Right on the money!Not only does classical music place more demands on the system,it is also FAR more difficult for a cartridge to track the complex and massive forces,with the instrumental variety involved.This is where proper arm/cartridge set up is SUPREMELY important.Unfortunately,this is a tough task,so,I'm not blaming those who want to take a shot at the vinyl crowd.However,unless you are really impatient or inept,wonderful results can be had!Now I have to go and listen to my new CD of Wynton Marsalis and the Lincoln Center Jazz Orch. doing the sound track to the latest Ken Burns Documentary---"Unbearable Blackness",WOW it's not half bad,for mere digital!Actually,the music is SO DAMN GOOD that I'm not thinking about the storage medium.
What's wrong with classical music on vinyl?
As I go through my collection of classical music on vinyl, and get new ones from record stores and eBay, I notice that I am not impressed with the sound quality. Most of my pop music albums sound fine. The classical (even sealed), on the other hand, sounds full of static, noise, and pops that completely drown out the music. The rubber surrounds on my woofers ripple visibly, and the more intense passages become distorted (particulary the brass instruments). (And yes, I've tried it with minimal volume, to test the feedback theory, and with the same results.) I've tried extensive record cleaning with some of the most recommended products. On the other hand, my non-classical music sounds fine. Madonna, Yes, and Simon and Garfunkel play fine. So do Crosby Stills + Nash, REM, and Nickelback.
The only thing I can think of is that the classical music tends to be recorded at a much lower volume, thereby causing a low signal to noise ratio, whereas the pop music is inherently recorded at a higher volume, and this helps to drown out the noise.
I'm beginning to think that I should stick to CD's or brand-new 200g LP's for classical music from here on.
Any comments/suggestions?
The only thing I can think of is that the classical music tends to be recorded at a much lower volume, thereby causing a low signal to noise ratio, whereas the pop music is inherently recorded at a higher volume, and this helps to drown out the noise.
I'm beginning to think that I should stick to CD's or brand-new 200g LP's for classical music from here on.
Any comments/suggestions?
95 responses Add your response
Unfortunetly now almost all CD's will sound better than LP until you can get a system that can dig the music out. Then you will wonder however did CD,s get their foot in the door. My personnel opinion is the Minumum LP system 2nd hand should cost around $1000. Must for the budget system is a Modified Rega RB250, ($400) and a Sumiko blue piont ($150) and deck. I use a Sota. If you want to get nearer the CD sound buy a Lynn or Micheal. Lots of good steals about at present. Also a seperate phono amp is a must and a cleaning m/c. All up $1400 to S1500, A system as the above would out play any CD player up to $3000-$4000. |
Dear Eldart: *** " real world where surface noise is the major sonic deficiency of LPs . " *** I have to agree with Albert : *** " However it is wrong to make such statements based on your inexperience and hold it up as truth. " *** Eldart surface noise is not ( by any standars ) the MAJOR sonic deficiency of LPs. Maybe because your inexperience you think that, but is totally wrong. *** " What is the separation spec for your phono pickup (at various frequencies)? " *** Today this is not a critical issue in the sound reproduction of a LPs. BTW, we need, at least, 20 db on this spec for to have a very good sound reproduction. Almost any cartridge reach that spec: today is common to have 35 db on that spec, one of my cartridges: Allaerts MC2 Finish is over 70 db: yes, you read well: 70 db. I know that the CD wins in this spec, so what: the sound reproduction of a CD is always inferior to the LP. *** " measured the signal to noise ratio of the LP medium. " *** *** " and say that there is no surface noise generated in your superb phono playback system. " *** There is no dude that the CD has a greater dynamic range/signal to noise than the LP rig ( Albert the fact that you don't heard the surface noise does not mean that does not exist. Exist and is there in your audio sound reproduction system. If you think that really does not exist in your system then I can tell you that you have a problem in your system resolution. ), but these two specs can't tell any one that the CD is better than the LP. You choose specs than can't support your statement that the CD is superior to the LP. For the people that really know about music and really know about music reproduction at home: the CD is a inferior medium of sound reproduction and far away from the LP. One of the reasons is that the frecuency response of the CD is cut abrupt at 22.1 khz, this not only generate a high ringing on the sound reproduction but it causes that the music