ATTENTION! Some viewers have misinterpreted the message here and I was probably not very clear. Digital delay is NOT present in the current quality AAA productions that we all know and adore. I was mainly referring to the shocking fact that since the late 70's several records that we all believe being analog (AAA) have actually been cut with a digital delay and there is practically almost know way to know which had it and which not. Moreover, I SUPPOSE that other current random AAA productions made occasionally by lables who don't usually make AAA records may have in fact used a digital delay, perhaps not even knowing it since ity takes place in the lacquer mastering phase. As Michael Fremer pointed out Abbey Road, Sterling Sound, Cohearent Mastering, Emil Berliner Studios, Blue Heaven, GZ Media and many others all use analog delay tape heads when mastering and I would add also Quality Record Pressings. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
This is a great video! I recently produced my first all analog Album. Recording and Mixing all analog was something I knew enough about and so that worked out fine. When it then came to mastering and cutting all analog I started to find out that almost all companies who offer this service can't even do it all analog. They have like you said a digital step before the cutting. I was shocked because they are often getting analog master tapes and then before cutting they are converting it to a digital file to then put it on a analog format. Crazy! I finally found the Emil Studios in Berlin who have the right gear (Studer with a pre head...) and went there with my Mix tapes to have it mastered and cut all analog. I hope with time poeple will understand this part of the AAA process better and we will get more analog cutting from the analog tapes. Keep up the great work!!!
I was a cutting engineer back in the 80's (1984) and I was lucky enough to have been handed a brand new, state of the art lathe, the Neumann VMS-80 SX-74. That was the only one lathe I ever worked with as a mastering engineer.
This fabulous vinyl-cutting lathe included a Neumann SP-79 mastering console and a SAL 74B amp rack, paired with an MCI JH110B mastering 2-track tape player with two 1/4" heads with delay mechanism for normal and half-speed cutting. I agree with 99% of what you say in the video, because I lived all that myself. But I strongly disagree with the 1% of what you stated, which is that this lathe cut a digital conversion of what was played on the tape and used the analog content just to prepare the lathe for the changes needed to be done to get a perfect cut. Well, I know that for the lathe and array of components I came to know like my hand, this is not entirely true. The feed being cut into the acetate was the analog one, from the second head (delayed), of the tape player. The other analog feed, coming from the first head, was fed to the electronics in the SAL 74B rack, so that the filters and other electronics could provide the proper signals for the cutter to automatically adjust pitch, depth, and other non-musical tasks, instead of having to do it manually as in the VMS-70. T I believe this is the biggest difference between these two great lathes. This automation embedded into the VMS-80 allowed the cutting engineer to focus entirely on the nuances of the music, mastering and enhancing what was to be cut to make a better sounding, commercially and/or artistically desirable, final cut. I know this because I've been there, done that. Many, many times. I became a mastering engineer thanks to this marvelous Neumann lathe. Thank you for the beautyful and well done video
I think you are really saying the 99% of what he said is wrong, since the part he got wrong was the point of making the video. Thanks for your comment.
Nope! You're getting mistaken. You didn't listen with attention. When you have 2 heads obviously you are cutting analog, that is analog delay! It's when you DON'T have two heads that you have a digital delay because you are using only one head like the Ampex model I have shown in the video.
Thank you Guido for another well thought-out and well presented video. I remember this detail in your interview with Kai Seeman of Speaker's Corner, and I was shocked by it. This scandal comes down to honesty in marketing and truth in packaging for the audiophile community, one which more than others has the knowledge and expectation of truth in the details. I look at audiophile labels in the classical world and, pre-digital, some labels (Decca, Everest, Mercury, RCA, etc.) go into excruciating detail about specific microphones, tape recorders, cutting amplifiers, and cutting lathes used. Early stage digital labels would market and trumpet the new digital technology. I have a Decca album from 1980 that uses one-third of the backside jacket devoting four paragraphs to the new technology and how it revolutionizes the sound. All honest. All true. All respecting the listener. Makes me glad that I buy only used records pressed from the early fifties to the mid-sixties. At least I know these are fully analog which I love and enjoy. (And I spell "analogue" as "analog" so no one will know I'm such a late boomer, who hates hipsters who call records "vinyls.")
"This scandal comes down to honesty in marketing and truth in packaging for the audiophile community, one which more than others has the knowledge and expectation of truth in the details. " It is the audiophile community who cannot handle the truth about digital at all. The Mofi scandal and the dirty little secret of this video - a secret which has been common knowledge for forty years to everyone else - tell clearly and unambiguously that digital has been acoustically transparent for decades. I know, this is a bitter pill to swallow.
Thanks for this nice presentation and summary of the digital delay. While it is a well-known procedure amongst the pros of the industry and for most of the engineers involved in the musical production, many audiophiles are still unaware of all the technical steps needed to produce a vinyl record, from the recording until the LP slides out from the press. Your video also highlights why the SPARS code is (and always was) an inaccurate tool to track the devil (=digital conversion) within the conception and birth of a record.
Most audiophiles are well aware that this story is total nonsense. None of the records made today labeled AAA are cut using DDL. They all use preview heads. This story is nonsense.
Guido, you hit the nail on the head! This is one of the MAIN reasons I still do not own a turntable (I have plenty of DSDs - and tapes - that sound very analog WITHOUT any of the issues associated with LPs). If I need to mimic the ANALOG sound, I use a graphic EQUALIZER (YEAH, graphic EQ, a dirty word in the audiophile community! Experience the Schiit Lokius EQ yourself to see what I am talking about - this thing is amazing) or record the DSD music to my analog tapes using "musician's /high distortion" tapes such as EMTEC/RTM SM468 or 3M 206. BTW, I have read about the ADD-1 from Ampex years ago - another reason I despise modern vinyls!
Nice video, as a camera buff I can't help but note that you have to lock in your white balance before recording so that you don't have varying color temperatures during the shoot. I use to be hardcore about only trying to get AAA records but I have given up on that. I have digitally sourced recordings that sound better than the AAA variants and vice versa. AAA vs digital is simply too rudimentary a technique to judge which version will sound better. This thought process really sunk in with a couple of recently purchased RVG stamped mint records (Up With Donald Byrd and Reach Out! by Hank Mobley) that couldn't match the sound quality of digitally sourced versions. In my experience, the most reliable way to determine quality without listening is digging up info on mastering house and pressing plant (when available) or just reading discog reviews.
Thank you for your detailed explanation. I have many vinyl albums that I thought were sold as all analogue, yet my digital version of the same recording sounds better and for less money. For me the best source material is reel to reel tape. I used to buy tape sparingly because of the cost, but with some of the supposedly high end vinyl records costing around $500, (what a joke), I find myself buying more and more tapes. I have never purchased a tape that I was not happy with, yet I purchased many expensive vinyl records that were just imperfect in many ways. They were not flat, not concentric, plastic flashing in the center hole and around the outside perimeter of the album, the label is off-center, hair line scratches, early pressing are better than later pressings. etc. Vinyl making is just an imperfect, hit or miss process.
Before digital and analog delay lines, they used playback decks with two playback heads, one mounted several inches in front of the other so that the engineer could hear the music before it hit the lathe. This allowed the engineer to change the track pitch for loud and soft passages on the fly. And yes, this has been replaced with digital delay lines. The audio put down on vinyl is run through a digital delay line, giving the engineer the time necessary to react to changes needed in track pitch. The fact that no one ever complains of these records "sounding digital," and that people even praise them for not "sounding digital," is a bit telling, no? Good digital is completely transparent.
The mofi "scandal" says it all ! Mike Esposito (from the in groove) even said that his best sounding vinyl record is the mofi one-step of Santana's Abraxas, and that record was mastered with a digital DSD 256 file !!! It is time that the damn big record companies start to master their compact discs good again like in the ealy 80's !! The very first japanese compact disc of Micharl Jackson's Thriller from 1983 is a good example how good a well mastered CD can sound.
@@lucalone The problem with early CD's (and there IS a big problem with some of them) is that they were made not from the original studio master recordings, but from vinyl masters prepared (equalized, de-essed, and compressed) for making vinyl records. The compression, equalization, etc., needed to make the vinyl sound good sounded terrible when released on CD, which did not have the limitations of vinyl that these adjustments were meant to compensate for.
@@ScottGrammer that is sometimes true, yes. And now just imagine if they would really do a good mastering in 2022 with the original master tapes ! Those compact discs would sound absolutely fantastic ! But like I said before: damn those big greedy record companies ! Peace.
I too find it a bit telling. People like the distortion that the Vinyl system applies to sound, it is pleasant and musical, even if the source is digital. I personally do not like vinyl records but I do find them very atmospheric whenever I hear them. It is just something that is not suited to every kind of recorded music. Classical and live recordings tend to lack something on vinyl in my view.
Singles are usually cut at a constant pitch so no need for a pre-play tape head on the tape machine or an electronic delay in the signal chain.... Engineers know they only have about 5 min of land to work with so the LPI (lines per inch) can be easily calculated. Most 7" and 12" singles are cut at a constant pitch and without program delay. That's why i love singles!
@@Paul58069 For sure but, any limiting would be better done during the multi-track mix-down to master tape stage. It is possible to use an analogue automated mixing console or an outboard limiter controlled by a S.M.P.T.E. time code that you have pre-written to a single track of the tape. Unless you are referring to "acceleration limiting" which is used to limit only high end. This can be done on the fly while cutting without delay but you still should really have all those issues sorted at the mastering stage. In this instance we are using "delay" to control only "land" (i.e. how close you pack the grooves together). Bass occupies more "real estate" on the disc than mid range and high end so, when cutting the disc, you need to know (one revolution ahead) when the bass will arrive at the cutting head. So that you can increase pitch (the speed at which the cutter traverses across the disc). Once the heavy bass has passed you can slow the pitch down again and cram the grooves closer together. This variable pitch process allows you to put up to up to 30 minutes on a side of an LP. If you cut at a constant pitch you only need to set the pitch speed for the loudest/bassist part of the program which will limit you to around 15 minutes per side of an LP. On one side of an album you may have 5 tracks... two tracks heavy in bass with high dynamics and three ballads with quiet bass passages. Unless of course you just compress the hell out of everything. Then you don't need to worry. The beauty of cutting a 3 minute song to 7" disc that can hold a up to 5 minutes of music is, you have plenty of land to just set the pitch to the loudest and most bass heavy passages. Thus eliminating the need for delay.
@@janedoe6350 In part you are right. But a mixing engineer is not a mastering engineer and a mastering engineer is not a cutting engineer. This can, and almost always will be, three different persons. Only the cutting engineer will know if the are any peaks left that need to be dealt with. So yeah, a short look-ahead time when transferring the master tape to the laquer could be beneficial, even for 45's..
@@janedoe6350 You appear to be the only person in this video that knows what they're talking about. The digital delay or any delay fo that matter is used for the land. But, it appears a lot of people in these threads think the digital delay signal is what is cut into the vinyl as audio.
@@djpopcorn Here's the thing. The digital delayed signal IS used to cut the audio (because it comes later). The true original signal (the look ahead) goes to the computer to calculate the land. It has to because it comes first..... while the digitally delayed signal arrives at the cutting head one revolution later. (555 mili-seconds for 33.3 rpm & 750ms for 45 rpm) So the the quality of the audio is determined by the quality of the delay.(be it an analogue delay or a digital delay). The way it is done in analogue is that the tape machine has two playback heads spaced the correct distance apart in relation to the tape speed.
I would also add that a digital master can sound really good. If vinyl forces producers to stop the loudness wars and produce a better mix, it's already worth the price of admission. This is useful information though and it actually may explain why vinyl sounded different in the 80s.
You’re right, Benny. For me that’s the bottom line about vinyl. If it sounds great and it helps us to avoid the horrible loudness wars, it doesn’t matter if it’s digital.
Loudness war started in the vinyl era already. SP records could be easily hot-cut, so some labels began to use it in the sixties. Recently I bought LP version of some modern album, made a test record into computer and when I saw a waveform, I first thought, that my cartridge or preamp had some serious trouble. The waveform in the bassy parts was clipped. Tried another vinyls and no problem. The mix of this particular album was already digitally brickwalled and clipped in digital domain and in this form got onto the vinyl... Yes, sound of vinyl records changed in 80s, because modern music generally started to be recorded and mastered digitally. They even advertised it on the package, because back then this was a good selling point. Digital was a buzzword and everybody wanted to be digital...
@@StackOverflow80 Generally speaking, lots of time, even modern vinyl sounds better. Of course, there are many exceptions, but there is something to be said that audiophiles have kept vinyl alive. I think the problem with digital is that, analog is a lot more idiot proof. It's a lot harder to make a digital recording sound good. Analog is a ton more forgiving. A digital recording pressed on vinyl may sound even better because of the nature of analog.
You totally right, Sir, there are a lot of unsolved issues by new vinyl pressing, but the costs saving forcing the pressing plant produce cheaper stuff, they even don't thinking to improving something... MOSTLY OF THEM, - NOT ALL ...
pressing plants generally have little to do with mastering but the ones that do including Optimal and GZ can cut true AAA. I know hecause unlike Guido I'VE BEEN TO BOTH PRESSING PLANTS.
@@trackingangle929 what about MFSL ? they have said AAA, but it was digital, many of them ! i don't regret to have sold my Santana Abraxas ONE-STEP , it didn't sound natural at all !
Exactly. That's what I tell all my analog-head friends at parties - _". . . and that's why all this time you've been gloating while actually listening to digitally sourced audio, sometimes even worse than 16-bit. It turns out you just like hiss, pops, crackle, warble, and lacking bass! Ha ha ha!"_ - Then they leave wide-eyed and then can't sleep for several days.
Very very interesting! You've helped bring out the root of mastering techniques almost no one was aware of. I can't seem to find Mint magazine website?
I don't understand why it should be so expensive for the extra tape head. Most reel to reel decks that I used in the past have 3 heads (Erase, Record and Playback heads). This allows the person recording to monitor the recording. You're able to listen to the actual tape with less than one second delay after the record head. How hard would it be to wire a deck to allow for two playback heads?
@@Paul58069 I see. That makes sense cause it's a mechanical operation not just electronic. In the ole college Audio Club we used to put one tape machine on the table and run the tape a couple of feet to the other making for a long delay. I think we had to fool one of the machines by holding down the tape tensioner so we could use the take up reel on the other. We got all kinds of fun effects out of the two machines that way. Not a really precise thing but it worked.
The problem is that spacing between the preview and playback heads needs to be pretty long, about 28 inches for a 15 IPS tape. At 8.48 in the video you can see a diagram on the machine with the different tape lacing patterns to give the correct distance for cutting from 7.5, 15, and 30 IPS tapes.
It's not just the head, you practically have to change the whole trasport. Plus there wasn't a standard production. All these quality recorders are mastering recorders, in the sense of cresting the master tape from the mix, so that also made things more difficult hence you needed another machine and those were very expensive as well. When vinyl went down, several modifi8mschiens were reconverted or sold...very few existing know and nobody could create a new one if not for $200k or so
Do you know if Analogue Production records especially the UHQR are real AAA? There own factory walk around video let us see their reel to reel machines...but ... I couldn't see any with a needed double head.... So, please let me know your mind which company or label does real AAAs. Thank you in advance.
6:42 is this why I noticed that records made starting in this era sound so much better than the records made before that? I had guessed that they changed the formula and/or manufacturing process for the raw vinyl. Did they do that too?
Wow. Shocked. Especially the fact that the digital signal is what’s used to cut. So basically unless there’s an analogue preview head we’re getting a digital recording. All the more reason to stick with tape, original pressings, or transparent labels
@@trackingangle929 hey Michael! That’s a huge allegation: “giant lie”. What is wrong here? It would be cool if you presented some evidence or thoughts to support what part is the “Giant Lie”. Since you’re a journalist I’m sure you don’t just throw out allegations without support. Or is this your opinion?
As a bit of a joke and for fun only I'm waiting for someone to put a compressed digital file on an lp only to be decoded by a DAC. If I can play an audio file from an old slow bit rate floppy disk then this would be possible with digital compression on a grove. This would just be for fun to maybe decode a secret song or message. Of course you would have to warn others to remove the headphones before playing otherwise you would hear loud white noise. You would also have to own a DAC to decode it. It's like kind of finding those hidden messages scribed into the near center of the vinyl or messages that would have to be played backwards like something from the 1970s. Like ELO's Fire on high song at the beginning. That had me laughing the first time I heard it years ago. It makes vinyl fun like gatefold covers with pop out scenery. I have seen some crazy things like making a record out of chocolate or even ice and it actually worked.
@@XX-121 Ultimate compressed audio data might be able to be stored on linear analog media as a bit stream with some quality loss but listenable. I wonder if anyone has tried to put this on an analog casssete at normal speeds like they used 40 years ago for the Comedore.
The music at very low volume we hear at the start of the record just before the actual music is because of the delay in the cutting process, am I right?
