Half-Speed Masters - are they worth double dipping?
I have pretty much read all that being said online, what is your personal experiences with half-speed mastered records. I see a growing trend in lot of re-issues now being sold with half-speed mastering.
The two records I am interested in are,
Ed Sheeran’s X -10 Anniversary and Police - 30th Anniversary Greatest Hits.
One good thing is, they are reasonably priced and under $50 :-)
That has been my experience as well.
I don't think it's a goal as much as a natural consequence. After all, if the sound of an LP and its stream are very similar, the system should reveal that. When one is better than the other, the system should be able to reveal that as well. |
I'm not seeing any "vinyl adoration" going on here. There do seem to be some who are troubled by the LP's resilience, though. As for religion: It is a mistake to conclude that religion is inherently inconsistent with reason. To suggest otherwise is simple prejudice. |
Of course not. It’s just a manufacturing process. The same is true of CD - a CD itself is no guarantee of dynamic range.
I’ve never seen one shred of evidence that anyone has ever suggested such a thing. Red herring.
I provided you some references and suggested you measure some of your own. As I suggested, you might be be surprised that it is not uncommon.
Well there’s the Loudness Wars. And as @inagroove pointed out, CDs were often intended for use in cars, where lower DR could actually be beneficial. On the other hand LPs today are often marketed towards audiophiles through places like Acoustic Sounds and Music Direct. So whether you acknowledge it or not, there are "logical" reasons why LPs often have better DR than comparable CDs.
No one here needs to provide evidence to your satisfaction. You’ve been offered specific examples and guidance for how to learn more. |
That's because the compression was well applied. What labels do you prefer for classical? It is the exceptionally rare commercial recording that does not have at least some compression or limiting applied.
The RIAA curve is EQ, not compression. And it's complementary, so whatever is applied at the input is compensated at the output. That's not the case with compression or limiting, which deliberately alter DR. |
Actually, the data show that - in practice - an LP often has wider DR than its comparable CD counterpart. See the Dynamic Range Database and examples in my previous post. Better yet, make your own measurements. In absolute terms, the Compact Disc can have a much wider DR than even the best LP. There’s no debating that. |
I don't like being assigned homework, but you could check two of my favorites - Boston's first and S&G's Bookends. But that's not the best way to read the database, because when a CD does show as having better DR, it's often a special Japanese pressing, SBM or some other release that got extra attention over the common CD you'll get from Amazon. Even then, when compared to a similarly special LP pressing (such as from MFSL or Abbey Road) or an original pressing, the CD often doesn't compare favorably.
The best research is work you've done yourself. You can measure dynamic range yourself using your favorite recordings. If you do, you'll probably be surprised.
I couldn't disagree more. Remasterings are almost always lower DR. Loudness wars. |
If you check the Dynamic Range DB, you'll find that the LP version of an album often has a much wider dynamic range. And of course the HF on an LP can extend way beyond that of CD. Those are two reasons some people still by CDs. |
