Final Scratch

Discussion in 'TRIBE Main Forum' started by Mr_Furious, Feb 27, 2002.

  1. t-boy

    t-boy TRIBE Member

    all you vinal enthusiasts are obsessed with your analogue "warm" feeling records because of their incomplete frequency response... you guys are like the amish of the music industry.

    take a good mp3 encoder like lame, add proper optimizations to the encoding, and the mp3 file will be indestinguishable from the original digital master, at least to the most sensitive human ear

    now.. you want your dumbass inferiour warm vinyl sound? take a high quality filter, adjust frequency muffling to match that of a vinyl, and you have your lovely vinyl sound

    add a good timecoding interface (final scratch is perfect for this) and a good dsp software (probably comes with final scratch), and the tactile sensations of vinyl are there for you.

    final point:

    any analogue technology can be replicated via digital means.. if the replication is done properly (something that isn't necessarily possible with current technology), it will be indestinguishable from the original.
     
  2. Adam Duke

    Adam Duke TRIBE Member

    Alright then, homeboy....the challenge is on.

    @m.
     
  3. Adam Duke

    Adam Duke TRIBE Member

    i've played on CD players also, big boy. and that's MY opinon!

    @m.
     
  4. -Mercury-

    -Mercury- TRIBE Member

    yes, but obviously not a cdj1000 right????

    k, well, untill you try it out, maybe you should reserve judgement
     
  5. Adam Duke

    Adam Duke TRIBE Member

    nope. I'm judging, sorry!
    cd djing will never be an accepted form of public entertainment, no matter how realistic the technology becomes. Final scratch has already come onto the scene and is proving way cooler and more modern, so really cd djing is old technology now.
    A tool, sure, but it'll never replace the market as it is now.

    Deal with it, it just ain't gonna happen.

    @m.
     
  6. matty

    matty TRIBE Member


    The difference between anolouge and digital technology is this.

    [​IMG]

    The image above is a sound wave (in analogue form, and remember our ears are analogue too). The amplitude is the height of the wave at any particular point. In digital sound we just "write down" a number specifying the amplitude at any point. These points occur at equally distanced points many times a second. The more times a second we look at the height of a wave, the better quality the audio is.

    [​IMG]

    Each bar on the graph represents the amplitude measured. This clearly explains the "more frequent samples, better sound" theory. However, cd technology is limited because there are a finite number of times that the wave is sampled every second and when reproduced parts of the wave are filled in. In analogue recordings there are no parts of the sound wave that are extrapolations based on digital data. You get an exact representation of the audio wave. Granted, moving to 24bit audio (DVDA or SuperAudio) allows for a representation of the wave where the distance between points is virtually nil and therfore offers the benifits of both vinyl and cd. But they're sure aren't any cd decks that are DVD-A compatible right now.

    The warmth that people are talking about with vinyl has to do with some of the nuances of the music that are lost when the date is coinverted into a digital medium. And believe me filtering the highs on an audio file won't give you that warmth (bottom end of the mix) back. If anything it'd detract from the mixes air (top end) and muddy up the bottom.

    future technology will address these issues like you say, however at this point in time vinyl still is a better medium if the production, materials, and playback chain are all good enough, and sufficient care is taken over storage and cleaning.
     
  7. Stormshadow

    Stormshadow TRIBE Member

    Yah but what about on a big sound system...don't you think you'd be able to tell the difference between vinyl and a compressed digital audio file?
    Maybe this thing should use .wavs.

    Anyways, I'm a bit skeptical about FS. I want to see it in action before I dismiss vinyl.
    I'm all for new technology, but I can't see this on. I think it would "cheapen" DJ culture. Kinda reminds me of a product you'd see on a Ron Popeil infomercial.
     
  8. orange richie

    orange richie TRIBE Member

    Thank you!

    MP3's sound like shit, period. The sound is so thin and empty and do not compare to records. I hope FS supports the use of .wav. files.

    Our ears are analogue. Nothing sounds better, warmer and generaly more 'real'; a recording or sound from an (analogue)instrument than from an analogue source. The only downfall is that records lose their sound quality with use.

    Did anyone else ever notice how overproduced, tweaked and gained the music that is generaly heard on the radio is. It sounds too fake and not organic enough. Sure it sounds crisper but the shit needs to be balanced better.

    If everything was so crisp we wouldn't have that 'dirty' sound that a lot of us love in our electronic music.

    Rickardo Belmiro de la Cruz...
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2002
  9. seeker

    seeker TRIBE Member

    i am highly amused by the zealous nature of 'electronic' (ie digital) music djs adhering to a strictly 'analogue' way of playing music. :)
     
  10. Mr_Furious

    Mr_Furious TRIBE Member

    it does. Any MP3 file can be converted to a wav. in seconds with the use of a program like nero-burn

    I can....what's so hard about that?
     