No, that is normal tape print-through effect. When winded some magnetization of a layer passes to the one on top and you hear it because in the beginning there is nothing else recorded on that part, except for the print-through.
Oh man...Mike at The In Groove is gonna have to drastically change his top 100 in print analog record list now. And we thought Mofigate was bad! Good video my man
Thanks but I do want to make clear that quality audiophile labels like Speakers Corner, Analogue Productions, Bluenote reissues etc. do have machines with analog delay.
I recently watched a Paul McGowan video about how Octave Records transfers its DSD recordings to vinyl and it seem they do not undergo any compression during the procedure and I can't help wondering how a perhaps 90 plus dB dynamic range is going to be accommodated on a disc, particularly if a lot of the high level information is at low frequencies.
@@380stroker He didn't go into details but mentioned that two signals were sent to the cutting head: the first set up the movement of the head to expect a certain type of cut and then the corresponding audio signal was sent to it a short time later (no mention of time delay and I can only assume that the engineers at PS Audio would have devised a means of successfully tying in both signals to achieve that). What he didn't mention was what would happen with music that had very deep sounds at high levels for an appreciable amount of time - like a bass guitar in heavy rock - and how that could chew up playing time - even with the RIAA equalization.
3 Questions: 1-Do you have any videos detailing the steps of production from recording session to media, so that we can see where something can be "digitized" along the way? 2-Have you done any videos on the issue of digital masters of analog media (phonograohs and tapes) and whether they really are "analog" then? 3-Have you ever addressed the issue of whether a tape or phonograph of digital music (example: digital synth music) is really "analog", even if the production steps are all analog?
Hi Guido, as always cool video. We are being fooled on a daily basis. I didn't know these things to be honest. Prior to your video I had never heard of a digital or an analogue delay. To be honest I am no longer even interested in buying modern day vinyl. I paid 300 € for the 2x45 RPM MOFI release of Marvin Gaye's What's Going On. Yes, it sounds nice but I would never spend that amount on a record any longer. The prices for a lot of these vinyl releases and used vinyl records on discogs is plain crazy. 300 € for the vinyl release of Mulholland Drive OST ??? No way!!! Instead I decided to buy a high quality Technics SACD/CD/Network player that sounds better than any of my previous DACs. Finally I got to understand how fantastic CDs can sound. I compared a lot of my vinyl records to the respective CD releases and they do not sound any better now. I think I am going all digital now because I am no longer willing to finance these frauds. The only vinyl I buy nowadays is if I can find something cheap on a flea market.
The digital delays in vinyl cutting were introduced in the end of the 1970s already. This has been common knowledge for more than forty years now. Only the audiophiles did not want to know.this. But back then the ridiculous cult of the analogue did not yet exist.
I bought hunderds of classical music on vinyl for pennies................many were only played ONCE and many other NEVER ................these were mainly recordings from the fifties to the Eighties...................newer ediditions sounded often emotionless compared with earlier pressings . Generaly I like most of the pressings from the late fifties until the late sixties ...........I can hear also when they switched tube gear to solid state .........the sound beame cold and mechanical............to better with the years when solid state became better.
I've just thought of something (and it's a beneficial use of digital). What about a plugin for Audacity that scans the wave-form and outputs pitch and depth numbers over time? You could make a recording of the master tape on computer, Audacity outputs a file showing pitch and depth info, and the guy making the cut actually sits there adjusting the pitch and depth according to the numbers that have been produced by the file. He'd have to sit there paying attention, but it would be a lot quicker than the current analogue method
@@anadialog someone on the lathe trolls forum might know some figures for pitch and depth vs frequency. If you have those numbers, someone on the audacity team could make a plugin that outputs a file similar to midi
I always thought, a digital preview would be used. So you are saying, instead the actually sound is digital? How about syncing a digital form of the analog source to be used for the preview? I mean, why should the packing optimization required to be analog? Of course I am interested in analog audio, to state it clearly.
The most interesting bit about this all is that this is not something that happens with "new vinyl" only but also the last decade of "the vinyl of old" (after/before the format nearly disappeared). Many of us have not been aware that records were cut in this manner already in an era when vinyl was still a leading format. We should not be surprised, now that we know, that when manufacture of the format was resumed, it picked from where it was halted, using what was available then, instead of restoring older, very hard to find gear. This is not to say current labels, shouldn't be more honest and transparent about all the processes their product goes through.
You can find them in the comments. I posted the video, the time stamp and the article BUT as someone pointed out there is no reference for his claim. I simply reported it.
Something that I thought of is that I have records from the 80's Randy Travis and George Strait albums which were recorded digitally. Bur still have a wider and fuller sound than modern digitally sourced music . So is it the delay or what ?
Ciao! Ti saluto dall'Argentina. Voglio domandarti questo: _ascoltando un vinile con le cuffie_ è il suono della prima head quello che si ascolta a volume bassissimo un secondo prima d'ascoltare il "full" oppure il delay? Io sono fan dei Reder's Digest box sets e dei Audio Fidelity Records degli anni 60, poi delle collezioni italiane di musica clasica Fratelli Fabri e Curcio, Folklore Argentino e Tango fino ai primi 80 e poi Pop anni 70 e 80. Vorrei dire che in quasi tutti io posso ascoltare questo secondo di musica prima che comincie a suonare il full ma non succede con i dischi fine anni 80, 90 e i più nuovi che ho. Io non sono fan dell'audiofiglia, il massimo che ho in quel senso sono Abba Voulez Vous e The Album in versione doppio lp 45 rpm masterizzato in half speed alla Abbey Road che suonano essattamente uguali ai remasters anno 97 (cmq bellissimi!) 👋
Congratulazioni per la vittoria! Campioni del mondo! Il suono che senti è il cosiddetto print-through, quando cioè il segnale di una parte del nastro passa alla parte sopra (la magnetizzazione)
Have you checked to see what these digital delay lines are like in modern pressing plants with the latest electronics? What are the sample rates being used today? I'd be willing to bet they take the sample rate of the supplied master, regardless of what it is and in what format (DSD, PCM, etc) it is supplied, and simply delay it while supplying the audio file bit perfect to the DAC. And I'm also sure that the A/D-D/A conversion that occurs with an analog master is probably going to be audibly transparent, given the capability of modern digital audio processing I also wonder about the weird claim of reducing the signal down to as low as 8 bits in older pressings. Is it possible that they used that low bit rate conversion only for the lathe pitch control, but passed the audio signal through at a higher rate? Let's not forget that regular PCM processors with 16 bit processing were already available in the late 70's. I do agree with you that there should be more openness in exactly how "analog" a modern vinyl lp actually is. I'm reminded of the old Monty Python skit where the guy said to his wife "It's only got a little Spam in it".
Yeah, the 8 bit audio doesn't make sense. We know how that sounds. But A/D-D/A is never a 100% transparent, there is always a change of the signal that way.
@@booom4849 You should try a straight wire bypass ABX test with a high quality A/D-DA chain compared to a piece of wire. Easy enough to do. Good luck hearing the difference. I've done the test, and failed it miserably.
I never denigrated the quality of current digital delay, which yes I did check and they have higher resolution. The problem is that they were using DDL since in the 80's also in analog recordings as well as today in current "AAA" productions. Clearly most audiophile labels use analog delay machines but in other cases other labels probably don't even know that their laquers are being cut from digital, reissues and new analog recordings. The 8 bit claim as declared is sourced from Fremer: trackingangle.com/features/a-guide-to-collecting-japanese-imports
Another great video, much appreciated Guid-man! Read Miles Showell’s story about The Rolling Stones box set 1/2 speed masters originated from a mysterious hard drive he was given access to for one day. Sticky Fingers 1/2 speed is notoriously bad for this reason.
Miles cuts 1/2 speed from digital because that's how he thinks 1/2 speed works best. He's a fan of the late Stan Ricker who was a friend of mine. Guido is clearly misinforming people based on the comments here.
Ok, so that digital delay is a digital conversion, which is pcm conversion and not dsd conversion, correct? Most vinyls are pcm vinyls masquerading as pure analog?
That is why original pressings are saught after and often very expensive. Of course…the Dark Side of the Moon Light Blue Triangle as the most outstanding example. Moving house, I orden up 42 years of Life. And discovered at the back of a wardrope a stack of records, I had forgotten of. All my buys of the seventies. And to my joye…of course original pressings, including the light blue triangle. The sound just blows you away. And I paid a lot of money for newer (remastered) pressing. By the way. I paid £ 7 in 1974. Anyway. Look for original pressings. Still a lot out there, when one is ready to pay the prices. And is lucky enough to own a very very good system.
Hate to burst your bubble, but £7 from 1974 is £60.87 today. Even if the inflation perspective isn't PERFECT, due to life's many variables over the years, £7 was still a lot of money in 1974. For the life of me, I don't understand why so many older folks don't consider inflation. It's like you've been tricked into thinking money doesn't massively lose value over time, and been given rose-colored glasses about the 'good ol' days' to stay in denial about it.
@@MX-S Well, that is certainly true. BUT... there is another side to that other than just inflation. Let me give you an example. My Dad like 60 years ago was working at a grocery store @ $2/hour. So, around 1960 or so, his gross earnings per month for normal 40 hour weeks was about $320/month. Don't know how much they would've taken out for taxes, but I'm guessing at the time it probably wasn't much. Okay, so at that salary, he was able to rent a little TWO BEDROOM HOUSE (about $50/month IIRC), buy a relatively new car, AND save up to buy a really nice used BMW motorcycle. Also, he told me that at the time he and my Mom could go to L.A. (we lived near San Diego) for a WEEK, paying for a hotel for all nights, go out to lunch AND dinner, AND see movie every day. The total cost, including driving about 200 miles round trip, was about $100! Also, he and my Mom could drive to downtown San Diego (about 30 miles away) for a day and have lunch at a very nice place called Anthony's, get ice cream, and go see a movie for $10! So, yeah, the equivalence in money/inflation is definitely a factor, BUT... going by what I KNOW was his income and what he was able to do with it, there is *NO WAY IN HELL* that today a person making the rough equivalent could possibly even do 1/10 of what the money could buy at that time. I find that astounding. Decent, but not fancy apartments (NOT a home like we had) in the moderate areas where I live now are around $1600+/month, for a ONE BEDROOM, SMALL APARTMENT! Gasoline, here in California, although thankfully it is going down now, is about $4+/gallon as opposed to maybe 25 cents then. Whatever the reasons (Greed anyone...?) money does not go anywhere NEAR as far as it did just 60 years ago. How that factors in to what you are saying about inflation I don't know... I personally just think it is criminal.
@@MX-S Where did I say, that £7 in 1974 was little money? Anyway. When I come to England, 7£ was for me a lot less than for the Britains. That is not the point. 7£ invested in 1974, about 2000£ or more today. So. If I bought the record for £60.87 today, I could sell the record tomorrow for £2000 or more. But I wouldn‘t of course. You interpreted something into my comment, what I didn‘t write.
Nope, sadly the signal is converted to digital (and then back to analog) and goes on the record. The billboard article I show in the video explains it clearly
Tengo un Denon AVR1611 y declara 0,08 % de THD. Lo tengo desde 2013 y debo decir que me costo mucho hacerlo sonar bien. No obstante no lo digo porque no tenga la electrónica para lograrlo, sino que tiene tanto procesamiento y tantos parámetros para ajustar qué hay que hacerse especialista en estos equipos. Su calidad de sonido depende mucho de la fuete. Con audio digital suena impresionante. No le conectes un deck de cassettes porque suena espantoso. Luego de un tiempo me compré un Marantz PM5005 y en mi sala hago convivir el home theater y en equipo stereo. Desde ya que el Marantz va excelente con cualquier fuente!
I still don’t understand why digital delay is bad. If all it is used for is th determine the width of the cutting groove, isn’t the information put into that groove still the analog signal?
With digital delay, the digital signal (converted) goes on the record. If you watch all the video I show an article from bilbord of 1979 that clearly states it
That’s very interesting information thank you! It would be nice for the elite mastering engineers of today to comment on what they use for the delay. But even if it is analog, the delay tape adds an extra generation copy I was not aware of. I wonder if 45’s could be cut without a delay at all, at a constant pitch?
Very few mastering engineers will ever give out their technique. There are no cutting record schools. There are very few books on the subject and almost nothing on the net. This is a very closed world where people play their cards close to their chest. However, if you want to learn, i suggest you join a forum called "The Secret Society of Lathe Trolls". Good luck!
Cutting vinyl is a complex process where lots of human errors could occur. Lots of anlog processing involved before going to the cutting head. We could easily understand the superiority of Digital audio.
Hence, if the analog signal has been converted from A to D and vice versa for this delay proces the statement that vinyl sounds better than digital does no longer hold water. That said if vinyl compared to digital still sounds nicer to our ears then something else in the chain after the record itself comes in to play. The first thing that comes to mind is the mechanical to electrical conversion done by the phono cartridge. makes sense ? Same goes for tubes. They are not better than transistors but they are adding something to the sound ( a color) a sound hat I like. My 2cents
I think you are quite correct in your reasoning. Many audiophiles do not prefer vinyl despite its shortcomings but because of them. Then they blame digital for not coloring the sound the way vinyl does.
You are right. Some people simply choose the kind of distortion that sounds nicer to their ears. Bottom line, if it sounds good to you, good for you! No need to be purist.
I've watched the video and we are thinking the same about distortion and how pleasant it's to ears. As humans we are analog beings and all our sensors are analog based so to me it makes sense. Your conclusion at the end of the video..? to me it doesn't hold water anymore ?. At that time you. concluded that one has to have a complete analog chain to make this positive harmonic emotion come to life. As we now learned that vinyl is also digital just before the creation of the record however it's still possible to hear " analog" when plying that record ,there's something dominant that's overlooked. Clearly the record with its groves are analog and the mechanical to electrical conversion is also analog. Perhaps this is the dominant factor in the vinyl chain? . making a connection to streaming. Perhaps that's why I prefer the sound of a R2R DAC above a chip dac even though technically compared to a chip its a lesser (older) technology ? food for thoughts :-)
@@hansbogaert4582 The problem with this explanation is that even if we are "analog beings" the preference for analog sound reproduction methods is not universally shared. In addition, when listening to cds or streaming we are indeed listening to analog, converted by a DAC.
Very good, I am a musician, I always known what they did. You need two heads or a delay, no way around that. So i always buy before digital, otherwise you get DIGITAL. There are not enough machines with two heads around, only very very few pressings of today are really analog.
There are many machines with preview heads and many pressing are really all analog. Obviously it doesn't matter for digital recordings but there records today labeled AAA are.
If over 90% of all AAA have this digital step, then I think the problem is not the process, but the audience's beliefs that somehow digital is evil. There is nothing inheritedly wrong with digital. One can argue that the reason why vinyl sounds so good is because the mastering process required to get the material on vinyl makes vinyl sound a particular way and that CDs sound so bad because none of those mastering choices are needed for CD. Nobody could hear the digital in MoFi pressings and everyone praised their one-step releases...The only one person backtracking is Fremer, but that guy has issues.
No, it's over 90% of all records currently produced. Yes mastering is part of it BUT when you buy a 100% analog release like those made by Analog Productions or Speakers Corner or the the Tone Poet bluenote they are at another level. If you don't have a comparison of course the MoFi sound good. They are properly done, butbif you compare them with an original or true AAA edition you immediately hear the difference. Not always of course, but in the vast majority of cases. MoFi never one me, I have only 6 or 7 records by them. Ot even the AAA are that good. I like more their past gold CD remasters.
Ah, yes, although being an avid vinyl guy, I also love a well made SACD. BUT... here you are talk'n DSD64, which is a completely different animal than the 'digital' that is usually talked about. And Quad DSD is another thing altogether 😊 If I may humbly recommend an absolutely fascinating and truly *LIFE-CHANGING* video here on TH-cam which as I just mentioned, honestly changed my viewpoint and understanding. It is by the 'Audio Analyst' E87 where he interviews David Robinson, the owner of Positive Feedback. Just to give you a little teaser... He stated that he and Chad (of all people) and another audio luminary did blind listening tests between the original analog master tapes and Quad DSD copies (4xDSD) Let's just say that the results left ol' Chad a little bit speechless... 😁
Btw, maybe this has been mentioined here before but did you notice that ever since the scandal prices for MOFI releases on discogs have dropped a lot. I am seeing Santana's Abraxas for less than 600 € now. There were times when it couldn't be purchased where less than double that! And my Marvin Gaye MOFI release now also costs 180 € as opposed to the 300 € that I paid and the seller told me it was a good investment as it would most certainly grow in value over time. I can clearly see that now.
In summary: since the early 80s there is a growing number of mastering machines that DON'T use an analog delay (machines with two heads) but only one with a digital delay. That signal is converted to digital, processed, and converted back to analog and then cut on the record. So even if you have an original album on tape in several cases (who knows which?) It will be converted!