harmonics totally disappear, if for you this phenomenon is ok then I can understand your statements. For me and for any music lover that phenomenon is out of argument. There are other issues, like the jitter, only 16 bits, etc.... Dear Eldart, I have some years in the analog/digital design: right now I have a phono preamp ( no, I'm not on sale and I'm not on audio business. ) that beats any phono preamp in the audio market and I have, too, a digital player that beats Emm labs, Wadia, dsc, etc. We design those units because we can't find nothing that can satisfied the analog/digital music reproduction at home. I know every sigle advantage of the digital medium over the analog one and I know too every single advantage of the analog medium over the digital one. I agree with Albert: you are totally wrong. I agree totally with Sirspeedy: the LP is nearest the " true ". If I have to do a comparation I will write this: " the signal " flow " through the analog rig and only " pass " through the digital one. Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
With all due respect Albert, I'm not sure that certain specs are misleading or that they should be waived altogether... (the latter being NOT what you're suggesting, I know). Some measurements/ specs of interest made by an Australian testing audio media can be found here. These reflect what many people try to describe -- but cannot rationalise upon... Speaking of the 16bit 44,1 standard, part of our problem stems from how the 22kHz ceiling affects the audible frequencies one octave below. Speaking of LP noise floor, the interesting spec is the noise to dynamic content ratio; most good analogue rigs extract a very high dynamic content rendering the noise content "sonically immaterial" -- NOT the other way round (i.e. on good analogue there is NO noise). Speaking of ("channel", I assume?) separation at least spec-wise, quite a few cartridges spec over 60. Finally, speaking of riaa correction, most devices out there are "well below par" IMO. I'd use the other word related to erogenous rarefaction, but it's forbidden by the powers that be:). Cheers |
Rauliruegas, and Albertporter....Your suggestion that my disagreement with you regarding some aspects of LP technology stems from a lack of experience is foolish, because you have no way of knowing. I freely admit to now owning a playback system like Albert's, but if that were a prerequsite to have any opinion 99.9 percent of audiophiles, and all of the general public would be silenced. And don't give me the "it's the music" story. If that were all that was important a Bose waveradio would suffice. |
Gregm...As you say, it is signal-to-noise ratio that matters, not noise level per se. This is why surface noise is not a problem with most pop music that is recorded with very ittle dynamic range. Classical is another story. Can you offer a list of cartridges that have separation specs over about 40 dB at 1000Hz, (and less at higher frequencies). |
Hi folks, I have been following this thread for a few days and would like to make a couple of observations that I THINK have not been covered. The superiority of the LP medium as concerns the expression of musicality is, to my ears, clearly superior to CD in ways that have been covered by other respondents to this thread. There is one aspect of the issue of "noise" that I don't think has been adequately covered, and I think explains why many find the LP's arguably higher noise floor unobjectionable. The "noise" of LP playback occurs outside the sonic plane of the music, which is why many can "listen through" the noise. This noise is a result of the mechanics of playback, and is not woven into the fabric of the music content. The noise that I hear in CD playback is, in fact, in the same "plane" as the music content, and consequently much harder to ignore. Speculation as to the quality of Sufentanil's classical music pressings and turntable system aside, I propose that one of the reasons why he finds the noise on his classical LP's so objectionable is, ironically, the superiority of acoustic unprocessed music recorded in a real acoustic, as a test of a playback system's ability. I wonder if, in fact, there is that much more mechanical noise (pops, clicks) present when he plays back classical LP's as opposed to pop LP's. Mistracking is a somewhat seperate issue; as has been pointed out, tracking an orchestral brass section playing fortissimo is going to be much more taxing to a cartridge/arm than just about anything that I have come accross on a pop record. I suspect that part of his sensitivity to the mechanical noise is that it is heard in stark contrast to the purity of unprocessed music, while an occasional pop or even mild mistracking heard in the context of the distortions of electronic/amplified musical instruments, gross processing and multitracking, become pretty unobjectionable. While my two comments may seem to contradict each other, I think that this may point to a listener's preference for a certain type of music over another. Speaking for myself, I have found that when listening to music that doesn't particularly rock my boat, I tend to be much less tolerant of the problems in it's playback. While music that really turns me on, I can enjoy on my shower cd/radio player. Best to all. |
