|   Hifitommy made an interesting comment | rb122
Jun 26, 2003 10:09 AM | | On the digital domain forum, Tommy posted that vinyl is the standard to beat for sound quality. I didn't reply there since all it seems to lead to is a "vinyl is better - no, CD is better" argument and my experience is that there is NO argument; Tommy is correct.
Just a word about my listening history and then a question... I heard old beat up records as a young kid (I'm 31) but I grew up with the CD. As a musician, I always accepted the massive limitations and distortions of CD and that it didn't resemble live music in any way. I didn't hear vinyl done properly until about 7 years ago and I was floored by how much more natural it sounded. The instruments sounded realistic and the medium had timbral accuracy as well, which I find lacking in CD's. My point is that I'm not an old analog diehard and I can point to no biases at all that would indicate a preference for vinyl. Woodman (a poster at Cables, et al) has posted that our preferences are driven not by one being better than another but by our Attitudes, Beliefs and Expectations, i.e our internal makeup drives our preferences.
Are there any posters among those reading this that came to vinyl later in life and realized its sonic superiority? Or is vinylphilia mostly driven by what one has become accustomed to early in life? Woodman's theory seems plausible but I can't imagine what ABE's I've developed that would suggest vinyl as superior aside from the fact that I hear and perform live music 300 nights a year. Any thoughts on the genre of music being the determinant of which medium we prefer i.e classical for CD and jazz or rock for vinyl? Any insight? Thanks. |
| Check the literature | Ghirlandagio Frescobaldi
Jun 26, 2003 10:22 AM | | The most plausible theories concerning vinyl are based on research into the abnormal psychology and genetic defects of collectors. Search this Analog area under the name, "Techno." Some here discount his theories, but those who do most vociferously typically have a self-serving interest in perpetuating the myth that vinyl is (in some unspecified and unverifiable ways) sonically superior to CD. |
| New moniker? | rb122
Jun 26, 2003 12:41 PM | | Same BS. |
| Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong........ | skeptic
Jun 26, 2003 1:22 PM | | I'm not going to get into the vinyl vs cd arguement here but even among vinyl afficianados, the reference standard to beat is not vinyl but the master tapes from which the vinyl phonograph records were made. Whenever someone really wanted to put on a dog and pony show and strut their stuff so to speak for a new ultra ultra product, it was a master tape running on a studio tape recorder.
BTW, as a techincal point of fact, classical music as a whole generally demands the most from any medium in practically every technical aspect. It also happens to be the type of music I enjoy and collect. I have a reasonably large collection on both vinyl and cd but my preference is for cds. (Please don't tell me I never heard vinyl right and that I need to spend at least $25,000 on a turntable, arm and cartridge to know what I've been missing.) |
| Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong........ | rb122
Jun 26, 2003 2:30 PM | | Well, yes but I and I assume Hifitommy were referring to consumer media. I'll of course grant your contention that the master tape is the true reference standard.
No, you don't need to spend $25K but my first impression of the Walker Proscenium turntable system was that if anything in the world is worth an ungodly sum, this would be. It was that good. But I've gotten incredible sound from a Rega Planar turntable with arm and with a fairly inexpensive cartridge, total cost less than a grand. The sound from this rig was far superior to my ears than any CD on any CD player. |
| It's like a mantra discophiles need to say over and over again | skeptic
Jun 26, 2003 6:00 PM | | OK, there are two worlds, the cd world and the bizzarro world of phonograph records. (Or the transistor world and the bizzarro world of tubes, or the way way out bizzarro world of 7 watt per channel $3000 SETs connected to monster horn speakers.) Well it's not quite that bad. For a while, I was in both worlds at the same time but I made the transition. Ironically, having a cd player got me to experimenting much more with my sound system and I made significant improvements becuase by using the 4 way repeat, I could hear the same musical passage over and over again and make direct comparisons with different adjustments and setups, something that's far more difficult to do with phonograph records or tapes. I don't see why this silly arguement keeps going on. You don't often hear cd fans say out of the clear blue "boy I remember those days of awful scratchy phonograph records. I'm glad they're gone." We just enjoy them. Different strokes? Do they sound different? Yes, I think so. Are there badly recorded cds or cds made with lousy equipment that sound awful? Tons of them. Could cds be made to sound just like vinyl phonograph records? I think so. If the master tapes they were made from haven't deteriorated with time and the original equpment for mixing them down is still available. I feel sorry for people who can't enjoy cds as much as I do. It must be tough fighting a losing battle against an endless tide. When I had LPs I didn't listen much to 78s any more either. And when I do take out LPs to listen to them, It's nostalgia for me, kind of the way you feel when you listen to an old player piano or nickleodeon. And watching the disc go round and round on my beautiful Empire 698 is half the pleasure. It's still a stunning piece to look at. All I need to do now is take out my old Harman Kardon tube amplifier and get the warm glow of the vacuum tubes to light it up at night. |
| It's like a mantra discophiles need to say over and over again | rb122
Jun 27, 2003 5:46 AM | | b I feel sorry for people who can't enjoy cds as much as I do. b It must be tough fighting a losing battle against an endless tide.