Mastering studios were the earliest adopters of digital technology - as you said, in the 1970s - with a digital delay line replacing the preview head; and - as you said - originally at 14-bit. And this was not rare but commonplace and increasingly standardised in the era of vinyl as a mass market format; yet - as you said - many pressings that will have been through this digital step in the mastering chain, from this era, are now regarded as superb examples of the LP format (often collectible and commanding high prices). So what does this tell us? It tells us that AAA in itself is meaningless as guarantor of sonic and musical quality. A well-engineered recording in a great sounding studio tracked with quality equipment will sound fantastic if decently mastered even with a DDL line from the analogue tape feeding the cutter head. Conversely, a poorly made recording will not land on your turntable as an excellent sounding LP, even if Bernie Grundman cuts it AAA. Far from a dirty little secret, but open industry practice from the heyday of mass market vinyl sales. I don't think the musicality of the finished product can ever be reduced to single component or process in the chain from musician's physiology to consumer's phono cartridge.
Right on the money! Considering the fact that vinyl playback dynamic range is equivalent to about 12 bit digital, I'd imagine that the engineers considered 14 bit to be totally adequate for the job.
If it is recorded on analog tape, what does the rest matter? I've got good ears but telling the difference between a digital delay, which, by the way is obsolete for this job once they have created a copy master..
Funny that many people seem to have liked the vinyl despite the digital conversion taking place, being unaware of it. Seems that the digital conversion is relatively benign and does little to alter what gets into the groove. The vinyl seems to alter the sound in a way that pleases people (via its many limitations), which is fine of course. If you like the sound, then the sound is good.
@@pablohrrg8677 Yeah, I was wondering why some vinyls did sound digital even though I knew they were recorded on tape. Always good to listen to the vinyl at the store.
What we are going to see in the future are some vinylphiles getting more and more purist in their choices. The problem of course is that the choice of acceptable recordings gets narrower and narrower with every 'scandal' like this. Finally all the music they can listen to will be first pressings from a certain era. All other recordings must be declared ritually impure, no matter how high their musical and artistic value. If the recording engineer even wore a digital wristwatch during the sessions, the whole project is hopelessly contaminated.
Where did the 99% number come from? All of the US based audiophile mastering engineers I'm familiar with, Bernie Grundman, Kevin Gray, Steve Hoffman, Joe Harley, etc, use an analog preview head. The VMS 80 is not "still available" (6.55) The final Neumann lathe was built in 1987.
Ask mint! Audiophile releases are a drop in the ocean, we all know ow that. Listen to the entire sentence, still available meaning still present in mastering labs. I am mainly Italian so my phrases aren't 100% perfect but I think it was rather clear...
***NOTE: We are asked all the time if we can master directly from analog sources and keep it analog all the way through to lacquer disk. YES! THAT is our specialty and we are one of the very few places in the world that still do it that way!" Quote from Cohearant - Kevin Gray. I know that Bernie Grundman also has and uses the older tape machines. Given that they have the ability to keep things analog - the question is do they keep it analog and if so, what percentage of their mastering is using the digital delay. Further, without having a full disclosure on what studio's are suing when they go to laquer we are lost. This is further amplified by Universal and others being anal about NOT giving information about their releases and whether the source is digital or analog. I suggest that this makes all the statements from MOFI BS. There is a big difference when the master tape is used verses a digital copy. They have basically again proven that their little pictures in thousands of One Steps are lies and that their standard practice is to go from tape to digital to tape to digital delay to laquer. A far cry from tape to laquer then to One Step!
What is the point of "keeping things analog"? I hope you realize that every analog phase in the record making process adds another layer of noise and distortion inherent in any analog method known to man. Analog is a disservice to the original sound of music.
@@nyquist5190 perhaps you should watch a recent interview with Bernie Grundman where he explains that the opposite is true - there are noise and artifacts in digital and the more you use a file the worse it gets.
@@hifilive650 Unfortunately Mr Grundman's opinions are not supported by evidence of any kind. A file getting worse because it is getting used is pure superstition and magical thinking.
@@hifilive650 Mr. Grundman may be a superb recording engineer, but that doesn't make him an expert in digital recording technology. Quite frankly, if he actually said something like that, my opinion of him has dropped. But my guess is that there's a caveat in there, and that is, if you don't know what you're doing, you can add noise and artifacts. In analog recording, even if you know what you're doing, there's noise and distortion added in each and every step.
Yes, correct! That's why i always look for a bar code on the jacket. The whole world seemed to go digital over-night towards the end of the 80s. Bar code readers appeared around the same time as digital delays.... so no bar code on the jacket of an LP is a good sign it's all analogue (as even the stock control would be analogue).
Yes, this is mentioned from about 10 min. into the video onwards. One must fight the temptation of commenting without watching the whole thing... Well, I sometimes do that too, I'm not going to lie, BUT of course, if later on it turns out that I got something wrong I delete or edit the comment...
This might be superfluous but if 16 bit or below digital lathes are the issue maybe somebody could invent a 32 bit AI Smart Lathe. I obviously prefer to have analog through the entire chain but if it's not possible, 32 bit should provide plenty of resolution.
Fortunately sixteen bits are more than enough when cutting historical low res formats like vinyl. I am constantly amazed how so many audiophiles are enthralled by bigger numbers.
@@nyquist5190 Thanks for your insight. That seems shocking since no experienced audio engineer would record, mix or master at 16 bits. 24 bit, 44.1kHz is the minimum. I can hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio, especially in the percussive sounds and dynamics as a whole. To cut vinyl at only 16 bits seems limiting and inaccurate. Vinyl has incredible resolution when played on a professional turntable with a high quality stylus. A friend of mine masters for vinyl, I'm going to ask him. I definitely don't consider myself an audiophile. Open reel 2-track stereo tape is the most expensive, highest quality analog format btw but most audiophiles will never hear the source which is the multitrack 1 or 2 inch tape.
@@RobMentors It is of course utterly unlikely that you can hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit with normal music. 24 bit indeed provides benefits when recording, mixing and mastering. But in the end product it does not. Vinyl's resolution can hardly be described incredible since even 16 bit digital beats it handily. On a good day vinyl's resolution is equivalent of 11 - 12 bits. It is good to realize that you can make an audibly indistinguishable copy of any analog source with 16 bit digital. But you cannot make it vice versa. And that is really all there is to it.
About your last words, regarding the informations that the majors should give to the end users, i think that it would be fair but unnecessary, in any case the infos regarding mastering and the operations coming first of the press and print are not a key to reading of the overall quality of the disc, as you said at the beginning of the clip, also from the 60s are easy to find very good discs, how? Pure recordings, nice takes, i have for example a easy to find and pure audiophile vinyl of "Whipped Cream" by Herb Alpert, printed in Germany under London (1964) and sounds great as many Philips, Decca, Verve, Blue Note and Deutsche Grammophon recordings, another big issue it's about the Loudness war, happening expecially in the modern records, many new productions cannot be definded audiophile due to that. Yes i know, im going Off Topic, reasons to get a good or bad record are a lot, the one that you explained here it's one between many, it's good to know, but at the end our ears are the judge.
Certainly, but the point is that with the AAA excuse they ask tons of money. If quality is there I am glad to pay extra BUT we need to be sure of what we are buying....why? Simple, because EVEN if it sounds good, you still don't know what you're missing if it was, for example, a true AAA instead of a great digital copy. So ears are good but can't know what is best of you don't have a direct comparison. Hence, we need protection and certifications like all quality items.
@@anadialog I agree totally what you say, want my money? You have to describe well what you're selling me and let me say, if my hobby is to be a collector i become ready to pay tons of money for a special vinyl copy, if i'm a listener as many, when someone try to steal me money with exotics excuses but in my hands comes a vinyl disc, i would ask my self: Am I stupid? so i make the question and give myself the answer. Happy music to you and everybody here around!
I've been waiting ages for someone to talk about this. It's the hesitation I have in buying nineties albums. Hopefully people can build up a database of albums that don't have this problem. Surely with microscopes we can record the changing levels of the pitch and the depth on a record, and then use these coordinates to cut a new analogue release
I like to listen to a lot of new music. So what are you suggesting? To stop listen to what I like just because some engineer may or may not have used digital equipment in their mixing? That's the most stupidest thing I ever read. 1. Get a life. 2. Learn to enjoy it.
@@vdochev As in spending the extra money to get an analogue release on vinyl, or saving my money and just getting a cheaper digital version. Most of my music collection is digital for this reason. If we're buying analogue we want a genuine product, and there's potentially a very good market in genuine analogue re-cuts (one in which bands could actually earn a living from record sales)
Would you like to see pictures of analog preview heads at all of the major mastering studios around the world that I have? Will you issue an apology for your spreading this nonsense? Will you take down this video or amend it? I left out of my list Capitol, which is no longer operating but Ron McMaster showed me the preview head he had. The new DGG AAA records will be cut using a special 4 track preview head because they are cutting from 4 track surround masters and mixing live to lacquer ALL ANALOG.
But of course. DGG is catering for the faith based audiophile market where you cannot even mention digital. If they did, their product would not sell. But no one knew this in the 1970s or 1980s when the ritual impurity of digital was not yet invented.
I hope you got my point in the answers below. If this is the message the video is delivering then I will add a specification at the top and pin it. I am in search of the truth here. I would never invent something or make a video without solid info just for click bait. That's not my style. Since the 90's with your DVD, which I still have, you greatly inspired me I hope you will believe my words.
Yeah, the "pros" nowadays have no clue about the deliciousness of tape. I mean, if you never worked with it -- only emulators, if that -- then of course it "doesn't make a difference" and yada, yada, yada about this and that. Whatever, I say, and work with tape. Only then will one's ear know. If not, eh, you're missing out on a, uh, a "phatness" that cannot be digitally replicated. With that being said, I can't wait for the rise of the Tape Engineer! 😃
Analog phatness can be replicated quite simply by making a digital copy of the phat analog. But do we actually want it? As an effect it may sound nice but true music lovers prefer the accuracy only digital can provide.
Dirty little secret: this video is hilariously wrong. I've been to: Abbey Road, Sterling Sound, Cohearent Mastering, Emil Berliner Studios, Blue Heaven, GZ Media and many others and on and on. Where all of the great AAA reissues are cut. They ALL use a preview head not a DDL. Yes Miles Showell who cuts 1/2 speed from digital files doesn't use a preview head. DUH!
That makes me very happy! I am just sorry that you didn't understand my point because you are one among others who got me interested in this and I think it's quite shocking that starting in the late 70's several records had this last digital conversione, that's what the video is all about.
Once again, I know! That is not the message and I never said this in the video. I am talking about random AAA productions and past productions during the 80's and 90's. In fact in the other comments I clearly said that this does not regard audiophile labels.
Way too alarmist, I think, when there's easy solution for it nowadays. After all it's not necessary to feed cutting head with delayed digitized signal. You can first make digital audio file from your analogue tape, and use this digital audio to feed groove pitch controller. This digital audio would start in advance of analogue tape audio, exactly one rotation time before. Then the analogue tape audio would be the one which is delayed, and with this one the cutting head would be fed. For instance GZ Media offers this option for you.
@@anadialog Sure, you are absolutely right to press the issue. But not everyone has a Neumann cutting lathe. We have to be open for new ideas as long as we get analog sound.
@@anadialog If an independent band/label wants fully analogue print, they can do. I believe in pressing plants are analog loving people who are willing to go through that. But major labels just want cash for minimum work, they will usually not roll out their analog master tapes for vinyl reissues of their back catalog, when they have digital backups already. They just send digital files to pressing plants and tell them to do whatever they can. At least they use 192/24 quality, I believe. But to be fair, I would be careful to bring out precious master tapes too, moreover old tapes deteriorate with time and at one point the digital backups will be the best what we will have.
@@StackOverflow80 I think caring for the master tape is the thing, not necessarily because they have less work with digital. They know for sure they can get a few $ extra when advertising AAA. On the other hand, the world is flooded with music over the decades, so there is always the niche to produce AAA. It's not an issue to play the master tape every 10 years for a lacquer cut.
@@allthatyoutouch3164 Bro... C'mon man I'm obviously teasing you. Didn't you see the smiley? Since I don't know you, clearly how can I mean it seriously... I just thought that would be a funny way to reply to you because of the way you worded what you said, that's all... Chill mate! ✌
@@nyquist5190 Go look at their playback machines, You can clearly see the loop and the analog preview head. Joe Harley has posted dozens of videos on his Facebook showing them cutting records.
Great!! Now we need full provenance on all LP's? Now we need to know the mastering equipment used on each LP? Soon will need to know the tape use in making the master tape and not only that, which tape machine was use to produce it! This hobby is starting to be more problems than it's worth. I suggest we forget about all this and judge each record on it's on merit. Either the records sounds good to you or it doesn't. It really doesn't matter as much as we make it. A lousy engineer can have the best equipment available and still produce crap.
No, you certainly do not need full provenance on all LPs. Instead audiophiles should learn how digital and analog signals actually work instead of magical thinking.
If only they charged a fair price I personally wouldn't have any problem, BUT when I am paying dozens and in some cases hundreds of euro/dollars we deserve more clarity. All quality items have certification, why not music? Can't judge for myself, that would mean that I already made the purchase!
Nope, no confusion, unfortunately this is 100% solid. If you are using a machine without 2 heads but only one, the original signal is for groove pitch which is contemporarely digitized and sent to the lathe regulated by the electronics that have analyzed the signal amplitude. I also inserted an article in the video where this is CLEARLY stated. Also Kevin Grey stated this in a interview on Stereophile and in his own recent video. Plus, the president of Speakers Corner in my interview with him he stated this. The link is in the video description.
Thanks for you mature answer. Yes, as explained in the video, tape machines with two playback heads. For example Analogue Productions have a Studer with two heads for an analog delay and obviously Coherent Audio and Speakers Corner etc. but several others don't.
At the end of the day, if you enjoy it, what does it matter? If it's "the best of the best" why does it matter? You can't get any better, so why are you complaining? It wouldn't sound that good otherwise would it? I get the whole analog snobbery, but please, get over yourselves. you're all just pissed because you all thought "analog" was the pinnacle. And you've all had your pants pulled down en masse.
This story is total bullshit. We all know that DDLs were in use for a number of years replacing preview heads. BUT ALL OF TODAY'S AAA ALBUMS ARE CUT USING A PREVIEW HEAD.
I didn't say that. I said that some AAA productions maybe have a tape recorder without an analog preview head, clearly not quality audiophile releases as analogue productions. Moreover, I was referring mainly to the past when AAA was normal so a digital preview sounded probably cool not knowing about yhe damage. In fact, I cited you Michael on the 8bit digital preview in Japanese recordings...do you confirm that?