Eldarftford, I freely admit to now owning a playback system like Albert's, but if that were a prerequsite to have any opinion 99.9 percent of audiophiles, and all of the general public would be silenced. There seems to be plenty of support for analog from Audiogoner's who have spent considerably less money than I did. Many of them agree that LP provides superior musical reproduction. As for opinion, there is a need for truth as well. Audiogon is a high end audio site and reference to "the ultimate" is a perfect position to take, even if only as a base line of what may be achieved. If you cannot or will not make the financial commitment, fine. Just don't say your way is the only way because you choose to make compromises. And don't give me the "it's the music" story. If that were all that was important a Bose Wave Radio would suffice.That's a ridiculous statement. No one at Audiogon works on getting their Bose Radio "right," unless that's your reference, then that would explain your aversion to analog. |
Gregm...The most likely result of my current reevaluation of vinyl is that I go back to a MC pickup. Benz was the one I heard, and liked. I used to have Ortofons and Signet, which I also liked (except when the stylus needed replacement). Is your list about good sounding cartridges, or about separation? |
Hi, A number of people who are more qualified than me have offered some excellent suggestions. Setup/compatability of the cartridge in particular. I too have experienced the noise problems you mention with classical music, even with my former excellent vinyl setup. Believe it or not, the biggest improvement I made in terms of noise reduction was getting a better phono preamp, in my case the phono stage of my VAC Avatar. It made a huge difference in reduction of noise compared w/ the phono stages of some mid-priced tube preamps I had before (CJ, Anthem, Counterpoint). Not that you have to go to tubes, but I suspect that a higher quality phono stage would make a significant improvement, assuming it is worth the $$ to you. TLH |
Gregm...A quick check of specs shows... Ortofons run 25dB at 1 KHz and 15dB at 15KHz. One model, Jubilee, is 27 and 20. Clearaudio claims 30 dB for the Virtuoso MM and 35dB for the Sigma gold. I believe that almost all cartridges are in this range, which I think is really no problem. The Allaert MC1b claims 60 dB, and some other Allaert models claim 70dB. This is more than I thought to be possible. The spec comes with a warning that this performance depends on the arm. In other words, you might not actually achieve it. |
Instead of looking at that cartridges channel separation specifications, that time would be better spent listening and determining if it works in your system. Second best option is ask someone who's ears you trust, how does it sound? Specifications have almost no value in determining whether a product sounds good or not. Example: Amplifier A has distortion specifications of .002% THD and produces 1000 watts of power per channel. Amplifier B has distortion specifications of <3% THD and produces 750 watts of power per channel. Which sounds better? Product are: Amp A is Kenwood automotive amp. Amp B is VTL 750 mono blocks. This could go on for pages, there are countless products that have great specifications and sound bad and products that have lesser specifications that sound excellent. I don't know if it's flaws in the measuring process, people measuring are inept, the wrong things are being measured or the data is falsified. Regardless, specifications are not something on which I would base my decision to buy. |
Albertporter...Of course not all sonic characteristics can be measured, but some can. I have heard it said, as a general statement, that vinyl playback has separation as good as digital. For your particular cartridge, to my surprise, that appears to be almost true, but it would be quite unwise (IMHO) to tell newcomers to vinyl that they can expect separation equal to digital. Or background noise. To obtain your cartridge you need to get on a six month waiting list, as well as having several grand to spend. Few guys will do this. As I have said a number of times, I think that 25dB separation is good enough for music anyway, so what are we arguing about? I happen to think that vinyl playback can stand on its own merits without making technical claims that don't stand up to objective study. |
