The future of vinyl

[Frank Harvey]

Late teens picked up a cdp and I don't believe things are clear cut. To David from FH I think your generalisation is just not true when you dig in the 90s. I don't believe the Thomas Dolby produced Jordan: The Comeback album by Prefab Sprout in 1990 would sound better on vinyl than on CD. The beautiful and modern production just sees to that.

What did I say?

For some other reason I've preferred The Seeds Of Love album on vinyl, and I've had this album on tape, vinyl and cd.

Have to agree here. I spent years listening to it on CD, then picked up a used vinyl copy around 1993/1994 - wow! It was like listening to a different album, and made the (excellent sounding) CD sound a bit flat and lifeless.

 

[matt49]

Whats "snobby" about describing a piece of mass produced plastic as a piece of mass produced plastic?! If you didn't pick it up from my post, I'm talking about decks like the midi sized turntables that came with (or were available as an option in the 90s) "stacked" mini systems. They really were awful. Even I started out with a piece of plastic - I think it was a JVC QLA110 (from RS - we all start somewhere!). My mate had the QLA220 which was direct drive rather than my belt drive, but for some reason, thought mine sounded slightly better. It sounded really good at the time, but early 80s plastic was nowhere near as bad as they were still pretty well built back then. I moved onto an Ariston Q Deck a few years later. When I refer to modern cheap tat, you can include the Crosleys, a decent modern deck being about £200 up. Hey, there's a Crosley 'hate thread' up - pop over and call them all snobs!

Your comment is like calling someone snobby because they prefer to buy certain foods from M&S because it tastes better. And yes, I buy soup from there, and "Hand Crafted Italian Black Olive Flatbreads" - does that also make me a snob?! I buy some other flatbreads from Poundland. If you're going to try and dig at me, pick on something a little more meaty than that.

You've quoted selectively AGAIN. It's very hard to have a discussion with someone who doesn't bother to read posts properly.

What made your post sound snobbish was a combination of two things:

1. using words like 'suckered', 'taken in' and 'impressionable' to describe people who switched to CD from vinyl. It clearly implies you think these people were fools. If you hadn't meant to imply that, there were plenty of other non-judgemental words you could have used. But no, you waded in with all snob-guns fully loaded.

2. suggesting that vinyl is superior to digital AND (rightly or wrongly) that a price hurdle has to be overcome before vinyl is worth considering. It sounds like you're setting yourself up as a doorkeeper to the world of hi-fi. Not a good idea.

 

[Covenanter]

Whats "snobby" about describing a piece of mass produced plastic as a piece of mass produced plastic?! If you didn't pick it up from my post, I'm talking about decks like the midi sized turntables that came with (or were available as an option in the 90s) "stacked" mini systems. They really were awful. Even I started out with a piece of plastic - I think it was a JVC QLA110 (from RS - we all start somewhere!). My mate had the QLA220 which was direct drive rather than my belt drive, but for some reason, thought mine sounded slightly better. It sounded really good at the time, but early 80s plastic was nowhere near as bad as they were still pretty well built back then. I moved onto an Ariston Q Deck a few years later. When I refer to modern cheap tat, you can include the Crosleys, a decent modern deck being about £200 up. Hey, there's a Crosley 'hate thread' up - pop over and call them all snobs!

Your comment is like calling someone snobby because they prefer to buy certain foods from M&S because it tastes better. And yes, I buy soup from there, and "Hand Crafted Italian Black Olive Flatbreads" - does that also make me a snob?! I buy some other flatbreads from Poundland. If you're going to try and dig at me, pick on something a little more meaty than that.

You've quoted selectively AGAIN. It's very hard to have a discussion with someone who doesn't bother to read posts properly.

What made your post sound snobbish was a combination of two things:

1. using words like 'suckered', 'taken in' and 'impressionable' to describe people who switched to CD from vinyl. It clearly implies you think these people were fools. If you hadn't meant to imply that, there were plenty of other non-judgemental words you could have used. But no, you waded in with all snob-guns fully loaded.

2. suggesting that vinyl is superior to digital AND (rightly or wrongly) that a price hurdle has to be overcome before vinyl is worth considering. It sounds like you're setting yourself up as a doorkeeper to the world of hi-fi. Not a good idea.

+1 (well + 10 really)

Chris

 

[Frank Harvey]

You've quoted selectively AGAIN. It's very hard to have a discussion with someone who doesn't bother to read posts properly.

I did read it properly, and I usually quote specifically what I'm replying to, rather than clog up pages by quoting whole posts to answer a single sentence. It's a good forum practice.

