HD Vinyl

[jpmorris]

“High Definition Vinyl” Is Happening, Possibly as Early as Next Year | Pitchfork

This is interesting. While a lot of people have been pointing and laughing, the fact that they seem to be fabricating a stamper directly from audio data instead of cutting a disk and electroplating it is interesting indeed.
This could make it considerably cheaper to get vinyl pressed, and that's not a bad thing. It's a little disappointing that it necessitates a digital audio step in what could otherwise be an entirely analogue recording chain, but most cutting houses use a digital delay anyway as part of the variable pitch recording system.

 

[cyrano]

Interesting, at least.

 

[ecc83]

"30% more amplitude"??

When I left off reading about vinyl and the 'hi-fi' scene the limit had already been reached and only the 'supertrackers' like the V15ll could cope with the velocities they were getting into the grooves.

Then, no matter how good the original product (and you still can't get away from the drastically frequency dependant cutting regime) it won't STAY that way unless we live in Clean Rooms.

Dave.

 

[miroslav]

“High Definition Vinyl” Is Happening, Possibly as Early as Next Year | Pitchfork.

And then the new debates..."The audio on the vinyl cut with a lathe has a warmer, more analog sound to it than the vinyl cut with the laser."

 

[RFR]

All in all, it's only as good as your cartridge

 

[jpmorris]

I would suspect that the "30% higher amplitude and 30% longer" thing is probably a Chinese Whispers thing. They probably mean 'Either 30% louder OR 30% longer", since it tends to be a compromise between length and amplitude, but the story got garbled by the press.

 

[ecc83]

I would suspect that the "30% higher amplitude and 30% longer" thing is probably a Chinese Whispers thing. They probably mean 'Either 30% louder OR 30% longer", since it tends to be a compromise between length and amplitude, but the story got garbled by the press.

Very possibly but my point was, IF 30% louder there are very few systems that could track that, especially those tubular bells!

Dave.

 

[WarmJetGuitar]

Seems like good news. Although a bummer with digital being a nessecary part of the cutting process though. The Czech pressing plant that everyone in the "underground" (good lord I hate that word) music enviroment are using here in Denmark can cut from 1/4" 15 IPS with no AD/DA steps at all and since they're among the cheaper options it would actually surprise me if lots of other plants can do it by request.

But damm, what we could really use we be an entirely new analog listening medium. I mean, vinyl have too many shortcomings and compromises (am I the only one who downloads high res FLAC versions of my favourite albums to get the songs at the end of a site with proper sound?) and 15 IPS reel-to-reel too damm expensive and inconvinient for somehow casual listening.
Maybe a new format could be based on VHS, just with the whole tape width used for audio, perhaps at a higher speed and the electronics of players entirely designed for audio reproduction?

 

[ecc83]

Seems like good news. Although a bummer with digital being a nessecary part of the cutting process though. The Czech pressing plant that everyone in the "underground" (good lord I hate that word) music enviroment are using here in Denmark can cut from 1/4" 15 IPS with no AD/DA steps at all and since they're among the cheaper options it would actually surprise me if lots of other plants can do it by request.

But damm, what we could really use we be an entirely new analog listening medium. I mean, vinyl have too many shortcomings and compromises (am I the only one who downloads high res FLAC versions of my favourite albums to get the songs at the end of a site with proper sound?) and 15 IPS reel-to-reel too damm expensive and inconvinient for somehow casual listening.
Maybe a new format could be based on VHS, just with the whole tape width used for audio, perhaps at a higher speed and the electronics of players entirely designed for audio reproduction?

Well the Elcaset failed and that was reckoned to equal the performance of a Revox A77 way ago. With modern tape formulations and close digital (!) transport control* the concept could approach a dynamic range of 70dB (best FM radio) or better if you will stand for some analogue noise reduction.

Video tape is a non-starter because the oxide is not magnetically aligned in the tape travel direction and would give poor audio results. Do you ever recall hearing Betamax sound BEFORE it all went 'hi-fi'? Bloody awful!

*with a pilot tone at say neg 60 a digital control system could give ZERO W&F and perfect speed control.

How many do you think we can sell in the next five years or so? !

Dave.

 

[jpmorris]

If you can get enough bandwidth, e.g. a rotary head video system or something like a laserdisc, you could always FM encode the audio. But that tends to mean a lot of expensive, precision moving parts. Cassette with better noise reduction sounds like a better bet IMHO.

 

[cyrano]

Maybe a new format could be based on VHS, just with the whole tape width used for audio, perhaps at a higher speed and the electronics of players entirely designed for audio reproduction?

That's either FM or digital (ADAT, DAT)...

FM is analog, but it's not better than your well adjusted Revox.

Besides, there isn't anything wrong with digital an sich. It's just the way it is used. Over compressed, very loud and even just brutally clipping.

I agree it would sound better on analog media, cause these have soft clipping by nature.

