Vinyl vs. Digital (CD)

[ifor]

Further to what drummerman says, I find the whole ritual of listening to an LP much more pleasing. That sense of expectation and anticipation, almost an event. With a CD, you just bung it in the slot. I guess I'm just an old-fashioned romantic...

Whether CD, Vinyl or iTunes I always listen to whole albums. I never consider doing otherwise. To me, an album is a complete piece and not for dipping into. I abhor bonus tracks that weren't on the original album. If wanted it otherwise I would listen to radio.

 

[matt49]

I've followed this thread since page 1 and unless I've missed something I don't think anyone's been overtly anti-vinyl. Been a few home-truths to counter-balance the rose-tinted view that the format so frequently attracts. There's also been a little bit of nonsense as well about vinyl's supposed higher residual value, but that's only certain rare pressings of certain rare albums, in the eyes of collectors who probably don't even ever play them. The boxes and boxes of the things piled-up in charity-shops for 50p or less seem to have been forgotten.

I think that's right.

Digital and vinyl are two ways of doing essentially the same thing: enjoying high-fidelity music at home. Whilst some folk see the positives in both, it's to be expected that others will see it as a choice: either vinyl or digital. And a thread with the dread word "vs" in its title will inevitably encourage polarization (even if DM did in his OP recommend a more liberal attitude).

As I've repeatedly said on this thread (and I'll only say it once more), for me the issue is cost. I'm very happy with digital playback. I'm also interested in vinyl because I have a (historic) collection of LPs. But if I pump cash into a TT to sit alongside my digital front end, how much will it cost me to get vinyl playback that won't be shown up by the rest of my system? And might that money not be better saved up against a future speaker upgrade?

Matt

 

[Frank Harvey]

Actually David, I think it was one of your comments about how much more lifelike the sound of vinyl is (for whatever the recorded piece might be) that and the others like it and which I disagree with.

Doesn't really matter if you agree or not. It is the same as those who argue about active vs passive, solid state vs tube, electrostatic vs dynamic, solid core vs multi-strand, room acoustics vs EQ, moving magnet vs moving coil, bearing vs unipivot, bi-wire vs single wire, Class A vs Class A/B, etc etc. which is right and which is wrong? There is no right or wrong, just different approaches. Some approaches have been perfected over many decades, some are relatively new.

Personally, I have found vinyl to sound better to my ears on the whole, sometimes in a way that just can't be described. A good CD sounds great, despite its flaws, but I just find vinyl much more enjoyable, regardless of its flaws.

 

[matt49]

[...] A good CD sounds great, despite its flaws [...]

I guess some of us don't think CD has flaws.

Matt

 

[the record spot]

Doesn't really matter if you agree or not. It is the same as those who argue about active vs passive, solid state vs tube, electrostatic vs dynamic, solid core vs multi-strand, room acoustics vs EQ, moving magnet vs moving coil, bearing vs unipivot, bi-wire vs single wire, Class A vs Class A/B, etc etc. which is right and which is wrong? There is no right or wrong, just different approaches. Some approaches have been perfected over many decades, some are relatively new.

Which is my take. Thanks for getting it, eventually.

Personally, I have found vinyl to sound better to my ears on the whole, sometimes in a way that just can't be described. A good CD sounds great, despite its flaws, but I just find vinyl much more enjoyable, regardless of its flaws.

Well, you're welcome to that POV, it's what you enjoy and that's fine. However you just voiced the same sort of thing that infects the Hoffman forum at times - digital just can't do music in a lifelike manner and vinyl rules. It's a tired and outmoded mindset and has been for years.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Which is my take. Thanks for getting it, eventually.

"Had it" all the time.

Well, you're welcome to that POV, it's what you enjoy and that's fine. However you just voiced the same sort of thing that infects the Hoffman forum at times - digital just can't do music in a lifelike manner and vinyl rules. It's a tired and outmoded mindset and has been for years.

Vinyl is a tired and outmoded format that has been around for about 100 years, but nothing has come along yet to bury it along with other dead formats with regards to sound quality.

