Dream Theater- Metropolis Pt2:Scenes from a memory vinyl re-issue(available on b

[mrjazzguitar]

Mine was delivered today \m/

nice -- looking forward to getting mine soon!

[Öxölklöfför]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

I can give you two reasons for enjoying music on vinyl:

1. The tracks aren't "skippable" in the same way as a CD or digital music, which means that there's a bigger probability that you'll listen to the entire songs, instead of skipping through the music. In the end it makes me more dedicated to listening to the music.

2. Audiophiles insist on that there's a "warmer" sound on vinyl, and I have to agree on that. Even if it could be that the warmth is added after the music has reached my ears...

To this day I prefer BCASL on vinyl based on the reasons above.

[Öxölklöfför]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

[duncan3dc]

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

Regardless of where the difference comes from, if the difference is there for the listener and they get a better experience listing on a different format, then their preference is valid.

[hefdaddy42]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

The more accurate thing to say is that MOST human ears can't distinguish that difference.  There is a reason that there are audiophiles in the first place.  It is by definition a niche market of people with exceptional hearing.

[Öxölklöfför]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

The more accurate thing to say is that MOST human ears can't distinguish that difference.  There is a reason that there are audiophiles in the first place.  It is by definition a niche market of people with exceptional hearing.

Well, there are people with exceptional hearing, but even those people have a physical limit for what they can hear. Audiophile isn't the definition of a people with exceptional hearing, an audiophile is someone that have a good amount of interest in recorded music.

[Öxölklöfför]

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

Regardless of where the difference comes from, if the difference is there for the listener and they get a better experience listing on a different format, then their preference is valid.

Of course. I think that I argumented against something that weren't there from the first place. Sorry for that    There have been a lot of discussions about CD vs. FLAC vs. mp3, and I misread the post thinking that that was the topic.

[Algo Fonix]

Mine was delivered today \m/

Yay, I hope mine is waiting for me when I get home next week.

[seasonsinthesky]

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

The more accurate thing to say is that MOST human ears can't distinguish that difference.  There is a reason that there are audiophiles in the first place.  It is by definition a niche market of people with exceptional hearing.

this is exactly the kind of misinformation that people need to stop spreading. it shows a severe lack of understanding of the structure of sound.

the key here is harmonics. the harmonic structure of any given sound is what characterizes it differently from anything else; for example, the only reason A440 played on a guitar sounds different from A440 played as a straight sine wave is because of the harmonic structure created by the guitar and the way the player hits the note. you don't just hear the fundamental 440Hz pitch, you hear a vast network of related harmonics above and below that note.

even at 320kbps, the frequency response of an MP3 copy, no matter the encoder, is removing part of the harmonic structure present across all the layers of the song. this isn't just because the frequency ceiling tends to stop at a virtual wall at 18kHz — some encodes do allow spikes above, especially at high VBR rates — but because MP3 encoding also removes frequencies WELL within most people's hearing range using techniques like masking according to the Fletcher-Munson Curve and other models of how we hear.

on the most fundamental level possible, an MP3 (or any other lossy filetype) copy at any quality simply isn't the sound you are intended by the artist to hear — whole levels have actually been cut out because we apparently aren't supposed to hear it.

i assure you that i have had plenty of experiences wherein i have heard lossy copies of albums after only knowing lossless rips and have very, very easily heard the difference immediately. it tends to be obvious in the cymbals, but also vocal sibilance and the body of the snare drum, as examples to look for. i have no special hearing ability, i have simply built a familiarity with lossless copies of the music i listen to.

considering (1) even CD quality is castrated from the quality music is recorded at and (2) that hard drive space is more inexpensive by the day, there simply isn't a reason to settle for less than lossless. even the infamous iPod, music quality killer supreme (apparently), can play lossless easily.

[hefdaddy42]

Yeah, but most human ears don't care like yours do, so they can't hear the difference.

[seasonsinthesky]

Yeah, but most human ears don't care like yours do, so they can't hear the difference.

which is a goddamn shame!

[hefdaddy42]

Yeah, but most human ears don't care like yours do, so they can't hear the difference.

which is a goddamn shame!

I agree.

[Tumdace]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

Spoken like a true ignorant.