Hi, First analysis: Yes that's shocking, that's why reel to reel will and always will the best not digital signal transform, as well as very simple print method, we need back reel to reel for mass market! That's also why 45 rpm is stuck endlessly saying that the original from 70's pressing are always better! Anyway you don't say how the digital delay impact the signal is it a full adc then dac, or just a digital analysis of the peak which control an analog delay box, that totally different, in that case if it's for analog delay which digital control the impact isn't an issue at all! Also it can be mixed with the analog signal? So the resolution in that case isn't an issue, because 8 bit for the analysis of a peak on an average 75 db, is already sufficient. Also this is certainly for the bass frequency range which after experiment if not above 120Hz, could quiet accurately be sampled! The fact that vinyl are 99% digital in not as clear as you tell it because digitally controlled analog circuitry don't make things digital. (i suspect that's it is the case, digital controlled analog delay circuitry) Regarding the resolution i suspect clearly what 45rpm is calling a more compressed dynamic range due to low resolution of this digital part, having 24 bit one would allow better dynamic range of the signal! Remember that for an analog 48db a 8 bit signal sampling makes 0.19db step, so you need at least 12-16 bit to have correct steps, Also if the analysis is based on all the signal it's much impacting because an analog 75 db dynamic range require 24bits. In fact as for the frequency , you need at least twice the analog dynamic range to sample correctly it if you don't want to high db steps (distortion), in fact 0,01 db step are sufficient to not be noticeable whereas 0.19db are! Making a simple cassette tape the equivalent of a 16/24 bit res fill in term of db steps!!! (the more you have to sample a range the more analog volume you get 24bit of 48analog db is just 1,11758715615e-08 db step, not fabulous but sufficient), ok 16 bit is about 7,3222634947e-05, theoretically sufficient but practically insufficient as a 16 bit stream don't produce the same loudness as the 24 bit one for the same dynamic range, why still don't know! Edit: Definitively not digital it's a mechanical digital speed control (5ms speed delay correction nothing in common with sampling, and dac added to the source, Anyway there isn't any information in the article you mention to be 100% sure! even if it's clearly writted solid state device, that don't mean necessary digital processing device as known as today! Showed this to 45 rpm he got master skilled engineers whose should really confirm! Edit 2: I do state that no, vinyl AAA with this still stay an AAA for that simple reason if it would be digital, there isn't any need to use the tape anymore just a full DAA chain and that's insn't the case for the best producing plant still today whose still use analog eq + analog reverb! Also DAA vinyl cutting don't sound the same as AAA vinyl cutting with digital speed control (speed delay)! As i always saying, don't confuse digital control , with digital sound processing! So don't worry guys it's just misinformation/not well understood information your AAA vinyl are 100% analog (unless you buy mofi's ones or not respectful AAA companies) even with this digital speed delay (the only impact is a less eccentric dynamic range, which unfortunately is a much more realistic dynamic range and closer to the master what 45rpm confirm with old original pressing), by chance the vinyl HD would never comes, this one for the case was digital craps for economical purpose! Edit 3: Also remember that even with digital sound processing which i of course does not recommend, the final product is analog (There isn't any steps (distortion) in a traditional vinyl cutting, it's just a matter before cutting how you are close to the analog master). You can learn here that unfortunately again for economical purpose the perfect analog master would always be the reel copy! As for digital sound, the perfect master is the digital master, a vinyl cutting of a digital master would definitively alter it, fortunately in a better way as we know today that digital (inferior to analog never better, just can be closer to it) distortion are higher for higher frequency range starting for 192Khz/24 bit around 1Khz, putting those distortions into analog support does make a natural anti-aliasing effect still better than DSD512! (estimation to be confirmed in the future perhaps if those dac could go higher than 768Khz/24Bit/DSD512(1Bit) of equality around 6144Khz/24Bit/DSD 4096 for a 30Khz pure sinus, fortunately it would be unusable, making analog for the rest of the time of the humanity the best support for analog waves video/audio) Of course digital has also advantage no physical issues, and fast editing whose for the end listener hasn't any interest and are completely deleted by the power and space needed for a DSD512/768Khz/24Bit Decoding! Edit 5: I armed myself, so edit 2 well confirmed, digital delay isn't digital sound processing, to summarize it sample thought analog circuitry and in the worst case a pcm dac the signal amplitude, to drive the latch witch print was is called the preview sound, the goal is to target a maximum peak level doing a compression confirming first analysis 45 rpm part. Lazy and economical method, The full analog way make better result as it use the head analog compression. The best one is avoiding completely the compression part, but that require, a full listening as well as test pressing and of course no "today pointless?" (average time side 16 mn max at 33rpm...still left 8 minutes, plus if yu print at odb instead of +6....) space optimization! (for audiophile production facility it's the way to go) Anyway no digital vinyl, it just to avoid the latch to overcome the groove. So it's a digitally controlled mechanical drive with practically no impact on the sound except for the dynamic! Call it a digital controller mechanical limiter! Long life to analog.
I am afraid that you are creating misinformation. You are analyzing the pitch control part of the Neumann lathes which are indeed analog electronics. You are focusing on the pitch part, which is indeed analog. If you read the Billboard article is says, above the part I read in the video, that it is a 16 bit digital delay, which below it is clearly written that the delay is the program going on the record and the direct-to-tape signal is used to calibrate the groove width (pitch). Here is a Stereophile article where Kevin Gray states in an interview that a lot of people use digital delay while he instead uses analog (are you going to believe him or is he misinformed?): www.stereophile.com/content/kevin-gray-vinyl-mastering-master As stated in the video this information was clearly exposed by the PRESIDENT of Speakers Corner in a review I did a few months ago: th-cam.com/video/A405QH55cNk/w-d-xo.html (at 16:28) is even Kai Seeman misinformed? Most mastering facilities after the Neumann used the Zuma system and now several mastering studios are using the DJR Disc computer (KEvin Gray in fact uses this one). Here is the manual where it clearly says that the signal is converted: wwww.dkse.net/Discomp.Manual.US.pdf on page 15 but there are several solutions. The important fact is: If you don't have a tape recorder WITH TWO HEADS (analog delay) then you are mastering with a digital delay (signal is split one for the pitch, one for the signal) and that conversion is clearly used also to adjust the signal eq, RIAA curve etc. and then converted back to analog and cut on the lacquer.
@@anadialog don't have too much time for now but i will read all of this, i can assure you however that you're wrong it's the tape delay on what i focus, there are three type head based, analog circuitry, and pcm dac samplng the worst as it can add jitter. All of them has the purpose to limit the peak signal. it's a compression method based on a delay. All of them use only the amplitude analysis to do it. The input signal is delayed by this peak limited to control the latch! The input signal stays the preview one but the latch control is using the second one! there is no adc then dac on the input signal it's too early for that! No processor where available at that time to make a full digital sound processing!
@@anadialog you're wrong i read fastly the kevin gray article as well as the manual you provided! It's a mechanical feeding purpose, It's well written that there are sampling L/R/Pitch for driving purpose! The head based as well as the analog circuitry are equal, only the PCM dac is introducing jitter in the driving! The djr Discomp is a computer used to adjust the PITCH and DEPTH on Neumann VMS 66/70 disc mastering lathes. The Discomp also has utility functions related to disc cutting. I don't see any sound processing function!!! Also: A lot of people are taking a two-track analog machine and using a digital delay to create a split signal that feeds the computer and the cutter head (footnote 2) The unit accepts line level inputs of left and right preview signals. These signals are passed through a filter which rolls off high frequencies so as to simulate the amplitude of the cut signal. The signals are then digitized and passed to the microprocessor. The unit computes the peak signal of the left from the previous revolution and the current right peak, and uses this to generate the Lateral signal. This is then delayed to output effectively as the signal enters the cutting head. The out of phase signal L-R is generated and used to determine the Vertical output. this is applied again after a delay. This signal is also averaged and applied to the LV output. You confuse a digital driving with a digital sound! Everything finish as analog voltage! Where do you see standard digital sound which consist of reading binary data of a stream them processing it to a dac which then give sound voltage from these 0/1.in order to produce analog waves!! Also driving a head fully analog or digitally is a little of concern! The finishing would be an analog signal as the cutting process use voltage power for printing a groove. It's the same thing for the first printer whose add a digital control onto a mechanical head, when you look as these print there isn't anything common with a digital printer! Just analyze a groove with a microscope you won't see any digital step! Again it is not a big concern that the cutting process is driven digitally or fully analog, the result would be quiet the same jitter excluded! it's the same discussion for the turntable with direct drive + jitter, and belt driven + flutter, does that make the sound digital, no, the sound better well yes perhaps or no , it's difficult to tell! Explain me where is the gain except being more AAA, and the end everything go thought the computer! That not digital sound, that's digitally controlled mechanical device. Explain me how you want to cut without a driving controller, with your hand! With your way of thinking everything is digital, because an analog synthesizer digitally controlled would finish digital sound. NO, it's analog sound digitally produced(controlled) You've gone to far saying vinyl is digital, please find the vinyl with a c64 program hidden and here what's digital stream of 0 and 1 produce on an analog groove, unbearable sound.layered in analog sinus waves or prove that you can see aliasing onto a groove 0 or 1! No vinyl is 100% analog product, using a microphone to reproduce the sound. The input quality is essentially the source material not the cutting process(even if too much digital than necessary at this point is unwanted) When you record a VHS which is also 100% analog you're using digitally controlled device... Don't know about JVC best picture technology, it's doing the same thing that for vinyl cutting with this time a processor to control the reading. Does it makes the vhs digital, NO! And the best of all, the revox B77, PR99, studer, balfinger devices digitally controlled are perhaps also digital sound! Or perhaps oberhein did digital sounding synthesizers! Ok you want to be Audiophile the best process, but NO VINYL WOULD NEVER BE DIGITAL. People are confusing digital sound with analog sound using digital input, vs analog input, device digitally controlled vs sound produced by a binary stream! analog synthesizers with virtual analog ones. And if you think that digital delays in the cutting process does remove the AAA, of a vinyl then please prove it microscope two different pressing and prove it! I do love analog sound, i'm 95% using analog device, synthesizers but quiet all the time i have digital control on them! I even regret digital control for the inputs on my revox in addition with the analog ones! Always said digital control is not an enemy of analog sound, it's direct digital processing which is!
I have no business interest, and hate digital audio/video even my synthesizers have analog device converted for digital control if we could remove most digital in the people life except a few things (communication, Device control, video game...) i would be the first to do it. (in fact i'm doing it, unfortunately not all people) It's awful to live only with a smartphone as all analog device simulator, without any physical media, but i must admit that digital control, are welcome as soon as it never alter the sound path, and here it's the case! You cannot say vinyl is digital because some are using digital late control! It's not true! Therefor you couldn't prove it on the finished product. When i'm telling digital sound/video is inferior (not in all aspect), i have proof, because unless you have them no interest! Ok you've found that it's not full aaa control, but it's still full aaa sound except if input signal is digital and even in this case it wont be prof on the finished product, just a sound a bit different! Audiophile release deserve more interest in respect of the master, but if digital control improve the space/quality with not sound path alteration, why not, double headed decks are no more available, but a lot of people have Neumann lathes, it would be a shame to not use them just because they do not have a double headed deck,! However i would recommend them to switch back to in between mode, analog circuitry, even if less precise (not sure about this) groove optimization would be achieved!
I don't agree with framing everything as analog vs. digital. Digital is every bit as good and even better, as long as the technicians know what they're doing. If they don't, it's going to sound bad, regardless of whether it's analog or digital.
You missed the point of the video. We are talking about transparency and that most AAA records of the past, aren't. In terms of quality, the low number of bits is objective
@@anadialog I got the point. To me, it really isn't provocative that there's a digital step in vinyl production. I'm 85% into classical music, where the use of digital processes has always been a) transparent, and b) beneficial to sound quality.
I really wanted to be polite and professional with my comments, but I think I’m just gonna go with grow up it’s not 1950s anymore just except the fact that things are not going to go back in time the people that used to produce manufacture operate all these analog leads I’ve been long dead the expertise are not there in the industry anymore for analog people claim to know what they are doing but often the sound is terrible. I love vinyl LPs I have a model set up Technics turntable I got NAD power amp NAD preamp NAD phono amp I think you are really taking what is a brilliant way of listening to music a nice hobby. I’m running with it a little bit too far. I mean if you really wanna go back to analog go back to wax cylinders on a really old manual wind up phonograph purely analog but that sounds crap. Take what you’re given pick out what you like. If you don’t like something don’t buy it simple us take into account. We are living in 2022 Where 1940s 50s technology is not being invested in and the expertise in that particular industry are not there anymore. Yes I know people are gonna 99 disable. What about this version? What about that person? What about this company? Yes, but they are all self taught or at least thirdhand information on what they know and I’m sorry if that upsets anybody enjoying music. Anyway, you like it when you start getting too technical and getting upset about the sauce and the mastering then I’m sorry to say you’ve taken it too far and you’re no longer enjoying the music and I will say this out loud if the analog version is not good enough on vinyl, listen to it on CD all the problems that you are related to in this video with EQ curves and so on I’m not a problem on CD or digital download, but yes I know that’s not analog which is the whole idea of the channel
Cool info, but I don't see any problem here. If it works, it works. No sound engineer who mixes professional recordings cares about your or my opinion. They just do their job however they see fit. Yes, there exist bad mixes, but really no one cares. You just don't like it and move along.
The problem is the same of MoFi you are paying for a specific item (in the AAA cases)...and it's the opposite. Since this regards tape, it is a problem related to a wealth of so-called audiophile editions, plus, it means that even normal analog Productions of the 80's and 90's if the payback machines didn't have a second head it means that those are all digital. Finally, the conversion is Cary out not but reference DACs, hence and even more poor sound quality.
Why are so many people unable to create a literate sentence these days, perhaps they should read what they have typed in before publishing. Perhaps it wouldn't make a difference though.
@@MARTIN201199 Heh, in my post above where I recommended the video about this, David Robinson, the owner of Positive Feedback suggested that the guys at Abbey Road should get off their @sses and dump their use of PCM (24/192) and start using Quad DSD 😊
I think the max volume to ear buds, so kids would not destroy their hearing, was litigated to the point where record companies could not be sued by kids with diminished hearing from loud digitized music thru the Devices” “everyone’ IS FED BY TH-cam, just follow the Money, SO sad.
![ANA[DIA]LOG](http://yt3.ggpht.com/50CpmGNilS8aoMlarZVhI_GxRDoZdbj4ZgwCMZXg-Rq2PrEvCytlE6RVyLUrNY-rwE_sAlZ1Zw=s48-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj)
ATTENTION! Some viewers have misinterpreted the message here and I was probably not very clear. Digital delay is NOT present in the current quality AAA productions that we all know and adore. I was mainly referring to the shocking fact that since the late 70's several records that we all believe being analog (AAA) have actually been cut with a digital delay and there is practically almost know way to know which had it and which not. Moreover, I SUPPOSE that other current random AAA productions made occasionally by lables who don't usually make AAA records may have in fact used a digital delay, perhaps not even knowing it since ity takes place in the lacquer mastering phase. As Michael Fremer pointed out Abbey Road, Sterling Sound, Cohearent Mastering, Emil Berliner Studios, Blue Heaven, GZ Media and many others all use analog delay tape heads when mastering and I would add also Quality Record Pressings. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
This is a great video!
I recently produced my first all analog Album. Recording and Mixing all analog was something I knew enough about and so that worked out fine. When it then came to mastering and cutting all analog I started to find out that almost all companies who offer this service can't even do it all analog. They have like you said a digital step before the cutting. I was shocked because they are often getting analog master tapes and then before cutting they are converting it to a digital file to then put it on a analog format. Crazy!
I finally found the Emil Studios in Berlin who have the right gear (Studer with a pre head...) and went there with my Mix tapes to have it mastered and cut all analog. I hope with time poeple will understand this part of the AAA process better and we will get more analog cutting from the analog tapes.
Keep up the great work!!!
Thanks for this real-world feedback and congratulations for insisting!
P.S. I just ordered "Grace" from Amazon!
@@anadialog Wow! Thank you. I hope very soon many more new albums will be made this way.
that's a lie
Guido doesn't know what he's talking about. That's not a 'dirty secret'. It's obvious.
I was a cutting engineer back in the 80's (1984) and I was lucky enough to have been handed a brand new, state of the art lathe, the Neumann VMS-80 SX-74. That was the only one lathe I ever worked with as a mastering engineer.
This fabulous vinyl-cutting lathe included a Neumann SP-79 mastering console and a SAL 74B amp rack, paired with an MCI JH110B mastering 2-track tape player with two 1/4" heads with delay mechanism for normal and half-speed cutting.
I agree with 99% of what you say in the video, because I lived all that myself. But I strongly disagree with the 1% of what you stated, which is that this lathe cut a digital conversion of what was played on the tape and used the analog content just to prepare the lathe for the changes needed to be done to get a perfect cut.
Well, I know that for the lathe and array of components I came to know like my hand, this is not entirely true. The feed being cut into the acetate was the analog one, from the second head (delayed), of the tape player. The other analog feed, coming from the first head, was fed to the electronics in the SAL 74B rack, so that the filters and other electronics could provide the proper signals for the cutter to automatically adjust pitch, depth, and other non-musical tasks, instead of having to do it manually as in the VMS-70. T
I believe this is the biggest difference between these two great lathes.
This automation embedded into the VMS-80 allowed the cutting engineer to focus entirely on the nuances of the music, mastering and enhancing what was to be cut to make a better sounding, commercially and/or artistically desirable, final cut. I know this because I've been there, done that. Many, many times.
I became a mastering engineer thanks to this marvelous Neumann lathe.
Thank you for the beautyful and well done video
I think you are really saying the 99% of what he said is wrong, since the part he got wrong was the point of making the video. Thanks for your comment.
Nope! You're getting mistaken. You didn't listen with attention. When you have 2 heads obviously you are cutting analog, that is analog delay! It's when you DON'T have two heads that you have a digital delay because you are using only one head like the Ampex model I have shown in the video.
@@allanmoorhead6546 I am now saying tha it is 100% right. Please read the comments below. Thank you for your comment.
@@franciscojosecastanedojord3457 thanks Francisco!
The video is a lie.
Thank you Guido for another well thought-out and well presented video. I remember this detail in your interview with Kai Seeman of Speaker's Corner, and I was shocked by it.
This scandal comes down to honesty in marketing and truth in packaging for the audiophile community, one which more than others has the knowledge and expectation of truth in the details.
I look at audiophile labels in the classical world and, pre-digital, some labels (Decca, Everest, Mercury, RCA, etc.) go into excruciating detail about specific microphones, tape recorders, cutting amplifiers, and cutting lathes used. Early stage digital labels would market and trumpet the new digital technology. I have a Decca album from 1980 that uses one-third of the backside jacket devoting four paragraphs to the new technology and how it revolutionizes the sound.
All honest. All true. All respecting the listener.
