|
|
Post by DavidR on Dec 3, 2018 15:29:38 GMT -5
Well, as I always say: Vinyl: It's all about the inconvenience. However, we aren't talking about ease of use. Sure records can contain clicks and pops but most are static that can easily be controlled. I have way too many CDs that just plain suck for SQ. Overly compressed, edgy and these are very hard to listen to. Can you say instant listener fatigue? I use a tube buffer on those poorly engineered CDs. It does enough to take the edge off. If it didn't I'd never listen to any of my Gary Moore CDs and many others. I find CDs are quite sterile compared to vinyl.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 3, 2018 16:59:05 GMT -5
My story, I suspect, is not much different to others of my age group. I had a pretty expensive vinyl collection, including some quadraphonic and direct to disc recordings. When CD's appeared I started buying them to both replace and supplement my vinyl collection. Especially the albums that had been to a few too many parties. What I found then, and still do today, is that some CD's sound as good as or better than their equivalent vinyl. But many sound far worse, overly compressed, lacking in dynamic range and some have instruments that are either missing completely or mixed so low as to be almost inaudible. The term we used was "elevator music". As a result I have around 50 or so albums in vinyl that I still play because they sound better than any CD version I have been able to find. Nothing to do with the media itself, it's the mixing and occasionally what master they have used.
To be continued.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 3, 2018 17:19:10 GMT -5
Vinyl. High noise, limited capacity and low dynamic range. We all thought it sounded great when there was no real alternative. Digital blows it away in every possible aspect other than nostalgia and tactile interactions. Good riddance to vinyl.
|
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Dec 3, 2018 17:57:17 GMT -5
Vinyl. High noise, limited capacity and low dynamic range. We all thought it sounded great when there was no real alternative. Digital blows it away in every possible aspect other than nostalgia and tactile interactions. Good riddance to vinyl. I fully agree. But I won't toss my 200+ vinyls since many of those titles aren't found on CDs these days. Some of them are kind of funky, like the Reader's Digest LP of The Month Club albums I have. They are mostly classical, with some 1950's pop instrumental LPs. These are the 5, 7, or 12 LP sets. I only have about 25 rock LPs. Decent recordings for the most part, and some very good music mixed in with the funky stuff. CDs get the bulk of the play time, but I do enjoy putting an LP on the TT once in a while, and sit back and enjoy the music. I can't imagine the space that I would need if I were to convert all my 500+ CDs to LPs. |
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Dec 3, 2018 18:21:21 GMT -5
Early CDs in the 1980s were often horrible. There were quite a few which simply took the 78dB dynamic range LP Stereo Masters and put them on the CDs. All of the early Jefferson Airplane CDs were this way[1]. These days, I think our biggest CD Mastering enemy is " The Loudness War" ... Casey [1] By the way, Computer Audiophile recently had a nice article on evaluating the best available mastering of Jefferson Airplane's Surrealistic Pillow. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 3, 2018 18:58:20 GMT -5
Early CDs in the 1980s were often horrible. . Yea, good thing it's not 1981 any more, eh?  |
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on Dec 3, 2018 19:32:29 GMT -5
CDs are being replaced by this >>>  in autos anyway
Something totally new to complain about.
I suspect even more sterility.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Dec 3, 2018 23:13:52 GMT -5
Have any of you guys heard about Tidal? Yes I am being sarcastic of course...  |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 4, 2018 0:08:18 GMT -5
My story, I suspect, is not much different to others of my age group. I had a pretty expensive vinyl collection, including some quadraphonic and direct to disc recordings. When CD's appeared I started buying them to both replace and supplement my vinyl collection. Especially the albums that had been to a few too many parties. What I found then, and still do today, is that some CD's sound as good as or better than their equivalent vinyl. But many sound far worse, overly compressed, lacking in dynamic range and some have instruments that are either missing completely or mixed so low as to be almost inaudible. The term we used was "elevator music". As a result I have around 50 or so albums in vinyl that I still play because they sound better than any CD version I have been able to find. Nothing to do with the media itself, it's the mixing and occasionally what master they have used. To be continued. The continuation; What I have been doing the last couple of years is seeking out the best available version of my favourite albums. Whether that be a re mastered CD or an SACD, DVD-A etc it doesn't really matter. I then compare it against the vinyl version, if it's better I keep it, if it's not I return it. For example, recently I have obtained the SACD version of Hotel California which is the only version I have found that sounds better to me than the original vinyl. Whilst, in comparison, I have been trying for years to find a Sam Cooke CD, SACD etc that sounds better than the original vinyl, to date without any success. What actually started me on this journey was DSOM, which I had in quadraphonic form. The SACD uses that mix, from the original masters and it's easily the best version I have heard. It sounds better than the quadraphonic vinyl, which BTW I still have access to. That showed me what was possible, provided the right masters were available and the sound mixer/engineer improved the sound quality without playing around too much with the mix. I blame it for showing what was out there and possible for me to access. It has been my experience that what medium it is being played from (vinyl, CD, SACD DVD-A etc) is irrelevant when compared to how it was mastered and how it was mixed. They have a far greater effect on my listening pleasure than it's source. Cheers Gary |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2018 16:35:32 GMT -5
