Excellent video here, Ron. Your explanation of all of these topics has helped me understand everything much better. You cleared up a lot of confusion in this video. It's now apparent why compact discs and even the SACDs have always sounded 'sterile.' Too clean. Warmth in a range of subtle sounds and studio ambience went missing in digital. Now, I'm wondering what the future will look like. The record industry seems to be at a crossroads, but at least we're seeing record companies sure of the fact that listeners want sound with the most information and the least degradation possible. That seems like a 'no brainer,' but we have seen companies put out inferior product for the mass market, as if they don't care. After all the MoFi and related drama we've seen this year, the upside is that now I think record companies are going to care more about quality control, especially at the high price points collectors struggle with. I'm wondering about whether recording engineers will go back to 'tape only,' demand a very high quality tape that under the right conditions can be well preserved, demand tape machines that outperform the Studer benchmark, and require all-tube systems like were used in the 1950s. Or, will they get busy inventing a new recording format/medium that is unlike digital or tape, something altogether new, like what T-Bone Burnett is advocating.
Great comment thanks so much. I think the problem is what Bernie Grumman and Kevin gray said here years back now that the big record companies have got back into making records it was the worst thing ever because in the 90s classic records and those people that were making records made them for audiophiles and they made them to very high standards because those were the folks that were buying records. now we have a whole different group of people buying records they just want the records they're not too concerned about how they sound because at the end of the day they do sound pretty good but of course compared to what? so I don't believe the record companies feel any need to change anything they're in the business to make money, and they're selling everything they make. Fortunately we still have companies like analog Productions that are old school audiophile labels we can trust these people unfortunately we thought we could trust Mofi too but there's been a lot of shenanigans with mofi over the years so it's just a sign of the times.
@multiverser Sorry, but record labels do not care about vinyl records. The vinyl community is divided in geography. In Europe, at least in my country, grocery stores does not sell movies like DVD and Blu-ray's anymore. While I see that still in the US they sell such items at grocery stores. Why do I mention movies? The only physical stores we have left is those who sell computer games and movies. And only two of these in the capital in Norway sell new vinyl records among these items. And do you know what? Almost nobody buys movies anymore. People stream. This is what's going to happen. These stores will eventually go bankrupt. I know nobody in my near family who buys vinyl records, nor physical movies. Nobody. And as soon as people who caught the vinyl-bug let it go, it will go, down the drain. The division of people will be those who stream music and movies, and the very, very few audiophiles. This time around, the vinyl will go forever. I don't say this because I hate vinyl records. I enjoy them and I find them superior to the digital options. But this is the fact. The last countries that will let go is the bigger countries, like Australia, US, and France. Vinyl records will vanish in Norway, Denmark and Sweden first, or Scandinavia so to say. Keep in mind. Only one store left in Oslo among the big ones in the game. Only 10 years ago there were several to choose from. One left. Recently I talked with Speakers Corner, and they have given up. Even they said titles like the classical stuff on Decca had to let go. If you want classical Decca titles, this is the time to grab everything you find.
@@RocknRonni where is this the case? Big record companies use the same producers and engineers and mastering engineers that they have forever. When they don't, the artist's studio is usually equipped the same way. Keep in mind, a Universal Audio interface sounds better than any Sony PCM-3324 ever did. It has every bit as good hardware on the analog side, and WAY better ADDA conversion. 3324 16 bit and max 48khz. Apollo, 24 bit 196 max sample rate. A cheap Focusrite Red interface outperforms a PCM-3324 by miles. Add to that the extreme advancements in analogue modeling, we can make bedroom recordings sound MORE analog than anything mixed from a PCM-3324. Those albums still sound great because they were great music, recorded by great engineers, through great preamps and compressors. But the quality of the recorded medium isn't even close. I'm a prog rock guy for crying out loud, and I can still admit that Finneas is a great producer making albums that sound as good as great sounding albums have aways sounded.
With all due respect the Bernie, he mixed up (no pun) 2 issues. It is the MEDIA that deteriorates, not digital itself. Just like analog written on tape doesn’t degredate, the TAPE MEDIA deteriorates. Sure, a physical disc media like CD can pit, disk drives can get bad blocks, thumb drives can be scrambled near a magnet. But this is a function of the Media it is on, not the fact that it is digital. Being in IT for 40+ years, I get the point. But music in digital is just a file. That file is either cohesive and passes CRC and error checks to open or it doesn’t. All MEDIA deterioration is best protected by BACKUPS (more is better). Ever heard of a safety copy of analog tapes? No media is foolproof, even memory technology like SSD disk drives, they can just flake out and stop working. He said “digital will not hold up. Even jump drives lose their information.” Jump drives? Really? That’s what he used as a testament to the longevity of storing digital? Now when he speaks of digital FORMATS evolving and disappearing, like the DAT format, he makes a stronger case. That is a pitfall (no pun) as the tech world loves to create new “standards”. And the simplicity of tape is true. And he has seen well maintained tape last over 60 years. Yes, there is a lot of information is a file of music. But it’s no different than opening an Excel spreadsheet, if the file integrity isn’t there, you get no results. And if tapes are handled wrong, your results are impacted, but unless their destroyed, you can often pickup some pieces. With digital it is more of it either working or it doesn’t.
Yeah what you're saying makes a lot more sense the medium itself is a physical media so over time anything will degrade and lose its integrity. But I did find it curious where Bernie said that tape is better for long-term storage than the digital media. thanks again for your Insight really appreciate you
No the software in DAC's destroys and then recreates the data according to meet the needs. This is why ladder dacs are and sound much better than sigma delta dacs. Software is critical to playback. I demonstrate this using the same FLAC file played back through the same hardware BUT using either rythymbox or Clementine. Rythymbox has a rubbish interface but has minimal software and sounds good. Clementine has a great GUI, sounds rubbish.I've been developing software since the early 1980 and people assume that software has no impact on the sound 🤣😂
@@ergloo6660 a player IS software controlled, but the DAC itself has no software in the playback chain unless they are cheating doing DSP processing on it such as EQing. if you are doing bit rate conversion on a cheap DAC, there may be distortion or noise. simply play back at the original bitrate without conversion.
This was the part of the interview where he lost me. Thanks for your explanation - I didn’t even think that what he was referring to was the storage media and not the data.
Good Lord....I don't know where to start. Tape is an awesome medium but also (slowly) degrades over time and each time you copy from it. DAT tape (digital files written to tape) can also degrade over time. An actual file on a hard drive or archived to a server does not degrade over time. Sony has backed up mostly their entire catalog to DSD files (they are not on tape). DSD IMO is the superior digital format from a sampling perspective and is the closest digital format to actually sound like analog. There, I simplified that entire video.
Small clarification…SACD is a disc storage format for audio SACD where audio is stored in Direct Stream Digital (DSD) format using pulse-density modulation (PDM) whereas standard CD used pulse-code modulation (PCM).
Yeah it gets a little bit confusing and hard to describe the idea I was trying to convey was a regular sacd is one times DSD where what Mofi is recording is four times DSD I hope I got that right
Hey Ron love your break down of that RUclips episode the one quote I really got was what Bernie Grundman said was “Listen to Your Ears” so many great analog recordings especially for jazz and rock I’ve been really enjoyed your albums comparisons it’s definitely an eye opener Ron you put all vinyl talk in perspective great job have a great week Ron. Lovellandrew
Unless there is a hard drive crash or corrupt thumb drive, digital information cannot be destroyed or degrade over time. The main concern is the digital storage and its longevity. Luckly backups that are 100% faithful copies can be made. The same cannot be said about analog tapes or vinyl.
They shouldnt run from Bernie but embrace him. Thank you for talking with the Sony representatives and providinh with the information of their procedures and policies.
Great take on the discussion Ron! But I don’t understand how Bernie says digital degrades but tape does not! That goes against everything that I’ve ever read or learned! Even if tape is the very first generation everything after that is a second third or fourth generation! And tape does degrade! Even metal tape!
Yeah he caught me off guard when he said that tape was a better long storage medium than digital, but I don't know he's the expert on this stuff. apparently both mediums degrade. we know tape does. I didn't realize that the digital media for storage was poor as well. Thanks for watching and thanks for leaving good comments I appreciate that
@@RocknRonni Digital mediums do not degrade gradually over time. Either they work or they have errors and the data which is stored on them is damaged. That´s why you need backups. Digital storage mediums do not degrade over time like analog tape, that is just not the way it works.
@@SalseroAt Of course digital can degrade over time. You have glue oxidation in the layer if backed up on a CD/DVD/Blu-ray. the so called laser-rot. Even you get a bit or two error, a DVD may play just fine with a built-in correction in the device. For long term storage digital needs several backups. But they are much more preservable than tapes, as you can have multiple copies whereas the data is exact the same, whereas tapes are not. I'm quite baffled of Bernie's lack of knowledge in this video.
