Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
The Vinyl people are out again....
As seen here
I can understand when they say things come out mixed poorly on CD, that makes total sense, but a record just can't do it with the way a record works, I would think. Not to mention a needle jumping and such
I can understand when they say things come out mixed poorly on CD, that makes total sense, but a record just can't do it with the way a record works, I would think. Not to mention a needle jumping and such
Comments
There all kinds of differences in audio quality, even within formats. Just like you can hear the difference between a 128 kbs and a 320kbs MP3 (on an appropriate audio system), you can hear the difference between records throughout the ages. Modern technology has made this truly superior analog audio technology really come alive (unfortunately after its prime). It could make a comeback I think but not likely. For example, take a pristine, brand new vinyl and play it on a laser turntable that causes no wear from play. Store the vinyl in a dry, upright position and you now have high-quality analog sound stored and usable in true archival quality. Records that are never played (by a needle) and properly stored will always last longer than optical media or hard drives.
Sound quality isn't why I listen to records though . . . I can't find a significant difference on any of the sound systems I've ever had. I have some albums on record and CD and even though I have a high end Klipsch system, the differences aren't what I would consider quality. I think digital media has clearer bass range and vinyl has better high-end but I wouldn't consider the listening experience significantly different.
The reason I collect vinyl, and will likely continue to collect it, is mostly because there are many specific performances (especially in classical music and jazz/blues) that you cannot find on CDs . . . or they're poorly re-mastered for CD. That and the ladies dig it. I mean, there are few things that will get you points with a woman and her father.
Digital audio recordings are just binary numbers to give the height of the wave (simplification), The laser LP reader thingy uses a laser to gauge the depth of the groove.
The reason that vinyl and the (technicaly superior) CD are dying out is that quality isn't what people are getting music for. though I am considering making a media center and putting a lot of FLAC on it. I prefer MP3 but having the FLAC files means I can transcode without any more than necessary loss.
OK, the laser reads the depth of the groove on a record. The laser reads bits on a CD. How much of a frequency range can I store on a vinyl disc? How high of a frequency range can I store on a CD?
Vinyl has a limit, CD/digital does not.
Frequency Range of Vinyl Record: 7 Hz to 25,000 Hz Source + Article
While it is true that a digital recording can play frequencies an analog recording cannot, this doesn’t matter when it comes to the subjective limitations of the human ear.
The attached article from RTI covers the real difference between what we hear on digital recordings and analog recordings. The output level (volume) of a digital recording can be whatever you want it to be which means they set it higher than records. Typically CDs are about 6dB louder than a photo output. They do this by sacrificing dynamic range however. In fact, if you were to print a record at the same dynamic range as your average modern CD, it would be equally as loud. The catch is that your stereo system has a volume control, but no dynamic range control.
I see this at home; I have to turn down my stereo when switching from a record to a CD.
Now, this makes sense when you consider, as Omnutia alluded to, that quality isn’t what matters to most users. When most people hear their music through Wal-Mart stereos and iPods, you can’t tell the difference. The size of the file is much more important than the quality. If you can handle high quality output in your system however, then you’ll notice the difference.
Your average consumer may only care portable, ubiquitous music alone, but there are some of us that like to feel like we’re in the studio or at the concert.
Vinyl has a built-in limit on the dynamic range of its recordings. Digital has an infinte dynamic range.
The fact is, I don't have a single digital file in my collection that surpasses the quality of the top-'o'-the-line-vinyl in my collection . . . and I cannot go out and buy this digital media at my local Target. This means that whatever other reasons you buy music, other than quality, is what you should (and people do) focus on. This is why the industry doesn't sell master-tape quality music . . . people don't buy it. Even if they could, they likely can't listen to it to its full potential.
Now . . . if they started focusing on the 192khz audio dvds then that would be just grand . . . but these aren't CDs. You'll notice the link/article that started this thread is about CDs fading away. Vinyl has reached a plateau and is even coming back in by some estimates. There are hundreds of thousands of cheap, great vinyl recordings in existence today and only a few high-quality digital recordings so those of us focused on quality have little choice.
Even if my ears can not hear the difference I know that there is a difference and that digital is the better medium.
No, I do not buy Monster Cables. I'm half deaf from being around tanks during my Army days.
Cosmicenema: Vinyl is dead and it is no longer the superior medium for music.
Steve: Some people just like Vinyl and call themselves "Audiophiles". We don't talk to these people.
I went to Paris and Vienna this year and found tons of new records of American music. Delightful.