I'm 34 and have been getting vinyl since I was a kid. I never stopped getting vinyl even when people were saying vinyl was dead. So, when people are saying vinyl is coming back, for me, it never went away.
@thenoti1 What is important is music. If now music almost sucks is for more deep sociological reasons than digital vs analog. However if digital technology now it's so spread you have to conclude that in the end it's better than analog.
Trancemaster90 Music Is what matters!Not only song,rythm...It's the (re)production this guys are talking.Think of DAC,why to use it even today?Music it self is analog.Sadly,but in my house among thousants of cds,those couple of hundred vinyl LPs mostly sound waaaaay better.And why digital is so spread.Becouse it's cheap to produce.I gave an example of IPod.You realy think it's an Apple hi tech product :-) Same as IPhone.It's bussines and Nothing ellse.Even digital future is quantum-more analog.
@darren0512341 I still use tape to record and prefer it way better than any digital medium that has come out so far. Digital is just convenient. Just because a lot of modern pop songs are compressed doesn't mean everyone is doing it. Analog still have many advantages over digital in terms of sound.
@GTech006 So... just how many records have you recorded personally? I mean you wouldn't be saying anything positive about vinyl if you ever have. Would you? Anyway... once again... this is you.... ww.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XCumH8LRo1A#t=67s go have fun with your stupidly high noise floor Mr. cassette crusader! Audiophiles are so touchy for some reason... i guess they dont like people saying they spent 50k for no reason...
@nnorrellim well shit, why don't you expand on "more so today than ever"? or do you not have an opinion to give and are simply herpderping in agreeance with mustaine?
@mattresssurveyor Your use of herpderping is weird... and if you cant figure out from my comments to the ones Dave Mustaine made then me elaborating is futile.
Go have fun with your pops and crackles with your vinyl. I bet your herpderping to the sound of a high noise floor.
1993: vinyl and cd provide comparable sound quality, I think the idea that "pops and crackles" can hide a band's lack of ability is absurd, but I'm not interested in the vinyl/CD dickwaving you so eagerly want to get into.
2011: CD is over, mp3 is way of the future. The choice between digital and analogue is no longer CD/Vinyl but mp3/Vinyl. Choosing to release on vinyl over mp3 is choosing a higher quality format.
@mattresssurveyor Even today, buying vinyl is pretty much pointless. Reissues are almost exclusively created using digital masters. Studio reels are pricey, so few bands record in true analog, not to mention the lack of analog studios and the fact that you'll be searching for a long time for a pressing plants which accepts analog masters and sources. Put simply, buying modern vinyl just means you're spending $20-30 on a 12" black CD with grooves.
@Valgrindar I have some late cut vinyls at home.Couple of them realy suck.I prefer used or NOS.I don't know what you ment by 'even today'.LP or CD?Listening some albums like Dark side of the moon on cd has no point.Becouse on vinyl,stereo is almost 3D.Or any album of Vollenweider.On cd,you will thing there is something wrong with your setup.On Lp you will be blowned by variety of instruments.Some vinyl records rule and some suck.Just like digital format.Some are amazing and some crap.
@Valgrindar Not true. I think even if the vinyl is cut from a digital master, which most are these day, vinyl brings back a lot of the warmth lost in the digital. I asked my friend to compare some of my modern CDs with the vinyl and 3 out of 4 choose the vinyl.
@fatcatbuzz Yes, some warmth may be reintroduced just by virtue of using an analog player to begin with. However, digital recording causes compression, which subsequently cuts out undertones, overtones and harmonics. Those don't come back just because you're using a turntable.
@Valgrindar It's true that cutting vinyl doesn't bring back frequencies from the master. If anything, the digital master is going to arguably have the full frequency spectrum. But, vinyl gives some warmth and depth to the music that I think a lot people are beginning to notice again about the medium. If anything, the vinyl comeback is starting to make people realize the limitations of digital audio such as MP3 and compressed recordings. Even some bands are going back to recording with analog.
@fatcatbuzz That's not really how electrical signals and sound waves work, but I'll agree to disagree.
Some bands may be trying analog more, sure, but reels are difficult to justify due to high cost, and most plate/lacquer companies won't make records using analog reels anymore. Perhaps this will change, but for now all I see is a cash-in by record companies based around false pretenses.
@Valgrindar I'm not quite sure what you mean about "that's not really how electrical signals and sound waves work," but there are noticeable differences between analog and digital, especially mediums such as vinyl and a digital format. As for recording with tape, it is getting more difficult to find studios that still record with tape and most music recorded today arguably do not benefit much from tape. I think it's just easier for new artist to record with digital over tape these days.
@fatcatbuzz Sound travels via electrical signals and sound waves. When you record in digital, you do not have a smooth sound wave, but a digitized one which uses what's known as "stepping". It leaves out portions of the sound wave which cannot be returned by using vinyl. Point being, it doesn't change the sound at all. It's a matter of physics. Yes, it's very hard to find studios that use reels; they're expensive and inconvenient. You've gotta have money and patience for analog.
@Valgrindar It's true that digital leaves gaps in recording. Many engineers will record at the highest possible sampling rate for this reason. Yes, transferring a digital medium to vinyl doesn't bring back any of the loss of information that was not captured in the recording process. I'm saying by nature, analog mediums such as vinyl are a much more warmer sounding medium because it's the actually sound you hear, not a reproduction. I believe analog will never completely go away.
1993: vinyl and cd provide comparable sound quality, I think the idea that "pops and crackles" can hide a band's lack of ability is absurd, but I'm not interested in the vinyl/CD dickwaving you so eagerly want to get into.
2011: CD is over, mp3 is way of the future. The choice between digital and analogue is no longer CD/Vinyl but mp3/Vinyl. Choosing to release on vinyl over mp3 is choosing a higher quality format.
@nnorrellim And my point is his point is less true today than in '93 due to the absolute predominance of shitty quality mp3. CD is fucking dead, shit.
Neil Young actually recorded one of the first Digital Rock albums. It's not talked about alot but 1973 "not fade away" was recorded to 14 bit digital system. Interesting it shows him for this segment. @0:50..that little amp ontop of the CD player..those things rock. Realistic mini amp with PHONO input! :D
I've been saying this for years!!! Not to mention, MP3's are even worse!!! Took me three years to convert and my ears are still not satisfied!!!! MP3's are like drinking flat Tecate out of a paper cup!
@HypeBeGone It's why I don't have an iPod. I'd rather listen to my CDs and have stacks in my car. That said, nothing sounds as good as my Portishead "Dummy" tape cassette.
Best Buy on Nw Loop 410 and Bandera rd sells vinyl records in San Antonio, I was shocked to see Best Buy carry Vinyl new 180 gram vinyl that is. CD's suck!
Give me Analog, Metal Bias Cassettes, Nachmanchi Tape Deck, CD-4 4 Channel Turntable with a Shibata stylus, Quadraphonic Reel To Reel, Pioneer Quadraphonic QX-8000 hook that bad boy up with a DVD Recorder, VCR run Component Cables to a TV any day over what passes as Surround Sound these days!
Dave rocks. And these analog trolls have got it wrong. The shannon-nyquist theorem has to be understood before you talk about samples. And the noise floor depends on the bit depth, [CD - 16 bit], [Bluray - 24 bit]. With the very high quality ADC, DAC s nowadays, the only thing that colors sound are the Amplifiers (opamps in front of the DAC). The digital technology has been better than analog for at least 10 years IMO.
AND records have a life of 100+ years, and CD's are made purposely to last 50 or less years. Analog NES Cartridges outlived the "superior" CD in the 80's.
yeah, because all that creaking and hiss and muffled analog sound coming from a turntable is really superior to crystal clear digital sound coming from a cd player.
So if you take a high quality record and with a computer record it to a .FLAC file with the highest settings, will it sound the same? Would a computer's sound card play a role in this? Also, the dynamic range of a CD can go up to 120db while for Vinyl it can only go up to 60db because of physical limitations. Does this mean that the difference between a low and high dynamic range is less noticeable than a low and high sampling rate?