@MF Nickster Sorry but I am not confused. I know the technology of things inside out. Please keep your manners. I don't think you understand what Bernie really means. It seems it goes over your mind, but you are excused. They are not talking about doing a backup of an already digital file. This is where you miss the point. They are talking about preserving an analogue tape. Whatever AD you use, it will be degraded.
Bernie knows what sounds good. He is NOT a mathematical eingineer. He has no idea of what he is saying here. ESPECIALLY today. This was SOMEWHAT true when he first started saying these things, as digital was going to VHS or DAT tapes, or Sony 1/2 inch digital tape. Digitial modeling of analogue hardware is proof that he is wrong. The math is plenty capable of keeping track of the variance of the original recording to any manipulations made to the signal. After all, in analogue the very exact same math is applied, only through resisters, capacitors, transformers, tubes, transistors, opamps, etc. etc. etc. There is no way that is LESS fragile than cold numbers when it can't even do the math the same way twice in two different units due to changes in environment over time, manufacturing tolerances, etc. etc. etc.
This is the problem with this discussion and how hilarious it is. Having to wash the music. And Ron is talking about a LP is not degrading and is a good storage medium and sounds superior to a CD. 😂 @Ron Beaudry Do you know the vinyl record specifications and the RIAA association specifications and what it does. Do you know about loss of dynamics across the geometry of a vinyl record? I am just baffled.
Yeah Kevin gray said "the worst thing that ever happened to the record industry is when the big record companies got back into it." The only make records for one thing and it's not to make us happy it's to make them profit. Problem is so many people are into records now that don't care about the high fidelity aspect of records. they buy everything that's produced. Therefore the record companies have no need to change what they're doing and they don't even understand what they're doing they think they're making good records they like digital after all who made all the CDs in the past
Funny, for many years without hearing Bernie or other experts I've felt the issue is converting not storage.Electronics alter the sound to varying degrees.
Hi Ron, enjoyed your talk :) So what can be a possible outcome: Get in vinyl what is pure analog, okay. And the others, the digital sources: At least I try to skip them and buy the digital copy, is it DSD or PCM (High-Res of course). So those who do not have an excellent digital playback chain, will need one. I am very deep into classical music also, and as much as I like the old analog vinyl, I would not even consider to buy new releases in vinyl, when I can get the High-Res digital version - the "Studio Master" - 1:1 directly into my listening room :) Just my 2 cents.
Hi Ron, hard to believe digital sources deteriorate over time being binary. For me this is one of the most important and incredibly informative videos (which i need to watch a few times to absorb all the information) in your superb catalogue so my thanks for uploading.
Just guessing, but I would imagine the binary digital losing information over time has to do with quantum mechanics. At the quanta level, information can migrate from one 'field' to another. This is well known by engineers working on developing quantum computing. They have to somehow harness that migration and use it for lightning fast computing.
@@Baz63 I'm no expert in this, at all, but I read science articles and have heard scientists speak about it. To answer your question, I don't know. Most of this is over my head.
@@scottwheeler2679 DSD is a different topic altogether mofi made a direct copy DSD file of the master tape and then they did a one step process from that to make a record that should be the best sounding version ever and it is I have another video where three analog gurus including Chad kassum couldn't tell the difference between an analog tape and a DSD tape or file infact they all picked the DSD as the analog one in a blind test.
@MF Nickster "Not very many people know that". Me neither, but it took me two seconds to find out before even watching this video. About the rest YOU write, I couldn't care less.
And the particles in the grooves, the stylus wear, its cost of replacement, the loss of volume from the outer edge of a vinyl to the inner grooves. Many ANAlog guys are so in denial of the vinyl record's flaws. This is your biggest denial, I will repeat: "the loss of volume from the outer edge of a vinyl to the inner grooves." Ever wondered why the last few songs on a record has lower volume? Well, that's why, the obsolete format of the way it is physically and geometry stored. If you do not agree, let me hear you elaborate on it, and explain on which points I am wrong.
Hi Ron, great video. Very well put. I will say that the reason vinyl sounds warmer, nicer and perhaps better than digital recordings is that digital is cut off to only reproduce sound between 20hz and 20khz whereas analogue reproduces sound from 5hz to 50khz. Whilst human hearing is limited to 20hz to 20khz, as such we don't hear below or above those numbers we do feel the missing frequencies as ambiance. As for long term storage, vinyl is the best economical storage format. Master tapes are expensive, played at high speed and need high quality and expensive playback equipment. Master tapes will degrade if played often no matter how the equipment is set up or how good it is. Vinyl will playback many more times without degradation if the cartridge is properly aligned and adjusted and the vinyl is treated with care. Also one tip is to never play a vinyl record over and over in the same session and especially never play the same song again just after playing it. The groove walls become pliable due to heat caused by the stylus and warp if stylus hits them again before it has a chance to cool off. If you treat your vinyl carefully they will last longer than tapes (which can loose magnetism while in storage over time) or digital formats which do lose their digits over time. So much for so called perfect sound forever.
you have it the other way round, stop spreading FALSE INFORMATION, they actually limit the dynamic range and they high pass LPs, sometimes even as high as from 40hz, because LP groves are limited when it comes to low frequencies, if they used the same dynamic range as digital, your stylus would jump out of the grove, CD official is 2hz to 22Khz, Hi-res 24/96 44Khz, DIGITAL is the SOURCE to cut the vinyl, so how can vinyl have a wider frequency response than the source?
CD is limited to those frequencies not the 4xDSD files that are used to cut records. I'm not even going to comment on all the other falsities you mention.
@@emilspec1227 You want me to burn a CD for you which will have 0.5Hz and a 2Hz waveform tracks and mail it to you? the lower limit is your DAC and amplifier , as for 22Khz, you dont need anything higher than that, as for dynamic range of 96db for CD, your tube amplifier noise floor is probably 80db, same for your RIAA amplifier, and I'll bet your record player picks up hum which even reduces that, your vinyl has surface noise and unusable rumble at subsonic frequencies. (get an oscilloscope and measure, or use your eyes to look at your speaker cones moving unrelated to the music when playing vinyl ) , CD is superior to vinyl anyway you turn this unless you are a flat earther ignoring inconvenient facts , by the way, tube amps because they have an output transformer , have very low efficiency below 30hz, so no sub bass for you, usually 30hz is the lower usable with 20hz kind of available, certainly no 5hz. inconvenient facts for you ...
Ronnie, I think people think of "analogue " as past or obsolete, when nothing can be further from the truth! The popularity of LPs have caused analog to "resurge" ! They even making new tapes and machines (in a professional capacity mostly)! It's an "alternative " to "digital " recording! It's more expensive, but it's not dead!
I had read an article thirty years ago which stated, digital is not eter El. the physical medium well Stoke can resist time. bzrnie knows what he is talking about..
I'm old school Ronnie Baby. All this talk about MOFI, great systems, cartridges, turntables, pre amps and crap is so far out of my wheelhouse I feel bereft sometimes. Not often though. LOL...
@@ralex3697 Yes I appreciate technology too Ralex. I appreciate them going to the moon but I'm really not interested in all the little parts that got them there. LOL ... Hey I understand the fascination and involvement it just ain't my bag. More power to the folks that are into it as far as I'm concerned. Cheers.
thanks Ron. been waiting for your thoughts regarding this p.s. always thought arista was under BMG. just googled it and you're right ron. sony owns them as well. wow.
Vinyl while a good storage medium loses information(RIAA urge) due to its format from master tapes. DSD is probably the closest digital method to preserving analog. If we are worried about digital information losing its state due to quantum mechanics or other bizarre theories, what is to say the Vinyl doesn't degrade over time? After all we all know about plastic getting brittle over time.
And you are wrong about DSD. And comparing AP vs Mofi pressings is NOT comparing just all analog mastering vs mastering with a digital step. They use different cutting lathes, different analog tape decks, the settings on those decks will be different and the mastering moves will be different. There are so many other variables that make audible differences that it's just completely wrong to think that is a meaningful comparison between all analog vs analog with a digital step.
I agree with Bernie analog tape is the best storage medium for music. Best way to preserve these precious historic phenomenal recordings. That discussion was very interesting best one yet. Sad that Sony is not going to lend out tapes anymore, which is odd because some of their recordings on tape are in really good shape, the proof is Dave Brubecks Take Five and Miles Davis Kind of Blue 3 track session reels and the entire Bob Dylan catalog on anog tape. Records are a good medium for preservation of music. I do like the sound of an analog sourced recording, yea digital can sound really good if done right. Great video Ron.
