Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › vinyl rip vs cd
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

vinyl rip vs cd

post #1 of 297
Thread Starter 
I'm not sure I'm in the right forum but here it goes, what's the appeal of ripping a vinyl that is available in cd? I have the original of Godspeed - Slow Riot for new Zero Kanada and I've seen someone share the vinyl version of it and I was wondering why someone would do that... to me it's like recording a cd on an audio cassette and thinking it would be better than the original cassette but I'm probably wrong. Is it because vinyls are usually better mastered than cds that people listen to vinyl rips?
post #2 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Tuttle View Post
vinyls are usually better mastered than cds
Yep! Though I can't say that Godspeed really compressed their CD masters...
post #3 of 297
Vinyl LP's usually sound better than their CD counterparts. Most new vinyl is remastered by top notch engineers like Doug Sax, Steve Hoffman, Kevin Gray, etc.

Moreover, even with old LP's, the sound will be better because it will not be compressed to death like modern LP's.

Here is a great example:

Nat King Cole - Just One Of Those Things.

Both are 30 second uncompressed WAV files.

Sample From CD

Sample From LP

Consider the fact that this is an OLD CD and it is not compressed to death like most modern CD's. However, it sounds muddy and is drenched in reverb.

The LP sounds more natural.

I have tons of examples like this and this is the main reason I got into transferring vinyl to CD. Afterall, I can't actually play an LP on my iPOD or car unless I transfer it.
post #4 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Tuttle View Post
Is it because vinyls are usually better mastered than cds that people listen to vinyl rips?
Often, but not always. For example, most pop/rock groups releasing on vinyl have recorded entirely in the digital domain, and used the digital master as the source for the vinyl master. In this case, the CD would unquestionably be more accurate, since it contained the original master.

If the group recorded in the analog domain, and/or if the master for vinyl happens to be significantly better, the resulting sound quality could be closer to the original recording. This is the case for a lot of albums that were initially sold on vinyl, then converted to CD when the process was new (in the '80s).

In addition to all of that stuff, vinyl as a format tends to have some high and low frequency roll-off simply because those frequencies are harder to store and play back accurately. This leads to a warm, "liquid mid-range" sound, even if the album shouldn't sound different from the CD (i.e. sourced from a digital master).

So, there are a lot of variables, but in almost all cases, the vinyl version will at least sound different, and in some or most cases, better.
post #5 of 297
Thanks for sharing those WAVs LFF. What a striking difference. That reverb put on the CD version is terrible! It completely destroys the detail of the respective tracks it was placed over.
post #6 of 297
Yeah, LFF's WAVs demonstrate some bad mastering choices for the CD. The high end is much lower than on the LP. For example, the CD is at -5 dB @ 10 kHz, and -8 dB @ 15 kHz relative to the recording of the LP.
post #7 of 297
Vinyl does not sound better than the CD as a general rule.

Many of the old folks high off nostalgia think so and so in their opinion this is true - for them.

Quality DAC's are the way to go in my opinion.

I've heard vinyl, within the last two weeks even, in my opinion, my rig sounds more analog than analog.

Of course some CD's don't sound all that great due to poor mastering and what not, the same holds true for vinyl.

In my opinion vinyl is a pain, clean records, buy brushes, cleaning agents, or giant mechanical record cleaners to make them really shine. Turn over the album, buy new cartridges, et-cetera, not for me.

Also, after the first 1/3 of the beginning of the vinyl the sound degrades in quality. Did I mention that merely playing a record wears them out over time? I don't have to scratch up my CD's to hear music come out of my speakers.

If you dig vinyl, thats great, for real. If everyone had the exact same preferences how boring would that be?
post #8 of 297
As a side note, Doug Sax mastered all of the Pink Floyd CD's currently sitting on store shelves.

Steve Hoffman has mastered many a CD.

Shawn Britton of MFSL is still mastering many a CD.

Telarc is excelent for classical and jazz music.

I'm not saying vinyl sucks, it doesn't. I'm saying I prefer the CD.

Are there some records mastered better than some CD's? Yes.

Are there some CD's that are mastered better than some records? Yes.

In my opinion vinyl is over rated and the inflated prices due to the resurgence in it's popularity seem to reflect that.