Makes me glad that I buy only used records pressed from the early fifties to the mid-sixties. At least I know these are fully analog which I love and enjoy. (And I spell "analogue" as "analog" so no one will know I'm such a late boomer, who hates hipsters who call records "vinyls.")
😂
"This scandal comes down to honesty in marketing and truth in packaging for the audiophile community, one which more than others has the knowledge and expectation of truth in the details. "
It is the audiophile community who cannot handle the truth about digital at all. The Mofi scandal and the dirty little secret of this video - a secret which has been common knowledge for forty years to everyone else - tell clearly and unambiguously that digital has been acoustically transparent for decades. I know, this is a bitter pill to swallow.
The story is a LIE
Thanks for this nice presentation and summary of the digital delay. While it is a well-known procedure amongst the pros of the industry and for most of the engineers involved in the musical production, many audiophiles are still unaware of all the technical steps needed to produce a vinyl record, from the recording until the LP slides out from the press. Your video also highlights why the SPARS code is (and always was) an inaccurate tool to track the devil (=digital conversion) within the conception and birth of a record.
Most audiophiles are well aware that this story is total nonsense. None of the records made today labeled AAA are cut using DDL. They all use preview heads. This story is nonsense.
Guido, you hit the nail on the head! This is one of the MAIN reasons I still do not own a turntable (I have plenty of DSDs - and tapes - that sound very analog WITHOUT any of the issues associated with LPs). If I need to mimic the ANALOG sound, I use a graphic EQUALIZER (YEAH, graphic EQ, a dirty word in the audiophile community! Experience the Schiit Lokius EQ yourself to see what I am talking about - this thing is amazing) or record the DSD music to my analog tapes using "musician's /high distortion" tapes such as EMTEC/RTM SM468 or 3M 206. BTW, I have read about the ADD-1 from Ampex years ago - another reason I despise modern vinyls!
But they’re nice to hold 😅
@@gdwlaw5549 you mean the LPs? I'd argue that it is a lot nicer to hold and watch the reel to reel tapes spinning!
This story is a steaming load of nonsense.
the story is nonsense
Nice video, as a camera buff I can't help but note that you have to lock in your white balance before recording so that you don't have varying color temperatures during the shoot.
I use to be hardcore about only trying to get AAA records but I have given up on that. I have digitally sourced recordings that sound better than the AAA variants and vice versa. AAA vs digital is simply too rudimentary a technique to judge which version will sound better. This thought process really sunk in with a couple of recently purchased RVG stamped mint records (Up With Donald Byrd and Reach Out! by Hank Mobley) that couldn't match the sound quality of digitally sourced versions. In my experience, the most reliable way to determine quality without listening is digging up info on mastering house and pressing plant (when available) or just reading discog reviews.
Yep, his face colour changes during the video - the more evil things he's talking about, the more red his face turns haha!
The color shifts give the video “character”.
Probably better to lock the settings before recording for a stable look.
Thank you for your detailed explanation. I have many vinyl albums that I thought were sold as all analogue, yet my digital version of the same recording sounds better and for less money. For me the best source material is reel to reel tape. I used to buy tape sparingly because of the cost, but with some of the supposedly high end vinyl records costing around $500, (what a joke), I find myself buying more and more tapes. I have never purchased a tape that I was not happy with, yet I purchased many expensive vinyl records that were just imperfect in many ways. They were not flat, not concentric, plastic flashing in the center hole and around the outside perimeter of the album, the label is off-center, hair line scratches, early pressing are better than later pressings. etc. Vinyl making is just an imperfect, hit or miss process.
This story is NONSENSE.
Before digital and analog delay lines, they used playback decks with two playback heads, one mounted several inches in front of the other so that the engineer could hear the music before it hit the lathe. This allowed the engineer to change the track pitch for loud and soft passages on the fly. And yes, this has been replaced with digital delay lines. The audio put down on vinyl is run through a digital delay line, giving the engineer the time necessary to react to changes needed in track pitch. The fact that no one ever complains of these records "sounding digital," and that people even praise them for not "sounding digital," is a bit telling, no?
Good digital is completely transparent.
The mofi "scandal" says it all ! Mike Esposito (from the in groove) even said that his best sounding vinyl record is the mofi one-step of Santana's Abraxas, and that record was mastered with a digital DSD 256 file !!!
It is time that the damn big record companies start to master their compact discs good again like in the ealy 80's !!
The very first japanese compact disc of Micharl Jackson's Thriller from 1983 is a good example how good a well mastered CD can sound.
@@lucalone The problem with early CD's (and there IS a big problem with some of them) is that they were made not from the original studio master recordings, but from vinyl masters prepared (equalized, de-essed, and compressed) for making vinyl records. The compression, equalization, etc., needed to make the vinyl sound good sounded terrible when released on CD, which did not have the limitations of vinyl that these adjustments were meant to compensate for.
@@ScottGrammer that is sometimes true, yes. And now just imagine if they would really do a good mastering in 2022 with the original master tapes ! Those compact discs would sound absolutely fantastic !
But like I said before: damn those big greedy record companies !
Peace.
I too find it a bit telling. People like the distortion that the Vinyl system applies to sound, it is pleasant and musical, even if the source is digital. I personally do not like vinyl records but I do find them very atmospheric whenever I hear them. It is just something that is not suited to every kind of recorded music. Classical and live recordings tend to lack something on vinyl in my view.
@@phrtao can you describe atmospherical ?
Singles are usually cut at a constant pitch so no need for a pre-play tape head on the tape machine or an electronic delay in the signal chain.... Engineers know they only have about 5 min of land to work with so the LPI (lines per inch) can be easily calculated. Most 7" and 12" singles are cut at a constant pitch and without program delay. That's why i love singles!
They could also benefit from a delay for the purpose of creating a look-ahead time for a limiter
@@Paul58069 For sure but, any limiting would be better done during the multi-track mix-down to master tape stage. It is possible to use an analogue automated mixing console or an outboard limiter controlled by a S.M.P.T.E. time code that you have pre-written to a single track of the tape.
Unless you are referring to "acceleration limiting" which is used to limit only high end. This can be done on the fly while cutting without delay but you still should really have all those issues sorted at the mastering stage.
In this instance we are using "delay" to control only "land" (i.e. how close you pack the grooves together).
Bass occupies more "real estate" on the disc than mid range and high end so, when cutting the disc, you need to know (one revolution ahead) when the bass will arrive at the cutting head. So that you can increase pitch (the speed at which the cutter traverses across the disc). Once the heavy bass has passed you can slow the pitch down again and cram the grooves closer together. This variable pitch process allows you to put up to up to 30 minutes on a side of an LP.
If you cut at a constant pitch you only need to set the pitch speed for the loudest/bassist part of the program which will limit you to around 15 minutes per side of an LP.
On one side of an album you may have 5 tracks... two tracks heavy in bass with high dynamics and three ballads with quiet bass passages.
Unless of course you just compress the hell out of everything. Then you don't need to worry.
The beauty of cutting a 3 minute song to 7" disc that can hold a up to 5 minutes of music is, you have plenty of land to just set the pitch to the loudest and most bass heavy passages. Thus eliminating the need for delay.
@@janedoe6350 In part you are right. But a mixing engineer is not a mastering engineer and a mastering engineer is not a cutting engineer. This can, and almost always will be, three different persons. Only the cutting engineer will know if the are any peaks left that need to be dealt with. So yeah, a short look-ahead time when transferring the master tape to the laquer could be beneficial, even for 45's..
@@janedoe6350 You appear to be the only person in this video that knows what they're talking about. The digital delay or any delay fo that matter is used for the land. But, it appears a lot of people in these threads think the digital delay signal is what is cut into the vinyl as audio.
@@djpopcorn Here's the thing. The digital delayed signal IS used to cut the audio (because it comes later). The true original signal (the look ahead) goes to the computer to calculate the land. It has to because it comes first..... while the digitally delayed signal arrives at the cutting head one revolution later. (555 mili-seconds for 33.3 rpm & 750ms for 45 rpm)
So the the quality of the audio is determined by the quality of the delay.(be it an analogue delay or a digital delay).
The way it is done in analogue is that the tape machine has two playback heads spaced the correct distance apart in relation to the tape speed.
Good evening, have you dealt with the subject of the CD player clock? THANKS
I haven’t yet, though jitter these day is really down to minimum
I would also add that a digital master can sound really good. If vinyl forces producers to stop the loudness wars and produce a better mix, it's already worth the price of admission. This is useful information though and it actually may explain why vinyl sounded different in the 80s.
You’re right, Benny. For me that’s the bottom line about vinyl. If it sounds great and it helps us to avoid the horrible loudness wars, it doesn’t matter if it’s digital.
Yup, stated that in dozens of my videos...
Loudness war started in the vinyl era already. SP records could be easily hot-cut, so some labels began to use it in the sixties. Recently I bought LP version of some modern album, made a test record into computer and when I saw a waveform, I first thought, that my cartridge or preamp had some serious trouble. The waveform in the bassy parts was clipped. Tried another vinyls and no problem. The mix of this particular album was already digitally brickwalled and clipped in digital domain and in this form got onto the vinyl...
Yes, sound of vinyl records changed in 80s, because modern music generally started to be recorded and mastered digitally. They even advertised it on the package, because back then this was a good selling point. Digital was a buzzword and everybody wanted to be digital...
@@anadialog You did!
@@StackOverflow80 Generally speaking, lots of time, even modern vinyl sounds better. Of course, there are many exceptions, but there is something to be said that audiophiles have kept vinyl alive. I think the problem with digital is that, analog is a lot more idiot proof. It's a lot harder to make a digital recording sound good. Analog is a ton more forgiving. A digital recording pressed on vinyl may sound even better because of the nature of analog.
You totally right, Sir,
there are a lot of unsolved issues by new vinyl pressing,
but the costs saving forcing the pressing plant produce cheaper stuff,
they even don't thinking to improving something... MOSTLY OF THEM, - NOT ALL ...
pressing plants generally have little to do with mastering but the ones that do including Optimal and GZ can cut true AAA. I know hecause unlike Guido I'VE BEEN TO BOTH PRESSING PLANTS.
@@trackingangle929 agreed !
appreciate for clear !
@@trackingangle929 what about MFSL ? they have said AAA, but it was digital, many of them ! i don't regret to have sold my Santana Abraxas ONE-STEP , it didn't sound natural at all !
Video super interessante! È possibile sapere in che formato digitale è convertito il segnale per il delay? 44,1 khz 16 bit o più?
Grazie! Depende dalle macchine...ora si viaggia come minimo in qualità CD ma anche oltre
Exactly. That's what I tell all my analog-head friends at parties - _". . . and that's why all this time you've been gloating while actually listening to digitally sourced audio, sometimes even worse than 16-bit. It turns out you just like hiss, pops, crackle, warble, and lacking bass! Ha ha ha!"_ - Then they leave wide-eyed and then can't sleep for several days.
Guido HASN'T A CLUE
could we talk about the mix for streaming. Where do the platforms’ sources come from?
From the labels who prepare a dedicated master (ultracompressed in case of Spotify)
Very very interesting! You've helped bring out the root of mastering techniques almost no one was aware of. I can't seem to find Mint magazine website?
www.mintmag.de/
the video is a lie
The story is a total fabrication
I don't understand why it should be so expensive for the extra tape head. Most reel to reel decks that I used in the past have 3 heads (Erase, Record and Playback heads). This allows the person recording to monitor the recording. You're able to listen to the actual tape with less than one second delay after the record head. How hard would it be to wire a deck to allow for two playback heads?
The cutter needs more delay to adjust the groove pitch. So it has to be a completely separate head further apart from the standard playback head
@@Paul58069 I see. That makes sense cause it's a mechanical operation not just electronic. In the ole college Audio Club we used to put one tape machine on the table and run the tape a couple of feet to the other making for a long delay. I think we had to fool one of the machines by holding down the tape tensioner so we could use the take up reel on the other. We got all kinds of fun effects out of the two machines that way. Not a really precise thing but it worked.
The problem is that spacing between the preview and playback heads needs to be pretty long, about 28 inches for a 15 IPS tape. At 8.48 in the video you can see a diagram on the machine with the different tape lacing patterns to give the correct distance for cutting from 7.5, 15, and 30 IPS tapes.
@@jimromanski2702 same deal, only a cutting facility would want to have more precision and repeatablity :)
It's not just the head, you practically have to change the whole trasport. Plus there wasn't a standard production. All these quality recorders are mastering recorders, in the sense of cresting the master tape from the mix, so that also made things more difficult hence you needed another machine and those were very expensive as well. When vinyl went down, several modifi8mschiens were reconverted or sold...very few existing know and nobody could create a new one if not for $200k or so
Do you know if Analogue Production records especially the UHQR are real AAA? There own factory walk around video let us see their reel to reel machines...but ... I couldn't see any with a needed double head....
So, please let me know your mind which company or label does real AAAs. Thank you in advance.
Yes of course! They have studers with analog delay. They are truly AAA editions.
THEY ARE ALL ANALOG. THIS STORY IS COMPLETE NONSENSE.
6:42 is this why I noticed that records made starting in this era sound so much better than the records made before that? I had guessed that they changed the formula and/or manufacturing process for the raw vinyl. Did they do that too?
Guido can't answer because he knows nothing. His video is just conjecture and much of it is wrong.
Wow. Shocked. Especially the fact that the digital signal is what’s used to cut.
So basically unless there’s an analogue preview head we’re getting a digital recording.
All the more reason to stick with tape, original pressings, or transparent labels
Indeed!
THE STORY IS A GIANT LIE
@@trackingangle929 hey Michael! That’s a huge allegation: “giant lie”. What is wrong here? It would be cool if you presented some evidence or thoughts to support what part is the “Giant Lie”. Since you’re a journalist I’m sure you don’t just throw out allegations without support. Or is this your opinion?
As a bit of a joke and for fun only I'm waiting for someone to put a compressed digital file on an lp only to be decoded by a DAC. If I can play an audio file from an old slow bit rate floppy disk then this would be possible with digital compression on a grove. This would just be for fun to maybe decode a secret song or message. Of course you would have to warn others to remove the headphones before playing otherwise you would hear loud white noise. You would also have to own a DAC to decode it. It's like kind of finding those hidden messages scribed into the near center of the vinyl or messages that would have to be played backwards like something from the 1970s. Like ELO's Fire on high song at the beginning. That had me laughing the first time I heard it years ago. It makes vinyl fun like gatefold covers with pop out scenery. I have seen some crazy things like making a record out of chocolate or even ice and it actually worked.
actually somebody kinda did that but it was a tiny program for commodore 64
@@XX-121 Ultimate compressed audio data might be able to be stored on linear analog media as a bit stream with some quality loss but listenable. I wonder if anyone has tried to put this on an analog casssete at normal speeds like they used 40 years ago for the Comedore.
The music at very low volume we hear at the start of the record just before the actual music is because of the delay in the cutting process, am I right?
No, that is normal tape print-through effect. When winded some magnetization of a layer passes to the one on top and you hear it because in the beginning there is nothing else recorded on that part, except for the print-through.
Oh man...Mike at The In Groove is gonna have to drastically change his top 100 in print analog record list now. And we thought Mofigate was bad! Good video my man
Thanks but I do want to make clear that quality audiophile labels like Speakers Corner, Analogue Productions, Bluenote reissues etc. do have machines with analog delay.
This story is TOTAL NONSENSE.
@@anadialog THEN CHANGE YOUR CLICKBAIT "INCLUDING AAA RELEASES". You have only made clear that you don't care who you hurt with misinformation.
I recently watched a Paul McGowan video about how Octave Records transfers its DSD recordings to vinyl and it seem they do not undergo any compression during the procedure and I can't help wondering how a perhaps 90 plus dB dynamic range is going to be accommodated on a disc, particularly if a lot of the high level information is at low frequencies.
Well, the RIAA curves does miracles from that point of view. We're just going to see if the stylus jumps out I guess!
What kind of delay does octave records use?
@@380stroker He didn't go into details but mentioned that two signals were sent to the cutting head: the first set up the movement of the head to expect a certain type of cut and then the corresponding audio signal was sent to it a short time later (no mention of time delay and I can only assume that the engineers at PS Audio would have devised a means of successfully tying in both signals to achieve that). What he didn't mention was what would happen with music that had very deep sounds at high levels for an appreciable amount of time - like a bass guitar in heavy rock - and how that could chew up playing time - even with the RIAA equalization.
@@johnmarchington3146 Interesting.
@@anadialog That was my main concern too. PS Audio may end up changing their minds if they start getting a lot of complaints about mistracking.
3 Questions:
1-Do you have any videos detailing the steps of production from recording session to media, so that we can see where something can be "digitized" along the way?
2-Have you done any videos on the issue of digital masters of analog media (phonograohs and tapes) and whether they really are "analog" then?
3-Have you ever addressed the issue of whether a tape or phonograph of digital music (example: digital synth music) is really "analog", even if the production steps are all analog?