Yes absolutely digital does sound good but compared to what? when the recording is digital from the beginning we will never know how good it could have been if it was done analog from the beginning. Just something I've been thinking about because of the three mofis from digital that were compared to the AP's done analog.
Dr. David Robertson does not agree about long-term media storage as being a problem for digital media. He thinks analog is problematic in the long term. He indicates today’s digital can be hardened against degradation and loss.
If my memory serves me correct it was the CD that Phillips and Sony jointly created Phillip had originally come up with the digital recording system and Sony developed the error correction to make it work that's called red book 44.1
@@RocknRonni you are correct, But. Super Audio CD (SACD) is an optical disc format for audio storage introduced in 1999. It was developed jointly by Sony and Philips Electronics and intended to be the successor to the Compact Disc (CD) format. It was an attempt to bring high resolution audio to the public. The digital format used on sacd’s is Direct Stream Digital. Invented for the public not just for archival purpose.
@@dozo99 And this sadly failed. I Remember seeing these SACD albums in the stores, and they were WAY overpriced. It was their own fault (Sony and Philips).
@MF Nickster Always a cost to new technology. All this failed back then. Even the Sony PS3 removed the possibility to play SACD. The 1st. edition supported the SACD. By 2006 you could get decent priced DVD players with DSD/SACD support for around $150-$190. The majority of people have no interest in audiophile recordings.
Sony stopped talking to Bernie because they asked his advice about the (at the time) new "redbook 44.1k/16bit compact disc "! Bernie heard it and told them flat out "your not done, it's not ready"! Sony didn't want to hear that and pushed the "lower resolution" product ( but claiming it was higher than even tape masters🙄)!
Yes when they first introduced the compact disc there was more information on the CD for error correction then there was music. this was part of the problem when you try to make a copy. And all the problems Bernie talked about losing resolution also you're correct it's well known they rushed it to the marketplace knowing it could have been better if they had just spent more time to make it better that's why eventually they introduced the sacd
Bernie is a good knob turner but he is not up to date with the digital piece. He said last time he looked at it years ago seriously. Digital doesn’t degrade. He doesn’t understand. You need a physical drive not a solid state drive. He is out of his mind! I got a 2x DSD recorder and it is amazing. I am archiving my vinyl. Vinyl is a terrible media. The only reason they want it is so they can keep selling reissues to eternity. DSD4X is the tape. They don’t want to sell the actual quality of the tape. Their business model fizzles. They want to keep selling you “non copy” media. Vinyl. Read between the lines. Digital when done right smokes your tape. I will send you some 2X DSD…no way you tell a difference. Also, look at all these big reviewers. In Groove Mike, Mike 45. They all love many of the one steps now claim they felt something was off after the fact. I like those guys a lot, but good is good. Use your ears. If you prefer a crap sounding OG copy go get it. They nearly always sound like a campfire. What Mofi did was expose the hypocrisy of the “analogphile”. Ignore digital to your peril! CDs weren’t mastered well, nor is the current digital releases because they aren’t doing it right. Look of Jaime Howarth and the plangent process. That is the future.
I have a video where I talk about digital versus analog I ripped one of my records to 16-bit and then to 24-bit I listen to all three and I couldn't tell the difference I think what Bernie's talking about is after that when you've got the vinyl rip or the DSD master from the original tape then you have to start manipulating that that's when you run into the degradation thanks so much for your comments and for watching
@@RocknRonni Running that digital backup which has no degradation, you will get the exact same result back. Only running mechanical tapes will give a degradation. Both you and Bernie misunderstands this.
I'm sorry but your video is filled with so many factual errors it's just hard to watch. You are completely wrong about digital EQ vs analog EQ. In fact you got it exactly backwards. All analog EQs use analog filters that affect frequencies around the target frequencies. The slopes are dictated by the filters. Many analog equaliers also screw up phase and induce time domain errors. Digital EQ can target frequencies far more accurately, adjust slopes to exact shapes and do so without inducing any time domain or phase errors.
@@scottwheeler2679 I'm familiar with these digital recordings that use all these error corrections and such to fix so-called problems but many times the final product doesn't sound natural it sounds digitized. I trust Bernie He's got 50 years of experience making records. and he makes really good records. These are not my facts I'm just talking about the video. I found it very interesting. I thought that others made as well. Judging from the response the majority did. sorry you did not enjoy the video. And find it as informative as I did, but thanks for watching most appreciated.
Everyone talks about 1's& 0's but it has to go thru an electronic process (AD-DA) to get there and back. Straight digital transfers still aren't perfect. That's a lot of 1's & 0's to copy perfectly, nothing human is perfect.
The software in DAC's destroys info, a point I have made for years, the physics is simple, music is a pure sine wave, digital is stepped ergo by definition there is a loss of data. The moral of the story, by shares in AMPEX, Studer and BASF (not sure about tape manufacturers any more). I was comparing many UK 1st presses and MOFI's years ago til I stopped buying MOFI as I found that the MOFI's sound different and plain wrong to me on my system. However I grew up with originals so it may be a generation thing. Oh god Fremmer was right boy are lots of people going to have to eat humble pie. It's the "Heisenberg Principle" the act of observing a thing alters that thing.
I thought about Fremer, too! Bernie G seems to back up 100% what Fremer has been saying about how you can hear the difference between analog and digital.
You cannot be making such a false statement with ZERO understanding of math and electronics behind digital. so NO! DACs do not destroy any information period end of story.
@@RocknRonni The guy typed out that music is a sine wave then uttered physics next that , are you encouraging flat earthers? funny how they found flaws but n MoFO always AFTER the fact
As audiophiles we will be accused of believing that kit is more important than the music. From my viewpoint WRONG! for years I only had a CD of Lou Reed's Transformer, it was OK nothing special. THEN, I got a 1st press, the very first time I played it Vicious just blew me away it was well vicious for me the music was transformed! 😅 so it's all about hearing the best performance
I agree 100% audiophiles love the music so much and that emotional connection we get with it that when a song We Know on better equipment we get a better connection to the music. I think a lot of people have the same connection but they have not ever heard the difference. At first listen the differences aren't as apparent, but the more you listen the more apparent the differences become. That last bit was a quote from Kevin Gray
@ERG Loo It is just because it is mastered differently, cut with higher volume (read NOT compressed). Those LPs may sound lush and open and great and all that. But the vinyl record is not superior medium. You need to wash your vinyl record. You have dynamics degradation across the geometry. You have the RIAA filter. The medium is so obsolete if you do not understand the above info I've written here. An no, a good turntable in the million of $ value won't correct any of this. Also your stylus wears out, so does the PVC in the vinyl record. So many factors. Could you get the same master of this 1st press Transformer recorded to a digital file, sure you can, not from the vinyl LP, but from the master tape, without any geometry and RIAA specifications issues. This whole thing is ridiculous and hilarious. Sorry.
That's exactly what I noticed the "space" , cymbals and drum heads especially the snare didn't sound as real on CD, and being in bands have heard the real thing....a lot. I keep getting told oh it's bad mastering on the CD......? Everything I compared ? And why would CD;s be mastered bad ? If CD is such a perfect copy, why not do a straight transfer, no EQing etc.? Things didn't add up, except things get lost in the conversion. So make a decesion lower noise floor or more musicality. The whole concept of digital being perfect is stupid.....no copying process is perfect, there's electronics involved in both analog and digital. Maybe digital is a better storage medium but you gotta get it there and back. And I kinda get a kick outta the term "digital". is it because of 1's and 0's, which only represent a switch open or closed.
This is a joke right? Analog tape is a TERRIBLE archive medium. Whats all the baking of tapes just to get them to play again (once!)? Whats with the loss of high frequencies as the magnetisim fades? Oh and the print through, yeah, the print through! Admit it, digital superior in EVERY way. Practically ALL the reproduced sound you will ever hear today is from a digital source or has been digitised on its way to you. The tiny amount of analog sourced material being played on analog reproducers is irrelevant. Why do you think the sound from your PC is coming from?
What you're saying is true but is Bernie lying Bernie's letting us know about his experience The DSD format is fantastic Thanks for watching and liking the video ❤️
Bernie Grundman is a terrific mastering engineer. But he is wrong about digital. Hi res digital is audibly transparent. He and Kevin Gray, also a great mastering engineer are wrong about cable sound. It's easy to test and when tested the results are always the same. There are no inaudible differences under blind conditions. It is human nature to percieve differences where none exist when doing sighted non time synchronied comparisons. Doesn't matter how good one is at mastering. It's how we as humans are wired to process sound.
A guy who has worked with this technology for 50 years is wrong and you are right? What he says is dead on in my experience with digital. Yes you can tell the difference. You can hear it!
