3D-printed LP record

The main problem here is that digital reprinting of analog material is NOT Analog.

Vinyl is Final.

Yay for meeping around with a 3D printer.

Beach, should I take from your statement that an analog recording converted to digital is NOT digital?
Or is your point that the distortion created by a vinyl stamping is superior to the distortion created by this process?

I have literally thousands of vinyl records, from 10" 78s and colored, clear specials, to one-sided studio masters.

There is NO WAY being pelted with ice cubes is like running through the rainbow that summer sprinklers produce.

BeachGoat was referring to the fidelity of analog recordings which is lost in the digital recording process.

If you are not familiar with the difference I recommend reading this (or at least looking at the pictures).

@tesco

So.. the point was you can convert an analog recording to a digital recording - but you'd loose some "data" in between the 1's and 0's and in the reduction to 1's and 0's, reducing the fidelity.

likewise you cannot convert a digital recording into an "analog" recording, it would merely be (in this case) a vinyl playback of a digital file.

The medium is the message.

3D printed wax cylinders are the superior 3D printed obsolete format

^I bet only about three people will get that reference.

We are Analog Beings. When that few microseconds of "offbeat" is fixed, or that tiny bit of pitch in the bent note is tuned, the song loses its soul.

I have heard the same albums, on vinyl, original, and on disc, both "Original" & "Remastered".

Horrors...just Horrors.

Vinyl is Final.

Wax is cool...and the half dozen aluminum 10" I have are "Eh". Apparatus too heavy, and media too coarse.

@JohnLenin Good one.

I'm with the Goat on this- Vinyl is the only way to go. The industry must agree- they are still making it (in small numbers). Now if I could just find the room for a turntable in the car, and some way to stop it skipping.

I understand people get nostalgic for the types of distortion they have grown up with.
Back in the late 70's i knew a guy that did quite well selling a distortion box that made a transistor amp sound just like a tube amp.
Most people can tell the difference between a record and live sound, even speech. That is not true of modern digital recording.
The artists caught lip syncing in recent times, and band members caught with their axes unplugged, would not have gotten away with it the first time tried if they used analog equipment.
Especially if they used the crappiest analog medium ever created, the vinyl record.

As someone who has 10k+ vinyl albums, You are just meeping Wrong.

There is No meeping comparison. PONO comes close, but what you are speaking is idiocy.

I grew up on vinyl. I can't say that it miss it. I'm sure my fellow geezer's remember recording their LPs to reel to reel, that way you could hear the same song over and over with out the hisses and pops that inevitably acmeepulated over time.

As was previously mentioned, the cylinder was a much more accurate media than the vinyl plate. Wax wasn't durable, and the shape was difficult to mass produce at the time, so practicality trumped fidelity.
The fact is that modern digital recordings exceed the accurate sample rate of any vinyl plate, even with the best equipment.
Collecting antiques is a valuable service, but doing so because they are 'better' is delusion.

Bha-ha-ha-ha.

LISTEN to them. Any one can tell the difference in spacial imagery.

Six decades of listening, five playing, and four in the industry. I can tell meeping music.

But, all art is perspective, and you are entirely entitled to your opinion.

I'm with Goat too. I understood the spatial imagery thing when somebody did me a side-by-side demo with cd vs. vinyl of the same album. It was flat compared to 3D.

Beachgoat has me convinced that I could make a fair profit selling audio equipment & accessories featuring Digitally Induced Reactionary Technology.

The first things to market: Light-weight rim-drive turntables, signal to noise ratio compressors, dynamic range limiters, and my own proprietary formula for potentiometer grit.

NIce.

Most of the 'depth' a person hears from a record is a result of acoustic feedback between the speakers and the stylus.
Adding a touch of reverb to the lower frequencies replicates that distortion well.

(digs up dead horse)

Your level of ignorance astounds me.

In digital recording, everything below 100Hz is monophonic. Not so with analog vinyl. Unless you are a dolphin, this is bullmeep.