Analog will always be superior to digital. digital "chops" up sound waves which are not by nature digital or 1s and 0s, so while it IS crisper it is also less rich and less full. kids now a days just download everything off the internet anyway and can barely tell the difference between lossless and 96kps. digital ruins music
@B0ssKay Sound waves by nature aren't indentations on a piece of polyvinyl chloride either. A vinyl record is every bit as sampled as a digital recording. The only difference is that such sampling occurs at the molecular level, and thus theoretically has a higher resolution than current digital sampling rates. In practice however the many conversions from physical to electrical to physical, to electrical and physical again will hardly reproduce sound with accuracy that warrants such precision.
@21fretsalute Most people can actually hear the difference between digital and analog even though the human ear "shouldn't" be able to detect it. Analog recordings in general have a richer and more organic sound that is difficult to quantify or put your finger on, so to speak.
@B0ssKay In conclusion, digital doesn't ruin music. Corkstiffers ruin music. They do it by disparaging people who don't give a shit about all this nonsense and just want to listen to their tunes.
Amazing they were already arguing about this before CDs had fully taken off (cassettes were still in all the music stores in 1993). Still, if you have a problem with digital, then you must hate the mp3 revolution as well...
@CsontDr Digital for Hollywood Movies and Video games Analog for home physical recording, Digital for Dvr recording watch a few times recording, Analog for most of music, Cds for my car and mp3 player in direct copies to My Mp3 player more room better sound, Mp3 for nothing what a fucking horrible sound. Vinyl sounds the best when its mastered properly, Modern albums i buy on Cd classics i buy on vinyl, because a modern album on vinyl is just a digital copy to vinyl most times. Both R Reliable.
Would it make sense to invent hardware for your car or home that can play a CD in the 24 bit 96 Khz format? Would a Vinyl recorded in that format Unaltered by EQ or Mastering, sound the same? If it's too much memory for a CD, well......we can somehow come up with hardware that can play 24 bit 96 Khz Songs CD's via BLU Ray Discs that can hold 50 Gigs on a single side! What say you? Is this the solution? Please respond.....I'm really curious.
@Vanjal YUP and that Michael Freamer GEEKWANK magazine dude, tries to discredit Dave buy bullshitting on about his vinyl pipe-dream, so more poor uneducated fuckers buy his shitty magazine, I'll take the word of a multi platinum record seller over this magazine jerk-off!
Hahahha...yeah right. Go to analog. Spend tens of thousands of dollars and sound like Beatles or I don't know, Zeppelin. Or learn, buy affordable equipment, and make awesome sounding recordings for small money. No warm and cold in analog or digital. What you put in it will get out. Simple as that. Embrace ease of technology leaps you fucking noob or go Jurassic and record on a fucking tape with noise and shit all over the place.Or even better use vax tubes as Edison did. It will give you warmth
Dave Mustaine is such an egotistical ass. He's referring to the fact that when you record digitally, yo can isolate moments in the recording down to milliseconds and see how precisely parts are being played. Thats how they did their "Contdown to Extinction" album. That album is EXTREMELY precise performance wise and its geat in that respect. But it also sounds riciculously cold and sterile and robotic. It has NO WARMTH sound wise which is what the debate is about.
@bethshair No, he didn't say that at all. What he said was that if you know how to play and record your song well, it will be WARM (whatever that suppose to sound like). If you are Neil Young you will need some buzz, hum, hiss and SHIT all over the tape behind the music to give you your "talent" because with digital recordings which are unforgivable you really need to be kick ass to make it sound awesome.
It's all about money, not audio quality. For instance, CDs killed the stylus market. In other words, you don't need to replace warn parts. Records were just a botch, in order to make mass production viable at the time. We used the same CD player for 15-years. We certainly didn't need a stylus for that, and it still worked fine we we gave it to my stepson. I wonder how much the stylus market was worth before the introduction of the CD? And then there's cartridge upgrades, and new decks.
@mrfoxboy Aside from the fact that a digital consumer product (e.g., CD) could very have involved numerous analog steps in its production, and and an analog consumer product (LP) could have come from a digital master....so what? My point is that showing the 'stairstep' image was misleading. That isn't what's output from a DAC. It's only shown to bolster the dubious idea that digital is 'lower fidelity' than analog..
if it wernt for the laws of physics in a perfect world anologe would be better but in practice digital is... but now days digital is as good as anologe if u get enough samaples.. this was ages ago when digital ws new
There are good points and bad points to digital. I am going to say that CD's and Records are lame outdated and both loose sound. Its true that records can capture some higher freq. but no ones speakers or stereos can put them out. I have messed around with this on my own pc using SACD's wich are superior to both and when I sampled it and then placed it on CD it sounded exaclty like the CD version of Dark side of the Moon. I also got the 180 gram Dark side record and it sounds the same as the CD
@Riddler95 Ac/dc Black Ice is better sounding on Cd the vinyl version is very dull and lifeless, Metallicas Death Magnetic is the other way around Vinyl sound better when its a all analog Master, otherwise its just digital on Vinyl and not worth the money. Check out Sundazed Records for the real deal records, And Blue Cheer Vince Bus Eruptum sounds horrible on Remastered Cd compared to the 1969 original vinyl release, Im 23 i can notice the difference in some notes and more bass.,
Dave mustaine's comment is proof that just because you are a famous rock star, doesn't mean you understand sound engineering, even if you've been in more studios than I've had hot dinners. I saw a similar derogatory remark by Devon Townsend ( respected rock musician) during studio footage, who stated.... ' Tape? No one uses that shit anymore, now we have Pro Tools'. Utter rubbish! Digital fans who turn there nose up at analogue do themselves a dis- service.
so many years of digital audio and still people think the guys at sony and phillips pulled 44,100 times samples rate out of there ass while drinking beer at a local watering hole and thats why digital audio sound like shit to them !!! little do they know that there is a science to why the picked that sample rate (nyquist) and mathematic solutions to why the chose 16 bit
@jimg0007 THEY MAY NOT HAVE PULLED IT OUT HIS ASS, BUT WE LOST A WHOLE LOT OF FEELING IN THE MUSIC BECAUSE OF THESE LIFELESS CDS. TELL ME, DO YOU REALLY EVEN GIVE A SHIT ABOUT YOUR CD COLLECTION RIGHT NOW?
@jimg0007 dude. nyquist's theorem said that they need at least 44k of samples per second to make a 20000Hz sine audible. BUT, because of so few samples, you actually hear 20000Hz square wave playing off a cd (if you are even capable of hearing such frequencies). and 16 bit is standard register size, therefore...
@jimg0007 yeah they picked it because 44.1 kHz was the absolute minimum sampling frequency required to reproduce frequencies that are as high as the threshold of human hearing and 16 bit was the maximum the technology permitted. The CD is really an outdated technology. There are people out there that can hear the difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24.
@jimg0007 the sample rate was not pulled out of any ass. it was directly related to the framerate of a umatic video cassette. At the time, the best way to record digital audio was to record it as a special video signal. 6 samples could be recorded on each scan line. A PAL umatic tape stores 294 lines at 50 hz. 50*6*294/(2channels) gives 44100. that is why there are 44100 samples per second on a cd...
@jimg0007 u are a bit right, nyquist gives u the sample rate limit, but if u have a wave with detail at high frecuency, that detail is lost, i have done some tst on recording at 44khz, 96 khz and 192 khz, on 44khz were almost not wave, while on the others sample rates was way more detail.
That Megadeth guy doesn't know what he's talking about. If anything, digital made it EASIER for bad musicians to sound good, because digital editing allows you to cut and replace any part of a recording very easily. So if you play a guitar solo and a part isn't quite right, you can easily cut out and replace a few notes. With analog tape, this is much harder to do. So you have actually play better!
@ilterocktive yea not to mention thats michael fremer biased vinyl whore from stereophile who does not beliveve in blind testing and scientific based info!!!!!!!!! or does not know how digital audio really works
@ilterocktive Nuances? The problem is that no studio recording is, or can be, natural. In order to make a track even remotely publishable, the different sound-sources have to be suitably mixed. In order to make the musical piece sound pleasing to the ear, different instruments and vocals have to be disproportionately represented. If you have a song with a strong vocal theme, you don’t want those essential vocals drowned-out by the drummer.
@clemstevenson I'm a mixing and mastering engineer myself. The thing is: 1) this video is outdated, 2) people giving interview in the video has no in depth knowledge in the subject. If it's just names, let's ask what Michael Wagener or Andy Johns thinks about the matter. I think they too, are important names in the industry.
