Vinyl is just a ton of fun to mess with, from collecting, listening to perfecting the system. I could not live without it now. It can be expensive, but for $2,000 - $3,000 you can get yourself a very respectable and satisfying rig. |
Vinyl is still king when it comes to ultimate realism. Once you experience a proper setup tailored to your system you will wonder how you lived without it all these years! Happy hunting! |
I still think that vinyl is more relaxing than digital, if you stick to 1982 or earlier commercial lp's. Relaxation is definitly one reason we listen to music. |
Just enjoy some music, anyway you can. |
Yes vinyl does sound better when properly set up? Why the question mark because most people are not that committed to better sound and with the troubles galore that can happen more with an analog based system than cd. Lets also look at the purchase of software new and old. I would have to rake my brain just starting now looking for vinyl. Where, how, and when would I find it. Would I travel about looking under every garage sale,old record stores,or maybe place an ad on Craigslist and hope for an old widow who is selling her dearly departed husbands 10,000 lp collection for ten cents a record,ain't happening fellows been down that road.What about purchasing newly pressed reissues, Thats another ball of wax. Their expensive compared to cd/sacds, many have to be returned and how long before they close thier doors or just stop pressing vinyl? I have a little over 2000 lps myself and a modest player compared to many on this post. I would have to say if I was starting over I would stay with digital and hope for better sound down the road. |
I think vinyl is clearly superior to SACD, based on listening on my relatively modest system. The Pro-ject RM10 with a Sumiko Blackbird is less than $3000 and will get you very near the ultimate in resolution.
1-bit technology with a 5.6mHz sampling rate CAN indeed surpass vinyl, but I think that the lack of consumer demand for high quality signals is going to limit the availability of high quality music in ultra high resolution fomats. I DID buy a Korg MR1000 to archive my vinyl and show off to friends and make the occasional live recording, but I think we're a few years away from hi-rez digital that equals vinyl.
Dave |
To all intents & purposes this makes a lot of sense -- ten years ago I would have to say if I was starting over I would stay with digital and hope for better sound down the road. Ten years ago, because digital seems to be sliding at the moment; much of it is lossy & severely compressed. So, we (and quite a few pro's as well) are still -- or back -- into vinyl. I think we're a few years away from hi-rez digital that equals vinyl. My Goodness, wouldn't that be great, I for one, am ready to wait a few years! |
I have to agree with Cardinal. What other format has withstood the test of time like vinyl? Vinyl has actually improved over the years, with the release of some original artwork/gatefolds and ultra sleek album sleeves/covers built to last, and reprints from original masters are being cut out of 180+ gram vinyl.
I've been making mix tapes with albums and CD's for many years, and the sound repro is usually very similar between the two formats. I do however love to really push my system, and with vinyl, I am constantly amazed and blown away by the realism of the format. It has withstood the test of time.
If I were you Myoussif, I'd be finding a decent turntable and diving right in. I mean look at the sales of used turntables on the net. It's unreal how much some of the higher-end tables are commanding.
This hobby and format is far from over, and although the DJ and the audiophile have held on to the format for dear life, young buyers are starting to push up the sales of singles, and a new age of listener might actually be starting a trend that depends more on the ear and the art of listening, instead of simply wanting portability.
By the looks of the packed bins of new vinyl at my favorite record store, the format is doing just fine. For me, owning a CD is like owning a poster reproduction. Owning vinyl, is like having the original masterpiece! |
There's been decades of evolution in vinyl technology and it shows in the results. Doubtful anyone one this forum subjects their records to a 1930's steel needle marconi. Digital technology is still a neophyte. Once clocking stabilizes on AD/DA converters at sample rates that can reproduce at least a fourth level harmonic undistorted then I'll throw out the table. In the meantime I'll still enjoy the soundstage and tonal fullness that only analog can provide.
So the recommendation depends on your patience level. If you can hold out for at least another five years then wait. If not, I'd suggest it's worth buying a decent used rig |
Shall I make the move or just wait for the SACD/DVDA ? Isn't SACD dying? It seems like many new pieces of Audio gear do NOT support SACD. For example, I am hot to buy Nagra's high-end CD player and it does not support SACD. Plus many new recordings are not coming out on SACD. It looks like Redbook CD is here for a few more years. Regarding Vinyl, I just don't get it. I have heard a fancy system with really good vinyl and yes, it sounded great, but... Can you put up with the pops, and scratches? I am also thinking of what Peter Aczel wrote in the Audio Critic: "Digital audio has brought us flatter frequency response, deeper bass, wider dynamic range, lower THD, lower noise floor, safer storage, and greater editability than any other technology in the history of sound reproduction. It has every reason to sound better than analog, and it does the possible exception being 30-ips analog tape with Dolby SR, which is capable of sounding just as good
but which the tweaks arent even talking about. They talk about vinyl, for crying out loud; they say digital just doesnt have the same airiness, smoothness, front-to-back depth, dimensionality, tonal gradations, etc. etc. This is truly sickening drivel, without any foundation in logical thinking or accurate hands-on observation.