Listen to ASIO FLACs on a higher end system and tell me there is no difference. I hate people who rag on audiophiles because they love what they do and consider it a fabulous hobby.

If you cant tell the difference, thats your problem, but many of us can. I know the sound is cleaner and clearer when not compressed and using good equipment. My ears dont lie to me.

[Orbert]

Wait... so this isn't a spam/scam?

Someone comes on the board that we've never heard of, doesn't even spell the name of the band correctly, and hypes his product.  A few other people we've never heard of jump in and say how great it is.  But it's legit?

[FretMuppet]

Wait... so this isn't a spam/scam?

Someone comes on the board that we've never heard of, doesn't even spell the name of the band correctly, and hypes his product.  A few other people we've never heard of jump in and say how great it is.  But it's legit?

Dream Theater Tweeted about it a few weeks ago:

dreamtheaternet Dream Theater
bit.ly/pn3ia4 "Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes From A Memory" to be released on vinyl on November 25th, 2011.
22 Oct Favorite Retweet Reply

[Orbert]

Wow, okay then.

ZepDT says he got his.  I look forward to the review.  I guess I'm still skeptical.

[FretMuppet]

Its probably the only vinyl version they're ever gonna release, so I took my chances!

[ZeppelinDT]

Fun test to see if you can actually tell the difference between 128 and 320

https://mp3ornot.com/index.php

[Algo Fonix]

I couldn't tell a difference.

[seasonsinthesky]

try with headphones — my first attempt was with the home theater and i got it wrong, but then got four right in a row when i switched to headphones. and, obviously, listen a bajillion times to each before you commit to an answer!

it's a poor test, though; the real way is to acclimatize your ears to a particular song losslessly, pick a bit of it, and THEN compare 128kbps encodes (or whatever) to that. the difference becomes glaring because you're used to hearing the full quality version. instant-spotting like this site attempts can only ever be perfect from someone who's been a mastering engineer for decades (and i'm certainly far from that).

[Algo Fonix]

I was using headphones, quite good ones too. I just couldn't tell a difference.

[hefdaddy42]

Wait... so this isn't a spam/scam?

Someone comes on the board that we've never heard of, doesn't even spell the name of the band correctly, and hypes his product.  A few other people we've never heard of jump in and say how great it is.  But it's legit?

ZepDT posted this on page 1

I'm relatively familiar with Brookvale records (they're based out of Long Island) and in my experience they're a legit label, so I don't really doubt the authenticity of this. 

[Tumdace]

Fun test to see if you can actually tell the difference between 128 and 320

https://mp3ornot.com/index.php

Such a bad song clip to test that on. There wasnt enough going on with that sound clip to make a discernable difference.

I guarantee if you took a song like say Metropolis or BAI and compared a 128kbps to a FLAC, I could tell the difference 100% of the time.

[MirzekDT]

Fun test to see if you can actually tell the difference between 128 and 320

https://mp3ornot.com/index.php

Such a bad song clip to test that on. There wasnt enough going on with that sound clip to make a discernable difference.

I guarantee if you took a song like say Metropolis or BAI and compared a 128kbps to a FLAC, I could tell the difference 100% of the time.

They are not very good clips but anyway I was successful all five times I tried it so I doubt it was all just a luck and I'm not even an audiophile. I found the difference by weaker bass in one sample weaker clapping in another and so on...

[Öxölklöfför]

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

The more accurate thing to say is that MOST human ears can't distinguish that difference.  There is a reason that there are audiophiles in the first place.  It is by definition a niche market of people with exceptional hearing.

this is exactly the kind of misinformation that people need to stop spreading. it shows a severe lack of understanding of the structure of sound.

the key here is harmonics. the harmonic structure of any given sound is what characterizes it differently from anything else; for example, the only reason A440 played on a guitar sounds different from A440 played as a straight sine wave is because of the harmonic structure created by the guitar and the way the player hits the note. you don't just hear the fundamental 440Hz pitch, you hear a vast network of related harmonics above and below that note.

even at 320kbps, the frequency response of an MP3 copy, no matter the encoder, is removing part of the harmonic structure present across all the layers of the song. this isn't just because the frequency ceiling tends to stop at a virtual wall at 18kHz — some encodes do allow spikes above, especially at high VBR rates — but because MP3 encoding also removes frequencies WELL within most people's hearing range using techniques like masking according to the Fletcher-Munson Curve and other models of how we hear.

