CD versus vinyl LP - CD wins.

[derekrumble]

You know? After playing around with CD from about '87, and vinyl since who knows when, I vote for CD. I have heard vinyl sound fantastically good, of course. And there are terrible CDs - but on balance, having debated this too frequently, and got bored to death too often, I finally vote for CD. And I love hi-res digital audio even more. Final answer. Out of the closet. Done and dusted.

[Deleted]

Derek
Surprisingly, despite ageing hearing, the extra resolution isn't wasted.
It even helps to improve the overall sound. The ears may no longer be able to hear the actual higher frequencies any more, but I believe that the ears are able to respond to the faster waveform rise times.There are even claims that we can sense the presence of as high as 100kHz. Bone conduction ? The difference between properly ripped stuff like "Fleetwood Mac-Rumours "on CD, compared to the same ripped album in 24/96 is in my case, absolutely stunning, as is "Carly Simon-No Secrets in 24/192 vs. the 16/44.1 CD version.
Alex

[insomniac]

Dec 26, 2009 14:41:01 GMT mrarroyo said:

My vote is for cd's due mostly to convenience, specially when ripped and played as lossless files via a computer as a source. Yes sir, much easier and satisfying.

I agree, much more convenient with the added benefit of being able to use CD's nearly anywhere... car/multichanger, CD player, computer. Most of the big time club DJ's are dropping vinyl and moving to digital too thus marking the end of production of the famous Panasonic/Technics SL12xx range of turntables which were industry standard for many years.

Look Ma... no needles...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQRCFWG5YVg

[FauDrei]

Goes without saying - count me in for digital (without mechanical moving parts, if possible).

[Will]

Digital for me, too.

But, what about some of these guys?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs1aUws0Lrs

It's a 20 minute watch, but some of their gear is amazing, as are the hoops they jump through just to listen to it ;D

But, hey, they're enjoying it, so no problem

[Deleted]

Amazing and very very expensive, and there all playing Vinyl, i rest my case!!.

[Deleted]

Dec 31, 2009 19:10:35 GMT @heliharris said:

Amazing and very very expensive, and there all playing Vinyl, i rest my case!!.

Imagine how CD would sound if you were willing to spend the equivalent amount on CD playback that many Vinyl fanatics spend on their turntables,mats, cartridge,EXPENSIVE phono preamp, cleaners and anti static brushes etc. Also, buying CDs from places like CDWoW with FREE postage is MUCH cheaper than the limited range of new vinyl available.
Note also, that the price of a good MC phono preamp is lkely to be far greater than most people pay for a higher quality than average, CD player.

[videoguy]

As a former recording engineer & studio designer I favor vinyl. The problem I have with
cd is the low sampling rate of 41. something kilohertz. I listen mostly to classical & some lighter material. With the low sampling rate little pieces of room ambiance & reverb are lost.

The LP,s sound warmer & mercury living presence discs from late 50's & 60's have some of the best transients recorderded on vinyl. George Piros drove the Westrex cutter w 2 Mac Intosh 2oo watt amplifiers. I use a Denon D103R moving coil cartridge w UTC mike input transformer to boost the cartridges output. I used to maintain a Westrex 3D stereo cutting system for a studio in Nashville & also did a lot of dub cuts & some masters.

I far prefer analog mastering on tape to using a digital recorder.

[rowuk]

Jan 2, 2010 1:39:22 GMT videoguy said:

As a former recording engineer & studio designer I favor vinyl. The problem I have with
cd is the low sampling rate of 41. something kilohertz. I listen mostly to classical & some lighter material. With the low sampling rate little pieces of room ambiance & reverb are lost.

The LP,s sound warmer & mercury living presence discs from late 50's & 60's have some of the best transients recorderded on vinyl. George Piros drove the Westrex cutter w 2 Mac Intosh 2oo watt amplifiers. I use a Denon D103R moving coil cartridge w UTC mike input transformer to boost the cartridges output. I used to maintain a Westrex 3D stereo cutting system for a studio in Nashville & also did a lot of dub cuts & some masters.

I far prefer analog mastering on tape to using a digital recorder.

As an engineer you should know better. "Ambience" or the sense of room size is a function of LOW FREQUENCY reproduction and the LP loses here big time. Rumble may give you the sense of a room, but it has NOTHING to do with the original. Reverb is a function of the room or postprocessing (gold foil plates for classical) and if it should resemble anything found in the classical world, would only have any appreciable amplitude near the instrument itself - where we do not normally listen.

