Customer Discussions > Vinyl forum

Why vinyl?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 162 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 2, 2007 9:26:51 AM PDT
Jean says:
What is the attraction to vinyl technology?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2007 9:44:40 AM PDT
Ward Love says:
Vinyl has a different "sound" -- it also helps if you have top-of-the-line component stereo gear, but vinyl has a more "robust" sound -- to the point that you can often hear "mistakes." One of the greatest 1960's 33 1/3 albums was The Beach Boys "Pet Sounds," upon which, if it had been digital, you never would have heard why the album got that name. Basically, an digital medium is too "clean."

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 2, 2007 6:36:18 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Nov 2, 2007 6:38:21 PM PDT
Jean says:
Thank you for your reply. "Robust" - as in rustic, like a weathered barn? I'll have to play mine again. I do not remember "Pet Sounds" - I just remember driving over a causeway in Florida having left winter in New York, listening to "good vibrations" - it was pret-ty smooth - -
This is amazing that old technology would make a comeback! I love it. Jepne

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 3, 2007 6:37:25 PM PDT
Shane Fenton says:
If you really want to know it's aptly titled the "loudness war"...

It's all based on the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 16, 2007 5:17:05 PM PST
J. mckeever says:
vinyl, when properly cut from a great source that has been well recorded has a 3-d hollographic image that
is amazing and beautiful - a sense of depth that is impossible to achieve with digital - it has lower lows
and higher highs - in the the twenty years that the cd has reigned some very passionate people have
improved the quality of vinyl to the point where it is truly the most audiophile medium of all - digital is very
agitating - analog is soothing

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 27, 2007 1:07:51 PM PST
I agree with Mr. Mckeever, that vinyl records when properly manufactured, and played back through modern technology is superior to digital. What I believe confuses the matter is equating vinyl to analog.
CD's were created when 1k of memory cost over $1000.00. Remember the TRS-80 computer. Unfortunately instead of using todays incredible computer abilities to render analog information from digital information, we are compressing the files.
It's too bad that high resolution formats such as SACD didn't catch on. I fear most people don't listen to music anymore. It is more of an accompaniement to studying, working out, or talking on the phone.
My teenagers love my Pink Floyd on my Rega turntable, but I pod is how they playback music.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2007 11:27:15 AM PST
wewa says:
And dont forget to read:
Which pretty much explains why many are still attracted to vinyl, or have never abandoned it...
You do need a quality turntable, not just a $100 unit, to really understand what the fuss is about...

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 20, 2007 5:46:02 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Dec 20, 2007 5:48:07 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 20, 2007 5:47:26 AM PST
musmov says:
You have to remember that digital music is a "sampling" of the real recordings. CD's are at 320mb witch is a sampling of the "real" recording. Then when you make MP3's (196mb 128mb) of the CD you are taking a sampling of that. So when everyone is listing to their MP3's on their IPOD that are only getting about 1/3 of the music. So much for advance technology!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2007 9:26:39 AM PST
CDs in wav format... 1411 kps.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 10, 2008 1:00:49 PM PST
K. A. Mulkey says:
There was/is also a ritualistic component to playing records (LP's). You got the record out, cleaned it off, cued the record, sat down and read the liner notes and admired the artwork, and LISTENED, all the time with this warm fuzzy feeling as you saw the amber glow of your Technics, or Pioneer, or Kenwood strobe light out of the corner of your eye.
Now, you pop open the CD case and toss it to the side (because there are no liner notes or they are too small to read), open the CD player tray, put the CD in and then go clean the house...or the garage...never REALLY listening. Hence the popularity of the ipod. It's all about background noise, er, uh, I mean music as we do other things. We are just too busy to truly enjoy the simple music.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 10, 2008 5:27:41 PM PST
I believe it was the strobe lights on those old Technics and Pioneer Turnables were part of the problem. When I inherited a friends old vinyl collection, I dusted off my JVC direct drive turntable and played it through my Nakamichi integrated, I remembered why I converted to CD's.
A few years later I was in a great high end stereo shop in Chicago, and heard an incredible lifelike sound. I assumed the source was an $18000 Tranport/Processor combination as it was in the play mode. The source was a $400 Rega turntable, and a $200 cartridge. I bought them on the spot, and while I still listen to CD's, I always wish they were available on Vinyl.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 21, 2008 12:50:58 PM PST
Dom says:
How comforting to hear you say that ! Actually I found out true music lovers are not so numerous, people are just consuming (and throw away somehow). I admit my best times listening is when I do sit down & really take the time. Sometimes it takes a full hour until the whole thing "opens up", the sound suddenly getting better (maybe the electronic warming up too) and the pleasure reaching a rare intensity. Then I hardly believe what I hear...and wouldn't stop the music.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 1, 2008 8:14:57 PM PST
Shawn Owens says:
I agree with you 100%. A few years ago I found an OLD stereo system at a thrift store (old enough to have an 8-track player) and my only concern was if the turntable worked. It does, beautifully. I have what I consider a modest collection of vinyl, something on the order of 330+ 45's and a couple dozen LP's and say what you want, the cracks and pops are part of the experience of listening to records that makes it better (for me anyway) over CDs or mp3s. I have CDs that I would part with long before I would part with my vinyl. In fact about 20 years ago I was offered $10 for one of my 45s and turned it down. I look for vinyl almost every time I hit a garage sale or go to a thrift store/secondhand store. Call it nostalgia or whatever you want but whenever I play my records I sit and LISTEN to the music and perhaps look at the cover art of the albums as I do.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 2, 2008 10:47:30 AM PST
I don't blame you--vinyl still sounds wonderful. I try to find LPs at garage sales; but sadly they seem to be harder to find there these days. (I like classic pop vocals especially but I also like all music.) EBay seems to be a place to find vinyl, too.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 3, 2008 7:00:54 AM PST
Jeffrey Ward says:
As a guitarist, I think the best analogy is tube amps vs. solid state amps. Guitarists by far prefer the decades old technology of vacuum tubes because they make amps sound much "warmer" and you can't get that AC/DC growl with solid state circuitry.

