English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Main > Nostalgia & memories

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 14 January 2019, 17:39   #41
Foebane
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 47
Posts: 1,839
Very interesting, Roondar. Very interesting indeed...

Over to you, Hewitson.
Foebane is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 10:46   #42
Hewitson
Registered User
Hewitson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 37
Posts: 3,393
Compact Disc vs Vinyl:



CD and quality don't even belong in the same sentence. Look at the waveform, it's almost constantly clipped. The record doesn't clip one single time.

As I said, a giant step backwards in sound quality. Which admittedly, has more to do than brainless fuckwits "mastering" the CD rather than differences between the actual formats themselves.

Last edited by Hewitson; 15 January 2019 at 10:52.
Hewitson is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 11:23   #43
Foebane
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 47
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewitson View Post
Compact Disc vs Vinyl:



CD and quality don't even belong in the same sentence. Look at the waveform, it's almost constantly clipped. The record doesn't clip one single time.

As I said, a giant step backwards in sound quality. Which admittedly, has more to do than brainless fuckwits "mastering" the CD rather than differences between the actual formats themselves.
I have seen waveforms for songs that are almost always maxed out on the amplitude, but I think modern records do the same thing. Why shouldn't they? Such a waveform would be easier to cut into the master. Why would they use a more natural waveform for records?

Last edited by Foebane; 15 January 2019 at 11:34.
Foebane is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 12:13   #44
roondar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewitson View Post
Compact Disc vs Vinyl:



CD and quality don't even belong in the same sentence. Look at the waveform, it's almost constantly clipped. The record doesn't clip one single time.

As I said, a giant step backwards in sound quality. Which admittedly, has more to do than brainless fuckwits "mastering" the CD rather than differences between the actual formats themselves.
I don't see any waveform here??
Did you mean to include an example?



As is, I can't agree with that statement.

First off, I'm 100% sure that, say, classical music on CD (or even older (say 1980's-early 1990's) pop recordings) has plenty of dynamic range and equally sure that pop music re-released on vinyl these days is likely to also be heavily compressed.

Secondly, you didn't counter any of the points I made on the elements of vinyl audio reproduction that are objectively (as in you can simply measure it) worse than CD's.

And thirdly, the only reason that CD's can have such a 'loud' mixes to begin with is that they don't suffer from the non-flat frequency response curve, poor signal to noise ratio and variable dynamic range* that vinyl does. Or in other words, the crap mixes (which I also dislike!) are a consequence of CD's ability to play back audio with far fewer compromises than vinyl can.

*) DR on vinyl is strongly dependent on what frequencies you record and where on the record the stylus is. High DR music does best at the beginning of the record, as dynamic range reduces the closer you get to the center of the record due to the smaller tracks and constant velocity of the record (which is analogous to slowly lowering the sampling rate as you go from one side of a CD to the other).
--
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foebane View Post
I have seen waveforms for songs that are almost always maxed out on the amplitude, but I think modern records do the same thing. Why shouldn't they? Such a waveform would be easier to cut into the master. Why would they use a more natural waveform for records?
As I understand it, part of this whole 'loudness war' originates in how the average listener tends to find music that sounds 'louder' (i.e. has less dynamic range) to be sounding better. Crazy but apparently true.

Interestingly, some smaller CD labels/producers are 'fighting back' against this loudness war. Then there are hybrid SACDs, which usually have a very good plain CD layer as they too let the dynamic range be as big as needed rather than compressing it to hell.
roondar is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 12:23   #45
chb
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: germany
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewitson View Post
CD and quality don't even belong in the same sentence. Look at the waveform, it's almost constantly clipped. The record doesn't clip one single time.

As I said, a giant step backwards in sound quality. Which admittedly, has more to do than brainless fuckwits "mastering" the CD rather than differences between the actual formats themselves.
Well, as you state yourself, clipping on a CD has nothing to do with the limitations of the medium itself (there's actually plenty of dynamic range) but with mastering/mixing habit (aka "The Loudness War"). There are indeed albums that are more sensible mixed on vinyl. But a lot of CD records exists that are not compressed/brick wall limited to death - be assured, you would have a hard time finding a classic or jazz record showing that kind (or even any kind) of clipping.

