Is the resurgence of vinyl LP's a fad?

[twinkletoes]

Wrong, again and I'm also listening to TIDAL and it's the same quality, better than vinyl.

What makes me wrong?

You pay for tidal as well! that makes it even worst, you’re willingly paying for a service that’s worst quality even though you pay for a much higher quality service which offers more for the same price!

Hmmmmm fascinating

 

[podknocker]

What makes me wrong?

You pay for tidal as well! that makes it even worst, you’re willingly paying for a service that’s worst quality even though you pay for a much higher quality service which offers more for the same price!

Hmmmmm fascinating

I pay for Spotify (which sounds better than your vinyl nonsense) and I'm currently enjoying a TIDAL free trial period, which is also giving me better quality than your vinyl nonsense.

 

[twinkletoes]

You willingly pay for an inferior product by your logic I might add, you can’t argue round it, it’s that simple.

 

[ianrjones]

I left home and school aged 15. I have lived on friends sofas b+b's rented rooms, and sqats. What I am saying is; there was no way I could collect L.P's and, keep adding to my collection, it simply was not possible.
Now I am retired, I have put an average Hi-Fi together. I now have a completely
new Hi-Fi replacement. In boxes in my lounge. What I'm trying to say is; I am not going to buy a TT, then go out and purchase 100's of LP's going back to Love me do.
I consider vinyl promoters as having lived a charmed life. I purchase CD's online. I will never go back to vinyl, not in a million years. Stop knocking Pod,
YOU ARE SOUNDING LIKE A CLIQUE.

 

[Al ears]

I really don't care how people listen to their music, but I like to state facts and the fact is, vinyl sounds inferior to CD and newer, higher resolution formats. LPs will stick around for a while, but in 20 years people will want higher quality sound and delivered in a more convenient way. Digital files, across wireless connections is the future and I hope I live long enough to prove it.

You're beginning to sound like a cracked record......

 

[ianrjones]

You're beginning to sound like a cracked record......

And you know well what that sounds like.

 

[Al ears]

And you know well what that sounds like.

I have no idea what you mean

 

[Revolutions]

 

[GSV Ethics Gradient]

I'd hope in the cold, hard light of day that all concerned can see rules have been broken. No warnings this time, but there will be if it continues. Back on topic please.

 

[DCarmi]

Why does it matter how people listen to music? It is nobody's concern but mine if I choose to listen to LP, CD, tape or Spotify through a pair of £15 Bluetooth headphones.

Music is pretty much the one thing I like to collect. I want to be able to look at it, pick it up, play it. IMHO there is something nice about seeing a rack of vinyl. Though I am not an obsessive seeking out special or rare releases.

I could collect books or stamps or china teapots but a library of CD and vinyl is my thing.

Streaming is good. I get why people like or even prefer it. I wish it were available when I were a lad. But it is ephemeral.

I don't see Vinyl as being a fad. It may be a bit niche and perhaps you can argue the same for CD and possibly DVD/Blu Ray is going the same way.

 

[abacus]

Why is it so difficult to comprehend that it is the mastering that makes a quality recording, not the playback equipment, so no matter how good the equiopment is, if the master is bad it will sound bad.
There is also the case that many who were bought up in the vinyl era have 100s if not 1000s of vinyl (Many of which are not available on modern services or have been remasterd poorly), so what should they do, speand £1000s and buy the new, and forget whats not available on it, or ignore the fact that many of the modern masters are of poor quality and of inferior quality to the old. (Bad remastering)
Just because somethijng is more technologically advanced dosen't mean it will always sounfd better, it still relies on the source being of good quality.
Formatting also comes in handy.

Bill

 

[Kenneth Fernandes]

The shorter the fad is, the better or even the best it will get.

 

[Kenneth Fernandes]

many who were bought up in the vinyl era

Bill

I do not own nor have listened to any Vinyl LP's.

 

[DougK1]

Why is it so difficult to comprehend that it is the mastering that makes a quality recording, not the playback equipment, so no matter how good the equiopment is, if the master is bad it will sound bad.
There is also the case that many who were bought up in the vinyl era have 100s if not 1000s of vinyl (Many of which are not available on modern services or have been remasterd poorly), so what should they do, speand £1000s and buy the new, and forget whats not available on it, or ignore the fact that many of the modern masters are of poor quality and of inferior quality to the old. (Bad remastering)
Just because somethijng is more technologically advanced dosen't mean it will always sounfd better, it still relies on the source being of good quality.
Formatting also comes in handy.

Bill

Spot on Bill

 

[davidf]

Yes. It is.
Digital High Resolution is the future. Especially SACD/ Blu-ray audio.

192 kHz 24 bit.
Bring it.

Unfortunately, they're in a niche minority, much like Laserdisc was back in the 90s. The future, unfortunately, is streaming. Maybe until one day when the whole streaming platform crashes (even for a day or two) and people suddenly realise what they're relying on for their music. Kids growing up won't be buying physical media, not for music, not for films, not for gaming. It's alien to them.

