue circuit through the mic to the LP, or would it be stored somewhere first....say....in a digital format?
If the conversion from analogue to digital is what 'ruins' the quality....then how can the quality be possibly restored by putting the digital signal onto an analogue format? Surely the missing information doesn't just appear out of quantum strangeness.....
Think about it for a minute.....and if your argument doesn't change, then perhaps you need to redress the way in which you consider yourself to think critically.
>> ^Grimm:
I missed that bit...the only thing I heard about a computer was when he said "a computer monitors the cuting and adjusts the spacings between the grooves".
Also don't confuse digital audio as being superior sounding to analog audio. It has taken many years for digital audio to compete the the sound quality of analog audio. Some audiophiles argue that it still isn't as good. But just because it's "digital" doesn't automatically make it sound better then analog. The real advantage that digital has over analog is that it does not degrade over time or from copy to copy.
Personally I think if you have a really good system I don't think you can tell the difference between a really good analog recording and a digital one except that over time the analog recording will degrade. I think the reason vinyl is making a comeback is that people who grew up with it miss the ritual, the touch, the smell, of taking a record out and putting it on the turntable and placing the needle on the record.
>> ^charliem:
>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

No kidding!!
I got to the bit where they were talking about transferring the recording from PC onto the disc and was thinking....hang on.......your reducing the information by quite a huge amount of the original recording, by going from digital to analogue....what?
WHAT? I dont get it.

Analogue tapes? No such thing exists....magnetic tapes store data in magnetic polarity, positive and negative charge....this is digital. If you are looking for a truly analogue storage medium then youd be VERY hard pressed to find one, neigh Id go so far as to say it would be impossible to find one.

True analogue is to say an infinite state machine. Good luck!

Like I said, unless these guys are doing their recording directly to a master plate, with no digitisation in between, then there MUST be data lost in the process, no matter how good your ADC resolution is.

9:35 - BAM!
>> ^Grimm:

I must have missed where he said "refuse to buy into the digital revolution". What I heard him say was "some say they sound better then digital CDs and MP3s".>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

Didn't I say I must have missed that part?

Now where is the part where they said the source was digital?>> ^schlub:

9:35 - BAM!
>> ^Grimm:
I must have missed where he said "refuse to buy into the digital revolution". What I heard him say was "some say they sound better then digital CDs and MP3s".>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

Dude, it's 2012... no one records straight to vinyl or other analogue medium anymore. It's cheaper and easier to use a digital medium. Besides, in the video you can clearly see the master is cut using a computer which is displaying the waveform -- it's basically a CNC lathe. Audio can't be stored on a computer in analogue form. Unless that's one of those new-fangled analogue computers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_computer
>> ^Grimm:

Didn't I say I must have missed that part?
Now where is the part where they said the source was digital?>> ^schlub:
9:35 - BAM!
>> ^Grimm:
I must have missed where he said "refuse to buy into the digital revolution". What I heard him say was "some say they sound better then digital CDs and MP3s".>> ^schlub:
People "refuse to buy into the digital revolution" by purchasing an analogue medium produced from a digital source. Yeah, good work.

First I've never said anything about recording straight to vinyl. Second your just plain wrong that no one records to analog anymore. Yes it's cheaper and easier to do digital. But many sound engineers still prefer using analog in the mastering process. Do a simple search...you'll find plenty of articles and videos by sound engineers discussing the still on going debate (yes in 2012) of analog vs digital.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcogbpdNTlY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_mastering

Yes they use a computer while cutting the master...but they clearly say the computer is "monitoring" the process and makes adjustments to the "spacing" between the grooves. Letting the computer make adjustments to the "space" between the grooves has nothing to do with the transfer of the audio to the grooves.

>> ^schlub:

Dude, it's 2012... no one records straight to vinyl or other analogue medium anymore. It's cheaper and easier to use a digital medium. Besides, in the video you can clearly see the master is cut using a computer which is displaying the waveform -- it's basically a CNC lathe. Audio can't be stored on a computer in analogue form. Unless that's one of those new-fangled analogue computers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analog_computer