 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.166.116.8
I have a 16 bit digital recorder and when recording a random LP at maximum analog input gain of +6db it creates a digital file at 50% maximum scale - a 15 bit digital recording not a 16 bit recording.
If I swapped in 24 bit digital recorder with the same input impedance and record the same LP with the same maximum gain (+6db) would it produce a digital file at 50% maximum scale - a 23 bit digital recording not a 24 bit recording?
I don't know and I want to know before considering which if any 24 bit recorder I want to purchase.
The "problem" is related to the input sensitivity of your phono stage relative to your phono cartridge/SUT output (whatever your configuration) and the level of the signal being fed from the phono pre to your DA-3000.
However, you shouldn't worry about the resolution of the signal being encoded - the ADC of the DA-3000 is actually sampling the analogue signal in DSD and then decimating that digitized signal to PCM in whatever format you have selected if you select PCM rather than DSD as the data output format. Although the dynamic range of even 16 bit will still exceed the vinyl noise floor I would suggest sticking to 24 bit PCM as the recording format and then dithering to 16 bit later if you want RB versions to burn on a CD-R rather than coding directly in 16 bit as you would need to add dither later on the post-processing phase....although these days why not just stream or playback via PC in the full high resolution format from your storage to the DAC?
The analogue stage of the DA-3000 is not bad, but is easily bettered by alternatives. I have the DA-3000 (although it has now failed) and many years ago still preferred using my Benchmark ADC1USB as the ADC and feeding the digital output to the DA-3000 which functioned purely as a storage device to enable me to record at higher than 24/96 (the limit via USB from the Benchmark) to my PC. The sound was a bit shut-in and slightly coloured compared to the Benchmark which was very transparent by comparison.
Nowadays I have an RME ADI-2ProFS as my ADC although I could happily live with my Korg DS-DAC-10R which elimintes the need for a phono stage altogether as you connect the turntable directly and the EQ is done digitally (as well as offering multiple historical curves including Columbia and Decca). The Korg has a huge input overload margin (> 40dB) and can record in 32 bit float which obviates the need to worry about setting level as I can fully correct in post-processing.
Sound quality wise, removing the phono stage from the equation gives pinpoint soundstaging and wide detailed images - I can't go back to using a phono stage now although the Korg can record at line level direct from you phono stage if you prefer. The Korg uses the same ADC chip as the DA-3000 just in a much better package that can be had from eBay for less than USD300 direct from Japan often with free shipping. Sound quality is very good IMO and very close to my other ADCs (Benchmark, RME) although they are limited by the phono stage.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
NOTE : I tried posting prior to a deletion (for editing?) and I read it again and didn't catch what if anything changed.I have a the Tascam CD-RW900SX recorder and have been using it for years. I'm looking to move up to a 24 recorder. I'm trying to improve the quality my digital music library and will record records previously recorded when I spin the vinyl on a new 24 recording system. And all new LPs will be recorded on the 24 bit system.
I called RME today to talk about the ADI-2 FS which seems to do everything I want but it doesn't come with USB connectivity like the ADI-2 Pro FS R Black Edition. The Black Edition comes with a great headphone amp and a DAC that looks like it's worth using as my system DAC. Talked about warranty and repairs and was satisfied with the answers. At the top of my short list.
This Korg DS-DAC-10R is very interesting. I might like the idea of taking the phono section out of the loop. But I don't know because my vinyl front end is IMO a product of a synergetic combination of components. But like you said I can put the phono pre in before the Korg if I want. The question then becomes can I put the phono section on the line out? Not sure how this device works but it seems like the digital data is transmitted via the internet to software on the PC. If so how transparent is the Korg (in regard to the cartridge output on the line out)? If so it would make me wonder if the digital I create would sound better with a different cart. But if I thought so I could just put the phono pre in front of Korg.
Edits: 05/22/25
Sorry about that - I had used the "less than" symbol when I quoted the price for the Korg but forgot that it was a magic character that meant the text afterwards was lost! It took me a few goes to realize where the problem was.....
