Streaming new vs older recordings

For recordings before the cd format, around 1985, I prefer without hesitation to listen to them on my turntable.  Even hirez of these « old «  recordings can’t compete with lps.

So streaming them by tidal is even worse.     It is of course my point of view and I know some don’t share that.    But contemporary hirez can sound sublime. I just regret that there is no more hirez downloads to buy, a lot are still produced on cd format.

I would say that many older recordings sound better than new ones, regardless of the format. Of course that’s a generalisation with many exceptions, but still true in many cases. Perhaps Tidal are doing something to make MQA sound better!

With Tidal you are in the lap of the gods as they could be playing any ropey old version of albums. I have never been happy with the SQ of Tidal, whereas Qobuz via Bubble upnp is pretty we’ll indistinguishable from locally stored CD rips. 

Not sure but when you record and master for digital distribution you can put more power in the high frequencies vs. what you could do when you master for analog/vinyl distribution?

Actually pre-digital recordings are quite fine (anything from 70's and 80's is generally brilliant, quality-wise).
But it needs to be played back on analogue equipment. Modern-era digital transfers (most of them in high-res audio formats) are starting to catch-up with analogue originals.

So what the OP is hearing are most likely several effects:

• Streaming from Tidal - that is hardly a reference-quality source
• Digital render of a pre-digital recording - very much depends on transfers and mastering applied

Can you be specific about what older recordings you are referring to?

I have a large collection of 60s and 70s funk and rock all ripped from CD and these sound superb streamed locally. Some of my best sounding albums are from the pre digital era and I don't need a turntable to hear how good they are. Some from the 60s sound so immediate and fresh, they could have been recorded yesterday.

Humm. Yes. Well - Zen, that's a great question. I've only had the streamer for a week, so in my excitement drank most of a bottle of red wine while exploring Tidal for the first time the other night. That's when I noticed the above-described difference.

Last night I listened again to the many of the same tracks to identify which ones were muffled: 'A Love Supreme' Coltrane; 'Five Leaves Left' Nick Drake; 'Hot Rats' Zappa;  Philip Glass; 'Gesang des Juenglinge' Stockhausen; 'Since I've been loving you' Led Zep 3; 'Son of Neckbone' Beastie Boys'; 'Clubbed to Death'; 'Outkast' Ms. Jackson; 'Red House' Henedrix, etc.

On a more careful second listening the older recordings didn't sound muffled at all. They obviously sounded different - the different instruments and less hard-edged analogue recordings gave a different quality and a softer edge to the music. But they were not at all muffled. So I have to apologise and say that I think I mistook a real difference in sound between pre-and post- the digital recording era for a lower quality of sound on the older recordings.

Sorry to waste your time on this - but good that this problem has now evaporated from my brain....

Jim

JimDog posted:

Humm. Yes. Well - Zen, that's a great question. I've only had the streamer for a week, so in my excitement drank most of a bottle of red wine while exploring Tidal for the first time the other night. That's when I noticed the above-described difference.

Last night I listened again to the many of the same tracks to identify which ones were muffled: 'A Love Supreme' Coltrane; 'Five Leaves Left' Nick Drake; 'Hot Rats' Zappa;  Philip Glass; 'Gesang des Juenglinge' Stockhausen; 'Since I've been loving you' Led Zep 3; 'Son of Neckbone' Beastie Boys'; 'Clubbed to Death'; 'Outkast' Ms. Jackson; 'Red House' Henedrix, etc.

On a more careful second listening the older recordings didn't sound muffled at all. They obviously sounded different - the different instruments and less hard-edged analogue recordings gave a different quality and a softer edge to the music. But they were not at all muffled. So I have to apologise and say that I think I mistook a real difference in sound between pre-and post- the digital recording era for a lower quality of sound on the older recordings.

Sorry to waste your time on this - but good that this problem has now evaporated from my brain....

Jim

As some said already, « older” recordings are not lower quality, quite often the opposite.  But they were produced originally on analog master tapes and transferred on vinyl.  The digital transfer sound not the same, specially on 16/44 files and on tidal, who don’t always provide the best material.  If you listen to Coltrane, Zappa, Hendrix...on hirez, locally streamed, the sound will be better.  For that, you need a nas or something like the uniticore.

But for me, as some here,  Hendrix, Zappa, Coltrane...sound best on lp.   For streaming, I prefer largely contemporary material ( after 1990 in general).

Eureka! I have an explanation.

When I had my power amp serviced last Saturday at Class A, Darran told me that it would probably be 'up and down' for a week or two. So that's probably why there have been such odd and changeable reproductions this week. That also explains why my TT sounded so awful and weak on Saturday night even though I'd replaced the Cart and Belt.

