• If you ever spot Spam (either in the forums, or received via forum direct message) please use the Report button at the bottom of each post to make sure a Moderator can handle it quickly. Thanks for your help in keeping things running smoothly!

in reality......

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

The_Lhc

New member
Oct 16, 2008
1,176
1
0
Erocia said:
It's an absolute myth that vinyl is better than cd, compact discs superior dynamic range will leave vinyl for dead (the best in recorded music history).
That only matters if it's actually used though, when modern recordings are being mastered with 0db dynamic range it doesn't matter if it's recorded on CD, vinyl or a crisp packet.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
3
0
TomSawyer said:
Other will probably disagree, but to my mind, if you have an emotional connection to LPs, you know it already, and if you don't it just seems like unecessary complication and expense buying into a second format if you're content with the one you have.
Actually I think that sums it up very well. Though I've seen a few new-to-vinyl contributors on here who have been bitten by the bug having only known digital playback until that point (which makes me feel extremely old).
 

BigH

New member
Dec 29, 2012
97
0
0
Erocia said:
It's an absolute myth that vinyl is better than cd, compact discs superior dynamic range will leave vinyl for dead (the best in recorded music history). Vinyl is the sound of distortion,which totally colours the sound especially the bass. And yes I have heard an high end set up, I owned an linn for several years.
Depends what you put on the cds! Interesting that some manufacturers of high end cd players are putting tubes in them presumably to add distortion and colour.
 

manicm

Well-known member
May 1, 2008
557
42
18,920
BigH said:
TrevC said:
manicm said:
TrevC said:
It's the microphony thing that made me reject direct drive turntables in the 70s. They can be made to feed back at pretty low volumes making the music sound muddy, whereas a good suspended deck like the TD150 i currently use is far better in that regard. I also think a cartridge that can't track the inner groove well is not worthy of serious consideration even if it does sound nice at the beginning of a side. This for me means a high compliance cartridge like a V15 in a low mass arm.
Those must have been badly designed direct-drive turntables then. Our Technics from the early eighties had no such issue. A badly designed turntable is just that, regardless of drive type.
It's the lack of suspension that makes it feed back, so it applies to all non-suspended decks regardless of make. If you can mount the deck on a firm base away from the speakers it isn't such an issue.
The plinths on those Technics were not good, lightweight, transmit noise easily, just tap one with your finger nail. So yes poorly designed. The thin lightweight platter did not help either.
Those must have been the cheaper models, we had the Quartz locked SLQ-202 which had a hefty platter, and metal tubular arm. There must have been an ample supply of cheap and nasty belt driven decks too.
 

manicm

Well-known member
May 1, 2008
557
42
18,920
TomSawyer said:
When I owned a Technics TT in the 90s, I found closing the lid while playing gave a touch more headroom before it fed-back - which I needed back then given the volume levels *wacko*
well apart from the odd high end amp Technics lost their way badly from the late eighties.
 

tino

Well-known member
Sep 29, 2011
135
10
18,595
TomSawyer said:
The newer is technically superior but there are subjective and/or emotional aspects that make the older preferable to some that makes them prepared to live with their shortcomings ... if you have an emotional connection to LPs, you know it already, and if you don't it just seems like unecessary complication and expense buying into a second format if you're content with the one you have.
I think you describe it well ... music stored and replayed electronically is technically superior, more efficient, functional and convenient than any physical analogue format could ever be. There is no need for an emotional investment in either the equipment or the format, just the content. In this horseless carriage age, digital music is the motor car and top-end turntables are faster horses. Some people just prefer horses. :)
 

lindsayt

New member
Apr 8, 2011
16
2
0
I disagree totally with the motor car analogy.

A better analogy would be:

Vinyl is a Linhof Technika.

CD is a Canon T6s.
 

luckylion100

New member
Nov 6, 2011
72
0
0
bigfish786 said:
Both can be brilliant.

Whats the problem? If you don't like vinyl, don't buy it.

Same goes for CDs.
+1 Some people obvioulsy must have the final word, on everything. Like comparing chalk and cheese...
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
3
0
Strange thing is when I first started buyng CDs I used to feel like I hadn't really 'got' the album because I hadn't bought it on record. It felt a bit weird. Small silver disc with no real interaction between you and the machine beyond it being swallowed up. But within a year or two, the feeling had swapped round. After a long hiatus from LPs where I only bought CDs, I remember buying Queen Greatest Hits II on vinyl shortly after release. Great, I thought: bought it on record! First new record in about three years. Can't wait to listen it. But it was a let-down. My copy wasn't pressed particularly well (especially the second LP), the whole concept of buying an album on a format which sounded (on my then system) nowhere near as good as the CD suddenly felt more alien than I expected it to, and the following Saturday I distinctly remember trotting back into town to buy the CD.

Now I enjoy a mixture of both.
 

ID.

New member
Feb 22, 2010
207
0
0
luckylion100 said:
bigfish786 said:
Both can be brilliant.

Whats the problem? If you don't like vinyl, don't buy it.

Same goes for CDs.
+1 Some people obvioulsy must have the final word, on everything. Like comparing chalk and cheese...
Both are great sources of calcium?
 
K

keeper of the quays

Guest
ID. said:
luckylion100 said:
bigfish786 said:
Both can be brilliant. 

Whats the problem? If you don't like vinyl, don't buy it. 

Same goes for CDs.

 
 

+1 Some people obvioulsy must have the final word, on everything. Like comparing chalk and cheese...
Both are great sources of calcium?
don't much fancy a chalk and pickle sandwich!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts