Anything positive to say about BBC HD quality.

"Richard Evans" wrote in message
...
On Jan 3, 9:33 pm, "Keith G" wrote:


OK, not easy to do at short notice so by way of a quick snatch here's a
Laurie Anderson track from the LP and the same track from the CD for
Richard, both compressed to 256K MP3s for equalness (the CD track was
already an MP3) - make your own 'volume' adjustments as necessary:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/KokokuLP.mp3

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/KokokuCD.mp3

Enjoy! Compare! Marvel at the differences (or lack thereof)!

I've downloaded them. Going to add Replay Gain, then put them on my
Squeezebox server to listen to try out a bit later.

(Makes me smile when everyone immediately counters any mention of an LP,
or
vinyl generally, with some comparative remark about CDs! :-)

OK. Well I thought we were talking about CD being better than Vinyl,
or has the conversation moved on since then?


You are probably right Richard, but I was merely backing up my own remark
that I'm bothered when I see people appearing to imply you've got to spend a
fortune on vinyl gear to get a reasonable result. *Including* the brand-new
Denon solid-state stereo amplifier, I estimate the cost of the whole rig to
create the clips I have posted to have been about £355 - making the vinyl
side about a hundred quid or so.

Whether or not CDs sound better than LPs is for the individual to decide; it
doesn't bother me either way, I know where my own preferences lie.

That all said, if someone isn't completely blown away by vinyl I'd strongly
advise not to get into it - there's nothing much 'plug and play' about it,
once you get past a little 50 quid USB deck or suchlike!!

Keith G wrote:

"bcoombes" [email protected] wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:

Enjoy! Compare! Marvel at the differences (or lack thereof)!

Hmm, when listening on headphones the cd version just shades it on
treble transparency I'd say although there is not very much in it, I
could certainly live with the Technics vinyl system. (Let's hear it
for Ebay). Of course the problem with back to back listening tests is
you have to consider the whole food chain, I was listening through a
computer fitted with a Creative X-Fi Music sound card with the
Sennheisers plugged directly into it which gives quite good sound
reproduction considering the toxic (signal corruption-wise)
environment that is the interior of a computer. Whether I'd have come
to the same conclusion with the vinyl deck/cd player plugged directly
into my main rig is hard to say.


The only way to *choose* in situations like this is to run the two
sysytems properly in your own setup over a period of time. Your
preferences (if any) will evolve sooner or later. CDs (or 'digital'
generally) and LPs aren't mutually exclusive - it's perfectly possible
to enjoy both.


Indeed, but the bottom line is that I gave up being able to bother with vinyl
some years ago, it (the vinyl) and the playing equipment are just too vulnerable
to damage at just about every stage of use. Some of the vinyl buffs I know
[knew] were seriously anal characters.

"bcoombes" [email protected] wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:


The only way to *choose* in situations like this is to run the two
sysytems properly in your own setup over a period of time. Your
preferences (if any) will evolve sooner or later. CDs (or 'digital'
generally) and LPs aren't mutually exclusive - it's perfectly possible to
enjoy both.


Indeed, but the bottom line is that I gave up being able to bother with
vinyl some years ago, it (the vinyl) and the playing equipment are just
too vulnerable to damage at just about every stage of use.


Apart from nadging my share of MC cantilevers over the recent years, I'd
dispute that - it's very hard to damage a record accidentally and 'sensible'
tonearms and carts are much tougher than they look!


Some of the vinyl buffs I know
[knew] were seriously anal characters.



Yes, possibly but that doesn't include me. If anything, I'm an (inverted
vinyl snob* - I like to spend as little as possible on kit and get a good
sound from it. This is my main vinyl rig which is either home-made or at
least home-fettled (ignore the B&W speakers - they are for my cinema):

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...inyl%20Rig.jpg


It comes under the 'looks like ****e, sounds amazing' category! (Note the
DHTs which seem to be coming in for the usual flak elsewhere! ;-) One of
those decks cost 22 quid, the other wasn't much more!

My own experience is that it is the CD buff who is far more likely to be the
anal type - banging on forever about 'superior' SNR, useless frequency
extremes, low noise floor (when there's no tape hiss), absence of 'rifle
shots', resistance to damage (complete ******** that one) and gawd knows
what else! Proof, if you need it, is that they simoly can't stop bashing
vinyl whenever they get the chance, whereas most 'vinylista' that I know
couldn't care less what other people *say* they prefer!!

Me? I just slap a record on and listen to the music - if/when the record's a
noisy bugger (happens), I just move away from it! (That HF's got no legs!
;-)

Hardest thing to do with a CD in my book (especially if you have a remote in
your hand) is wait for the track to finish....!!

@;-)

Keith G wrote:

"bcoombes" [email protected] wrote in message
o.uk...
Keith G wrote:


Some of the vinyl buffs I know
[knew] were seriously anal characters.