We can easily calculate the highest possible transients when a disc is rotating at 33 1/3 RPM. The resonant behaviour of cartridges with extended high frequency response leave much to be desired elsewhere! You will find that modern digital systems will be far superior in transient response. Especially if the stuff was recorded to tape first, there is a big loss in high frequency response due to head saturation. Hell, it is even tough getting flat frequency response because the RIAA equalization deviation and calibration is not published on the disc assuming the engineer didn't do something completely different! There are only a hand full of phono pre amps with selectable EQ so does that mean you guys ACCEPT several dBs of incorrect response? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIAA_equalization

I will agree that both media have areas where the listener can develop strong preferences, just not for any of the reasons that you mention.

Vinyl sounds better because it introduces its own "flavor" into the sound. It is farther away from the "original" though and the pains of achieving partial "superiority" increase after several plays, regardless of the equipment.

Don't misunderstand me, I am not getting down on vinyl, just the BS about what supposedly gets lost. Read reviews on phono cartridges from the audiophile press back in the 70s and 80s. They found plenty of stuff that was bad - until the digital "enemy" hit the market. New target and VERY forgetfull engineers and critics.

Enjoy vinyl for what it is. Celebrate your music. Accept the fact that EUPHONIC is not original, but very nice to listen to. Realize that the microphones had problems that anolog chains compensated for with roll off. It took the engineers a while to get the source straightened out. That is what modern digital CAN be about: original, repeatable, mobile, back up-able.

My advice to the analog audiophile is to get a decent backup before it is too late. The plasticizers in the vinyl do deteriorate with time and then your transients are just ploughed under, never to return! If you have analog tapes, bleed through is the curse after 10 years or so.

[Nigel]

It took you 23 years to finally reach this conclusion Derek, that says something for the longevity of the good old LP.

[derekrumble]

Jan 7, 2010 10:01:29 GMT Nigel said:

It took you 23 years to finally reach this conclusion Derek, that says something for the longevity of the good old LP.

Didn't take me 23 years to decide - took me 23 years to feel strong enough to own up to it in a public forum!

Derek

[derekrumble]

Dec 26, 2009 11:35:51 GMT @sandyk said:

Derek
Surprisingly, despite ageing hearing, the extra resolution isn't wasted.
Alex

It's not just the extra resolution and extended bandwidth though is it - isn't it also to do with the fact that the filters in the DAC chain work far higher up and therefore sound better. Which is why upsampled 'red book' may sound smoother etc. ?

Derek

[Deleted]

I totally 100% agree with Rowuk on this subject .
Could not have said it any better.

(@ sandyK: now I found the right thread ;D)

[derekrumble]

Because I made the point that, for me, digital wins, I don't really think this thread belongs in the 'Spin it!' forum. Discuss....

By the way I do enjoy vinyl for what it is. And back in the late 70s & early 80s I was keen to extract as much as I could afford to out of the good old LP. AKG P8E and my beloved SME did the trick and this was far superior to (my) FM radio and cassette machine (although TDK SA and similar tapes were very good).

But along came digital with its black silences etc. and I rolled over with my legs in the air.

However, in those crossover years where LP was still a major format along came Decca's Direct Metal Mastering. I have one of those; Mozart's 'Eine Kleine Nachtmusik' played by the Salomon Quartet + Barry Guy on double bass. I haven't played it in a while but IIRC the top end is SOOOO extended, dynamics are fabulous. On my copy there are just one or two clicks and very low background noise over all. It actually sounds quite a bit like CD; an analogue fan would say that that's because the LP was mastered from a digital source, but then vinyl guys like their digital to be vinylised anyway. With this particular DMM LP the vinyl flavour is very light. Think I have a 24/96 dub somewhere in my HD directory labyrinth. Sample anyone?

Derek

[Nigel]

From my local record fair website.

THE VINYL REVIVAL

When the Compact Disc first appeared in the late 1980's it was thought the days of the vinyl record were numbered. Yet amazingly over 20 years on, it is possible that vinyl could well see off the CD. There is no denying that the vast majority of the music buying public switched to the new format. Its undeniable appeal was its ease of use and portability. But there was always something lacking - the detail and warmth in the sound, the artwork and presentation, the pleasure in watching the tone-arm track across the record. Even the odd hiss and crackle added to the authenticity. The younger age group once regarded as the download generation are shunning CD's and have discovered the pleasures of vinyl and record fairs for the first time, being the ideal place to find all genres of music at bargain prices. The record companies that were slow at first to see what was going on under their noses have now started to increase their output of new releases and back catalogue on vinyl. This is a trail that had been blazed by a myriad of small pressing plants all over the world for the format that just refused to go away.

[Deleted]

Mar 29, 2010 22:42:22 GMT Nigel said:

From my local record fair website.