Is a cello digital? Is a piano digital? (I'll not go on). You're taking a natural analogue waveform of a purely analogue instrument that can have harmonics way above those that CD produces, and changing it into a series of zeros and ones. Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex - and it is extremely complex - multi layered end result comprising of hundreds, if not thousands, of frequencies all playing simultaneously. The day that can be done, and done with the same quality as the studio master on a domestic format, is the day that vinyl might die.

Does a digital piano sound exactly like a real piano? No, it doesn't, otherwise no one would buy pianos any more, they'd all be buying electronic keyboards. Or maybe people buy pianos because of the 'retro factor', or because they think its cool?

I'm not saying digital can't "do music". When used well, it does an amazing job.

 

[Frank Harvey]

[...] A good CD sounds great, despite its flaws [...]

I guess some of us don't think CD has flaws.

Matt

Nothing is perfect, otherwise we'd have a format available now that is capable of reproducing, 100% faithfully, a piano in your living room. Saying CD isn't flawed is like saying Bluray isn't flawed. Everything is compressed to some extent, somewhere along the line. If your system could reproduce drums in the same way as a real set of drums, you'd be half deaf by now, and I'd be completely deaf, as I love a good, tight, powerful snare drum.

 

[Jim-W]

Much of this has to do with age; if you grew up with records then there will always be an attachment to the format. For younger people, there's the romantic cache of vinyl and record players. I guess for those of you in the middle who grew up with cd's then you may prefer that format. I like records but I'm under no illusions about sound quality: I have plenty of warped, clicky and scratched records;on the other hand, I've got plenty of rare first pressings from the 60's in excellent condition. I don't hide them away to preserve them as somebody suggested collectors are want to do: I play stuff every day. I've got a few turntables so I don't ruin a stylus by putting knackered records on, but I'll agree that the condition of records causes worry and I can easily see why some people just can't tolerate the stress involved in maintaining a collection. Similarly, all the faffing about setting up a turntable is time-consuming.

Cd's sound great to me: the new Elbow cd is terrific, but I bought it on cd because I wanted to hear it and the band are not of interest to me as a collector. I can't collect everything even if I'd like to. Having said that, if I saw a copy on vinyl I'd no doubt buy it if the price was right.

Sound quality then is not of the greatest importance to a collector; we want the best copies we can find but we'll happily buy a VG copy until the right one comes along. There's just so much more to music than hi-fi equipment.

 

[matt49]

Is a cello digital? Is a piano digital? (I'll not go on). You're taking a natural analogue waveform of a purely analogue instrument that can have harmonics way above those that CD produces, and changing it into a series of zeros and ones. Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex - and it is extremely complex - multi layered end result comprising of hundreds, if not thousands, of frequencies all playing simultaneously. The day that can be done, and done with the same quality as the studio master on a domestic format, is the day that vinyl might die.

Does a digital piano sound exactly like a real piano? No, it doesn't, otherwise no one would buy pianos any more, they'd all be buying electronic keyboards. Or maybe people buy pianos because of the 'retro factor', or because they think its cool?

I'm not saying digital can't "do music". When used well, it does an amazing job.

This is incorrect -- I mean scientifically incorrect -- on a number of levels.

First, sound is NOT analog. Analog hi-fi is a mathematical expression of a physical phenomenon, just like digital is. If you don't believe me, please read this, which explains the science very well:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/iandm/pdf/chapter12.pdf

Second, the conversion of digital data by a DAC is perfect. The perfection is not just some idle notion: it's been mathematically demonstrated, and no serious scientist doubts it in the slightest.

Third, the synthesis of e.g. pianos by computers is quite different from the digital recording of the same instruments. Synthesized music uses algorithms to approximate to actual harmonics. It does a pretty good job, but it's far less accurate than the digital recording of same instruments. Consider this: pretty much all the music you listen to now, whether on CD or vinyl, has been recorded digitally. Does that make you feel different about digital?

Matt

 

[matt49]

Nothing is perfect, otherwise we'd have a format available now that is capable of reproducing, 100% faithfully, a piano in your living room. Saying CD isn't flawed is like saying Bluray isn't flawed. Everything is compressed to some extent, somewhere along the line. If your system could reproduce drums in the same way as a real set of drums, you'd be half deaf by now, and I'd be completely deaf, as I love a good, tight, powerful snare drum.

