Another vinyl post

[TLS Guy]

Dynamic Comparison of LPs vs. CDs - Part 4
I found a link here on Audioholics; I just skimmed over it, sounds interesting.
http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/dynamic-comparison-of-lps-vs-cds-part-4
Back when I was into LP's I just couldn't handle the pops and clicks.
So, I was wondering, how do you guys deal?
It just sucked the pleasure out of it for me back then.
I was the same way when I purchased an amp. I'd turn up the volume, with no input or AUX selected;
If I heard any background noise, I wouldn't buy that amp.
That was my none scientific in store test.

I have always used the Cecil E. Watts Dust Bug, since my childhood. You can see one here on one of my turntables. I have four turntables in use, so I guess that qualifies me as a vinyl enthusiast.

http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424105_Kh5ff#127081086_HJmkb

I have quite a few of them still, and I'm well stocked with spare parts. Careful handling and use of Mr Watts' Dust Bug with EVERY playing, has kept my LP collection pristine. I have always used the Bug dry. The antistatic fluid talked about in the interesting historical document below, left the LPs slightly sticky and after time attracted grit. I give the disc a quick brush with the Hunts Brush if there is any visible dust visible.

Also two of my turntables have the Shure V15 xmr which has a brush that discharges static build up to ground as it plays the record.

Cecil Watts was a great pioneer and researcher into LP reproduction. He was also a very nice man. His wife wrote a touching biography after his death.

http://www.smartdev.com/Watts.pdf

 

[3db]

TLS

I use the disc-washer brush and fluid system but my fluid is running low so I thought I'd make a new solution based on a couple of gys working at used vinyl shops;

80% distilled water
15% white vinegar
5% alcohol to have the solution evaporate.

Do you have comments on this or the disc washer brush?

 

[TLS Guy]

TLS

I use the disc-washer brush and fluid system but my fluid is running low so I thought I'd make a new solution based on a couple of gys working at used vinyl shops;

80% distilled water
15% white vinegar
5% alcohol to have the solution evaporate.

Do you have comments on this or the disc washer brush?

There are two camps dry and wet! I'm in the dry camp. If you use a wet method you have to keep using a wet method, AND play the discs wet, which I would find troublesome. My discs have not seen any liquids.

 

[krabapple]

Digital looks "perfect" on paper but we all know that isnt true, what is called "Distortion" is a pleasing coloration that most enjoy, Digital is easy and portable......like a Microwave meal, Vinyl is a gourmet dinner.

Yeah, and modern automobiles don't need to be cranked..and that makes things too easy. Those old model Ts are gourmet, a Prius is just fast food.

 

[krabapple]

What distortion is added into a vinyl recording? I would like to know? I've compared both CD and vinyl recordings and noticed know distortion from the vinyl side.

The same commercial recording on CD and vinyl is almost certainly gong to be mastered differently -- so those difference (in EQ, levels, noise reduction) will predominate.

After that you have the inherent differences due to formats. Vinyl has more noise of several types, less channel separation, less flat frequency response, and less information. But *some* of these distortions result in illusions that are pleasant to some listeners. I speculate that this is because to some extent, they mitigate the 'flattening' effect of two=channel recording (huge amounts of spatial information are lost at the recording stage). So there's no 'sin' in vinyl having euphonic distortion -- I myself apply Dolby Pro Logic II to lots of stereo sources, to try to make them sound more 'real'. But this is a choice that I can activate or not, and I can play with parameters. With vinyl, you don't really get the choice. Your only 'parameter' is changing carts or TTs or tediously adjusting their setup.





If I may quote James Johnston, posting on the Skeptic forum (the whole thread is a wealth of information)

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=85&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=vinyl

Let's look at LP. It has a dynamic range of about 70dB in the best of times and cases (must count surface noise, an unavoidable part, as well as rumble, etc).

If it had two channels and the same bandwidth (and the same SNR at every frequency) that would work out to about 70/6 bits per Hz, that is to say about 12 bits/Hz (11 2/3). That by itself is inferior to the CD's 16 bits/Hz.

However, it is argued, and with some meaning, although how much is actually present in any real recording can be debated, that LP's can go to 30kHz.

So, multiplying by frequency, you see (one sided spectrum, for various reasons at the end we have to double all of this, but we'll compare apples to apples) 20*16 vs. 30 *12. That would seem to put LP with more information, HOWEVER...

