Hello,Ive tryed a few plugins over my time, but i was wondering your advice on vinyl mastering & dynamics
plugins & why its sounds so good on some vinyl, was it because of the studio hardware or can it be good using software??

 

First and foremost, it's always down to a trained, highly skilled and talented sound engineer, with years of professional experience. The eternal, never-ending argument about whether vinyl sounds better than digital. Digital files are far superior to vinyl.

Jim Anderson, Grammy award-winning recording engineer and professor at New York University’s Clive Davis Institute of Recorded Music:

“I think some people interpret the lack of top end [on vinyl] and interpret an analog type of distortion as warmth. “It’s a misinterpretation of it. But if they like it, they like it. That’s fine.”

Spoiler: Digital Music Files Compared to Vinyl

Digital Music Files Compared to Vinyl

From the (pre-)amplifier of the playback chain, the signal path between records and digital playback is the same. The record is a round, disc-shaped sound carrier made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) in which the sound information is stored in a spiral groove, the flanks of which (in the case of stereo records) depict the sound vibration of the signal (flank writing according to A. Blumlein).

In this respect, not only the elements for sound recording and production of the record influence the sound result, but also the elements of scanning and playback.

Scanning and playback:

The following are relevant for scanning the record information:
- the drive,
- the pickup and tonearm and
- the phono preamplifier

The end result is that the record is a medium that, as the end product of a long chain of production and playback steps with sometimes different technical parameters, does not significantly exceed the following parameters on average:

- Frequency range: 20 - 20,000 Hz (+/- 3 dB)
- Dynamic range: 50 - 60 dB (20 Hz - 20 kHz)
- Wow and flutter: 0.06%
- Distortion: 0.2% (at 1 kHz)
- Crosstalk attenuation: 35 dB (20 Hz - 20 kHz)

The magnitude of this data is more important than the exact values for individual devices. The data is also not always directly comparable. And of course there is a wide range of quality in every device category - both in terms of recording and playback. This is not about the limits of what is technically feasible, but about the data in a representative cross-section of the upper quality segment with which audiophile listeners have or could have experience.

Playback of the digital master:
The digital-analog converter is primarily relevant to the sound when playing back the digital master. The sound properties of the playback software or operating system, which many users like to discuss, are not among the elements that influence the sound - assuming the system settings are correct. The influences of power supply and cable quality, which are also passionately discussed, are undisputed, but are fundamentally not taken into account here (not even on the analog side).

The end result is that the digital master in 96kHz/24Bit format is a medium that, as the end product of a chain of production and playback steps with sometimes different technical parameters, does not significantly exceed the following parameters when listening:

- Frequency range: 5 – 45,000Hz (+0/-3dB)
- Dynamic range: 120 dB (5Hz-45kHz)
- Wow and flutter: 0.0%
- Distortion: 0.003% (at 1kHz)
- Crosstalk attenuation: 100dB (20Hz-20kHz)

Digital music reproduction (with at least 96kHz/24Bit) is therefore far superior to analogue in all the usual technical parameters. In general, it can be said that the far greater limitation of signal fidelity lies on the playback side. The recording side is and has always been of a much higher quality than even the best high-end playback systems have ever been able to reproduce.

Of course, one could argue that the technical parameters cited here for describing the sound quality (frequency range, dynamic range, distortion, etc.) are not sufficient to fully describe the sound quality of a recording and playback system. There is some truth in this argument. There are many examples of systems with the same measurement results but very different sounds. However, the proponents of this argument would then have to make suggestions as to which parameters are not recorded using the usual measurement methods and how they could be recorded.