Vinyl has that same "warmth" while CDs sound antiseptic.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2008 8:25:10 AM PDT
Why do you believe the strobe lights are a problem? I bought an old Technics SL-3310 direct drive turntable and it has a strobe light. (I believe it's from the late seventies or 80's). I upgraded the cartridge to an audio-technica AT110E and i'm pleased with the sound for now. When the old turntable brakes down i'll probably buy a Rega or something similar. Is the turntable or the cartridge more important?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2008 10:16:09 AM PDT
I'm sorry that the strobe light appeared to be the cause of bad sound in my post. The strobe was more symptomatic of the direct drive turntables, adjustable motors, and mass produced plastic from technic's, TEAC, BIC etc.
The turnable, tonearm and cartridge are all equally important. I briefly replaced my Dynavector cartridge with a much more expensive one from the same company and it sounded awful on my table. Went happily back to the less expensive one. Without getting into audiophile stuff, check out a stereo shopin your area, and try out a REGA, Music Hall, or MMR rig. You can get CD killing sound for about $ 400. Also look on Audiogon. There are used REGAs out there since they are built simply without modes for fancy upgrades.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 1, 2008 8:53:05 PM PDT
BWR says:
I don't connect to CD's.

Sometimes a live concert on CD gets me but that is up to the band. I feel like there is an ocean between me and the sound on CD whereas I feel involved when I listen to an LP, and I have a 80's turntable with original release LP's from the 70's and 80's and they still sound better.

Many newly remastered albums from the 60's and 70's on CD sound terrible, too heavy on the bass and so clean it is piercing, all the Fleetwood Mac albums from 75-79 sound much more vibrant and exciting on LP and many songs on remasters have been altered or given remixes that don't work.

I also find the drums on many CD releases sound tinny or hollow in comparison and many 5.1 mix CD's are so pristine that they sound like what they are, a bunch of instruments recorded on separate tracks and mixed together.

On LP I get a sense (true or not) that there is a band playing together. Whether every instrument was recorded separate or not.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 2, 2008 7:16:27 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Apr 2, 2008 8:06:35 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 4, 2008 12:04:43 PM PDT
I'm an avid DJ'er, and when I first started out I swore by my mp3 dj technology, which is still good, but then I got an old record player out of the garage and played some vinyl, then I got hooked, bought more and more vinyl, and now I can't get enough of it. It sounds so much better, and now that I have top of the line turntables and sound gear, I much prefer it. It is more hands on than the 'point-and-click' mp3 DJ method, and is much more fun!

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 14, 2008 3:39:31 PM PDT
jammin63 says:
K.A Mulkey,
I could not agree more. You said it perfectly.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2008 9:19:54 PM PDT
I really do miss Liner notes!