Yes, possibly but that doesn't include me. If anything, I'm an (inverted
vinyl snob* - I like to spend as little as possible on kit and get a
good sound from it.

Yes me too although I do give any new Ebay purchases a good clean inside and
out. (Specially remotes which sometimes I've been almost afraid to touch such
was their native used state.)

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...inyl%20Rig.jpg

Looks good, not sure if I could live with the speaker stand colour but I really
like the metal rack. Lately I've been looking at valve amps again, particularly
as the Chinese ones are so cheap lately. I nearly pressed the buy button on one
last month but at the last minute didn't.


It comes under the 'looks like ****e, sounds amazing' category! (Note
the DHTs which seem to be coming in for the usual flak elsewhere! ;-)
One of those decks cost 22 quid, the other wasn't much more!

My own experience is that it is the CD buff who is far more likely to be
the anal type - banging on forever about 'superior' SNR, useless
frequency extremes, low noise floor (when there's no tape hiss), absence
of 'rifle shots', resistance to damage (complete ******** that one) and
gawd knows what else! Proof, if you need it, is that they simoly can't
stop bashing vinyl whenever they get the chance, whereas most
'vinylista' that I know couldn't care less what other people *say* they
prefer!!

Well the anality I was referring to wasn't in the sense that they were vinyl
advocates, more in the sense that they spent several hours a day cleaning their
LPs and several more hours calibrating their decks and the remaining hours
rebalancing their tonearms. And someone with the temerity to suggest that they
could 'put a record on' caused immediate cold sweat outbreak. I exaggerate a
shade of course but the syndrome was quite common at one time. I knew of a guy
who always purchased two of any new album he bought..one to play and the other
to remain pristine in it's sleeve.

"bcoombes" [email protected] wrote


Yes me too although I do give any new Ebay purchases a good clean inside
and out. (Specially remotes which sometimes I've been almost afraid to
touch such was their native used state.)


The only time I bought a remote from eBay it was so bad I returned it - I
think a dog had been chewing on it!




http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/shown...inyl%20Rig.jpg

Looks good, not sure if I could live with the speaker stand colour but I
really like the metal rack.


You see them everywhere - I bught a number of them from Argos. Dirt cheap at
the time.


Lately I've been looking at valve amps again, particularly
as the Chinese ones are so cheap lately. I nearly pressed the buy button
on one last month but at the last minute didn't.


Hmm...

OK. I was very curious about the cheepie Chinky amps when they first turned
up a few years back and bought a couple of Chinese SETs to try them out. I
was very pleased with them but they can have a few little issues that might
need a bit of attention to settle them down - although probably no more than
any other valve amps, when I remember a friend of mine that had an EAR phono
stage that went tits-up in a week from brand new!

Anyway, I don't have them now but they were very good VFM and the sound from
them was lovely, but I think there's some about now that I wouldn't be too
keen on. 'Music Angel' is one such name - PCBs for a start....

I've just had a quick look on ebay for 'tube amplifier' and it's interesting
to see the bottom's dropped out of the prices on this Chinese stuff - is why
I unloaded mine a bit smartish for what I had paid for them; I suspected it
would, once they had flooded the market with them!!



[anal vinylista]

Well the anality I was referring to wasn't in the sense that they were
vinyl advocates, more in the sense that they spent several hours a day
cleaning their LPs and several more hours calibrating their decks and the
remaining hours rebalancing their tonearms. And someone with the temerity
to suggest that they could 'put a record on' caused immediate cold sweat
outbreak. I exaggerate a shade of course but the syndrome was quite common
at one time. I knew of a guy who always purchased two of any new album he
bought..one to play and the other to remain pristine in it's sleeve.



Oh, OK - I know that type! They always had a rig with a Shure V15/III on
it - *back in the day*!! :-)

I envy anyone who could afford two copies of everything they bought! But
even if I had been able to afford to do that, it's not my style - I do have
one ot two unopened records held back for a rainy day and a bunch of Beatles
LPs in plastic dust jackets, otherwise I just play 'em - I'm not preserving
them for posterity and they're still going to see me out without too much
trouble!!

"bcoombes" [email protected] wrote

Well the anality I was referring to wasn't in the sense that they were
vinyl advocates, more in the sense that they spent several hours a day
cleaning their LPs and several more hours calibrating their decks and the
remaining hours rebalancing their tonearms. And someone with the temerity
to suggest that they could 'put a record on' caused immediate cold sweat
outbreak. I exaggerate a shade of course but the syndrome was quite common
at one time. I knew of a guy who always purchased two of any new album he
bought..one to play and the other to remain pristine in it's sleeve.

Keith likes to complain about CD advocates because he wants uk.rec.audio to
be a haven for vinyl freaks, and gets upset when anyone points out that,
sound quality wise, vinyl is very much the poor relation. Then he starts up
with the sort of crap you responded to.

