Folks, I just spent a hell of a lot of my sparse free time putting to test through the SAME speakers AND at the SAME levels etc. of my VERY OLD (hell, ALMOST as old as me, I'm 42) copy of Croby Stills Nash & Young's "Déjà Vu" album VERSES both downloaded .mp3's and a store bought CD copy.

Despite all the scratches and visible (to me) disc-warp (from being left in the sun under the windshield of the car once ...GRR, I coulda KILLED that guy who borrowed it that time... but, I digress)

Yup, the vinyl record somehow still sounded better.

It "took me back"

I felt it

...do any of you know what I am fucking trying to say?

-------------------

What I think is happening is that EVEN the good "old stuff" is getting re-mastered to where is sorta sounds like the "new stuff" (compression and "loudness-war")

sad, sad, sad.

-------------------

If I had a million dollars, I'd gladly give it for an UNOPENED and UNTOUCHED copy of CSN&Y's Déjà Vu, Atlantic 1970 *, US #1 album.

...do any of you know what I am fucking trying to say?

Yes. Vinyl has more depth. If the CD audio format went to 24-bit, it would be a significant improvement and go a long way toward putting this debate to rest.

In the meantime, I'm going to start adding snap, crackle and pop to my tracks.

What about dither, George? Do you use that? It might help. I'm not much of a digital recordist, so I have little experience.

yeah, I hear ya. I work at an audiophile store where we sell $10k turntables, etc. When you hear a properly mastered record, it really does sound good, even though it doesn't have the frequency range of digital, linear f response of digital, wide dynamic range of 24-bit digital....It FEELS GOOD.

But, that is what we grew up with. The kids today don't know what they are missing. The average person listens to music on $9 ear buds. They don't sit and listen to records from beginning to end. There is little album oriented music. It is all about the single, not a concept or thought relayed through art.

No, 24-bit wouldn't matter. Most recording sessions are 24-bit now. The problem is that we are not making use of the dynamic range as it is. There is 6dB per bit. The morons are making the RMS the constant peak, square waving everything, and smashing it. so it does not matter. 16-Bit is fine, because they are not maximizing it's benefits.

Most records have satisfying dynamic range and probably an unmeasurable quality called "warmth". I own about three thousand of' 'em, most in pristine condition, going back to when I started collecting in the early sixties. I've always babied my stuff; people used to make fun of me. (Especially when just my stylus alone was costing several hundred dollars.)
BTW, Shmoo, I have two copies of a CSN&Y's Déjà Vu, Atlantic 1970; one that I play, and another unopened that I bought for $2 when it became a cut-out in the late '70s. I'm sorry I can't part with either. But if I learn about one that's mint somewhere, I'll let you know.

lowdbrent -- I try to leave dynamics in my recordings. I record everything at 24-bit. I can hear the difference when I put it on a CD.

These extra 8 bits are a 50% increase in accuracy. 16-bit is the audio equivalent of setting your monitor to 256 colors. It's the transition points that suffer most.

You are not normal mixing with dynamics.

Not being normal is one of my most endearing qualities.