Sure, but most of the "compression" you refer to is down to speakers and microphones (and TT cartridges!). Transducers all distort. They have to,because they're contact-based systems. They all suffer from the fundamental problem that when you pass energy through a substance, some of the energy is lost. There is no perpetual motion machine. But this is entirely different from the digital vs analog debate.

Matt

 

[matt49]

I omitted to comment on this:

Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex

Most good CDPs can error correct perfectly, by virtue of substantial buffering. But if you rip your CDs to a bit-perfect lossless copy, error correction is no longer an issue, which is one theoretical advantage of streaming systems. My £300 NAS drive provides a bit-perfect stream to my DAC (in my Devialet!).

Matt

 

[stevebrock]

My head hurts

 

[plastic penguin]

My head hurts

Excessive heat gives me a bonceache too. :doh:

 

[musical0111]

My head hurts

turntable lovers call it digialiitis.

 

[cheeseboy]

Personally, I have found vinyl to sound better to my ears on the whole, sometimes in a way that just can't be described. A good CD sounds great, despite its flaws, but I just find vinyl much more enjoyable, regardless of its flaws.

what about vinyl that's been recorded on to cd? don;t know if you've ever heard any but maybe you should. Best of both of your world then

 

[Al ears]

I omitted to comment on this:

Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex

Most good CDPs can error correct perfectly, by virtue of substantial buffering. But if you rip your CDs to a bit-perfect lossless copy, error correction is no longer an issue, which is one theoretical advantage of streaming systems. My £300 NAS drive provides a bit-perfect stream to my DAC (in my Devialet!).

Matt

Quite right matt49, however if the CD you are ripping has been mastered by a complete idiot and is compressed to hell then it matters not a jot if your ripping to a bit-perfect lossless copy.

 

[chebby]

I omitted to comment on this:

Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex

Most good CDPs can error correct perfectly, by virtue of substantial buffering. But if you rip your CDs to a bit-perfect lossless copy, error correction is no longer an issue, which is one theoretical advantage of streaming systems. My £300 NAS drive provides a bit-perfect stream to my DAC (in my Devialet!).

Matt

Quite right matt49, however if the CD you are ripping has been mastered by a complete idiot and is compressed to hell then it matters not a jot if your ripping to a bit-perfect lossless copy.

An LP will be cut from the same master, so this is 'format neutral'.

 

[chebby]

Is a cello digital? Is a piano digital? (I'll not go on). You're taking a natural analogue waveform of a purely analogue instrument that can have harmonics way above those that CD produces, and changing it into a series of zeros and ones. Then when you play your CD on your CD player (that has to error correct on the fly), it changes those zeros and ones back into the complex - and it is extremely complex - multi layered end result comprising of hundreds, if not thousands, of frequencies all playing simultaneously. The day that can be done, and done with the same quality as the studio master on a domestic format, is the day that vinyl might die.

Does a digital piano sound exactly like a real piano? No, it doesn't, otherwise no one would buy pianos any more, they'd all be buying electronic keyboards. Or maybe people buy pianos because of the 'retro factor', or because they think its cool?

I'm not saying digital can't "do music". When used well, it does an amazing job.

This is incorrect -- I mean scientifically incorrect -- on a number of levels.

First, sound is NOT analog. Analog hi-fi is a mathematical expression of a physical phenomenon, just like digital is. If you don't believe me, please read this, which explains the science very well:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/iandm/pdf/chapter12.pdf

Second, the conversion of digital data by a DAC is perfect. The perfection is not just some idle notion: it's been mathematically demonstrated, and no serious scientist doubts it in the slightest.

Third, the synthesis of e.g. pianos by computers is quite different from the digital recording of the same instruments. Synthesized music uses algorithms to approximate to actual harmonics. It does a pretty good job, but it's far less accurate than the digital recording of same instruments. Consider this: pretty much all the music you listen to now, whether on CD or vinyl, has been recorded digitally. Does that make you feel different about digital?

