You can't use your analogue rip as a benchmark. From SoX - Sound eXchange...Engonoceras wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 3:50 pm OK, Ian's is tonally closer to my rip but still a bit muted sounding. Paul's is very muffled compared to mine and Ian's.
Honestly I would just ditch the De-Emph script or whatever and do it by ear because the other way is simply not accurate according to my samples. The results speak for themselves.
"A typical CD deemphasis circuit of the time might be out by as much as a dB."
So de-emph filters are regarded as more accurate.From SHF...
"To my ears SoX is the most transparent way to do it. Even better than any CD player's de-emphasis that I have heard."
You suggest the uploads using Sox are closer to yours than mine.From SHF...
"The Foobar IIR filter also uses SoX and I agree it is great."
...and...
"In the wiki - http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Pre-emphasis - the following is stated:
"WaveEmph, SoX, and all of the foobar2000 plug-ins have been tested and produce nearly identical output. The differences are minuscule and inaudible."
Conclusions:
Any differences in results using plug-ins are NOT down to one filter being more accurate than others.
So any CD rips using the leading digital de-emph filters will be accurately de-emph'd. So we must assume any difference in various digitally de-emph'd rips must lie elsewhere. Different pressings? There were at least 2 variations of the japanese pre-emphasised Abbey Road (I may well try using foobar de-emph on the raw upload from yymca6 and see if it produces a better sounding result).
Analogue rips can not be guaranteed to be quite as accurate. Because of possible inaccuracy in the players de-emph circuit as noted in the discussions on SoX - Sound eXchange but also let's remember there a small degree of amplification by the player and (if recorded thru an amplifier) a further degree of amplification by the pre-amp. All CD players (if using the analogue outputs) and all amplifiers sound different so analogue rips will sound different depending on the equipment used. Basically a further EQ difference is introduced. So we cannot use an analogue rip as a benchmark.
"Honestly I would just ditch the De-Emph script or whatever and do it by ear because the other way is simply not accurate according to my samples."...No! That is clearly not correct as demonstrated by above. If it produces a result you like as your listening copy great. But not as an accurate rip of the original source.