[S Clark]

 

Something something double blind testing.

[G Georgopoulos]

How do vinylphiles tolerate all the surface noise and lack of dynamic range?  And why would you limit yourselves to such a small/hard to find/expensive range of recordings?

hi jlm

surface noise turn it up and you wont hear it,dynamic range turn it up and you'll have to your heart's desire,limited recordings find your way to 8.000.000 songs.

digital may be better,but vinyl is closing in... cheers...

[vinyl_lady]

Although I've never thought I had great hearing, my opinion of vinyl hasn't changed in 30 years (and I wear protection).  How do vinylphiles tolerate all the surface noise and lack of dynamic range?  And why would you limit yourselves to such a small/hard to find/expensive range of recordings?

I have between 2,500 and 3,000 LPs, from the late 50s through today. I don't call that a small range of recordings. Since I only listen to rock and pop (classic, folk, alternative, blues, country, bluegrass, progressive, psychedlic), I am able to find almost everything I want to listen to on vinyl. I also listen to CDs when there is no vinyl, but that is extremely rare these days. Virtually every new album in the genres I listen to is released on vinyl, sometimes before any digital version is released. When I'm  cooking or cleaning or working in the yard or entertaining a large group, I will stream from iTunes through Apple TV connected to my OPPO 105D. Every song in my iTunes library was ripped bit for bit from a CD using AIFF, so it sounds pretty good. But when it is time for serious listening, vinyl is the"drug" of choice for me. I prefer the sound and I am not  giving up any audible dynmaic range. And like I said earlier, if you take are of your records and invest in a good RCM, surface noise is minimal.

Vinyl is not for everyone, but for those of us that do prefer vinyl, it is worth the  time and ritual. I have heard really god digital and I have heard really god vinyl. To each there own.

[Art_Chicago]

Although I've never thought I had great hearing, my opinion of vinyl hasn't changed in 30 years (and I wear protection).  How do vinylphiles tolerate all the surface noise and lack of dynamic range?  And why would you limit yourselves to such a small/hard to find/expensive range of recordings?

That is why I hate this topic. Again.

Most (>95%) of the digital recordings have the dynamic range less than 20 dB thanks to brilliant mastering.

Vinyl can go up to 65. All depend on the sound engineer.

[S Clark]

That is why I hate this topic. Again.

Most (>95%) of the digital recordings have the dynamic range less than 20 dB thanks to brilliant mastering.

Vinyl can go up to 65. All depend on the sound engineer.

DBX encoded vinyl... max of 120 dB dynamic range!

[RPM123]

Well, here are a couple of links to some informative reading. The Wikipedia one is way long. Enjoy your respective media! 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_analog_and_digital_recording

http://www.analogplanet.com/content/does-vinyl-have-wider-dynamic-range-cds-heres-some-math#IvhgVahfE5CPQSRG.97

[Art_Chicago]

DBX encoded vinyl... max of 120 dB dynamic range!

do you mind share a link about dbx?

[Phil A]

do you mind share a link about dbx?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dbx_(noise_reduction)

[Phil A]

btw - I don't have vinyl playback for almost 35 years as I only had 30-40 pristine albums (vs. those played over the years on lousy equipment) like MoFis, Sheffield Labs, etc., when I got out of it.  I have listened to both vinyl and digital.  My opinion is that good vinyl the majority of times will sound better than equivalent CD playback.  When it comes to hi-rez it's more of a mixed bag.  There's so much dependent on the quality of mixing and mastering.  If there was nothing above CD quality playback at this point in time, I'd probably consider some sort of vinyl playback rig.  I just can't justify the hassle when I've heard high quality digital playback that clearly sounds as good if not better.  Much will also be dependent on one's playback chain.  Some of the people here for example indicating one format sounds better than the other likely have a far better playback chain in one format.  For example comparing something of CD quality on a decent high end CD player vs. a vinyl playback chain including a $7k+ phono preamp probably is not a comparison on equal footing.  I also have found that I prefer my music server/DAC to any CD player I've personally heard (and that includes $20k+ CD players).  To me it's about enjoyment of the music and all formats can be enjoyed.

[stereocilia]

Sometimes I wonder if the ability to instantly access a quintillion songs is always an advantage. The  "tyranny of choice" effect can take hold, tempting me flip through songs like tv channels when nothing is on because everything is on. Maybe with records the sound itself really is more involving.  Then again,  maybe some of our brains conflate musical involvement with how involved getting up off our ass to change the music is. Records might sound so much better if they were less convenient. Like, if they took up way more space and needed to be rewound. Oh...wait...

[jimtranr]

Not a hoax to these ears, assuming that the analog mastering and pressing were done with at least a nod to decent production values. For me, it's not nostalgia--though I started in this hobby/addiction/obsession (take your pick) with mono LP's on a Webcor portable back in the...well, let's just stipulate that George Lucas would say "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away." Nor is it a self-righteousness derived from the strictly-observed devotional performance of the ongoing rituals of record cleaning, azimuth checking, platter leveling, etc., etc., required to keep ticks, pops, and other perverse vinyl-gnawing demons at bay. No, the closer is what's already been mentioned as the organic flow and timbral rightness of vinyl that render it the "serious listening" format that gets the most playing time here...and that judgment applies to both Mrs. and me.

But I have to admit that vinyl's primacy here has just been challenged with the recent acquisition of a reconditioned--oh, wait a minute. That reel-to-reel deck (that's going to require a strict maintenance regimen of its own) is analog, too, isn't it.       

[FullRangeMan]

Although I've never thought I had great hearing, my opinion of vinyl hasn't changed in 30 years (and I wear protection).  How do vinylphiles tolerate all the surface noise and lack of dynamic range?  And why would you limit yourselves to such a small/hard to find/expensive range of recordings?

BTW the max theoretical dynamic range from vinyl are 65dB.

[FullRangeMan]

I have between 2,500 and 3,000 LPs, from the late 50s through today. I don't call that a small range of recordings.

3K LPs! This is a lot of space and weight.
You should live in a huge mansion or a large wharehouse.
I would not want to live on the floor under your apartment.

[Phil A]

3K LPs! This is a lot of space and weight.
You should live in a huge mansion or a large wharehouse.
I would not want to live on the floor under your apartment.

Yes lots of weight and space.  I remember dragging a bunch off to college 45 years ago (when I was 3 years old of course ) and the bus driver could not move my suitcase from the underneath luggage space when we got there.  He wanted to know if I had bricks in there.  As it is my other media discs, although much lighter take up lots of room and probably at some point down the road, I'll have to make a decision on what to do to expand my storage capabilities.

[DaveC113]

I only have digital, the big problem with vinyl for me is the cost of the equipment and of the albums. I have heard vinyl that I prefer over any digital I've ever heard but it's expensive. I think rtr is even better but the cost of tapes is ridiculous. So I'll stick to digital until I have a lot more cash in the bank.

[FullRangeMan]

RTR also have limited useful life.
Do you know how many times one can use it?

[dminches]

RTR also have limited useful life.
Do you know how many times one can use it?

I don't agree.  I have reels that are over 30 years old and they still play perfectly well.  If you played the same reel every day I would assume at some point the dropouts would be bothersome.  But otherwise my reels will out live me.

Why do people have to have come to a conclusion on what's better, analog vs. digital?  There is no answer to that. For many of us each format serves a useful purpose in our music loving hobby.  While analog (tape and vinyl) is my preferred source, I thoroughly love digital too.

[FullRangeMan]

I think Iam this kind of guy, as I wear out various LPs and even this CD by listen them quite often:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r12RtLdt82A

[Guy 13]

Hi all,
analogue or digital ?
There's room and lovers for each format.
However, I would think that the ones that prefer digital is for convenience, room saving
and quality, anyway, that's waht they say,
because there's always looking for better sound and maybe never get satisfied
with their search for the ultimate quality, maybe sound quality even better
than live - studio recording.
That's my opinion for what's it's worth. 

Guy 13

[Guy 13]

I think Iam this kind of guy, as I wear out various LPs and even this CD by listen them quite often:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r12RtLdt82A

Hi FullRangeMan,
I don't get it ????
What's you point with that link - video ???? 
I've listen to it several time to see - hear
if I missed something, but... ????

Guy 13