@ilterocktive I have no personal involvement with professional technology. This technology must, by default, have advanced in the last 17-years, just as other things have. Although I was involved in varied electronics work, technological advances over the years have rendered my kind of work obsolete.
@ilterKalkanci Not to worry. You didn't upset me, as I was only able to offer a layman's viewpoint in any case. When I started work in electronics, over 30-years ago, there were already zillions of integrated circuits on the market. Technology has continued to advance throughout that period. I took redundancy from electronic repair (in 2010) as an opportunity to become a carer for my wife, who had been saved from death by cancer at the Royal Free Hospital in 2009.
@ilterocktive the "nuances" he is referring to are called transients. There are people out there that can hear the difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24.
@ACDC7369 No, nuances can never be called transients. And no, it hasn't been proven that human hearing can differentiate between 16bit 44.1kHz - 24bit 44.1kHz/48kHz/96kHz. We use high bitrates to capture a higher dynamic range, and the overal mix drops below -60dB very seldom (in the finished mix)
@ilterocktive Yes, there are people who can hear the difference between 96/24 and 44/16, including myself. Quantization noise is higher in 16 bit and transients are affected in slow (44k) sampling rates. Go over to Steve Hoffman Forums and try telling audiophile mastering engineers Steve Hoffman and Barry Diament that they can't hear the difference. See what they say.
@ACDC7369 Please make your research in scientific platforms, not in audiophile web forums. There are people who claim they'd been abducted by Martians and have their sperms taken in the web forums as well. And there are also people who still claim the the World is not a sphere. Thanks.
@ACDC7369 Btw, there's a research. Please search with the keyword "Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very High Frequency Components". "Quantization noise" is added during dithering. Its use is program dependent and its level is sub -70dBFS level. What you might be referring to could be the "Quantization error", hence dithering is needed during mastering.
@ACDC7369 It would be deleted there thanks to the heavy moderation. Diament is a superstitious doof when to comes to digital, and Hoffman is an ignoramus *and* a Luddite when it comes to digital. Neither have a clue about the scientific reasons why blind testing is required for proving something like the ability to hear 44/16 vs 96/24. Btw , if you hearing quantization noise in your Redbook recordings either they were recorded without dither, or you are playing them *way* too loud.
@Schizont Many of my posts have been deleted on that site, without explanation, for challenging viewpoints that contradict science. But, I can hear when something has been mixed in 16-bit rather than 24-bit. I'm not convinced that I can hear the difference between a 24-bit final mixdown and a 16-bit final mixdown. I definitely would not be able to do it in a blind test.
A modest set up like a Dual 505-2 with a Shure M95HE for example, if set up properly (cartridge alignment, overhang) will sound great and beat out cd playback. Digital loses a good percentage of the native "information" of an analogue recording. As far as noise is concerned, a decent table won't sound noisy. Clean your records (simple as I show in my video -see my vids). I think many accepted digital cause of ease and convenience. Many also didn't have tables that were good or set up properly.
Digital editing makes being a successful "mediocre" musician much less objectionable to the non-discerning ear. Happens every day. Especially on EMPTY V. But I applaud them for having the stones to address the issue......
Analog tape also introduce harmonic distortion, which is very musical. Digital being as clean as possible don't have this, and can thus sound thinner. Think about it, have you ever heard a guy playing the guitar without any phase interaction (sound bouncing from items/walls f.i), backround noise (people breathing, normal noise) etc? I haven't. So hearing a record without any noise and harmonic distortion would be quite alien to me.
This is wrong. The shannon/nyquist theorem proves that you only need twice the number of samples to perfectly recreate a sine wave in amplitude, frequency and phase. That higher sample rates sound better is that the filters used are imperfect, so at higher samples rates the errors occur outside the hearing range. Digital "harshness" usually comes from digital clipping. Even though there are no samples above 0dBFS you can still reproduce a sine wave that exceeds it.
@soundiscomforting He theorem is more for digital communications, it does not have to do with the subtle nuances of digital vs analog sound. For the best possible quality you want an analog(ous) sound to the original, digital adds different distortions and other problems to the original analog sound.
Dave Mustaine is right. Musicians were better off with a analog recorders, because a tape compressed and colored signal and in some way reviled less mistakes. Some sound engineers even believe that it is easier to mix analog recording because it is more cohesive. Digital sounds cold and very clinical therefore is harder to make it sound warm and fat.
24 bit or up will only improve dynamic (depth) but It wont change the fact that digital stays digital (0,1). At 44.1 (CD) 10KHz is archived only by 4 samples. Even 88KHz won't make it sound as natural as tape and vinyl. IMHO, turntable as Thorens TD-150 or Systemdek IIX can make your ears feel really happy.
This was before 24 and 32-bit DACs. The only way to get analogue to sound better is to have a professional reel to reel. Turntables are poorly designed from the beginning. They collect dust and prone to noise from the motor and power supply.
@SlimeTron5000 What are trying to say? I've never heard a turntable that could hold a decent signal without adding to the sound. If you can still hear the difference between analogue and digital @ 32 bit, wait till 64 bit and then tell me it's better.
@SlimeTron5000 Every turntable I've heard has added to the sound, mostly Kenwoods, ARs and Garrards. A turntable is a sensitive microphone moving across a flat vinyl surface, you've got dust, rumble, inference from the power supply.. You've got to spend a fortune to set up a decent analogue system these days. Besides, they master vinyl records on tape.
And lets remember that this doco was made to get people to watch MTV.
@SlimeTron5000 They add pops and crackle and rumble to the sound (some even distort) and the signal generally isn't as strong as a decent tape reel. It's a sound caved into plastic, how good could it get? Most of the bass is generated by the pre-amp, so the signal can alter more so than digital or decent analogue tape.
Wow so amazing that this exact debate is still going on, except instead of crappy or passable CD sound it's MP3. If they only knew in 93 that we'd be taking an even BIGGER step back in quality!
What about about new music today that is recored digitally and then going to vinyl. Does that sound better then the CD since it was recored digitally in the first place? I can understand if it was recorded in both analog and then on vinyl. And what about reissues of Vinyl, like old albums being brought back on vinyl? I hear those are really bad because they use digital masters.
@DawnPatroler Good question. Typically, digital music will still sound the same on LP as CD, for the most part. You're still dealing with the loss of information inherent in digital sampling. It isn't the vinyl itself that makes music great - it's the ANALOG sound.
This is the BIG POINT - digital music sounds terrible on LP. I don't know why this is so. LP is meant for analog music, and the difference is striking. You can compare and hear the difference for yourself.
@DawnPatroler Here are some trusted brands for reissue LPs. These guys work in ANALOG, so you can trust them -- MFSL, Classic Records, Sundazed, Rhino Vinyl, RTI, Speaker's Corner.
Pretty much everything else is suspect. ALL of the major label reissues are digital. That includes Sony Legacy, Capitol, and Back to Black. The majors are merely dumping CDs onto vinyl and charging you a premium. However, the new Jimi Hendrix Legacy LPs are ANALOG. And so is B2B Axis w/ "All Analog" sticker.
I think CD technology has definitely caught up (Sounds much better now than 20 years ago), but LP just always sounded best. Both the specialty record stores here have vinyl, and when I temped at Amazon over the holidays, I was kind of surprised to see how many LP's were shipping. Also, digital is not 'permanent'. CD's get scratched or lost down the couch, IPods and MP3 players get dropped in bowls of soup, etc. Best maybe to have the LP at home and then digitize it for everything else.
@DevSodDribble Even better to have the LP and play it on a turntable.
You're right that CDs break easily. They were so fragile that even a single fingerprint would ruin them. You'd get that heavy skipping that sounds like techno... thmp-thmp-thmp-thmp-thmp. Damn, I hated that with a passion.
@gamesDAMNED I've had CDs that looked like they were used as hockey pucks, and played just fine. But then you get that CD with one tiny little scratch or blemish, and it never plays right again. There's a million tricks to fix this with a scratched record (putting a nickel on the arm, etc), but with a damaged CD you're just screwed.
