Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!teddy!rdp
From: rdp@teddy.UUCP (Richard D. Pierce)
Newsgroups: net.audio,net.rumor
Subject: Re: CD vs vinyl (long, sorry)
Message-ID: <2588@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-May-86 09:14:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: teddy.2588
Posted: Wed May  7 09:14:05 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 8-May-86 22:03:45 EDT
References: <2679@pixar.pixar> <297@uthub.UUCP> <2743@pixar.pixar> <331@omen.UUCP>
Reply-To: rdp@teddy.UUCP (Richard D. Pierce)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 55
Xref: watmath net.audio:8379 net.rumor:2193

In article <331@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:
>
>Please show me an LP with any 20 kHz material anywhere near 0db, let alone
>+12 or +20 db, ticks and pops excluded.

Well, the show us any musical source whatsoever that has 20 Khz material
at anywhere near the kinds os levels your talking about first, though.
(Careful here, I've done quite a bit of study of musical spectra!)

>
>Show me an LP with a 82 db dynamic range at 20 kHz or even at 5 kHz before
>claiming it!
>

Show us any musical source with the kind of dynamic range your talking about.
The nonsense being perpetrated on the net about orchestras having billion
db dynamic range is unfounded. Measurements that I have done when I was
involved in this kind of research indicate far less dynamic range is needed.
For example, one of my measurements of the Boston Symphony Orchestra doing
Stravinsky's "Le sacre du Printemps" showed an average floor noise in excess
of 50 db at best, quitest passages in the same general region, and peaks (using
impulse measurement techniques) to about 93 db. A big fat 43 db. Rock music is
far worse, in the neighborhood of 10 to 15 db.

I have chosen to stay as far as possible from the CD issue, but it's this
sort of complete misinformation that completely muddies the waters. 

I have, myself, auditioned both LP's and CD's under far more stringent
requirements than it appears anyone here has mentioned. People talk about
which sounds more "real", but with, it seems, complete ignorance of what
constitutes "real". 

I have listened to LP's and CD's playing instruments that I know well,
harpsichords and organs. Even recordings of specific instruments I have
played, and the net result is that both CD's and LP's are spectacularly
bad at generating a convincing image of the original instrument. This is
a point you are all loosing sight of. The recording techniques are miserable,
including bad miking, worse mixing, and terrible EQ. So much information is
lost BEFORE the decision is ever made to go to LP or CD. 

If those of you with your Infinity's and your Polk's and your this's and that's
REALLY knew how awfully grim your speakers really were, maybe you might be
humbled into the realization of the absolute stupidy of this argument. I 
have been in the audio field for nearly 16 years. I have seen this shit all
before, and it is always the same. You are all barking up the wrong trees, in
fact your still wandering around in the wrong forest.

Go to more concerts, learn to play some of these instruments yourselves. Then
see how much effort you are willing to put in these arguments. If you're
reasonable, I suspect the market for used high-end stereo equipment would be
flooded.

Meanwhile, direct further CD vs. LP discussion to net.audio.anally_fixated

Dick Pierce