Above 5-6kHz, the SNR of an LP goes down rapidly, instead of being 70dB, the actual SNR is more like 20-30 dB. This is now 4-5 bits/Hz. This applies over at least half of the bandwidth, in reality, so now we can treat that as (I'm approximating, but not terribly harmfully so)

lp bits = 12 * 5 +5*25 or about 185 compared to the cd's 320
(note both measures are for one-sided spectrum and one channel)

But that's not all. The LP has distortion. We can't send as much information at lower frequencies, so we'd better use 50dB (.3 % distortion) as an upper figure instead of 70dB.

No, but wait, at high frequencies, channel independence goes to pot, and we only have 10-15dB of channel independence. So really at high frequencies (supra 15kHz for sure, maybe lower) we don't really have 5 bits/Hz/channel, we have more like (5+2,5) bits/Hz/2channels.

In other words, the LP isn't close in terms of total information content.

Point out to your friend that LP's do have some very euphonic kinds of distortion, i.e. distortions (l-r enhancement, noise floor, out of phase rumble, interchannel intermod, etc) that often sound better than the linear system.

Note: the above analysis is very, very rough. It is, however, not too far off the mark.

You may hear people claim 90dB from turntables, ask them to turn off their A-weighting if they do. You will have people who claim less distortion at high frequencies, or higher frequencies, but then we can have several discussions if you'd like, on the realities of getting 30kHz through either a new or old recording chain, as well as the atmosphere.

 

[krabapple]

Exactly. This is the fact that those who try to find flaws in the CD format fail to understand. The Redbook encoding/decoding sceme works. There is no signal loss whatsoever.

Well, there is some, way up near the 22.5 khz nyquist limit. Good luck hearing it, though. What can be audible, is if the brickwall filtering is poorly implemented, aliasing artifacts can manifested at lower frequencies.

 

[krabapple]

Dont forget that those who trash Vinyl most likely had a crap table hooked up to a crap reciever with a crap cartridge that wasnt set up properly and didnt clean records correctly so no wonder it sounds better to them.It is much easier to get good sound from most any CD player but if you invest a bit of cash, cleaning and care to Vinyl you quickly see how much warmer, pleasing and less fatigueing Vinyl often is.

There is a certain stereotypical progression of 'arguments' put forward by vinylphiles...so far you're hitting all the marks.

Let's turn your cliche around -- could it be that your system and room are optimized (consciously or not) to the inherent features of LP sound, and your ears trained to expect such, and thus CDs won't sound as good?

One way for you to test whether it's really LP's peculiarities you;'re enjoying (rather than not enjoying digital), is to record one of your LPs to CD. In theory, digital should capture all the important euphonic distortions coming off your TT output. So when you compare your recording to the LP, they should sound much less different, than a commercial CD vs commercial LP.

 

[krabapple]

Yeah I think you should read this before you start spouting crap you know nothing about.

http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library/article.aspx?article=2131

That is why there are archival grade discs. Temperature and light heavily weight on the life span of a compact disc.

No, that article is primarily about writeable media (CDR/RW), which certainly are more susceptible to temperature and light than factory-pressed *CDs*.

Schmoe's point about playing CDs holds. Playing them does not reduce their life span. By contrast, temperature and storage *and playing* heavily weigh on the life span of an LP, because you're basically running a rock over plastic every time.

 

[chadnliz]

TLS

I use the disc-washer brush and fluid system but my fluid is running low so I thought I'd make a new solution based on a couple of gys working at used vinyl shops;

80% distilled water
15% white vinegar
5% alcohol to have the solution evaporate.

Do you have comments on this or the disc washer brush?

The Alcohol ratio seems really low, almost worthless, I use a DIY mix with pure water, dish liquid and Alcohool....but alot more of it........that mix you describe would be ok for use on machine to vac off but if its on the platter cleaning, not so much. If you smell disc washer fluid it has a strong scent of Alcohol that 5% certainly wouldnt allow.

 

[TLS Guy]

The Alcohol ratio seems really low, almost worthless, I use a DIY mix with pure water, dish liquid and Alcohool....but alot more of it........that mix you describe would be ok for use on machine to vac off but if its on the platter cleaning, not so much. If you smell disc washer fluid it has a strong scent of Alcohol that 5% certainly wouldnt allow.

