Why get into vinyl?

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #40 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 08:23 pm »

I know what you guys mean about digital being fatiguing; 18 straight hours of it is all I can normally take.

Not to be a smart ass, but I wonder how bright/harsh you guys gear must sound to be unable to take a listening to CDs!

I guess I can understand the nostalgia factor if you grew up with LPs (I did, but I'm not sentimental!) or the novelty/"in club" feeling of vinyl if you're too young to have been there when they were new. I ditched most of mine once I got a small CD collection amassed; I was a pretty early adopter of CD. Obviously, I grew up on vinyl, and I've heard some nice playback systems, but good digital just sounds sooo much better! (Hey, what can I say; I'm a facilitator on the Digital Domain!

)

I could see getting a new table someday, or more likely borrowing one, to get a better CD-R copy of my few rare LPs. I'd like to experiment w/some of the newer software for PC to "clean up" old LPs for burning. I do have a couple precious albums that aren't in the best shape-let's face it, the simple act of playing it is harmful to vinyl. And some of those LPs got played at parties, where the handling wasn't the most gentle.

I think I'll keep it to myself just what LPs I have; they are DEFINATELY not audiophile approved!

Mathew_M · « **Reply #41 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 09:54 pm »

Rob, I agree with you to an extent. However, and I think a lot will agree here is that to get digital to sound anywhere near as good as vinyl you have to spend a lot of money. True there are a lot of turntables that are exorbitantly priced but I think comparatively it is much cheaper to put together an analog system that would rival any cd rig within $500. Just read the latest DAM shootout. I bet if they plugged in a Rega 3 or even a Music Hall 5 w/ a decent cartridge and threw on a mint vinyl copy of Nora Jones there would be no contest. Just MHO.

Hantra · « **Reply #42 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 11:34 pm »

Tell you what. . .

I listened to $95,000 worth of Linn digital yesterday, and I wouldn't even consider vinyl if I had that system.

The Klimax mono's are STILL one of the two best amps I have ever heard, and have been since the first time I heard them. The Halcros are the other, in case you are wondering. . .

That CD-12 is amaaaaazing!

B

duff138 · « **Reply #43 on:** 11 Feb 2003, 12:22 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

I know what you guys mean about digital being fatiguing; 18 straight hours of it is all I can normally take. Not to be a smart ass, but I wonder how bright/harsh you guys gear must sound to be unable to take a listening to CDs!

I can and do listen to many CDs, but I find after a while if I'm just sitting there listenning to the music my mind will drift away from the music and I'll just start thinking about other things, or I'll turn on my computer and surf the net while the music is playing. With vinyl I can just listen for hours (only getting up to get another beer of coarse!).
My vinyl set up just produces a thicker, deeper soundstage that makes the CD playback seem more compressed and thin in comparison.
Also I'm lucky because almost everything I to buy is released on vinyl. Actually some of it is only available on vinyl.

Tonto Yoder · « **Reply #44 on:** 11 Feb 2003, 12:41 am »

Quote from: Beezer

Tonto, thanks for the lpnow link. I just placed an order and made sure to get the Lucinda EP along with another LP they have by her.

Beez

I'd be interested in knowing your thoughts on the relative sonic merits of the full LP vs. the 5 track 12" EP. THE EP has the single title track "Passionate Kisses" on one side of the 33 1/3 disc and four other non-LP tracks on the flip side.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #45 on:** 11 Feb 2003, 03:23 am »

Sigh...I always swear I'm gonna stay away from these "Analog Vs Digital" type posts. Oh, well!

IMO, one could make a case that vinyl sounds better, but I think digital sounds more real. For any "flaws" of digital, I have to compare that to the groove echo, surface noise, dynamic compression, & lack of weight (no lack on me, I'm afraid...) of LP playback.

It's amazing that most audiophiles run in horror when you mention adding an eq to the system, but every LP listener already has one. It's built in to the format, nestled neatly into the RIAA input for phono. Why no outcry about that? I'd be curious to see the phase angles measured from the RIAA eq. Of course most recordings incorporate some eq in production, but you can just add another layer when it hits your preamp!

I've heard some 12" singles that had good bass, but with a wiggling stylus in a narrow groove, there's only so much room for bass & dynamics. When you get in towards the middle, especially, the real estate gets pretty tight. You can spread the music out over several sides, but that's a pain in the ass.

Another big problem with getting good bass from LPs is acoustic feedback. It takes some good isolation to keep the bass of, say, a pair of VMPS or SVS Ultra's from feeding back into the tonearm at high volumes.

I suppose it's pure laziness on my part, but I just hate cleaning the damn records. The only way I've ever been satisfied with the cleaning is to wet clean, and once you do that once then you pretty much have to always do it. I have a bit of problems with dust and static both in my place. Makes a TT tough to maintain.

Of course, the act of playing an LP itself is the undoing of the disc. No matter how good he stylus and the level of care given, the needle is in physical contact with the medium. It will wear, period. If you have a favorite LP, how many times have you bought it? If you say just once, I have to wonder how many times it's been played.