This morning I tried Led Zep on the TT and it sounded superb - by far the best it's ever been.

I have almost all my older recordings on vinyl, so now the problem is solved - I'm going to clean up my records and use my TT a lot more.

Also, longer term get a NAS and rip my CDs, and upgrade my TT.

(Didn't think I was drunk!)

cheers

Jim

At least you didn’t buy a ridiculously expensive box set while imbibing, which I’ve been known to do!

.sjb

JimDog posted:

Eureka! I have an explanation.

When I had my power amp serviced last Saturday at Class A, Darran told me that it would probably be 'up and down' for a week or two. So that's probably why there have been such odd and changeable reproductions this week. That also explains why my TT sounded so awful and weak on Saturday night even though I'd replaced the Cart and Belt.

This morning I tried Led Zep on the TT and it sounded superb - by far the best it's ever been.

I have almost all my older recordings on vinyl, so now the problem is solved - I'm going to clean up my records and use my TT a lot more.

Also, longer term get a NAS and rip my CDs, and upgrade my TT.

(Didn't think I was drunk!)

cheers

Jim

It’s good to hear you enjoy again your turntable.   I bought some weeks ago the Led Zep II, my favorite, on discogs, french 1973 pressing in near mint condition.  Fabulous on my rega rp10.  The hirez is fade by comparison.       But Jeff Beck, Blow by Blow, on dsd ( hd tracks), is very very near the lp.   

I have ordered a Rega Fono MkIII 2017 Model Phono Stage, and vinyl and stylus brushes.

How should I clean my records (without buying a £300 Project cleaning machine)?

I will need an LP12 and good phono stage eventually...why do they vary so much in price?

You may end up buying a record cleaning machine - it's just so much easier
In the meantime - manual cleaning: spray and a dedicated cleaning pad.

LP12 is still a fantastic deck. But Rega is now pretty much in the same league - I believe their RP10 is a good match for LP12's top of the range version.

Really enjoying my vinyl - have rediscovered Led Zep 2 thanks to Rooster.

but when I put an old 'strobe' type monochrome disc for testing the speed on the TT neither the old (stretched) nor the new (tight white) belt seems to appear with the bars stationary

but do I need a tungsten lamp to shine on it? and what is that?

JimDog posted:

Really enjoying my vinyl - have rediscovered Led Zep 2 thanks to Rooster.

but when I put an old 'strobe' type monochrome disc for testing the speed on the TT neither the old (stretched) nor the new (tight white) belt seems to appear with the bars stationary

but do I need a tungsten lamp to shine on it? and what is that?

Good to hear you enjoy the lps now.  I don’t know how to help you with the disc speed testing. But you can check the speed with many apps on applestore or other platforms.  You can view on YouTube the demos. It’s very easy.   One app: turntabulator: you install the app and put your phone on the platter.

jlarsson posted:

Not sure but when you record and master for digital distribution you can put more power in the high frequencies vs. what you could do when you master for analog/vinyl distribution?

 

The bass end that has to be limited for vinyl, hence the RIAA pre-emphasis/de-emphasis, which also serves to reduce hiss from stylus surface contact noise. (Similarly tape CCIR or NAB).  The re-emphasis supposedly restores the frequency balance, though arguably the filters doing it may cause artefacts. However, very strong bass sometimes has to either be reduced further or the groove gap on the record widened to prevent breakthrough, a permanent reduction not restored on playback (very noticeable on some ‘sampler’ albums where they’ve crammed in as much music as possible on the record). Analog recordings also may need dynamic range compression to lift quiet passages out of surface noise, whether or not with expansion at the time of play (may be normal with master tapes, but not with vinyl). 

Against these limitations, digital can simply have a flat response, immune to issues at either end of the spectrum. and without compression being necessary. Fantastic... but whether that is what is done with digital is another matter - I understand one move with digital has been to try to normalise average sound levels between different recordings, which given the different dynamics of different music can require some degree of compression, while the so-called ‘loudness war’ trying to maximise perceived loudness led to a lot more compression. And then mastering might involve tweaking to maximise some aspect or aspects to sound better through whatever mass-market playing devices are envisaged (true of vinyl analogue and digital recordings, but new vinyl being seen as niche might limit that now, while old vinyl decades ago might have been seen to have more of a quality demand, at least with LPs.

So on balance digital may often be compromised due to mastering desires, rather than medium requirement, whereas analogue recordings are differently compromised at least partly because of the limitations of the medium. Commercially distributed digitised music that has been in the digital domain since recording could therefore be anywhere from uncompromised to heavily compromised. Music digitised from an analog recording will at least have whatever limitations arose through the analog format - rather more if a digitised LP than an original analog master tape - and then once digitised could be preserved like that, or subject to any of the additional compromising through mastering as can be done to pure digital. 

