I've posted in this section as I recall the thread about someone asking if he'd get a better sound from MP3s than CDs or record decks.

I am starting a project to check if vinyl is still okay for some purposes. Just run my first test of Blondie tracks on vinyl (new 180gm) versus 320kbps MP3 download (supplied free with LPs).

Now LPs are very old tech, no way do they record in a linear fashion so need to use RIAA equalisation through the frequency range. Very un-hifi really.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-Curve.svg.png

The RIAA equalization curve for playback of vinyl records. The recording curve performs the inverse function, reducing low frequencies and boosting high frequencies.

Digital recordings, on the other hand, do not need any compression, the format provides a large signal to noise ratio so no compression is ever needed. Though they are often compressed on pop and rock music to add weight when played over the radio on a crappy transistor radio.

I think that's what happened to the Blondie tracks, as I was very disappointed with the sound of the MP3s - it was terrible actually.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40311629/Europa.JPG

The vinyl was immeasurably better in this instance. Despite being such a crude and antiquated mechanism by today's standards it had vastly more depth and subtlety. Whereas the MP3 were a pain in the ear really - I kid you not.

Being brand new pressing on 180gm the records had no clicks or pops whatsoever. If I still had the originals (which I threw out years ago) they'd have plenty of clicks as I often played them when a bit pissed.

I'd expected the LP and MP3 to be rather more alike. Maybe they are bad MP3s though - will download some FLAC versions of the CDs tomorrow and check, probably both original and remastered.

I don't think this happens with classical stuff, which is my preference for musical listening - most of the classical digital stuff is pretty damned good.

My whim to test this stuff has cost me £400 so far, though I think it is sufficiently interesting to be worth it.

Just because records as a medium have been around for a long time doesn't make the system of recording crude. It's mechanical; yes. It requires RIAA because otherwise the needle would mistrack on bass notes; yes. Those are just facets of the medium.

Anyway, as much as I love vinyl, and I do love vinyl, a well recorded digital file (CD or 24/96) converted properly to 320kbps MP3 would be hard to tell from the original. What differences there were would then come back to the difference in mastering of the original vinyl pressing versus the CD. Vinyl doesn't have the dynamic range of an uncompressed digital file and some of us like that. Then again, CDs have been subject to the Loudness Wars for a few decades now which means they're often compressed in a way that means they no longer use the full dynamic range of the medium. After that it becomes a comparison of the replay chain.

There have been studies done that conclude that the average listener can't tell the difference between a CD and a 320kbps MP3 file. Having said that I doubt that many recording engineers and artists would be happy to have their masters stored in MP3 format. It damages the sound in an unrecoverable way.

Where I'm convinced MP3 falls down, even 192~320kbps, is in timing. Part of the process of conversion messes up the temporal positioning of the notes. I think this is fairly obvious to hear in heavily compressed MP3. It just sounds like micro variations of the speed of the musical strands.

Some of the reasons for your own findings so far is that you're relying on downloads. You haven't said the source but I would question how well the file conversions have been done and what other processing has been applied before they were made available.

If you're interested then there was a good programme on Radio 4 this week all about what MP3 does to music. Here's a link. You should be able to play the programme direct off the page.

Vinyl assuming it is not cut from a digital master is the only format that is fully analogue and lossless. Comparing vinyl with MP3 or other digital formats should therefore ensure the vinyl was cut from an analogue source and has not been converted to digital before it got pressed.

Surely vinyl cutting is not totally lossless as it is limited by the electrical / engineering tolerances of the equipment used as well as the granularity of the vinyl?

True, it's far more lossy than CD - and even more so once it's been played a few times.

The biggest difference with vinyl which is the added distortion many find pleasurable will be present whatever the source.

that's not true

most material recorded over the last 35 years, particularly rock and pop, even if recorded to analogue tape and the vinly cut from that tape, will have some form of digital sound somewhere along the line. and this is why most of the vinly vs digital arguements fall apart

most guitar pedals of the last few decades will be digital effects, so the sound of the guitars, bass included, will often be digitally processed

likewise digital delay and reverb on vocals and other instruments, digital compression etc

drum machines, samplers and keyboards are also usually digital

so even if the artist is performing live on stage, typically most of what you hear will have been digitally processed before it comes out the speakers, yet people don't talk about the digital vs analogue sound of live performances very often

so take modern albums that are recorded via a number of digital effects to a digital master, edited digitally, and pressed on LP, there's a huge amount of digital processing, yet some will bang on about it being better quality, even if playing on one of those plastic sub £100 dansette type players

and thats before you address wow and flutter and pops and clicks and rumbles and all the other artifacts that vinly typically introduces that wasn't part of the original recording

What's not true. I never said vinyl produced today wasn't recorded digitally, I'm fully aware it is. I merely said if you wish to properly compare the true sound of vinyl to MP3 you shouldn't use such digitally recorded vinyl to do so. I also never voiced an opinion on the merits of vinyl versus digital so I'm not sure why you're getting your knickers in such a twist.

what you said isn't true. the part in bold in particular

to compare true analogue to digital you need to look a lot harder to find records that haven't had digital effects in the recording process, as otherwise it won't be true analogue, even if recorded to analogue

so for example take an 80s album recorded to analogue but has typical digital delay, digital reverb, digital compression, digital guitar pedals, digital drum machine, digital keyboards, but recorded to analogue and even mastered from analogue tape, it's not fully analogue. the recording has been digitally processed before it hits the tape. yet most people completely overlook all of this and others will bang on about analogue being better whilst much of what they may be listening to has digital effects imposed during the performance prior to capture on the master

As always in the vinyl vs digital debate, the answer to the question "Is vinyl better?" is; unless you have a very expensive setup, no.

And even then, no

Ooh, controversial...

There are too many variables at work. Nowadays, unless you have one of those cheap and nasty modern "record players" from fashion shops, vinyl is almost always played through a system made up of separate components. If the source components (turntable, cartridge, phono stage) are good then the sound from the speakers can be better than the sound from CDs. Those source components don't have to be very expensive but they do have to be carefully selected, which is why many, many people don't get better sound from vinyl: they're not interested in auditioning components, tinkering with styli etc.

Personally I prefer the experience of listening to vinyl. Not because of "warmth" or whatever but because I find I tap my feet and nod along more: it has that impossible-to-measure quality of musicality that somehow CD lacks.

We disagree on tis all the time Nigel.

The answer is sometimes.

I remember once reading that when recording engineers first attempted to clean up very old recordings from wax cylinders, they were amazed at the amount of information captured within them, which could be retrieved with modern equipment.