@@bellisariosonic No, I'm not right. an entire field of scientific research is right. So back at ya, an entire field of science is wrong and some guy who has no scientific back ground and has done zero research in that respective field of science is right?
@@bellisariosonic That reminds me of creationists saying My mom and dad weren't monkeys. Have you even heard of the scientific field called psychoacoustics? Are you even aware of the research done on the human auditory perception system? It really doesn't sound like it if your response is "science doesn't have ears."
Sorry... Bernie knows what sounds good. He is NOT, however a mathematical engineer. He has no idea of what he is saying here. ESPECIALLY today. This was SOMEWHAT true when he first started saying these things, as digital was going to VHS or DAT tapes, or Sony 1/2 inch digital tape. Digital modeling of analogue hardware is proof that he is wrong. The math is plenty capable of keeping track of the variance of the original recording to any manipulations made to the signal. After all, in analogue the very exact same math is applied, only through resisters, capacitors, transformers, tubes, transistors, opamps, etc. etc. etc. There is no way that is LESS fragile than cold numbers when it can't even do the math the same way twice in two different units due to changes in environment over time, manufacturing tolerances, etc. etc. etc.
@@KevinWale well Bernie may be talking about the old tapes with the old technology he would be correct I'm just talking about his video I found it interesting thought others may as well. I like Bernie he makes good records. I appreciate your feedback as I don't keep up with all the latest technology on digital most helpful thank you.
@@RocknRonni That's what I said... may have been true in the digital tape days. Don't get me wrong... I love his work. He's a brilliant mastering engineer by any metric. He is just wrong on the math. Say you record a signal to 2 different tape machines, and 2 different Pro Tools rigs. There will be FAR more variances in the 2 tape recordings than there will be the 2 ProTools recordings... even at 44.1, you're talking 44 thousand samples are taken a second. Now consider various analog drift.. wow and flutter, current changes, etc. etc. etc. 44.1 alone captures all of that stuff. In the time a clock ticks a second, a cd player will check a recording 44,100 times. The human brain can barely notice 2 different instruments played at the same time within that time frame. We talk about sensitivities is equipment that we can't even perceive a thousandth of.
No Bernie G did not said that. What I heard yes he said tape is for long storage. But here I interpreted what he said is that edit the DSD degrade the DSD. But if NOBODY edit the DSD then nothing is lost! And make your tape from the untampered and stored DSD file then nothing is lost. Yes there is nothing lost nor is there any bits lost when storing a DSD. But as I heard Bernie G said IF edited all is altered in the DSD file. But for storage nobody alter anything and nothing is lost. End of story. We don't need to spread FUD. 💕🥰🎶🎼🎵 Come on a DSD file is NEVER a copy as you state.. that is because you PRESUME that we always talking about old stuff that back then were TAPE! That is not the norm since many decades ago. So NO a we can't say that a DSD file is a copy! Yes of course it is a copy only if the original were done on a tape. So again FUD when no context is used. 👍
Well what we're talking about is the old analog tapes and making records from those because records are analog. when you make a digital copy of an analog tape and then you try to make a record from that. there's the problem because now you're making a copy of the digital to make it analog. so there's two steps making a digital copy of analog and then converting it back to analog to make a record. Never mind if they try to do EQ and stuff in the middle of all that. So what if they just record direct to DSD and make CDs of that because that keeps it all in the digital domain. Well there's kind of a problem with that because a lot of testing has been done in record sound better than CDs, so we've got a ways to go hopefully they will come up with a good storage medium that doesn't degradate the sound and it will last in many many years without deteriorating. thanks for your wonderful comments so much appreciated and thanks for watching my friend
@@scottwheeler2679 When tape deteriorate and fall apart over time. DSD is not having that issue. So that were why i said do a DSD/flac for long term storage. And if or when we want our tape back after 50 years then make a tape copy from the DSD. So it were only a way to fix the issues with long storage of tape! What is the alternative to do a copy of the master tape to another tape and get SQ losses each 10 to 20 years.. to try to keep the deteriorating to a minimum and after some iterations the SQ loss is so severe that nobody wants to listen to it and it doesn't matter that it's a beloved tape.. tape will vanish in the end IF no solution that I give a example on here. To preserve it in some lossless digital format maybe flac or whatever but not a lossy tape that slowly make historical musical moments to fade away.
Just a big contradiction from Bernie Grundman when he saying tape is the best media of storage. In the same video he shocks me when he says that he have "ovens" and hint that the other mastering engineer that he also has that too.. But he is silent when he knows that is information that is bad for the format and the industry. Everybody knows that a oven is used to "bake" a determinating tape that are FALLING APART so that it will fall apart little bit less when played (it is not 100% fixing the deterioration). I were shocked they do not have ONE oven they need more than one! (That is hidden behind the scenes form us.. And we think that maybe this happens occasionally.. But only god knows how many ovens they need to use in parallel and how often..)🤯 How can tape be a long time storage medium when it is not storage persistent at all. What a contradiction from Bernie.. He maybe have a hidden agenda and get a share of every oven that is sold .. 🤣😉🎵🎼🎶🥰 Solution STORE in 4xDSD no editing. When a new fresh tape is wanted transfer it to tape. So the digitize and play it back to analog without editing the DSD file in any way (when the editing is altering all data on the track) Just use the DSD as a storage format and NOTHING is lost or need a oven in any way or form. 🤣 Anyway the music of today is safe and more storage persistent than on the tape era. So that is comfortable to know. 👍🙏🎶🎼🎵💕
Hey thanks very much for your comment I think what Bernie is saying that the best storage medium for him is tape. he can best utilize that to make good sounding records. there's trouble with the digital when trying to make a good analog record. he also said that the digital storage medium does deteriorate after time as well. we lose information so we need something that's better than both. Because the lp is a analog format. So I may be one can conclude that we should keep it all in the digital domain well that doesn't seem to work either because a good analog record is better than a good digital CD maybe they'll finally get this digital stuff to work properly and we won't have to worry about records anymore of course that was the promise in the 80s thanks again for your comment and really appreciate your thoughts because of course yeah the baking of the tapes is a problem
Digital bits degrade and disappear? Are you for real? Perhaps storage medium does degrade, but bits will never. So much silliness in this hobby. Analog guys discovered digital and they are talking nonsense.
You are of course correct it's the medium that degrades over time and the information is lost hence the bits disappear. The information I am discussing is in the video Bernie Grumman who is a mastering engineer one of the best in the world this is these are his findings I'm just reporting on them thanks for watching and leaving a comment I appreciate that
Excellent video here, Ron. Your explanation of all of these topics has helped me understand everything much better. You cleared up a lot of confusion in this video. It's now apparent why compact discs and even the SACDs have always sounded 'sterile.' Too clean. Warmth in a range of subtle sounds and studio ambience went missing in digital. Now, I'm wondering what the future will look like. The record industry seems to be at a crossroads, but at least we're seeing record companies sure of the fact that listeners want sound with the most information and the least degradation possible. That seems like a 'no brainer,' but we have seen companies put out inferior product for the mass market, as if they don't care. After all the MoFi and related drama we've seen this year, the upside is that now I think record companies are going to care more about quality control, especially at the high price points collectors struggle with. I'm wondering about whether recording engineers will go back to 'tape only,' demand a very high quality tape that under the right conditions can be well preserved, demand tape machines that outperform the Studer benchmark, and require all-tube systems like were used in the 1950s. Or, will they get busy inventing a new recording format/medium that is unlike digital or tape, something altogether new, like what T-Bone Burnett is advocating.
Great comment thanks so much. I think the problem is what Bernie Grumman and Kevin gray said here years back now that the big record companies have got back into making records it was the worst thing ever because in the 90s classic records and those people that were making records made them for audiophiles and they made them to very high standards because those were the folks that were buying records. now we have a whole different group of people buying records they just want the records they're not too concerned about how they sound because at the end of the day they do sound pretty good but of course compared to what?
so I don't believe the record companies feel any need to change anything they're in the business to make money, and they're selling everything they make.
Fortunately we still have companies like analog Productions that are old school audiophile labels we can trust these people unfortunately we thought we could trust Mofi too but there's been a lot of shenanigans with mofi over the years so it's just a sign of the times.
@@RocknRonni Right on.
@multiverser Sorry, but record labels do not care about vinyl records.
The vinyl community is divided in geography. In Europe, at least in my country, grocery stores does not sell movies like DVD and Blu-ray's anymore. While I see that still in the US they sell such items at grocery stores. Why do I mention movies?