The Compression/Noise Reduction chip destroys any actual audiophile quality to the recording, along with its soul. meep, anyone who plays/records/listens can tell you that. Did you just start with your first "Close'N'Play"? Jeebus Crust on a Pizza!

The Proper Turntable is isolated from "feedback and reverberation", and is not affected by these things. You are thinking of your Mother's Hips.

Have you ever actually heard a good vinyl record, or are you going by stories, and you recollection of some 45 at your grandma's?

All that aside, it is a matter of perspective and taste. You have neither. meep You Very Much.

Goat

@LOki

Beachgoat has me convinced that I could make a fair profit selling audio equipment & accessories featuring Digitally Induced Reactionary Technology. The first things to market: Light-weight rim-drive turntables, signal to noise ratio compressors, dynamic range limiters, and my own proprietary formula for potentiometer grit.

And Yes, You Would Make a Fortune, just with Apps & Software, and never have to do anything but find the existing hardware sources and adapt for each one. There are More than enough "Tescos" that can't tell peanut meeper from dogmeep, and you will get a pocket of nickels for a bit. Grab it. "Vinyl" (replicants) are in a comeback now.

I take issue with current mastering standards which basically just makes eveything as loud as possible. It sterilizes all the levels and the music loses any dynamics captured during recording. To me, this is the primary reason digital music is critcized for lacking "soul".

The truth is: a day is coming when digital bit rates will be indistiguishable to the ear when compared to analog. The question is whether people will get over the idea that in order for music to be good it must be as loud as possible when compressed to mp3 format.

I should clarify, I think, that I'm referring to compressed mp3 and wma formats...which max out at a lowly 320kbps.

They day isn't coming..it's already here. A recorded vinyl song using a 64bit wav format would sound exactly like the record version. Regardless of how "tuned" your ears are, you would not be able to tell the difference. The issue is that the file would be +200MB and you would need special software to play it. So it's possible, but not really for mass consumption yet.

If I had the money to bring all of you together in one place I'd have each of you set up a science fair-type display and have some side by side comparisons so the rest of us would know what the f#ck you guys are arguing about.

You missed the thrust of my jab ... the target audience for D.I.R.T. enhanced audio is "audiophiles" cut from fossilized nostalgic luddite cloth; hoping to catch a retro-hifi from sniffing discwasher D4.



@BeachGoat

That is sitting on my shelf as we speak....

I KNOW IT! :D

@BeachGoat

Well Beachy, by picking your comparison you can always be right.
Multitrack digital is true stereo, all the way down to 10HZ (or in some cases even lower).
That carved up dinner plate creates only the illusion of stereo.
Creating true stereo on a record was tried, it was meepbersome and unreliable.
Try comparing audiophile record technology with audiophile digital technology.
You will find out what you are missing, and it is a lot.

Please, by all means, load your system into your flying car, and bring it right over. I am always ready to learn. As of now, here in DinosaurLand, this is the Best we Got.

Goat

Here in 21st century land 4 track digital recorders go for less than $200.
Drop a true 4 channel audio card in your PC and you can listen to it for less than the cost of a quality turntable.
Most music these days is recorded on multi track digital. Sure, you can't buy it at Kmart, but you can't buy LPs there either.
Go to a live concert, look at the equipment. Digital preamps, digital mixing boards, digital multi track recorders and playback equipment.
I guess you just figured that since it sounded so good, it just HAD to be analog.
That, or maybe you don't get out of the house very much. Say, since the 70's?

Pretty much 1974

That explains it.
As an electrical contractor I have had the privilege of working on 5 different installations of systems for audiophiles, and back in the mid 80's I did sound work for a few bands.
One of the audiophiles has a turntable he built that can read each side of the groove separately so he can re master the music as 2 separate channels. Naturally he saves it as 2 channel digital. He does it to preserve old music.

I always appreciated the sound from my 8-track tapes as they would stretch over time.

When I was working on Roger MgGuinn's SG (snagged the Velvet Bricks from it), he was talking about Neil Young's PONO system coming. Now that interests me.