Jump to content

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull LP?


Lurker
 Share

Recommended Posts

And given the fact that vinyl degrades at every play... and I don't know about you guys, but I listen to the same album thousands of times...

That won't be an issue with the KOCS score.

Neil

Well, from this point of view, the TDK score would be a much better LP choice.

Colin Thomson, trying so hard not to take the bait...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I regret I didn't figure it out earlier. It was just the two of you, and it was a lonely way to figure anything out. If you had been ordinary, average, like the other guys, I'd have understood the joke. As wonderful as you think it was.

But now it's time to eat up, go to bed, and wash my ears. I know, that's when things get interesting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine from Denmark sent me a sample of "The Raiders March" from the Raiders double LP that he ripped using an Audio-Technica AT PL120 Turntable and sampled it at 192kHz 24-bit compressed with Flac lossless. I have a Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium sound board that plays 192/24 with superb quality. And yet I'm struggling to notice any biiiiiig improvment...

Indeed the 180-gram virgin vinyl ripped with a turntable as good as the one from my friend above and sampled at the highest rate possible for consumers today will sound better than it's 44.1/16 counterpart, but not enough to make me go and buy stuff like that. It's a minor sound improvment and definitly not worth the price. And given the fact that vinyl degrades at every play... and I don't know about you guys, but I listen to the same album thousands of times...

The LP and the CD sound nigh-identical because they were both mastered by Steve Hoffman (who's a mastering genius). The difference between LP and CD is much more pronounced on different recordings, based upon how they were mastered. Many MANY albums sound terrible on CD due to the way they were mastered, whereas a different mastering of the same album on vinyl ends up sounding much better. That's mainly an issue with pop/rock recordings, though - soundtrack scores seem to do pretty well on CD, barring some exceptions (ROTJ SE springs to mind).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine from Denmark sent me a sample of "The Raiders March" from the Raiders double LP that he ripped using an Audio-Technica AT PL120 Turntable and sampled it at 192kHz 24-bit compressed with Flac lossless. I have a Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium sound board that plays 192/24 with superb quality. And yet I'm struggling to notice any biiiiiig improvment...

Indeed the 180-gram virgin vinyl ripped with a turntable as good as the one from my friend above and sampled at the highest rate possible for consumers today will sound better than it's 44.1/16 counterpart, but not enough to make me go and buy stuff like that. It's a minor sound improvment and definitly not worth the price. And given the fact that vinyl degrades at every play... and I don't know about you guys, but I listen to the same album thousands of times...

The LP and the CD sound nigh-identical because they were both mastered by Steve Hoffman (who's a mastering genius). The difference between LP and CD is much more pronounced on different recordings, based upon how they were mastered. Many MANY albums sound terrible on CD due to the way they were mastered, whereas a different mastering of the same album on vinyl ends up sounding much better. That's mainly an issue with pop/rock recordings, though - soundtrack scores seem to do pretty well on CD, barring some exceptions (ROTJ SE springs to mind).

So that makes the decades long "LP vs CD" debate rather pointless, if the problem is the master recording, and we're stuck with advantages/disadvantages that each media can offer, wich will end up leading us to pure marketing strategy from the music industry to make us buy the same album in various formats, but all with the same quality and content.

I vote for CDs. Plays nicely without extremely expensive equipments, reproduces the exact same sound quality no matter how many times you play it, free of pops/clicks and hiss (unless the master recording has some of those), smaller in size, easy to handle, easy to control (skip tracks, fast fowarding, rewinding, programing track orders, and so on...)

About the ROTJ 1997 SE, you're indeed right. It sounds awfull . But if we take the 1993 Anthology, you'll hear the difference. In that case, even the original 1983 LP sounds way better than the 1997 SE. But, like you pointed, it's a mastering issue.

And Neil, you're right too... I won't be playing KOTCS enough to damage the LP's grooves... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.