We asked if hi-fi is getting better and ignited a vinyl vs CD format war

[What Hi-Fi?]

The readers have spoken, and the answer is a resounding yes!

We asked if hi-fi is getting better and ignited a vinyl vs CD format war : Read more

 

[Ian AV]

Better loudspeaker bass units being stiffer and bass cavity giving rise to lower frequency output and less coloured sound.
Far more flexible pre-amplifiers with staggeringly better connection options for matching, improving overall sound.
Volume control with better resolution, graduated in DB leading to more precise level adjustment.
Room correction - Not many have a perfect room. No windows, ratiators, chimney breast or other projections, floorboards, plaster ceilings and not forgetting the shape, etc.
'Leave less of a fingerprint on the result' - Another benefit of CD!

 

[Mrmason62]

Listen to those rudy van gelder recordings in the 50s and tell me today's digital vinyl sounds better.
Digital vinyl is no more than a cd pressed on to vinyl. They use the same digital source. GINGO.
There aren't two masters there's only one.
Analogue vinyl is in a different league entirety to digital.
It's got perfect balance.
Recordings from decades ago loose today's digital masters.
Remasters and remixes are no more than cash ins.
Of course there's no way whatsoever to quantify if digital is better than analogue.
It's all down to personal taste.
And younger peoples ears are attuned to the sterile lifeless sound of digital.
This is why Giles Martin gives his beatles work a digital sound. He openly admits it.
Ive been in both analogue and digital era so I can appreciate both. Those who only know digital and also consider phones and streaming to be hifi have a much more limited experience.
I'm not saying that digital sounds bad. I'm saying that analogue sounds much better. Everything is in balance and isn't sterile.
Ive also got a massive cd collection and a decent player. I just prefer analogue.

 

[Ian AV]

Listen to those rudy van gelder recordings in the 50s and tell me today's digital vinyl sounds better.
Digital vinyl is no more than a cd pressed on to vinyl. They use the same digital source. GINGO.
There aren't two masters there's only one.
Analogue vinyl is in a different league entirety to digital.
It's got perfect balance.
Recordings from decades ago loose today's digital masters.
Remasters and remixes are no more than cash ins.
Of course there's no way whatsoever to quantify if digital is better than analogue.
It's all down to personal taste.
And younger peoples ears are attuned to the sterile lifeless sound of digital.
This is why Giles Martin gives his beatles work a digital sound. He openly admits it.
Ive been in both analogue and digital era so I can appreciate both. Those who only know digital and also consider phones and streaming to be hifi have a much more limited experience.
I'm not saying that digital sounds bad. I'm saying that analogue sounds much better. Everything is in balance and isn't sterile.
Ive also got a massive cd collection and a decent player. I just prefer analogue.

Digital vinyl does not come from the CD master, the CD master is remastered for vinyl to make it suitable for vinyl 's limitations. It's compressed, highs chopped and lows converted to mono. Without it vinyl could not cope. 65dB max dynamic range opposed to CD's 96dB. That's why vinyl sounds like MP3, except for the MP3 lcompression algorithm for file size reduction.
I still listen to my old vinyl on occasion, but replaced much with CD even though it is limited due to the old analogue tape deficiencies. Digital vinyl does benefit from lower noise and distortion of digital storage media that never degrades.

 

[Mrmason62]

There is only one digital master. Thats used for both CD and vinyl.
They come from the same source. Just as analogue only had one master.
Best SQ is from analogue. Its completely different and more natural to digital. Itd got life to it. Its got beautiful balance.
I can easily tell which is ab analogue source and which is digital.
If people are happier with digital then great. If people are happier with analogue then fine.
Theres no right and wrong and it cant be quantified.

 

[Ian AV]

There is only one digital master. Thats used for both CD and vinyl.
They come from the same source. Just as analogue only had one master.
Best SQ is from analogue. Its completely different and more natural to digital. Itd got life to it. Its got beautiful balance.
I can easily tell which is ab analogue source and which is digital.
If people are happier with digital then great. If people are happier with analogue then fine.
Theres no right and wrong and it cant be quantified.

One master down mixed to a vinyl copy from the master as stated above
There was an article in this self same magazine some years ago on the subject during an interview with one of Abbey Road studios master recording engineers. Can't do better than that to know the facts.
However, happy with lossy sound or the closest to the original, everyone's different.

 

[Mrmason62]

One master down mixed to a vinyl copy from the master as stated above
There was an article in this self same magazine some years ago on the subject during an interview with one of Abbey Road studios master recording engineers. Can't do better than that to know the facts.
However, happy with lossy sound or the closest to the original, everyone's different.

Then theres analogue. That sounds better than any digital recording. Especially digital remasters of analogue.
I have always said that digital vinyl is a waste of money.
Digital sound just the same on a vinyl or cd. Its got the same imbalance and sterile unnatural sound compared to analogue.
The real quality comes from analogue.
Which is what I have always said.
Hi-fi isnt getting better because sound quality has got worse.
The source determines everything as you have said.
This not a digital vinyl vs cd debate because the are basically the same.
Its an analogue verses digital debate. People talk like hifi started with Digital. In many ways quality started going down with the advent of digital
In my original comment I mentioned the work of Van Gelder. Todays sound can't get anywhere near his work over 60 years ago.
One example
Another are the horrible remixes by Giles Martin of the Beatles, They are no more than cash ins and sound absolutely awful compared to the originals.
And so on.

 

[Ian AV]

Just like analogue CRT TV is far surpeior to 4k OLED TV, dream on.
Unless you have audio equipment approaching £10k per item, including amplification separates per item, you are unlikely to be able to tell the difference due to the finer details ultra high end items reveal.

 

[Fdkausw]

Hi-Fi doesn't always get better - but it doesn't get worse either. It's more a question of commerce. If the amplifier from the 70s was better than the one from today, who would buy the new one? The parts have simply become smaller and (with the right selection) may last longer. See also the discussion tube vs. transistor.

 

[GSV Ethics Gradient]

Hi-Fi doesn't always get better - but it doesn't get worse either. It's more a question of commerce. If the amplifier from the 70s was better than the one from today, who would buy the new one? The parts have simply become smaller and (with the right selection) may last longer. See also the discussion tube vs. transistor.

Can you keep posts in English please, as per forum rules?