  11. PosTMOd

    PosTMOd Well-Known Member

    Any music off the air is compressed to shit. Standard procedure.

    Vinyl is inferior in sound to digital... yes, even mp3 (as long as it's with a quality coder, and at a high enough rate). MP3 compression (NOT the compression I mentioned above) only gets rid of stuff that you can't hear anyway... that is a physiological and physical FACT...

    It's like arguing that black and white TV is better than colour.

    People can't stand change-- it scares them. Don't be frightened people...

    Once I get a nice system, I will inviting people over for some live A B testing... and if you can tell the difference more than by chance alone, you get $5 and a free gerbil.
     
  12. matty

    matty TRIBE Member

    Where do I pick up my gerbil?

    Believe me I can tell you the difference. ESPECIALLY between vinyl and mp3. But we'll just have to agree to disagree. I also believe I can tell the difference between my DVD-A discs (24/192)and regular cds. Sit in a studio for long enough and you begin to notice the differences between 32/194, 24/96, 16/44, and vinyl. Ask any professional engineer.

    Vinyl is a better medium than cd for many reasons. Cd is better than vinyl for others. You pick wether you want accurate reproduction or convenience and durability.

    On a side note. I'm pretty happy to have gotten the never released masters to the gold records that took off with voyager. Talk about some sweet sampling material.

    [​IMG]

    http://www.art.uiuc.edu/squier/students/199JS/ejschmit/life/GOLD.HTM
     
  13. t-boy

    t-boy TRIBE Member

    m..m can you please post some references as to the validity of your statements?

    as far as I knew, 44,000 Hz was sufficient to trick the ear into seeing it as a continuous analogue sound

    as far as mp3 encoding, the compression is psychoacoustic. it removes frequences undetectable by human ears.. some mp3 encoders, like lame, are quite good at not dropping audible frequencies.. there's some site deep posted once with some waveform tests comparing it to the original digital master, and it is pretty indestinguishable...

    i'm not saying you are incorrect, (although as far as my limited knowledge goes, you are), I just want to see some references as to where you got your info. obvioulsy 24 bit / 192 kHz is higher quality than 16 bit / 44 kHz. But whether or not it is detected by the human ear, I am not so sure...
     
  14. matty

    matty TRIBE Member

    t-boy, try here to start -> http://www.howstuffworks.com/question487.htm It's a pretty simple explanation of what I'm trying to get across. If you want some more in depth, sciency articles I can dig those up too.

    Most popular music today has very little dynamic range (the difference between the loudest part of the track and softest part) Using cd format to record and reproduce this sonically limited music usually works just fine. However with music that has a large dynamic range 16/44.1 doesn't do it justice. That's why you'll find that almost all reputable classical music recording facilites operate in 32/196.

    Taking this all the way back to production. Low pass and high pass filers are just that filters. If you listen to a synthesizer without any filters you are going to hear something that probably isn't very easy on your ears. It's only the filters that by removing certain frequencies soften up the sound and allow a sound engineer to shape it. This is just an example of how frequencies that lie outside of the audio signal or the human audible spectrum can leave artifacts in the sound we hear.
     
  15. alexd

    alexd Administrator Staff Member

    You are even likely to tell the difference in a big club with big soundsystem. Just think of all the background noise (the talking, gino pickup lines being spoken, glasses smashing, busboys grunting under heavy tubs of dirty glasses, feet shuffling). Not to mention the continuously changing room acoustics due to people moving around...If there is an audible difference, you would only be able to tell in an acoustic listening room with nobody else around.
     
  16. alexd

    alexd Administrator Staff Member

    Or at a Menonite's place.
     
  17. orange richie

    orange richie TRIBE Member

    Although a lot of electronic music is digital, a lot of it is still produced with analogue gear.

    By no means am I saying that digital is shit, I just want to hear that 'warm' sound coming through the speakers wether it's didgital or analogue.

    Did anyone else ever notice how overproduced, tweaked and gained the music that is generaly heard on the radio is. It sounds too fake and not organic enough. Sure it sounds crisper but the shit needs to be balanced better.

    What I meant by this is music we hear on the radio is 'popular' music. Not necesarily off the radio but even CD's. The recordings on most CD's theses days have crapy nynamics. I think it's cuz they raise the levels so much in the mastering stage. The volume on newer CD's tends to be getting louder and louder.

    Rickardo Belmiro de la Cruz...
     
  18. Mike Richards

    Mike Richards TRIBE Member


    Unfortunately the Canadian Release has been delayed!! And on another sad note I have it on good authority that there has been some drama between Stanton and Erikson Pro (who was supposed to be the Canadian Distributor) which will probably land Final Scratch in the hands of a considerably less capable distributor.

    Am I pissed off? You're damn right I am!!!
     

Share This Page