On the other hand, the preference for record playback may be based to a large extent on a kind of "misunderstanding". Interestingly, it is precisely the technically necessary limitations in record production that are perceived by the human ear as "better" or at least "more pleasant". Although the audiophile tries to get as close as possible to the ideal of the original, in reality, with the preference for record playback he is moving away from the original sound and towards a subjective sound ideal that is perceived as particularly "pleasant" in terms of auditory psychology in the environment of his own listening room. The reasons for this are varied:

- System-related noise in analog technology has a moderate spatial effect and is pleasant

- Harmonic distortions in record playback (even multiples of the respective frequencies), in which artificial overtones are generated (e.g. more brilliance in the high frequencies), sound "livelier" and more lively. Even-numbered partials (especially the first octave) are very popular because they can make sounds appear warmer, but also clearer and more contoured - a main reason why certain tube devices are still popular today.

- Gentler clipping behavior of the record in overdriven recordings leads to a softer, more analogue sound,

- The lower crosstalk attenuation of the analogue sound recording leads to a less accurate, less precise stereo image, which can sound more pleasing (for this reason, for example, some microphone methods are preferred to others, more technically precise ones when recording)

- Dynamic compression makes listening at home much more pleasant. Otherwise, the listener would have to constantly turn the volume up for quiet passages and turn it down again for loud passages.

- The compression effects also give the music more pressure (not unlike mastering in the so-called 'loudness war').
In technical mastering (i.e. the preparation for cutting a record), the highs are often limited to a steep edge at 18 or 19 kHz for technical reasons. As a result, the music then “breathes” a little less, but it appears warmer and more pleasant “analog”.

- Non-linear frequency responses in the components of record playback often lead to (and are often deliberately used by the manufacturers of the corresponding equipment) a tuning of the sound that is pleasant for the listener but alien to the original sound.

This is also confirmed by Jim Anderson, Grammy award-winning recording engineer and professor at New York University’s Clive Davis Institute of Recorded Music: “I think some people interpret the lack of top end [on vinyl] and interpret an analog type of distortion as warmth. “It’s a misinterpretation of it. But if they like it, they like it. That’s fine.”

The higher the quality of the components of the record playback system, the less these sound distortions will be. However, compared to digital playback, record playback requires an extremely large amount of effort in terms of the playback chain in order to keep the physical deficiencies of analog LP playback as small as possible.

Source: https://digital-audio-systems.com/digitale-musikdateien-im-vergleich-zu-vinyl-prox/?lang=en

 

Hey what's up. The best advice/info i can give you is this:
Any master you will do to a musical piece to be sent and cut on vinyl is NOT final. The cutting engineer will decide the final properties of that and this perhaps, is the most fundamental part in the vinyl cutting process. So if, from a producer's perspective, you want your track(s) to sound as you expect them to (given you are familiar with vinyl sound), you have to be in touch with the cutting engineer. In the pre-internet days this could pose a problem due to distances and language barriers etc etc. Now that instant communication is a no brainer, any producer that wants to have his music on vinyl should really be in close co-ordination with the cutting engineer, as they will re-master the final master to fit the standards of vinyl cutting, standards which are a handful and very individual to the particular medium if i may say so.
Beware that there is good sounding vinyl and there is best sounding vinyl. As a producer to get to the latter after following the fundamntal rule of being in contact with the cutting engineer, just do the best you can for the final sound. It doesn't matter what you will use. If you can have a top notch mix it is always the best, because then the master will be an easy peasy few tweaks. With these said keep in mind two things. Knowing that your music will be cut on vinyl thus re-mastered anyway, just don't overdo it with extremes on bass and highs. And on the other hand and also very important don't cripple your music either with narrowing frequency range and stereo field etc. If your final track(s) are beyond repair for the cutting process, the cutting engineer will tell you so and will give you advice on what to do to get a better "master" so they can provide you with the best sounding possible record.

