I started buying music in about 1970, on vinyl, of course. That's all we had. Cassette tapes had just arrived, so there was also the option of placing a microphone next to the radio or TV to try to get a decent recording, but I always ended up with a DJ yacking over the intro and ending, so it wasn't ideal, and let's not go into the legalities of such behaviour.
In order to atone for my misdemeanours I made it my mission, once CDs arrived, to buy everything I had listened to and liked (i.e. may have allegedly had on a C90). I believe I achieved this some years ago. It's not too many CDs actually, as my collection was politely referred to as "focussed", it's just over 1,000 albums, and growing slowly. That's less than an album a week, but later on you'll see I've been to the music shops more often than that.
I was very happy with CDs when they first came out in 1984: no vinyl pops and clicks, easy to pick out individual tracks, and easier to carry around. It's only later with the resurgence of vinyl lately that I do sort of miss the big covers with lyrics and cover notes you can actually read. You really knew you owned something with the big gatefold vinyl sleeves.
Have they fixed the vinyl pops and clicks? Well no. So why are some people buying them, now that they are more expensive than CDs when they used to be less? Unfortunately the CD format at 44.1KHz with 16-bit stereo data is barely adequate. So the vinyl carries a more accurate representation of the original music, albeit covered up by pops and clicks.
The thinking was that the human ear can only hear up to about 20KHz, so as long as we can do that on a digital medium then we're covered. Unfortunately those unheard higher frequencies that exist on the original analogue tapes do seem to make a difference, and the number of values that can be stored in 16-bits turned out not to be quite good enough either. To put that into perspective: digital mastering is typically done now at 96KHz and 24-bit stereo, and that's what you get from your Blu-ray discs. Mastering can go to 192KHz and you can get some music at that even higher frequency. I believe they worked out that analogue master tapes could only distinguish about 22-bits of data, so digital has finally exceeded analogue, but it took 25 years.
So music is starting to become available on DVD and Blu-ray formats in full fat, plus you can buy and download in high-definition too. So vinyl ought not be needed, except for the nice big cover art. Maybe there's a market for reproduction vinyl sleeves, maybe a voucher could be included in digital albums, but why are we buying vinyl again?
I had a CD set of the Benny Goodman Carnegie Hall gig originally recorded in 1938... on vinyl. Yes, they actually recorded it directly onto vinyl - we hadn't begun to record on tape yet. The first CD set I bought just reproduced the original recording. I now had a CD that popped and clicked, a lot. After one listen I decided that despite the music being fantastic, I would not ever want to listen to the CDs again. I had originally heard a song on Jamie Cullum's Radio 2 show, and his recording didn't pop and click. I found a remastered edition of the CDs that had been treated to remove the pops and clicks. Of course they had to be covered with something, because they obliterated the music underneath, so there must have been some digital reconstruction algorithm. Later complaints came in that the percussion and other high frequencies had suffered, but at least you could listen to the music now. I'm quite happy with the new CDs.
Now I'm on the CD remastering band-wagon. Every time my favourite albums get remastered I dutifully go out and upgrade them. I'm hoping that short-cutting to High Definition formats will effectively stop the need for this process. What's happening currently is that while albums are being remastered via 24-bit 96KHz digital formats we are saving the music from being lost as master tapes deteriorate, and they can be down-sampled to CD and released in that same High Definition. There is one trick still up the record companies' corporate sleeves though... surround sound.
I did a sound test a while ago with Deep Purple's Machine Head. We had it on vinyl, original CD, remastered CD, and DVD-audio in both stereo and 6-channel surround. We quickly agreed that the original CD was very dull and flat (and Roger Glover pretty much said the record company did a straight transfer to the original CDs whereas when he remastered them they used some engineering magic). The vinyl sounded nice, except for the pops and clicks, and the remastered CD sounded nice. The stereo DVD-audio didn't add much that we could hear, in fairness, but the 6-channel version was totally glorious. Suddenly you're surrounded by the band, sounds can move back and forth as well as from side-to-side, and sounds can be projected inside your head. Sadly DVD-audio is also a dying format, but Blu-ray can do the same job, so if you have a surround system then go find some Hi-Def surround music.
Of course one's loudspeakers are analogue, and until we get an HDMI socket fitted to the backs of our necks at birth we'll always be listening to analogue sound waves. Your loudspeakers would convert your digital data to analogue even if your DACs hadn't already had to do that for the power amplifiers. The granularity of the digital data has already been smoothed out, twice, before your ears get to do it again. I have also read a detailed article that I was tweeted that explains that it's all hogwash and the "improvements" we're hearing are usually down to better mastering and nothing to do with the extra bits. I've got 3 HD albums in stereo mastered from same source as the CDs I have, and whilst you can't tell on your ear-buds or the car stereo, I still believe the bass especially is smoother and you can pick out more detail. That's what I want to believe, anyway!
Of course one's loudspeakers are analogue, and until we get an HDMI socket fitted to the backs of our necks at birth we'll always be listening to analogue sound waves. Your loudspeakers would convert your digital data to analogue even if your DACs hadn't already had to do that for the power amplifiers. The granularity of the digital data has already been smoothed out, twice, before your ears get to do it again. I have also read a detailed article that I was tweeted that explains that it's all hogwash and the "improvements" we're hearing are usually down to better mastering and nothing to do with the extra bits. I've got 3 HD albums in stereo mastered from same source as the CDs I have, and whilst you can't tell on your ear-buds or the car stereo, I still believe the bass especially is smoother and you can pick out more detail. That's what I want to believe, anyway!
I then set to wondering how many copies of some albums I bought over the years. Rush's A Farewell to Kings comes to mind. I know I bought the vinyl 3 times, because I'd worn the first 2 out. Just taking a vinyl record out of the cover can cause damage, playing it can cause damage, speaking about it can cause damage! Then I bought the musicassette version to play in the car. I bought the CD when it came out, I bought the remastered CD when it came out, then I bought the box-set re-remastered set when that came out, and that has a CD and a surround DVD copy. So that's 8 copies, and the DVD probably isn't the full 24-bit 96KHz monty. Same sort of thing happened with Moving Pictures, though I have that on Blu-ray, so shouldn't be needing that any more. The only way it could be better is if Rush set up in my living room and play it live.
So when bands say they have sold 10 million copies of an album, they haven't necessarily got 10 million fans, they might only have 1.25 million nuts like me that keep buying the same album over and over trying to get the most out of it.
0 Yorumlar