[Rischa]

A rant:

I just got into vinyl a couple months ago at the age of 33. The more I listen to records, the more peeved I become that my generation was deprived of them. People are 100% correct when they say vinyl is richer, fuller, and more dynamic than digital; but more to the point, vinyl has texture and presence, two things I've never heard from digital.

Nobody had vinyl when I was a teenager in the 90's. Not only that, but we all actually believed CD's were better. I would have been all over vinyl back then had I known better.

I'm curious what made CD the dominant format. Was it that recording companies had a bunch of money invested in the technology, and therefore promoted digital more? Was it just the convenience of CD's that made them more popular?

It definitely wasn't sound quality. As I write this, Steely Dan Aja is spinning on my tt, a record which just yesterday I pulled from a dusty cardboard box and paid $.99 for. Needless to say, it's beating the CD version to a bloody pulp. This is one of my all-time favorite classic-rock albums that I've heard many times before (or thought I had until now), so if anyone was going to hear a difference between the two formats from this recording, it'd be me.

Well, that's it. Just a quick rant about how my generation was deprived of vinyl. The world should be so lucky to have my problems, no?

My system:
Rega RP-3 with Elys2 cartridge
Emotiva USP-1 preamp
Odyssey Khartago Extreme amp
Bluejeans speaker cables
Tekton Lores
Happy ears

[Hank]

My opinion is that the record companies determined that the manufacturing cost of a CD would be far lower than the labor intensive record pressing mfg cost and therefore, they announced to the public that CD's would be great and not subject to scratches, pops, ticks and would be far more convenient that vinyl.  One thing most people have forgotten is that they also told us that CD's would be less expensive than vinyl after volume production kicked in.  That lie I have not forgotten or forgiven.

[Indiansprings]

The 20 year cycle.
CD was the new easy, small format. Everything was getting smaller. Then China, cheaper, more profit was in there as well.

[wilsynet]

Poor turntable setup, a worn out needle, the clicks and pops of vinyl together with marketing that digital was of course better, and that you'd have perfect sound forever contributed to the view that CDs were inherently better.

An unsophisticated buyer, with a bad stereo might mistake the thin and edgy sound of CDs at the time as having superior resolution.  The late 80s and throughout the 90s, electronics were getting cheap.  It still happens today, where the average consumer is quite happy with the sound of their iPod and their tinny headphones.  Convenience is to be praised ahead of sound quality.

Having said all of that, I should also say that I've given in to the dark side.  For the time being, I've given up my vinyl rig for the convenience of ripped CDs, a Mac Mini and a PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC.  And a very good quality solid state integrated (LFD) has replaced my tube separates.

No doubt I'll restore the vinyl rig at some point, but with a small place and just the life I have right now, I found spinning vinyl to be a rare thing.  Even so, I think really good digital is likely to be nearly as good as pretty good vinyl, but so much of it depends on the quality of the recording and mastering process.  For example, I have found very little difference between my Norah Jones CDs and my Norah Jones vinyl, but Simon and Garfunkle's Bridge Over Troubled Waters, and various Duke Ellington and Dave Brubeck records are clearly superior to their CD counterparts.

[Wayner]

I think what is witnessed is merely a circumstance of time. In the early 80s when CDs popped up, they where attractive, because there were no more pops, clicks or worries about the evil scratches, no TT to set-up as mentioned. The early CD cases even made claims that they were "convenient", and certainly smaller then a record, so they were compact. It wasn't some giant plot by the audio industry, as some speculate, rather more a "changing of the guard".

While the performance of the CD has improved with better transports, DACs and higher speed electronics, so has vinyl with improved stylus, cartridges and TTs.

Equipment has gotten better and better. The birthing process of superior multi-track recording was also underway, so you can throw that technology into the mix.

