>vinyl rips
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
>vinyl rips
>>53305492
You should get those cocks out of your face; you really need to watch where you're posting.
>rips of a CD with a 320kbps MP3 master
i have one single vinyl rip. it's 1.5gb. there are crackling noises everywhere and the overall sound is quiet as fuck. never again
Actually, in some cases, mainly for select older albums, a vinyl rip will be from a different master and may subjectively sound better than a CD rip.
I downloaded a FLAC rip of The Man Machine, a Kraftwerk album, off What.CD, and it sounded a bit harsh to me, even though I liked the songs. It just seemed a bit off, lacking a big depth in sound.
I then decided to try a vinyl rip... now, an important note here is that this particular album comes in an original German version, and an English version.
The first vinyl rip I tried was the English version, like the CD I downloaded. This vinyl rip wasn't really much of an improvement. In fact, I think I liked it less than the rip that I tried first. It did have a slightly different "sound", not necessarily a bad difference, almost like a different filter put through, and maybe slightly more depth... but the problem here was that it sounded lower quality, like it was missing small details...
I looked at the download description and it appeared that this vinyl ripper put it through some rather aggressive noise removal. They listed their gear and ripping settings, and IMO, the post processing really damaged the audio quality. With stuff like noise removal, less is really more, and it may even be better if you have a pristine needle and clean record and avoid noise removal entirely.
So this vinyl rip was a miss... but wait, it turns out, I had one more option: the vinyl rip of the original German language release. I thought, why not, lets give this a chance, as I really liked the actual songs and wanted a good quality version of them. I wasn't sure if I would prefer the original German versions or not, as I didn't understand German... but I like the originals now.
Anyways, let me tell you... this rip was done right, and you could hear it. It had lots of depth, more "air" to it, and sounded more three dimensional. I checked the description, and guess what? There was no post processing done, whatsoever.
Cont next post..
>>53306407
The difference between the CD rip of the English version, and the vinyl rip of the German version (Die Mensch-Maschine), was truly astonishing. I believe that it's a combination of a better master, and a skilled vinyl ripper, that made it sound so good. You should take note that the album's original release, in 1978, was in fact on vinyl, technically making CDs a re-release of the album. Surprisingly, for a rip free of noise removal, there were no pops or clicks other than the very beginning on the first track, where for the first few seconds you can hear the soft sound of the needle on the spinning record. This goes away once the music really kicks in at around 10 seconds or so (I'm recalling from memory, as I'm not on my main computer at the moment). For the remaining duration of the album, there is no more audible noise that one may expect from a digitally recorded record... almost as if it wasn't a record, but it really was.
I wasn't expecting a vinyl rip to be superior... but it actually was (at least to my ears, without a doubt). Now, I've tried listening to some vinyl rips of other albums... and did not get the same results. They can be hit or miss. The quality of a vinyl rip very much depends on the individual ripper and the album in question. I'm not saying that vinyl is a superior format, but I am saying that vinyl releases sometimes contain different masters and may sound more pleasing to your ears in some cases (but certainly not all.) Equipment plays a big role as well in the quality you'll get out of vinyl... and if you're ripping, settings are game-changing.
>>53305492
Ever since I left windows
GNU
>>53306427
And yes, I really did type out this ridiculously long two post response to talk about this positive experience with one particular vinyl rip. I hope it will be useful or interesting to someone, and provide an argument in favor of the existence of vinyl rips.
some music is only available on vinyl. hell, some music is only available on cassette
>>53306407
>What.cd
>>53305492
>3 gig vinyl rip
>crackling/popping everywhere making it unlistenable
never again
I'm sometimes in the mood to hear the clicks and pops of a record, it reminds me of being a kid and playing with the record player.
That said, I'll download both a CD rip and a vinyl rip if I do so.
>>53306100
Literally makes an album unlistenable
>>53306607
>tfw I have a rare record I could upload to what but I'm too afraid to play it again
>>53305492
>vinyl rip
>nothing but hiss
>>53305492
>rip vinyl
>someone else rips the same vinyl
>they sound different
>argue over which is the "best"
>third person rips the same vinyl
>three way argument over which rip is the best
>>53305492
I like how many vinyl rips of private trackers use extreme bit depths and sampling rates which matter less with a poor fidelity format like vinyl and just reveal all the distortion, noise and crackles better.
>>53305492
You say this only because you never listened to good vynil rips. Most vynil rips have terrible sound quality due to background noises, but the few good vynil rips are unbelievably better than the CD rips. I've got a Hunky Dory's vynil rip and a Low's reel to reel rip and they sound much better than any other rip I got from these two discs. Also bear in mind that the original vynil recordings are generally much much better than any other recording, because original vynil recordings are the closest ones to the source. What I've just said exclusively applies to music which was first recorded on vynils, of course. There's no reason to get vynils, or even worse vynil rips, of recent records.
>>53307752
>vynil
>the few good vynil rips are unbelievably better than the CD rips
Must be the master and nothing to do with the shitty format itself which is inferior to CD in every possible way.
>>53307769
> must be the master
So what? CD might be a better physical support, but at the end of the day most of the masters used for CD suck compared to vynil masters. Mastering quality is all that count after all.
>>53307798
It's vinyl not vynil and no, CD master can be just as good and they often are. The problems are the older vinyl masters vs CD remasters where the remaster is usually just a compressed version of the original and the original master was never released on digital for whatever reason. This is a problem outside of the formats themselves.
>all that count
No not really but it does make the biggest difference.
>>53305492
>what is loudness war
>not ripping your vinyl wet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVLCIZK0-cg
>>53307873
Yes, you basically agree with me then, listening to old music in vynils is just better. Of course it doesn't depend on the format, CD is better, but I'd rather listen to the original master than to a master noone knows about.
>>53306407
>whatcuck rangers
>vinyl
yes you are retarded.
>>53308240
This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
Everyone in this thread should read this.
>>53309408
Everyone knows that and it's not a music format related issue.
---
http://www.soundstage.com/vinyl/vinyl200702.htm
Do you even demagnetize your vinyls?
>>53306571
Great posts!
Music sucks
>>53306407
>>53306427
shit I didn't read.
Anyways the advantage behind vinyl is that you don't have to convert it from digital to analog to listen to it. But by ripping it to a digital container you lost that advantage.
>>53311037
Makes no difference. Pretty much any vinyl cut in the last 30+ years will have passed through some kind of digital circuit.
>>53311133
Which is exactly why it's a meme.
