[Sal1950]

  Quote:
Not that I'm a fan of vinyl -- less a couple of unique masterings exclusive to this medium -- but it just sounds like you disregarded the entire thread and wanted to have a go at people. This is the Sound Science section, not the Sound Science Circlejerk section.

Not my intention at all. But the subject of this thread asks a question and I answered it, IMHO, in as short and sweet a manner as possible.  There are over 400  posts here attempting to do the same but when the facts of the matter are as they are, I just see no reason in going on and on about it.
If you enjoy listening to vinyl for it's nostalgic sound, (the proven measurable distortions of the media) or enjoy the ritual of preparing each LP side for playback (cleaning, etc.) that's great. If you enjoy displaying your wealth by having extremely expensive vinyl playback equipment on display and demo'ing it to your friends, that's cool too! Just don't try and justify it with ridiculous claims of superior sound. That position only makes this lunatic fringe of audio the laughing stock of any other scientific technological endeavor.
I have a 1925 Atwater Kent Model 20 Compact that I get a real kick out of firing it up for friends just due to it's age and to demo the sound of an old horn speaker.
I also have a 1939 Zenith that I also enjoy playing, envisioning a family gathered around it listening to FDR making his famous Pearl Harbor attack speak, or Harry Truman announcing victory over Germany and then Japan, a real part of history. One day soon I hope to find a Edison Cylinder player I can afford to add to my collection, the coolest of all in antique music playback.
But both are just artifacts of the past, as is vinyl playback. Cool toys but not something to use to experience the SOTA in sound reproduction.

 

[Exacoustatowner]

Not my intention at all. But the subject of this thread asks a question and I answered it, IMHO, in as short and sweet a manner as possible.  There are over 400  posts here attempting to do the same but when the facts of the matter are as they are, I just see no reason in going on and on about it.
If you enjoy listening to vinyl for it's nostalgic sound, (the proven measurable distortion of the media) or enjoy the ritual of preparing each LP side for playback (cleaning, etc.) that's great. If you enjoy displaying your wealth by having extremely expensive vinyl playback equipment on display and demo'ing it to your friends, that's cool too! Just don't try and justify it with ridiculous claims of superior sound. That position only makes this lunatic fringe of audio the laughing stock of any other scientific technological endeavor.
I have a 1925 Atwater Kent Model 20 Compact that I get a real kick out of firing it up for friends just due to it's age and to demo the sound of an old horn speaker.
I also have a 1939 Zenith that I also enjoy playing, envisioning a family gathered around it listening to FDR making his famous Pearl Harbor attack speak, or Harry Truman announcing victory over Germany and then Japan, a real part of history. One day soon I hope to find a Edison Cylinder player I can afford to add to my collection, the coolest of all in antique music playback.
But both are just artifacts of the past, as is vinyl playback. Cool toys but not something to use to experience the SOTA in sound reproduction.

Well said!

 

[Exacoustatowner]

I think it’s entirely possible to be at either end of the spectrum and be WRONG.

I’ve stated before that I still enjoy listening to vinyl and tubes and want to understand WHY. (96% of my listening is digital for sheer practicality).

100% understand and agree with all of the advantages (technical and practical) of digital but again still want to understand why so many people express preference for Vinyl/Tube. Much of the preference can be explained by nostalgia, tactile pleasure of physical medium etc. but I’m still CURIOUS if there are psycho-acoustic principles behind why some people hear digital as “bright”, “thin” etc.  Not everyone is a “Flat Earther” but are not also 100% convinced that there might not be inherent properties in either medium that affect how people perceive (and enjoy!) music. Like it or not our brains are heavily involved in how we “hear” music and if there is a physical aspect to reproduction that affects how our brains interpret then it would be a real variable.

Not that I want to defend or promote vinyl/tube I simply want to understand if there is some aspect of my digital setup that I might ENJOY tweaking purely for my PLEASURE based on that learning.