THE VINYL REVIVAL

When the Compact Disc first appeared in the late 1980's it was thought the days of the vinyl record were numbered. Yet amazingly over 20 years on, it is possible that vinyl could well see off the CD. There is no denying that the vast majority of the music buying public switched to the new format. Its undeniable appeal was its ease of use and portability. But there was always something lacking - the detail and warmth in the sound, the artwork and presentation, the pleasure in watching the tone-arm track across the record. Even the odd hiss and crackle added to the authenticity. The younger age group once regarded as the download generation are shunning CD's and have discovered the pleasures of vinyl and record fairs for the first time, being the ideal place to find all genres of music at bargain prices. The record companies that were slow at first to see what was going on under their noses have now started to increase their output of new releases and back catalogue on vinyl. This is a trail that had been blazed by a myriad of small pressing plants all over the world for the format that just refused to go away.

YAWN. zzzzzzzz.
It's just that some old farts like to keep listening to the same old 30 year old (or more) stuff over and over again from the days before CD became commonplace. CD made them realise just how bad their beloved relics really were. Even Ian doesn't much like his own recordings now ! ;D
Life was simpler back then, and it made them feel they were in control, when gently lowering the stylus,and farting around with record brushes and sprays. Some of them need to do this now, as they no longer get to use a brush with their hair !

[Nigel]

Big record fair in Liverpool, Easter Monday, Alex. I'd love you to be there with me flicking through all those vinyl albums hoping to find something that you've been searching for all those years. A couple of pints & holding the one that got away, bliss.

[Deleted]

Mar 29, 2010 23:22:04 GMT Nigel said:

Big record fair in Liverpool, Easter Monday, Alex. I'd love you to be there with me flicking through all those vinyl albums hoping to find something that you've been searching for all those years. A couple of pints & holding the one that got away, bliss.

Nigel
And after the glow from the couple of pints has worn off, the realisation that they may have been played a few too many times already ! ;D
Alex
P.S.
I bet you don't find too many half speed mastrered records in pristine condition either.

[Nigel]

www.musicangle.com/feat.php?id=106

Ten Years Into The Digital Revolution: A Continuing Disaster in Sound
A Look Back at the Digital Debacle.

by Michael Fremer

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2010 22:01:20 GMT Nigel said:

www.musicangle.com/feat.php?id=106

Ten Years Into The Digital Revolution: A Continuing Disaster in Sound
A Look Back at the Digital Debacle.

by Michael Fremer

Hi Nigel
I only read the 1st page, and it is drivel.
The information is all there on a well recorded CD, you just need a decent player to extract it properly. See the link below.
Also, higher resolution digital is capable of crapping on vinyl from a great height.
Alex

rockgrotto.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=c&thread=6156&page=1

[xerxes]

How may recordings post around 1990 are really analogue anyway? It may be available in an analogue, vinyl format, but chances are it was recorded, mixed and mastered digitally, so you're just listening to someone elses DAC output to analogue and transposed to vinyl.

And as mentioned before, there's the whole issue of RIAA equalisation. If you think the "analogue" groove on your LP is pure and unadulterated, you're kidding yourself. If it were, you'd only get 10 minutes per side and your stylus would only last a a couple of weeks.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2010 1:33:17 GMT xerxes said:

How may recordings post around 1990 are really analogue anyway? It may be available in an analogue, vinyl format, but chances are it was recorded, mixed and mastered digitally, so you're just listening to someone elses DAC output to analogue and transposed to vinyl.

And as mentioned before, there's the whole issue of RIAA equalisation. If you think the "analogue" groove on your LP is pure and unadulterated, you're kidding yourself. If it were, you'd only get 10 minutes per side and your stylus would only last a a couple of weeks.

Oooooh !
You are even more cynical than I am !

[Deleted]

If you sniff vinyl or eat bits for breakfast might be due to personal preference, taste, enjoyment and the feeling you get handling vinyl or messing about with CD's or PC's

[Deleted]

For me it's the basic convenience of the digital format(s) that is winning through.

As I've said before, in MY system vinyl is still king, though there is, albeit painfully slow, progress in MY digital playback which is becoming more pleasing a bit ( ) at a time.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2010 8:29:07 GMT @cjarchez said:

For me it's the basic convenience of the digital format(s) that is winning through.

As I've said before, in MY system vinyl is still king, though there is, albeit painfully slow, progress in MY digital playback which is becoming more pleasing a bit ( ) at a time.

Perhaps you need a new CD player like Mick's new player?
After reading what was inside that player, I only wish that I could afford one to replace my much modified Marantz CD65 that simply wore out. There appears to be some interesting modification possibilities with that player too, due to the separate transformers instead of today's crappy SMPS types.It doesn't appear to be available in Australia though, perhaps due to it weighing much more than most ?