In other words old or new recordings available digitally could sound as good, bad, better or worse than the other!

JimDog posted:

Really enjoying my vinyl - have rediscovered Led Zep 2 thanks to Rooster.

but when I put an old 'strobe' type monochrome disc for testing the speed on the TT neither the old (stretched) nor the new (tight white) belt seems to appear with the bars stationary

but do I need a tungsten lamp to shine on it? and what is that?

Did you found the issue ?

Yes, I used my son's LED night light for a speed test.

The bars were moving steadily and slowly to the left/clockwise.

Reading online it seems this means it is a bit fast, but steady.

The general opinion online seems to be that Rega do that either because it sounds "better" a little faster at first and/or because it will later stretch and slow a bit... Sounds distinctly non purist (if that is the case) - but then any real belt that is made of rubber or soft plastic will inevitably stretch - my last one is very stretched and loose after about 15 years use.

I didn’t notice it being fast when the cart was in it – nor did I notice any flutter – so all seems to be well.

(Am upgrading the Bias 2 for an Elys 2 so don't have a cart right now to use).

I will check the speed tonight with a speed app (turntabulator or RPM?) – need to borrow a smartphone from my wife or daughter as I don’t have one.

Again, this is highly pragmatic, but I think I could live with a steady (but very slowly declining) 33.4 or 33.5.....(!)

Also, I have no real choice as I'm just not prepared to buy a new TT now to play my 250 records on as I'm not planning to buy many more.

OR - even nastier!

The Speed Box S provides push button, precise speed control for your XXX-ject turntable.

Many XXX-Ject turntables do not offer a built-in electronic speed change. The Speed Box S lets you easily switch between 33 and 45 RPM at the push of a button. A quartz regulation and filter circuit gives speed stability for smooth and undisturbed motor operation. Speed Box S is compatible with many XXX-Ject turntables and some also offer the possibility to play 78 rpm records with the addition of a special accessory pulley.

YJimDog posted:

Yes, I used my son's LED night light for a speed test.

The bars were moving steadily and slowly to the left/clockwise.

Reading online it seems this means it is a bit fast, but steady.

The general opinion online seems to be that Rega do that either because it sounds "better" a little faster at first and/or because it will later stretch and slow a bit... Sounds distinctly non purist (if that is the case) - but then any real belt that is made of rubber or soft plastic will inevitably stretch - my last one is very stretched and loose after about 15 years use.

I didn’t notice it being fast when the cart was in it – nor did I notice any flutter – so all seems to be well.

(Am upgrading the Bias 2 for an Elys 2 so don't have a cart right now to use).

I will check the speed tonight with a speed app (turntabulator or RPM?) – need to borrow a smartphone from my wife or daughter as I don’t have one.

Again, this is highly pragmatic, but I think I could live with a steady (but very slowly declining) 33.4 or 33.5.....(!)

Also, I have no real choice as I'm just not prepared to buy a new TT now to play my 250 records on as I'm not planning to buy many more.

Rega « old » turntables have the reputation to run a bit too speed.  Perhaps a new belt can ameliorate this.   You can ask Richard, the Administrator, he knows very well all the rega Turntables.  Or open a topic «  how to slow the speed of a rega turntable ? »....

Normally, the belt must be changed every 1 to 2 years.    The installation of the app takes 1 minute.  Very easy.

I wouldn't get too hung up about a TT running very slightly fast or slow. The belt itself will have a marked effect on this, so if there's any doubt then change an old belt for the best new one you can afford. If you're concerned then the best way to check would be to use a proper keystrobe disc and strobe light or even Rega's own strobe kit. Other methods often just aren't accurate enough.  Of more concern would be speed variation - not good and can indicate serious issues. 

I'm struggling with the concept of one belt that can make a platter run faster than another! I think Isaac Newton might have something to say about that - am I missing something here?

Size of pulley, size of inner platter rim, rotational speed of pulley... 

The belt if loose could slip, if tight could slow the motor of not enough torque (unlikely in reality), and if uneven in thickness/elasticity could introduce speed fluctuations.

ChrisSU posted:

I'm struggling with the concept of one belt that can make a platter run faster than another! I think Isaac Newton might have something to say about that - am I missing something here?

I read that an increased diameter of an old belt can run the platter faster....

French Rooster posted:

ChrisSU posted:

I'm struggling with the concept of one belt that can make a platter run faster than another! I think Isaac Newton might have something to say about that - am I missing something here?

I read that an increased diameter of an old belt can run the platter faster....

Wear on the inside of the belt leading to a larger diameter belt would slow the platter down, surely?