@jimg0007 WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT HALF ASS ATTEMPT TO SAY VINYL IS BETTER THAN CD!!!!!!!!!!!!! OK 1993 !! LOOK ITS 2010 NOW DACS NOW ARE 1000 TIMES BETTER THAN VINYL! VINYL IS EUPHORIC DISTORTION . CD IS MORE ACCUTATE ANY ONE WHO REPLYS TO MY MESSAGE WITH SOME BULL SHIT IS GONNA GET THERE SHIT BROKE OFF ! I AM A PROFESSIONAL
@jimg0007 Next time you're out trolling, try not to sound so full of crap. Also, I'd like to add, the technology of CDs, save for mastering, has not changed since the 1980's. That includes sample rate. So if you prefer digital, that's your personal preference, and that's fine, but don't yell at others and spew false information.
@sardhouse76 CDs are dieing but Vinyl isnt exactly "comming back" its just going to get buried with more technology. Now people Buy music off the internet and store it in HDDs and SSDs which are far more effeicent and over all, a superior method.
@1ohtaf1 I would have to disagree on the the "come back" part. I mean sales of vinyl has increased more than 110% in the past 3 years. With any other "product" on the market with that type of increase in sales would be considered unreal. For a media that has been out of "style" for years...when Hasting, Best Buy, and many new artist releasing on vinyl....shows the market is growing!
@mrhoffame Even if that is true, most of the sales are probably from older people that want to have their vinyl back or some younger people curious of it. Still it cant match the sales of itunes and the popularity of people storeing their music and other data in PMPs MP3s using SSDs and HHDs.
@1ohtaf1 No offense intended but in my town of 300k people I have two friends that own record stores. It is not the older crowd because most the new vinyl is modern day groups. Example..last shippment we unloaded last week (White Stripes, The Used, NOFX, Smashing Pumpkins, Rob Zombie, Rammstein, and many others. Young people who are just curious don't drop $35 On a Whites Stripes lp out of curiosity.
@mrhoffame "Young people who are just curious don't drop $35 On a Whites Stripes lp out of curiosity." Well they dont even buy vinyl, no one does. Especially younger people. Not a single person in my school has vinyl, some of them dont even know what its called, they describe them as big old fastion cds. Alot of them dont even buy cds anymore, and they certainly dont buy vinyl. In fact they dont even buy music, its free.
@1ohtaf1 You need to be mature enough to understand that your set of friends don't represent the entire industry. You say noone buys vinyl? There were more than 1.2 million sales in just new vinyl last year. Not including "old" records sold. As I said, I work with two different store and I can tell you AS A FACT that the college kids are the biggest purchasers of our vinyl. Sorry noone at "your school" does.
Funny how i saw recent vid from Dave saying that vinyl sounds better than cd. I guess he was just trolling in '93
JuniorST35 3 days ago
lol i love to randomly see dave while i wasn't expecting him at all
skylinrg 1 week ago
ANALOG FOREVER!!!!!!!.
EXTREME4YEARSTOCOME 2 weeks ago
I'm 34 and have been getting vinyl since I was a kid. I never stopped getting vinyl even when people were saying vinyl was dead. So, when people are saying vinyl is coming back, for me, it never went away.
fatcatbuzz 3 weeks ago
FLAC
ZerroShadows 1 month ago
Mp3 IPod kids simply can't understand it.There is no meaning to explane...They listen to music,but don't hear it.
thenoti1 1 month ago
@thenoti1 What is important is music. If now music almost sucks is for more deep sociological reasons than digital vs analog. However if digital technology now it's so spread you have to conclude that in the end it's better than analog.
TheTrancemaster90 1 month ago
Trancemaster90 Music Is what matters!Not only song,rythm...It's the (re)production this guys are talking.Think of DAC,why to use it even today?Music it self is analog.Sadly,but in my house among thousants of cds,those couple of hundred vinyl LPs mostly sound waaaaay better.And why digital is so spread.Becouse it's cheap to produce.I gave an example of IPod.You realy think it's an Apple hi tech product :-) Same as IPhone.It's bussines and Nothing ellse.Even digital future is quantum-more analog.
thenoti1 1 month ago
Digital killed the analog star. I always say that.
davidtheguitarman 2 months ago
no cheap to run on tape.
plus without invention of digital, we'll never have protools logic, all these great softwares.
people seems to compress songs anyways, no point of using analogue anymore.
darren0512341 2 months ago
@darren0512341 I still use tape to record and prefer it way better than any digital medium that has come out so far. Digital is just convenient. Just because a lot of modern pop songs are compressed doesn't mean everyone is doing it. Analog still have many advantages over digital in terms of sound.
fatcatbuzz 3 weeks ago
VIVA EL VINYL .... DJ DINKY
tokobot 3 months ago
I love vinyl, I still buy new released records, and they sound so much better
MrDemilord 3 months ago
In the end all Digital Sound is converted to Analog Sound.
Riddler95 3 months ago
@Riddler95 Yes D/A converter.. But you still miss the air, and breath of Analog..
I like the small crackles.. its the part of nature.. If you listen to music you also hear background noise from whatsoever
MrDemilord 3 months ago
@MrDemilord I know what you mean.
In fact some of my CDs were recorded in Digital, but they still have a very soft hiss in the background.
I heard that even HD Sound on Blu-Ray is converted to Analog.
Riddler95 3 months ago
@Riddler95 because the microphone always picks up a little hiss
MrDemilord 3 months ago
@GTech006 So... just how many records have you recorded personally? I mean you wouldn't be saying anything positive about vinyl if you ever have. Would you? Anyway... once again... this is you.... ww.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XCumH8LRo1A#t=67s go have fun with your stupidly high noise floor Mr. cassette crusader! Audiophiles are so touchy for some reason... i guess they dont like people saying they spent 50k for no reason...
nnorrellim 4 months ago
And my point is this is less true today than in '93 due to the absolute predominance of shitty quality mp3. CD is fucking dead, shit.
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago
@mattresssurveyor You still dont get it.
nnorrellim 4 months ago
@nnorrellim well shit, why don't you expand on "more so today than ever"? or do you not have an opinion to give and are simply herpderping in agreeance with mustaine?
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago
@mattresssurveyor Your use of herpderping is weird... and if you cant figure out from my comments to the ones Dave Mustaine made then me elaborating is futile.
Go have fun with your pops and crackles with your vinyl. I bet your herpderping to the sound of a high noise floor.
nnorrellim 4 months ago
@nnorrellim I'll break it down for you.
1993: vinyl and cd provide comparable sound quality, I think the idea that "pops and crackles" can hide a band's lack of ability is absurd, but I'm not interested in the vinyl/CD dickwaving you so eagerly want to get into.
2011: CD is over, mp3 is way of the future. The choice between digital and analogue is no longer CD/Vinyl but mp3/Vinyl. Choosing to release on vinyl over mp3 is choosing a higher quality format.
Truth is less true today. Q.E.D.
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago
@mattresssurveyor Even today, buying vinyl is pretty much pointless. Reissues are almost exclusively created using digital masters. Studio reels are pricey, so few bands record in true analog, not to mention the lack of analog studios and the fact that you'll be searching for a long time for a pressing plants which accepts analog masters and sources. Put simply, buying modern vinyl just means you're spending $20-30 on a 12" black CD with grooves.
Valgrindar 2 months ago
@Valgrindar I have some late cut vinyls at home.Couple of them realy suck.I prefer used or NOS.I don't know what you ment by 'even today'.LP or CD?Listening some albums like Dark side of the moon on cd has no point.Becouse on vinyl,stereo is almost 3D.Or any album of Vollenweider.On cd,you will thing there is something wrong with your setup.On Lp you will be blowned by variety of instruments.Some vinyl records rule and some suck.Just like digital format.Some are amazing and some crap.
thenoti1 1 month ago
@Valgrindar Not true. I think even if the vinyl is cut from a digital master, which most are these day, vinyl brings back a lot of the warmth lost in the digital. I asked my friend to compare some of my modern CDs with the vinyl and 3 out of 4 choose the vinyl.
fatcatbuzz 3 weeks ago
@fatcatbuzz Yes, some warmth may be reintroduced just by virtue of using an analog player to begin with. However, digital recording causes compression, which subsequently cuts out undertones, overtones and harmonics. Those don't come back just because you're using a turntable.