Lastly, and this is my opinion, LPs just sound mechanical. I wonder why...wait, could it be that it IS MECHANICAL?!

Sorry, couldn't resist!

Again, I have no problem with someone prefering LPs, but I'm really surprised that the tired baseless claims are constantly parroted about vinyl's superiority. That dog just don't hunt, for me anyway. The suspension of disbelief I can generate just doesn't cover vinyl's sonic shortcomings in my book. The subtle sheen of distortions tossed over every LP just wears thin on my ears pretty fast.

BTW, I'm really not talking about just CD vs LP; I actually much prefer SACD & DVD-A to either. There just isn't any comparison in the level of transparency and detail of the newer HiRez digital mediums as compared to any other mechanical or optical format I've heard.

Just my opinion. Now go back to your stacks of vinyl with my blessing! And for God's sake, please don't sic Micheal Fremer on me!

Mathew_M · « **Reply #46 on:** 11 Feb 2003, 03:48 am »

The best analogy I've read and agree with is:
Vinyl sounds like real wood
Cd sounds like formica

laugh if you will

Carlman · « **Reply #47 on:** 11 Feb 2003, 07:03 pm »

I agree with Rob as to the actual sound reproduction of vinyl. I really appreciate that he has perfectly disected what about it is different than CD. I have an OK TT and a fairly decent CD player/DAC. They are on similar par with each other cost-wise and the TT has its sonic signature and the CD has its own sound as well.... I really don't agree with the wood/formica analogy.

After reading this thread over the past few days, I decided to play a Grover Washington Jr. album. It's a really good, new, clean record. I played a few others as well and noted that the TT images differently than my CD player... It has a different character than a CD player, it's just different. It's also quanitifiably not as good. Why?

2 things:

1-Dynamic range is more limited. (The range within that range is great, though) I'd guess the TT probably only produces 40Hz-10kHz. All the music sounded like electronically recorded music and not like the music. Bass wasn't as tight or deep, upper midrange and higher octaves didn't form an extremely convincing reproduction of the original instrument.

2-Hiss,pop, and/or pressing quality all show up in the sound.

The listening experience was fantastic (couple of beers helped as well), I had a beautiful sound, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's different than a CD in that it's more esoteric, has a routine where you flip the record, clean it, inspect stylus, etc. It's an interactive experience and still you have a wonderful sound to enjoy. What I've heard on every album on every player is a limited dynamic range but with a silky sweet midrange. I think that is why Hantra has fallen in love with the medium. I think that's his taste. (tube DAC)

There is no substitute for infinite values within an analog reproduction, limited range or not.... (I haven't heard SACD yet)... however, the midrange is reproduced with an incredible smooth sweetness to it that is what TT listening is all about. (as far as I'm concerned)

So, if I had to make an analogy, the best I could come up with is:
Playing a record is like smoking a pipe and playing a CD is like smoking a cigar. They're both good but different.

I prefer records when I'm in a record mood, and CD's when I'm in CD mood. I'm in CD mood a lot more than record mood, though. So, it's not worth thousands of dollars to me to make it sound a little bit better than what I have. Plus, it is a hassle to keep records sounding good.

I hope this provides someone some insight into "why vinyl?"... and why not vinyl. I mean no harm or put downs to anyone and I didn't intend to come across that way.

Thanks,
Carl

Mathew_M · « **Reply #48 on:** 12 Feb 2003, 01:04 am »

Well your cigar/pipe analogy stinks

Let's just say that vinyl sounds more organic and leave it at that. I threw on a Beck (Mutations B side) 45 7" last night and was blown away by the sonics. There was a thunderous bass line that like a drill filled out the bottom of my room and then swooped upward. So much for limited dynamics. From my experience digital images slightly better with tubes but leaves an edgy after halo to my ears. Also I find that cd's don't get the PRAT of music quite right or the same as vinyl.

BlackCat · « **Reply #49 on:** 13 Feb 2003, 04:56 pm »

This thread reminds me of my first stereo system:

BIC Formula 4 Speakers
Kenwood 3500 Integrated Amp (a whopping 40 wpc!!)
Dual 601 Belt drive turntable
Shure V15 Type III cartridge
Pioneer Rt-909 Reel-to-Reel tape deck

Vinyl is all there was (besides 8-tracks & cassettes and unless you had the bux for a Nakamichi - the sound quality of those was laughable). I recorded a lot of the vinyl onto reel tapes in those days, so I could save my valuable records from getting worn. I had Sound Guard on every album, used a DiscWasher before every play, had a dust bug on the turntable, it was almost a religion. And this system, when I was a poor college student, sounded freaking fantastic. However, I was probably one of the first people in the world to run right out and buy a very expensive CD player when they first came out, I've never looked back. Out of that old system, the only thing I wish I still had was that Pioneer reel-to-reel. With my current system, I think the CD's sound better than the records ever could have, without ritual. Of course, it seems I used to get laid a lot more in those days, it may have been the vinyl?? Anyway I don't see a reason to get into vinyl other than nostalgia. It was just too much trouble.