on the most fundamental level possible, an MP3 (or any other lossy filetype) copy at any quality simply isn't the sound you are intended by the artist to hear — whole levels have actually been cut out because we apparently aren't supposed to hear it.

i assure you that i have had plenty of experiences wherein i have heard lossy copies of albums after only knowing lossless rips and have very, very easily heard the difference immediately. it tends to be obvious in the cymbals, but also vocal sibilance and the body of the snare drum, as examples to look for. i have no special hearing ability, i have simply built a familiarity with lossless copies of the music i listen to.

considering (1) even CD quality is castrated from the quality music is recorded at and (2) that hard drive space is more inexpensive by the day, there simply isn't a reason to settle for less than lossless. even the infamous iPod, music quality killer supreme (apparently), can play lossless easily.

First of all, I am well aware of that "lossy" compression relies on the removing of information. After all, it's called "lossy" for a reason. I'm also quite aware of how the algorithms to accomplish this works (frequency masking etc.), and I'm also aware of how many encoders destroys the file even further by cutting highs or/and lows. Actually, my first experiences with the mp3 format had a lot to do with finding "the right" encoder that didn't "do to much" to the audio. Even today, 15 years later, there are still encoders that can't do the job correctly. As you say, cymbals tend to be where bad compression is audible at the most, because of that they are on the "top" of the frequency spectrum.

Further on, I do understand the structure of sound. But I don't sit down and think about this when I'm listening to music. I focus on the result, which I have to do to be able to enjoy it. To me, it doesn't matter how it's done as long as the result is good (having relatively good hearing and absolute pitch I'm quite nitpicky with what I hear). I know when something sounds good or bad, or "as it is supposed to".

[Öxölklöfför]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

Spoken like a true ignorant.

Listen to ASIO FLACs on a higher end system and tell me there is no difference. I hate people who rag on audiophiles because they love what they do and consider it a fabulous hobby.

If you cant tell the difference, thats your problem, but many of us can. I know the sound is cleaner and clearer when not compressed and using good equipment. My ears dont lie to me.

1. Can you tell me why that was ignorant? Because I said something that you didn't agree on?
2. Can you tell me where I did rag on audiophiles? Being an audiophile myself I would find that a bit inappropiate. I don't understand why the definition of an audiophile seems to be "someone searching for perfect audio" for some people, when the definition actually covers a lot more ground than that (with myself being an example, vintage sound is my "speciality".
3. My ears don't lie to me neither, I can distinguish the difference between good audio and bad audio. The difference between you and me is that I don't need to know what's happening before the music reaches my ears as long as I enjoy the result.

[Öxölklöfför]

  Can you say.....flame bait?

lol yeah, maybe a little. Honestly, I've just never understood the hype about vinyl. I guess it's a matter of preference and I've always preferred the "cleaner" sound of CDs and high quality mp3s. To be fair though, I haven't really heard a whole lot of music side-by-side on both so I can't judge. Maybe once I hear the same album on a vinyl I'll instantly convert and also throw away thousands of dollars converting my music collection to vinyl.

The words "high quality" and "mp3" do not go together. If you cant understand why, you will never understand why some prefer vinyl.

Well...the human ear can't distinguish the difference between CD audio and mp3 when the mp3 reaches a certain level of quality and compression (320 kbit/second done with a good compressor erases the difference imho). At this point the differences are only in your mind.

Spoken like a true ignorant.

Listen to ASIO FLACs on a higher end system and tell me there is no difference. I hate people who rag on audiophiles because they love what they do and consider it a fabulous hobby.

If you cant tell the difference, thats your problem, but many of us can. I know the sound is cleaner and clearer when not compressed and using good equipment. My ears dont lie to me.

1. Can you tell me why that was ignorant? Because I said something that you didn't agree on?
2. Can you tell me where I did rag on audiophiles? Being an audiophile myself I would find that a bit inappropiate. I don't understand why the definition of an audiophile seems to be "someone searching for perfect audio" for some people, when the definition actually covers a lot more ground than that (with myself being an example, vintage sound is my "speciality".
3. My ears don't lie to me neither, I can distinguish the difference between good audio and bad audio. The difference between you and me is that I don't need to know what's happening before the music reaches my ears as long as I enjoy the result.