Valgrindar 6 days ago
@Valgrindar It's true that cutting vinyl doesn't bring back frequencies from the master. If anything, the digital master is going to arguably have the full frequency spectrum. But, vinyl gives some warmth and depth to the music that I think a lot people are beginning to notice again about the medium. If anything, the vinyl comeback is starting to make people realize the limitations of digital audio such as MP3 and compressed recordings. Even some bands are going back to recording with analog.
fatcatbuzz 6 days ago
@fatcatbuzz That's not really how electrical signals and sound waves work, but I'll agree to disagree.
Some bands may be trying analog more, sure, but reels are difficult to justify due to high cost, and most plate/lacquer companies won't make records using analog reels anymore. Perhaps this will change, but for now all I see is a cash-in by record companies based around false pretenses.
Valgrindar 5 days ago
@Valgrindar I'm not quite sure what you mean about "that's not really how electrical signals and sound waves work," but there are noticeable differences between analog and digital, especially mediums such as vinyl and a digital format. As for recording with tape, it is getting more difficult to find studios that still record with tape and most music recorded today arguably do not benefit much from tape. I think it's just easier for new artist to record with digital over tape these days.
fatcatbuzz 5 days ago
@fatcatbuzz Sound travels via electrical signals and sound waves. When you record in digital, you do not have a smooth sound wave, but a digitized one which uses what's known as "stepping". It leaves out portions of the sound wave which cannot be returned by using vinyl. Point being, it doesn't change the sound at all. It's a matter of physics. Yes, it's very hard to find studios that use reels; they're expensive and inconvenient. You've gotta have money and patience for analog.
Valgrindar 4 days ago
@Valgrindar It's true that digital leaves gaps in recording. Many engineers will record at the highest possible sampling rate for this reason. Yes, transferring a digital medium to vinyl doesn't bring back any of the loss of information that was not captured in the recording process. I'm saying by nature, analog mediums such as vinyl are a much more warmer sounding medium because it's the actually sound you hear, not a reproduction. I believe analog will never completely go away.
fatcatbuzz 3 days ago
@nnorrellim I'll break it down for you.
1993: vinyl and cd provide comparable sound quality, I think the idea that "pops and crackles" can hide a band's lack of ability is absurd, but I'm not interested in the vinyl/CD dickwaving you so eagerly want to get into.
2011: CD is over, mp3 is way of the future. The choice between digital and analogue is no longer CD/Vinyl but mp3/Vinyl. Choosing to release on vinyl over mp3 is choosing a higher quality format.
Truth is less true today. Q.E.D.
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago 2
@mattresssurveyor this is you... ww.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XCumH8LRo1A#t=67s
nnorrellim 4 months ago
2:28 Dave Mustaine tells the truth that still exists more so today than ever!!!
nnorrellim 4 months ago
@nnorrellim "more so today than ever"? geez, enjoy your shitty 128kbps mp3s then
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago
@mattresssurveyor You completely missed his point.... i doubt dave was talking about mp3's.
nnorrellim 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nnorrellim And my point is his point is less true today than in '93 due to the absolute predominance of shitty quality mp3. CD is fucking dead, shit.
mattresssurveyor 4 months ago
Neil Young actually recorded one of the first Digital Rock albums. It's not talked about alot but 1973 "not fade away" was recorded to 14 bit digital system. Interesting it shows him for this segment. @0:50..that little amp ontop of the CD player..those things rock. Realistic mini amp with PHONO input! :D
oatstao 5 months ago
I've been saying this for years!!! Not to mention, MP3's are even worse!!! Took me three years to convert and my ears are still not satisfied!!!! MP3's are like drinking flat Tecate out of a paper cup!
HypeBeGone 6 months ago
@HypeBeGone It's why I don't have an iPod. I'd rather listen to my CDs and have stacks in my car. That said, nothing sounds as good as my Portishead "Dummy" tape cassette.
Apathesis0 5 months ago
little did they know low bit rate mp3 would take over
Stephenxs 6 months ago
Best Buy on Nw Loop 410 and Bandera rd sells vinyl records in San Antonio, I was shocked to see Best Buy carry Vinyl new 180 gram vinyl that is. CD's suck!
willdav713 7 months ago
Give me Analog, Metal Bias Cassettes, Nachmanchi Tape Deck, CD-4 4 Channel Turntable with a Shibata stylus, Quadraphonic Reel To Reel, Pioneer Quadraphonic QX-8000 hook that bad boy up with a DVD Recorder, VCR run Component Cables to a TV any day over what passes as Surround Sound these days!
willdav713 7 months ago
Dave rocks. And these analog trolls have got it wrong. The shannon-nyquist theorem has to be understood before you talk about samples. And the noise floor depends on the bit depth, [CD - 16 bit], [Bluray - 24 bit]. With the very high quality ADC, DAC s nowadays, the only thing that colors sound are the Amplifiers (opamps in front of the DAC). The digital technology has been better than analog for at least 10 years IMO.
Jayakiran1 7 months ago
digital is boring.
dionitrix1 7 months ago
Digital is good, portable and sounds okay but Vinyl is the best for quality
ADKIc3mAnX36O 7 months ago
lol Dave is a troll
Sweetassour 7 months ago 8
Dave mustane has no clue about digital
dcp10200 7 months ago 2
8 bit FTW
sid12345678910 8 months ago
AND records have a life of 100+ years, and CD's are made purposely to last 50 or less years. Analog NES Cartridges outlived the "superior" CD in the 80's.
KNGarver 8 months ago
Analog is more reliable, and music in alalog format can't be illegally copied. Unless you are a former programmer or a pro.
KNGarver 8 months ago
@deabreu Yeah right, if you turn on a DVD player: WHIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
KNGarver 8 months ago
what if you increase the sample rate....?
creapah 8 months ago
what you hear in youtube right now is more lower samplerate fyi.... 22050hz...
AuraQualic 9 months ago
yeah, because all that creaking and hiss and muffled analog sound coming from a turntable is really superior to crystal clear digital sound coming from a cd player.
technophobes.
deabreu 9 months ago 2
So if you take a high quality record and with a computer record it to a .FLAC file with the highest settings, will it sound the same? Would a computer's sound card play a role in this? Also, the dynamic range of a CD can go up to 120db while for Vinyl it can only go up to 60db because of physical limitations. Does this mean that the difference between a low and high dynamic range is less noticeable than a low and high sampling rate?
AeroVortex92 9 months ago
Analog > Digitial
xSobhan 9 months ago
@xSobhan
Well, even analog music is filtered because of noise and has losses as well.
lampuiho 7 months ago
Analog will always be superior to digital. digital "chops" up sound waves which are not by nature digital or 1s and 0s, so while it IS crisper it is also less rich and less full. kids now a days just download everything off the internet anyway and can barely tell the difference between lossless and 96kps. digital ruins music
D;
B0ssKay 9 months ago
@B0ssKay Sound waves by nature aren't indentations on a piece of polyvinyl chloride either. A vinyl record is every bit as sampled as a digital recording. The only difference is that such sampling occurs at the molecular level, and thus theoretically has a higher resolution than current digital sampling rates. In practice however the many conversions from physical to electrical to physical, to electrical and physical again will hardly reproduce sound with accuracy that warrants such precision.
21fretsalute 8 months ago
@21fretsalute Most people can actually hear the difference between digital and analog even though the human ear "shouldn't" be able to detect it. Analog recordings in general have a richer and more organic sound that is difficult to quantify or put your finger on, so to speak.
B0ssKay 8 months ago
@B0ssKay
i say it's more the psychological effect.
lampuiho 8 months ago
@lampuiho please don't mind my entourage troll... he/she is parodying me...
rosskay 8 months ago
@B0ssKay lol, you are so full shit b0sskay and you don't even know what youre talking about
rosskay 8 months ago
@rosskay Touche rosskay ;x
B0ssKay 8 months ago
@B0ssKay In conclusion, digital doesn't ruin music. Corkstiffers ruin music. They do it by disparaging people who don't give a shit about all this nonsense and just want to listen to their tunes.
21fretsalute 8 months ago
Amazing they were already arguing about this before CDs had fully taken off (cassettes were still in all the music stores in 1993). Still, if you have a problem with digital, then you must hate the mp3 revolution as well...
Discern4 9 months ago
@DGENERATE07 buy a Cowon iAudio player with some decent to audiophile headphones and download FLAC copies of your music.
Paspiedreamcast 10 months ago
xcvdv sgsgsg
yowmen111 11 months ago
Comment removed
t0xictreasure 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Easy way to meet enchating girls naneedj.info
montagmonta 1 year ago
what if you're out of your house and want a portable music player, what gives the best sound?
