Black mysteries

In the Tuesday issue of “Gazeta Wyborcza” a very interesting article appeared about the oldest recording of sound (P. Cieśliński, Nagranie z zaświatów, „Gazeta Wyborcza”, 9 June 2009, p. 17). Although the case was known earlier, such a popularizing look cannot be underestimated. To keep a long story short, there is a new leader in this field, other than Edison’s recording from 1877 (actually this recording was not preserved, the one which is comes from 1888, and is a Handel Oratorio recorded by Edison). American scientists discovered in the French Academy of Sciences archives even older recordings, from the years 1853-54, and another one, from 1860, with a folk tune, that could be played back. And yes, in this case the playback was the main issue. The idea for those recordings came from a Frenchman Éduard-Léon Scott de Martinville, who patented his invention in 1857. On the outside this contraption was similar to Edison’s phonograph: it had a big tube used for recording spoken (or sung) text, and on its narrower end a diaphragm was mounted, which moved a scriber. This stylus drew a line on a smoked (with smoke coming from a kerosene lamp) wax cylinder. This was primitive, but it’s just how this all started. So the recording was not the problem, but playing the recorded sound back. Scott did not think about that, he aimed only to study sound waves and represent them graphically. The Frenchman’s invention was first, but Edison’s marketing skills and cunning resulted in him being awarded as the inventor of mechanical sound recording.

But all this is just the introduction to what I want to talk about. The same article mentions an alternative way of playing the sound back, a “virtual diamond”, which was used by Library of Congress scientists to reveal the mentioned tune, a method, which does not need physical contact between the equipment and the carrier. The signal is recorded, analyzed and decoded in a computer. This reminded me of something, probably long forgotten – analog turntables made by ELP Corporation of Japan, which utilized a laser beam instead of a classic pickup system to read the groove of a vinyl disc. It seems, that such turntables were purchased by the Library of Congress. The idea of those turntables was somewhat similar to a CD, quite simple, but difficult to implement in practice. The disc in this device (ELP Laser Turntable) was placed on a big tray, looking like a giant version of the Stable Platter Mechanism from Pioneer. After closing the tray the disc was scanned by a laser to detect the gaps between the tracks, and the result was displayed just like on a CD player. So the user was able to skip tracks just like on a CD. But still the readout mechanism was most important. The grooves were read by two laser beams. This readout was absolutely analog, no digital processing was employed anywhere in the sound path.

It would seem to be the perfect solution – we could play our beloved jewels and not damage them. But the hype did quiet down and seems to be stone cold now. And this was not even about the sound – as that was fantastic. During one of the last (or the last – I do not remember it anymore) High End Shows in Frankfurt, in the Kempinsky hotel, I had the opportunity to listen to such a turntable for a long time. I left the showroom only to buy another disc in the ballroom and return. They probably had enough of me, but – being Japanese – they were too polite. Frankly speaking I spent about two hours in the ELP room, asking questions and comparing. Because there were two classic, high quality turntables in that room, besides the ELP Laser Turntable. And while those showed something extra here and there, the sound from the ELP seemed phenomenal to me – saturated, full, clean, and free from those distortions, that annoy me so much in turntables. However this method of playback had one big disadvantage – the discs had to be ideally clean. Every pollen, every scratch, every dust was interpreted by the device as sound. Still, a good copy, cleaned before use, sounded splendidly, although the noise level was slightly higher than with a classic pickup. Otherwise the sound was plain brilliant. So why was this not a hit?

One of the answers could be the high price of those units. But is this true? ELP offers three models: LT-1LRC for 10990 USD, LT-1XRC for 13990USD and LT-2XRC for 14990. Compared to other hi-end turntables this is not that much, not by far, especially considered what a powerful tool we get. I think, that the problem is much more complicated, and has nothing to do with sound. I think, that it was because ELP devices resemble more a CD (or rather LaserDisc) than a turntable. And this laser inside… And it does not matter, that this is a true advancement in terms of ergonomics, comfort, not even mentioning care of the vinyl disc. Only personal barriers and superstitions find their place here. Because no vinyl follower can become convinced to digital sound and vice versa. I see this every day, I deal with this during every contact with the Readers, distributors, salesmen, manufacturers, etc. When somebody opts for one solution, then the other does not even exist as an option. Many people own a CD and a turntable, but the Compact Disc player is there for comfort, and the vinyl, celebrated from time to time, is the king, or the opposite, vinyl is there to ennoble its owner in the eyes of his or her acquaintances, while the silver disc remains the medium of choice. So how is it? Who’s right? Is it possible, to find some universal argument?

The simplest solution would be opting for one of those technologies, as that would guarantee the support of that fraction, while the opponents would not even notice what I am writing. But I would not be honest in what I am doing, and the information I try to communicate, would be falsified. The problem is, that for me both formats are cripple, and their flaws irritate me more than stupidity and arrogance of the politicians. I will now try to elaborate this thought a little. I spent my childhood with a turntable at my side, which quickly became mine, and which I used to play my first Depeche Mode LPs (among others). So my first discs were big and black. Later, when I dealt with sound professionally, when I worked as a sound engineer and acoustician, I had the opportunity to work with analog reel-to-reel tape recorders from Studer, and the sound coming from an analog tape crushed even the best vinyl. Unfortunately, even this way of recording had its flaws, like significant noise and not so precise definition of treble and very low frequencies. However besides that, the sound was more natural than the analog disc, which is exceptional in that aspect. And I made also many high resolution recordings in 24/96 and 24/192 formats, but not on a computer, but on external recorders from Korg and Tascam. And that was it – finally most of the vinyl related distortion - like the lack of real definition of bass and not fully satisfying resolution – disappeared. And finally I heard many of the best CD players and could not believe what could be done with that format. Since then I believe firmly, that the digital sound has as much development to go through, as vinyl has already undergone, and only then we can speak about its assets and flaws.

But… Since some time, I think back to the experience with studio analog recordings, and I cannot suppress the irritating thought, that a CD will never be like that! Like I said – things achieved by companies like Jadis, Ancient Audio or Reimyo using the CD are astounding, yet still this is nothing, what would give a feeling of being in “another” world. The sound is incredibly pleasing, precise, even beautiful, but never “true”. This is the reason, that while I use mostly the CDP for testing, as this is easier, and I know it throughout (there are less variables that could influence a listening session), for pleasure I put the vinyl on. And because lately “High Fidelity” started to cooperate with Pure Pleasure, I have the resources to listen to :) It turns out, that this format is closest sonically to the analog tape, and gives most pleasure from listening. I have my complaints, this is not the ideal format, but it is the only one capable to recreate incredibly credible musical event. Compared to it, the CD has a flat sound, deprived from truth and emotion, almost without space. It has also many assets, and when we would analyze them one by one, it would turn out, that the CD is better. But the vinyl conveys more emotions. This is the reason, that, at least in my opinion, it is not easy to decide which is better, so everybody must choose for him or herself. For me it is the direction of the vinyl, but I know, that the digital formats have not yet made their last statement.

Wojciech Pacuła
Editor in chief

Please direct your questions, suggestions, opinions, etc. to:
opinia@highfidelity.pl

WHO ARE WE?
"High Fidelity OnLine" is an internet magazine, published since may 2004, devoted to high quality reproduction of sound and picture. It is a monthly magazine, but the articles are uploaded twice a month - in the beginning of the month and in the middle. The news column is updated on on-going basis, if possible. The main sections are: "Tests", "Events" (interviews, reportages, and similar), "Hyde Park" (user tests, opinions) and "Who asks..." (readers questions and HFOL answers). Articles from earlier issues can be read in the "Archive". Have a nice read!