The only physical stores we have left is those who sell computer games and movies. And only two of these in the capital in Norway sell new vinyl records among these items. And do you know what? Almost nobody buys movies anymore. People stream. This is what's going to happen. These stores will eventually go bankrupt. I know nobody in my near family who buys vinyl records, nor physical movies. Nobody. And as soon as people who caught the vinyl-bug let it go, it will go, down the drain.
The division of people will be those who stream music and movies, and the very, very few audiophiles. This time around, the vinyl will go forever. I don't say this because I hate vinyl records. I enjoy them and I find them superior to the digital options. But this is the fact.
The last countries that will let go is the bigger countries, like Australia, US, and France.
Vinyl records will vanish in Norway, Denmark and Sweden first, or Scandinavia so to say.
Keep in mind. Only one store left in Oslo among the big ones in the game. Only 10 years ago there were several to choose from. One left.
Recently I talked with Speakers Corner, and they have given up. Even they said titles like the classical stuff on Decca had to let go. If you want classical Decca titles, this is the time to grab everything you find.
@@RocknRonni where is this the case? Big record companies use the same producers and engineers and mastering engineers that they have forever. When they don't, the artist's studio is usually equipped the same way. Keep in mind, a Universal Audio interface sounds better than any Sony PCM-3324 ever did. It has every bit as good hardware on the analog side, and WAY better ADDA conversion. 3324 16 bit and max 48khz. Apollo, 24 bit 196 max sample rate. A cheap Focusrite Red interface outperforms a PCM-3324 by miles. Add to that the extreme advancements in analogue modeling, we can make bedroom recordings sound MORE analog than anything mixed from a PCM-3324. Those albums still sound great because they were great music, recorded by great engineers, through great preamps and compressors. But the quality of the recorded medium isn't even close. I'm a prog rock guy for crying out loud, and I can still admit that Finneas is a great producer making albums that sound as good as great sounding albums have aways sounded.
Glad you mentioned quiet vinyl as that is often lost when speaking of what sounds better and why.
With all due respect the Bernie, he mixed up (no pun) 2 issues. It is the MEDIA that deteriorates, not digital itself. Just like analog written on tape doesn’t degredate, the TAPE MEDIA deteriorates. Sure, a physical disc media like CD can pit, disk drives can get bad blocks, thumb drives can be scrambled near a magnet. But this is a function of the Media it is on, not the fact that it is digital. Being in IT for 40+ years, I get the point. But music in digital is just a file. That file is either cohesive and passes CRC and error checks to open or it doesn’t. All MEDIA deterioration is best protected by BACKUPS (more is better). Ever heard of a safety copy of analog tapes? No media is foolproof, even memory technology like SSD disk drives, they can just flake out and stop working. He said “digital will not hold up. Even jump drives lose their information.” Jump drives? Really? That’s what he used as a testament to the longevity of storing digital?
Now when he speaks of digital FORMATS evolving and disappearing, like the DAT format, he makes a stronger case. That is a pitfall (no pun) as the tech world loves to create new “standards”. And the simplicity of tape is true. And he has seen well maintained tape last over 60 years. Yes, there is a lot of information is a file of music. But it’s no different than opening an Excel spreadsheet, if the file integrity isn’t there, you get no results. And if tapes are handled wrong, your results are impacted, but unless their destroyed, you can often pickup some pieces. With digital it is more of it either working or it doesn’t.
This, but I doubt anyone here wants to hear this.
Yeah what you're saying makes a lot more sense the medium itself is a physical media so over time anything will degrade and lose its integrity. But I did find it curious where Bernie said that tape is better for long-term storage than the digital media.
thanks again for your Insight really appreciate you
No the software in DAC's destroys and then recreates the data according to meet the needs. This is why ladder dacs are and sound much better than sigma delta dacs. Software is critical to playback. I demonstrate this using the same FLAC file played back through the same hardware BUT using either rythymbox or Clementine. Rythymbox has a rubbish interface but has minimal software and sounds good. Clementine has a great GUI, sounds rubbish.I've been developing software since the early 1980 and people assume that software has no impact on the sound 🤣😂
@@ergloo6660 a player IS software controlled, but the DAC itself has no software in the playback chain unless they are cheating doing DSP processing on it such as EQing.
if you are doing bit rate conversion on a cheap DAC, there may be distortion or noise. simply play back at the original bitrate without conversion.
This was the part of the interview where he lost me. Thanks for your explanation - I didn’t even think that what he was referring to was the storage media and not the data.
Good Lord....I don't know where to start. Tape is an awesome medium but also (slowly) degrades over time and each time you copy from it. DAT tape (digital files written to tape) can also degrade over time. An actual file on a hard drive or archived to a server does not degrade over time. Sony has backed up mostly their entire catalog to DSD files (they are not on tape). DSD IMO is the superior digital format from a sampling perspective and is the closest digital format to actually sound like analog. There, I simplified that entire video.
I enjoy Ron’s perspective. Always honest and informative
Yes wires (cables) make a difference. Bad recording, bad master, bad record.
Thank you bro
Digital audio files don’t “lose bits”. Hard drives can drop sectors but raid arrays have parity and error correction.
Great video Ron! You summarized and elaborated nicely.
Thank you very much
Great video Ron. New listening room is looking awesome. Thanks for sharing!
You're most welcome thank you very much for the encouraging words
Small clarification…SACD is a disc storage format for audio SACD where audio is stored in Direct Stream Digital (DSD) format using pulse-density modulation (PDM) whereas standard CD used pulse-code modulation (PCM).
Yeah it gets a little bit confusing and hard to describe the idea I was trying to convey was a regular sacd is one times DSD where what Mofi is recording is four times DSD I hope I got that right
@@RocknRonni yes SACD is DSD64
Hey Ron love your break down of that RUclips episode the one quote I really got was what Bernie Grundman said was “Listen to Your Ears” so many great analog recordings especially for jazz and rock I’ve been really enjoyed your albums comparisons it’s definitely an eye opener Ron you put all vinyl talk in perspective great job have a great week Ron. Lovellandrew
Thank you very much for your inspiring words much appreciated my friend
Unless there is a hard drive crash or corrupt thumb drive, digital information cannot be destroyed or degrade over time. The main concern is the digital storage and its longevity. Luckly backups that are 100% faithful copies can be made. The same cannot be said about analog tapes or vinyl.
no, Mofi does not have to make an analog copy of the DSD file. They can cut directly from the DSD file if they choose
They shouldnt run from Bernie but embrace him. Thank you for talking with the Sony representatives and providinh with the information of their procedures and policies.
Great take on the discussion Ron! But I don’t understand how Bernie says digital degrades but tape does not! That goes against everything that I’ve ever read or learned! Even if tape is the very first generation everything after that is a second third or fourth generation! And tape does degrade! Even metal tape!
Yeah he caught me off guard when he said that tape was a better long storage medium than digital, but I don't know he's the expert on this stuff. apparently both mediums degrade. we know tape does. I didn't realize that the digital media for storage was poor as well. Thanks for watching and thanks for leaving good comments I appreciate that
@@RocknRonni Digital mediums do not degrade gradually over time. Either they work or they have errors and the data which is stored on them is damaged. That´s why you need backups. Digital storage mediums do not degrade over time like analog tape, that is just not the way it works.
@@SalseroAt Of course digital can degrade over time. You have glue oxidation in the layer if backed up on a CD/DVD/Blu-ray. the so called laser-rot. Even you get a bit or two error, a DVD may play just fine with a built-in correction in the device. For long term storage digital needs several backups. But they are much more preservable than tapes, as you can have multiple copies whereas the data is exact the same, whereas tapes are not. I'm quite baffled of Bernie's lack of knowledge in this video.
@MF Nickster Sorry but I am not confused. I know the technology of things inside out. Please keep your manners.
I don't think you understand what Bernie really means. It seems it goes over your mind, but you are excused.
They are not talking about doing a backup of an already digital file. This is where you miss the point.
They are talking about preserving an analogue tape. Whatever AD you use, it will be degraded.
Bernie knows what sounds good. He is NOT a mathematical eingineer. He has no idea of what he is saying here. ESPECIALLY today. This was SOMEWHAT true when he first started saying these things, as digital was going to VHS or DAT tapes, or Sony 1/2 inch digital tape. Digitial modeling of analogue hardware is proof that he is wrong. The math is plenty capable of keeping track of the variance of the original recording to any manipulations made to the signal. After all, in analogue the very exact same math is applied, only through resisters, capacitors, transformers, tubes, transistors, opamps, etc. etc. etc. There is no way that is LESS fragile than cold numbers when it can't even do the math the same way twice in two different units due to changes in environment over time, manufacturing tolerances, etc. etc. etc.
Great video, thank u
i thing the UHQR sounds great after 3 cleanings .. but oh boy was i shockd at first without wasching .. great video as always
Well I guess I should clean mine some more then thanks for the info bro and thanks for watching and leaving good commentary
This is the problem with this discussion and how hilarious it is. Having to wash the music. And Ron is talking about a LP is not degrading and is a good storage medium and sounds superior to a CD. 😂
@Ron Beaudry Do you know the vinyl record specifications and the RIAA association specifications and what it does. Do you know about loss of dynamics across the geometry of a vinyl record? I am just baffled.
Very well explained sir, thank you! 👍
Thank you very much for the encouraging words much appreciated
More about the mighty dollar than the mighty sound.
Yeah Kevin gray said "the worst thing that ever happened to the record industry is when the big record companies got back into it." The only make records for one thing and it's not to make us happy it's to make them profit. Problem is so many people are into records now that don't care about the high fidelity aspect of records. they buy everything that's produced. Therefore the record companies have no need to change what they're doing and they don't even understand what they're doing they think they're making good records they like digital after all who made all the CDs in the past
Funny, for many years without hearing Bernie or other experts I've felt the issue is converting not storage.Electronics alter the sound to varying degrees.
Hi Ron, enjoyed your talk :) So what can be a possible outcome: Get in vinyl what is pure analog, okay. And the others, the digital sources: At least I try to skip them and buy the digital copy, is it DSD or PCM (High-Res of course). So those who do not have an excellent digital playback chain, will need one.
I am very deep into classical music also, and as much as I like the old analog vinyl, I would not even consider to buy new releases in vinyl, when I can get the High-Res digital version - the "Studio Master" - 1:1 directly into my listening room :) Just my 2 cents.
Hi Ron, hard to believe digital sources deteriorate over time being binary. For me this is one of the most important and incredibly informative videos (which i need to watch a few times to absorb all the information) in your superb catalogue so my thanks for uploading.
Thanks Barrie as always so gracious and kind
Just guessing, but I would imagine the binary digital losing information over time has to do with quantum mechanics. At the quanta level, information can migrate from one 'field' to another. This is well known by engineers working on developing quantum computing. They have to somehow harness that migration and use it for lightning fast computing.
@@continentalgin I've heard of the binary black hole...just wondering if that is related to your comment?
@@Baz63 I'm no expert in this, at all, but I read science articles and have heard scientists speak about it. To answer your question, I don't know. Most of this is over my head.
@@continentalgin you're not alone but thanks.
“All the ones from the analog tape are better.” Which all analog pressing of Abraxas sounds better than the MoFi one step?
@@scottwheeler2679 DSD is a different topic altogether mofi made a direct copy DSD file of the master tape and then they did a one step process from that to make a record that should be the best sounding version ever and it is I have another video where three analog gurus including Chad kassum couldn't tell the difference between an analog tape and a DSD tape or file infact they all picked the DSD as the analog one in a blind test.
The MoFi situation is the best thing to happen to the industry. Now we may see the revival of proper analog recordings.
Yeah, good luck with that, especially anything coming from Sony/Columbia.
I sincerely hope it will help thanks for watching appreciate your comments
Why would his lead recording artists to start recording nag in analog?
Brothers in Arms was recorded digitally, but mixed with an analog mixer.
@MF Nickster "Not very many people know that". Me neither, but it took me two seconds to find out before even watching this video. About the rest YOU write, I couldn't care less.
@MF Nickster Most all these engineers has foggy memories, wonder why (me thinking white stripes of chemicals lined up across their mixing desk). 😂
Records also sound better because of the critical additional transducer in the audio presentation element in our systems: the cartridge.
Thanks for your help and your comments much appreciated
The microphone
And the particles in the grooves, the stylus wear, its cost of replacement, the loss of volume from the outer edge of a vinyl to the inner grooves. Many ANAlog guys are so in denial of the vinyl record's flaws. This is your biggest denial, I will repeat: "the loss of volume from the outer edge of a vinyl to the inner grooves." Ever wondered why the last few songs on a record has lower volume? Well, that's why, the obsolete format of the way it is physically and geometry stored.
If you do not agree, let me hear you elaborate on it, and explain on which points I am wrong.
Hi Ron, great video. Very well put. I will say that the reason vinyl sounds warmer, nicer and perhaps better than digital recordings is that digital is cut off to only reproduce sound between 20hz and 20khz whereas analogue reproduces sound from 5hz to 50khz. Whilst human hearing is limited to 20hz to 20khz, as such we don't hear below or above those numbers we do feel the missing frequencies as ambiance. As for long term storage, vinyl is the best economical storage format. Master tapes are expensive, played at high speed and need high quality and expensive playback equipment. Master tapes will degrade if played often no matter how the equipment is set up or how good it is. Vinyl will playback many more times without degradation if the cartridge is properly aligned and adjusted and the vinyl is treated with care. Also one tip is to never play a vinyl record over and over in the same session and especially never play the same song again just after playing it. The groove walls become pliable due to heat caused by the stylus and warp if stylus hits them again before it has a chance to cool off. If you treat your vinyl carefully they will last longer than tapes (which can loose magnetism while in storage over time) or digital formats which do lose their digits over time. So much for so called perfect sound forever.
Yes I agree Peter what a great comment thank you so much
@@RocknRonni Thanks Ron....and YW....
you have it the other way round, stop spreading FALSE INFORMATION, they actually limit the dynamic range and they high pass LPs, sometimes even as high as from 40hz, because LP groves are limited when it comes to low frequencies, if they used the same dynamic range as digital, your stylus would jump out of the grove,
CD official is 2hz to 22Khz, Hi-res 24/96 44Khz, DIGITAL is the SOURCE to cut the vinyl,
so how can vinyl have a wider frequency response than the source?
CD is limited to those frequencies not the 4xDSD files that are used to cut records. I'm not even going to comment on all the other falsities you mention.
@@emilspec1227 You want me to burn a CD for you which will have 0.5Hz and a 2Hz waveform tracks and mail it to you? the lower limit is your DAC and amplifier , as for 22Khz, you dont need anything higher than that, as for dynamic range of 96db for CD, your tube amplifier noise floor is probably 80db, same for your RIAA amplifier, and I'll bet your record player picks up hum which even reduces that, your vinyl has surface noise and unusable rumble at subsonic frequencies. (get an oscilloscope and measure, or use your eyes to look at your speaker cones moving unrelated to the music when playing vinyl ) , CD is superior to vinyl anyway you turn this unless you are a flat earther ignoring inconvenient facts , by the way, tube amps because they have an output transformer , have very low efficiency below 30hz, so no sub bass for you, usually 30hz is the lower usable with 20hz kind of available, certainly no 5hz. inconvenient facts for you ...
Nice one ron. Great follow up.
Thanks my friend always enjoy your comments I was watching one of your videos last week as well
@@RocknRonni it’s a shame it took all these years to find all this out.
Music Matters are spectacular, just so pricey now and very hard to get
Too bad Paul McGowan from PS Audio and Octave Records was not a participant. They record in DSD and press vinyl from it.
Ronnie, I think people think of "analogue " as past or obsolete, when nothing can be further from the truth! The popularity of LPs have caused analog to "resurge" ! They even making new tapes and machines (in a professional capacity mostly)! It's an "alternative " to "digital " recording! It's more expensive, but it's not dead!
When movie restorers are finished, the movies are saved by being transferred back to film.
I don't like it when people refer to Ryan Smith as the new guy, his a very accomplished mastering Eng sterling sound.
I had read an article thirty years ago which stated, digital is not eter El. the physical medium well Stoke can resist time. bzrnie knows what he is talking about..
I'm old school Ronnie Baby. All this talk about MOFI, great systems, cartridges, turntables, pre amps and crap is so far out of my wheelhouse I feel bereft sometimes. Not often though. LOL...
I’m old school as well, but I still appreciate technology
@@ralex3697 Yes I appreciate technology too Ralex. I appreciate them going to the moon but I'm really not interested in all the little parts that got them there. LOL ... Hey I understand the fascination and involvement it just ain't my bag. More power to the folks that are into it as far as I'm concerned. Cheers.
I know how you feel Bobby and I appreciate you very much for watching and leaving comments buddy
thanks Ron. been waiting for your thoughts regarding this p.s. always thought arista was under BMG. just googled it and you're right ron. sony owns them as well. wow.
Thanks for watching my friend and leaving good comments always appreciated
Vinyl while a good storage medium loses information(RIAA urge) due to its format from master tapes. DSD is probably the closest digital method to preserving analog. If we are worried about digital information losing its state due to quantum mechanics or other bizarre theories, what is to say the Vinyl doesn't degrade over time? After all we all know about plastic getting brittle over time.