Vinyl. High noise, limited capacity and low dynamic range. We all thought it sounded great when there was no real alternative. Digital blows it away in every possible aspect other than nostalgia and tactile interactions. Good riddance to vinyl. I would have to disagree with CDs having more dynamic range. Some may but too many did not. Couple things factor into it. 1- the studio doing the recording mix 2- the label publishing the recording. They are far from being equal. Do a little reading on the dr.loudness-war.info site and see my point. The same album can very from year to year and from "pressings". I luv'd listening to my Thorens TT with Rabco vertical tracking arm on a brand new LP. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 8, 2018 16:43:22 GMT -5
I would have to disagree with CDs having more dynamic range. Sorry but you can't "disagree" with science. LPs have max 70db of dynamic range with a practical limit of 63db. CD has >100db with a practical limit of 98db. It's the specs of the format. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2018 16:57:28 GMT -5
I would have to disagree with CDs having more dynamic range. Sorry but you can't "disagree" with science. LPs have max 70db of dynamic range with a practical limit of 63db. CD has >100db with a practical limit of 98db. It's the specs of the format. and continue with what I stated- some may, some may not. That's what I'm saying. My buddy owns Planet Dallas Recording studio and we have discussed the topic. It's like any profession, some are better than others. I also believe the same album can sound better on one DAC than another. That may be why people can disagree with the rating of a cd. My CD's from the 80's do not blow me out of seat compared to today's CDs. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 8, 2018 17:10:41 GMT -5
Apples and oranges, and of course the quality of a given recording depends on the skill of who made it. I am talking about the technical limitations of the format, not what someone might do with it. CD is superior to vinyl in every possible technical way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2018 17:23:42 GMT -5
I will say DVD-A definitely sounds better than CDs of the same album on either my Denon DVD3800 ,Sony DVP-S7700 & Samsung Bluray. OK, DYohn, we can agree that the limits are indisputable. I and others are saying not all CDs are the same of the same album. edit- I can't get a pix to copy, but here is an evaluation of Hotel California albums and how much they can differ. dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=eagles&album=hotel+california |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 8, 2018 17:47:40 GMT -5
Again, we are not talking about the same things...
Some recordings sound like trash no matter the format. Some sound worse BECAUSE of the format.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 9, 2018 5:04:49 GMT -5
Again, we are not talking about the same things... Some recordings sound like trash no matter the format. Some sound worse BECAUSE of the format. And some sound worse (or better) regardless of the format.  Cheers Gary |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2023 10:34:56 GMT -5
My story, I suspect, is not much different to others of my age group. I had a pretty expensive vinyl collection, including some quadraphonic and direct to disc recordings. When CD's appeared I started buying them to both replace and supplement my vinyl collection. Especially the albums that had been to a few too many parties. What I found then, and still do today, is that some CD's sound as good as or better than their equivalent vinyl. But many sound far worse, overly compressed, lacking in dynamic range and some have instruments that are either missing completely or mixed so low as to be almost inaudible. The term we used was "elevator music". As a result I have around 50 or so albums in vinyl that I still play because they sound better than any CD version I have been able to find. Nothing to do with the media itself, it's the mixing and occasionally what master they have used. To be continued. The continuation; What I have been doing the last couple of years is seeking out the best available version of my favourite albums. Whether that be a re mastered CD or an SACD, DVD-A etc it doesn't really matter. I then compare it against the vinyl version, if it's better I keep it, if it's not I return it. For example, recently I have obtained the SACD version of Hotel California which is the only version I have found that sounds better to me than the original vinyl. Whilst, in comparison, I have been trying for years to find a Sam Cooke CD, SACD etc that sounds better than the original vinyl, to date without any success. What actually started me on this journey was DSOM, which I had in quadraphonic form. The SACD uses that mix, from the original masters and it's easily the best version I have heard. It sounds better than the quadraphonic vinyl, which BTW I still have access to. That showed me what was possible, provided the right masters were available and the sound mixer/engineer improved the sound quality without playing around too much with the mix. I blame it for showing what was out there and possible for me to access. It has been my experience that what medium it is being played from (vinyl, CD, SACD DVD-A etc) is irrelevant when compared to how it was mastered and how it was mixed. They have a far greater effect on my listening pleasure than it's source. Cheers Gary I have DSOM on multichannel SACD, but I don't have good pressing to compare. I find the SACD mastering a bit too loud. I would have preferred a level closer to original analog tapes. I'm sure it can be compressed a tad before ruining it, but the SACD is right on the border from being ruined from compression. That's just my opinion. I think it's the only SACD I own that I would consider over compressed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2023 11:31:32 GMT -5
From my experience, vinyl can sound very good and in some cases fantastic. From the 80s and my parents setup and collection, yes I remember pops and clicks, but today we have proper cleaning systems, carbon brushes and stylus cleaning gel. I don't buy enough used records to need a spin clean, but Lasermedia VNC-8 and microfiber towels work great. Regarding floor or surface noise, on a clean record I am unable to detect anything when music is playing and unless the volume is really turned up, I can't really hear much between tracks from my listening position. Regarding floor noise, a modern quality pressing is WAY cleaner than I remember tape hiss. I guess that's another discussion.
On the flip side, I wouldn't really recommend getting into vinyl unless you like some of the artist that only release on vinyl, you have access to a decent collection. With today's prices in the top tier pressings, it's not a cheap hobby. Than again, neither is a $500+ quality DAC, so getting into great sounding digital isn't cheap either.
|
|