Speaking more about audiophiles: I really love when people have a passion for these kind of things. The only type of audiophiles I can't stand are those who overanalyze everything, I.e. comparing frequency curves etc. I think that removes tha purpose of being an audiophile.

[seasonsinthesky]

First of all, I am well aware of that "lossy" compression relies on the removing of information. After all, it's called "lossy" for a reason. I'm also quite aware of how the algorithms to accomplish this works (frequency masking etc.), and I'm also aware of how many encoders destroys the file even further by cutting highs or/and lows. Actually, my first experiences with the mp3 format had a lot to do with finding "the right" encoder that didn't "do to much" to the audio. Even today, 15 years later, there are still encoders that can't do the job correctly. As you say, cymbals tend to be where bad compression is audible at the most, because of that they are on the "top" of the frequency spectrum.

Further on, I do understand the structure of sound. But I don't sit down and think about this when I'm listening to music. I focus on the result, which I have to do to be able to enjoy it. To me, it doesn't matter how it's done as long as the result is good (having relatively good hearing and absolute pitch I'm quite nitpicky with what I hear). I know when something sounds good or bad, or "as it is supposed to".

apologies for coming across harsher than my intention — i was referring to the entirety of the quote, especially the post you were quoting, and my comments then went beyond where the conversation had stopped at that point.

i do find it a bit displeasing that you'd be accepting of the kind of audible destruction lossy encoding necessitates. how far does it go for you, though? if your first impression of an album is at 320kbps and you like it so much that you listen to it quite often, do you ever upgrade to lossless? what about vice versa?

[ZeppelinDT]

[SlickSy]

I thought this was a thread about a Dream Theater vinyl

[ZeppelinDT]

I thought this was a thread about a Dream Theater vinyl

It was.  But then the internet happened.  :/

[Öxölklöfför]

First of all, I am well aware of that "lossy" compression relies on the removing of information. After all, it's called "lossy" for a reason. I'm also quite aware of how the algorithms to accomplish this works (frequency masking etc.), and I'm also aware of how many encoders destroys the file even further by cutting highs or/and lows. Actually, my first experiences with the mp3 format had a lot to do with finding "the right" encoder that didn't "do to much" to the audio. Even today, 15 years later, there are still encoders that can't do the job correctly. As you say, cymbals tend to be where bad compression is audible at the most, because of that they are on the "top" of the frequency spectrum.

Further on, I do understand the structure of sound. But I don't sit down and think about this when I'm listening to music. I focus on the result, which I have to do to be able to enjoy it. To me, it doesn't matter how it's done as long as the result is good (having relatively good hearing and absolute pitch I'm quite nitpicky with what I hear). I know when something sounds good or bad, or "as it is supposed to".

apologies for coming across harsher than my intention — i was referring to the entirety of the quote, especially the post you were quoting, and my comments then went beyond where the conversation had stopped at that point.

i do find it a bit displeasing that you'd be accepting of the kind of audible destruction lossy encoding necessitates. how far does it go for you, though? if your first impression of an album is at 320kbps and you like it so much that you listen to it quite often, do you ever upgrade to lossless? what about vice versa?

No problem - I guess I was a little harsh too :-) Sorry for that.

To sum it up, I don't accept audible destruction. I do accept lossy encoding though - the differences between them is my main concern in our discussion :-) As long as I can't hear the difference between the to I don't feel it necessary to upgrade. Though, I really like to own a physical product, so usually it ends up with that I get it on CD anyway(or vinyl, for the matter - BCASL is one of the albums i prefer in this format).

[Öxölklöfför]

I thought this was a thread about a Dream Theater vinyl

It was.  But then the internet happened.  :/

Maybe we lost track there for a while...but I guess this isn't the first thread in the world where that has happened ;-)

[FretMuppet]

Anyone in the UK got theirs yet? I never ordered from outside the UK so I don't know how long it should take to arrive...

[Tumdace]

Isnt it not supposed to come out until Nov 25? Why are people expecting it any sooner than that?