In reply to an earlier post on May 10, 2008 11:09:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2008 11:12:36 PM PDT
R. Phillips says:
Even though there are often some little bumps and dips in frequency response when playing back vinyl... and maybe a pop here and there... the music does sound better than CD. Smoother... better imaging... better rhythm... no digital "hash" sound in cymbals... more "organic"... maybe not better dynamics in scientific terms, but a better sense of "attack" in dynamic passages. I agree with the one who said a person with entry-level analog gear isn't going to understand. You need a really good table with good speed stability and all of the tonearm adjustments... A basic phono stage with no fine-tuning adjustments for gain, loading and capacitance to match the cartridge usually won't get you there... The minimum entry-level gear I'd recommend for seriously exploring what vinyl is capable of is probably a Technics SL-1200MKII, a Jolida JD-9A phono preamp or something similar with some fine-tuning capability, A Denon DL-103 moving coil cart that really can't be beat unless you're willing to spend over $500.00 on a Benz Ace or a Shelter...

I've recently had an experience that made me absolutely sure of why I never warmed up to CDs and stuck with playing a lot of vinyl....

I got to hear the same recording played on a nice system from a computer with a pro recording sound card in two versions. A 16/44.1 CD quality version and a 24/96 version. The difference between the two was just as obvious as the difference between CD and mp3. The CD quality version had "hashy" highs, vague imaging, poor sense of rhythm and dynamics sounded "mushy" and lacking "power". The overall sound was "cold" like I have come to expect from CD. The 24/96 version sounded MUCH better... much more like vinyl, but without the bumps and dips in frequency response. All of the faults in the CD quality version were corrected. Imaging was much better... Timing and dynamics sounded dead-on. No "hash" or cold, "mushy" sound.

So... My conclusion is that digital sound isn't to blame... It's just that the 16/44.1 CDs were a first step into a digital format for the masses and it wasn't quite as perfect as promised. They chose 16/44.1 because it was simply all the data they could fit on a disk at the time. All the problems I have with CD sound were corrected when listening to a digital recording made at a higher resolution. I think the sound of CDs is a major part of why music sales have slumped and this generation cares little about hi-fi. A system can only sound as good as what you play on it and the CD sound has NEVER "taken me away" like the sound of vinyl (or higher resolution digital) can.

Until they introduce a 24/96 format that becomes accepted... I'll have to stick with vinyl. They should have done it LONG ago. I think they let things get to the point where they sold us bad sounding music so long... people just don't care anymore and a new higher resoulution format will be a hard sell (hence the failure of HDCD catching on). If I were the record companies, I would just introduce something new and stop making the CDs. My bet is that people would slowly start to value sound quality again and probably get more into music again over time, even if they had to be forced to buy a new, better format right now by ceasing production of the old one. I sure wouldn't miss those nasty sounding little silver discs. They were the first attempt at a digital medium for the masses. But, it's become very clear the resolution is not good enough to sound "musical". I'm sure the recording industry has suffered due to this. Why do they want to keep hurting themselves by selling a poor product and blaming us for file sharing, etc?... Time to move on and sell us a quality product with higher resolution easily stored on a disc using technology that's now old.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 4, 2008 4:43:51 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 21, 2008 3:43:12 AM PDT
K.TheaterFan says:
I agree with you the 24/96 is better detail and thicker sound. But the artificial increased and the sound didn't come closer to analog, same thing to SACD and other digital medium. In my opinion all analog formats sound better. For example, people in the past never complaints against the tape cassettes even there was hiss noise, simply because sound is natural, this is the sign of success for analog. Analog or LP sound very relax, full and smooth natural, even if you listen to music not in your style or desire still sound charming.

Many information and details in CD lowered or disappeared due to compression, in order to enhance resolution. That's why the micro dynamics like echoes; air and far notes become too weak and missing, also the sound become too edgy and sterile. So what we heard from digital is not 100% full sound but a lot of manipulations. Digital have reach good level in playback but not natural level.

It is very sad when we through out all our old tapes, records, VHS believing wrongly they are old technology and digital better new, they turned up to be best formats.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Vinyl forum (319 discussions)


This discussion

Discussion in:  Vinyl forum
Participants:  63
Total posts:  162
Initial post:  Nov 2, 2007
Latest post:  Aug 30, 2011

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers

Search Customer Discussions