The problem comes from blanket statements that infer that ALL vinyl playback is noisy, contains pops that "must be listened through" and that the bass is summed and therefore "inferior" somehow. All that talk about defects would lead a newcomer to the conclusion that ALL LP playback is a disaster. There are many fine turntables on the market and many great cartridges that mate up well with them. I agree that CD has convenience on its side (not to mention being able to play in the car) and is always free of noise. Analog, particularly LP, requires more work, but can be just as free of noise and distraction. When I say free of noise, I'm not talking about some machine specification, rather to real life experience of placing a CLEAN LP on a good quality turntable and listening to music at levels that are safe for our hearing (approximately 88 to 90 DB, at 14 feet in my room). In my system and everyone in my music group who I have listened with, that is sufficient "room filling music" and usually ZERO noise or pops. The other night we were actually discussing this topic and we consciencely listened for flaws, just to see if we were fooling ourselves. In four plus hours of listening to everything from Rock to Bluegrass and Classical to Blues, we had one LP that had pops about 15 seconds into the first track. Otherwise the evening could have been mistaken for all CD playback (except that I prefer the sound of analog). Everyone in my group has good turntables, SME, VPI, Basis, Walker, Lenco, Linn and Versa Dynamics (to name a few). All these are capable of pulling off this "miraculous" stunt, provided the software is clean, the cartridge and arm are good quality and all the settings are correct. Analog is a lot of work, but once done, there is a vast library of great software available, some at very reasonable prices. If this is too much trouble or you don't want to spend the money, or dislike having to "feed" two formats, that is fine. I have never said everyone should convert. What I have claimed all along is that analog is more satisfying musically. Music is the only reason I own my system, otherwise it's just a bunch of junk taking up space in the living room. |
Albertporter...I think we are coming to an agreement! I should not have implied that ALL vinyl playback is noisy and inferior to digital. You should not have implied that ALL vinyl playback is quiet and superior to digital. We agree that to achieve satisfactory results the user must spend a good deal of money and effort, not only on the playback equipment, but on the LPs and the equipment used for their care. Also, I recognize that extreme measures which few can justify, can achieve superb results. The original poster, Sufentanil, has a problem with LP background noise, and his experience is more common than you would like to believe. I agree with his thought that perhaps CDs would be the practical solution. You also have a solution to Sufentanil's problem, but is it practical? That's up to him, and his bank account. |
Dear Gregm: *** " , I'm not sure that certain specs are misleading or that they should be waived altogether... " *** I think you are right. There are some specs that are critical in the sound reproduction of any audio system, example: RIAA equalization deviation or amplifier output impedance. *** " Specifications have almost no value in determining whether a product sounds good or not " *** Albert you are right. The specs can't tell us how it will be the sound, but some specs like those on my examples are specs that any one that take care about music and about music reproduction have to take in count seriously before buying an amplifier or a phono preamp. Those specs can tell us which will be the " behavior " of the amp/phonopreamp that we choose. The specs subject is a very complicated issue. The important point is to know which specs really count in the quality of the sound reproduction of an audio item, like in my spec examples. BTW, the problem with Eldart is that he don't know about and Eldart this is one of the reasons why I know for sure that you are an inexperience audio people. Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
I don't want to get into any animosity related feelings here,as this is becoming a hot topic.Just my 2 cents worth.I have and love both formats,for the music!Always first,as Albert has put it.I can't get artists like John Zorn on vinyl.His stuff released on the TZADIK label (which he owns) sounds great and the music is incredible. There are other fabulous releases that are just too much money,on vinyl,if you are a collector,as I am.Case in point,artists like William Kappel(sp?)who's piano style is amazing and the entire repertoire of his short life was put out on 10 CD's,which I just bought for about 1/500 of what the originals would cost. There are other incredible releases of "NEW" music that I must have.Madeiline Peyroux's new album,some sound tracks,the music to the Ken Burns film "Unbearable Blackness" with music by Wynton Marsalis.I just LOVE being able to keep up with what I like. That being said--You really have to be a "YUTZ" to sit there constantly listening for differences in