Vinyl is not a primary medium; it is nearly always a transfer from tape, sometimes even digital tape, except for the very few direct-to-disc recordings. The process of transferring tape-recorded material to vinyl entails measurable losses and distortions, not to mention mechanical ticks, pops and swishes. |
I've been reading Peter Aczel on and off since the mid-1970s. IMHO, he shouts to make his point of the day, but is as likely to flip-flop as a fish in the bottom of the boat. Yes, CDs can sound pretty darn good and digital can sound extremely good, but what we can order online is usually much better in vinyl. It has to do with the format first, but also the care with which the perveyors of vinyl put their offerings together.
Now it's getting harder and harder to buy a CD that's not seriously overcompressed. The SACDs are getting all screwed up trying to offer a surround version of a two-channel recording. With vinyl they're forced to stick to the basics and do a really good job of that.
I've got an incredible DSD recorder that'll give me 130dB of dynamic range and make better than vinyl 5.6MHz recordings, but there's no software available. We'll see what happens, but with the transition to downloads, all the momentum is toward mp3. There are some really good downloads, but they're few and far between.
Anyway, I wouldn't but a lot of stock in Mr. Aczel's rants.
Dave |
I personally think that vinyl will outlast all digital forms in the end. Certainly there is no doubt that it will outlast CD. SACD is a joke. Downloads will be the next thing, once they loose all compression and more easily can be played from a hard drive. Yeah, yeah, I know...lossless still sucks. Vinyl beats everything and probably always will. |
Chashmal, why would you say SACD is a joke? I'm finding that it meets and/or beats vinyl, depending on the engineering. For instance, all the SACD reissues of the classica RCA recordings of the 1950s are as good or superior to my "shaded dog" copies of the same.
With the right playback equipment, even CDs are not "a joke." They leave something to be desired, but with new upscaling schemes to DSD, elimation of jitter in some machines and other enhancements, the format is finally living up to it's promise.
I too like the hi rez download direction, BUT downloading 3-gig files is a drag, particularly when there are errors in the middle of the download. Even on a T1 line the downloads have been slow and inaccurate for me.
Dave |
Vinyl can sound great on cheap equipment, I know since I've been listening to it for 50 years. You don't need an expensive turntable etc,to enjoy vinyl. Yes, it's better but not necessary.
Yet, not all vinyl is equal. Some vinyl really sucks and is not as good as it's digital equivalent.
In many instances it comes down to the recording quality, and some digital, anyway, keeps getting better.
The wild card is digital played from computer files where there is no moving playback (such as a cd player). This has enormous potential and is believed by some (when lossless) to be far superior to any current cd player. If this is perfected and storage capabilities are improved then it could get very interesting. |
Couldn't resist the resurrection of this vintage thread. Let's get past splitting hairs: Both digital and vinyl can be made to sound very satisfying. However, digital is and always will be a convenience format. If you want to easily access your music and don't like to fiddle with gear, go digital. If you enjoy a tactile experience with your software and playback gear, go with vinyl. I fall into the second camp. I have two lower-side of hi-end CD players (each was $1400 new) that satisfy me totally when I need to pop something in and do something that may demand my attention, like when I'm entertaining or drawing. However, when I want to LISTEN, I enjoy the enforced focus that vinyl provides. There is nothing more deliberate than sliding a 40-year-old slab of vinyl out of its beautiful jacket and dropping a needle whose pressure and position you set up onto it-- This act even focuses the attention of others whom you are introducing to the music. |
Another 7 year thread. I love it! Keep em coming! |
As Dr. Frankenstein stated "It's Alive, It's Alive!!!!!" |
Another 7 year thread. I love it! Keep em coming! Ever heard of the 7 year itch? The only cure is the 7 year scratch. You can only scratch with records. The thread lasted long enough to answer itself. |
Screw the "new stuff" it'll be 20 years before they get it right! |
Albert: it seems at this point that vinyl will outlast the plastic CD disc, other modes of digital not withstanding. |
The fact that kids can freely exchange digital files and burn perfect copies without paying has certainly hurt CD sales.
As you hinted, digital will remain but distributed by other means and who knows how many of those might be in our future?
I think LP hangs on because the old die hard music people like myself prefer the sound. No question LP is more difficult to get right and more labor intensive to maintain. |
I think I would take the plunge to vinyl. As so many others have mentioned, there just is nothing quite like listening to music on vinyl. Even with all the newest ways to listen to music,vinyl is still in a class of its own. |