As much as I like vinyl for various reasons, it is technically clearly inferior to CD audio.
chb is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 12:42   #46
roondar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,374
I should add here that I love the experience of playing a record and feel it's a wonderful way to get 'closer' to the act of playing back music (the sheer physicality of seeing the needle move and being able to hear the sounds coming from the actual stylus even when no amplification is used just 'work' for me). My points have nothing to do with me being 'against' vinyl. It's just that I disagree with pretending it's 'better' than everything else regardless of what technical or scientific facts actually tell us.
roondar is offline  
Old 15 January 2019, 12:53   #47
daxb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,387
The two waveforms of a song show a normal one and a ramped (clipping). 16bit and 32bit. That is all the information I can extrapolate.
daxb is offline  
Old 19 January 2019, 01:07   #48
oundfire99
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Norwich
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foebane View Post
I can take any demo or game and run in on WinUAE, or even real hardware, and it will sound as intended, but when I take the .mod file and run it on something like XMPlay, it will invariably sound different - why?

I'm specifically talking about some of the samples sounding like they have a low-pass filter on, but not all of them. Why is that? As far as I'm aware, music modules don't have a filter on/off for each sample.

So what's going on?
Not an expert but I would say WINUAE does a very good job of emulating the Paula chip, obvs. not the same as Paula but still close
oundfire99 is offline  
Old 19 January 2019, 03:29   #49
chip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Italy
Age: 45
Posts: 1,392
WinUAE does a PERFECT job with audio emulation

Just try this by yourself :

Take a module which you like

Make a recording in .WAV with WinUAE option

Create a .MP3 from the resulting .WAV

Then go to this site

http://www.paula8364.com/

Download the "same" .MP3 you created with WinUAE and make comparison

I can ensure you that i tried this by myself with some different modules

Well, result is that the real thing sounds exactly like the emulated thing

Or, at least, my ears are not able to spot the difference
chip is online now  
Old 19 January 2019, 18:26   #50
robinsonb5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by roondar View Post
As I understand it, part of this whole 'loudness war' originates in how the average listener tends to find music that sounds 'louder' (i.e. has less dynamic range) to be sounding better. Crazy but apparently true.
I think part of it is also that people want to be able to listen to music in their cars and other noisy environments. The low dynamic range means that more of the song is audible over road noise.
robinsonb5 is offline  
Old 19 January 2019, 20:52   #51
zipper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: finland
Posts: 1,557
Radio senders (commercial) were competing of listeners - louder one got more attention.
zipper is offline  
Old 20 January 2019, 01:46   #52
oundfire99
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Norwich
Posts: 24
As someone said on here, answered my thought about analog and 8bit merging together (ie. Octamed) better than modern digital, means you don't need to over compress the shit out of everything to make it louder and lose dynamic range. Really interesting subject though as modern methods require a lot of EQ and work to make mix work where-as everything sounds amazing in Octamed or similar (8 bit tracker) Analog vs Digital argument proven right here ...
oundfire99 is offline  
Old 20 January 2019, 03:35   #53
robinsonb5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Norfolk, UK
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by oundfire99 View Post
Really interesting subject though as modern methods require a lot of EQ and work to make mix work

That's mainly because modern mixes have many more channels to deal with. A naive method of mixing channels is to add the signals together and divide by the number of channels. That will obviously result in each channel getting quieter as more channels are added, requiring more advanced EQ, compression, etc.


The Amiga has it easy by only having to mix 2 channels for each side of the stereo image.
robinsonb5 is offline  
Old 20 January 2019, 06:00   #54
Mrz
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: I
Posts: 338
I have an old version of winamp which can play Amiga modules using an old plugin called in_mod.dll
this is very precise and the sound obtained playing modules is identical to my Amiga 1200
Mrz is offline  
Old 23 January 2019, 22:41   #55
brett71
Registered User

brett71's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ames, IA, USA
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrz View Post
I have an old version of winamp which can play Amiga modules using an old plugin called in_mod.dll
this is very precise and the sound obtained playing modules is identical to my Amiga 1200
Yeah, I used to use that too, but there is one MOD that it never was able to play correctly, i.e. same as an actual Amiga or with Deliplayer. The mod is called "Dirt.MOD". Something it did with the tempo setting just wasn't handled by that WinAmp module correctly.
brett71 is offline  
Old 23 January 2019, 22:46   #56
Hewitson
Registered User
Hewitson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 37
Posts: 3,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrz View Post
I have an old version of winamp which can play Amiga modules using an old plugin called in_mod.dll
this is very precise and the sound obtained playing modules is identical to my Amiga 1200
I'm sorry, but that's simply not correct.
Hewitson is offline  
Old 29 January 2019, 22:41   #57
lordofchaos
TinkerTailorContentMaker

lordofchaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bedfordshire
Age: 41
Posts: 1,114
To the posters original question... Back in the day I had a decent HI-FI system that the Amiga was hooked up to, it sounded great. These days I`m running WinUAE through a similar HI-FI, and it sounds as if it's lacking some bass frequency along with high end frequencies? It's quite subtle, just sounds weaker.

To remedy this (maybe) I record the sound module in WinUAE using NVIDIA capture (MP4 at highest bitrate, dump the video file into Sony Vegas, then use post processing on PC. Adjusting the EQ, restoring the bass and higher range frequencies. Bit of a pain but can yield better results, to my ear anyway.

I guess it comes down to how you want to consume Amiga audio in the modern era. Real hardware, emulated hardware, PC mod players, YouTube, MP3s, CD's, cassette tapes etc.. Too much choice!!!
lordofchaos is offline  
Old 30 January 2019, 03:52   #58
mc6809e
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 304
A problem with digital audio, IMHO, is with the belief that because we have all the samples necessary for perfect reconstruction we get perfect reconstruction when those samples are output through some simple filter.

But this is incorrect.

Absolutely perfect reconstruction requires that all samples be read before the first value is output. Anything less will not give perfect reconstruction. Practically, perfect reconstruction isn't usually necessary, but any filter shorter than the entire length of the sample is going to introduce some amount of interpolation error. How this error manifests itself depends on the playback hardware.

Of course all the typical abuses, clipping, etc, don't help either.
mc6809e is offline  
Old 30 January 2019, 15:08   #59
KONEY
Vampire 2 Amiga Musician

KONEY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 396
Because Paula DACs have an unique sound texture.
KONEY is offline  
Old 13 February 2019, 12:45   #60
FromWithin
Music lord

FromWithin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Liverpool, UK
Age: 45
Posts: 619
Quote:
Originally Posted by mc6809e View Post
A problem with digital audio, IMHO, is with the belief that because we have all the samples necessary for perfect reconstruction we get perfect reconstruction when those samples are output through some simple filter.
It's not a belief. It's a mathematical certainty.

Quote:
Absolutely perfect reconstruction requires that all samples be read before the first value is output. Anything less will not give perfect reconstruction. Practically, perfect reconstruction isn't usually necessary, but any filter shorter than the entire length of the sample is going to introduce some amount of interpolation error. How this error manifests itself depends on the playback hardware.
A filter shorter than the length of the sample? What does that even mean? In fact, that whole paragraph makes no sense.

I've just been reading back at some of the other comments from the past few weeks and there is some extraordinary misinformation in there. "everything sounds amazing in Octamed or similar". You've got to be joking. Most of it sounds like it came out of someone's arse. If you think it all sounds amazing it's because your level of expectation for how it should sound is so low.

Last edited by FromWithin; 13 February 2019 at 17:05.
FromWithin is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amiga Modules with original sound (DC-BASS Source filter MOD) technick support.Other 0 21 February 2012 23:40
Trapped 2 music modules s2325 request.Modules 11 04 October 2011 12:17
oldest music modules s2325 request.Modules 10 12 November 2008 12:55
Amiga music modules fsx Amiga scene 0 13 November 2007 12:28
World of Sound (1994)(U. S. Dreams), MODules from Amiga dax Amiga scene 0 26 January 2007 14:08

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:00.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.09157 seconds with 13 queries