Think of the Korg as basically a computer controlled phono stage with a built-in headphone amp (WinPC or Mac not Linux). The line out will function as your phono pre (EQ or flat output) going straight into your analogue Pre or Integrated amp. The output is line level so you can't feed a flat signal into your analogue phono pre without attenuating the signal again. If you want the flavour of your analogue phono pre, then just use the line-in of the Korg. However, I personally think it sounds better with digital EQ - it is basically "perfect" EQ with perfect channel balance since EQ errors due to the topology of the circuit and/or component tolerances are eliminated. Also multiple signal path components have been eliminated so I think it is the purest route for listening to your records with your chosen cartridge. The Phono Load is 50k but you can always use T-dongles with loading resistors and capacitors in parallel with the cartridge output connector. MCs require a SUT of course.
You need to have your laptop or PC connected to it all the time to function - I only use the headphone amp to monitor recordings and it makes an ideal companion for an office or bedroom setup where you don't want clutter.
The way it works (for phono or line in) is that the ADC feeds the data to the PC that then processes the data (applies EQ or record flat) and sends it back to the Korg to the internal DAC to convert to analogue which is fed to the Line Out and to the headphone amp. Up to 2496 it doesn't require a powerful machine to run - I happily use it with an old Ultrabook from 2012 (2nd generation low power i3!). More powerful hardware is needed though if you want to go up to fs=384kHz or DSD512.
Given the relatively modest price of (at the moment as low as USD226 from Japan) I think it is worth the asking price for a much more versatile device that gives you alternative curves for vintage records if you have any that need Decca, Columbia and NAB etc in addition to using with your existing phono pre. I actually use it most of the time now.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
So the Korg saves a copy of it's translation on the PC from which I can create a digital LP that I can playback via my file server?
This sounds to good to be true. How much is the software required to do this? Are you using the DAC on the RME when playing the digital file?
Yup...to both your questions. The Korg really doesn't disgrace itself as an ADC (in my opinion) and I could happily live with it if it were the only ADC product I could keep. (BTW, I sent you a PM)As I mentioned, you could record in PCM up to 24 (or 32 bit float) /384 kHz or DSD64/DSD128 (sorry I made a mistake on the DSD spec previously - I was thinking of MoFi and their default). If you record in 32 bit float, you will need to dither down to 24 bit if you play the file via normal media servers or you could play back via Audiogate.
The software comes free - it is also a media player and simple wave editor too - have a look at the link.
Anyone can download the link and get limited functionality, but full functionality only comes free with the Korg product you purchase (DS-DAC-10R and other models).
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Edits: 05/22/25
ALL PROFESSIONALs today record at 24 bits for multiple good reasons.
Setting appropriate level is a choice. Abe gave an example of a bad choice. I have a couple of needle drops made with Audacity at 96/24 using a cheap HRT Linestreamer+. While there was no danger of that actually replicating the original quality, I have a few convenient copies for the media server that can be played around the house. Level is not a problem with the choices I made.
> > ALL PROFESSIONALs today record at 24 bits for multiple good reasons.
At least one or more of them obvious to me why based on my experiences with a 16 bit recorder recording LPs.
Isn't a small part of the "problem" that, in order to bolster the robustness of the data, one bit of the 16-bit word is not a datum that represents digitized music, it is a "Checksum" bit. So, there are only 15 bits available for recording, at best.
The purpose of the "Checksum" bit is to indicate whether summing the other 15 bits results in an Odd or an Even sum (or total). If there is a conflict between the sum and the Checksum, Error Correction kicks in.
Pretty darn clever, I thought back in 1983, or whenever it was I was recruited to write for Digital Audio magazine. I was also impressed by the Reed-Solomon Interleave Code.
Like Roseval says it's a sign bit. If it were a checksum a 16 bit recorder would be completely useless as a lossless recorder instead of very difficult to use as one.
Edits: 05/19/25 05/19/25
I don't blame you to think so in 1983. Almost none of us did understand digital at that time.
Today we know the MSB is not a checksum (parity) but a sign bit. It simply tells you if the values are negative (-32768) or positive (+32767).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc_Digital_Audio
Edits: 05/19/25 05/19/25
Someone in different circumstances (and with a different personality) might have saved every scrap of "official" communication from the Compact Disc Group, or whatever was the name of the public-relations collaborative in NYC that was funded by the various industry participants.