DGENERATE07 1 year ago
Analog recording with digital mastering is good enough for me.
BrianSATX79 1 year ago
ANALOG or DIGITAL? It's no question! Digital form is the solution
for the perfect copies of music, film, PC games etc.
It's cheap, simply and reliable.
But a huge problem for the copyright owners!
CsontDr 1 year ago
@CsontDr Digital for Hollywood Movies and Video games Analog for home physical recording, Digital for Dvr recording watch a few times recording, Analog for most of music, Cds for my car and mp3 player in direct copies to My Mp3 player more room better sound, Mp3 for nothing what a fucking horrible sound. Vinyl sounds the best when its mastered properly, Modern albums i buy on Cd classics i buy on vinyl, because a modern album on vinyl is just a digital copy to vinyl most times. Both R Reliable.
hambone9119 10 months ago
Vinyl and Analog FTW!!
tjampe 1 year ago 13
digital a step backwards????
I guess you'll want a black and white tv
costellom5 1 year ago
@costellom5 That is the most pathetic argument ever.
VinylReelToReel 11 months ago
flash memory ftw
theringfilm1 1 year ago
Analog records sounds better than digital CD's, but digital is easier to copy, covert to mp3 and take it with you in your pocket.
dariusmidi 1 year ago
I like what Eddie Kramer (Hendrix, Beatles, Led Zep) does.
Tracks in analog, mixes in digital, masters in analog.
Seems like he gets the best of both worlds.
coolmusic888 1 year ago
Mustaine is a smart guy. What he said made no sense though.
coolmusic888 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Would it make sense to invent hardware for your car or home that can play a CD in the 24 bit 96 Khz format? Would a Vinyl recorded in that format Unaltered by EQ or Mastering, sound the same? If it's too much memory for a CD, well......we can somehow come up with hardware that can play 24 bit 96 Khz Songs CD's via BLU Ray Discs that can hold 50 Gigs on a single side! What say you? Is this the solution? Please respond.....I'm really curious.
380stroker 1 year ago
The cool thing about Analog is that it sounds different everytime you hear it
DawnPatroler 1 year ago
@DawnPatroler until it only makes noise and scratches.
bestplugins 1 year ago
I love my vinyl!!!
mannythedrummer 1 year ago
The man speaks the truth about analog has much better sound. Digital sucks!
djverdugo7 1 year ago 2
Do kids these days even know what sound quality is?
truefaith00 1 year ago
Dave Mustain explained it really to the pure bit...."Because they suck". Oh yeah....that's the only good part of this video. And true.
Vanjal 1 year ago
@Vanjal YUP and that Michael Freamer GEEKWANK magazine dude, tries to discredit Dave buy bullshitting on about his vinyl pipe-dream, so more poor uneducated fuckers buy his shitty magazine, I'll take the word of a multi platinum record seller over this magazine jerk-off!
beano1eye 1 year ago
Hahahha...yeah right. Go to analog. Spend tens of thousands of dollars and sound like Beatles or I don't know, Zeppelin. Or learn, buy affordable equipment, and make awesome sounding recordings for small money. No warm and cold in analog or digital. What you put in it will get out. Simple as that. Embrace ease of technology leaps you fucking noob or go Jurassic and record on a fucking tape with noise and shit all over the place.Or even better use vax tubes as Edison did. It will give you warmth
Vanjal 1 year ago
Dave Mustaine is such an egotistical ass. He's referring to the fact that when you record digitally, yo can isolate moments in the recording down to milliseconds and see how precisely parts are being played. Thats how they did their "Contdown to Extinction" album. That album is EXTREMELY precise performance wise and its geat in that respect. But it also sounds riciculously cold and sterile and robotic. It has NO WARMTH sound wise which is what the debate is about.
bethshair 1 year ago 2
@bethshair so theres rust in peace and peace sells
DawnPatroler 1 year ago
@bethshair No, he didn't say that at all. What he said was that if you know how to play and record your song well, it will be WARM (whatever that suppose to sound like). If you are Neil Young you will need some buzz, hum, hiss and SHIT all over the tape behind the music to give you your "talent" because with digital recordings which are unforgivable you really need to be kick ass to make it sound awesome.
Vanjal 1 year ago
It's all about money, not audio quality. For instance, CDs killed the stylus market. In other words, you don't need to replace warn parts. Records were just a botch, in order to make mass production viable at the time. We used the same CD player for 15-years. We certainly didn't need a stylus for that, and it still worked fine we we gave it to my stepson. I wonder how much the stylus market was worth before the introduction of the CD? And then there's cartridge upgrades, and new decks.
clemstevenson 1 year ago
This was tendentious nonsense in 1993, and it still is today. Typical Michael Fremer confusion of opinion with fact.
And btw, the output of a digital audio player is...a smooth 'analog' waveform, not the 'stairsteps' shown in this video.
Schizont 1 year ago
@Schizont Yes, but the recording itself is digital, it is reconverted to analog. Analog means you record, master, press, and play analog.
mrfoxboy 1 year ago
@mrfoxboy Aside from the fact that a digital consumer product (e.g., CD) could very have involved numerous analog steps in its production, and and an analog consumer product (LP) could have come from a digital master....so what? My point is that showing the 'stairstep' image was misleading. That isn't what's output from a DAC. It's only shown to bolster the dubious idea that digital is 'lower fidelity' than analog..
Schizont 1 year ago
if it wernt for the laws of physics in a perfect world anologe would be better but in practice digital is... but now days digital is as good as anologe if u get enough samaples.. this was ages ago when digital ws new
happygamestvfun1 1 year ago
There are good points and bad points to digital. I am going to say that CD's and Records are lame outdated and both loose sound. Its true that records can capture some higher freq. but no ones speakers or stereos can put them out. I have messed around with this on my own pc using SACD's wich are superior to both and when I sampled it and then placed it on CD it sounded exaclty like the CD version of Dark side of the Moon. I also got the 180 gram Dark side record and it sounds the same as the CD
Albee213 1 year ago
Vinyl Record sounds more warm and natural than CD, I still prefer the sound quality of CD over Vinyl record.
Riddler95 1 year ago
@Riddler95 Ac/dc Black Ice is better sounding on Cd the vinyl version is very dull and lifeless, Metallicas Death Magnetic is the other way around Vinyl sound better when its a all analog Master, otherwise its just digital on Vinyl and not worth the money. Check out Sundazed Records for the real deal records, And Blue Cheer Vince Bus Eruptum sounds horrible on Remastered Cd compared to the 1969 original vinyl release, Im 23 i can notice the difference in some notes and more bass.,
hambone9119 10 months ago
1.Analog Audio is Best on Reel to Reel (15ips) and Vinyl(except scratches)
2.For Superior Quality on Digital Audio: 96000Hz at 24bit on DVD's and Bluray
KnightRiderKARR 1 year ago
Dave mustaine's comment is proof that just because you are a famous rock star, doesn't mean you understand sound engineering, even if you've been in more studios than I've had hot dinners. I saw a similar derogatory remark by Devon Townsend ( respected rock musician) during studio footage, who stated.... ' Tape? No one uses that shit anymore, now we have Pro Tools'. Utter rubbish! Digital fans who turn there nose up at analogue do themselves a dis- service.
mellodge 1 year ago 2
so many years of digital audio and still people think the guys at sony and phillips pulled 44,100 times samples rate out of there ass while drinking beer at a local watering hole and thats why digital audio sound like shit to them !!! little do they know that there is a science to why the picked that sample rate (nyquist) and mathematic solutions to why the chose 16 bit
jimg0007 1 year ago 12
@jimg0007 THEY MAY NOT HAVE PULLED IT OUT HIS ASS, BUT WE LOST A WHOLE LOT OF FEELING IN THE MUSIC BECAUSE OF THESE LIFELESS CDS. TELL ME, DO YOU REALLY EVEN GIVE A SHIT ABOUT YOUR CD COLLECTION RIGHT NOW?
xraydelta1 1 year ago
@jimg0007 44.1K/16bit it's lowest number they could use.