Gift from my Wife

I get it. I have what some call an "endgame" integrated amp from "Schiit Audio" called the Ragnarok. It's a fully balanced "circlatron Class A MOSFET bla blah design that sounds fantastic. Recently I've been doing a lot of A/B testing with the CD player repeating certain 2-3 second snippets of music and quickly switching my headphones between units. About 1-2 second delay. Levels matched by ear. Also deliberately making one a little louder then the other
My other integrated amp is the Lyr with various highly rated tubes.
Not entirely scientific by any means!
But I have to say I Subjectively Enjoy the hybrid Lyr for some music and the Ragnarok for other. It may be a subtle EQ effect.
I very subjectively perceive the fully balanced signal path CD player, Ragnarok, headphones as sounding better- haring more "Hall reverb" with all balanced.
I can't state this is scientific (sighted, no double blind, approximate level matching), but I still Subjectively enjoy them differently

 

[spaark]

  Not my intention at all. But the subject of this thread asks a question and I answered it, IMHO, in as short and sweet a manner as possible.  There are over 400  posts here attempting to do the same but when the facts of the matter are as they are, I just see no reason in going on and on about it.
If you enjoy listening to vinyl for it's nostalgic sound, (the proven measurable distortions of the media) or enjoy the ritual of preparing each LP side for playback (cleaning, etc.) that's great. If you enjoy displaying your wealth by having extremely expensive vinyl playback equipment on display and demo'ing it to your friends, that's cool too! Just don't try and justify it with ridiculous claims of superior sound. That position only makes this lunatic fringe of audio the laughing stock of any other scientific technological endeavor.
I have a 1925 Atwater Kent Model 20 Compact that I get a real kick out of firing it up for friends just due to it's age and to demo the sound of an old horn speaker.
I also have a 1939 Zenith that I also enjoy playing, envisioning a family gathered around it listening to FDR making his famous Pearl Harbor attack speak, or Harry Truman announcing victory over Germany and then Japan, a real part of history. One day soon I hope to find a Edison Cylinder player I can afford to add to my collection, the coolest of all in antique music playback.
But both are just artifacts of the past, as is vinyl playback. Cool toys but not something to use to experience the SOTA in sound reproduction.

I understand where you're coming from, but let's be honest, there was nothing constructive in that comment, whatever your intention. I see a lot of ipsedixitisms outside this section, making the sorts of claims you dislike. It comes off bad to me in either case. Anyway, it's not really a big deal now. I've said worse things than you on a whim .

 

[wnmnkh]

There is only one, but a very good valid argument for having vinyl setup.
 
 
There are tons of records that are only available as vinyl. Yes, there are a lot of digital re-releases, but quite a lot of stuffs never made into CDs. If you have only digital setup, you won't get to hear them.
 
 
Recently I obtained an entry-level vinyl setup once I realized I was missing those records. A nice entry-level TT costs about 250~300 bucks with cart, and you can grab a phono amp around 60~120 dollar range if TT does not have it inside. I think spending 250~420 bucks is not that bad if you have a decent digital setup already.
 
That said, when I first heard my vinyl setup, I immediately understood why classical labels quickly abandoned vinyl and all-in into digital. Listening to quiet passages ones and small-scale play is quite mediocre experience.

 

[sonitus mirus]

  There is only one, but a very good valid argument for having vinyl setup.
 
 
There are tons of records that are only available as vinyl. Yes, there are a lot of digital re-releases, but quite a lot of stuffs never made into CDs. If you have only digital setup, you won't get to hear them.
 
 
Recently I obtained an entry-level vinyl setup once I realized I was missing those records. A nice entry-level TT costs about 250~300 bucks with cart, and you can grab a phono amp around 60~120 dollar range if TT does not have it inside. I think spending 250~420 bucks is not that bad if you have a decent digital setup already.
 
That said, when I first heard my vinyl setup, I immediately understood why classical labels quickly abandoned vinyl and all-in into digital. Listening to quiet passages ones and small-scale play is quite mediocre experience.

 
Unless a person is a collector or has some specific records they want, I could never recommend a vinyl setup to anyone simply to expand their potential music exploration capabilities.  I suppose it depends on the genre, but in nearly every situation I have found, there are tens of thousands of digitally available songs, and oftentimes many more, that I have not had the opportunity to listen to yet.  I wouldn't consider reverting back to a vinyl setup until I exhausted my options with music subscription services and CDs.

 

[nick_charles]

   
Unless a person is a collector or has some specific records they want, I could never recommend a vinyl setup to anyone simply to expand their potential music exploration capabilities.  I suppose it depends on the genre, but in nearly every situation I have found, there are tens of thousands of digitally available songs, and oftentimes many more, that I have not had the opportunity to listen to yet.  I wouldn't consider reverting back to a vinyl setup until I exhausted my options with music subscription services and CDs.

