Does analog sound better than digital? If so, why do my CDRs of LP's sound so good?

**Steve Hoffman** · 03-23-2006, 04:24 PM

Just askin'...

A continuation of this:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...ad.php?t=76165

dgsinner · 03-23-2006, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

Just askin'...

A continuation of this:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...ad.php?t=76165

"If so, why do my CDRs of LPs sound so good?"

That would be the mastering, would it not?

Dale

**Steve Hoffman** · 03-23-2006, 04:35 PM

I'm asking you guyz. I mean if digital sucks so bad....

Manos · 03-23-2006, 04:45 PM

I've always believed that the unpleasantness I hear in some CD's is a result of decisions made in the mastering process. If it were caused simply the digitization of sound, then there would be no good sounding CD's. But as soon as you find one richly detailed, fully dimensional, pleasant-sounding disc, you disprove the digitization theory.

nosticker · 03-23-2006, 04:48 PM

I've always been baffled by how recording basic tracks directly into something like Pro Tools can sound dark and awful. but recording on good analog 2" tape like BASF/EMTEC 900 and then dumping that into Pro Tools sounds OK. There are theories, but it still makes me shake my head.

Dan

andyinstal · 03-23-2006, 04:53 PM

It is probably just my memory playing tricks on me, but I used to really enjoy a really good cassette recording of album tracks alot more than a CD comp of CD tracks.

Doug Hess Jr. · 03-23-2006, 04:54 PM

Steve, I believe a CD-R of an LP sounds so good for the same reason one of your mastered CDs sounds so good. While I realize there is a certain sound or coldness that can be attributed to a CD as a storage medium, I believe our brains can tune that out and hear what is stored on there. So since we like the sound of the LP from the EQ built into that medium and the EQ/mastering of the analog source to get it on that LP, we pay attention to that since we enjoy that sound and ignore anything that the CD playback system may be doing to the audio since it is not enough to override the mastering or sound of the music that our brain is listening for.*
So in my opinion, analog sounds better than digital even if it is analog stored in a digital format for the convenience of playback. Digital only sucks when someone tries to master for digital without understanding how to properly master in the first place and then blames the poor sound on the digital when that isn't the real problem.

*Yes, that is a run-on sentence for the grammar majors in the Off Topic forum thread. I'll take a 5 point penalty on my grade.

Joe Koz · 03-23-2006, 04:59 PM

I don't care if its analog or digital. Bottom line is; garbage in, garbage out. Plain and simple.

Tim S · 03-23-2006, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Hess Jr.

...since we like the sound of the LP from the EQ built into that medium and the EQ/mastering of the analog source to get it on that LP, we pay attention to that since we enjoy that sound and ignore anything that the CD playback system may be doing to the audio since it is not enough to override the mastering or sound of the music that our brain is listening for...

THis is about as good a way to put this as I can think of. I guess I can adjust my perception of sound more easily to accomodate what I WANT to hear when I listen to discs made like this.

dgsinner · 03-23-2006, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

I'm asking you guyz. I mean if digital sucks so bad....

I don't have enough technical background to get into it from that standpoint, so all I can do is post my own experience. That experience is that 8 or 9 times out of ten, the full analog sounds better to me...all sorts of caveats go with that, though. My listening focus is 60s and 70s rock (mostly 60s), so my favorite music was recorded in an earlier era. The audio gear I have here is (IMO) not too bad, but certainly in the used, vintage category, not exactly budget, but not high-end by any means. Kind of low mid-fi I guess.

I know equipment has a lot to do with it. I recently made significant preamp upgrade, and this preamp goes a long way in 'taming' the steely highs I find on a lot of CDs. Doesn't eliminate it, though. The only CDs that really impress me were mastered by you and a handful of others, but I'm not someone who focuses a whole lot on who masters what, except for you. I just listened to a Razor and Tie CD that I thought had some nice air around the sound and a high-end that wasn't too fatiguing...but even on the best-mastered CDs, there is still that bit of "steel" in the high end that I would like to get rid of. I realize there is high end equipment ,SACD/dual-layer, DSD, tube amps/preamps, filters, and perhaps other esoterica that might do the job for me, but I'm not in a position to get into that much money...another factor in my particular situation is that my music collection probably runs 10-to-1 vinyl over CD...

I know the biggest factors at user's end, the listener's end, is the way a recording was mastered or remastered and the equipment being used for playback. But I still believe there are factors inherent to the particular medium you're listening to that affect your experience. And so far, my most pleasurable listening experiences have been analog.

A long-winded two cents...

Dale

Veech · 03-23-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

I'm asking you guyz. I mean if digital sucks so bad....

Thank you. I've avoided this topic because I thought it was against forum rules but since you asked I have the same question. I've heard needle drops that sound fantastic. So simply digitizing an analog signal shouldn't impact the sound negatively if it's done correctly.

I wonder how many of us could pick out an analog signal vs a digital signal in a blind sound test. Same song, one played on a TT and the other (say a needle drop of the LP) played as a wave file, everything else equal.. same amp same speakers, etc.

VinylSoul · 03-23-2006, 05:07 PM

Good does not mean equal, When I make a cassette copy of an LP it sounds good but hardly the equivalent of the LP, and furthermore the better the LP recording meaning LSC or FFSS the greater the discrepancy between the two.

**Steve Hoffman** · 03-23-2006, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Veech

Thank you. I've avoided this topic because I thought it was against forum rules but since you asked I have the same question. I've heard needle drops that sound fantastic. So simply digitizing an analog signal shouldn't impact the sound negatively if it's done correctly.

I wonder how many of us could pick out an analog signal vs a digital signal in a blind sound test. Same song, one played on a TT and the other (say a needle drop of the LP) played as a wave file, everything else equal.. same amp same speakers, etc.

I have been able to compare an analog master tape with the signal after it's been digitized. There is a difference, mainly in ambiance retrieval. However, in my mastering I have little "tricks" that I use to insure that the final digital master will retain more of the analog "sound" than the usual attempt... In other words, a little more oomph in and it comes back "normal" from the manufacturing plant. Served me well for many years..

Doug Hess Jr. · 03-23-2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

I have been able to compare an analog master tape with the signal after it's been digitized. There is a difference, mainly in ambiance retrieval. However, in my mastering I have little "tricks" that I use to insure that the final digital master will retain more of the analog "sound" than the usual attempt... In other words, a little more oomph in and it comes back "normal" from the manufacturing plant. Served me well for many years..

And I applaud your use of HDCD encoding to help that even more since I notice just the slightest increase in ambiance compared to hearing that same disc non-HDCD decoded.

Joe Nino-Hernes · 03-23-2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

I'm asking you guyz. I mean if digital sucks so bad....

Digital does not suck, it is all in how it is processed.

A ProTools recording that is processed to death will sound bad, since the digits are being altered so much. So much data is being lost.

If you are just making a needle drop, with one analog to digital conversion process, with no additional processing, most of the data will be retained. This goes for the studio as well. If you make a recording on a digital workstation, and you use minimal processing, the finished product will sound very good. Here is a direct to two track all digital recording that I did a few months ago. I mixed on an analog console direct to my two channel interface at 24/48. I made a DVD-A disc and a redbook CD from this master. Below you can download a 16/44 version of it. Even with that conversion, some quality was lost, but I did not do any processing in the digital domain (I did very little in the analog domain as well).

http://www.srctape.com/demo/3.wav

So digital does not suck, over-processing in the digital domain with poor digital signal processing sucks. Bad A to D and D to A converters suck as well.

Tubeman · 03-23-2006, 05:22 PM

Steve, my DCC "Doors" vinyl sounds so much better than my DCC "Doors" CD, could you suggest what upgrade I might make in a CD player to get them to sound close to the same? My CD player sounds very shrill and cold.

Pinknik · 03-23-2006, 05:24 PM

Seems like maybe Joe nailed it, Waxman, re: "Bad A to D and D to A converters suck as well."

dgsinner · 03-23-2006, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

There is a difference, mainly in ambiance retrieval.

And that's just what some of the articles I've scanned suggest as well. Harmonic overtones is a theme that's repeated often. I'm sorry I'm not sufficiently conversant on the topic to be clearer, but one article suggested that while digital can reproduce certain waveforms perfectly, it does less well on others, perhaps those that have to do with overtones...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

However, in my mastering I have little "tricks" that I use to insure that the final digital master will retain more of the analog "sound" than the usual attempt... In other words, a little more oomph in and it comes back "normal" from the manufacturing plant. Served me well for many years..

That makes a huge difference.

You've established a brand name in that regard. Most of my recent CD purchases have been based on your name being listed as the remastering engineer. Just wish I'd known 15 years ago so I could have scooped up all those DCCs at retail prices instead of audiophile/collectors'.

Dale

**Steve Hoffman** · 03-23-2006, 05:28 PM

Hence the never ending quest for the perfect A/D converter..

