Upsampled CD Vs Vinyl

[blue]

^^  awesome post!  deserves an award!

just sayin :)

[MDV]

On reflection I think I'd rather have SACD.

Which basically means I wont bother. What are the players, about 2k?

Edit - no they dont.

my old electronics lecturer had something to do with the design of the SACD.
his missus left him and he changed into a woman... dunno if he went for whole hog with that, but he's now she.
just sayin'

:lol:

I think I'll chance the SACD transmitted transgenderism.

A guy on my course, called andrew, now goes by anna...dunno if he went through with the whole thing either.

[JJretroTONEGOD]

sometimes i wonder when people dig into digital if they consider how much digital equipment may have been present in the recording process? what sample rates etc was that kit running at? what is the dynamic range of wax disc on a turntable, and a CD in a cd player? according to nyquist you should be ok running at 44.1kHz. can you hear a huge difference between 8 and 10bit coding?

I can hear a massive difference between 16 bit and 24 bit, did you know that 24 bit digital audio has a far greater dynamic range than all vinyl, yet people insist vinyl is better. why? I can hear a difference between 8 and 10 bits, but that's because of my amazing speakers and my extra-sensory ears. with quantization added and dither, there may be slightly less difference. SACD is the way forward, just wish it wasn't so expensive... I really want 1 bit technology to take off, as it is equal to the very best analogue sound, except with different transient and compression responses. One needs to ask oneself if this is what one needs to feed oneself?

[blue]

yeah, i have quite a few SACD and DVD-A discs, and i think they're generally wonderful.  annoys me greatly that both formats are virually unused and people prefer mp3.  stupid people.

i have plenty of vinyl too.  i love the experience of using it, it feels special to play a record, and they do sound great.  not so sure about this "you need to spend a grand" notion though.  if you can afford it, sure, but there are cheaper players that are very good.

[jibidy]

I also have the Pro 750's and love them.

Gadget show is just for normal people who like gadgets. Not peolpe educated in audio or electronics.

People have become used to hearing bad digital mp3 and alot of people nowadays havent even heard vinyl.

[MDV]

fwiw I restested some CD rips in wav and mp3, with the mp3 nominally resampled to 44.1, as per foobar normal output.

I couldnt hear a jot of difference.

MP3s were 320kbs and ripped in media player, so I dont know what encoding it uses.

This is on adam a7s, sub 8, moderately well treated listening position

[Dmoney]

i hate media players encoding.

i mostly listen to stuff on fairly average in ears when out and about, and i cant even stand it on those. and i have some terrible mp3s taken from vinyl that have got to me one way or another.

you ever tried Ogg?

[MDV]

The wavs were ripped in media player too....but I figure how wrong can you get a wav? Its not even an encoding, its just copying data off the CD.

Never tried ogg, no. Tried flac, though. for the ~30% space saving, or whatever it is, its not worth it when mp3s can be made to (to my ears at least, which are ok but clearly not great) sound nigh on identical and for that little bit more space you can have wav.

[MDV]

If I can stand the typing (cant seem to get it to fill in track names and stuff automatically) I may re-rip some stuff from foobar. Uses LAME for mp3 and...well, we're back to how wrong can you get a wav rip?

[MDV]

Trying ogg now. The lossy version. Sounds pretty good. Am about to ab with wav.

[MDV]

I just scr@ped through an ABX test in foobar by the skin of my teeth.

500kbs 10Q OGG Vs WAV.

It was the tiniest bit less 'air' in the chime of the ride that gave it away. Very good format.

[jibidy]

Wav files can still be a lossy format. They are not full lossless format, especially when ripped from a CD. The best formats are flac and another I cant remember (something like monkeys audio?)

[MDV]

WAV, lossy?

FLAC better?

Youre gonna have to back that up, I'm afraid; I dont believe you.

[Modular1]

im currently a fan of the Back on Black vinyl relases by plastichead distribution. Im liking the way they have taken the time to remaster the stuff they release for vinyl. These releases and other vinyl i have bought recently sounds a lot better then the cd releases simply because most cd releases these days are brickwall limited to the point where they sound fking shocking. most cds these days are mastered to a volume level that is over 6db higher than the redbook cd standard. cds can sound really great. most modern releases are broken for you at the mastering stage.

a well mastered release for vinyl sounds better than a hot-mastered cd. end of story.

(even on my modest setup)

turntable/cartridge : pro-ject genie/grado gold
phono box: nad entry level
amp: arcam avr 280
speakers: B&W 685

i wanna get some kind of tube phono stage for crimbo to replace the nad :)

[JDC]

Wav files can still be a lossy format. They are not full lossless format, especially when ripped from a CD. The best formats are flac and another I cant remember (something like monkeys audio?)

ye it's called monkey's audio, the file extension is .ape