Видео

Have tried Prores a few times and I like it, but well it just so much easier to record internally when you're running around with the camera. But I really should do more Prores RAW. What do you use to add sharpening and to make the image less noisy if you shoot with high ISO?

please suggest suitable power cables for godox GM6S monitor and SONY A7SIII TO PAIR WITH VB99 PRO

So, what happens if you just add some saturation in post, how different would they look side by side then?

Please blink 😅

Did you compare between digital and analogue masters? I find this makes a very big difference. For me.

Any advice on shooting in All-I 400mbs in camera or even just prores 422 or prores hq on a ninja? Is there something to gain using that those codecs? I like raw and the flexibility but man it’s tedious to work with in post. Having to individually set white balance and ISO per clip and then having to reduce noise. It drags lol

You made this video so soothing man. It was the music and voice for me

I will eventually inherit my Dad's vinyl. I don't mind listening to vinyl as I used to many times as a young teenager. Streaming services will be here for a long time I think. More than 20 years. There are not a lot of options when it comes to keeping music 'forever'. You eventually end up repurchasing, re-saving, or doing something to preserve a collection. I like streaming for a few reasons. First, I can stream forever without having to swap CDs or Vinyl. Second, I don't have to clean digital streams. Third, I don't have to clean anything after someone borrows it. Forth, streaming is high resolution and less expensive. Fifth, I can stream remotely at work or anywhere. The disadvantage is that your music disappears if you lose a connection.

Digital done properly (same applies to vinyl) rocks

When I started to listen to music, vynle was the best medium. With a proper setting and equipment the medium can sound great. I like CD’s but still play records, got the equipment and the right setup.

It has nothing to do with "vinyl ". NEARLY ALL VINYL RECORDS SOLD TODAY ARE DIGITAL, WHETHER YOU THINK THEY SOUND "WARMER " OR NOT. The superiority of analogue has nothing to do with just sounding nicer. It's about sounding more real. Genuinely analogue records are either secondhand or very very expensive. I really wish people would start to get that... You are all being ripped right off!

Vinyl IS better sound, no doubt. My ears don't lie. But i love the convenience of the listening to cd's.

There's simply an experience and degrees of separation of notes and instruments that become "MORE" alive and present than on digital and thats just a fact. Now, whether someone wants to go through the process of setting up a nice turntable and putting on and taking off LP's is up to the individual. For me, it's a no brainer and because I was born in the late 60's so yeah, Im a 70's/80's kid and very grateful to be.

Art isn't *always* better - having bought enough reissues where the label put out a blurry JPEG on the cover, versus a high res digital file on my desktop, sometimes vinyl feels cheap (despite the money spent). And for clarity, there's enough times where I'm listening and wondering what's wrong - is it dust on the needle? A bad pressing? Why does it sound distorted or muffled or lower quality than my digital setup? Yesterday alone I was wondering if this glow in the dark release made it sound like a garage recording, or another sounded like it had repetitive scratch despite the side being mint. Having to question why its often worse definitely nags me, especially after all the cost and prep and pampering.

Streaming,you don’t need a warehouse for it

It’s rip off priced why???

Garrard turntables and about 8 45s on a drop down Spindle was my memory of late 50s and 60s vynyl.

Open reel tape is device most dinamic range.

What does the term "high resolution" mean with respect to a digital recording?

no we love Apple Music quality, spatial audio, Apple carplay, suggestions to new music

a good pressing Vinyl sound better than cd for sure.

The only record i have left is a picture disk of the german band helloween. Its nailed to a wall.. my preference is a hard drive. i never liked the roundness of cds.

Back in the 70s when I bought my first home audio gear, I collected well over a thousand LPs in the space of about six years. But I never was happy with LPs. I got so tired of ticks and pops, warpage, end-of-side distortion, wow and flutter, off-center spindle holes, and general wear of a record each time it's played. Pressings often were poor; at least 10 percent of the LPs I purchased were defective. This is to say nothing of frequency response nonlinearity (requiring equalization--ever hear of the RIAA curve?), stylus wear, limited dynamic range and bass fall-off below 50 hz. I couldn't wait for CD's to be adopted and once they were introduced, I never looked back. (Those thousand-plus LPs I purchased haven't been played in decades and are sitting in a closet.) If you had made a case for analog vs. digital, I'd consider your argument. But vinyl vs. digital? No way.

