VH I released on 180 gram RTI vinyl

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ZahZoo
    ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

    • Jan 2004
    • 9170

    #16
    Originally posted by Nickdfresh
    I know vinyl is the new audiophile thing because every old is new again. But isn't part of the problem with records, aside from the pops, is they dampen the bass?

    Is this really much better than the remasters on CD?
    No the bass wasn't dampened on vinyl... it was somewhat compressed and focused within a more narrow bandwidth than what's delivered today on CD's.

    Back in the day the full spectrum on vinyl was optimized to sound best within the frequency range of stereo amps and speakers prevelant at the time. There were limitations in the analog technology and the width of a record groove to reproduce sound in an audible range for the average human ear.

    CD's expanded that range both on the low and significantly in the high end of the sound frequency. Older analog recordings for vinyl actually had the high end frequencies boosted to allow for less distortion for the way a needle handled the low end frequencies.

    This is why older conversions of analog masters to early CD's sounded thin and tinny. Mastering techniques had to change with digital recording to compensate for the range of CD's.

    One reason you see speaker systems with 2,3 or 5 tiny little speakers and a single subwoofer today is digital recordings still are heavy on the higher frequency ranges.

    My opinion is these new systems sound ok... but you'll get much more full sound from a system with a decent crossover in the amps. A solid subwoofer, 12 inch woofers, 5-6 inches mids and high quality ceramic tweeters. Today's home theater systems just don't produce clean sound that the old 12 & 5-6 inch low and mid range speakers deliver. It's mostly high highs and low lows with huge gap in the mid-range.
    Last edited by ZahZoo; 02-25-2009, 12:12 PM.
    "If you want to be a monk... you gotta cook a lot of rice...”

    Comment

    • LoungeMachine
      DIAMOND STATUS
      • Jul 2004
      • 32576

      #17
      Thank God !!!

      I was worried VH, Inc would be wasting precious time and energy on new material.

      Why write and record new stuff, when you can re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release perfectly good songs from 30 years ago?

      Originally posted by Kristy
      Dude, what in the fuck is wrong with you? I'm full of hate and I do drugs.
      Originally posted by cadaverdog
      I posted under aliases and I jerk off with a sock. Anything else to add?

      Comment

      • ZahZoo
        ROTH ARMY WEBMASTER

        • Jan 2004
        • 9170

        #18
        Originally posted by LoungeMachine
        Why write and record new stuff, when you can re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release perfectly good songs from 30 years ago?

        Better yet... re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-release perfectly good songs on audio media 100 years old.

        Go for the old... not the gold!!
        "If you want to be a monk... you gotta cook a lot of rice...”

        Comment

        • ForeverDLR/VH
          Roadie
          • Feb 2009
          • 159

          #19
          If you really want to get down to it, get the 180 gram RTI vinyl and go on ebay to get your hands on the VH 1 Gold Disc, Listen to all 3 formats and compare the 3 to see, which version is better?

          Comment

          • ThatArtGuy
            Foot Soldier
            • Jan 2004
            • 672

            #20
            I had all three, and I personally prefer the remasters. When using a HDCD receiver, there really isn't much of a comparison left.
            I brought my pencil!!!

            Comment

            • Panamark
              DIAMOND STATUS
              • Jan 2004
              • 17161

              #21
              LP's always sounded better to me..
              Akin to the difference between
              solid state and tube amplifiers....

              That Art Guy, what CD player do you own ?
              (Brand/Model) ... got me curious..
              BABY PANA 2 IS Coming !! All across the land, let the love and beer flow !
              Love ya Mary Frances!

              Comment

              • ThatArtGuy
                Foot Soldier
                • Jan 2004
                • 672

                #22
                I have a NAD C542. It's a good player and decodes HDCD's wonderfully, but I will probably upgrade down the road. The remasters sound superfluous (read: f'n awesome) when decoded correctly.

                It doesn't do sacd, but I have my Playstation 3 for that now. :D
                Last edited by ThatArtGuy; 02-28-2009, 07:55 PM.
                I brought my pencil!!!

                Comment

                • Panamark
                  DIAMOND STATUS
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 17161

                  #23
                  Originally posted by ThatArtGuy
                  I have a NAD C542. It's a good player and decodes HDCD's wonderfully, but I will probably upgrade down the road. The remasters sound superfluous (read: f'n awesome) when decoded correctly.

                  It doesn't do sacd, but I have my Playstation 3 for that now. :D
                  I just picked up a Panasonic Blu Ray, might grab the old spec book and see if it plays HDCD...... Fingers Crossed !
                  BABY PANA 2 IS Coming !! All across the land, let the love and beer flow !
                  Love ya Mary Frances!

                  Comment

                  Working...