Nope! Maybe in the future! ;-)
story is nonsense
@@anadialog how about showing all of the mastering houses cutting using a preview head, which is all off them making AAA records.
Hi Guido, as always cool video. We are being fooled on a daily basis. I didn't know these things to be honest. Prior to your video I had never heard of a digital or an analogue delay. To be honest I am no longer even interested in buying modern day vinyl. I paid 300 € for the 2x45 RPM MOFI release of Marvin Gaye's What's Going On. Yes, it sounds nice but I would never spend that amount on a record any longer. The prices for a lot of these vinyl releases and used vinyl records on discogs is plain crazy. 300 € for the vinyl release of Mulholland Drive OST ??? No way!!! Instead I decided to buy a high quality Technics SACD/CD/Network player that sounds better than any of my previous DACs. Finally I got to understand how fantastic CDs can sound. I compared a lot of my vinyl records to the respective CD releases and they do not sound any better now. I think I am going all digital now because I am no longer willing to finance these frauds. The only vinyl I buy nowadays is if I can find something cheap on a flea market.
The digital delays in vinyl cutting were introduced in the end of the 1970s already. This has been common knowledge for more than forty years now. Only the audiophiles did not want to know.this. But back then the ridiculous cult of the analogue did not yet exist.
This is sad but I do understand 😔
I bought hunderds of classical music on vinyl for pennies................many were only played ONCE and many other NEVER ................these were mainly recordings from the fifties to the Eighties...................newer ediditions sounded often emotionless compared with earlier pressings .
Generaly I like most of the pressings from the late fifties until the late sixties ...........I can hear also when they switched tube gear to solid state .........the sound beame cold and mechanical............to better with the years when solid state became better.
GUIDO IS FOOLING YOU. HE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT
I've just thought of something (and it's a beneficial use of digital). What about a plugin for Audacity that scans the wave-form and outputs pitch and depth numbers over time? You could make a recording of the master tape on computer, Audacity outputs a file showing pitch and depth info, and the guy making the cut actually sits there adjusting the pitch and depth according to the numbers that have been produced by the file. He'd have to sit there paying attention, but it would be a lot quicker than the current analogue method
Could be but I am afraid that engineers don't have the time and a lot of times the skills to do that...
@@anadialog someone on the lathe trolls forum might know some figures for pitch and depth vs frequency. If you have those numbers, someone on the audacity team could make a plugin that outputs a file similar to midi
I always thought, a digital preview would be used. So you are saying, instead the actually sound is digital? How about syncing a digital form of the analog source to be used for the preview? I mean, why should the packing optimization required to be analog? Of course I am interested in analog audio, to state it clearly.
Unfortunately yes, quite sad 😔
all of the major cutting studios today cut AAA all analog. This guy is full of it.
The most interesting bit about this all is that this is not something that happens with "new vinyl" only but also the last decade of "the vinyl of old" (after/before the format nearly disappeared). Many of us have not been aware that records were cut in this manner already in an era when vinyl was still a leading format. We should not be surprised, now that we know, that when manufacture of the format was resumed, it picked from where it was halted, using what was available then, instead of restoring older, very hard to find gear. This is not to say current labels, shouldn't be more honest and transparent about all the processes their product goes through.
Indeed!
Your comment is seriously misguided and not particularly well informed.
Guido... is mint magazine available in English?
Not that I know...
Wow missed this one. Great post. I missed Fremers post as well, Could someone share the link with me?
You can find them in the comments. I posted the video, the time stamp and the article BUT as someone pointed out there is no reference for his claim. I simply reported it.
Fremer here: Guido is CLUELESS
Something that I thought of is that I have records from the 80's Randy Travis and George Strait albums which were recorded digitally. Bur still have a wider and fuller sound than modern digitally sourced music . So is it the delay or what ?
Who knows, most probably yes...
Ciao! Ti saluto dall'Argentina. Voglio domandarti questo: _ascoltando un vinile con le cuffie_ è il suono della prima head quello che si ascolta a volume bassissimo un secondo prima d'ascoltare il "full" oppure il delay? Io sono fan dei Reder's Digest box sets e dei Audio Fidelity Records degli anni 60, poi delle collezioni italiane di musica clasica Fratelli Fabri e Curcio, Folklore Argentino e Tango fino ai primi 80 e poi Pop anni 70 e 80. Vorrei dire che in quasi tutti io posso ascoltare questo secondo di musica prima che comincie a suonare il full ma non succede con i dischi fine anni 80, 90 e i più nuovi che ho. Io non sono fan dell'audiofiglia, il massimo che ho in quel senso sono Abba Voulez Vous e The Album in versione doppio lp 45 rpm masterizzato in half speed alla Abbey Road che suonano essattamente uguali ai remasters anno 97 (cmq bellissimi!) 👋
Congratulazioni per la vittoria! Campioni del mondo! Il suono che senti è il cosiddetto print-through, quando cioè il segnale di una parte del nastro passa alla parte sopra (la magnetizzazione)
@@anadialog Grazie per il saluto e la risposta. Allora è il print through... L'avevo immaginato prima ma non ero sicuro. Ancora grazie!
Have you checked to see what these digital delay lines are like in modern pressing plants with the latest electronics? What are the sample rates being used today? I'd be willing to bet they take the sample rate of the supplied master, regardless of what it is and in what format (DSD, PCM, etc) it is supplied, and simply delay it while supplying the audio file bit perfect to the DAC. And I'm also sure that the A/D-D/A conversion that occurs with an analog master is probably going to be audibly transparent, given the capability of modern digital audio processing I also wonder about the weird claim of reducing the signal down to as low as 8 bits in older pressings. Is it possible that they used that low bit rate conversion only for the lathe pitch control, but passed the audio signal through at a higher rate? Let's not forget that regular PCM processors with 16 bit processing were already available in the late 70's. I do agree with you that there should be more openness in exactly how "analog" a modern vinyl lp actually is. I'm reminded of the old Monty Python skit where the guy said to his wife "It's only got a little Spam in it".
Yeah, the 8 bit audio doesn't make sense. We know how that sounds. But A/D-D/A is never a 100% transparent, there is always a change of the signal that way.
@@booom4849 You should try a straight wire bypass ABX test with a high quality A/D-DA chain compared to a piece of wire. Easy enough to do. Good luck hearing the difference. I've done the test, and failed it miserably.
@@johnstone7697 Yeah I did that with quad DSD and succeeded. Don't have a $10k converter though.
I never denigrated the quality of current digital delay, which yes I did check and they have higher resolution. The problem is that they were using DDL since in the 80's also in analog recordings as well as today in current "AAA" productions. Clearly most audiophile labels use analog delay machines but in other cases other labels probably don't even know that their laquers are being cut from digital, reissues and new analog recordings. The 8 bit claim as declared is sourced from Fremer: trackingangle.com/features/a-guide-to-collecting-japanese-imports
@@anadialog Actually the article is written by Michael Johnson on Fremers site. Sorry for the "nit picking" 😊
Another great video, much appreciated Guid-man! Read Miles Showell’s story about The Rolling Stones box set 1/2 speed masters originated from a mysterious hard drive he was given access to for one day. Sticky Fingers 1/2 speed is notoriously bad for this reason.
miles is a hack. digital+half speed will sound awful every time and his remasters are amongst the worse.
Miles cuts 1/2 speed from digital because that's how he thinks 1/2 speed works best. He's a fan of the late Stan Ricker who was a friend of mine. Guido is clearly misinforming people based on the comments here.
Ok, so that digital delay is a digital conversion, which is pcm conversion and not dsd conversion, correct? Most vinyls are pcm vinyls masquerading as pure analog?
Not in past and not supposedly AAA, or at least that is what we thought...
@@anadialog but that digital delay is pcm, correct?
Isn’t the digital mechanism controls only the delay/speed whilst the sound stays analogue the whole chain ? Meaning those are 2 parallel processes ?
No. The digital is the delayed signal and that is what is cut on the laquer
It's the delayed signal that goes to the cutter head. Without an analog preview head, that will be the digitized signal.
That is why original pressings are saught after and often very expensive. Of course…the Dark Side of the Moon Light Blue Triangle as the most outstanding example. Moving house, I orden up 42 years of Life. And discovered at the back of a wardrope a stack of records, I had forgotten of. All my buys of the seventies. And to my joye…of course original pressings, including the light blue triangle. The sound just blows you away. And I paid a lot of money for newer (remastered) pressing. By the way. I paid £ 7 in 1974. Anyway. Look for original pressings. Still a lot out there, when one is ready to pay the prices. And is lucky enough to own a very very good system.
Damn man, that was quite a find mate! 👍
Hate to burst your bubble, but £7 from 1974 is £60.87 today. Even if the inflation perspective isn't PERFECT, due to life's many variables over the years, £7 was still a lot of money in 1974. For the life of me, I don't understand why so many older folks don't consider inflation. It's like you've been tricked into thinking money doesn't massively lose value over time, and been given rose-colored glasses about the 'good ol' days' to stay in denial about it.
@@MX-S Well, that is certainly true. BUT... there is another side to that other than just inflation. Let me give you an example. My Dad like 60 years ago was working at a grocery store @ $2/hour. So, around 1960 or so, his gross earnings per month for normal 40 hour weeks was about $320/month. Don't know how much they would've taken out for taxes, but I'm guessing at the time it probably wasn't much. Okay, so at that salary, he was able to rent a little TWO BEDROOM HOUSE (about $50/month IIRC), buy a relatively new car, AND save up to buy a really nice used BMW motorcycle. Also, he told me that at the time he and my Mom could go to L.A. (we lived near San Diego) for a WEEK, paying for a hotel for all nights, go out to lunch AND dinner, AND see movie every day. The total cost, including driving about 200 miles round trip, was about $100!
Also, he and my Mom could drive to downtown San Diego (about 30 miles away) for a day and have lunch at a very nice place called Anthony's, get ice cream, and go see a movie for $10!
So, yeah, the equivalence in money/inflation is definitely a factor, BUT... going by what I KNOW was his income and what he was able to do with it, there is *NO WAY IN HELL* that today a person making the rough equivalent could possibly even do 1/10 of what the money could buy at that time. I find that astounding. Decent, but not fancy apartments (NOT a home like we had) in the moderate areas where I live now are around $1600+/month, for a ONE BEDROOM, SMALL APARTMENT! Gasoline, here in California, although thankfully it is going down now, is about $4+/gallon as opposed to maybe 25 cents then.
Whatever the reasons (Greed anyone...?) money does not go anywhere NEAR as far as it did just 60 years ago. How that factors in to what you are saying about inflation I don't know... I personally just think it is criminal.
@@MX-S Where did I say, that £7 in 1974 was little money? Anyway. When I come to England, 7£ was for me a lot less than for the Britains. That is not the point. 7£ invested in 1974, about 2000£ or more today. So. If I bought the record for £60.87 today, I could sell the record tomorrow for £2000 or more. But I wouldn‘t of course. You interpreted something into my comment, what I didn‘t write.
The digital delay is only used to predict the amount of pitch, and does not introduce digital into the signal path, right?
Nope, sadly the signal is converted to digital (and then back to analog) and goes on the record. The billboard article I show in the video explains it clearly
@@anadialog that's crazy. Thanks for bringing light to this.
Tengo un Denon AVR1611 y declara 0,08 % de THD. Lo tengo desde 2013 y debo decir que me costo mucho hacerlo sonar bien. No obstante no lo digo porque no tenga la electrónica para lograrlo, sino que tiene tanto procesamiento y tantos parámetros para ajustar qué hay que hacerse especialista en estos equipos. Su calidad de sonido depende mucho de la fuete. Con audio digital suena impresionante. No le conectes un deck de cassettes porque suena espantoso. Luego de un tiempo me compré un Marantz PM5005 y en mi sala hago convivir el home theater y en equipo stereo. Desde ya que el Marantz va excelente con cualquier fuente!
Thank you for the revelation and explanation.
he's a liar or just plain ignorant
Dude, I never knew this !! Thanks a lot for the information !!
My mind just blown out.
The story is a total fabrication
I still don’t understand why digital delay is bad. If all it is used for is th determine the width of the cutting groove, isn’t the information put into that groove still the analog signal?
With digital delay, the digital signal (converted) goes on the record. If you watch all the video I show an article from bilbord of 1979 that clearly states it
@LuisPuncel are you baffled?
Blue note classic and tone poet LPs have this digital step or am I OK? :(
Joe Harley and Kevin Gray use an all analog cutting system with an analog preview head.
Them and many others are the serious part of audiophile reissues!
Nope, no digital.
That’s very interesting information thank you! It would be nice for the elite mastering engineers of today to comment on what they use for the delay. But even if it is analog, the delay tape adds an extra generation copy I was not aware of. I wonder if 45’s could be cut without a delay at all, at a constant pitch?
It doesn' t add another generation
No! It's a preview head, not an "analog delay". The same piece of tape passes over two playback heads. There is no generational loss.
Very few mastering engineers will ever give out their technique. There are no cutting record schools. There are very few books on the subject and almost nothing on the net. This is a very closed world where people play their cards close to their chest.
However, if you want to learn, i suggest you join a forum called "The Secret Society of Lathe Trolls".
Good luck!
THE TOP MASTERING ENGINEERS TODAY DO NOT USE A DDL TO CUT RECORDS LABELED AS AAA. THEY ARE AAA
All of the records cut today AAA are AAA the same as they were cut when there was only AAA.
Excellent. Great information,(if a little depressing). Thanks and have a great holiday. Giles uk
Thank YOU Giles!
the story is a big fat LIE
Cutting vinyl is a complex process where lots of human errors could occur.
Lots of anlog processing involved before going to the cutting head.
We could easily understand the superiority of Digital audio.
Good explanation, I always found this issue confusing.
he's confusing you more.
Hence, if the analog signal has been converted from A to D and vice versa for this delay proces the statement that vinyl sounds better than digital does no longer hold water. That said if vinyl compared to digital still sounds nicer to our ears then something else in the chain after the record itself comes in to play. The first thing that comes to mind is the mechanical to electrical conversion done by the phono cartridge. makes sense ? Same goes for tubes. They are not better than transistors but they are adding something to the sound ( a color) a sound hat I like. My 2cents
I think you are quite correct in your reasoning. Many audiophiles do not prefer vinyl despite its shortcomings but because of them. Then they blame digital for not coloring the sound the way vinyl does.
You are right. Some people simply choose the kind of distortion that sounds nicer to their ears.
Bottom line, if it sounds good to you, good for you! No need to be purist.
Harmonic distortion first of all! Here is a video I made on the topic: th-cam.com/video/aTYc7vZuM-c/w-d-xo.html
I've watched the video and we are thinking the same about distortion and how pleasant it's to ears. As humans we are analog beings and all our sensors are analog based so to me it makes sense. Your conclusion at the end of the video..? to me it doesn't hold water anymore ?. At that time you. concluded that one has to have a complete analog chain to make this positive harmonic emotion come to life. As we now learned that vinyl is also digital just before the creation of the record however it's still possible to hear " analog" when plying that record ,there's something dominant that's overlooked. Clearly the record with its groves are analog and the mechanical to electrical conversion is also analog. Perhaps this is the dominant factor in the vinyl chain? . making a connection to streaming. Perhaps that's why I prefer the sound of a R2R DAC above a chip dac even though technically compared to a chip its a lesser (older) technology ? food for thoughts :-)
@@hansbogaert4582 The problem with this explanation is that even if we are "analog beings" the preference for analog sound reproduction methods is not universally shared. In addition, when listening to cds or streaming we are indeed listening to analog, converted by a DAC.
Was bored until your upload popped in notifications 😅
Very good, I am a musician, I always known what they did. You need two heads or a delay, no way around that. So i always buy before digital, otherwise you get DIGITAL. There are not enough machines with two heads around, only very very few pressings of today are really analog.
total LIE
There are many machines with preview heads and many pressing are really all analog. Obviously it doesn't matter for digital recordings but there records today labeled AAA are.
If over 90% of all AAA have this digital step, then I think the problem is not the process, but the audience's beliefs that somehow digital is evil. There is nothing inheritedly wrong with digital. One can argue that the reason why vinyl sounds so good is because the mastering process required to get the material on vinyl makes vinyl sound a particular way and that CDs sound so bad because none of those mastering choices are needed for CD. Nobody could hear the digital in MoFi pressings and everyone praised their one-step releases...The only one person backtracking is Fremer, but that guy has issues.
No, it's over 90% of all records currently produced. Yes mastering is part of it BUT when you buy a 100% analog release like those made by Analog Productions or Speakers Corner or the the Tone Poet bluenote they are at another level. If you don't have a comparison of course the MoFi sound good. They are properly done, butbif you compare them with an original or true AAA edition you immediately hear the difference. Not always of course, but in the vast majority of cases. MoFi never one me, I have only 6 or 7 records by them. Ot even the AAA are that good. I like more their past gold CD remasters.