Threemicsrecords 1 year ago
@jimg0007 dude. nyquist's theorem said that they need at least 44k of samples per second to make a 20000Hz sine audible. BUT, because of so few samples, you actually hear 20000Hz square wave playing off a cd (if you are even capable of hearing such frequencies). and 16 bit is standard register size, therefore...
baca262 1 year ago
@jimg0007 yeah they picked it because 44.1 kHz was the absolute minimum sampling frequency required to reproduce frequencies that are as high as the threshold of human hearing and 16 bit was the maximum the technology permitted. The CD is really an outdated technology. There are people out there that can hear the difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24.
ACDC7369 1 year ago
@jimg0007 the sample rate was not pulled out of any ass. it was directly related to the framerate of a umatic video cassette. At the time, the best way to record digital audio was to record it as a special video signal. 6 samples could be recorded on each scan line. A PAL umatic tape stores 294 lines at 50 hz. 50*6*294/(2channels) gives 44100. that is why there are 44100 samples per second on a cd...
bryceHUHwhat 1 year ago 3
@jimg0007 u are a bit right, nyquist gives u the sample rate limit, but if u have a wave with detail at high frecuency, that detail is lost, i have done some tst on recording at 44khz, 96 khz and 192 khz, on 44khz were almost not wave, while on the others sample rates was way more detail.
ehypersonic 9 months ago
@jimg0007 because it was 1977 and they didn't have the technology to create 192khz 32 bits discs
kainthevampireduck 7 months ago
That Megadeth guy doesn't know what he's talking about. If anything, digital made it EASIER for bad musicians to sound good, because digital editing allows you to cut and replace any part of a recording very easily. So if you play a guitar solo and a part isn't quite right, you can easily cut out and replace a few notes. With analog tape, this is much harder to do. So you have actually play better!
MacXpert74 1 year ago 4
@1:52 Nuances my a**. His ears are superior. Yeah, right.
ilterocktive 1 year ago 5
@ilterocktive yea not to mention thats michael fremer biased vinyl whore from stereophile who does not beliveve in blind testing and scientific based info!!!!!!!!! or does not know how digital audio really works
jimg0007 1 year ago 2
@ilterocktive Nuances? The problem is that no studio recording is, or can be, natural. In order to make a track even remotely publishable, the different sound-sources have to be suitably mixed. In order to make the musical piece sound pleasing to the ear, different instruments and vocals have to be disproportionately represented. If you have a song with a strong vocal theme, you don’t want those essential vocals drowned-out by the drummer.
clemstevenson 1 year ago
@clemstevenson I'm a mixing and mastering engineer myself. The thing is: 1) this video is outdated, 2) people giving interview in the video has no in depth knowledge in the subject. If it's just names, let's ask what Michael Wagener or Andy Johns thinks about the matter. I think they too, are important names in the industry.
ilterocktive 1 year ago
@ilterocktive I have no personal involvement with professional technology. This technology must, by default, have advanced in the last 17-years, just as other things have. Although I was involved in varied electronics work, technological advances over the years have rendered my kind of work obsolete.
clemstevenson 1 year ago
@clemstevenson sorry if I sounded assertive with my previous message. I didn't mean to argue with you. I was just thinking loud.
ilterKalkanci 1 year ago
@ilterKalkanci Not to worry. You didn't upset me, as I was only able to offer a layman's viewpoint in any case. When I started work in electronics, over 30-years ago, there were already zillions of integrated circuits on the market. Technology has continued to advance throughout that period. I took redundancy from electronic repair (in 2010) as an opportunity to become a carer for my wife, who had been saved from death by cancer at the Royal Free Hospital in 2009.
clemstevenson 1 year ago
@ilterocktive the "nuances" he is referring to are called transients. There are people out there that can hear the difference between 44.1/16 and 96/24.
ACDC7369 1 year ago
@ACDC7369 No, nuances can never be called transients. And no, it hasn't been proven that human hearing can differentiate between 16bit 44.1kHz - 24bit 44.1kHz/48kHz/96kHz. We use high bitrates to capture a higher dynamic range, and the overal mix drops below -60dB very seldom (in the finished mix)
ilterocktive 1 year ago
@ilterocktive Yes, there are people who can hear the difference between 96/24 and 44/16, including myself. Quantization noise is higher in 16 bit and transients are affected in slow (44k) sampling rates. Go over to Steve Hoffman Forums and try telling audiophile mastering engineers Steve Hoffman and Barry Diament that they can't hear the difference. See what they say.
ACDC7369 1 year ago
@ACDC7369 Please make your research in scientific platforms, not in audiophile web forums. There are people who claim they'd been abducted by Martians and have their sperms taken in the web forums as well. And there are also people who still claim the the World is not a sphere. Thanks.
ilterocktive 1 year ago
@ACDC7369 Btw, there's a research. Please search with the keyword "Perceptual Discrimination between Musical Sounds with and without Very High Frequency Components". "Quantization noise" is added during dithering. Its use is program dependent and its level is sub -70dBFS level. What you might be referring to could be the "Quantization error", hence dithering is needed during mastering.
ilterocktive 1 year ago
@ACDC7369 It would be deleted there thanks to the heavy moderation. Diament is a superstitious doof when to comes to digital, and Hoffman is an ignoramus *and* a Luddite when it comes to digital. Neither have a clue about the scientific reasons why blind testing is required for proving something like the ability to hear 44/16 vs 96/24. Btw , if you hearing quantization noise in your Redbook recordings either they were recorded without dither, or you are playing them *way* too loud.
Schizont 2 months ago
@Schizont Many of my posts have been deleted on that site, without explanation, for challenging viewpoints that contradict science. But, I can hear when something has been mixed in 16-bit rather than 24-bit. I'm not convinced that I can hear the difference between a 24-bit final mixdown and a 16-bit final mixdown. I definitely would not be able to do it in a blind test.
ACDC7369 2 months ago
A modest set up like a Dual 505-2 with a Shure M95HE for example, if set up properly (cartridge alignment, overhang) will sound great and beat out cd playback. Digital loses a good percentage of the native "information" of an analogue recording. As far as noise is concerned, a decent table won't sound noisy. Clean your records (simple as I show in my video -see my vids). I think many accepted digital cause of ease and convenience. Many also didn't have tables that were good or set up properly.
rmk4362 1 year ago
Digital editing makes being a successful "mediocre" musician much less objectionable to the non-discerning ear. Happens every day. Especially on EMPTY V. But I applaud them for having the stones to address the issue......
Ricktpt1 1 year ago
they didn't talk about vinyls limitations, there are limitations with vinyl for how deep or high that frequencies can be produced.
kennykensworth 1 year ago
Wow, Dave Mustaine's a douchebag.
deadkennedysfan 1 year ago
its that deep bass sound they are talking about
creapah 1 year ago
Analog tape also introduce harmonic distortion, which is very musical. Digital being as clean as possible don't have this, and can thus sound thinner. Think about it, have you ever heard a guy playing the guitar without any phase interaction (sound bouncing from items/walls f.i), backround noise (people breathing, normal noise) etc? I haven't. So hearing a record without any noise and harmonic distortion would be quite alien to me.
soundiscomforting 1 year ago 3
This is wrong. The shannon/nyquist theorem proves that you only need twice the number of samples to perfectly recreate a sine wave in amplitude, frequency and phase. That higher sample rates sound better is that the filters used are imperfect, so at higher samples rates the errors occur outside the hearing range. Digital "harshness" usually comes from digital clipping. Even though there are no samples above 0dBFS you can still reproduce a sine wave that exceeds it.
soundiscomforting 1 year ago 4
@soundiscomforting He theorem is more for digital communications, it does not have to do with the subtle nuances of digital vs analog sound. For the best possible quality you want an analog(ous) sound to the original, digital adds different distortions and other problems to the original analog sound.
codic3s 1 year ago
im still undecided. :-}
lemonlimestiv 1 year ago
This is a moot video at this time and age. "For many artists", yeah.
ilterocktive 1 year ago
There's good and bad to both. As long as we don't throw MP3's into the discussion, we'll be fine!
truefaith00 1 year ago
Dave Mustaine is right. Musicians were better off with a analog recorders, because a tape compressed and colored signal and in some way reviled less mistakes. Some sound engineers even believe that it is easier to mix analog recording because it is more cohesive. Digital sounds cold and very clinical therefore is harder to make it sound warm and fat.
