LP Rip vs Digital

Posted by: Mr Underhill on 30 April 2015

As you may know I am in the process of digitally archiving my vinyl. This is a long, and let's not beat about the bush, tedious process, only relieved by the joy of rediscovering and plain discovering some great music ....and unfortunately some dreadful pieces!

 

Over the last few weeks I decided to test whether these LP rips were actually 'better' or whether I was deceiving myself. I set up a playlist on my NS01 with tracks where I had LP rip & digital, I then played these to a number of friends and family. The results:

 

Consistently preferred LP rip ..........3

Consistently preferred digital ..........0

Mixed ..............................................2

 

The mixed were the people stated they could hear no difference on some tracks and then were inconsistent on choosing one source over the other.

 

I decided to take the test myself, with my daughter in control of what was played.

 

When I tested a person I simply asked them which track they preferred. In mine I tried to identify the LP rip.

 

My result: 5 pairs of tracks in which I correctly identified the LP rip; but with two I thought the digital was 'better' in HiFi terms ....and this did get me thinking.

 

Whether I or anyone else can 'spot' a digital vs LP rip by listening to short passages of music is not the point. What I can state positively is that I am listening to a LOT more music, both in terms of frequency and length; I generally find the LP Rip simply more relaxing to listen to. I do not mean that it lacks visceral dynamics, far from it, but I think that I do not await the appearance of an uncomfortable edge.

 

I will mention two tracks: Stevie Wonder - Superstition; and, Genesis - Mama.

 

Superstition: Both the digital and LP rip are very dynamic, and the bass for the digital rendition is subterranean. Additionally the higher frequencies reveal more detail than the LP rip, this detail IS present on the LP rip it just isn't so obvious, 'in your face'? When listening to a short piece of Superstition I would select the digital rendition as better. However, I know that when I listen to the LP rip I get comfortable and listen to the whole album. With the CD rip I start hoping through tracks.

 

Mama is interesting as I think the CD rip IS simply better, but it is a dreadful recording regardless!

 

M

 

 

Posted on: 04 May 2015 by winkyincanada
Originally Posted by joerand:
Originally Posted by Tony2011:

.... this is something I will never ever have considered. I cannot see for the life of me a  rip sounding anywhere near the original vinyl no matter how good the hard/software is.  You must, of course, have your reasons

I'm with Tony on this one. I can't see how adding another recording step (and the associated software) to playback can standup to the original. But I've never tried the needledrop process, so must bite my tongue.

 

With regard to archiving; isn't the vinyl already archived simply sitting on your shelf? Just a matter of whether or not you choose to play it.

I can imagine a couple of reasons:

 

1) Knowing that you're doing the rip, you might take extra care in cleaning, and ensure your cartridge, arm and TT are in good form/adjustment. More care than you might take for routine listening.

 

2) You can do the rip with no (or little) volume coming from the speakers, and when the room is quiet. The absence of vibration and micro-phonic effects might have a beneficial effect. Naim go to great lengths to isolate micro-phonics in their solid state gear. I imagine the issues are potentially much greater when a cartridge (which is of course a transducer DESIGNED to convert vibrations into electrical signals in the replay chain) is involved.

 

3) You can take the trouble to switch off and unplug all unnecessary equipment (including power amps). You can do the rip during a period when mains stability is at its best. OK, to listen to the rip you will probably have these things back on (just like you would when listening to the record), I guess, so perhaps scratch this.

 

The extra ADC-DAC steps to get to final playback might not be so significant that they overwhelm the advantages set out above.

Posted on: 04 May 2015 by Mr Underhill
Originally Posted by George Johnson:

For me the best digital recordings are better [but still obviously not perfect] than .....

Hi George,

 

<Contentious View>

Been thinking about this. I believe that your musical diet is predominantly classical? Also, you are a musician.  I think that both of these are factors that could lead you and I to come to different conclusions.

 

I am very sensitive to female vocals, but I find that the issues that I hear are significantly lessened with classically trained voices, e.g. in Choral and Opera. I would suggest that classical music tends to probably, on the whole, be better recorded and produced than pop & rock music.

</Contentious View>

 

M

Posted on: 04 May 2015 by Mr Underhill

Winky,

 

As it happens I do take those steps ....and record without listening via my poweramp; which gives me a chance to catch up on what is being published here!

 

M

Posted on: 04 May 2015 by George Johnson
Originally Posted by Mr Underhill:
Originally Posted by George Johnson:

For me the best digital recordings are better [but still obviously not perfect] than .....

Hi George,

 

<Contentious View>

Been thinking about this. I believe that your musical diet is predominantly classical? Also, you are a musician.  I think that both of these are factors that could lead you and I to come to different conclusions.

 

I am very sensitive to female vocals, but I find that the issues that I hear are significantly lessened with classically trained voices, e.g. in Choral and Opera. I would suggest that classical music tends to probably, on the whole, be better recorded and produced than pop & rock music.

</Contentious View>

 

M

Dear Martin,

 

I think that what you say is true in all aspects. I do not really like to describe recording quality of music I only hear on the radio at work, but I have one example where the CD was less enjoyable than the LP?

 

Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits.

 

Both were first releases in the respective formats, and the CD was peculiar after the LP. A friend visited and wanted to see which sounded finer considering that my CD player was the CDS 2 in those days.

 

My TT was a Rega P3 [not the earlier Planar 3] and fitted with a Super Elys cartridge. A nice deck that seemed to manage the trick of being lovely for not a fortune.

 

After the Brothers in Arms LP the CD sounded artificial, with the vocal part seeming recorded in a different acoustic to the percussion and bass, whereas the LP sounded coherent and  not in any way distracting.

 

The transfers I made were mainly of EMI recordings and the best of them was a 1960 five LP set of Helmut Walcha playing the Well Tempered Clavier. This was something that was not either currently issued on LP or CD, but is a benchmark performance and very effective recording. As it happens I was lucky to find this set in Oxfam [German EMI pressings in a deluxe boxed set], and I was delighted to find that the discs were pristine when played over. I knew that I should try to preserve it with a transfer to CD. I cleaned the records, warmed up the cartridge with a side played over before each effort, and listened with headphones to prevent any vibration feedback to the TT.

 

EMI eventually saw fit to release this recording on CD in Japan and France. I bought the French issue [remastered in London, and pressed in Holland]. Even though the LPs I used were so beautifully preserved, the CDs were not only as quiet as a modern digital recording [and lacking the usual rumble at the start of LP sides for example], but had a naturalness to the harpsichord timbre that was itself a surprise after the LPs, which I had expected to be finer at the time. 

 

I made transfers of about 20 LPs at that time [in about 2004], and gradually all these were replaced by EMI CDs as restored and remastered from the masters. I do think EMI were going through a very good stage at Abbey Road from the mid nineties to the mid- two-thousands in their efforts. In more recent times, their efforts, particularly on 78 masters, have been less accomplished, so I look at the remaster date these days. If it is between say 1993 and 2008, then I am confident. If it is earlier or later then I expect less by experience.

 

ATB from George