While this may be technically true, there is much more to vinyl than what the highly esteemed Jim Anderson describes. To me it is not that vinyl is warmer, it's just that digital can be pretty much "lifeless", lacking the imperfection that can be thought as relevant to humans as the far-from-perfect living beings we are, each and every one of us. High end digital audio can sound so precise that it tends to be annoying sometimes lol.
So, Vinyl is a way of life. The feeling of playing it and listening to it, is second to none and is a larger than life, religious experience to those who enjoy it. And to them, vinyl transcends its technical limitations by sounding as humanized as possible.
So, whatever anyone may argue about the merits of digital, vinyl will never die because it still keeps gaining new fans, now having surpassed the sales of cd annually. So yeah, Jim Anderson says what he says at his 70something year old. But ask him what made him who he came to be. What were his humble beginnings as radio dj. It's easy to get lost in the search for perfection and never look back,"left to your own devices".
Now, I grew up in an era when there were 3 records in the stores that sold stereo equipment. The Dark Side Of The Moon, Oxygen, and a little later Man Machine. A little further on Sade's Diamond Life and MJ's Thriller joined the ranks of "records good and popular enough to sell a stereo". So what you had, is petty costing vinyl albums actually "selling" equipment worth 100 and in some occasions 1000 times more their worth. In the 70s and the 80s (and perhaps a good part of the 90s), having a good stereo system was actually a priority not a commodity for any respectable family home. Fast forward 50-40 years later to now and hi-fi is just a niche market. Just an indication that with all the high end digital audio, super audio cd, receivers with internet connectivity to streaming services etc, as subjective as this may sound, the industry has failed to prove that humans actually like digital better. Even more, the constantly declining sales of digital singles and albums in favor of free youtube and spotify streams, shows -at least to my humble opinion- that younger generations do not perceive listening to music as a sole satisfying experience as the old and some of the newer vinyl lovers do, but prefer it as a background underlying "carpet" to whatever else they 're doing on their phones or comps etc. Hence most music has been degraded to what we used to call "elevator music" back in the day, no matter if it's the poppiest Kate Perry or the deepest Pink Floyd or whatever. Attention span from a scale of 1 to 10 equals 1.
Guys like Jim Anderson don't listen to much music nowadays. It is inevitable that most studio guys' listening repertoire is limited to what they produce and/or mix because it takes up a significant portion of their lives. So it is good to take a break and be a "kid" again, listen to something new that may be exciting without the professional 's bias, because it might remind to guys like Anderson that music is about the feelings it invokes and not about perfection. In fact, it is the imperfection to the art that is admirable. Ergo, vinyl is still around.
Much love and thanks for listening.
All the best

 

Last edited: Nov 16, 2024

All records that you buy should be digitized first because sometimes the stylus makes scratches.

I used to throw a lot of parties - I even got burn holes and lots of scratches on my LPs from my guests who played the records.
I was lucky enough to have a big record shop where I worked (MIchelle) where you could get everything. Back then, people read in analogue form, i.e. in paper form, there were fanzines and great underground labels and you listened to radio shows like BBC Jon Peel Session or Grenzwellen by Eckie Stieg, which always introduced bands, and then you bought the records. If you didn't have any money, your friends would make cassette tapes.

Since the invention of the World Wide Web, CD ROMs, laser technology and MP3 and today Spotify and YouTube, the world of music has become even bigger. It is growing every day because people can make beats and songs at home on their PC or on the train and upload their creative songs directly to the internet using wireless technology.

The next big thing is AI ???
The human creative spirit is infinite but human life is finite.

 

Tokyo Dawns Labs have some stuff for this, I believe. I'm ignorant about the whole vinyl process, so I can't tell you if I think their vinyl dedicated programs are good or bad.

 

FabFilter

 

Quality Control.

 

When was this beat 16 we never got invited... you talking about spliff burns on the vinyl or have you just gooogled it..

 

The previous text was written by me. That was in the 90s, I was about 30 years old when we met regularly to drink. Back then there was beer and hand-rolled cigarettes. Once you reached a certain level of alcohol, the music got louder, the coordination of the muscles and nervous system got worse and the person responsible for the music was already a bit drunk and the embers would fall on the record.

All the scratches on the records were pretty annoying. At some point I downloaded all my records digitally from Spotify. That's the nice thing about MP3s, nothing gets damaged.

 

Get a good audio engineering handbook (modern recording techniques, the newest version - by runstein) and follow the guide lines therein for what you on the studio side need to do to prepare audio tracks for vinyl duplication.

It used to be, and I have done quite a few of them, the master you hand in to the vinyl house consisted of two 1/4" or 1/2" reels of tape (one for disc side-one the other for disc side-two, or more if you're doing an album with more than one disc) with paper leadered heads, tails and track "tween's". You have track sheets included with any special playback and/or processing instructions (like noise reduction type, tape bias, etc)...

Nowdays it consists of handing over a SSD, hard drive, or USB stick. You'll find that on the studio side of the coin for vinyl production the studio side do's and dont's that must be adhered to are universal even from the old days. For the most part once your job on the studio side has been completed, you hand your stuff to the person running the cutting lathe and the rest is pretty much up to them. The task of cutting good vinyl masters is very specialized and you should exercise due diligence and research when selecting a vinyl mastering house to do your master disc. Because the telling tale of a great sounding vinyl master comes down to who, how, and on what that master disc was cut. This is why there are few good vinyl mastering houses to choose from. They get their rep's from how well their masters disc's hold up in duplication.

My software of choice for completing the studio master prep tasks == Steinberg WAVELAB. period.

 

Last edited: Nov 16, 2024

Currently some of the best inbox tools to optimize music for the vinyl format are Tokyo Dawn filters (Infrasonic, Ultrasonic, Elliptical, Arbiter ), Limiter6 HF limiter (kindd of a Neumann lathe acceleration limiter) you can also try Simulathe to see what problems your master might have as it give you some clues on what should be tamed. If you're looking for louder cuts avoid out of phase signals overall and specially bellow ~150hz, keep the high end smooth and natural sounding, harsh digital sound transforms to distortion when transferred to vinyl, look out for sibilances, hats and spikes in this region.

 

Everything you said here resonated with me on so many levels. I actually can sum it up in one sentence:-

When Digital was brought in to replace vinyl, everyone wanted that crystal clear sound. Now though, Digital is SO crystal clear that producers want analogue tape plugins (I still have an original real to real) among others to add that grit, soul and life that digital just doesn't give.

Why? Because perfection is something you strive for until you have it. Then? You realise perfection isn't perfection at all.

(OK, maybe more than just one sentence)
------------------------------------------

You have a point that scratches can ruin a good listening experience, but on the flip side, there are plugins that give that scratchiness the flavour so many people now crave.

 

Last edited: Nov 17, 2024

Yeah, they are very unsouvereign.
No one want's to have a scratch randomly appearing in his song.

This "creating imperfections" (one can also say creating nonsense) is just a phase some people have about the need to fiddle around all day long not knowing what they actually want. Technically they could also just leave it - psychologically they can not.

 

if it was annoying then why do they have vinyl fx plugins to replicate the good old sound.

 

I have some experience in mastering for vinyl...

First of all, knowing how vinyl is cut is key to understanding the principles of how and why certain decisions are made in the mastering process.

The groove cut by the lathe is 3-dimensional and is essentially a spiral waveform. The width of the cut will depend on the frequency, with higher frequencies being more closely spaced than low frequencies and the amplitude by the depth of cut. The channel information is cut into either side of the "valley" of the groove. Drastic amplitude/width excursions will result in the up/down, left/right groove movement being excessive which can cause skips. This can be counteracted to some degree by cutting at a relatively lower amplitude and/or reducing the play length but it's best avoided if you want to maximise play length and playback to be as loud as possible.

Also, the position of the groove on the vinyl affects the quality of reproduction. The outer groove is cleaner as there is more area per rotation to contain the recorded information than the inner groove which effectively has half the capacity available, causing high frequency loss plus additional distortion.

The speed of the playback is another important factor. 45rpm is superior to 33rpm for the same reason as 30ips is superior to 15ips in tape - more information being passed to the pickup for the given period of time. The obvious tradeoff with speed is that the program length needs to be reduced in order to keep the groove far enough apart to not collide on successive rotations.