GUIDO IS LYING OR JUST IGNORANT OR BOTH.
I've been trying to tell people this for years
He's lying or just ignorant
I love my records but have to say I am really coming around to SACD
Ah, yes, although being an avid vinyl guy, I also love a well made SACD. BUT... here you are talk'n DSD64, which is a completely different animal than the 'digital' that is usually talked about. And Quad DSD is another thing altogether 😊
If I may humbly recommend an absolutely fascinating and truly *LIFE-CHANGING* video here on TH-cam which as I just mentioned, honestly changed my viewpoint and understanding. It is by the 'Audio Analyst' E87 where he interviews David Robinson, the owner of Positive Feedback. Just to give you a little teaser... He stated that he and Chad (of all people) and another audio luminary did blind listening tests between the original analog master tapes and Quad DSD copies (4xDSD) Let's just say that the results left ol' Chad a little bit speechless... 😁
Btw, maybe this has been mentioined here before but did you notice that ever since the scandal prices for MOFI releases on discogs have dropped a lot. I am seeing Santana's Abraxas for less than 600 € now. There were times when it couldn't be purchased where less than double that! And my Marvin Gaye MOFI release now also costs 180 € as opposed to the 300 € that I paid and the seller told me it was a good investment as it would most certainly grow in value over time. I can clearly see that now.
Very interesting and informative not sure I understand it all but eye opening none the less
In summary: since the early 80s there is a growing number of mastering machines that DON'T use an analog delay (machines with two heads) but only one with a digital delay. That signal is converted to digital, processed, and converted back to analog and then cut on the record. So even if you have an original album on tape in several cases (who knows which?) It will be converted!
Mastering studios were the earliest adopters of digital technology - as you said, in the 1970s - with a digital delay line replacing the preview head; and - as you said - originally at 14-bit. And this was not rare but commonplace and increasingly standardised in the era of vinyl as a mass market format; yet - as you said - many pressings that will have been through this digital step in the mastering chain, from this era, are now regarded as superb examples of the LP format (often collectible and commanding high prices). So what does this tell us? It tells us that AAA in itself is meaningless as guarantor of sonic and musical quality. A well-engineered recording in a great sounding studio tracked with quality equipment will sound fantastic if decently mastered even with a DDL line from the analogue tape feeding the cutter head. Conversely, a poorly made recording will not land on your turntable as an excellent sounding LP, even if Bernie Grundman cuts it AAA. Far from a dirty little secret, but open industry practice from the heyday of mass market vinyl sales. I don't think the musicality of the finished product can ever be reduced to single component or process in the chain from musician's physiology to consumer's phono cartridge.
Right on the money! Considering the fact that vinyl playback dynamic range is equivalent to about 12 bit digital, I'd imagine that the engineers considered 14 bit to be totally adequate for the job.
If it is recorded on analog tape, what does the rest matter? I've got good ears but telling the difference between a digital delay, which, by the way is obsolete for this job once they have created a copy master..
Funny that many people seem to have liked the vinyl despite the digital conversion taking place, being unaware of it. Seems that the digital conversion is relatively benign and does little to alter what gets into the groove. The vinyl seems to alter the sound in a way that pleases people (via its many limitations), which is fine of course. If you like the sound, then the sound is good.
Now you have all the analog purists saying thay they knew there was something wrong with vinyls from the eighties.
@@pablohrrg8677 Yeah, I was wondering why some vinyls did sound digital even though I knew they were recorded on tape. Always good to listen to the vinyl at the store.
What we are going to see in the future are some vinylphiles getting more and more purist in their choices. The problem of course is that the choice of acceptable recordings gets narrower and narrower with every 'scandal' like this. Finally all the music they can listen to will be first pressings from a certain era. All other recordings must be declared ritually impure, no matter how high their musical and artistic value. If the recording engineer even wore a digital wristwatch during the sessions, the whole project is hopelessly contaminated.
Of course they like it, it's the only "analog" version available!
Where did the 99% number come from? All of the US based audiophile mastering engineers I'm familiar with, Bernie Grundman, Kevin Gray, Steve Hoffman, Joe Harley, etc, use an analog preview head.
The VMS 80 is not "still available" (6.55) The final Neumann lathe was built in 1987.
Ask mint! Audiophile releases are a drop in the ocean, we all know ow that. Listen to the entire sentence, still available meaning still present in mastering labs. I am mainly Italian so my phrases aren't 100% perfect but I think it was rather clear...
@@anadialog YOU REALLY DO A DISSERVICE TO EVERYONE.
Of course.
There also needs to be a new technology where the stamper never goes bad and can be used an infinite amount of times. Yes?
Indeed! Rebeat was working on ceramic stampers laser engraved but unfortunately they went broke
Basic rule of thumb... if there is no black and white bar code on the record jacket (pre mid 80s), it's all analogue.
***NOTE: We are asked all the time if we can master directly from analog sources and keep it analog all the way through to lacquer disk. YES! THAT is our specialty and we are one of the very few places in the world that still do it that way!" Quote from Cohearant - Kevin Gray. I know that Bernie Grundman also has and uses the older tape machines. Given that they have the ability to keep things analog - the question is do they keep it analog and if so, what percentage of their mastering is using the digital delay. Further, without having a full disclosure on what studio's are suing when they go to laquer we are lost. This is further amplified by Universal and others being anal about NOT giving information about their releases and whether the source is digital or analog.
I suggest that this makes all the statements from MOFI BS. There is a big difference when the master tape is used verses a digital copy. They have basically again proven that their little pictures in thousands of One Steps are lies and that their standard practice is to go from tape to digital to tape to digital delay to laquer. A far cry from tape to laquer then to One Step!
What is the point of "keeping things analog"? I hope you realize that every analog phase in the record making process adds another layer of noise and distortion inherent in any analog method known to man. Analog is a disservice to the original sound of music.
Kevin Gray's chain is all analog, no digital delay.
@@nyquist5190 perhaps you should watch a recent interview with Bernie Grundman where he explains that the opposite is true - there are noise and artifacts in digital and the more you use a file the worse it gets.
@@hifilive650 Unfortunately Mr Grundman's opinions are not supported by evidence of any kind. A file getting worse because it is getting used is pure superstition and magical thinking.
@@hifilive650 Mr. Grundman may be a superb recording engineer, but that doesn't make him an expert in digital recording technology. Quite frankly, if he actually said something like that, my opinion of him has dropped. But my guess is that there's a caveat in there, and that is, if you don't know what you're doing, you can add noise and artifacts. In analog recording, even if you know what you're doing, there's noise and distortion added in each and every step.
👋🤗GREETINGS GUIDO 💚💚💚
Happy holidays!
This stuff has been digital since the mind 1980's. Especially all the "remastered from original tapes" releases.
Yes, correct! That's why i always look for a bar code on the jacket. The whole world seemed to go digital over-night towards the end of the 80s. Bar code readers appeared around the same time as digital delays.... so no bar code on the jacket of an LP is a good sign it's all analogue (as even the stock control would be analogue).
Yes, this is mentioned from about 10 min. into the video onwards. One must fight the temptation of commenting without watching the whole thing... Well, I sometimes do that too, I'm not going to lie, BUT of course, if later on it turns out that I got something wrong I delete or edit the comment...
THAT'S BULLSHIT
That's a LIE
This might be superfluous but if 16 bit or below digital lathes are the issue maybe somebody could invent a 32 bit AI Smart Lathe. I obviously prefer to have analog through the entire chain but if it's not possible, 32 bit should provide plenty of resolution.
Fortunately sixteen bits are more than enough when cutting historical low res formats like vinyl. I am constantly amazed how so many audiophiles are enthralled by bigger numbers.
@@nyquist5190 Thanks for your insight. That seems shocking since no experienced audio engineer would record, mix or master at 16 bits. 24 bit, 44.1kHz is the minimum. I can hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio, especially in the percussive sounds and dynamics as a whole. To cut vinyl at only 16 bits seems limiting and inaccurate. Vinyl has incredible resolution when played on a professional turntable with a high quality stylus. A friend of mine masters for vinyl, I'm going to ask him. I definitely don't consider myself an audiophile. Open reel 2-track stereo tape is the most expensive, highest quality analog format btw but most audiophiles will never hear the source which is the multitrack 1 or 2 inch tape.
@@RobMentors It is of course utterly unlikely that you can hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit with normal music. 24 bit indeed provides benefits when recording, mixing and mastering. But in the end product it does not. Vinyl's resolution can hardly be described incredible since even 16 bit digital beats it handily. On a good day vinyl's resolution is equivalent of 11 - 12 bits. It is good to realize that you can make an audibly indistinguishable copy of any analog source with 16 bit digital. But you cannot make it vice versa. And that is really all there is to it.
Sorry we question your favourite moving magnet cartridge for £250.
I know you're not asking me, but a Shure V-15 Type IV or V for the right price may be close to the best option
About your last words, regarding the informations that the majors should give to the end users, i think that it would be fair but unnecessary, in any case the infos regarding mastering and the operations coming first of the press and print are not a key to reading of the overall quality of the disc, as you said at the beginning of the clip, also from the 60s are easy to find very good discs, how? Pure recordings, nice takes, i have for example a easy to find and pure audiophile vinyl of "Whipped Cream" by Herb Alpert, printed in Germany under London (1964) and sounds great as many Philips, Decca, Verve, Blue Note and Deutsche Grammophon recordings, another big issue it's about the Loudness war, happening expecially in the modern records, many new productions cannot be definded audiophile due to that. Yes i know, im going Off Topic, reasons to get a good or bad record are a lot, the one that you explained here it's one between many, it's good to know, but at the end our ears are the judge.
Certainly, but the point is that with the AAA excuse they ask tons of money. If quality is there I am glad to pay extra BUT we need to be sure of what we are buying....why? Simple, because EVEN if it sounds good, you still don't know what you're missing if it was, for example, a true AAA instead of a great digital copy. So ears are good but can't know what is best of you don't have a direct comparison. Hence, we need protection and certifications like all quality items.
@@anadialog I agree totally what you say, want my money? You have to describe well what you're selling me and let me say, if my hobby is to be a collector i become ready to pay tons of money for a special vinyl copy, if i'm a listener as many, when someone try to steal me money with exotics excuses but in my hands comes a vinyl disc, i would ask my self: Am I stupid? so i make the question and give myself the answer. Happy music to you and everybody here around!
I've been waiting ages for someone to talk about this. It's the hesitation I have in buying nineties albums. Hopefully people can build up a database of albums that don't have this problem. Surely with microscopes we can record the changing levels of the pitch and the depth on a record, and then use these coordinates to cut a new analogue release
I like to listen to a lot of new music. So what are you suggesting? To stop listen to what I like just because some engineer may or may not have used digital equipment in their mixing? That's the most stupidest thing I ever read.
1. Get a life.
2. Learn to enjoy it.
@@vdochev As in spending the extra money to get an analogue release on vinyl, or saving my money and just getting a cheaper digital version. Most of my music collection is digital for this reason. If we're buying analogue we want a genuine product, and there's potentially a very good market in genuine analogue re-cuts (one in which bands could actually earn a living from record sales)
THE STORY IS A COMPLETE FABRICATION AND NOT TRUE
@@trackingangle929 You're well qualified to say so. Can you give us some more debunking it? (some things I'd very happily be wrong about)
So what you’re saying is you pay more for more distortion and less precision
Would you like to see pictures of analog preview heads at all of the major mastering studios around the world that I have? Will you issue an apology for your spreading this nonsense? Will you take down this video or amend it? I left out of my list Capitol, which is no longer operating but Ron McMaster showed me the preview head he had. The new DGG AAA records will be cut using a special 4 track preview head because they are cutting from 4 track surround masters and mixing live to lacquer ALL ANALOG.
But of course. DGG is catering for the faith based audiophile market where you cannot even mention digital. If they did, their product would not sell. But no one knew this in the 1970s or 1980s when the ritual impurity of digital was not yet invented.
I hope you got my point in the answers below. If this is the message the video is delivering then I will add a specification at the top and pin it. I am in search of the truth here. I would never invent something or make a video without solid info just for click bait. That's not my style. Since the 90's with your DVD, which I still have, you greatly inspired me I hope you will believe my words.
P.S. I also changed the title (I added PAST) so now maybe it's more clear.
Yeah, the "pros" nowadays have no clue about the deliciousness of tape. I mean, if you never worked with it -- only emulators, if that -- then of course it "doesn't make a difference" and yada, yada, yada about this and that. Whatever, I say, and work with tape. Only then will one's ear know. If not, eh, you're missing out on a, uh, a "phatness" that cannot be digitally replicated. With that being said, I can't wait for the rise of the Tape Engineer! 😃
Analog phatness can be replicated quite simply by making a digital copy of the phat analog. But do we actually want it? As an effect it may sound nice but true music lovers prefer the accuracy only digital can provide.
@@nyquist5190 You obviously never worked with tape.
Dirty little secret: this video is hilariously wrong. I've been to: Abbey Road, Sterling Sound, Cohearent Mastering, Emil Berliner Studios, Blue Heaven, GZ Media and many others and on and on. Where all of the great AAA reissues are cut. They ALL use a preview head not a DDL. Yes Miles Showell who cuts 1/2 speed from digital files doesn't use a preview head. DUH!
That makes me very happy! I am just sorry that you didn't understand my point because you are one among others who got me interested in this and I think it's quite shocking that starting in the late 70's several records had this last digital conversione, that's what the video is all about.
I have been to all of the major mastering houses cutting AAA albums. They use a preview head not a digital delay line. This story is total nonsense.
Once again, I know! That is not the message and I never said this in the video. I am talking about random AAA productions and past productions during the 80's and 90's. In fact in the other comments I clearly said that this does not regard audiophile labels.
Way too alarmist, I think, when there's easy solution for it nowadays. After all it's not necessary to feed cutting head with delayed digitized signal. You can first make digital audio file from your analogue tape, and use this digital audio to feed groove pitch controller. This digital audio would start in advance of analogue tape audio, exactly one rotation time before. Then the analogue tape audio would be the one which is delayed, and with this one the cutting head would be fed. For instance GZ Media offers this option for you.
Yeah, that is what I was talking about. I don't see a reason for the preview to be required to be analog, but the sound needs to be.
Yes of course, but what if someone wants or, worse, thinks he's is buying an full analog record? Past OGs? Hmm...
@@anadialog Sure, you are absolutely right to press the issue. But not everyone has a Neumann cutting lathe. We have to be open for new ideas as long as we get analog sound.
@@anadialog If an independent band/label wants fully analogue print, they can do. I believe in pressing plants are analog loving people who are willing to go through that. But major labels just want cash for minimum work, they will usually not roll out their analog master tapes for vinyl reissues of their back catalog, when they have digital backups already. They just send digital files to pressing plants and tell them to do whatever they can. At least they use 192/24 quality, I believe. But to be fair, I would be careful to bring out precious master tapes too, moreover old tapes deteriorate with time and at one point the digital backups will be the best what we will have.
@@StackOverflow80 I think caring for the master tape is the thing, not necessarily because they have less work with digital. They know for sure they can get a few $ extra when advertising AAA.
On the other hand, the world is flooded with music over the decades, so there is always the niche to produce AAA. It's not an issue to play the master tape every 10 years for a lacquer cut.
I've been saying this and they called me stupid.
Well... that is likely for many other reasons... 😁
@@latheofheaven As if you know anything about me.
@@allthatyoutouch3164 Bro... C'mon man I'm obviously teasing you. Didn't you see the smiley? Since I don't know you, clearly how can I mean it seriously... I just thought that would be a funny way to reply to you because of the way you worded what you said, that's all... Chill mate! ✌
If it's done by "Bernie Grundman" "Kevin gray" "Ryan k. Smith " and "Chris bellman" it's guaranteed analogue! They all use analogue delay!
Do they actually? Or is this something you would like to believe?
None of them work exclusively with analog sources, but if it's advertised as AAA and cut by any of them then I would think it's legit.
@@nyquist5190 Go look at their playback machines, You can clearly see the loop and the analog preview head. Joe Harley has posted dozens of videos on his Facebook showing them cutting records.
YES. AND THAT IS WHY THIS STORY IS COMPLETE B.S.
Great!! Now we need full provenance on all LP's? Now we need to know the mastering equipment used on each LP? Soon will need to know the tape use in making the master tape and not only that, which tape machine was use to produce it! This hobby is starting to be more problems than it's worth. I suggest we forget about all this and judge each record on it's on merit. Either the records sounds good to you or it doesn't. It really doesn't matter as much as we make it. A lousy engineer can have the best equipment available and still produce crap.
No, you certainly do not need full provenance on all LPs. Instead audiophiles should learn how digital and analog signals actually work instead of magical thinking.
If only they charged a fair price I personally wouldn't have any problem, BUT when I am paying dozens and in some cases hundreds of euro/dollars we deserve more clarity. All quality items have certification, why not music?
