[linuxworks]

you have a valid point about pure analog things being able to give back (most) of their data over a long long time.

and I don't have to wait long before opto loses bits. it happens in years, not tens of years! almost all my old first-gen (when cd first came out to consumers) cd's that were used in car audio changers have pits and holes in them due to temp changes and just handling.

but digital does not degrade at all if you treat it right. analog vinyl degrades on every play, even if you don't want to consider it as additive, it is. its physics. phys contact is a wearing process. it is - not debatable (not my rules, its how the physical world works).

but with opto, you have at least the chance to get a perfect bit copy before the phys media starts to degrade. even on vinyl, the first play is a destructive play.

and once the data is online and replicated, its safe. replicate it and checksum it and you are totally safe. all data preserved for as long as files are readable. no media needed beyond the initial capture-to-disk.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozz /img/forum/go_quote.gif So spinning vinyl is a full contact sport.

no hitting below the belt (drive) though!

 

[tom hankins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif you have a valid point about pure analog things being able to give back (most) of their data over a long long time. and I don't have to wait long before opto loses bits. it happens in years, not tens of years! almost all my old first-gen (when cd first came out to consumers) cd's that were used in car audio changers have pits and holes in them due to temp changes and just handling. but digital does not degrade at all if you treat it right. analog vinyl degrades on every play, even if you don't want to consider it as additive, it is. its physics. phys contact is a wearing process. it is - not debatable (not my rules, its how the physical world works). but with opto, you have at least the chance to get a perfect bit copy before the phys media starts to degrade. even on vinyl, the first play is a destructive play. and once the data is online and replicated, its safe. replicate it and checksum it and you are totally safe. all data preserved for as long as files are readable. no media needed beyond the initial capture-to-disk.

How long would you guess that vinyl last if kept clean? Ihave albums that I bought NEW over 40 years ago and have played countless times. They show no signs of sound loss. I also have much older pressings I got used that sound as good as new. They will last a life time. I think its funny when posts like this make it sound as though the record has such limited playback. When nothing could be farther from the truth.

 

[ozz]

As was stated you can not beat the laws of physics if it moves and comes in contact with
a stationary object there has to be wear now that wear may be so minute that the listener gets adjusted over time and may not be noticeable till its compared against a never been played copy.

 

[DBrim]

LP wear is just about as pronounced as CD rot.

That is, not noticeable at all. CD rot is physics, too.

 

[linuxworks]

cd rot only matters over time. your first snapshot to hard disk preserves the bits.

there is no way, short of optical scanning, that rubbing a stone against plastic is not going to cause physical wear. wear directly affects the resultant playback wave (unlike digital which has redundancy built in, to some extent). there is ZERO redundancy in vinyl. it could not have such a thing; there is no buffering and its purely real-time

but that's one of its fatal flaws that cannot be fixed.

 

[DBrim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif cd rot only matters over time. your first snapshot to hard disk preserves the bits. there is no way, short of optical scanning, that rubbing a stone against plastic is not going to cause physical wear. wear directly affects the resultant playback wave (unlike digital which has redundancy built in, to some extent). there is ZERO redundancy in vinyl. it could not have such a thing; there is no buffering and its purely real-time but that's one of its fatal flaws that cannot be fixed.

Fair enough. But you are zeroing in on an extremely minute issue. You could say that vinyl is too much maintenance for you, or the pops and clicks bother you too much, or they take up too much space, or whatever. Those are all very valid arguments. But LP wear is nowhere near as much of an issue, and doesn't deserve much attention. Pressing down on something with 2 grams of force just isn't going to wear it that much.

 

[ozz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DBrim /img/forum/go_quote.gif Fair enough. But you are zeroing in on an extremely minute issue. You could say that vinyl is too much maintenance for you, or the pops and clicks bother you too much, or they take up too much space, or whatever. Those are all very valid arguments. But LP wear is nowhere near as much of an issue, and doesn't deserve much attention. Pressing down on something with 2 grams of force just isn't going to wear it that much.

You don't believe the stylus is the only part wearing when it comes time for
replacement do ya.

 

[mark_h]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozz /img/forum/go_quote.gif So spinning vinyl is a full contact sport.

Love it! My quote of the year.

 

[DBrim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozz /img/forum/go_quote.gif You don't believe the stylus is the only part wearing when it comes time for replacement do ya.

Of course I know what happens. The stylus wears. The record wears. The bearing wears out. The belt wears out. And so on and so forth.

What I'm saying is that record wear is not nearly pronounced enough to be fixating on it like he is.

 

[ozz]

Not picking on anyone but if it moves it wears out this goes for laser tracking and spindle
motors so it all has to be replaced if played often enough as for CD rot never experienced it, laser rot on the pioneer Laserdisc yes more than I would like to admit.

 

[linuxworks]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DBrim /img/forum/go_quote.gif Fair enough. But you are zeroing in on an extremely minute issue.

please don't insult me like that, even though you may not have meant it.

I grew up in the vinyl days. I know FULL WELL that the pops and clicks and noise are something you cannot get away from. I may not have heard $10k tables but if you need things that are 10x the price of a good dac - it really scratches my head and makes me WONDER why y'all bother

again, I'd sample the content off 'rare' lp's but I'd NEVER play the source, itself, after capture was done and edit applied.

each play is destructive and it adds up. do you realize what stuff accumulates in the air, alone, in any given household? your 'needle' (I know, you guys hate that term) digs that stuff into the semi-soft grooves.

its a losing proposition from the get-go.

LP surface noise with the best of phono pre's is just way higher than even a $50 dac. fact. numbers don't lie.

I'll accept arguments about content but NEVER about the format. the format is a loser. a well encoded lossy compressed file is still tons better than a lossless LP source. there just is NO good noise floor on lp - its impossible by modern standards.

 

[ADD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your missing the point. The original post is about the rise in vinyl sales.

Respectfully, you are incorrect. The original post referred to a vinyl resurgence. It's main point was not about a rise in vinyl sales. The rise in vinyl sales was used as a supporting argument pertaining to a vinyl resurgence. My point - for the third and last time - is that RIAA figures do not support a statistically meaningful resurgence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins /img/forum/go_quote.gif The sales of new vinyl is way up the last two years. My wife and I travel alot to different cities around the country and we are amazed at what once were only used vinyl stores, now sell alot of new releases and remasters. Also Best Buy has anounced it will make room for around 200 titles per store on vinyl. that alone tells you the interest in vinyl has gone up.

Thanks for the anecdotal evidence, but I would rather go by the RIAA figures. If you think a 0.7% increase in new vinyl sales is "way up" then I am not sure any argument is going to convince you otherwise.

 

[ADD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins /img/forum/go_quote.gif How long would you guess that vinyl last if kept clean? Ihave albums that I bought NEW over 40 years ago and have played countless times. They show no signs of sound loss.

I do not see how you can categorically make such a statement. You would have to be using precisely the same equipment that you did all those 40 years, your hearing would have had to show no decline whatseover in the last 40 years and you would have to have an infallible audio memory. In other words, impossible.

In tests I and other have performed in making high resolution 24-192 copies of vinyl when new and on subsequent playbacks, the decline in quality is quantifiable in terms of reduced output over time - particularly as regards high frequency content over 9 - 10 khz.

 

[ADD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hankins /img/forum/go_quote.gif I also have much older pressings I got used that sound as good as new.

If you bought them used, how would you know what they sounded like new?