There are two methods of cutting - Direct metal mastering and lacquer, which have different outcomes. DMM is cheaper, brighter and quieter with less surface noise than lacquer which is warmer and louder but holds less duration. The approach to mastering needs to take into consideration the choice of cutting.

Plugins for vinyl mastering are the exact same plugins used for digital mastering. What differs, to some extent, is the way they are used. There are certain things that can be done digitally that can cause problems with cutting vinyl. If these issues are not dealt with effectively then it could result in the cutting engineer having to make additional sonic changes or even in the worst case scenario outright rejecting the master.

Whilst the cutting engineer (these guys are experienced mastering engineers) is actually the best placed individual to make many of these decisions, it pays to be aware of the pitfalls ahead of delivery so the result is consistent with what is delivered and to avoid last minute decisions taken at the lathe.

The key issues are:

1. Phase Correlation. Out of phase material cannot be reproduced effectively on vinyl so any psychoacoustic techniques for creating width can end up with a master not being cut correctly due to lathe excursion, resulting in skips - The lower the frequency, the worse it gets.

2. No stereo bass under 100 Hz, EVER (that can extend upwards to 120 or 150, even all the way to 300 if the material allows). Not doing so can result in the same issues as above. A slightly more complex approach is to mono everything under 100 Hz and attenuate the sides a little under 150 Hz, which leaves some stereo information intact but not enough to cause issues. (My personal opinion is that this also applies to digital masters but there are those who will disagree and there are circumstances where it is inappropriate - Wide guitars is one, solo pianos another and there are also "special effects" that are appropriate for cinematic sound design but are largely pointless for music. The biggest exception is orchestral music but that is so highly specialised that it's pretty much irrelevant to this discussion.)

3. Cut under 20 Hz, better under 30. Vinyl is capable of reproducing these frequencies but there's a huge trade-off. The more lower frequencies there are, the quieter the vinyl has to be cut and less effective duration available. Again a combination of filters can provide the best results - 12dB high pass at 20 Hz plus a gentle 6 dB high pass or shelf at 30 Hz can be optimum

4. Excessive extremely high frequencies can be a big issue as they aren't reproduced accurately on vinyl and can result in unpleasant and unwanted distortion. l would say it's always wise to use a 6 dB low pass or shelf at around 16 kHz (a bell set at the very top of the frequency range, adjusting the depth of cut and Q to taste, can also work very well for this).

5. As is the case with the previous example, too much high frequency content can result in distortion. We're talking anywhere from 3 kHz upwards. Keeping the highs subdued will result in a cleaner and LOUDER cut. Sibilance control is particularly important - Excessive sibilance will destroy a vinyl master. Any component that can create sibilance such as vocals, cymbals, percussion and resonant synths need to be carefully controlled to avoid problems.

6. Distortion. It can't be emphasised enough that the excessive high frequency harmonics created by many types of distortion are not going to work on vinyl (it doesn't work digitally either in my opinion but they can at least be reproduced accurately). Introducing this type of distortion at any stage, never mind the mastering stage, is a tricky business and is best applied sparingly. To be clear, we're not particularly talking about the type of distortion that would be introduced via a typical metal guitar for instance. Most of the meat of that is under 3 kHz, generally attenuated above and pretty much non-existent above 12 kHz - We're talking harmonic coloration effects where large amounts of high harmonics are introduced.

7. High transient content that is hard panned can cause similar issues to phase, creating very wide, fast and deep grooves that can only be controlled by reducing overall stereo width and cutting at a lower amplitude. Narrow those hard panned percussive elements up and/or squash the transients slightly.

8. Compression / Limiting. Controlling dynamics is more important in vinyl mastering than digital as the available dynamic range is lower and this provides a more even cut with reduced head excursions. Leave plenty of headroom, there's absolutely no point in hitting 0dBFS for a vinyl master, -6 to -3 dBFS is good and gives the cutting engineer plenty of space to work, never exceed -1 dBFS. A combination of peak reduction and low level compression will work best for this task. Peak limiting should be kept to a minimum, if not avoided entirely and clipping, just forget it, that'll actually result in a quiter and distorted cut. An average of -18 to -14 dBRMS is a good target to aim for.

