"the vinyl has been replaced by the CD, largely inferior in quality" - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverickronin 

OT, but I'm actually interested in that as well.

Don't hold your breath. I've already asked him twice, once in the original thread and once in another thread before this one.

Apparently he either can't or won't elaborate so I'll quit asking.

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry 

OK, so it boils down to the fact that a vintage vinyl deck sounds better than a cheap CD player?

Who said anything about a cheap CD player?

Virtually everyone I know who prefers vinyl prefers it even compared to CD playback on the finest CD players out there.

Who says they're comparing to a $30 DVD player?

Exactly who are the "these people" you're referring to?

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9pintube 

Maybe it's also an age thing, we grew up with the vinyl LP, we/I love the ritual of holding the LP jacket ( let alone the Info and art work on the covers).

And of course the double albums were indispensable for cleaning the seeds out of your uh... Schiit.

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry 

I dunno...."the people" who seem to prefer the crackling noisy sound of a lofi source that carries horrid SNR/THD/crosstalk specs, when they can get a much clearer and just as PRaTty sounding source.

 

But what if they simply don't like that "much cleaner and just as PRaTty sounding source" as much as they do vinyl?

Why do you seem to be so intolerant of those who may prefer something other than what you prefer?

Great! It's all about what gives one the most pleasure and enjoyment.

How does the fact that others may prefer vinyl effect you in any way?

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy 

Yeah, it's nice if you can find ones that haven't been scratched up and played a bazillion times with a 5 pound tonearm.

 

By the way, still wanting some elaboration on your NFB/strangled signal comment.

 

se

I didn't see your comment earlier; I had to go back.  Also, anyone is welcome to send a PM if I miss something.

There are different camps on NFB, most of what I've read seeks to minimize or eliminate it.

If you'd point me to some reading on the other side, I'll be happy to read it.  I take you seriously and I'll change my mind if I see some good arguments and examples on the other side.  I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again, so show me the right direction and I'll learn.

As for the records, I've had good luck finding classical box sets.  Some of them have had one disc played with the others seemingly untouched.  I also don't buy a lot of records and have thrown some away.  I just enjoy going through the bins and finding music I didn't know about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry 

They might as well listen to cassettes recorded in Dolby B for what I care, I just wonder why JM Jarre made this statement on national TV at 8PM that "CD is largely inferior to vinyl"...in 2010....when he's selling a pimped ipod dock.

 

Perhaps because he knows that vinyl is gaining acceptance by a broader audience than in the recent past.

How can you say something that's actually gaining in popularity is obsolete?

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik 

 

There are different camps on NFB, most of what I've read seeks to minimize or eliminate it.

 

If you'd point me to some reading on the other side, I'll be happy to read it.  I take you seriously and I'll change my mind if I see some good arguments and examples on the other side.  I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again, so show me the right direction and I'll learn.

 

I don't have any particular argument one way or the other with regard to NFB. What caught my attention was your argument where you said that because there's a delay involved with negative feedback it "strangles the signal." I was wondering what exactly was the effect on the signal that you were referring to as being "strangled."

If you wish to answer, let's continue this in the original thread:

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/510113/low-impedence-headphones-more-susceptible-to-tube-induced-distortion-why

Right. And music you would likely never know about otherwise.

There's a whole world of music on vinyl that will never be offered on CD or any other digital format for that matter.

se

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry 

ok, I guess it's indeed the distortion ppl like so much in vinyl: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/309979/could-crosstalk-be-what-s-responsible-for-vinyl-s-superior-sound/15#post_4035097

 

"the main diferences in vinyl is a lack of hardness in the treble, soundstage depth, natural warmth, texture throughout the freq. range."

 

they're not interested in a 1:1 copy of the mastertape at all, they want it to crackle and pop w/ low crosstalk and SNR...and I guess JMJ is just playing it old school to sell his (prolly grossly overpriced) ipod dock.

If you can't discuss this issue without constantly backhandedly denigrating people, then just go away.

se

I think the point is, there's nothing 'magical' about vinyl.  Its a clear degradation of the signal in a very specific way, which is pleasing to some people, or because the vinyl gets a different and better master.  That has to be true.  Otherwise this would be impossible.  Either the playback from the vinyl is adding something that the ADC can capture, or you are simply digitizing a copy of a better master.  Either way vinyl is unnecessary.  The vinyl 'sound' can either be added to the master and pressed to a cd, of the better master can be used to make the cd in the first place.

Sure do.

Of course the 2010 numbers aren't in yet because well, it's still 2010.

Read 'em and weep:

And since this trend has been going on for at least the past four or rive years, I've no reason to suspect that it won't continue in 2010.

And here are the top selling vinyl artists from 2009:

se