Also, I can't blow out a perfectly good set of speakers by walking on the floor in the same room as a CD player. lol

On a side note I've noticed that FLAC files streaming from a hard drive into a DAC sound better than the CD and the Record to me. lol
post #9 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Love View Post
Many of the old folks high off nostalgia think so and so in their opinion this is true - for them.
Who are you calling old? Alright, I'm 35 and remember a time before the CD, but I'm not nostalgic about it. If anything, the terrible sound I remember was a barrier to getting into vinyl.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Love View Post
In my opinion vinyl is a pain, clean records, buy brushes, cleaning agents, or giant mechanical record cleaners to make them really shine. Turn over the album, buy new cartridges, et-cetera, not for me.
Oh, come on. That stuff is fun! Some of us enjoy the little rituals, and records are easily cleaned by hand in the sink. You only need to do it once if you keep them clean afterwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Love View Post
Also, after the first 1/3 of the beginning of the vinyl the sound degrades in quality. Did I mention that merely playing a record wears them out over time? I don't have to scratch up my CD's to hear music come out of my speakers.
The sound is even across the record once you get the cartridge aligned correctly.

While records do wear, they hold up and sound good for years and years if you care for them.

The biggest reason I'll listen to and rip vinyl is because I've found something not available on the silver discs. There's a massive amount of music that isn't. I scrounge around junk stores, used record shops and flea markets. Vinyl is a lot cheaper than CD for the most part, and it gives me access to a mess of interesting recordings not available otherwise.

Even if it isn't the most technically perfect medium, vinyl still sounds amazingly good.
post #10 of 297
In the case of the Godspeed albums, there's more difference than just the mastering. There are missing or added parts to the music, and different structures too.
post #11 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Love View Post
Vinyl does not sound better than the CD as a general rule.

Many of the old folks high off nostalgia think so and so in their opinion this is true - for them.

Quality DAC's are the way to go in my opinion.

I've heard vinyl, within the last two weeks even, in my opinion, my rig sounds more analog than analog. ...
I've got thousands invested in both digital and vinyl and think that vinyl usually beats CDs, hands down. However, SACD, DSD and DVD-A certainly give vinyl a run for its money. Ultimately, when a truly hi rez, hard drive server becomes available I'll move every thing to hard drive, including my beloved D2D vinyl collected over the years.

I'm one of the "old folks" so I can speak with authority that it's not about nostalgia for the people that I know, it's about quality of sound. I love the convenience of digital and I'll convert everything to digital (retaining my originals) as soon as a hi rez solution is available at a reasonable cost (no, I'm not paying 20K for that mid-rez Linn that just got reviewed in Stereophile).

Vinyl DEMANDS a good front end to show its potential, while CD can be pretty good with something like a $200 Oppo. Still, I modded my Pioneer Elite DV-58AV with a Superclock 4, extra shielding and upgraded input and output stages to maximize my digital enjoyment. Still, even with the digital mods my vinyl front-end cost twice as much as the digital front end. $1500 seems to be a price point where you can get exceptional digital results, while a vinyl front end that exceeds "CD quality" (an oxymoron) is double that, typically.

So, when I hear someone say that CD is better than vinyl I think that they must not have heard vinyl done well. With most recordings I don't find it even close. However, if I could by everything as SACD, DVD-A or hi-rez download, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

I suspect that when CDs finally die, the most accepted replacement will be hi rez downloads.

Dave
post #12 of 297
Thread Starter 
thanks for the comparison LFF
post #13 of 297
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duggeh View Post
In the case of the Godspeed albums, there's more difference than just the mastering. There are missing or added parts to the music, and different structures too.
whoa seriously, is that with all their albums? I will have to endure the annoying vinyl recording noise...
post #14 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Tuttle View Post
thanks for the comparison LFF
Anytime. Hope they helped.
post #15 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Tuttle View Post
whoa seriously, is that with all their albums? I will have to endure the annoying vinyl recording noise...
This can be the case with many recording artists. You need not endure the vinyl noise. If your LP is clean and in mint condition, it should sound as quiet as a CD if everything is set up properly.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › vinyl rip vs cd