It's not like that at all. I have had no trouble finding LP's to purchase (although I do have trouble coming up with enough money to buy the ones I want!) nor am I suffering while listening to vinyl. I'd add to that that I do enjoy CD's. It should be pointed out again that the medium is not nearly as important as the message. Let's create a fake pleasure continuum, using numbers from 1-100, 100 being high. Listening to a favorite artist on CD would net me, say, a 93. Listening to the same artist on vinyl would raise the bar to 95. Listening to Kenny G on ANY medium dips the meter to 14.
I do more posting on music forums than I do here at A/R. Yes, I "just enjoy" my recordings at home but it's also nice to learn how to enjoy them more. |
| Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong........ | DMK
Jun 26, 2003 3:56 PM | | b Please don't tell me I never heard vinyl right and that I need to spend at least $25,000 on a turntable, arm and cartridge to know what I've been missing.)
Shoot, no! How does $140 grab you? I bought a used Technics SL-QD22 from Dougman (who used to post here) and replaced the cartridge, total $140. I use it in a second system. No, it doesn't measure up to my more expensive rig but it's still preferable to me over CD's. I can't speak for RB but I'd be the last guy to tell anyone they need to spend big bucks on an analog front end. Of course, improvements can be wrought with more money but my $140 has given numerous people hope after they've heard it. |
| re: Hifitommy made an interesting comment | DMK
Jun 26, 2003 3:50 PM | | Vinyl holds a distinct advantage over any other medium except the master tape, as Skeptic pointed out. At least, it does in my experience and since my ears are ultimately what matter to me....
Anyway, I started collecting vinyl in 1971. I didn't take the best of care of it but I didn't abuse it, either. When I discovered the CD, I was very pleased with its lack of surface noise and I embraced it for a couple of years. Then I started having problems with the sound of cymbals in particular and as I listened more carefully, I noted the lack of harmonic and tonal integrity in the CD. I started to compare it to my old vinyl and it was painfully obvious that the CD medium was severely flawed. This happened in 1991. When I learned to properly clean my vinyl, the improvement over CD was phenomenal. The LP over the CD is the single biggest improvement I've ever made within my system or my listening room. Everything else pales in comparison.
It may be my ABE's at work. It's an interesting theory but ultimately it's irrelevant. WHY I prefer the LP doesn't matter to me. What matters is that it's a clear preference. CD's can't compete.
Regarding genre, I think Skeptic has something when he says that classical "sounds better" (if I may intimate from what he actually wrote), particularly large orchestral works. I've found I can more clearly hear each instrument or at least each group of players of the same instrument better. On the other hand, I'm bothered by the unnatural, screechy character I hear, especially in the violin section. I find that small ensemble classical sounds better in every way on vinyl. Jazz is clearly better sounding on vinyl. With rock, a lot of the necessity for audiophilia becomes moot. On the other hand, if you know what a Fender Stratocaster sounds like when played through a Fender tube amp, you'll hear that more closely replicated on vinyl.