 

[davidf]

I haven't read all the arguing, but I have to say that choosing to use vinyl over streaming isn't being "set in your ways", it's a choice. Being set in your ways means you refuse to even try listening to streaming. If you've listened, considered, and decided against it, that's choice.

Going by the rationale of some, I'm set in my ways. I don't use streaming for my own personal enjoyment of music. I use CD and vinyl, and the odd download, as long as it's of at least CD quality. Why? Not because I'm set in my ways...

Most streaming services will replace an album with a newer, shinier, remastered version as and when it appears. Some might even host both, but unlikely. So when they replace that album, you may get a few extra tracks, and it might sound a bit more detailed, but like most modern remasters, it will have lost dynamic range because they've upped the levels. And in some cases, like Roger Waters' 1992 album Amused To Death, you can only stream the "remastered" version released in 2015. He remastered it, took out some instruments, rerecorded some vocals and guitar, and did some major tinkering. Yes, it sounds much better. It sounds like it was recorded yesterday, a real audiophile's dream. But for me, it has lost the raw sound that I feel suits the album. Plus, he screwed up my favourite three tracks on the album. As the original vinyl run was the only run, I was quite excited about the remaster, so pre-ordered two audiophile 200gm vinyl copies (£50 each), and the multi-channel Bluray Audio copy. What a waste of money. I listened to it a few times and haven't done so since. Suffice to say, that's the only version you can stream. Now whether you like Roger Waters or not, it's a fine example of your lack of choice when it comes to streaming.

So personally, I prefer to invest in something I have some control over. I can choose to buy the version I want to listen to, and I can listen to it whenever I want, Internet or no Internet. And for me, this also spills over into my movie viewing. I use streaming services, but I don't rely on them, and never would. Again, cut or altered films, and some from lower quality sources.

Oh, and I've done the CD vs vinyl comparison - they're not as different as most people think when vinyl is played on a quality turntable. Well preserved and maintained vinyl has no clicks and pops, which is also something that isn't as blatantly apparent on a quality turntable. I think a lot of people who make comparisons in favour of digital have only ever heard a £200 turntable.

 

[Jasonovich]

I haven't read all the arguing, but I have to say that choosing to use vinyl over streaming isn't being "set in your ways", it's a choice. Being set in your ways means you refuse to even try listening to streaming. If you've listened, considered, and decided against it, that's choice.

Going by the rationale of some, I'm set in my ways. I don't use streaming for my own personal enjoyment of music. I use CD and vinyl, and the odd download, as long as it's of at least CD quality. Why? Not because I'm set in my ways...

Most streaming services will replace an album with a newer, shinier, remastered version as and when it appears. Some might even host both, but unlikely. So when they replace that album, you may get a few extra tracks, and it might sound a bit more detailed, but like most modern remasters, it will have lost dynamic range because they've upped the levels. And in some cases, like Roger Waters' 1992 album Amused To Death, you can only stream the "remastered" version released in 2015. He remastered it, took out some instruments, rerecorded some vocals and guitar, and did some major tinkering. Yes, it sounds much better. It sounds like it was recorded yesterday, a real audiophile's dream. But for me, it has lost the raw sound that I feel suits the album. Plus, he screwed up my favourite three tracks on the album. As the original vinyl run was the only run, I was quite excited about the remaster, so pre-ordered two audiophile 200gm vinyl copies (£50 each), and the multi-channel Bluray Audio copy. What a waste of money. I listened to it a few times and haven't done so since. Suffice to say, that's the only version you can stream. Now whether you like Roger Waters or not, it's a fine example of your lack of choice when it comes to streaming.

So personally, I prefer to invest in something I have some control over. I can choose to buy the version I want to listen to, and I can listen to it whenever I want, Internet or no Internet. And for me, this also spills over into my movie viewing. I use streaming services, but I don't rely on them, and never would. Again, cut or altered films, and some from lower quality sources.

Oh, and I've done the CD vs vinyl comparison - they're not as different as most people think when vinyl is played on a quality turntable. Well preserved and maintained vinyl has no clicks and pops, which is also something that isn't as blatantly apparent on a quality turntable. I think a lot of people who make comparisons in favour of digital have only ever heard a £200 turntable.

I think you make a very good point, people can be a little tribalistic but at the end of the day it's really about the enjoyment of music. How you enjoy it doesn't really matter, if it presses your button and that's all that matters.

 

[ianrjones]

Yes, a clique. Good night.

 

[jonboywalton75]

Just got a beer on the go and my turntable spinning, and yes it's THE best way to listen
I LOVE VINYL 😁😁😁

 

[Gray]

Just got a beer on the go and my turntable spinning, and yes it's THE best way to listen
I LOVE VINYL 😁😁😁

...until you spill beer on it.
Be careful.