1. using words like 'suckered', 'taken in' and 'impressionable' to describe people who switched to CD from vinyl. It clearly implies you think these people were fools. If you hadn't meant to imply that, there were plenty of other non-judgemental words you could have used. But no, you waded in with all snob-guns fully loaded.

I used the phrase "suckered in" because many were "suckered in" by the "perfect sound forever" tag line, as I have previously mentioned. I even admitted that I was also taken in by it - which would imply that I was a fool as well. Come on Mr. PhD man, you can do better than that...

2. suggesting that vinyl is superior to digital AND (rightly or wrongly) that a price hurdle has to be overcome before vinyl is worth considering. It sounds like you're setting yourself up as a doorkeeper to the world of hi-fi. Not a good idea.

In a previous post, I have said that I buy electronic stuff (particularly quiet electronic stuff) on CD for the reasons I stated, which isn't exactly painting vinyl as superior in that respect. I have a lot of CDs. There are some CDs I just wouldn't buy the vinyl of, because there's a lot of 'not very much' going on - when I listen to atmospheric electronic music, I want to get lost in it, lights out, no room or visual cues, and the odd click and pop isn't going to perpetuate that illusion.

As for the price aspect, any individual wanting to freshly get into vinyl really has to take that into account - otherwise it's akin to overstretching yourself to buy a supercar, without thinking about the cost of insurance, fuel and servicing. New vinyl costs about £10-25 on average per album, whereas CD will be £6-12 ish I guess - I rarely buy new CDs so I don't know the exact going rate at the moment. If the individual is just looking to stick to the used market and scour charity shops etc like BBB, there's little to consider other than maybe investing in a cleaning machine, but if they're looking at only new vinyl, the cost aspect can be a major factor for them. I've always found the notion that people trying to get 20% off a one off purchase of their hardware a little crazy, when it is the hardware that is going to bleed them dry for the rest of their life.

Of course, those that just like the format may overlook the cost because they like what the format does - my record collection, as valued on Discogs (I log everything there so I can remember what I have) is between £9,000 and £21,000 - can I afford that on my wage? Not really. But then, 50 years of top tier Spotify is £12,000 (if it stays at £20, and is still around).

 

[tino]

1. using words like 'suckered', 'taken in' and 'impressionable' to describe people who switched to CD from vinyl.

2. suggesting that vinyl is superior to digital AND (rightly or wrongly) that a price hurdle has to be overcome before vinyl is worth considering.

+ 1

I had a half decent turntable in the 90s - a Linn Axis. My cheaper Sony CD player of the time was a better piece of kit IMO for playing music on. I was informed at the time that spending shed load more money on a better turntable (an LP12) would be the answer ... but I wasn't 'suckered in' and got rid of the turntable when I could. I digitized my vinyl just to remind me of those hissy crackly days ;-)

PS, looking back maybe I should have kept my turntable as a vintage hifi investment piece (not to play music on)

 

[tonky]

Not a nice term - but I was well and truly s******d in at the advent of compact disc. In those days I didn't watch TV. If I was in I was listening to good music on a good enough hi-fi - vinyl. Otherwise, I was out on the p**s (etc). If I remember rightly a number of vinyl albums around the time of early cd (mostly classical I think) were being pressed using a digital process throughout . If it was DDD (digital throughout from start to end). Or it was coded AAD or ADD (analogue recording etc)

They sounded clearer, sharper, drier etc. The hi-fi mag reviewing classical albums used to score sound quality quite high for them - but I wasn't convinced.

But as I said we music lovers wanted "better" - well played vinyl did become scratchy, with increasing background noise. It was buying into the convenience too, of course. I sold most of my vinyl

Like many I am now happy with the digital side of things - streaming off a hard drive - internet radio - a NAS sometime in the future.

I hope I am not "suckered" back into vinyl again! (btw - that's a joke) - I can't afford to buy back into it again. I know it sounds great - but so does compact disc and lossless files.

tonky - did I hear my Naim

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I had a half decent turntable in the 90s - a Linn Axis. My cheaper Sony CD player of the time was a better piece of kit IMO for playing music on. I was informed at the time that spending shed load more money on a better turntable (an LP12) would be the answer ... but I wasn't 'suckered in' and got rid of the turntable when I could. I digitized my vinyl just to remind me of those hissy crackly days ;-)

PS, looking back maybe I should have kept my turntable as a vintage hifi investment piece (not to play music on)

Of course, if you'd looked after your records and cleaned them properly, they'd have played wthout any noise, and would have value. CDs, on the other hand are virtually worthless when they are looked after, and totally worthless when not.

I listen to vinyl and stream Flac files, CDs are a pointless format, other than to rip Flac files from.