Wayner

[Kinger]

I'm 38 and like you picked up a TT just a few months back for the simple reason that I was really blown away by what I heard of vinyl at a fellow audio enthusiasts house.  There is no doubt that vinyl is more of a pain to maintain over CD's or computer audio, but I'm enjoying this part of the hobby ATM.  Not so sure I would have enjoyed vinyl as much during my college years when I wanted my music to be portable and bullet proof.  Now that I'm getting older it's not as big of a deal.......

[Ericus Rex]

Sony's multi-million-dollar push of their new patented format was a big factor.

[NIGHTFALL1970]

I bought my first CD player in 1987 at 17. I believed the hype that thay were perfect (and unbreakable). No snap,crakle,pop. No needle dragging on the surface wearing out the grooves. My first CD was RUSH "2112". CDs were about $18-22 on average then.  I sold all of my record collection then, (something I regret to this day). I did not do any A/B comparisons between LP and CDs. It never occured to me untill around 1990 I bought an import LP of MeatLoaf "Bat out of hell II" When I played the LP it was so much better than the CD that I started to buy LPs again. In most (but not all) cases the LP sounded better than the CD. I now have built up a very nice LP collection. If I like an album enough, I buy both the CD and the LP now.

[Rischa]

  Not so sure I would have enjoyed vinyl as much during my college years when I wanted my music to be portable and bullet proof.  Now that I'm getting older it's not as big of a deal.......

This is a good point. That said, I've always had two listening modes, critical and passive. If I'd been wise to vinyl in my teens and 20's, I would have used Lp's for critical listening and CD's as background music and for traveling. In fact, despite my gushing over vinyl in the OP, I still use CD's and music files this way.

Convenience aside, my friends and I definitely had the notion that CD's sounded better than vinyl back then. We were all music lovers, and got together for the sole purpose of listening to music. If we'd known better and had access to vinyl and a properly set up rig, I'm sure we would have listened to records instead of CD's.

[coverto]

I think the record companies duped themselves as much as they duped everyone else. My own theory about the decline and fall of rock and roll is that CDs and digital audio have played a key role. Imagine if CD technology had already been ruling when Elvis and the Beatles hit the scene. Would they have changed the world the way they did? I think there's at least some doubt. Popular music doesn't hold sway in the digital age the way it used to, when it was distributed on vinyl. I think one big reason is that digital playback has a very hard time grabbing and immersing the listener the way a decent vinyl rig can do so effortlessly.

When CDs came out, I was a teenager with a modest vinyl collection. Recently, I had a small revelation that The Police, which had been one of my favorite bands at the time, sound much, much, much better on vinyl than they do on digital. Maybe they're an extreme example of a band that sounds especially flat and boring on CD versus what they sounded like on vinyl. But I think that dynamic is at work with most bands.

[doug s.]

as an "old fart", i couldn't ewen tolerate the sound of cd's, until they had been out almost 20 years.  today, a well set up $1k (used) analog system will still outperform any redbook system at any price, imo.  while i can enjoy redbook, winyl is way better, assuming equal mastering quality.

cd's came about for one reason and one reason only - profit.  cd's could be sold for twice the price of winyl, and they cost 1/10th the price to manufacture - you do the math...

doug s.

[Wayner]

Profit? Your fogetting about 3/4 of the cost of distribution. Records weigh a lot. So the shipping costs were high. There were also lots of returns. That meant refunds or exchanges. Returns had to be shipped back. More costs. The printing and artwork for an LP was also much more expensive.

CDs were not $22 back then either. More like $15-$16 dollars for the usual album. Initial costs were recovery from tooling costs for equipment, processing and distribution. In the early days, there were not that many facilities that could consistently make CDs at an acceptable failure rate.

I guess you'd have to have spent some time in product manufacturing to understand that there is lots of pieces to the pie in making anything, and a CD is no exception. Considering there entry date of about 1982-1983, their prices have not changed.

LPs used to be about $7 in the mid 70's, now they are $25-30.

Once again, demonizing the very industries that provided the consumer with what they wanted is kind of, well, way off base. If you thought they were so evil, why did you buy their music?