Matt

When David was defending the 'directional' properties of some boutique audio cables (in another thread earlier this year) he thought that alternating current was an attempt to 'blind' him with science, so don't expect him to be persuaded by scientific or technical facts. That just leads to arguments like "scientists don't know everything".

 

[andyjm]

An LP will be cut from the same master, so this is 'format neutral'.

Well no, actually.

A master (pre master in LP terms) needs some serious mangling before it gets to a cutting head on a lathe. De essing, LF filtering, mix bass to mono and then RIAA pre emphasis. This then becomes the cutting master.

It is not the same as the master used to make the CD.

While the RIAA effects should drop out on playback, the other manipulation remains.

http://www.totalsonic.net/vinyl.htm

 

[Covenanter]

An LP will be cut from the same master, so this is 'format neutral'.

Well no, actually.

A master (pre master in LP terms) needs some serious mangling before it gets to a cutting head on a lathe. De essing, LF filtering, mix bass to mono and then RIAA pre emphasis. This then becomes the cutting master.

It is not the same as the master used to make the CD.

While the RIAA effects should drop out on playback, the other manipulation remains.

http://www.totalsonic.net/vinyl.htm

Interesting link, thank you. I knew they had to do loads of stuff but didn't know the details. It won't convince the vinyl lovers of course.

Chris

 

[chebby]

It still comes (ultimately) from the same master recording though and if that is already b###ered, then both CD and LP will be likewise. (Regardless of the extra stages necessary in LP production.)

My point was that a substandard recording is not somehow 'rescued' by virtue of being on an LP.

It does not get invested with some 'magic' that will make the LP better than the same substandard recording on a CD.

 

[The_Lhc]

It still comes (ultimately) from the same master recording though and if that is already b###ered, then both CD and LP will be likewise. (Regardless of the extra stages necessary in LP production.)

My point was that a substandard recording is not somehow 'rescued' by virtue of being on an LP.

I was of the understanding that the dynamic range problems found on CD come from the engineering AFTER the music has been mastered and only applies to CD, a vinyl version will be engineered separately and it isn't physically possible to create the same level of DR compression on vinyl as it is on CD. It was along time ago that I read that (it was one of the more well-known articles on the Loudness War but I can't remember what it was called now), so I may be mis-remembering completely but if any of it is true then it may well be entirely possible to have a poor sounding CD but a good sounding LP of the same album.

Of course if there's some other problem with the master then none of that will apply, regardless of whether it's true or not.

 

[Coll]

I used to have a vinyl only collection but when cds came I purchased a cd player and my first cds this was back in the ealy 80s. I found that the sound quality was far superior and also that cds were much easier to store and look after. Also of course no more setting up the tone arm and cleaning records.

I sold my entire collection of records and deck and then set about replacing every record with cds.

I dont regret this step and will never go back to vinyl

 

[Frank Harvey]

When David was defending the 'directional' properties of some boutique audio cables (in another thread earlier this year) he thought that alternating current was an attempt to 'blind' him with science, so don't expect him to be persuaded by scientific or technical facts.

Erm, what?! Where was I defending directionality?! Not that it is relevant in any way to this thread anyway. Another member who likes to refer to other things to discredit people - "he said this", "he said that" etc etc. I don't claim to know everything, never have. Unfortunately I don't really have time like some people on here to research some of the things I'd like to.

That just leads to arguments like "scientists don't know everything".

If we knew everything, we'd be living in quite a different world, so I stand by that.

 

[chebby]

When David was defending the 'directional' properties of some boutique audio cables (in another thread earlier this year) he thought that alternating current was an attempt to 'blind' him with science, so don't expect him to be persuaded by scientific or technical facts.

Erm, what?! Where was I defending directionality?! Not that it is relevant in any way to this thread anyway. Another member who likes to refer to other things to discredit people - "he said this", "he said that" etc etc. I don't claim to know everything, never have. Unfortunately I don't really have time like some people on here to research some of the things I'd like to.

That just leads to arguments like "scientists don't know everything".

If we knew everything, we'd be living in quite a different world, so I stand by that.

Ok, maybe it was someone else. I can't be bothered to look either.