I definitely remember setting aside time to read all the stuff about how wonderfully robust S/PDIF-System CDs were.
I vividly recall that the staff at DIGITAL AUDIO review decided that the WORST EVER CD TO DATE was by Zubin Mehta's son Bejun, who was a Boy Soprano.
So, they decided to sacrifice that CD to a Torture Test. Does anyone else remember that?
I thought it was gratuitously cruel.
They smeared Peanut Butter on it, etc.
About Checksum vs. +/- Sign--that bit is still not available for music data, right?
ciao,
saintjean
CD is 16 bit PCM audio.
Might it be you are mixing up CD and S/PDIF?
S/PDIF is a 32 bit word with 24 bits reserved for audio and a 8 bit preamble. One of this 8 bits is a parity bit so the receiver can check the integrity of the data.
The Well Tempered Computer
struggle a bit with your numbers.
The loudest possible signal in digital audio is 0 dBFS by design.
A 16 bit recording can capture signal down to -96 dBFS, a 24 goes down to -144 dBFS.
When recording you need some headroom say 18 dB.
If you do so using 16 bits, you effectively have 13 bit resolution. (78 dB dynamic range)
If you do so using 24 bits, you effectively have 21 bit resolution.
However, there is another limit, the noise floor of the recording chain and in case of vinyl, the substantial surface noise.
If your max is at 50% (-48 dBFS) the input signal is way to weak. This of course won't improve by switching to 24 bit.
The Well Tempered Computer
Nt
Not everything is compressed, it just SOUNDS compressed. Everything sounds compressed.
So then if it sounds uncompressed or even less compressed does that means it is actually uncompressed or less compressed?
Relative to what?
You're the one saying "Why everything sounds so f compressed is anybody's guess".
If everything sounds so f compressed what is your reference? When I'm standing next to some guy using a jack hammer it sure doesn't sound compressed to me.
My point is that although CDs boast a very high dynamic range, that was their big selling point. But, in practice/reality they sound compressed, all of them, some more than others. Cassettes, by comparison, as a reference, don't sound that way at all. They sound relatively uncompressed, some more than others. Not only that but CDs boast a very high SNO, yet CDs generally sound distorted, very distorted, as well as noisy.
Edits: 05/27/25 05/27/25
At least we are talking about audio. I don't know but most LPs I own sound compressed compared to hearing music live even good recordings of live music has some degree of compression.I'll even concede given a quality cassette recorder might have a better chance of making a better sounding recording of an LP than a 16 bit recorder or even a 24 bit recorder. I'm betting it's more about resolution than dynamic range. But what difference does it make if you can't put it in a music library and front it with a GUI or music player or put it on a DAP.
Isn't it true that cassette tapes had typical limits of 40hz and 10khz?
And FWIW it was "Perfect Sound Forever" and I took it to mean no more tapes being ate as much as it did about ticks and pops. I'm not sure where the sound quality thing comes into play but far as I know it's always been a subjective thing. I couldn't come to grips with digital until sometime in the 00s but since then I've needed a CDP for at least getting albums that weren't released on vinyl.
Edits: 05/27/25
We are not on the same page. I am not intimidated by the measurements crowd.
Edits: 05/28/25
I am not intimidated by the measurements crowd.
Yet you started off right at the beginning talking about the dynamic range of a CD and how it they sound compressed and noisy to you? I'm thinking this is more an issue of resolution than dynamic range but that noisy seems more than a big reach when comparing with cassettes which almost always were inundated with noise when I've heard them.
Everything sounds compressed because most of it is - otherwise it would be mostly worthless for most playback environments. Funny how that's only obvious to you on CDs.
But that's my subjective observation. Follow? That's kind of the whole point.
Yep I follow. Not an objectivist. More of a defensive contrarian pseudo scientist pretending to be a subjectivist. If I really liked cassettes would have been doing the comparison with LPs and resting the case on the similarities with the master tape as opposed to some rock sliding around on grooves cut into a slab of vinyl. Not trying to misconstrue a CDs dynamic range potential as evidence of whatever subjective point you were trying to make.