9. Making digital masters at the highest resolution possible should go without saying. A little known fact is that some lathes are able to cut at half speed. ie. Cutting at 16.66 or 22.5 for 33.33 or 45 rpm playback. The slower lathe rate means that the difficult to cut high frequencies are halved, leading to less distortion in the finished product. Higher resolution means that the high frequencies remain well above nyquist when slowed down so no odd quantization errors become audible.

Anyhow, my last opinion. Vinyl sucks, digital is better...

 

Last edited: Nov 17, 2024

Capstan – an end to Wow and Flutter
celemony.com/en/capstan

Happily zipped in HDD since it came to sis..
(used to be super overpriced iirc)

 

Last edited: Nov 17, 2024

Otoh, if what you want is to Prepare a Master for Vinyl..

HP Filter
DC Bias filter - (Important)

Maybe try to control Dynamics so the range falls within the limits of what Vinyl can reproduce..

 

This is probably the most comprehensive guide of "dos and dont's" the OP could ever have. And in contrast at all the misinformation that there is out there in the interwebs, this is fucking on point, all of it. Kudos. I almost put a winner tag there, if it wasn't for the last phrase haha. Sent you a heart nevertheless lol. But i explained how i feel about vinyl so i don't mind, i hear the same phrase very often by fellow "digital djs" that can't make people enjoy and dance even if they were all on multiple Es. Then they get their lesson by the old sod yours truly who tears the place down with what evidently sucks, vinyl. And those djs who just a couple of hours ago were "meh", start rolling the joints and shots one after the other. But all that is another story and bragging also sucks, so i might suck too hahaha.
So i can agree, purely from an audio perspective digital realistically is far superior. But nothing is black and white in the real world. And i think deep down you know, that vinyl releases do add prestige to an artist's resume, especially if the artist's music targets groups that will be interested in vinyl. Hence the Cure's new album (no 1 in many countries incl. UK) was released in 3 different vinyl editions with the first being a half speed master by Abbey Road's Miles Showell.
Again, on behalf of everyone interested, thank you for taking the time to write all that.
Cheers

 

Last edited: Nov 17, 2024

Right but that is mostly for digital transfer of 7" records that are not well centered, eccentric hole, I have a lot of experience in listening to poor vinyl printings.

 

Yeah, I'm sure you recognise that I put that last sentence there as a bit of a wind up. Technically it's a true statement of course but it doesn't mean to say that vinyl isn't a valid medium for music, there's more to the story than pure fidelity and I wouldn't have written any of that if I didn't think so.

I worked as a DJ/promoter many years ago, first running an alternative night in the late 80s to mid 90s. I (we) then moved on to running techno/trance parties in the mid 90s to mid 00s, which we ran a label alongside. I actually dropped out of the DJing bit at the parties after a couple of years because basically I wasn't the best mixer (kinda ironic for a mixing/mastering engineer which was my main job) and there were plenty of others around who were way better, which meant I could concentrate on taking drugs and dancing (I was still the promoter of course).

So, I totally get the things you're saying. All the best techno DJs worked from vinyl back then, doing things that I couldn't even comprehend, hence me bowing out. It was a little different for psytrance, digital was always a better medium for that due to the fidelity, plus a bigger majority were playing their own self-produced tunes.

I've always maintained that the primary skill of a DJ is in fact "taste". No taste and your fucked, no matter whether you can mix standing on your head whilst juggling discs (or USB sticks these days) with your feet. No taste transcribes to an empty dancefloor. Banging tunes and the odd dodgy transition will be forgotten about in moments. Mess the mix up with bad tunes and the people that were dancing for the last five minutes waiting for a more interesting event will take it as a cue to go the bar/toilet/chill out room and soon enough everyone's gone home.

 

Last edited: Nov 18, 2024 at 1:59 PM