 

[Vladimir]

There is this notion about analogue audio, especially vinyl, that it has endless resolution and never ending musical information captured, unlike the "artificial" and "lego block" digital audio, especially CD. Therefore, you just need to pour money and time in the player in order to endlessly extract more and more music out of the records.

However, from the technical point of view, vinyl has lower resolution and less musical information captured compared to Redbook digital. It's essentially in best case scenario 13bit resolution and drowning in noise, pops, clicks, wow, flutter etc. etc. This is because by far biggest bottleneck in a vinyl setup is the smashed blob of vinyl record, and not the player. It was the best they could come up with for mass distribution of music at a profit at that time. It's essentially a business model that people tend to romanticize. After you buy a TT like the Technics SL-1210, the laws of diminishing returns really weigh in heavy and any further investment is in euphonics masked as "better take on the truth".

Video

OK Freddy, this is the other camp's POV, summarized in this post for balance of opinions. However, they are irrelevant since they do not contribute to the revival of vinyl today, only perhaps ditching vinyl back in the 80's.

Let's say vinyl was replaced by CD not because of marketing and hype, but because of easily evident advantages of sound quality and practicality. Why is it back now?

One could say because of the loudness wars that began in the pop and rock genre during the 90's and dominate still today. Are those two genres enough for a vinyl revival? Surely jazz, world music and classical still sound better on CD than vinyl like in the 80's?

Other alternative is Americans hoarding on vinyl because it was cheap, had the nostalgia and cool factor for the babyboomer generation, so the industry used this trend to blow it up in huge hype and marketing of vinyl comeback. So instead of cheap and easy way toa hoard music, it's now the most expensive way and it's becoming a mainstream format in the audiophile niche worldwide.

Maybe a mix of both explanations. Any other versions why vinyl is back?

For what I gather I think I summed up David's and other vinyl afficionados thoughts in this post.

So the general consensus seems to be that people massively switched to CD because of marketing and hype, and audiophiles have smartened up now and began a vinyl revival as the 'perfect sound forever' drug wore off. Vinyl is clearly the better format for sound quality and sonic immersion, and it's here to stay indefinitely. Also the weak link in a vinyl setup is the TT and the more money and time you invest in it, better your records will sound.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Of course, if you'd looked after your records and cleaned them properly, they'd have played wthout any noise, and would have value. CDs, on the other hand are virtually worthless when they are looked after, and totally worthless when not.

I listen to vinyl and stream Flac files, CDs are a pointless format, other than to rip Flac files from.

I'm not sure I'd agree that CD is 'pointless', but it's days should certainly be numbered due to higher resolution downloads and fairly high quality, easy streaming alternatives. I still like buying CDs as I can use them for demonstration purposes as well as rip them to my Zen Mini at home for my own use. If I didn't work where I worked, CDs may no longer be in my collection, although I'd rather buy a CD than purchase an equivalent quality download.

 

[Vladimir]

Music from vinyl records is like a tasty strawberry covered with dog poo. You keep cleaning and cleaning it to get just to the strawberry and nothing else. Music from CDs is like dog poo smeared with strawberries. The more you clean it, worse it gets.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Music from vinyl records is like a tasty strawberry covered with dog poo. You keep cleaning and cleaning it to get just to the strawberry and nothing else. Music from CDs is like dog poo smeared with strawberries. The more you clean it, worse it gets.

Vladimir, you seem a little too obsessed with poo. *biggrin*

 

[Vladimir]

Music from vinyl records is like a tasty strawberry covered with dog poo. You keep cleaning and cleaning it to get just to the strawberry and nothing else. Music from CDs is like dog poo smeared with strawberries. The more you clean it, worse it gets.

Vladimir, you seem a little too obsessed with poo. *biggrin*

In my defence, I have two large dogs.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I'm not sure I'd agree that CD is 'pointless', but it's days should certainly be numbered due to higher resolution downloads and fairly high quality, easy streaming alternatives. I still like buying CDs as I can use them for demonstration purposes as well as rip them to my Zen Mini at home for my own use. If I didn't work where I worked, CDs may no longer be in my collection, although I'd rather buy a CD than purchase an equivalent quality download.

I buy, I rip, I sell (if I can). As I said, the only point of a CD is as a good source to copy. it's definitely not worth the hassle of playing and storing, and it holds no emotional or monetary value.

If my records were destroyed or stolen, I genuinely would cry. CDs will never have that, as they're all instantly replaceable.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Music from vinyl records is like a tasty strawberry covered with dog poo. You keep cleaning and cleaning it to get just to the strawberry and nothing else. Music from CDs is like dog poo smeared with strawberries. The more you clean it, worse it gets.