Cassettes are obviously a viable source for music and for those who want to use them for whatever purpose. I think its really cool when folks prefer them to LPs or CDs and could accept whatever reasoning subjective or objective on why provided, but even a simple "I think they sound better" would suffice. Funny how you start with the pseudo-science then revert into it's just my subjective opinion when asked about it. I thought there was an interesting conversation here (actually a couple of different ones), maybe with some who understood it chiming in, but I guess not.
Edits: 05/28/25
You are overthinking it. I go strictly by the sound. Please note that in my world nothing is obvious.
Edits: 05/28/25
> > If your max is at 50% (-48 dBFS) the input signal is way to weak. This of > > course won't improve by switching to 24 bit.By definition a recording is lossless at 16/44. My concern is the lower level recording become lossy. My interest is to create lossless recordings of my analog.
I don't believe there is enough gain to do so on the 16 bit recorder even if I wanted to do so. As I want to preserve the volume relationship between the LPs and it just isn't going to happen unless lossy recordings are permitted with a 16 bit recorder.
--------
Enter a 24 bit recorder. If I get the 21 bit resolution for the low level files it's not a lossy recording if 16 bits is the definition of lossless. With 24 bits to work with I could actual cut gain back a tick or two and never have a chance of clipping.
-------This is actually were I start having doubts if I'm thinking about this practically. Given identical gain why wouldn't I expect recording on the 24 bit recorder to get the exactly the same resolution on the 24 bit recorder - only 13 bits used for a lowest level recordings?
I don't know and before buying a 24 bit recorder I better make sure it can do what I want.
Edits: 05/18/25 05/18/25
"If your max is at 50% (-48 dBFS) the input signal is way to weak. This of course won't improve by switching to 24 bit."There is an inmate here who used his Tascam recorder to digitize vinyl. He was proud of the fact that the recordings should have lots of headroom and therefor lots of dynamic range. He sent some tracks to me for a listen. I didn't have the heart to tell him that his recordings were all very weak and anemic - sounding rather dead - even with the Volume turned UP. Why was this? I don't know but I suspect his input signal was very weak.
In my limited experience with digitizing vinyl to my Mac using Audacity software I would let the signal clip slightly into the red but only on peaks. This kept it 'lively' with no perceptible distortion and never anemic.
Edits: 05/18/25 05/18/25
you just don't like the way his turntable sounds. I'm sure he loves his TT and he's proud of his recordings of it.
I have nothing against his turntable or mine... or his Tascam. But his digitized vinyl was anemic. My digitized vinyl were very 'alive' just like coming off the turntable.I can't explain the 16 bit vs 24 bit issues that have you concerned. I would simply experiment with turning the gain up/down while recording in 16 bit -or- 24 bit and see what works best. I guess that's easier said than done if you don't yet have a 24-bit recorder.
My "recorder" was comprised of a Phono preamp driving a 24-bit/96kHz ADC that was USB connected into my Mac running the free Audacity software. Both the Phono preamp and Audacity on the Mac had gain adjustments so adjusting the level was super easy. The software made it easy to visualize the signal level with colored bar graph VU meters (L & R channels). I would digitize with the VU meters mostly in the green with the very occasional peaks into the red.
As for that inmate's Tascam recordings they were extremely weak compared to anything I had heard before - That included my own CD rips, commercial music downloads, and my own vinyl conversions. My point being, I think he was shooting for extreme dynamic range by keeping the signal low but the result was anemic sounding recordings. I don't think it was the Tascam's fault.
My setup from over a dozen years ago
TT + MM Cart -> PS Audio GCPH Phono -> HRT Linestreamer ADC + -> Mac -> Audacity software.
Headphones on the Mac came in handy for monitoring the audio.
Edits: 05/19/25 05/19/25
Not sure what I was thinking when first looking at the pics. Thanks for the info.That recording setup would take a tremendous amount of work. I like recording via tape outs when listening. I've made over 2000 recordings of vinyl.
How does the recording shown in Audacity in your pic sound? Looks like a decent recording down about 6 db. How far off max scale before recordings start sounding weak?
Using the 16 bit CDRW recorder every recording I've compared head to head with vinyl sounds weak.
Edits: 05/20/25
I haven't recorded vinyl in several years. None of them sounded weak. In Audacity I do a dry run playing various sections of various tracks looking for peaks. I adjust the level so it's mostly in the Green on the bargraph VU meters with occasional peaks into the Red. If it looks good I digitize the entire album side. If it ever did sound weak you can simply bring up the level across the board within Audacity software after the fact. However, I think it is always best to start with a decently robust analog signal into the ADC to begin with.
Edits: 05/21/25
> > My point being, I think he was shooting for extreme dynamic range by > > keeping the signal low but the result was anemic sounding recordings.
That doesn't make any sense to me.
Unless I buy a recorder a dedicated laptop is going to be required. The Tascam is a basic 16/24-bit 44.1/48/96Kz recorder SS storage and a network interface. This is just about perfect for my specified usage - I'm waiting for a response from Tascam on a query I made on Saturday. There's a slightly less costly RME interface that adds another sample frequency, more gain choices, looks better but needs laptop.
Glad you mention it. My CDRW recorder is attached to my line out. Wonder if that line out could attach to a ADC that could connect to laptop running Audacity. What kind of connectors do you use on the laptop? What's a good ADC? How's that work - turn on ADC, prepare for needle drop, start Audacity, needle drop?
"> > My point being, I think he was shooting for extreme dynamic range by > > keeping the signal low but the result was anemic sounding recordings That doesn't make any sense to me."By keeping the input signal low he avoided any chance of even the slightest clipping on peaks thinking he had lots of extra headroom for dynamic range. Unfortunately in doing this most of the desired signal was way down resulting in an overall very 'weak sound', even with the playback volume turned up on my end. Doesn't make sense to me either.
" My CDRW recorder is attached to my line out. Wonder if that line out could attach to a ADC that could connect to laptop running Audacity. "
You kind of lost me here because I thought we were talking about digitizing vinyl. If you're making a copy of a CD there's no need to use a line-out. No need for an ADC. Just pop the CD in your PC and using something like dbpoweramp software create a perfect digital copy (rip) of the original. This will result in multiple tracks (files) that correspond to the tracks on your CD. Music servers PCs, Macs, and player software on them will know how to handle it.
For digitizing vinyl in my setup I had a separate Phone preamp and ADC. There are products out there that combine both and make it a little easier.
My setup:
TT+Cart -> RCA cables to Phono Preamp with variable output -> RCA cables to ADC -> USB cable to Mac -> Audacity software to capture the digitized signal. If your Phono Preamp lacks variable output (most don't) take the signal off your preamp as the preamp has variable output. IMHO having the variable analog output helps in adjusting the signal level driving the ADC. You can also adjust signal level in Audacity but you first want to ensure that you have a solid analog signal driving the ADC.
I capture one full side of the LP (one huge file) using Audacity then use Audacity to break up each track on that side. Repeat for the other side of the LP. This process is optional. Some people just create one huge file per side and listen with no track breaks. There is specialized software that breaks up the tracks and helps to automate the process. I have no experience with it but one such software is Vinyl Studio
If you can accomplish all of this with a dedicated digital recorder that's great. Either way, it will be fun (for a while) but a royal pain in the butt! ;-) I digitized a dozen or so LP's then gave up. I already had a few hundred CDs that I 'ripped' to the music server. I still play them but it's all also available to me via streaming service Qobuz.
Parasound Z-Phono USB = Phono Pre + ADC + USB Out to your PC for capture:
There are other similar units like the Parasound with higher resolution. However, you don't NEED 24-bit unless you're in the studio doing a lot of multitrack edits.
P.S. If you go to YouTube and search on "Digitizing Vinyl Records" you'll find tons of info.
Edits: 05/20/25
So is your point then that the 13 bit recording will still be a 13 bit recording on a 24 bit recorder given the same LP, same line out, same analog input impedance and same gain setting. It will not somehow magically become a 21 bit recording just because someone bought a 24 bit recorder. The stored file size will be much larger though.
Vinyl has a dynamic range of approximately 70 dB max. Wouldn't be surprised if a majority of the recordings are at 50 dB. I don't think you need the clipping to get the full dynamic range.
The Well Tempered Computer
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
