Difference between revisions of "Myths (Vinyl)"

From Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Vinyl is better than digital because the analog signal on the vinyl tracks the analog signal exactly, while digital is quantized into steps)
(→‎Vinyl is better than CD because it reproduces higher frequencies than CD and avoids anti-aliasing filter issues at the frequencies CDs can reproduce)
Line 14: Line 14:
 
==Vinyl is better than CD because it reproduces higher frequencies than CD and avoids anti-aliasing filter issues at the frequencies CDs can reproduce==
 
==Vinyl is better than CD because it reproduces higher frequencies than CD and avoids anti-aliasing filter issues at the frequencies CDs can reproduce==
  
−
The recording/tracking ability of vinyl is easily at least 50 kHz and perhaps as high as 100 kHz. The most notable proof of this is the CD4 quadraphonic system which relied on a 45 kHz bandwidth to be accurately reproduced. That said, the high-frequency response accuracy of vinyl varies tremendously. Frequency deviations of 5-10 dB or greater are not uncommon in the 20 kHz range for many records.
+
vinyl fuck cds n da ass
−
 
+
−
More discussion: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=98178
+
−
 
+
−
Playback of ultrasound frequencies is still not guaranteed. Many MM cartridges have resonant peaks defined by the preamp loading, or stylus tip resonances defined by the cantilever, that attenuate high-frequency content.
+
−
 
+
−
When groove wear does occur, it occurs much faster at high frequencies than at low frequencies. For modern styli this is not as much of a concern, though.
+
−
 
+
−
There are rarely, if ever, any ultrasonic frequencies for vinyl to preserve. In audio recordings, such frequencies, when present, are normally low-energy noise imparted by electrical equipment and storage media used during recording, mixing, and mastering. Although some musical instruments can produce low-energy overtones in the ultrasonic range, they could only be on the vinyl if every piece of equipment and storage medium in the recording, mixing, and mastering stages was able to preserve them—which is unlikely even in modern recordings, since the average microphone or mixing console is designed only with audible frequencies in mind. Even if the overtones were preserved all the way to the mastering stage, mono and stereo lacquer cutting equipment typically includes a lowpass filter to avoid overheating the cutting head with ultrasonic frequencies.
+
−
 
+
−
Finally, on top of all of these issues, there is simply no scientific evidence that frequencies beyond the 22 kHz limit of CD audio are audible to any known group of people, or that such frequencies affect anyone's perception of the audible range. There is no evidence that reconstruction and anti-aliasing issues are audible.
+
  
 
==Vinyl is better than digital because the analog signal on the vinyl tracks the analog signal exactly, while digital is quantized into steps==
 
==Vinyl is better than digital because the analog signal on the vinyl tracks the analog signal exactly, while digital is quantized into steps==

Revision as of 00:19, 6 June 2013

Vinyl always sounds better than CD

naw fuck cds

The vinyl surface is heated to several hundred degrees on playback, and repeat play of the same track should wait at least several hours until the vinyl has cooled

dem cds is shit

Proper vinyl playback is click-free

cds suck dick

Vinyl is better than CD because it reproduces higher frequencies than CD and avoids anti-aliasing filter issues at the frequencies CDs can reproduce

vinyl fuck cds n da ass

Vinyl is better than digital because the analog signal on the vinyl tracks the analog signal exactly, while digital is quantized into steps

nigger assed cds need 2 get fucked

Vinyl has greater resolution than CD because its dynamic range is higher than for CD at the most audible frequencies

The dynamic range of vinyl, when evaluated as the ratio of a peak sinusoidal amplitude to the peak noise density at that sine wave frequency, is somewhere around 80 dB. Under theoretically ideal conditions, this could perhaps improve to 120 dB. The dynamic range of CDs, when evaluated on a frequency-dependent basis and performed with proper dithering and oversampling, is somewhere around 150 dB. Under no legitimate circumstances will the dynamic range of vinyl ever exceed the dynamic range of CD, under any frequency, given the wide performance gap and the physical limitations of vinyl playback. More discussion at Hydrogenaudio.

Adding a penny to the headshell improves tracking/sound

The trackability of a cartridge is related to the mechanical parameters of the tonearm and stylus assembly. Adding weight to the headshell (and adjusting the counterweight to compensate) increases the effective mass of the tonearm and reduces its resonant frequency. If the resonant frequency is excessively high - 15-20 Hz as measured by a test record - the weight may improve trackability by moving the resonance out of the audible range. Otherwise, it will generally only reduce trackability.

A cartridge is permanently damaged and should be replaced if the stylus appears even slightly bent

Bent styli cause azimuth and alignment errors which may be audible. In extreme cases they can cause record damage. Cartridges are hand-built and always have some finite tolerance in their construction. No stylus is perfectly straight. That said, if a brand-new cartridge arrives visibly bent, it is probably a good idea to return it.

Belt-driven turntables are better than direct-drive turntables

Belt drives are far easier to implement than direct drives, easier to improve, and arguably easier to repair. Well built direct drives have speed and rumble tolerances as good or better than well built belt drives.

Subjective claims to the improved musicality and audio quality of belt drives are disputed and not well agreed upon by all listeners.

Belt drives hold their value just as poorly in the used market as direct drives.

Direct drive motors tend to last a very long time (some original-model SL1200s may still run without any maintenance). Belt drives need new belts on a semi-regular basis and tend to have noisier motors at the same price ranges as direct drives.

There is a common myth that a direct drive will "hunt" for the correct speed and cause audible speed variations. This has no basis in reality.

It is believed that direct drives are better at handling dynamic stylus friction than belt drives, except in cases of very poor direct drives or very good belt drives.

Some examples do exist of direct drives of inferior quality.

Stock tonearms on direct drives tend to be much less expensive than the tonearms that come with belt drives at similar price points.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl)&oldid=25169"