Vladimir, you seem a little too obsessed with poo. *biggrin*

In my defence, I have two large dogs.

Simon 'RIP' Lewis has some cats that seem to sh*t everywhere, maybe you two could compare aromas? *biggrin*

 

[Vladimir]

Music from vinyl records is like a tasty strawberry covered with dog poo. You keep cleaning and cleaning it to get just to the strawberry and nothing else. Music from CDs is like dog poo smeared with strawberries. The more you clean it, worse it gets.

Vladimir, you seem a little too obsessed with poo. *biggrin*

In my defence, I have two large dogs.

Simon 'RIP' Lewis has some cats that seem to sh*t everywhere, maybe you two could compare aromas? *biggrin*

Cats for some reason are way way worse. I would genuinly get sick if I visit his funeral home for a chat.

 

[MajorFubar]

I buy, I rip, I sell

You do know that's illegal...

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I buy, I rip, I sell

You do know that's illegal...

Sorry, I meant I buy, I sell. *biggrin*

 

[MeanandGreen]

Of course, if you'd looked after your records and cleaned them properly, they'd have played wthout any noise, and would have value. CDs, on the other hand are virtually worthless when they are looked after, and totally worthless when not.

I listen to vinyl and stream Flac files, CDs are a pointless format, other than to rip Flac files from.

This just highlights one of the big advantages of CD and it's "perfect sound forever". You don't need to clean them at all in normal use, I've got CD's that are 20 odd years old and have never been cleaned ever, played regularly and have not degraded at all. Unlike records which ideally need a go over with a carbon brush every time you play it if you want noise free playback.

Another benefit highlighted here with the CD is that it's a very cheap way to purchase new music. Often cheaper than downloads and significantly cheaper than new vinyl.

Even if you consider less than perfect second hand examples of CD & vinyl, the CD is cheaper and will without a doubt play perfectly unlike the dusty neglected vinyl.

It doesn't matter if a second hand CD has been played in a cheapo player or a high end one, there is no impact on the disc. Unlike a used record where poor styli and handling basically destroy it on every play.

I've never bought a used CD yet that doesn't play without error, that includes fine surface scratches and smudges. Used records don't even go on my turntable until they've been cleaned thoroughly, but even then they can be hit and miss depending on the life they've lived. CD is by and large immune to this, unless a disc is severely damaged of course.

If you want cheap physical media it's an excellent format.

It's also the perfect source for the digital playlists we all play. Those files came from a CD, it's very versatile. Take into account the fact that in this current digital age we are still listening to rips from the CD format it goes to show that maybe there was truth in that "perfect sound forever", otherwise where would all of these rips be coming from?

Eveyone listeng to rips are actually listening to their CD collection, just not physically. It's a fantastic format to be able to allow us to perfectly extract it's data and play it 'virtually' if you will.

 

[Frank Harvey]

There is this notion about analogue audio, especially vinyl, that it has endless resolution and never ending musical information captured, unlike the "artificial" and "lego block" digital audio, especially CD. Therefore, you just need to pour money and time in the player in order to endlessly extract more and more music out of the records.

It's almost exactly like old films from the pre digital camera era. Just because they're old, people think they're low quality (some even think they're "standard definition"!), and it's going to look all soft and fuzzy, and generally look and sound bad. Yes they will, if the master tapes haven't been looked after, in the same way that vinyl will sound bad if it hasn't been looked after. But the quality on those reels of tape are far higher quality than people have seen on television over the decades, as well as on DVD and even Bluray - they were high definition before the term high definition was phrased. Many old movies are being rescanned to digital in resolutions of up to 8K, cleaned up, and re-released (and downscaled) on 1080p Bluray Discs - these look far superior to anything people have seen before, and we still have more scope to improve and see even more. It is surprising just how good old films do look, sometimes looking better than some newer films. But it is all down to how they're treated as to how they can ultimately look - it isn't their resolution holding them back. Just take a look at the remaster of Nosferatu from 1922.

It was the best they could come up with for mass distribution of music at a profit at that time. It's essentially a business model that people tend to romanticize.

Until CD came along - smaller, cheaper, to produce, more money for them.

After you buy a TT like the Technics SL-1210, the laws of diminishing returns really weigh in heavy and any further investment is in euphonics masked as "better take on the truth".

As good as a 1210 may be, a quick A/B demo will dispel the myth of diminishing returns sitting so low with turntables.

Let's say vinyl was replaced by CD not because of marketing and hype, but because of easily evident advantages of sound quality and practicality. Why is it back now?

Many people went for CD because of the practicality of it - no more record cleaning, you could handle the CDs how you like, play frisbees, let you kid chew on them, spread jam on them and they would still be perfect - a record will still play if you smear it with jam and play the other side....

One could say because of the loudness wars that began in the pop and rock genre during the 90's and dominate still today. Are those two genres enough for a vinyl revival? Surely jazz, world music and classical still sound better on CD than vinyl like in the 80's?

Maybe it's the steady decrease in dynamic range that is doing it - but as I've said, I have some albums that score fairly low on the scale, and they still sound great.

Other alternative is Americans hoarding on vinyl because it was cheap, had the nostalgia and cool factor for the babyboomer generation, so the industry used this trend to blow it up in huge hype and marketing of vinyl comeback.

How do you make a comeback out of such a small resurgence though? And surely if vinyl is as bad as you say, why would people be moving back to it? most people are getting back into it AFTER hearing it, not to follow some trend.

So the general consensus seems to be that people massively switched to CD because of marketing and hype, and audiophiles have smartened up now and began a vinyl revival as the 'perfect sound forever' drug wore off. Vinyl is clearly the better format for sound quality and sonic immersion, and it's here to stay indefinitely. Also the weak link in a vinyl setup is the TT and the more money and time you invest in it, better your records will sound.

The switch to CD was a mixture of things - digital was all the rage in the 80s, it was new technology, it was more convenient both from a storage point of view as well as handling, it was pitched as being perfect, it was pitched as indestructible, many liked the lack of clicks and pops, and were more impressed by its more 'forthright' sounding nature. Most people had sub £500 midi systems with low quality turntables, so the difference for them was fairly big. Most "audiophiles" had a CD and a turntable.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I buy, I rip, I sell (if I can). As I said, the only point of a CD is as a good source to copy. it's definitely not worth the hassle of playing and storing, and it holds no emotional or monetary value.

If my records were destroyed or stolen, I genuinely would cry. CDs will never have that, as they're all instantly replaceable.

Agreed.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

As I said, the only point of a CD is as a good source to copy. it's definitely not worth the hassle of playing and storing, and it holds no emotional or monetary value.

If my records were destroyed or stolen, I genuinely would cry. CDs will never have that, as they're all instantly replaceable.

Would any of you give two hoots if all your CDs were stolen? They are outdated digital transport, nothing else.

 

[matt49]

I used the phrase "suckered in" because many were "suckered in" by the "perfect sound forever" tag line, as I have previously mentioned.

Well, actually what you said was

I think most were suckered in by the "perfect sound forever" tag line [...]

There's a big difference.

I even admitted that I was also taken in by it - which would imply that I was a fool as well. Come on Mr. PhD man, you can do better than that...

Charming.

If you want academic rigour, then give us some evidence for your claim that "most" people who switched from vinyl to CD back in the eighties did so because they were fooled by the advertising.

In a previous post, I have said that I buy electronic stuff (particularly quiet electronic stuff) on CD for the reasons I stated, which isn't exactly painting vinyl as superior in that respect. I have a lot of CDs. There are some CDs I just wouldn't buy the vinyl of, because there's a lot of 'not very much' going on - when I listen to atmospheric electronic music, I want to get lost in it, lights out, no room or visual cues, and the odd click and pop isn't going to perpetuate that illusion.

That's always been one of the main objections to vinyl from people who listen to classical music. It's incontrovertible, isn't it?

As for the price aspect, any individual wanting to freshly get into vinyl really has to take that into account - otherwise it's akin to overstretching yourself to buy a supercar, without thinking about the cost of insurance, fuel and servicing. [...]

I'm not really interested in arguments about the cost of the media.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Everyone listeng to rips are actually listening to their CD collection, just not physically. It's a fantastic format to be able to allow us to perfectly extract it's data and play it 'virtually' if you will.

You're playing a copied file, nothing else. As I said, CDs are only useful as source to copy, keeping and playing the physical media is a pointless exercise.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I've never bought a used CD yet that doesn't play without error, that includes fine surface scratches and smudges.

You're very fortunate, because I've had loads that have had problems due to minor scratches and finger marks.

 

[Vladimir]

I agree with your first point. Converting analogue video to digital with digital effects and cleaning up significantly improves it compared to the original analogue. This is what they do with original recording audio master tapes. With digital they will remain preserved forever and can be improved with cleaning and remastering from the analogue gunk of the tape media.

CD is cheaper to make as an economy of scale. But if you compare it unit vs unit, CD manufacturing is by far more expensive, advanced and complex technology. Vinyl is like making waffles on a hot press with a mold.

LPs are better for frisbies, I've compared.

Analogue vs Digital = Candle light vs Electric bulb.