As for how and where you may have found your biases for vinyl, who knows? I happen to think that it's highly possible that the more technically bent among audiophiles may prefer CD's because of their measurements and that's as much of a bias as anything else. It would be normal and natural to read the specs prior to listening and that knowledge might skew one's ears. I don't worry too much about specs since I have a limited understanding of them. What I do worry about is if what I'm listening to in my home comes anywhere close to what I hear live. With vinyl, it often does. With CD, it's very rare. If vinyl is measurably distorted, may it continue! Was it you who said "I prefer distortion that simulates reality over reality that simulates distortion" - and I paraphrase? Clever quote to distinguish the LP from the CD. It's the end result that matters.
Which reminds me, you asked somewhere on A/R what label the CD's are on that I think sound really good. I can't find the post just now. The label is Creative Improvised Music Projects (CIMP) and they are available from Cadence at www.cadencebuilding.com. Purist microphone techniques, small ensemble, mostly avant garde jazz but plenty of mainstream stuff as well. They are the best I've heard on CD. I've requested they produce vinyl and while the RE agrees that vinyl would be a further if slight improvement, the cost is prohibitive. So much for the argument that CD is higher quality instead of just cheaper! Check them out and let me know if you need some steering toward what you'd most enjoy. There's a slight coldness to these discs but I'm needlessly nitpicking. I could nitpick against vinyl if I tried hard enough. These CD's sound awesome. |
| Many interesting comments. | jbangelfish
Jun 26, 2003 9:04 PM | | This may be an argument or discussion that will never end or be won but it's interesting, just the same. I prefer vinyl over cd as many do but I am not as sharp as someone like Skeptic or others who can modify a system to suit my needs. I'm doing well enough to change a cartridge, some tubes or maybe even a tonearm but beyond that, I'm not confident in my skills. By the same token, these changes can make drastic differences.
I'm 50 years old and have listened to vinyl as long as I have been alive. You could say that I am not a good candidate for a vote but my sons who are 22 and 23 years old agree with me and so does anyone else who hears vinyl on my system. I have about $700 in my turntable/cartridge combination but it will soon rise as I buy a new tonearm to accomodate the low output MC cartridge. I'll still be in a reasonable price range and a friend assures me that it will rival rigs of a much higher price. I think the main reason is a fantastic cartridge that I bought NOS for $350 but is comparable to $2k and $3k cartridges of today. The turntable is no slouch either with .028 W&F and rumble of greater than -74. I bought it used for $326. I also have a Cary PH301 tube phono preamp and use Holland Bugle boy 12AU7s and Sylvania Gold Brand Gold pin 5751s for 12AX7s. This makes for a pretty good front end.
My preamp and amps are Parasound (2000 and 2200's) and are class "A" and A/B, respectively. This makes for a good clean power supply. My CD player is a single play Denon model 2700 from about 93 or 94 and was nearly $2000 new. I'm not trying to brag in any way so please don't take it that way. I bought all of these items used except for a couple of NOS items and I'm still under $6,000, including speakers. Bragging about that would be foolish as I know many spend 50k or 100k or more. I hope it sounds good.
My speaker system is still in the building stage but if you guys remember, I always listened to Bose 901's and was very happy with them. I still use them but in a different way. I use a three way crossover and have two bass modules with two 12 inch woofers each. I use a pair of series VI 901's for treble and a pair of series II for midrange. This ain't the greatest but the VI's are alittle more efficient than the II's and always had alittle better treble. I plan to replace them with some Heil tweeters. All in due time.
Anyway, the system sounds pretty damn good and while I am sometimes amazed at what a good CD can do, I am more often blown away by an original recorded LP. I have tried many reprints both LP and CD and while the reprints of LPs seem to be better (not usually better than the original), the reprint CD's that were bought to replace an album were pure garbage. I would listen to them to wait for a favorite part and when I heard it, I'd usually say "what the hell is this crap?". It was so vastly different that I'd never listen to it again. It wasn't better different, it was just different.
All this said, I've heard some great CD's and I'll never be without them but to me they are more of a convenience and great for the car but if I wan't to hear music that will make me feel like I'm there, I'll take an LP every time. The clarity, the unbelievable stereo effects, the crispness, and tight bass seem superior to me on albums. As you can see, I have trouble putting it into words. You audiophiles are much better at it than me.
Bill P |
| Thanks for your thoughts | rb122
Jun 30, 2003 6:00 AM | | Very interesting and I have to agree that it's the end results that matter. I'm not really questioning my own preferences but rather, curious as to their origins.
b Was it you who said "I prefer distortion that simulates reality over reality that simulates distortion" -
It was. I won't say that measurements don't matter because that is a silly comment but I will say that if measurements tell me that I shouldn't prefer something that I do, I'm going to go with my preference every time, regardless of how it makes me appear to others. I also say "serve the music", meaning that whatever method or medium best conveys the music to me is what I will go with.
Thanks for the scoop on the jazz label. If you could email me at rb1222000@yahoo.com and advise of which discs are more mainstream jazz - not too "out"- I'd appreciate it. I have a printed list of the discs so I'm prepared. Thanks, DMK! |
| i think | hifitommy
Jun 30, 2003 7:51 PM | | dmk was acquiescing to the 'tube disrortion' or 'vinyl distortion' idiots. its one way of getting them off your back. FACT is, its not distortion, its BETTER SOUND. it serves the music because its a more direct connection to it.
quick jazz rec. roland kirk-the inflated tear.
...regards...tr |
| Hifitommy's comment | hifitommy
Jun 26, 2003 9:34 PM | | listenng to vinyl properly done will cost you much less than digital properly done. Teresa at AA just unloaded her sacds and in their place put vinyl and a $200 mmf! at this time, sacd is the only digital format that poses a sonic threat to vinyl.
ABEs? i WANTED rbcd to sound better but found differently. for those that just cant stand the ticks and pops, groove noise in general (not present on LPs), and or the convenience factors of digital, they should not go vinyl. i know people of both species with VERY strong opinions digital nor vinyl is better for all persons. for those of us willing to tolerate the rigors of vinyl playback, and those who feel digital is the only way to go, we are ALL rewarded by carrying out our preferences.
.i am not distracted by a moderate amount of vinyl associated noises nor the inconvenience. my reward is the relaxed and satisfied feeling during and after an LP listening session. and yes, it sounds more like the live experience of music to me.
the live feed from the mixing board is the most vivid of all these experiences, followed closely by master tape playback. vinyl captures and holds a closer facsimile of that master tape better than any currently used medium except perhaps dsd/sacd. and that remains to be proven over time. i am ready for this better sound and have embraced sacd in hopes of encouraging the improved format. meanwhile, vinyl is where its at.
my embracement of sacd proved to be a revelation in the rbcd area. my cheeeep sony ns500v is the best cdp ive ever had in the house and rbcd sound better than ever and i am enjoying my rbcds more than ever. i still buy rbcds and now not so reluctantly. still, the vinyl grabs my inner self more and its not nostalgia.
can cds be made to sound just like LPs? nope, not in a million years. sacd maybe but not rbcd! the 44.1k sampling rate just isnt there. its physics. mulltiway speakers usually designed so the individual drivers responses are flat way above the crossover points to avoid ringing and interference effects between the drivers and also peaks and dips caused by those interference effects. even the top end of the tweeters are usually flat to way beyond audibility to avoid the breakup modes when they run out of steam. this leads to more relaxed sound presentation.
the 44.1 rbcd standard cuts off at about 19k with a steep brickwall filter which RINGS in the audible band. also, the sampling rate cuts the high frqs in too few parts for accurate reproduction. the shimmer and natural sheen of cymbals and violin overtones cant be completely represented. theres not enough THERE there. the 2.8 MILLION sample rate of dsd covers that base nicely. so does analog recording.
skeppie, i can understand why you dont hear some of these things with the empire TT, that massive arm has a lot of work to do. perhaps a mc cart would be good there, try an ortofon kontrapunkt b. you may be in for a surprise. MM carts dont do as well with massive arms so that may be your limitation.
tubes arent all wamth and glow. my arc preamp has wider band response than my adcom 565 and that truly floored me. not what i expected. so much for ABEs. what i got was wider freq response, greater dynamic range and MUCH better tonal rendition. thats not all but this isnt the place for a preamp review. all this with an adcom 555II amp. tubes in the right place, ss in the right place.
