Wow, you ARE thick. Are you really saying that dynamic compression is the same as file compression? If you don't like Wikipedia, you can find hundreds of other sources that confirm that it's not. It's okay to make mistakes, but being stupid on purpose is idiotic.

http://cochise.uia.net/pkelley2/DynamicCR.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-10360787-47.html
http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/compressor.html

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/file-compression.htm


No, I most definately am right. You're wrong. There's no two ways about it, it's a fact.

LOL! You're so far off that you don't even understand it. You're confusing file compression with audio compression. Two totally different things. They have NOTHING to do with each other.

WAV-file is a data file containing audio. You can not have a compressed WAV file. MP3 is a lossy, compressive audio FILE format. It has NOTHING to do with audios (file or not) DYNAMIC RANGE COMPRESSION which is where you decrease the dynamic range of ANY audio, in file format, analog or digital, it's all the same.

And EVERY vinyl recording has dynamic range compression, it's done in the mastering process. You HAVE TO HAVE dynamic range compression on vinyl as there IS MUCH LESS room for dynamics than on a CD.

Again, it's okay to make mistakes, but you're just being an idiot. You've been presented all the evidence you need, from a professional audio technician telling you how it goes to numerical facts, but instead of reading it, and maybe learning something, you act like a 4-year-old.

I don't have anything to prove here, everything I've told you is a FACT. You can look it up anywhere. Call any professional, they will tell you the same.

I will try to put this in simple sentences, maybe you'll get it this way:

FILE compression IS NOT dynamic range compression.

File compression makes digital files smaller.
Dynamic range compression makes audio sound louder. Two TOTALLY different things.
You can compress (=dynamic range compression) ANY audio source, analog or digital.
Audio compressing (dynamic range compression) is a NORMAL PART of any mastering process.
It defines how much dynamic range the mastered recording will have.
No matter where you're going to place the finished product; CD, vinyl or cassette or anything else, there's compression on it.
On vinyl you HAVE TO compress the dynamics, because the needle will jump out of the grooves if there's too much dynamics.
Also, you CAN use more compression on vinyl, if you decrease the amount of audio you fit on it. Wider curves for grooves allow bigger dynamics.
HOWEVER a CD has MUCH BIGGER ROOM for dynamics than a vinyl album.
Maximum dynamic range on a vinyl album is about 80dB, depending on the amount of audio on one side.
Maximum dynamic range of a CD is over 120dB, even up to 150dB.

So, be wrong if you want to be, but you'd better know what you're talking about before trying to act smart.

I didn't learn this from Wikipedia, I learned it in school way before Wikipedia was ever invented. I've also taught sound design in many schools, so I do know what I'm talking about. You, however, seem to base all your infromation of hi-fi myths.

And since you think compression means file compression, how do you think compression plug-ins work? You apply them before you ever save the audio files, what are they then compressing?

http://www.musicradar.com/news/tech/...ugins-588689/1

And how to guitar compression pedals work? What are they compressing? What file are they making smaller?

http://music.stackexchange.com/quest...essor-pedal-do

Again, if you make mistake, own up to it. Don't be an idiot. Read the info provided to you, free of charge. Learn. Own up to your mistake. Don't be an idiot.

Ice

Aloha !

Are you in your "Manchester Diamond Circle was the best ever mode" again? Only to then take everything you said back because you were "trolling?" Your "compression isn't possible on vinyl" thing proves you know **** all.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan

Allan Tucker‬ (Audio Engineer: Elvis, Johnny Cash, Boston, John Lee Hooker, Judas Priest, Metallica): "The vinyl mastering engineers job was to just translate, not to make changes unless the vinyl couldn't handle it. So you don't change the low end or the high end. If the vinyl is blowing up you have to do something but otherwise it wasn't supposed to be particularly creative, but modern mastering is widely creative. We are suppose to jump in and taking a part, putting it back together again to come up with something that's new."

Icemoron - I feel sorry for your "students" if you've been teaching them fundamental basics this badly. Your original argument about CD sounding better than vinyl is WRONG. You are a proper retard, mate. You claim to be such a fundamental expert in sound engineering (whereas I dont - as I clearly have gotten compression mixed up - granted). Lets steer it back to your original idiotic arguments. How the hell can you claim that CD is better than vinyl in sound quality.

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm

This is put into VERY BASIC form so fraud teachers like yourself can understand. Then you can give the kids their money back.

Always good to hear from you, Seb. ;-)

EDIT: And to note - I tell you what - because I'm nice like that I will let you have the final say. Dont hold back

I do not mind the sound quality of CD vs Vinyl, the most important is the production, mixing and mastering from master, if this is done improperly, be heard poor both cd as vinyl. "WAN" or "Aftermath" have this problem, and not even a vinyl would do justice.

The remasters of These Days are not as dramatic, lose some elements and clarity due to the decibels for have more punch, it became fashionable in the nineties for radio, and now with iPods have gained over the account.

At some point, the industry needs to realize that they have to set a maximum volume limit, because that is the real problem, trying to push all the elements up, to have a more intense sound, finally create a sonic wall that sounding like absolute shit.

Wow, resorting to name calling. You must really be out of arguments. And no, I'm not wrong, you are. There's this thing called "physics", maybe you've heard of it. It says I'm right and you're wrong. There is not even a slightest chance you could be right, it's so cut and dried.

And again? No, I'm not, but you seem to be.

No, I don't. I'm not an expert, but I did quote you many. Too bad you didn't read them. Could've saved you the embarressement.

So, you WERE WRONG! This whole discussion is about which has more dynamic range, which is more capable of producing the sound recorded. And that is the CD. Like I said WAAAAAYYY back when you started this idiocy, it's up to the individual to like something better than the other. Some people prefer vinyl, because it has less high end and less low end. But it doesn't make it better. You kept on insisting (and YOU WERE WRONG!!!) that "vinyl has no compression" and that "vinyl is better" and how I was wrong, but in fact, all that time you were COMPLETELY and UTTERLY WRONG ON ALL ACCOUNTS! :) So, there, who's retarded moron now?

Because it is. There is no way vinyl can reproduce the sounds CD is capable of. No way. It isn't possible.

That's bullshit. Which you would know if you'd read the links I've posted, as one of them directly addressed that page as being wrong on at least six accounts.

I suggest you read up on Nyquist-Shannon theorem, keeping in mind that the human ear can only hear up to about 20hHz, and the CD sample rate is 44.1kHz. Also, remember that vinyl's dynamic range = 80dB, CD's 150dB.

Also, CD has more low end than vinyl. Vinyl has a physical limit (meaning the groove can not be any deeper) at about 35Hz, but the CD goes down to 10Hz, even a little lower. Vinyl could, in theory, reproduce higher sounds than a CD, but rarely can it be used because of harmonic distortion, and why bother, as no one would hear it anyway. A CD can reproduce frequencies up to 22kHz, which is above human hearing anyway.

Very basic, and very wrong. The first problem is that it states that vinyl has "unlimited" resolution. It doesn't. It's actually very limited. Like I've told you before, when it comes to dynamics, vinyl has bout 80dB of room. CD has a good 90dB MORE room. And not to mention the frequency range, in which the CD is much better. Believing that page is like saying that the early cartoons with 12 frames per second are better than the HDR 60 fps. You can like the older one, but it doesn't make it technically better.

And I didn't teach kids, they were adults. :)

Don't know if this was aimed at Seb or not, but I don't have to. You already made an ass out of yourself by arguing about "facts" you got wrong. "WAV file is compressed", "vinyl has no compression", "CD's came around with the intent of compression because its a massive space saver", etc. etc. etc.

I know, I, too, would be embarrassed if I'd spewn that sort of bullshit, but luckily, it was you.

Let's see what you REALLY know. Name one, just ONE, measurable, technically proven way in which vinyl is better than a CD. Just one.

Oh, and do remember, that practically ALL the music put on vinyl since the late 80's has been digitized before pressing it on the vinyl. So, even if vinyl reproduced the sound perfectly (which it clearly doesn't, like I've shown many, many time above), it would still only be as good as a CD (which it isn't, like I've blah blah blah).

Ice

Yeah, the loudness wars (see the link I provided earlier) are ruining music for a generation. I get that radio stations like their music to be even in volume, but they could just compress it (like they do anyway). I don't get why every album needs to be compressed flat as well. Don't people know how to use the volume controller on their stereo system?

And it's not the people mastering, it's the producers and artists who demand this. For some reason it seems to be a competition now, who has the loudest album out...

Ice

'fraid I'd take what Ice says about stuff like this over most of the world. I can still remember watching his kiss tribute band video, epic. :D

Well said Ice. Dynamic range is one of the main reasons why I still look for unremastered versions instead of remastered versions. Usually means I can find them for cheap. :D

I'm expecting to listen to this baby when it arrives in Neil Young's HD audio Pono service.