Strongly agree on the whole dynamic range issue. However, you don't say anything about jitter or aliasing, and how they are uniquely digital forms of distortion. I believe they are at the root of listener fatigue. If jitter isn't a problem, why are high DACs now offered with external clocks?

Oh, and it's records. Not vinyl. Vinyl is what Grandma's couch was made of. Elvis called them records. All the Beatles called them records. Do you achieve a gold vinyl? No you do not. GOLD "RECORD".

The name of the game is enjoyment of the music. No format delivers this (to me) better than a RECORD. A record slows down the experience. It forces you to be present. Can a record perform at the extreme levels of quality digital recordings? 100% yes. Unquestionably. But...and but means ignore everything I just said and go from there. But, it will cost you. The turntables, cords, cartridges, maintenance, etc. Is it worth it? Over my 50+ years of music, NOTHING has brought me more joy musically. YES! Don't believe me. Try this. Put on Dope Lemon, Smooth Big Cat. Indulge in a taste of canibus. Nice cool drink. Sit back and live. Yes, records make music better. Full stop.

Depends. Is the original recording made using digital or analog gear? I still prefer the sound of analog on a good playback system. I would also argue that the recording engineers of the 40's and 50's were better at their jobs than many modern counterparts.

The problem with CD's is that they are CD's.

Vinyl its difrent it has it class . cd has it own class. the word 'better' is not compare between this two 😊

The comment about when the Internet is down only applies to online streaming services. I do not reply on these services. All my non-vinyl music playing is either on my computer or on CD and I don't need the internet to play it. While I have a large collection of vinyl, I find it cumberson and in this busy world, having to turn the vinyl over to play the other side becomes a PITB. CD's are easier and on a 6-CD player system, I can randomise tracks, play just one album at a time, program whatever I want, while I work and also enjoy my collection of music. My CDs are looked after because I learnt at a young age to look after vinyl and so I take the same care with my CD's. However, I am finding that I am now using a laptop with a good external DAC to play back my music, more and more. And I can take it with me wherever I go. The lack of Internet doesn't phase me at all, but the lack of electrical power would though and that transends the media used as none will work without it. I like the look and feel of vinyl and it's large artwork, and in that I am in complete agreement. I will not get rid of my vinyl and I have some original and valuable records still in excellent condition because I recorded it digitally so I could play it more often. I did not want to end up where a favourite record had deteriorated to such a degree that I could hear the wear defects and have to stop listening to it. I love vinyl and yet I prefer digital playback for the consistant quality and ease of selection of what I want to listen to. It doesn't deteriorate over time and usage. Vinyl will though, have a special part in my soul.

The problem with digital, most CDs are compressed to hell unless it is an orchestral recoding. Even remastering of analog recordings is usuall compressed compared to the original lp release. Sad because when digital is done right, it can be phenomenal. The other issue for me is all the digital processing that is being done to modern recordings. Auto tune is the worst invention to happen to digital recording.

A band I'm a fan of likes their compression, all their songs are brickwalled by choice. A few years ago they released an LP of one of their albums, and the vinyl version was for all intents and purposes sounding exactly like the CD. I even recorded both, made the levels the same and then cut them intertwinedly, and you couldn't tell where the cuts were. All songs on the vinyl looked like sandpaper with shiny bits in between (the pauses between the songs), no recognizable groove difference. The level on the LP was overal lower than that of a dynamic LP because otherwise the songs wouldn't have fit because of the groove width. So yes, vinyl can be made to sound "as bad as digital" or even worse, if you mean by "sounding bad" the mastering compression that's being applied. I gave them advice saying that if I would be buying an LP for its sound quality, that this wouldn't be what I had in mind. Their subseqent release they had had mastered especially for vinyl, with a lot more dynamic range. It sounded fantastic compared to the digital version, but that was only because of the mastering. On the surface you could see the loud and the quiet parts, and the drum hits. I digitized the vinyl and listen to that instead of the official digital version. Funny how we nowadays have to resort to a medium with limited dynamic range for being able to enjoy more dynamic range 🙂 Furthermore I agree with everything you said; I enjoy vinyl mostly because of the mastering, the artwork and the sleeves. I also enjoy cassette, 8-track, R2R, 78s and even wax rolls. I love to listen to history and am amazed by how good things could sound (or in the case of wax rolls, could even sound at all) with only such a limited technology being available back then. It gives me an extra kick when listening to the music, warts and all (and oh does 8-track have warts 🙂). Also with vinyl, I don't mind old crackly records because the cracks tell you that the record has a history.