And you are wrong about DSD. And comparing AP vs Mofi pressings is NOT comparing just all analog mastering vs mastering with a digital step. They use different cutting lathes, different analog tape decks, the settings on those decks will be different and the mastering moves will be different. There are so many other variables that make audible differences that it's just completely wrong to think that is a meaningful comparison between all analog vs analog with a digital step.
I agree with Bernie analog tape is the best storage medium for music. Best way to preserve these precious historic phenomenal recordings. That discussion was very interesting best one yet. Sad that Sony is not going to lend out tapes anymore, which is odd because some of their recordings on tape are in really good shape, the proof is Dave Brubecks Take Five and Miles Davis Kind of Blue 3 track session reels and the entire Bob Dylan catalog on anog tape. Records are a good medium for preservation of music. I do like the sound of an analog sourced recording, yea digital can sound really good if done right. Great video Ron.
Kind Of Blue three track cut by Bernie was done in 1997 for the very last time. That was quarter of the century ago.
Yes absolutely digital does sound good but compared to what?
when the recording is digital from the beginning we will never know how good it could have been if it was done analog from the beginning.
Just something I've been thinking about because of the three mofis from digital that were compared to the AP's done analog.
If you want to know how good a hi res digital recording would have sounded on analog tape just make an analog copy of the digital recording
Dr. David Robertson does not agree about long-term media storage as being a problem for digital media. He thinks analog is problematic in the long term. He indicates today’s digital can be hardened against degradation and loss.
You might not be aware of it, but the development of SACD/DSD was a joint venture between Philips and Sony. not just a Sony thing.
If my memory serves me correct it was the CD that Phillips and Sony jointly created Phillip had originally come up with the digital recording system and Sony developed the error correction to make it work that's called red book 44.1
@@RocknRonni you are correct, But.
Super Audio CD (SACD) is an optical disc format for audio storage introduced in 1999. It was developed jointly by Sony and Philips Electronics and intended to be the successor to the Compact Disc (CD) format.
It was an attempt to bring high resolution audio to the public. The digital format used on sacd’s is Direct Stream Digital. Invented for the public not just for archival purpose.
@@dozo99 And this sadly failed. I Remember seeing these SACD albums in the stores, and they were WAY overpriced. It was their own fault (Sony and Philips).
@MF Nickster Always a cost to new technology. All this failed back then.
Even the Sony PS3 removed the possibility to play SACD. The 1st. edition supported the SACD. By 2006 you could get decent priced DVD players with DSD/SACD support for around $150-$190.
The majority of people have no interest in audiophile recordings.
Sony stopped talking to Bernie because they asked his advice about the (at the time) new "redbook 44.1k/16bit compact disc "! Bernie heard it and told them flat out "your not done, it's not ready"! Sony didn't want to hear that and pushed the "lower resolution" product ( but claiming it was higher than even tape masters🙄)!
Yes when they first introduced the compact disc there was more information on the CD for error correction then there was music. this was part of the problem when you try to make a copy. And all the problems Bernie talked about losing resolution also you're correct it's well known they rushed it to the marketplace knowing it could have been better if they had just spent more time to make it better that's why eventually they introduced the sacd
None of you, nor Bernie, understands the Nyquist theorem.
Bernie is a good knob turner but he is not up to date with the digital piece. He said last time he looked at it years ago seriously. Digital doesn’t degrade. He doesn’t understand. You need a physical drive not a solid state drive. He is out of his mind! I got a 2x DSD recorder and it is amazing. I am archiving my vinyl. Vinyl is a terrible media. The only reason they want it is so they can keep selling reissues to eternity. DSD4X is the tape. They don’t want to sell the actual quality of the tape. Their business model fizzles. They want to keep selling you “non copy” media. Vinyl. Read between the lines. Digital when done right smokes your tape. I will send you some 2X DSD…no way you tell a difference. Also, look at all these big reviewers. In Groove Mike, Mike 45. They all love many of the one steps now claim they felt something was off after the fact. I like those guys a lot, but good is good. Use your ears. If you prefer a crap sounding OG copy go get it. They nearly always sound like a campfire. What Mofi did was expose the hypocrisy of the “analogphile”. Ignore digital to your peril! CDs weren’t mastered well, nor is the current digital releases because they aren’t doing it right. Look of Jaime Howarth and the plangent process. That is the future.
I have a video where I talk about digital versus analog I ripped one of my records to 16-bit and then to 24-bit I listen to all three and I couldn't tell the difference I think what Bernie's talking about is after that when you've got the vinyl rip or the DSD master from the original tape then you have to start manipulating that that's when you run into the degradation thanks so much for your comments and for watching
@@RocknRonni Running that digital backup which has no degradation, you will get the exact same result back. Only running mechanical tapes will give a degradation. Both you and Bernie misunderstands this.
All due respect to Bernie, who is great but to say that analog tape will last longer than digital copies is ridiculous
I'm sorry but your video is filled with so many factual errors it's just hard to watch. You are completely wrong about digital EQ vs analog EQ. In fact you got it exactly backwards. All analog EQs use analog filters that affect frequencies around the target frequencies. The slopes are dictated by the filters. Many analog equaliers also screw up phase and induce time domain errors. Digital EQ can target frequencies far more accurately, adjust slopes to exact shapes and do so without inducing any time domain or phase errors.
@@scottwheeler2679 I'm familiar with these digital recordings that use all these error corrections and such to fix so-called problems but many times the final product doesn't sound natural it sounds digitized. I trust Bernie He's got 50 years of experience making records. and he makes really good records. These are not my facts I'm just talking about the video. I found it very interesting. I thought that others made as well. Judging from the response the majority did. sorry you did not enjoy the video. And find it as informative as I did, but thanks for watching most appreciated.
As always, a first rate breakdown on things. Unfortunately, any form of concensus on all this is likely lifetimes away, Ron.
Thank you Rachel and thanks for watching
My pleasure, Ron 🥰
Everyone talks about 1's& 0's but it has to go thru an electronic process (AD-DA) to get there and back. Straight digital transfers still aren't perfect. That's a lot of 1's & 0's to copy perfectly, nothing human is perfect.
The software in DAC's destroys info, a point I have made for years, the physics is simple, music is a pure sine wave, digital is stepped ergo by definition there is a loss of data. The moral of the story, by shares in AMPEX, Studer and BASF (not sure about tape manufacturers any more). I was comparing many UK 1st presses and MOFI's years ago til I stopped buying MOFI as I found that the MOFI's sound different and plain wrong to me on my system. However I grew up with originals so it may be a generation thing. Oh god Fremmer was right boy are lots of people going to have to eat humble pie. It's the "Heisenberg Principle" the act of observing a thing alters that thing.
I thought about Fremer, too! Bernie G seems to back up 100% what Fremer has been saying about how you can hear the difference between analog and digital.
You cannot be making such a false statement with ZERO understanding of math and electronics behind digital. so NO! DACs do not destroy any information period end of story.
@@xprcloud Calm down, before you have a heart attack.
Great Insight my friend trust your ears thanks for your inspiring words
@@RocknRonni The guy typed out that music is a sine wave then uttered physics next that , are you encouraging flat earthers? funny how they found flaws but n MoFO always AFTER the fact
As audiophiles we will be accused of believing that kit is more important than the music. From my viewpoint WRONG! for years I only had a CD of Lou Reed's Transformer, it was OK nothing special. THEN, I got a 1st press, the very first time I played it Vicious just blew me away it was well vicious for me the music was transformed! 😅 so it's all about hearing the best performance
I agree 100% audiophiles love the music so much and that emotional connection we get with it that when a song We Know on better equipment we get a better connection to the music.
I think a lot of people have the same connection but they have not ever heard the difference. At first listen the differences aren't as apparent, but the more you listen the more apparent the differences become. That last bit was a quote from Kevin Gray
@ERG Loo It is just because it is mastered differently, cut with higher volume (read NOT compressed). Those LPs may sound lush and open and great and all that. But the vinyl record is not superior medium. You need to wash your vinyl record. You have dynamics degradation across the geometry. You have the RIAA filter. The medium is so obsolete if you do not understand the above info I've written here. An no, a good turntable in the million of $ value won't correct any of this. Also your stylus wears out, so does the PVC in the vinyl record. So many factors. Could you get the same master of this 1st press Transformer recorded to a digital file, sure you can, not from the vinyl LP, but from the master tape, without any geometry and RIAA specifications issues. This whole thing is ridiculous and hilarious. Sorry.