 

[Gray]

....nor have listened to any Vinyl LP's.

Well you could be the youngest forum member Kenneth.
You'd have to be to never have heard vinyl from a music radio station.

Indeed, whether directly or indirectly (likely directly), Solar Radio regularly use vinyl sources to this day.

Some of the best content I've heard, has never been on digital formats.

 

[nightanddaygamechangers]

I used to really enjoy listening to music on my Dads system back in the late 70’s and early to mid 80’s.

He had a Planar 3, a Sony TA-2650 (or some very similar model) amp, a Leak tape deck with VU meters, that had a lift up window and you slid the tape up into position, a tuner, no idea of the brand or model, and some Omar speakers, that were on stands similar to the KLH Model 5. No idea what the model was. The user experience with each part was completely unique and particularly satisfying. The knob feel was particularly good, though each was very different.

I remember listening to the LP Out of the Blue by ELO. My favourite album art. One time the hairs stood up on the back of my neck. I’ve never experienced that on any system since, using CD or streaming.

 

[Al ears]

I haven't read all the arguing, but I have to say that choosing to use vinyl over streaming isn't being "set in your ways", it's a choice. Being set in your ways means you refuse to even try listening to streaming. If you've listened, considered, and decided against it, that's choice.

Going by the rationale of some, I'm set in my ways. I don't use streaming for my own personal enjoyment of music. I use CD and vinyl, and the odd download, as long as it's of at least CD quality. Why? Not because I'm set in my ways...

Most streaming services will replace an album with a newer, shinier, remastered version as and when it appears. Some might even host both, but unlikely. So when they replace that album, you may get a few extra tracks, and it might sound a bit more detailed, but like most modern remasters, it will have lost dynamic range because they've upped the levels. And in some cases, like Roger Waters' 1992 album Amused To Death, you can only stream the "remastered" version released in 2015. He remastered it, took out some instruments, rerecorded some vocals and guitar, and did some major tinkering. Yes, it sounds much better. It sounds like it was recorded yesterday, a real audiophile's dream. But for me, it has lost the raw sound that I feel suits the album. Plus, he screwed up my favourite three tracks on the album. As the original vinyl run was the only run, I was quite excited about the remaster, so pre-ordered two audiophile 200gm vinyl copies (£50 each), and the multi-channel Bluray Audio copy. What a waste of money. I listened to it a few times and haven't done so since. Suffice to say, that's the only version you can stream. Now whether you like Roger Waters or not, it's a fine example of your lack of choice when it comes to streaming.

So personally, I prefer to invest in something I have some control over. I can choose to buy the version I want to listen to, and I can listen to it whenever I want, Internet or no Internet. And for me, this also spills over into my movie viewing. I use streaming services, but I don't rely on them, and never would. Again, cut or altered films, and some from lower quality sources.

Oh, and I've done the CD vs vinyl comparison - they're not as different as most people think when vinyl is played on a quality turntable. Well preserved and maintained vinyl has no clicks and pops, which is also something that isn't as blatantly apparent on a quality turntable. I think a lot of people who make comparisons in favour of digital have only ever heard a £200 turntable.

Your last paragraph is very pertinent. My findings as well and agree with the whole post.

 

[Gray]

I remember listening to the LP Out of the Blue by ELO.

Didn't make much news but keyboardist (and vocoder voice) Richard Tandy has just died.
Jeff is going to miss him, that's for sure.

 

[jy999]

Wow. I look away for 5 minutes and look where the thread goes! lol.

Two things I wanted to add..

My 10 year old fell in love with Fleetwood Mac after watching Guardians of the Galaxy. He has an old Pioneer all-in-one (read: not hifi) in his room, and I bought him the CD with lyrics and art, and he loves it. He couldn't care less about audio quality, but popping the CD in and reading the lyrics is a nice ritual for him.

I'll also chime in on the streaming. Some years ago I did my own CD rips and did blind A/B testing on flac vs original, and flac vs various bitrates lossless. For me, obviously the flac vs original was random choice. For flac vs lossless, I found around 320kbps mp3 to be a spot where I couldn't tell the difference on my equipment. So, I reasoned, there's my answer.

I use high quality spotify a lot. About a year ago some of my regular music disappeared, so I dusted off my old CDs, pulled some rips to FLAC (hell, space is free these days), and setup a plex server. I was shocked. The difference was immediately obvious. Even in my car with stock equipment. I couldn't believe how obviously lower quality the Spotify was, even on high quality. Is it possible they've been lowering their bitrates? huh.

I since tried Tidal and Qobuz. Both were way better quality than Spotify, if worse user experiences. Apart from the occasional miss on Tidal (sounds like crap? bad upload?), the music sounds obviously better.

So, I am fine with streaming. I am fine with high bitrate lossless.. but my ears are telling me that something fishy is going on with what Spotify is currently doing. Maybe I should just switch back to LPs and be done with it.