All frequencies below 125Hz do *NOT* need to be summed to mono. This is a MYTH. Just mix bass, kick, snare etc panned center. Sibilance and side lengths can be far more of an issue than stereo bass.

Also let it be known that *nothing* goes out into the world on CD without the artist and producer first approving it. The same cannot be said for vinyl, in which *if* a test cut is done and approved, and *if* test pressings are approved, they're still at the mercy of the playback setup: tonearm balancing, cartridge type, alignment and weight, stylus shape, along with the expertise of the cutting engineer(s) if done cut at more than one facility.

Objectively: vinyl is lossy. Digital done well beats vinyl done badly (and a *lot* can go wrong, especially on playback), just as vinyl done well beats digital done badly. CD's sonic problems early on were a combination of masters (often 2nd gen) that were mixed for vinyl, along with the filters and jitter of early A-D convertors and glass mastering systems.

<--- Look at my avatar and you'll have the answer to the question "vinyl or cd?".

There's no point comparing streaming because it's just an equivalent of radio - something to hear a tune before I decide if I want to buy it. The comparison is between CD and vinyl, both of which formats I have several hundred. Vinyl does sound better. Maybe it shouldn't and the technical capabilities of CD should far exceed those of vinyl but the fact is that vinyl sounds better. I have some albums on the GRP label on both formats and the vinyl versions have more sound information than the CD versions e.g. cymbals ring for longer, sound sharper, you can hear the fingers on bass strings and more room ambience on the vinyl versions than on CD, like the wave is being gated on the digital version for some reason. With vinyl, if I listen to an acoustic band with my eyes shut it really sounds like they are in the room but on CD I can tell it's been processed. Why is this? I dont know but that's just the way it is. Another observation is that with older recordings typically on vinyl, i.e. from the 60s and 70s, the instruments sound natural because they didn't put effects on drums, just recorded them as they were so they actualy sound like real drums sound in the studio. It's rare to find that these days because they usually have some processing that changes the sound. I guess being a musician, I expect things to sound natural and it annoys me when they don't.

If we consider phonograms as a product of their time and understand that result was intended and pursued by the original creators with the existent and available tools, any intervention (re-mixing, re-mastering) made on digital to make them sound "good" according to contemporary standards is sad to hear. As a musicologist, I always prefer listening to older phonograms in their original media, so we can have what has been originally cut. However, I don't see a lot of sense in vinyl reissues where any digital process was involved.

Do not measure dynamic range, vinyl simply sounds better, but to notice you must change your turntable Rega for a Linn Sondek, the cartridge from 2M blue to a Hana and a excellent phono preamp and is going to sound better than a Mark Levinson transport and dac

So another video claiming superiority of vinyl. I am music and hifi enthusiast who goes to concerts and attends hifi shows (Munich, Ascot, Warsaw) so I have a chance to listen to systems costing even million dollars. I mostly listen to classical, opera, jazz and genres like Fado. Yes, vinyl can sound amazing on expensive system but i have never heard analog system below £5k which sounded better than similarly priced digital in the last 10 years. Below £1k there is no contest. According to vinyl enthusiasts music reproduction must be the only area of technology which did not benefit from digitisation. Do they still watch 20 inch CRT tv, use analog mobile and post letter typed on Olivetti typewriter? I happen to know musicians in philharmonic orchestras and opera singers. None of them uses anything but digital to listen to music. Only about 10% of people in my circle who listen mostly to classical music etc have analog hifi equipment. I am 65 and people i know who buy vinyl are mostly in their 20s. But they admit that their choices are based, in most cases, on non musical aspects of vinyl. Mostly artwork. Then there is a basic issue of what is actually on vinyl record. It was recorded and mastered in digital domain. Only then it goes back to analog and gets pressed to vinyl. So we are introducing extra steps into recording and reply chain. The only thing this introduces are artefacts, which to some people are preferable to original recordings. Reality is that most expensive part of audio reply chain to make well are speakers. So, if you choose digital as source, that allows you to allocate more of your budget to speakers and amplifiers. If you go to classical music concerts then one thing is obvious: even million dollars music system is not even close to real experience. That is the basic problem with hifi industry. Whether source in reply chain is digital or analog is not relevant. Somehow visual industry progressed much more in the last 40 years than hifi industry. My friend £25k laser projector is very close to what you get in good cinema (obviously not the size of the picture). I never found logical explanation as to why hifi industry could not progress the same way.

Unfortunately, digital remasters form tape recordings are usually bad. When done straight form the tape with perhaps only minor eq adjustments they can sound great. But mastering engineers have the urge to fiddle around. Bob Katz once said the vinyl master sounds better than the digital master but the LP does not necessarily sound better XD Vinyl is cool because you are able to sonically tweak your front end to your liking/system. Digital is limited in that regard. Also I think the harmonic distortion of vinyl playback adds dimensionality and eases the sound. When comparing a digital recording to the vinyl of the same recording done by the same engineer I hear better soundstage depth and a slightly more relaxed sound (not dull/rolled off, actually a bit brighter). They aren't worlds apart just a bit different. I am not so sure about mono summing, however. My John Coltrane "My Favorite Things" record cut by Bernie Grundman has right channel bass till 35hz. At 50hz I measure 10db crosstalk. That's hardly mono.

I collect vinyls and EARLY CD issues. Before "loudness war" the CDs sounded very dynamic. SOME new CDs still keep good DR too.

I sold off all my vinyl and turntable 15 years ago and never regretted it. However, now my CD collection is collecting dust since converting it all to FLAC and streaming lossless from Apple and Tidal, with quality DACs where I need them. I even sold my Emotiva CD player.

I got the new se mini one that just came out

Hey, I first thought you were Steven Wilson the prog rock musician. I guess you guys have similar glasses, hair style and facial hair 😊.

Digital downloads also have the “does not expire” feature. Have you tried Roon? The integrated realtime lyrics (where available) is something else. Also I find the metadata in Roon displayed on a large iPad far richer than what’s printed on a vinyl sleeve or CD booklet. You can open links to biographies of each artist, the composer, the composition, similar artists, entire discography of a band, etc.

Sound quality is subjective.

After considering this for a bit - I think the attraction is in large part the nostalgia of memories. When the technology changed to CD. When I picked up CD titles of which I had the vinyl they sounded a bit different to me, noticeable, preferring the vinyl. The dynamic range of CD is said to be superior. Well, that is always nice, oops not always that nice. There are times when I want to figure out a way to compress my theaters signal - I have my AVR dynamic range set to low. It depends on the material for music especialy classical digital range if way good. For movies it makes it hard to hear low level then blows the room up when the movie blows up. That vinyl is said to be “warmer”. I don’t describe this difference only a warmer. To me and my musical senses vinyl is not only less sterile but also seems to me to be whole. Like that CD’s are just missing some of it - seeming to be a little hollow not quite as full. It just seems to me that more so on some titles I really think I can hear there is less frequency content - and really why should it be that a human that is conditioned to perform and listen to music would not be able to hear the difference. And here is what seems like a significant take away. It is not just me, you know. Many people who are particularly drawn to the higher end of audio fidelity in fact claim to hear that - ok. The BASS range of CD is said to be superior. Been said that the phono cartridge can't resolve below 20Hz - Well if you want to believe that, do. It seems odd to me that my AT15Sa spec claims 5Hz - 45kHz my Definitive Sub claim to 13-125Hz and you would be correct if said cannot hear it - but I sure can feel that momma. I don’t know does the CD do that? Ah - maybe not? Somday if live long enough might test with REW software. WEAR - Is a big deal for those super hi audiophile vinyl LPs - I take them ever so carefully out their pack and record them and really can’t hear the difference of playback - so I can save the LP and wear our the tape. Isn’t that the way they say it goes? There may be more but my back says I done.

Same here brother

Time to stop this nonsense. How much more to pump down our throats. DECENT SERUP ,JUS ENJOY MUSIC.