Threemicsrecords 1 year ago
24 bit or up will only improve dynamic (depth) but It wont change the fact that digital stays digital (0,1). At 44.1 (CD) 10KHz is archived only by 4 samples. Even 88KHz won't make it sound as natural as tape and vinyl. IMHO, turntable as Thorens TD-150 or Systemdek IIX can make your ears feel really happy.
Threemicsrecords 1 year ago
This was before 24 and 32-bit DACs. The only way to get analogue to sound better is to have a professional reel to reel. Turntables are poorly designed from the beginning. They collect dust and prone to noise from the motor and power supply.
TVperson1 1 year ago
*cough* human error
SlimeTron5000 1 year ago
@SlimeTron5000 What are trying to say? I've never heard a turntable that could hold a decent signal without adding to the sound. If you can still hear the difference between analogue and digital @ 32 bit, wait till 64 bit and then tell me it's better.
TVperson1 1 year ago
What 'turntables' were you hearing?
SlimeTron5000 1 year ago
@SlimeTron5000 Every turntable I've heard has added to the sound, mostly Kenwoods, ARs and Garrards. A turntable is a sensitive microphone moving across a flat vinyl surface, you've got dust, rumble, inference from the power supply.. You've got to spend a fortune to set up a decent analogue system these days. Besides, they master vinyl records on tape.
And lets remember that this doco was made to get people to watch MTV.
TVperson1 1 year ago
What do you mean by 'adding to the sound'?
SlimeTron5000 1 year ago
@SlimeTron5000 They add pops and crackle and rumble to the sound (some even distort) and the signal generally isn't as strong as a decent tape reel. It's a sound caved into plastic, how good could it get? Most of the bass is generated by the pre-amp, so the signal can alter more so than digital or decent analogue tape.
TVperson1 1 year ago
CD sounds way better than Vinyl! Vinyl sounds like crap to me!
overwatever 1 year ago
Wow so amazing that this exact debate is still going on, except instead of crappy or passable CD sound it's MP3. If they only knew in 93 that we'd be taking an even BIGGER step back in quality!
viciousattackvideo 1 year ago
2:29 ~ Dave's way of logic cracks me up every time.
GilucZ 1 year ago
What about about new music today that is recored digitally and then going to vinyl. Does that sound better then the CD since it was recored digitally in the first place? I can understand if it was recorded in both analog and then on vinyl. And what about reissues of Vinyl, like old albums being brought back on vinyl? I hear those are really bad because they use digital masters.
DawnPatroler 1 year ago
@DawnPatroler Good question. Typically, digital music will still sound the same on LP as CD, for the most part. You're still dealing with the loss of information inherent in digital sampling. It isn't the vinyl itself that makes music great - it's the ANALOG sound.
This is the BIG POINT - digital music sounds terrible on LP. I don't know why this is so. LP is meant for analog music, and the difference is striking. You can compare and hear the difference for yourself.
gamesDAMNED 1 year ago
@DawnPatroler Here are some trusted brands for reissue LPs. These guys work in ANALOG, so you can trust them -- MFSL, Classic Records, Sundazed, Rhino Vinyl, RTI, Speaker's Corner.
Pretty much everything else is suspect. ALL of the major label reissues are digital. That includes Sony Legacy, Capitol, and Back to Black. The majors are merely dumping CDs onto vinyl and charging you a premium. However, the new Jimi Hendrix Legacy LPs are ANALOG. And so is B2B Axis w/ "All Analog" sticker.
gamesDAMNED 1 year ago
I think CD technology has definitely caught up (Sounds much better now than 20 years ago), but LP just always sounded best. Both the specialty record stores here have vinyl, and when I temped at Amazon over the holidays, I was kind of surprised to see how many LP's were shipping. Also, digital is not 'permanent'. CD's get scratched or lost down the couch, IPods and MP3 players get dropped in bowls of soup, etc. Best maybe to have the LP at home and then digitize it for everything else.
DevSodDribble 1 year ago
@DevSodDribble That's a good point, and that's pretty much what I do ;) Good to have all your bases covered.
SolarjaazPiano 1 year ago
@DevSodDribble Even better to have the LP and play it on a turntable.
You're right that CDs break easily. They were so fragile that even a single fingerprint would ruin them. You'd get that heavy skipping that sounds like techno... thmp-thmp-thmp-thmp-thmp. Damn, I hated that with a passion.
gamesDAMNED 1 year ago
@gamesDAMNED I've had CDs that looked like they were used as hockey pucks, and played just fine. But then you get that CD with one tiny little scratch or blemish, and it never plays right again. There's a million tricks to fix this with a scratched record (putting a nickel on the arm, etc), but with a damaged CD you're just screwed.
DevSodDribble 1 year ago
HORSESHIT!
jimg0007 1 year ago
@jimg0007 WHAT A PIECE OF SHIT HALF ASS ATTEMPT TO SAY VINYL IS BETTER THAN CD!!!!!!!!!!!!! OK 1993 !! LOOK ITS 2010 NOW DACS NOW ARE 1000 TIMES BETTER THAN VINYL! VINYL IS EUPHORIC DISTORTION . CD IS MORE ACCUTATE ANY ONE WHO REPLYS TO MY MESSAGE WITH SOME BULL SHIT IS GONNA GET THERE SHIT BROKE OFF ! I AM A PROFESSIONAL
jimg0007 1 year ago
@jimg0007 Next time you're out trolling, try not to sound so full of crap. Also, I'd like to add, the technology of CDs, save for mastering, has not changed since the 1980's. That includes sample rate. So if you prefer digital, that's your personal preference, and that's fine, but don't yell at others and spew false information.
SolarjaazPiano 1 year ago
@jimg0007 Are you a professional of capslocked commentary? Chances are you're just another asshole.
skydark 1 year ago
Well I think CDs do sound better than Vinyl Record. No hissing, no pops or clicks in the background.
But I think Vinyl records sound alot more organic and authentic that CDs.
Riddler95 1 year ago
I fucking love Dave's logic
GilucZ 1 year ago
Haha Dave Mustaine's hella badass.
I didn't imagine Dave would be on this.
DawnPatroler 1 year ago 2
Dave Mustaine, you dimwit. Nice logic.
And we all know how wonderful the digital 80s gear sounded. Just horrendous.
FuckingStanz 1 year ago
CD is diyng ahahaahahahaha VINYL RULES
sardhouse76 1 year ago
@sardhouse76 CDs are dieing but Vinyl isnt exactly "comming back" its just going to get buried with more technology. Now people Buy music off the internet and store it in HDDs and SSDs which are far more effeicent and over all, a superior method.
1ohtaf1 1 year ago
@1ohtaf1 I would have to disagree on the the "come back" part. I mean sales of vinyl has increased more than 110% in the past 3 years. With any other "product" on the market with that type of increase in sales would be considered unreal. For a media that has been out of "style" for years...when Hasting, Best Buy, and many new artist releasing on vinyl....shows the market is growing!
mrhoffame 1 year ago
@mrhoffame Even if that is true, most of the sales are probably from older people that want to have their vinyl back or some younger people curious of it. Still it cant match the sales of itunes and the popularity of people storeing their music and other data in PMPs MP3s using SSDs and HHDs.
1ohtaf1 1 year ago
@1ohtaf1 No offense intended but in my town of 300k people I have two friends that own record stores. It is not the older crowd because most the new vinyl is modern day groups. Example..last shippment we unloaded last week (White Stripes, The Used, NOFX, Smashing Pumpkins, Rob Zombie, Rammstein, and many others. Young people who are just curious don't drop $35 On a Whites Stripes lp out of curiosity.
mrhoffame 1 year ago
@mrhoffame "Young people who are just curious don't drop $35 On a Whites Stripes lp out of curiosity." Well they dont even buy vinyl, no one does. Especially younger people. Not a single person in my school has vinyl, some of them dont even know what its called, they describe them as big old fastion cds. Alot of them dont even buy cds anymore, and they certainly dont buy vinyl. In fact they dont even buy music, its free.
1ohtaf1 1 year ago
@1ohtaf1 You need to be mature enough to understand that your set of friends don't represent the entire industry. You say noone buys vinyl? There were more than 1.2 million sales in just new vinyl last year. Not including "old" records sold. As I said, I work with two different store and I can tell you AS A FACT that the college kids are the biggest purchasers of our vinyl. Sorry noone at "your school" does.