 

[ecc83]

If you can get enough bandwidth, e.g. a rotary head video system or something like a laserdisc, you could always FM encode the audio. But that tends to mean a lot of expensive, precision moving parts. Cassette with better noise reduction sounds like a better bet IMHO.

IMHO that would be sort of cheating because FM is sort of digital with a sampling frequency of 10.7 MHz or lower for a pulse counting detector which gives better linearity.

Dave.

 

[jpmorris]

IMHO that would be sort of cheating because FM is sort of digital with a sampling frequency of 10.7 MHz or lower for a pulse counting detector which gives better linearity.
Dave.

I was going to suggest PWM or PDM (DSD) which in the case of DSD is digital, but has more analogue-sounding artifacts.

 

[jamesperrett]

If you can get enough bandwidth, e.g. a rotary head video system or something like a laserdisc, you could always FM encode the audio. But that tends to mean a lot of expensive, precision moving parts. Cassette with better noise reduction sounds like a better bet IMHO.

You know that you've just described how Hifi VHS works don't you. It has been around for over 30 years and most commercial VHS tapes used it. In the days before DAT I used it as a way of backing up our master tapes. I seem to remember that the machine that I used had a bandwidth of over 40kHz. The sound was far superior to cassette.

 

[ecc83]

You know that you've just described how Hifi VHS works don't you. It has been around for over 30 years and most commercial VHS tapes used it. In the days before DAT I used it as a way of backing up our master tapes. I seem to remember that the machine that I used had a bandwidth of over 40kHz. The sound was far superior to cassette.

Yes, in conjunction with an Analogue to DIGITAL Converter!
As you were! That is wrong, penalty for posting very late when knackered. But, Hi Fi Video sound often had a 'companding' system? I was lucky to get a gen'one Ferguson (JVC) machine with a 'linear' recording path, bloody good LED meters for that time and a switchable limiter. Son used to dump a 4>2 track mix from a Teac A3440 to it and avoid one stage of noise introduction. Once we had a 1/2 decent computer tho' and a Fast track pro....Easy street!

Dave.

 

[jpmorris]

You know that you've just described how Hifi VHS works don't you. It has been around for over 30 years and most commercial VHS tapes used it. In the days before DAT I used it as a way of backing up our master tapes. I seem to remember that the machine that I used had a bandwidth of over 40kHz. The sound was far superior to cassette.

Yes. It was also used by the Racal 4DS which was an instrumentation recorder going up into ultrasound.

 

[Lance Lawson]

After said hi res disk is cut it will be subject to the same degradation that ordinary vinyl is. It may sound better longer but it'll be a worn out slug eventually. I tend to agree that we need a new analogue format. A permanently programmed disk read by a magnetic stylus that either floats just above the disk or makes contact very lightly might be an option. Such a permanently programmed disk could be made as robust as a vinyl record and could be made to the same dimensions so as to have the same visual/tactile appeal as grooved records.

 

[ecc83]

After said hi res disk is cut it will be subject to the same degradation that ordinary vinyl is. It may sound better longer but it'll be a worn out slug eventually. I tend to agree that we need a new analogue format. A permanently programmed disk read by a magnetic stylus that either floats just above the disk or makes contact very lightly might be an option. Such a permanently programmed disk could be made as robust as a vinyl record and could be made to the same dimensions so as to have the same visual/tactile appeal as grooved records.

Sort of analogue "Mini-Disc" but bigger? (and OT I know but, the MD was THE perfect medium for ICE and is still much handier than anything else for grabbing home audio. I suspect Phillips/Sony of putting an oar in? )

Dave.

 

[rob aylestone]

Over the years we have had some amazing new inventions work for us, and with each step up, we've had attempts to improve the previous 'standard' to get extra life, but they only survive as a niche. Not just audio, but with every technology based product. The only real fact that comes out of it is that the resurrected system always sits in the enthusiasts only section. The rose coloured glasses always come into play and we remember the good bits and set aside the bad bits. Vinyl is having a resurgence but at what cost? Certainly the money cost for a record is hardly insubstantial, but the replay systems cost serious money. They may well sound wonderful on first play, but every replay is destructive. This happened first time around and we seem to have forgotten buying an album, then copying it to cassette, and playing that because it lasted longer and sounded sort of good enough, and we were happy with the virtually unplayed LP sitting on the shelf looking good. I spend hours producing the best quality audio I can, and then by far the most popular delivery format is now mp3.

Is HD vinyl worth it?

 

[inkline]

Analog just plain sounds better than digital quite often, I won't say 100% of the time like some, but quite often.

The drawbacks are of course, the noise floor, the fact that it is less convenient, etc.

A good reel to reel tape, or a good record, has a life to it the digital copy normally doesn't. Though if you record to reel to reel first and then to digital, you can make up for that a lot.

Hopefully this attempt at HD vinyl is better than the last one, it'd be something to look forwards to. Though I suspect if I get one it'll be like my regular turntable, I'll record to from the HD vinyl to mp3 and only listen to the vinyl on the turntable on special occasions.