.i truly dont enjoy the cleaning process for LPs and all the attendant PIAs but until sacd or another truly hi rez digital format becomes fully viable, i must endure.
...regards...tr |
| Hifitommy's comment | rb122
Jun 27, 2003 5:55 AM | | b vinyl captures and holds a closer facsimile of that master tape better than any currently used medium except perhaps dsd/sacd.
I've been fortunate enough to hear dozens of master tapes and yes, vinyl captures more of the sound of master tapes than does CD. I'm not sure about SACD.
b the shimmer and natural sheen of cymbals and violin overtones cant be completely represented.
The sound of cymbals through redbook CD is a huge problem for me as is the sound of guitars. As you are probably aware, even electric guitars have signature sounds that come through, even through different amps. I once heard Herb Ellis playing what sounded like a Fender Strat, even though he was playing a Gibson ES-175 at the time. The two guitars could not sound more different. Redbook CD distorted the sound in the most horrible manner.
b i truly dont enjoy the cleaning process for LPs and all the attendant PIAs but until sacd or another truly hi rez digital format becomes fully viable, i must endure.
Ditto. |
| Hifitommy's comment | skeptic
Jun 28, 2003 6:52 AM | | I was listening to Liszt's "Faust Symphony" recorded by Solti conducting the Chicago Symphony Orchestra yesterday (Decca cd# 289 466 751-2). I don't see what more one could ask for from a recording. |
| Hifitommy's comment | rb122
Jun 30, 2003 5:54 AM | | b I don't see what more one could ask for from a recording.
They could ask for it on vinyl!
kidding...just kidding.... :) |
| Hifitommy's comment | skeptic
Jul 3, 2003 6:35 AM | | "They could ask for it on vinyl!"
IMO, it would not be as good!
not kidding...not kidding.... :)
Now if you realy want to hear one that probably couldn't even fit on vinyl, listen to the 1990 Doyly Carte version of the Mikado, Sony SK58889. The opening overture has to have been made with the biggest drum in the world. If your speakers handle bass like my Teledyne AR9s, the windows will rattle, the floor will shake, the pictures will fall off the walls, and dogs and small children will go screaming into the night. OK, the last part is an exaggeration. My two rottweiler mixes weren't phased by it and I don't have any children.
PS, in all other respects, it is a beautiful recording and if you like Gilbert and Sullivan, I highly recommend it. |
| you underestimate | hifitommy
Jul 3, 2003 7:12 AM | | the capability of vinyl. try journey to love by stanley clarke, the cut-silly putty. thats what the room turns into. drums likewise, there are plenty of drum strikes on vinyl that are quite testicular.
i dont have any mikados but if i see that one used, it will find its way home with me.
...regards...tr |
| Not I | rb122
Jul 3, 2003 10:13 AM | | I have been so moved by vinyl... deeper bass than my poor chest could handle. I recall the first time I heard Elvin Jones stomp that bass drum. It felt like a spear through my body. Killer! |
| Hifitommy's comment | rb122
Jul 3, 2003 10:10 AM | | b the windows will rattle, the floor will shake, the pictures will fall off the walls,
Sounds totally unappealing to me. I want those pictures in one piece! So it could be said that listening to vinyl is a safer endeavor! But not perhaps if you have rottweiler mixes. :)
I appreciate the recommendation. I'd reciprocate but I'm more of a jazz fan and you probably already own all the classical I do. :) |
| Hifitommy's comment | skeptic
Jul 3, 2003 1:52 PM | | I just ordered two dixieland discs from Green Hill Music. I received a couple as gifts in Christmas gift packages from some acquaintances and I like the quality very much. |
| |