Can't judge for myself, that would mean that I already made the purchase!
There appears to be a lot of confusion.
The digital delay is used to control the lathe. That is not the signal that is recorded onto vinyl.
Nope, no confusion, unfortunately this is 100% solid. If you are using a machine without 2 heads but only one, the original signal is for groove pitch which is contemporarely digitized and sent to the lathe regulated by the electronics that have analyzed the signal amplitude. I also inserted an article in the video where this is CLEARLY stated.
Also Kevin Grey stated this in a interview on Stereophile and in his own recent video. Plus, the president of Speakers Corner in my interview with him he stated this. The link is in the video description.
@@anadialog My apologies.
@@anadialog What models of lathes use two heads? Do you mean two cutting heads? Or are you referring to tape machines with the preview?
Thanks for you mature answer. Yes, as explained in the video, tape machines with two playback heads. For example Analogue Productions have a Studer with two heads for an analog delay and obviously Coherent Audio and Speakers Corner etc. but several others don't.
At the end of the day, if you enjoy it, what does it matter? If it's "the best of the best" why does it matter? You can't get any better, so why are you complaining? It wouldn't sound that good otherwise would it? I get the whole analog snobbery, but please, get over yourselves. you're all just pissed because you all thought "analog" was the pinnacle. And you've all had your pants pulled down en masse.
Ignorance is bliss ;-)
Noyman... NEWMAN!!
Noyman is German pronunciation
This story is total bullshit. We all know that DDLs were in use for a number of years replacing preview heads. BUT ALL OF TODAY'S AAA ALBUMS ARE CUT USING A PREVIEW HEAD.
I didn't say that. I said that some AAA productions maybe have a tape recorder without an analog preview head, clearly not quality audiophile releases as analogue productions. Moreover, I was referring mainly to the past when AAA was normal so a digital preview sounded probably cool not knowing about yhe damage. In fact, I cited you Michael on the 8bit digital preview in Japanese recordings...do you confirm that?
Hi,
First analysis:
Yes that's shocking, that's why reel to reel will and always will the best not digital signal transform, as well as very simple print method, we need back reel to reel for mass market!
That's also why 45 rpm is stuck endlessly saying that the original from 70's pressing are always better!
Anyway you don't say how the digital delay impact the signal is it a full adc then dac, or just a digital analysis of the peak which control an analog delay box, that totally different, in that case if it's for analog delay which digital control the impact isn't an issue at all! Also it can be mixed with the analog signal? So the resolution in that case isn't an issue, because 8 bit for the analysis of a peak on an average 75 db, is already sufficient. Also this is certainly for the bass frequency range which after experiment if not above 120Hz, could quiet accurately be sampled! The fact that vinyl are 99% digital in not as clear as you tell it because digitally controlled analog circuitry don't make things digital. (i suspect that's it is the case, digital controlled analog delay circuitry)
Regarding the resolution i suspect clearly what 45rpm is calling a more compressed dynamic range due to low resolution of this digital part, having 24 bit one would allow better dynamic range of the signal! Remember that for an analog 48db a 8 bit signal sampling makes 0.19db step, so you need at least 12-16 bit to have correct steps, Also if the analysis is based on all the signal it's much impacting because an analog 75 db dynamic range require 24bits. In fact as for the frequency , you need at least twice the analog dynamic range to sample correctly it if you don't want to high db steps (distortion), in fact 0,01 db step are sufficient to not be noticeable whereas 0.19db are! Making a simple cassette tape the equivalent of a 16/24 bit res fill in term of db steps!!! (the more you have to sample a range the more analog volume you get 24bit of 48analog db is just 1,11758715615e-08 db step, not fabulous but sufficient), ok 16 bit is about 7,3222634947e-05, theoretically sufficient but practically insufficient as a 16 bit stream don't produce the same loudness as the 24 bit one for the same dynamic range, why still don't know!
Edit:
Definitively not digital it's a mechanical digital speed control (5ms speed delay correction nothing in common with sampling, and dac added to the source, Anyway there isn't any information in the article you mention to be 100% sure! even if it's clearly writted solid state device, that don't mean necessary digital processing device as known as today! Showed this to 45 rpm he got master skilled engineers whose should really confirm!
Edit 2:
I do state that no, vinyl AAA with this still stay an AAA for that simple reason if it would be digital, there isn't any need to use the tape anymore just a full DAA chain and that's insn't the case for the best producing plant still today whose still use analog eq + analog reverb! Also DAA vinyl cutting don't sound the same as AAA vinyl cutting with digital speed control (speed delay)! As i always saying, don't confuse digital control , with digital sound processing! So don't worry guys it's just misinformation/not well understood information your AAA vinyl are 100% analog (unless you buy mofi's ones or not respectful AAA companies) even with this digital speed delay (the only impact is a less eccentric dynamic range, which unfortunately is a much more realistic dynamic range and closer to the master what 45rpm confirm with old original pressing), by chance the vinyl HD would never comes, this one for the case was digital craps for economical purpose!
Edit 3: Also remember that even with digital sound processing which i of course does not recommend, the final product is analog (There isn't any steps (distortion) in a traditional vinyl cutting, it's just a matter before cutting how you are close to the analog master). You can learn here that unfortunately again for economical purpose the perfect analog master would always be the reel copy! As for digital sound, the perfect master is the digital master, a vinyl cutting of a digital master would definitively alter it, fortunately in a better way as we know today that digital (inferior to analog never better, just can be closer to it) distortion are higher for higher frequency range starting for 192Khz/24 bit around 1Khz, putting those distortions into analog support does make a natural anti-aliasing effect still better than DSD512! (estimation to be confirmed in the future perhaps if those dac could go higher than 768Khz/24Bit/DSD512(1Bit) of equality around 6144Khz/24Bit/DSD 4096 for a 30Khz pure sinus, fortunately it would be unusable, making analog for the rest of the time of the humanity the best support for analog waves video/audio)
Of course digital has also advantage no physical issues, and fast editing whose for the end listener hasn't any interest and are completely deleted by the power and space needed for a DSD512/768Khz/24Bit Decoding!
Edit 5: I armed myself, so edit 2 well confirmed, digital delay isn't digital sound processing, to summarize it sample thought analog circuitry and in the worst case a pcm dac the signal amplitude, to drive the latch witch print was is called the preview sound, the goal is to target a maximum peak level doing a compression confirming first analysis 45 rpm part. Lazy and economical method, The full analog way make better result as it use the head analog compression. The best one is avoiding completely the compression part, but that require, a full listening as well as test pressing and of course no "today pointless?" (average time side 16 mn max at 33rpm...still left 8 minutes, plus if yu print at odb instead of +6....) space optimization! (for audiophile production facility it's the way to go) Anyway no digital vinyl, it just to avoid the latch to overcome the groove. So it's a digitally controlled mechanical drive with practically no impact on the sound except for the dynamic! Call it a digital controller mechanical limiter!
Long life to analog.
I am afraid that you are creating misinformation. You are analyzing the pitch control part of the Neumann lathes which are indeed analog electronics. You are focusing on the pitch part, which is indeed analog. If you read the Billboard article is says, above the part I read in the video, that it is a 16 bit digital delay, which below it is clearly written that the delay is the program going on the record and the direct-to-tape signal is used to calibrate the groove width (pitch). Here is a Stereophile article where Kevin Gray states in an interview that a lot of people use digital delay while he instead uses analog (are you going to believe him or is he misinformed?): www.stereophile.com/content/kevin-gray-vinyl-mastering-master
As stated in the video this information was clearly exposed by the PRESIDENT of Speakers Corner in a review I did a few months ago: th-cam.com/video/A405QH55cNk/w-d-xo.html (at 16:28) is even Kai Seeman misinformed?
Most mastering facilities after the Neumann used the Zuma system and now several mastering studios are using the DJR Disc computer (KEvin Gray in fact uses this one). Here is the manual where it clearly says that the signal is converted: wwww.dkse.net/Discomp.Manual.US.pdf on page 15 but there are several solutions.
The important fact is: If you don't have a tape recorder WITH TWO HEADS (analog delay) then you are mastering with a digital delay (signal is split one for the pitch, one for the signal) and that conversion is clearly used also to adjust the signal eq, RIAA curve etc. and then converted back to analog and cut on the lacquer.
@@anadialog don't have too much time for now but i will read all of this, i can assure you however that you're wrong it's the tape delay on what i focus, there are three type head based, analog circuitry, and pcm dac samplng the worst as it can add jitter. All of them has the purpose to limit the peak signal. it's a compression method based on a delay. All of them use only the amplitude analysis to do it. The input signal is delayed by this peak limited to control the latch! The input signal stays the preview one but the latch control is using the second one! there is no adc then dac on the input signal it's too early for that! No processor where available at that time to make a full digital sound processing!
@@anadialog you're wrong i read fastly the kevin gray article as well as the manual you provided! It's a mechanical feeding purpose, It's well written that there are sampling L/R/Pitch for driving purpose! The head based as well as the analog circuitry are equal, only the PCM dac is introducing jitter in the driving!
The djr Discomp is a computer used to adjust the PITCH and DEPTH on Neumann VMS 66/70
disc mastering lathes. The Discomp also has utility functions related to disc cutting.
I don't see any sound processing function!!!
Also:
A lot of people are taking a two-track analog machine and using a digital delay to create a split signal that feeds the computer and the cutter head (footnote 2)
The unit accepts line level inputs of left and right preview signals. These signals are passed
through a filter which rolls off high frequencies so as to simulate the amplitude of the cut
signal. The signals are then digitized and passed to the microprocessor. The unit computes
the peak signal of the left from the previous revolution and the current right peak, and uses
this to generate the Lateral signal. This is then delayed to output effectively as the signal
enters the cutting head. The out of phase signal L-R is generated and used to determine the
Vertical output. this is applied again after a delay. This signal is also averaged and applied to
the LV output.
You confuse a digital driving with a digital sound!
Everything finish as analog voltage! Where do you see standard digital sound which consist of reading binary data of a stream them processing it to a dac which then give sound voltage from these 0/1.in order to produce analog waves!!
Also driving a head fully analog or digitally is a little of concern! The finishing would be an analog signal as the cutting process use voltage power for printing a groove.
It's the same thing for the first printer whose add a digital control onto a mechanical head, when you look as these print there isn't anything common with a digital printer!
Just analyze a groove with a microscope you won't see any digital step!
Again it is not a big concern that the cutting process is driven digitally or fully analog, the result would be quiet the same jitter excluded! it's the same discussion for the turntable with direct drive + jitter, and belt driven + flutter, does that make the sound digital, no, the sound better well yes perhaps or no , it's difficult to tell!
Explain me where is the gain except being more AAA, and the end everything go thought the computer! That not digital sound, that's digitally controlled mechanical device.
Explain me how you want to cut without a driving controller, with your hand! With your way of thinking everything is digital, because an analog synthesizer digitally controlled would finish digital sound. NO, it's analog sound digitally produced(controlled)
You've gone to far saying vinyl is digital, please find the vinyl with a c64 program hidden and here what's digital stream of 0 and 1 produce on an analog groove, unbearable sound.layered in analog sinus waves or prove that you can see aliasing onto a groove 0 or 1! No vinyl is 100% analog product, using a microphone to reproduce the sound. The input quality is essentially the source material not the cutting process(even if too much digital than necessary at this point is unwanted)
When you record a VHS which is also 100% analog you're using digitally controlled device... Don't know about JVC best picture technology, it's doing the same thing that for vinyl cutting with this time a processor to control the reading. Does it makes the vhs digital, NO!
And the best of all, the revox B77, PR99, studer, balfinger devices digitally controlled are perhaps also digital sound!
Or perhaps oberhein did digital sounding synthesizers!
Ok you want to be Audiophile the best process, but NO VINYL WOULD NEVER BE DIGITAL.
People are confusing digital sound with analog sound using digital input, vs analog input, device digitally controlled vs sound produced by a binary stream! analog synthesizers with virtual analog ones.
And if you think that digital delays in the cutting process does remove the AAA, of a vinyl then please prove it microscope two different pressing and prove it!
I do love analog sound, i'm 95% using analog device, synthesizers but quiet all the time i have digital control on them!
I even regret digital control for the inputs on my revox in addition with the analog ones!
Always said digital control is not an enemy of analog sound, it's direct digital processing which is!
I have no business interest, and hate digital audio/video even my synthesizers have analog device converted for digital control if we could remove most digital in the people life except a few things (communication, Device control, video game...) i would be the first to do it. (in fact i'm doing it, unfortunately not all people) It's awful to live only with a smartphone as all analog device simulator, without any physical media, but i must admit that digital control, are welcome as soon as it never alter the sound path, and here it's the case! You cannot say vinyl is digital because some are using digital late control! It's not true! Therefor you couldn't prove it on the finished product. When i'm telling digital sound/video is inferior (not in all aspect), i have proof, because unless you have them no interest! Ok you've found that it's not full aaa control, but it's still full aaa sound except if input signal is digital and even in this case it wont be prof on the finished product, just a sound a bit different! Audiophile release deserve more interest in respect of the master, but if digital control improve the space/quality with not sound path alteration, why not, double headed decks are no more available, but a lot of people have Neumann lathes, it would be a shame to not use them just because they do not have a double headed deck,! However i would recommend them to switch back to in between mode, analog circuitry, even if less precise (not sure about this) groove optimization would be achieved!
I don't agree with framing everything as analog vs. digital. Digital is every bit as good and even better, as long as the technicians know what they're doing. If they don't, it's going to sound bad, regardless of whether it's analog or digital.
You missed the point of the video. We are talking about transparency and that most AAA records of the past, aren't. In terms of quality, the low number of bits is objective
@@anadialog I got the point. To me, it really isn't provocative that there's a digital step in vinyl production. I'm 85% into classical music, where the use of digital processes has always been a) transparent, and b) beneficial to sound quality.
You said digital is every BIT as good. 🤣
@@VideoArchiveGuy Accidental pun.
I really wanted to be polite and professional with my comments, but I think I’m just gonna go with grow up it’s not 1950s anymore just except the fact that things are not going to go back in time the people that used to produce manufacture operate all these analog leads I’ve been long dead the expertise are not there in the industry anymore for analog people claim to know what they are doing but often the sound is terrible. I love vinyl LPs I have a model set up Technics turntable I got NAD power amp NAD preamp NAD phono amp I think you are really taking what is a brilliant way of listening to music a nice hobby. I’m running with it a little bit too far. I mean if you really wanna go back to analog go back to wax cylinders on a really old manual wind up phonograph purely analog but that sounds crap. Take what you’re given pick out what you like. If you don’t like something don’t buy it simple us take into account. We are living in 2022 Where 1940s 50s technology is not being invested in and the expertise in that particular industry are not there anymore. Yes I know people are gonna 99 disable. What about this version? What about that person? What about this company? Yes, but they are all self taught or at least thirdhand information on what they know and I’m sorry if that upsets anybody enjoying music. Anyway, you like it when you start getting too technical and getting upset about the sauce and the mastering then I’m sorry to say you’ve taken it too far and you’re no longer enjoying the music and I will say this out loud if the analog version is not good enough on vinyl, listen to it on CD all the problems that you are related to in this video with EQ curves and so on I’m not a problem on CD or digital download, but yes I know that’s not analog which is the whole idea of the channel
We aren't talking of what is better but transparency and correct pricing, just as for MoFi-gate
Because it is not about enjoying music anymore. It is about a collecting hobby.
Cool info, but I don't see any problem here. If it works, it works. No sound engineer who mixes professional recordings cares about your or my opinion. They just do their job however they see fit. Yes, there exist bad mixes, but really no one cares. You just don't like it and move along.
The problem is the same of MoFi you are paying for a specific item (in the AAA cases)...and it's the opposite. Since this regards tape, it is a problem related to a wealth of so-called audiophile editions, plus, it means that even normal analog Productions of the 80's and 90's if the payback machines didn't have a second head it means that those are all digital. Finally, the conversion is Cary out not but reference DACs, hence and even more poor sound quality.
Why are so many people unable to create a literate sentence these days, perhaps they should read what they have typed in before publishing. Perhaps it wouldn't make a difference though.
There should be a question mark after "days", not a comma, and you're missing a comma after "difference", professor.
@@mk5346 ahhh sheeeet.
24bit is so good it's hard to tell sometimes the difference!
24 bit & 96kHz well mastered digital audio is indeed hard to beat !
@@lucalone DSD beats them
@@MARTIN201199 Heh, in my post above where I recommended the video about this, David Robinson, the owner of Positive Feedback suggested that the guys at Abbey Road should get off their @sses and dump their use of PCM (24/192) and start using Quad DSD 😊
I think the max volume to ear buds, so kids would not destroy their hearing, was litigated to the point where record companies could not be sued by kids with diminished hearing from loud digitized music thru the Devices” “everyone’ IS FED BY TH-cam, just follow the Money, SO sad.