Wayner 

[doug s.]

Profit? Your you're forgetting about 3/4 of the cost of distribution. Records weigh a lot. So the shipping costs were high. There were also lots of returns. That meant refunds or exchanges. Returns had to be shipped back. More costs. The printing and artwork for an LP was also much more expensive.

CDs were not $22 back then either. More like $15-$16 dollars for the usual album. Initial costs were recovery from tooling costs for equipment, processing and distribution. In the early days, there were not that many facilities that could consistently make CDs at an acceptable failure rate.

I guess you'd have to have spent some time in product manufacturing to understand that there is lots of pieces to the pie in making anything, and a CD is no exception. Considering there entry date of about 1982-1983, their prices have not changed.

LPs used to be about $7 in the mid 70's, now they are $25-30.

Once again, demonizing the very industries that provided the consumer with what they wanted is kind of, well, way off base. If you thought they were so evil, why did you buy their music?

Wayner

wayner, your cost model simply reinforces what i said.  albums half the cost of cd's.  of course, the initial set-up/mfr'g costs need to be recovered; it doesn't take too long when it costs pennies to make a cd, vs dollars to make an album.  (i have been in and around manufacturing for quite a while, thank you.)

and, i forgot about the added shipping/returns cost.  but, w/the abhorrent costs of winyl, i guess you would have me to believe that the major labels were losing money, right up until the time they started making cd's?  ya, right!   

i am not demonizing anyone or anything.  not now, not "once again".  i am simply stating the facts.  "prowiding the consumer what they wanted"?  spare me - mebbe you need to spend some time in the marketing world to understand that there are lots of pieces to the pie in marketing anything!     the major labels spend most of their time telling the consumers what they want, and telling their musician toadies who they signed to abusive recording contracts what they're gonna play.   not sure why my opinions seem to get your panties all in a bunch.

and, fyi, before ~2000, i had about 10 cd's - cuz i had a car w/a cdp at one point...  i was not (and i am still not) a supporter of the major music labels, after the adwent of cd.  most all my cd's are from small labels...

doug s.

[*Scotty*]

Here is something many people have forgotten. CDs actually replaced two formats vinyl and cassettes.
Compared to mass produced cassettes CDs were Hi- Fidelity for your car and don't forget the CD Walkman.
 I think convenience and portability in addition to aggressive marketing sealed the fate of vinyl.
The same things portability and convenience are doing to the same thing to CDs. I have already run into a problem getting some music on CDs and not mp3 downloads. In one case I received a CDR of the music I wanted that was burned on demand.
 Records and most CDs are a non-perishable storage medium, I am going to miss not having a hard copy of my music when CDs get hard to find. I am hoping we can keep 16/44.1 resolution in the face of current market forces.
Scotty
 

[neobop]

Sony's multi-million-dollar push of their new patented format was a big factor.

It certainly was. Sony lost out on the Betamax format and El cassette. They were determined to not only get the patent, but to dominate with digital. Other digital tape formats were already available but really weren't for playback of new software. Sony had to team up with Philips who were also getting ready to launch a CD type format and they co-own the patent.

The hype was perfect sound forever and the public was ready and bought into it. This was supported by the fact of greater potential on some specs.  Possible S/N, dynamic range etc far exceeded the record format. Even though the first players were horrendously bad sounding, most people figured it would get better. It did. After all, there was nowhere to go but up. By the late '80s there were many $1K players and a couple of multi thousand dollar ones. Production costs for CDs went way below $1 ea, depending on the size of the run. But it wasn't lower production costs that almost drove vinyl to extinction. It was demand for CD and the gestalt created by those who profited from it and/or disliked vinyl. If people didn't by CDs we wouldn't have them today. So blame it on advertising and the demonizing of vinyl. Some of it is probably justified for mass market consumption. Millions of maladjusted record players with worn needles and playing dirty, crunchy records were not only out there but was the basis for many opinions.