Hantra · « **Reply #50 on:** 13 Feb 2003, 09:53 pm »

Quote

Dynamic range is more limited. (The range within that range is great, though) I'd guess the TT probably only produces 40Hz-10kHz.

I'm going to have to get clarification here.

Vinyl has WAY more dynamic range than does CD. When folks talk dynamic range, and dynamics in general, 99% of the time, they are referring to amplitude differences, and not frequency response.

I believe frequency response may be the word you were looking for.

Nevertheless, the addictive thing about vinyl is the dynamic range. A CD will start at a certain volume, and play up to a certain volume, but only always within that given range. This is a problem with the CD spec. Analog starts at zero, and goes where the music goes. It is limitless.

Sure, you hear more crap, but it doesn't bother me enough to cancel out the increase in palpable dynamics I get.

L8r,

B

Psychicanimal · « **Reply #51 on:** 14 Feb 2003, 05:07 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

If you don't like the answer, maybe you asked the wrong question. Or maybe you asked someone stupid.

Unbelievable!

Nobody has answered the question yet!

Hint: It's the same answer as to "Why get into 78's?"

doug s. · « **Reply #52 on:** 14 Feb 2003, 02:43 pm »

hey psychic,

ya need to read more carefully - here's a cut-n-paste from my post on page one of this thread:

<<<"...s/s or toobs, vinyl still sounds killer, imo; tho "youngsters", not used to the surface noise, may have a hard time dealing w/it. it's a non-issue for me. in fact, it was only w/in the past couple years that i could even tolerate the sound of cd's, and only w/in the past year that i could actually enjoy it, for a price i could afford...">>>

hantra,

yure mistaken about winyl having more dynamic range than cd - cd can have >120db of dynamic range; even the best possible mastering on heavy winyl will be lucky to give 60db of dynamic range. but where yure *not* mistaken is what happens in the studio - compression rules! so, cd's may sound compressed, if that's what the recording engineers did, to make them more palatable for the masses who listen in their cars, on boom-boxes, etc... but, the potential dynamic range on cd's is *much* better...

winyl is also not immune to compression - even newly released winyl. i was thrilled to get a copy of santana's supernatural release on winyl last year - i had awoided the cd, as it was universally reviewed as being compressed as hell. well, i shoulda saved my money - the winyl is no better. if it weren't for the dbx 3bx i have plugged into my preamps' tape loop, i'd never listen to this record...

doug s.

Psychicanimal · « **Reply #53 on:** 14 Feb 2003, 02:59 pm »

Quote from: doug s.

hey psychic,

ya need to read more carefully - here's a cut-n-paste from my post on page one of this thread:

<<<"...s/s or toobs, vinyl still sounds killer, imo; tho "youngsters", not used to the surface noise, may have a hard time dealing w/it. it's a non-issue for me. in fact, it was only w/in the past couple years that i could even tolerate the sound of cd's, and only w/in the past year that i could actually enjoy it, for a price i could afford...">>>

doug s.

That's not the answer...

doug s. · « **Reply #54 on:** 14 Feb 2003, 03:16 pm »

sorry psychic - "because it sounds killer" *is* the answer, for me at least... also for many others...

regards,

doug s.

Psychicanimal · « **Reply #55 on:** 15 Feb 2003, 05:30 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

If you don't like the answer, maybe you asked the wrong question. Or maybe you asked someone stupid.

JohnR · « **Reply #56 on:** 20 Feb 2003, 05:08 am »

Has anyone mentioned clipping distortion from badly remastered CDs

Not that uncommon. Better to get the unclipped original. For some reason, it seems like nobody can transfer opera to CDs properly

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #57 on:** 24 Feb 2003, 08:46 pm »

You mean there's a good way to transfer opera?

Just kidding. I'm a lover of classical music, but not a huge fan of most opera.

I don't know what's up with some of the new remasters on CD. Some of them are just remastered at a level that routinely clips, but some are breathtaking. Just seeing "Digitally Remastered" doesn't mean much, but I will say that the Dire Straits, XTC, Iron Maiden, & Judas Priest catalogs benefitted greatly from the process.

I think that the term dynamic range is being misunderstood by many. The fact that you see a lot of compression is rarely due to the format, especially with popular music, where compression is rampant. The full dynamic range of a 16 bit system is very wide, and the range of a 24 bit system is enormous, well beyong the range of any mechanical playback medium. Actually, beyond the ability of the amps and speakers to resolve.

Lastly, who DARES mock my signature? ARE YOU THREATENING ME?! I AM THE GREAT CORNHOLIO...er, uh, sorry about that!

Psychicanimal · « **Reply #58 on:** 24 Feb 2003, 10:53 pm »

I am not mocking yer signature--it's very appropriate to whats going on! So far NO ONE has answered the question, even though I gave a really good hint...

JohnR · « **Reply #59 on:** 24 Feb 2003, 11:42 pm »

Music?