Using detergent on disc is a no no. Cecil Watts showed that over 50 years ago! It leaves a sticky deposit in the bottom of the groove and attracts dirt that sticks in just the wrong place. My advice is to avoid all wet cleaning if possible. If you care for your discs properly, I can assure the hazards of wet cleaning can be avoided.

 

[chadnliz]

Cecil Watts doesnt matter to me and most every serious Vinyl guy has a wet machine, well the far vast majority atleast. From VPI, Nitty Gritty, Loricraft, ClearAudio and others it is the true standard for record cleaning. One can use detergent or not, buy pre mixed solutions or make one of their own, I also steam clean after a wash so your detergent caution is mute and besides that it works for me. Between my VPI fluid, Record DR wash, various DIY solutions from Ultra pure water, Genee in a bottle, and others I can assure you I know whats best and works for me no matter what Cecil claims. Everyone has an opinion, twist or general theory on what works for them and I respectfully disagree with your views......and as long as we are all enjoying the music it really doesnt matter right?
For those lucky enough to purchase new vinyl every single time the wet method can be debated but for those of us who have to entertain used albums there really is no way around this if one wants any true hope of quality playback, too bad every record isnt treated with LAST but thats the world we live in. Cheers and nice studio you have there, looks like a fun place to enjoy music!

 

[Joe Schmoe]

There are two camps dry and wet! I'm in the dry camp. If you use a wet method you have to keep using a wet method, AND play the discs wet, which I would find troublesome. My discs have not seen any liquids.

I have never heard of "playing a disc wet". How can that not adversely affect the sound?

 

[krabapple]

it was touted long ago as method to get a 'clean' pass at the record, for archiving, because it makes some pops/tics go away, by 'floating' the causative crud out of the groove. TLS is right, if you go 'wet' you have to keep playing it wet. It makes much more sense to wet the disc then vacuum it and dry it,as per chadnliz' posts; that way the crud is actually removed.

Wet disc playing is mentioned (and warned against) here

http://www.discomusic.com/101-more/6193_0_7_0_C/

 

[TLS Guy]

I have never heard of "playing a disc wet". How can that not adversely affect the sound?

It does not adversely affect the sound. The water provides lubrication. There have been "wet" systems out there over the years. The problem is that once you adopt wet playing you are stuck wit it, as the discs pick up excess surface noise if you go back to dry.

I just feel that with careful handling and dry techniques you can keep a pristine LP collection.

 

[TLS Guy]

Cecil Watts doesnt matter to me and most every serious Vinyl guy has a wet machine, well the far vast majority atleast. From VPI, Nitty Gritty, Loricraft, ClearAudio and others it is the true standard for record cleaning. One can use detergent or not, buy pre mixed solutions or make one of their own, I also steam clean after a wash so your detergent caution is mute and besides that it works for me. Between my VPI fluid, Record DR wash, various DIY solutions from Ultra pure water, Genee in a bottle, and others I can assure you I know whats best and works for me no matter what Cecil claims. Everyone has an opinion, twist or general theory on what works for them and I respectfully disagree with your views......and as long as we are all enjoying the music it really doesnt matter right?
For those lucky enough to purchase new vinyl every single time the wet method can be debated but for those of us who have to entertain used albums there really is no way around this if one wants any true hope of quality playback, too bad every record isnt treated with LAST but thats the world we live in. Cheers and nice studio you have there, looks like a fun place to enjoy music!

We are not far apart. I have carefully preserved my collection. If you have a dirty record, I think wet cleaning is important and needed. I do feel you need a vacuum system. Seldom does a very dirty record turn out perfect. For one things owners that have been slobs with their LPs, put scratches in them too, and cleaning by what ever means won't help that.

There has been huge debate about cleaning fluid for years, which suggests they are all less than ideal.

 

[3db]

It does not adversely affect the sound. The water provides lubrication. There have been "wet" systems out there over the years. The problem is that once you adopt wet playing you are stuck wit it, as the discs pick up excess surface noise if you go back to dry.

I just feel that with careful handling and dry techniques you can keep a pristine LP collection.

The thing with the disc washer system is you put very little on the leading edge of the brush and rotate the brush to the trailing end after many revolutions of the lp so by the time I lower the arm, the record is dry.