[PDR]

You had to live thru it to understand why.
I was born in 1960, we had a black and white "tube" tv till 1974, 3 channels till cable also around "74, then we were in heaven with a whopping 13 channels. I remember at the time thinking how to make a choice with 13 channels. Then color came to our house around '75......wow. When I was 16 I placed a 8 track player in my car....I was styling!
Then came cassettes....then "pong" the world was changing fast. In high school we were told our kids would have computers in their homes.....they lied, they had them in my home. When CD players came out in the 80's....at least when they were affordable....everybody jumped on the band wagon.....think about it I went from black and white tubed television to color, to 8 track, to cassette to digital in a period of 15 yrs. People bought them because it was the thing to do.....it was progress, nobody wanted to be left behind. For the masses it wasnt about fidelity, it was about style (see 80s clothes fashions) and being on top of technology...be it good or bad. Thats why vinyl died.....it was seen as old fashioned.
I think thats the problem today as well.....the latest iphone....it does everything cept play decent music....nobody cares, stick some ear buds in and go....you have the latest and greatest......till next yr anyway. I'm old.....my phone just rings and I answer it.....seems to work fine. The only reason I have a cell is for work provided by them, I never loose a call at home.....so why is the cell better exactly?..... the same reason Cds are better.....theyre really not....just more convenient.

[SET Man]

Hey!

     CD won the format domination because it is more convenient period.

    I'm 34 and grew up with cassette tape than CD in the late '80s. Yes, I remembered the first time I heard the CD I thought it was very good.

   I've been interested in musics and audio since I was young thanks to my Father and uncle. I always have soft spot for vintage and antique stuffs. So, I got interested in vinyl back around 1994 I think. It was more of curiosity at first fueled by Michale Fremer's article in Stereophile.

   Yes, back than people were busy getting rid of their LPs collections. Because I was young and didn't have money I went to junk store down in Chinatown here in NYC and got myself a $2 turntable, than I bought new belt and when down to Stereo Exchange and got the cheapest Ortofon cart there.

    I was hooked!  Even though my system back than weren't great and I don't think I aligned the cart 100% collect but I heard something very special, there seem to be more to music with analog vinyl. And the rest is history. I'm still spinning LPs and now LPs represent about 45% of my music collection.

   Well, I've always say that CD were born with inadequate performance with it 16 bit. I'm not saying that it can not sound decent, it can. But when both format done right LP usually sound better to me.

   The downside with LP for me? No, not setting up or keeping LPs clean . But it is the space. I'm lucky to have space for my TT and all my LPs in my current rental apt here in NYC. 

   Well, if you think CD generation got duped. Than I will say the the current MP3 generation and their $0.99 per song is having it worst now! 

Take care,
Buddy

   

   

   

[Tyson]

Digital has improved a lot in cameras, not as much in audio.  Why do we have HDTV's and bajillion megapixels for cameras, but SACD and hirez audio flounder?  Because people care a lot more about video quality than they do about audio quality. 

[S Clark]

You also have to understand that vinyl was in a transition period.  Although there were a few great vinyl suppliers (Sheffield Lab and others) most of vinyl was in a period of decay.  In the late 70's - early 80's I can't tell you how many new vinyl were full of ticks and pops.  And most of use didn't have cleaning machines, and the venerable Discwasher would only do so much... so it was inevitable that your vinyl would end up flawed.  Many of us bought tape machines and listen to tapes while the vinyl remained in storage after making a copy. 
I know exactly when I made the jump to CD- Christmas of 82.  I opened a small present from my brother that was a cd of the Planets, and the next package from the wife was a Technics cd player.  The quality wasn't horrendous, the dynamics were actually quite good, and no more tics and pops.  I thought that music had reached the apex of quality reproduction and that recycled crappy vinyl was dead. 

[Wayner]

I picked up the hammer and saw.

Wayner