Joe Nino-Hernes · 03-23-2006, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

I have been able to compare an analog master tape with the signal after it's been digitized. There is a difference, mainly in ambiance retrieval. However, in my mastering I have little "tricks" that I use to insure that the final digital master will retain more of the analog "sound" than the usual attempt... In other words, a little wetter in and it comes back "normal" from the manufacturing plant. Served me well for many years..

I have similar tricks as well. I make sure that I capture as much detail as possible, so when the final version is just right. I notice the most degradation in detail when I go to redbook, so when I master for redbook, I make sure that my master is as nuanced and detailed as I can, so that when it comes out of the butt end of the 16/44 converter, it has as much detail as it possibly can, obviously some gets stripped away, but I try to make sure it balances out.

03-23-2006, 04:24 PM	#1
Steve Hoffman Your host Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 39,603	Does analog sound better than digital? If so, why do my CDRs of LP's sound so good? Just askin'... A continuation of this: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/sh...ad.php?t=76165

03-23-2006, 04:45 PM	#4
Manos Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Ann Arbor, MI, USA Posts: 719	Human intervention I've always believed that the unpleasantness I hear in some CD's is a result of decisions made in the mastering process. If it were caused simply the digitization of sound, then there would be no good sounding CD's. But as soon as you find one richly detailed, fully dimensional, pleasant-sounding disc, you disprove the digitization theory.

03-23-2006, 04:53 PM	#6
andyinstal Runner for Others Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Allen, Texas Posts: 2,140	It is probably just my memory playing tricks on me, but I used to really enjoy a really good cassette recording of album tracks alot more than a CD comp of CD tracks. __________________ There is no chin under Chuck Norris' beard. There is only another fist.

03-23-2006, 04:59 PM	#8
Joe Koz Prodigal Bone Brother™ Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 10,834	I don't care if its analog or digital. Bottom line is; garbage in, garbage out. Plain and simple. __________________ Joe Koz of the Bone Family..... One of the infamous Chicago Four

03-23-2006, 05:24 PM	#17
Pinknik Forum Hall Of Fame Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sitting in a bunker, here behind my wall Posts: 6,393	Seems like maybe Joe nailed it, Waxman, re: "Bad A to D and D to A converters suck as well." __________________ Butt fish, banana boat, Dixie Cups. All flavors and push-ups too.

03-23-2006, 04:35 PM	#3
Steve Hoffman Your host Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 39,603	I'm asking you guyz. I mean if digital sucks so bad....

03-23-2006, 04:48 PM	#5
nosticker Forum All Star Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ringwood, NJ Posts: 3,460	I've always been baffled by how recording basic tracks directly into something like Pro Tools can sound dark and awful. but recording on good analog 2" tape like BASF/EMTEC 900 and then dumping that into Pro Tools sounds OK. There are theories, but it still makes me shake my head. Dan

03-23-2006, 04:54 PM	#7
Doug Hess Jr. Forum Icon Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Belpre, Ohio Posts: 2,156	Steve, I believe a CD-R of an LP sounds so good for the same reason one of your mastered CDs sounds so good. While I realize there is a certain sound or coldness that can be attributed to a CD as a storage medium, I believe our brains can tune that out and hear what is stored on there. So since we like the sound of the LP from the EQ built into that medium and the EQ/mastering of the analog source to get it on that LP, we pay attention to that since we enjoy that sound and ignore anything that the CD playback system may be doing to the audio since it is not enough to override the mastering or sound of the music that our brain is listening for.* So in my opinion, analog sounds better than digital even if it is analog stored in a digital format for the convenience of playback. Digital only sucks when someone tries to master for digital without understanding how to properly master in the first place and then blames the poor sound on the digital when that isn't the real problem. *Yes, that is a run-on sentence for the grammar majors in the Off Topic forum thread. I'll take a 5 point penalty on my grade.

03-23-2006, 05:07 PM	#12
VinylSoul Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lake Erie Posts: 458	Good does not mean equal, When I make a cassette copy of an LP it sounds good but hardly the equivalent of the LP, and furthermore the better the LP recording meaning LSC or FFSS the greater the discrepancy between the two.

03-23-2006, 05:22 PM	#16
Tubeman Forum Icon Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 2,855	Steve, my DCC "Doors" vinyl sounds so much better than my DCC "Doors" CD, could you suggest what upgrade I might make in a CD player to get them to sound close to the same? My CD player sounds very shrill and cold.

03-23-2006, 05:28 PM	#19
Steve Hoffman Your host Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 39,603	Hence the never ending quest for the perfect A/D converter..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode