Mastering Vinyl, Myths, questions, discussion Options

[Axon]

This is a split of a discussion Hancoque and I had, which desperately needs to be elaborated on.

First of all, I've dumped my thoughts on the matter into the Wiki: http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...Vinyl_Mastering. Please comment on it.

A couple of the points there are explicitly worth starting this topic off:

• There is no consistent, unambiguous way to identify the provenance of a vinyl master. Most methods - but most of all, the zoomed-out waveform plot - are inaccurate in one way or another. Visual examination of clipped samples is fairly telling, but not applicable or effective in all cases. How can a vinyl master be accurately observed as being the same or different as a CD master?
• Even if a difference exists, whether or not it is audible is another question entirely. IIRC, brickwall limiting of 3-4db, correctly applied, may not be audible. If so, Hancoque's Slayer waveforms might not mean anything, because his peaks are all within 4db of the CD peaks. What audibility thresholds exist for clipped signals?

That said, I may be eating a hearty dinner of crow tonight, as I just examined one of the records I thought was of the same master as the CD (Battles - Mirrored), and I was able to observe pretty strong differences in clipping between the vinyl and CD versions. I'll reply later with some visual examples.

[analog scott]

If it is a "very pervasive myth" as you claim we should find it spewed all over the place in audio forums, no? So once again I would like to see this pervasive myth expressed somewhere other than this thread and the wiki article by someone who actually believes it if I'm going to buy into your claims of pervasiveness.

I have posted comments in the past which could be construed as supporting this myth. The gist of my argument is this:

*IF* you cut a vinyl LP from a hypercompressed master, *THEN* you will either get very little playing time per side *OR* you have to seriously limit the levels which compromises the (already woeful) S/N ratio available from vinyl.

On reflection, it occurs to me that when the source material is hypercompressed there is little need for any kind of decent S/N ratio. So perhaps turning down the levels to achieve sensible playing time isn't the big problem I had previously believed it to be.

1. The real issue is there comes a certain point with hypercompression of certain signals where the cutting head physically can't cut the laquer from the same signal without burning out.
2. While your comments are novel and interesting on a theoretical basis they really are non issues in the world of vinyl since no one is actually doing what you are talking about there.
3. The myth on wiki states "vinyl records must have intrinsically different masterings than CDs of the same material."
There is a pretty substantial nonsequitor between your comments and the aleged myth.
4. Even if there was some irrational connection between your comments and the aleged myth it would again depend on some unstated inherent line of reasoning of others since clearly you are not pushing the aleged myth that "vinyl records must have intrinsically different masterings than CDs of the same material" based on your comments.

If the myth as stated in the Wiki article is pervasive it ought to be called out. But if it is pervasive it ought to be easly cited as described in the article in the form of claims by people who actually believe it.

[cliveb]

2. While your comments are novel and interesting on a theoretical basis they really are non issues in the world of vinyl since no one is actually doing what you are talking about there.

Not sure I understand what you're getting at. Are you saying that my comment is not relevant because in the real world nobody actually cuts vinyl LPs from the same hypercompressed master as the CD? The impression I get from what others have said is that this is precisely what seems to be going on in some cases. If that isn't what you're saying, can you try and rephrase?