That's exactly what I noticed the "space" , cymbals and drum heads especially the snare didn't sound as real on CD, and being in bands have heard the real thing....a lot. I keep getting told oh it's bad mastering on the CD......? Everything I compared ? And why would CD;s be mastered bad ? If CD is such a perfect copy, why not do a straight transfer, no EQing etc.? Things didn't add up, except things get lost in the conversion. So make a decesion lower noise floor or more musicality. The whole concept of digital being perfect is stupid.....no copying process is perfect, there's electronics involved in both analog and digital. Maybe digital is a better storage medium but you gotta get it there and back. And I kinda get a kick outta the term "digital". is it because of 1's and 0's, which only represent a switch open or closed.
This is a joke right?
Analog tape is a TERRIBLE archive medium. Whats all the baking of tapes just to get them to play again (once!)? Whats with the loss of high frequencies as the magnetisim fades? Oh and the print through, yeah, the print through!
Admit it, digital superior in EVERY way. Practically ALL the reproduced sound you will ever hear today is from a digital source or has been digitised on its way to you.
The tiny amount of analog sourced material being played on analog reproducers is irrelevant. Why do you think the sound from your PC is coming from?
What you're saying is true but is Bernie lying Bernie's letting us know about his experience The DSD format is fantastic Thanks for watching and liking the video ❤️
Bernie Grundman is a terrific mastering engineer. But he is wrong about digital. Hi res digital is audibly transparent. He and Kevin Gray, also a great mastering engineer are wrong about cable sound. It's easy to test and when tested the results are always the same. There are no inaudible differences under blind conditions. It is human nature to percieve differences where none exist when doing sighted non time synchronied comparisons. Doesn't matter how good one is at mastering. It's how we as humans are wired to process sound.
A guy who has worked with this technology for 50 years is wrong and you are right? What he says is dead on in my experience with digital. Yes you can tell the difference. You can hear it!
@@bellisariosonic No, I'm not right. an entire field of scientific research is right. So back at ya, an entire field of science is wrong and some guy who has no scientific back ground and has done zero research in that respective field of science is right?
@@scottwheeler2679 yeah we only work with it everyday in studios. Such fantasy worlds digital fanatics live in.
@@scottwheeler2679 Science doesn't have ears, people do!
@@bellisariosonic That reminds me of creationists saying My mom and dad weren't monkeys. Have you even heard of the scientific field called psychoacoustics? Are you even aware of the research done on the human auditory perception system? It really doesn't sound like it if your response is "science doesn't have ears."
Generation loss is inevitable in all formats in amalog more so than digital.
Sorry... Bernie knows what sounds good. He is NOT, however a mathematical engineer. He has no idea of what he is saying here. ESPECIALLY today. This was SOMEWHAT true when he first started saying these things, as digital was going to VHS or DAT tapes, or Sony 1/2 inch digital tape. Digital modeling of analogue hardware is proof that he is wrong. The math is plenty capable of keeping track of the variance of the original recording to any manipulations made to the signal. After all, in analogue the very exact same math is applied, only through resisters, capacitors, transformers, tubes, transistors, opamps, etc. etc. etc. There is no way that is LESS fragile than cold numbers when it can't even do the math the same way twice in two different units due to changes in environment over time, manufacturing tolerances, etc. etc. etc.
@@KevinWale well Bernie may be talking about the old tapes with the old technology he would be correct I'm just talking about his video I found it interesting thought others may as well. I like Bernie he makes good records. I appreciate your feedback as I don't keep up with all the latest technology on digital most helpful thank you.
@@RocknRonni That's what I said... may have been true in the digital tape days. Don't get me wrong... I love his work. He's a brilliant mastering engineer by any metric. He is just wrong on the math. Say you record a signal to 2 different tape machines, and 2 different Pro Tools rigs. There will be FAR more variances in the 2 tape recordings than there will be the 2 ProTools recordings... even at 44.1, you're talking 44 thousand samples are taken a second. Now consider various analog drift.. wow and flutter, current changes, etc. etc. etc. 44.1 alone captures all of that stuff. In the time a clock ticks a second, a cd player will check a recording 44,100 times. The human brain can barely notice 2 different instruments played at the same time within that time frame.
We talk about sensitivities is equipment that we can't even perceive a thousandth of.
No Bernie G did not said that.
What I heard yes he said tape is for long storage.
But here I interpreted what he said is that edit the DSD degrade the DSD.
But if NOBODY edit the DSD then nothing is lost! And make your tape from the untampered and stored DSD file then nothing is lost.
Yes there is nothing lost nor is there any bits lost when storing a DSD. But as I heard Bernie G said IF edited all is altered in the DSD file. But for storage nobody alter anything and nothing is lost. End of story. We don't need to spread FUD. 💕🥰🎶🎼🎵
Come on a DSD file is NEVER a copy as you state.. that is because you PRESUME that we always talking about old stuff that back then were TAPE! That is not the norm since many decades ago. So NO a we can't say that a DSD file is a copy!
Yes of course it is a copy only if the original were done on a tape.
So again FUD when no context is used. 👍
Well what we're talking about is the old analog tapes and making records from those because records are analog. when you make a digital copy of an analog tape and then you try to make a record from that.
there's the problem because now you're making a copy of the digital to make it analog. so there's two steps making a digital copy of analog and then converting it back to analog to make a record. Never mind if they try to do EQ and stuff in the middle of all that.
So what if they just record direct to DSD and make CDs of that because that keeps it all in the digital domain. Well there's kind of a problem with that because a lot of testing has been done in record sound better than CDs, so we've got a ways to go hopefully they will come up with a good storage medium that doesn't degradate the sound and it will last in many many years without deteriorating.
thanks for your wonderful comments so much appreciated and thanks for watching my friend
This is so moly not true. There is no need to make an analog tape copy from the DSD file.
@@scottwheeler2679 When tape deteriorate and fall apart over time. DSD is not having that issue.
So that were why i said do a DSD/flac for long term storage. And if or when we want our tape back after 50 years then make a tape copy from the DSD.
So it were only a way to fix the issues with long storage of tape!
What is the alternative to do a copy of the master tape to another tape and get SQ losses each 10 to 20 years.. to try to keep the deteriorating to a minimum and after some iterations the SQ loss is so severe that nobody wants to listen to it and it doesn't matter that it's a beloved tape.. tape will vanish in the end IF no solution that I give a example on here. To preserve it in some lossless digital format maybe flac or whatever but not a lossy tape that slowly make historical musical moments to fade away.
Just a big contradiction from Bernie Grundman when he saying tape is the best media of storage.
In the same video he shocks me when he says that he have "ovens" and hint that the other mastering engineer that he also has that too.. But he is silent when he knows that is information that is bad for the format and the industry.
Everybody knows that a oven is used to "bake" a determinating tape that are FALLING APART so that it will fall apart little bit less when played (it is not 100% fixing the deterioration).
I were shocked they do not have ONE oven they need more than one! (That is hidden behind the scenes form us.. And we think that maybe this happens occasionally.. But only god knows how many ovens they need to use in parallel and how often..)🤯
How can tape be a long time storage medium when it is not storage persistent at all. What a contradiction from Bernie..
He maybe have a hidden agenda and get a share of every oven that is sold .. 🤣😉🎵🎼🎶🥰
Solution STORE in 4xDSD no editing. When a new fresh tape is wanted transfer it to tape.
So the digitize and play it back to analog without editing the DSD file in any way (when the editing is altering all data on the track)
Just use the DSD as a storage format and NOTHING is lost or need a oven in any way or form. 🤣
Anyway the music of today is safe and more storage persistent than on the tape era. So that is comfortable to know. 👍🙏🎶🎼🎵💕
Hey thanks very much for your comment I think what Bernie is saying that the best storage medium for him is tape. he can best utilize that to make good sounding records. there's trouble with the digital when trying to make a good analog record.
he also said that the digital storage medium does deteriorate after time as well. we lose information so we need something that's better than both. Because the lp is a analog format. So I may be one can conclude that we should keep it all in the digital domain well that doesn't seem to work either because a good analog record is better than a good digital CD maybe they'll finally get this digital stuff to work properly and we won't have to worry about records anymore of course that was the promise in the 80s thanks again for your comment and really appreciate your thoughts because of course yeah the baking of the tapes is a problem
The analog tapes that need baking are from a very specific time period. It isn’t true for all analog tape
mofi and abbey road got lazy and they wil pay for it at the end
Digital bits degrade and disappear? Are you for real? Perhaps storage medium does degrade, but bits will never. So much silliness in this hobby. Analog guys discovered digital and they are talking nonsense.
You are of course correct it's the medium that degrades over time and the information is lost hence the bits disappear.
The information I am discussing is in the video Bernie Grumman who is a mastering engineer one of the best in the world this is these are his findings I'm just reporting on them thanks for watching and leaving a comment I appreciate that
yup they sure are>