Dubstepforum.com

i'd say both, i really want to invest in a seperate CD deck to go with my turntables becasue of the ridiculous amount of mp3's i have. plus i cant afford to spend 30-40 quid on a dub of my own tunes each time.

Mixin with vinyl and just generally have sound under your fingers is a strange but amazing feeling. compare that to using CD decks then vinyl wins hands down.

Depends on your dubget... if it's low, you can buy cheap but nonetheless fine turntables like the TT500 + a Torque.
Otherwise you should get Techs + a Serato.


Seriously tho, considering that for a similar budget you can have cd decks or vinyl decks + a digital interface, you really need to ask yourself: "do I want that unique feeling of spinning plates combined with the endless possibilities of digital? Or just the second part?"

EDIT: I wouldn't worry about scratches on the 12s and crashing hds. Be nice with your records and backup your mp3s on dvds you'll only use in case of emergency and everything will be fine.

yeh i can see where your coming from, is it still like possible to add effects and remixes whilst on serato

eg: the stuff you can do on say cdj 400s like cue points etc

badger wrote: the sound quality with both CDs and mp3s is vastly inferior to vinyl though and this is the main reason most big DJs use vinyl. the amount of compression required to fit music on CDs or mp3s means that the sound quality is a lot poorer and this is particularly noticable on big systems

I'm no extpert, but I don't know how it can be vastly inferiour to be honest. What gets ont he vinyl has been sequenced with a digital sequencer and saved as a WAV afterall. It gets convereted to analogue when it gets cut onto the vinyl, I do see how that's vastly more magical than being convereted to analgue before it pumps out your speakers?

And on bg systems when it's loud, the fine details of sound quality are less noticable I think. I've played tunes that I know needed work on the mixdown and they don't sound noticably unfinished in a club, compared to at modest volumes in the bedroom.

saying it's vastly inferior may be overexaggerating a bit...

there's been threads about this in the past but i couldn't find it with a search. from what i remember CDs are eight times more compressed in sound quality than vinyl is which is clearly going to cause a decrease in quality. this is particularly noticable in the low end which is obviously important in dubstep. if you listen to the same track on CD and vinyl it's instantly noticable that it lacks a certain warmth

i'm not saying that sound quality is necessarily the most important consideration to take into account but it's definitely something worth bearing in mind

It's mainly high frequencies that noticeably deteriorate when you convert to mp3. I've played after laptop DJ's before and the sound quality really was shockingly different though; maybe it was just a coincedence, but I personally will stick to vinyl.

asusu wrote:It's mainly high frequencies that noticeably deteriorate when you convert to mp3.

- this is why you get a phasey kinda sound (aliasing).

badger wrote: from what i remember CDs are eight times more compressed in sound quality than vinyl is which is clearly going to cause a decrease in quality.

but vinyl is alalogue? how can you measure the amount of information in it compared to a CD? that dosen't really make sense to me although feel fre to explain how you get tha figure. But of course it's got more information, it's analogue.

what im saying is, the 0's and 1'a on a cd dissapear once your D/A converters make the signal analogue and spit it into your amp.

I don't see how this is so different to converting what is already a bunch of 1's and 0's into analogue before being cut to vinyl?

they both start of as a 1's and 0'1 and they both end up becoming an anlogue signal.

here, here, flippo

100% agree

a cd is what takes your tune to the mastering house anyways! you can only put on wax what arrives at the mastering house on a cd!

what badger is probably tryina say is that you cannot burn a 24 bit wav onto cd, only a 16 bit, whereas a 24 -> 36 bit wav can be put on vinyl
if ur superman ears can tell the diff in the club i want an MRI of them please

Spherix wrote:
what badger is probably tryina say is that you cannot burn a 24 bit wav onto cd, only a 16 bit, whereas a 24 -> 36 bit wav can be put on vinyl
if ur superman ears can tell the diff in the club i want an MRI of them please

and yet I was told to only give a 16 bit to be cut to wax because 24 was only really better in theory? Go figure.

one thing nobody seems to have pointed out is that the best way by far to find out about dubstep is to go to a record shop where the new releases are on the walls and the people behind the counter know EVERYTHING! on the internet you can buy WAVs of tunes you already know about about
but nobody's got a wall covered in the best new releases for you to listen to.

vinyl is actually 4 times 'better' than cd - it can carry frequencies up to around 80 khz. this is only going to be reproduced if you record using a pro tools hd rig or onto tape in the first place. the human hearing range extends up to 20khz (which deteriorates as you get older), and cd's can reproduce 22,050 hz. audiophiles claim that the harmonics in the sound that we can't hear compliment what we can hear... tbh, when you're playing in a club, that makes no difference. Still, there is no doubt that cd's sound cold and clinical, whereas vinyl has what can only be described as 'warmth'. bass does sound much better on vinyl.

bjackman wrote:one thing nobody seems to have pointed out is that the best way by far to find out about dubstep is to go to a record shop where the new releases are on the walls and the people behind the counter know EVERYTHING! on the internet you can buy WAVs of tunes you already know about about
but nobody's got a wall covered in the best new releases for you to listen to.

promos & white labels as well...

think ill go for the vinyl option satarting off and then compliment the set up with serato when i can actually 'run'

asusu wrote:vinyl is actually 4 times 'better' than cd - it can carry frequencies up to around 80 khz. this is only going to be reproduced if you record using a pro tools hd rig or onto tape in the first place. the human hearing range extends up to 20khz (which deteriorates as you get older), and cd's can reproduce 22,050 hz. audiophiles claim that the harmonics in the sound that we can't hear compliment what we can hear... tbh, when you're playing in a club, that makes no difference. Still, there is no doubt that cd's sound cold and clinical, whereas vinyl has what can only be described as 'warmth'. bass does sound much better on vinyl.

heh thanks for explaining with actual facts, i was just reproducing what i could remember from what other people have said in the past (and not doing it very well )

hooray for accuracy!

I use Serato, i think its the best of both vinyl and digital mixing. Had CDJs before but wasnt too keen.

does serato function pretty much like a cdj? and other digital software eg being able to produce over the top?

asusu wrote:vinyl is actually 4 times 'better' than cd - it can carry frequencies up to around 80 khz. this is only going to be reproduced if you record using a pro tools hd rig or onto tape in the first place. the human hearing range extends up to 20khz (which deteriorates as you get older), and cd's can reproduce 22,050 hz. audiophiles claim that the harmonics in the sound that we can't hear compliment what we can hear... tbh, when you're playing in a club, that makes no difference. Still, there is no doubt that cd's sound cold and clinical, whereas vinyl has what can only be described as 'warmth'. bass does sound much better on vinyl.

i was under the impression freqs were generally rolled off from 30 down at mastering
jtransition?