formats.Sometimes I do,when I hear an aberration in the particular medium.Then I wonder how it might have sounded in a different format.Only then do I do this.However, it is exactly the same as wondering what an early pressing of an lp would sound like,if you have a later pressing."YOU can dig this ALBERT",am I right?I've seen your rig,and you have to have PLENTY of early pressings!! I have been a "MUSIC" lover all my life,and I'm old (according to my 21 year old).I have obtained,with alot of hard work,a really fine lp collection.I pride myself with coming up with many unique and offbeat lp's of fabulous and interesting music.Remember,the lp era lasted a really long time,so there are some amazing and varied types of albums out there.What am I supposed to do?Dump them all,because some of you are "RATIONALIZING" off the vinyl format partly because you are IMO spoiled by the simplicity of CD.Easy to "plug and play" and get music.Hey,there is nothing wrong with that. My son is 24 yrs old and will not listen through many of my lp's.He was brought up on Computer games and digital.What could I expect?However he "REALLY" changed his tune one night,when some of his more musically sophisticated pals were over and wanted to hear my VINYL,yes, lp's.They were curious because they had "Heard about LP playback from their ANCESTORS". Now I had my time to have the new generation experience BOTH/BOTH/BOTH formats.These were "HIP" kids and I had to literally kick them out of my listening room!!They loved the digital(a mere Levinson 390s),but were BLOWN AWAY by the lp's I played.They were shocked by the,YES,superior sound!!In their words.I did not have to even ask.BOY was that satisfying.Now I'm cool to my son.What a laugh. Vinyl has some really rich rewards.I,also don't blame anyone for goofing on the stuff.It leaves more stuff in circulation for me to acquire.Thanks for staying exclusively with your digital gear.I truly hope you guys(who are trying to get a rise out of well intentioned "Gentlemen" like Alber Porter)keep loving your digital gear.I love mine.I just like vinyl better.My Generation "Y" friends did to,once they heard it correctly. Oh,yea--I just got a new transfiguration temper cartridge for a retip charge of 1000.The list is about 4,000.00.My previous model was 8 1/2 years old.Not too pricey IMO!! |
El, the cartridges I mentioned (sorry about the Ortofons) related only to channel separation -- not sound. Regarding sonics, I like Allaerts, the bigger (&expensive) Clearaudio & the two common Shelters. I used to use a VdHul MC2 and a Grasshopper back in the old days. I'm now using a Clearaudio Insider. Not very indicative -- I get along with most cartridges ever since I acquired a good TT+arm combo. Practically I've found that much of the cartridge's performance is directly related to the arm (obvious, but it took me a long time to realise) rather than its specs. Sorry I can't be more informative (or opinionated?). Cheers |
Rauliruegas..."I know for sure that you are an inexperience audio people". Stupid remark. I go back to about 1953 with my own systems, and used others before that. I remember when high end meant that you used triangular wooden "needles" that you sharpened before play with a special clipper. If you have a valid point to make it is not necessary to use personal abuse. |
Guys I think part of the answer is in the current Feb/Mar 2005 TAS issue on page 92 RE "Dynamic Compression and the Loudness Race". With CDs being mixed louder and louder to out match the competition on the radio, dynamic compression is applied - chopping musical peaks and raising the average loudness. LPs doesn't have this issue, cannot be mixed too loud or the stylus will jump out of the groove. And with classical, we all know that the dynamic range required to capture a full orchestra is certainly very wide, so I surmise that engineers have had to lower the recording levels for classical music. Unfortunately, with such low levels, its just above the level of record surface noise, which does get in the way. As to whether CDs sound superior to LPs, except for the occassional tic and pop, how can CDs ever sound better than an LP of the same recording with all this dynamic compression (unless the LP record engineers made a mess of the mix) is simply beyond me. Though I would concede that CDs have improved and are bridging the gap. I also agree with TLH, a good phono makes a world of a difference. |
Cmk, A comparission between CD and LP from the same recording is a problem. I have Moussorgsky's 'Pictures At An Exhibition' on 45rpm, 33rpm 1S and SACD from Classic Records. All the same recordings. And the SACD sounds rather blanketed. A lot of blankets. But when I listen to the new recordings, like the Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto from Anne-Sophie Mutter then this is totally different. This sounds pretty close to my vinyl rig. And I don't have my 'good' SACD player yet. It seams to me that they improved a lot in the new recordings. Unfortunately there is no way to know because I have not found a new recording on SACD and LP yet. I am talking about classical music. Perhaps someone can enlighten me. |