I entirely agree that, in this day and age, being a vinyl advocate and being
analy retentive are more or less synonymous. After all if your chosen
preference is the one that not only offers significantly worse sound quality
but also requires all that faffing about with record cleaners and
bias-compensators, you have to justify your perverse choice somehow!

David.

Keith G wrote:

My own experience is that it is the CD buff

There are no "CD buffs". Just people who enjoy listening to recorded music
and simply use the most suitable medium.

who is far more likely to be the anal type - banging on forever about
'superior' SNR, useless frequency extremes, low noise floor (when there's
no tape hiss), absence of 'rifle shots', resistance to damage (complete
******** that one) and gawd knows what else! Proof, if you need it, is
that they simoly can't stop bashing vinyl whenever they get the chance,
whereas most 'vinylista' that I know couldn't care less what other people
*say* they prefer!!

Well that's not you then is it? Because you really do care what other people
say!

David.

On 04/01/2010 15:48, David Looser wrote:
"bcoombes"[email protected] wrote

Well the anality I was referring to wasn't in the sense that they were
vinyl advocates, more in the sense that they spent several hours a day
cleaning their LPs and several more hours calibrating their decks and the
remaining hours rebalancing their tonearms. And someone with the temerity
to suggest that they could 'put a record on' caused immediate cold sweat
outbreak. I exaggerate a shade of course but the syndrome was quite common
at one time. I knew of a guy who always purchased two of any new album he
bought..one to play and the other to remain pristine in it's sleeve.

Keith likes to complain about CD advocates because he wants uk.rec.audio to
be a haven for vinyl freaks, and gets upset when anyone points out that,
sound quality wise, vinyl is very much the poor relation. Then he starts up
with the sort of crap you responded to.


What you're doing, or trying to do, is disagree with a preference.

I entirely agree that, in this day and age, being a vinyl advocate and being
analy retentive are more or less synonymous.

Who are you agreeing with?! There's nothing necessarily obsessive about
listening to LPs unless you read that into the practice. Which makes
you, erm, er, leaves it ;-)

After all if your chosen
preference is the one that not only offers significantly worse sound quality

That's just nonsense. I'd have thought you'd have taken some notice of
the recent discussion about this.

but also requires all that faffing about with record cleaners and
bias-compensators, you have to justify your perverse choice somehow!


'Requires' - there you go again :-)

Rob

"Rob" wrote

What you're doing, or trying to do, is disagree with a preference.

No, I'm disagreeing with the notion, still peddled in some quarters, that
vinyl is, in some mysterious way, "better".


After all if your chosen
preference is the one that not only offers significantly worse sound
quality

That's just nonsense. I'd have thought you'd have taken some notice of the
recent discussion about this.

It's hardly the fault of the CD that some mastering is utterly crap is it?
Nor is a rational response to poor CD mastering to go and buy vinyl; that
simply leaves one with choosing between poor mastering or a poor medium.

but also requires all that faffing about with record cleaners and
bias-compensators, you have to justify your perverse choice somehow!


'Requires' - there you go again :-)

There I go again - what?

If you don't "faff about" with record cleaners and bias compensators then
your "vinyl experience" will be even worse. If you are content to listen to
your records played on a Dansette with the stylus removing the dirt from the
grooves as it goes be my guest!

David.

Java Jive wrote:
Thanks for this link Mark. I've now incorporated this data into the
transmitter files ready for the next republish of the alignment
calculator, but some questions arise from it:

1) Why is Knock More being apparently converted to DVB-T2 the month
immediately following its DSO? Is this simply a mistake, in planning
or transcription, or is there a good reason?
DSO Beg: 08/09/2010
DSO End: 22/09/2010
DVB-T2 SO: 10/2010
http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/when_do_i...orth/knockmore

Don't know, might be a typo on either DUK or the Beeb's part.

2) I had thought Lichfield a Ch5 only TX which was going out of
service at DSO on 30/09/2011. Is there life after DSO for Lichfield,
or is this an interim pre-DSO digital transmission which will cease
when Sutton Coldfield switches over? Meanwhile, what will happen to
SC's pre-DSO transmission of Mux B?

Mux B from SC will continue until its DSO (the same applies at CP, EM, PP, and
BH). There's a lot of engineering work in progress at SC currently to prepare
it for DSO, and some services have been transferred to a temporary mast while
this continues. I assume it is less disruptive to use nearby Lichfield for the
interim HD mux, perhaps sharing the C5 analogue aerials ? AIUI Lichfield will
carry no TV services after SC's DSO in Sept 2011.

http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/suttonc...x.php#june2009

3) Have you any idea why there might be a DSO start date for Torosay,
13/10/2010, but not an end date?
http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/when_do_i_switch/stv_central

Don't know, the STV Central Scotland DSO dates were originally this autumn,
but about six months ago they were pushed back to Spring 2011. Again I suspect
typos or a discrepancy in someone's database.


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk