[jaduffy007]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlendaleViper /img/forum/go_quote.gif Aha, but you're really kind of making my point for me here. I'm not dismissing the increasing demand for online/electronic media - I'm coming out and saying I believe it is indeed the future of music distribution and far, far moreso than it already is. And while I recognize that the CD isn't dead yet, it's starting to look inevitable.

While I do miss the LP experience in terms of sound quality and packaging, it is the demise of CD quality sound that's freaking me out. I love the download distribution concept. Better for the environment, etc. Problem for me is the sound quality of mp3 and iTunes downloads. Apple's 256aac DRM free stuff isn't bad, but the artifacts are audible to me. I want lossless downloads.

Digital recording *can* surpass analog, but with CD sales tanking and P2P mp3 "sharing" surging, things don't look good. With HD catching on, it's sad people don't desire the same quality experience in audio.

mp3 is the sound equivalent of VHS compared to HD. We can do better. Consumers have to demand it with the power of BUYING music of better quality....SACD, etc. At least buy CDs! If we stop buying mp3, it will go away. Yeah...I'm dreaming.

 

[MdRex]

Vinyls are just so much more expensive to get into, the ENTRY-LEVEL equipment that is required to play vinyl is just so much more expensive than a digital solution. A new vinyl album cost like 2-3 times the price of its CD equivalent. Coming from someone who do not have a large pool of disposable income, I think the sonic benefits (if any) cannot justify the jacked-up price when CD just sound good enough. Larger artworks may be pretty and all but then comes the price of maintenance and care and transport. If my current collection of CDs were to be vinyl, then it would have taken up much of my room, i simply cannot have that much space. Furthermore I cannot just buy a vinyl from a shop, chug it into my waist pouch and take the train home, rip them into my hard drive in lossless and play it on my computer rig.

As far as the CD vs mp3 revolution, I would still prefer by a large extend to hold the plastic jewel case, smell the new-ish smell of the booklets and all. I refuse to pay for downloads and I refuse to download illegal rips, unless the music is only available in digital format.

 

[ken36]

[size=x-large]GOOD STUFF![/size]

 

[eduj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MdRex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Vinyls are just so much more expensive to get into, the ENTRY-LEVEL equipment that is required to play vinyl is just so much more expensive than a digital solution. A new vinyl album cost like 2-3 times the price of its CD equivalent. Coming from someone who do not have a large pool of disposable income, I think the sonic benefits (if any) cannot justify the jacked-up price when CD just sound good enough. Larger artworks may be pretty and all but then comes the price of maintenance and care and transport. If my current collection of CDs were to be vinyl, then it would have taken up much of my room, i simply cannot have that much space. Furthermore I cannot just buy a vinyl from a shop, chug it into my waist pouch and take the train home, rip them into my hard drive in lossless and play it on my computer rig. As far as the CD vs mp3 revolution, I would still prefer by a large extend to hold the plastic jewel case, smell the new-ish smell of the booklets and all. I refuse to pay for downloads and I refuse to download illegal rips, unless the music is only available in digital format.

Agree.

 

[OptionTrader]

At the risk of getting flamed here, I need to toss in my two cents.

Consider this:

The propagation of sound itself is an analog phenomenon. Always has been, always will be. Digital media was really designed for one reason and one reason only. Convenient portability. I believe that we can all agree that vinyl as a relative pain in the ass to play properly. The records need pressed properly in good vinyl, they to be clean, the playback equipment is relatively large, expensive and delicate. At least the equipment that makes it worthwhile is.

When sound is recorded these days, it has to be converted to digital so that we may store and transport it in convenient mediums such as CDs or files of a chosen format. We can easily carry these around with relatively little regard to their integrity. When we wish to play these digital recordings, they must be painstakingly read from the medium, accurately and faithfully converted back to analog, and then properly amplified for us to enjoy. Again, we here at Head-Fi all know that there are many methods employed to accomplish this. The higher the sampling resolution, the better the approximation is of the analog waveform that becomes the sound that we hear. The human brain still subconsiously 'smoothes' these digitally approximated waveforms. This is why some people, myself included, cannot listen to digital recordings for too terribly long before getting headaches or some other discomfort that requires the playback to be paused for some period of time.

This being said, I still prefer a properly recorded vinyl record played through the proper equipment over a properly recorded digital medium played through the proper equipment. My point here is: Why go through all the masturbation of converting natural sound to digital only to have to convert it back to some approximation of natural sound for us to hear?

Please don't tell me I answered my own question...

 

[Davey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OptionTrader /img/forum/go_quote.gif The human brain still subconsiously 'smoothes' these digitally approximated waveforms.

Actually, if you look at the output of a CD player with a good oscilloscope (or any instrument of that type) you'd find that it is fully analog. There is no way you can tell that it originated from a digital medium. You could do a frequency spectrum analysis to determine what the bandwidth is, and that would probably give you a clue to the source since digitally recorded signals must be bandwidth limited for the target sample rate. But many, if not most vinyl masters are either digital or go through digital stages nowadays as well.

Fortunately, I never get a headache listening to music but I have seen where a few people say that. There's a woman over at Audio Asylum who claims listening to digital recordings can even harm your health

 

[OptionTrader]

^^^ I'm sure that there are terabytes of discussions on the Internet that support your argument and I am not sure that I want to spend the energy to argue them. If you are satisfied that digital sound equals analog sound, that's fine. I guess it's just me, my old-fashioned analog wired brain and my ears. I also prefer vinyl masters that are not digital. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I will say that the woman on Audio Asylum probably belongs in an asylum.

 

[eduj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OptionTrader /img/forum/go_quote.gif I will say that the woman on Audio Asylum probably belongs in an asylum.

That site is called Audio Asylum for a reason

 

[ken36]

When the CD becomes a collector's item, I will be a collector.

 

[Davey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OptionTrader /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you are satisfied that digital sound equals analog sound, that's fine.

That's not at all what my post was about. I much prefer the sound of good vinyl playback too. My post merely was pointing out that digital signals are converted to analog before getting to your ears, so your brain isn't needed to "smooth the approximated waveform". The filtering is done in the digital to analog stage of the player, hence the name. Check the specs, they all generally have very low levels of distortion. You can't get low levels of distortion with an "approximated" waveform. Of course, that doesn't mean the output sounds as good as the original analog signals before they were converted to digital and made into a CD, only that the output is a smooth analog waveform

It is true that a small segment of the market (both commercial and DIY) uses designs typically referred to as NOS (non-oversampling) that don't fully filter the output from the D/A stage, and they do rely on the natural filtering mechanisms in our audio amplifiers and in our ears to further filter the waveform, and while some people (and equipment) do report a sensitivity to the leftover sampling glitches, that is a very small part of the market.

 

[OptionTrader]

I fully understand that the digital is converted to analog before it gets to my ears. It's just that the conversion on most hardware is not as smooth as purely technical measurements with oscilloscopes and spectrum analyzers would have you believe. It is often the case that certain systems sound surprisingly better than their specs would have you believe and vice versa.

This is a good discussion.

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken36 /img/forum/go_quote.gif When the CD becomes a collector's item, I will be a collector.

There're many CD that have became collectable...."Target" CD (not the store), early Japanese or West German first pressings, 3" CD singles, CD that have gone out of print, etc.

 

[LFF]

Very interesting read.

The CD is already a "collectible" item. As soundboy mentioned, there are Targets, West German first pressings, OOP CD's, DCC, MFSL and all of these are highly sought after by collectors.

While I highly endorse vinyl, I am also aware that it is a small cut of the pie. Many friends of mine give me a weird look when I tell them that I listen to vinyl. Older people do the same. Vinyl is just a niche market. It is growing but it is still a rather small group.

Portability seems to be the rage. Every time I debate one of my younger brother's friends, the argument is always about how you can't listen to vinyl on the go and the maintenance involved with it, or how bulky a PCDP is. They will gladly pay for downloading a song and in their own words "it's instant satisfaction". If they want to buy a new hit single - they can buy it at anytime they wish.

Personally, I would never pay for a download unless it's lossless and comes with artwork in a pdf or something. Even then, I wouldn't pay full price. I rather pay full price for the physical CD and rip it to my computer and archive the CD in case my HD fails.

I will pay for quality music, packaging and mastering.