Styx You could probably find CD and LP versions of classical music during the time when both formats were still competing with each other, circa 70s-early 80s. Nowadays its just CDs and SACDs. There are good SACDs, and there are not-so-good SACDs, a lot depends on the process before the pressing. The format has its advantages, but it cannot atone for the sins of a bad recording engineer. IMO due to the hi resolution afforded by SACD, it just exacerbates errors. I'm not aware of any new SACD and LP classical issues at the moment. |
Cmk I 100% agree. Although the process before pressing counts for vinyl as well. There are a lot of bad vinyl. And unfortunately you can not judge by the label. You have to buy them and find out later what is good and what is junk. Although I have to admit that I am very pleased with the reissues from Classic Records. Not so with the condition of the LPs. But there are labels which are worse. Anyways, we should perhaps listen more to the classical interpretation. I am glad that I am not biased in one direction. Otherwise I could not have enjoyed Tchaikovskys 'Serenade for Strings Op.48' from the Concertgebouw Chamber Orchestra with Marco Boni PentaTone (SACD) at this afternoon. Recorded in 2002. Or I would not listen to Karajan's interpretation of Dvoraks 9th - DGG (Vinyl) 138 922, at this evening. Recorded in 1964.;) |
Styx, Although I have to admit that I am very pleased with the reissues from Classic Records. Not so with the condition of the LPs. Are you saying the LP's you have from Classic Records are not satisfactory? If so, I am surprised. The ones I have are extremely good, generally free of all defects and sound excellent. |
Styx Yes, certainly regardless of format, the process before pressing probably makes a bigger impact than we would like it to. I've to admit, I'm somewhat biased towards analog, though I do appreciate good performances on CD/SACD. Pentatone does have a very good classical issues, both new and old recordings. I myself like the Dvorak No.9 by Yakov Kreizberg, Netherlands PO on Pentatone 5186 019 recorded 2003. Then I'll do a switch and listen to Tchaikovsky's Serenade for Strings by Karajan, Berlin PO recorded 1967. |
Albert, I perhaps did exaggerate a little bit. But lately I bought 4 of the 5 Classic Records 1S boxes. There are some records which have goo or scratches or lots of clicks/pops on them. And you can not send them back. After all I am happy that I could find those records at all. The sound is outstanding. Especially from those 1S. It is better than my 45rpm. But there are those little imperfections. Now, everybody has a different point of view. I am very particular about it. If I receive a LP which has a even a small scratch on it I'll send it back. Now I am off for my next lesson. Cmk, I was biased toward analog to. But it just restricts my horizon. I even started to take piano lessons to better understand music. We have a baby grand from Kawai with a piano disc system. You know, you put a midi diskette in and it starts to play. Yesterday I was listening to the Pictures At An Exhibition suite from Mussorgsky. Very refreshing. I wish I had a whole orchestra, than I wouldn't need those canned music.;) But than I wouldn't be here and discus HighEnd with others, which is a lot of fun. |
Albert, one I could buy used for $200 used. There were on each side a finger print. So the pre-owner did not know how to handle vinyl, or didn't care. But the condition is very good consider the price. Two of the boxes I got for $400 (sealed) each from theMusic.com. I guess they still have some left. And one I bought here on agon for $475 (sealed), The Export box which was not for sale in the US. This is actually the worst one. But you don't know when you buy sealed one. Last time I bought a sealed DMM from ebay and the record was scratched all over. And had some nasty marks on it. I guess the record was to much moved around and/or was badly stored. |
I would also say that on the average classical albums have slightly more surface noise than rock/jazz albums. Worse yet, most classical albums have much wider dynamic range than rock/jazz albums, and even though they have the the same noise level, it’s likely that classical albums reveal more. Those noise will be mostly buried from the music in jazz/rock albums. I also have experienced little tick noise from many new DG albums. However those slight noise seldom bothers me. Anyway I grew up with the noise through 70s and early 80s. I enjoy more full and true sound from vinyls with slight audible surface noise than noiseless and a bit lifeless sound from CDs. If the noise is at annoying level there maybe something wrong with cartridge setup or albums. Or maybe something else. |