 
 
In the classical genre unless it is a ultra-rare historical recording I've never found a recording I wanted that has not been released on CD, certainly I had most of the 1950 mono Furtwangler Ring recordings on CD and loads of old Philadelphia Orchestra recordings going back to 1917, many of these old recordings are sadly pretty terrible but hey...

 

[RRod]

   
 
In the classical genre unless it is a ultra-rare historical recording I've never found a recording I wanted that has not been released on CD, certainly I had most of the 1950 mono Furtwangler Ring recordings on CD and loads of old Philadelphia Orchestra recordings going back to 1917, many of these old recordings are sadly pretty terrible but hey...

 
The lovely thing about classical is that there is some probability of a brand-spanking new recording coming out that hits all of your buttons for a particular piece, including sound quality. Other genres are a bit more stuck in this regard, so you get more of the phenomenon of people buying every single new mastering of the same exact recording, hoping for magical things to happen.

 

[Exacoustatowner]

The lovely thing about classical is that there is some probability of a brand-spanking new recording coming out that hits all of your buttons for a particular piece, including sound quality. Other genres are a bit more stuck in this regard, so you get more of the phenomenon of people buying every single new mastering of the same exact recording, hoping for magical things to happen.

I've multiple versions of some of my favorites for just that reason. None on vinyl or Edison Wax Cylinders though

 

[icebear]

  There is only one, but a very good valid argument for having vinyl setup.
 
There are tons of records that are only available as vinyl. Yes, there are a lot of digital re-releases, but quite a lot of stuffs never made into CDs. If you have only digital setup, you won't get to hear them.
 
Recently I obtained an entry-level vinyl setup once I realized I was missing those records. A nice entry-level TT costs about 250~300 bucks with cart, and you can grab a phono amp around 60~120 dollar range if TT does not have it inside. I think spending 250~420 bucks is not that bad if you have a decent digital setup already.
 
That said, when I first heard my vinyl setup, I immediately understood why classical labels quickly abandoned vinyl and all-in into digital. Listening to quiet passages ones and small-scale play is quite mediocre experience.

 
The number of releases that are available as digital medium (CD, SACD, download, streaming) and not on vinyl is vastly greater than the other way around. Although there might be some vinyl records that have historic value and are highly praised by aficionados. I give them a pass, thanks a lot.
 
My cut off point is early 60's. I have a lot of Mercury / Living Stereo CD/SACD that I enjoy immensely and I am stunned by what they were able to capture on 35mm magnetic tape at the time. And I realize that choice and position of microphones in the recording room are most likely much more important than digital resolution or 16 vs 24 bits. Recordings before that area are historic and mostly the hiss and distortion are so distracting for me that I don't push myself to make the effort to listen beyond these obvious short comings. There are lot's of other recordings in much better sound quality available as alternative. Interpretation, passion and sound quality make up the recording, if one of these is unacceptable than it's a no go for me. I might miss out on some rare stuff but I am completely OK with that.

 

[Sal1950]

I've got the CD set "Frank Sinatra - The Colombia Years" recorded from 1943-1952. For the time and equipment available some of the recordings sound amazing.
I also have the Sinatra - Dorsey 5 CD set 1940 -1942, don't know how the original masters were recorded but these remasters done in 1998 (I think) make the music well worth listening to. 4 of the CDs are studio recordings and 1 is a transcription of their radio show broadcasts. There was a beautiful book that came with the set with all the info but I ripped everything to flac and sold the set so I have nothing to refer back to.

 

[wnmnkh]

 

  There is only one, but a very good valid argument for having vinyl setup.
 
There are tons of records that are only available as vinyl. Yes, there are a lot of digital re-releases, but quite a lot of stuffs never made into CDs. If you have only digital setup, you won't get to hear them.
 
Recently I obtained an entry-level vinyl setup once I realized I was missing those records. A nice entry-level TT costs about 250~300 bucks with cart, and you can grab a phono amp around 60~120 dollar range if TT does not have it inside. I think spending 250~420 bucks is not that bad if you have a decent digital setup already.
 
That said, when I first heard my vinyl setup, I immediately understood why classical labels quickly abandoned vinyl and all-in into digital. Listening to quiet passages ones and small-scale play is quite mediocre experience.

 
The number of releases that are available as digital medium (CD, SACD, download, streaming) and not on vinyl is vastly greater than the other way around. Although there might be some vinyl records that have historic value and are highly praised by aficionados. I give them a pass, thanks a lot.
 
My cut off point is early 60's. I have a lot of Mercury / Living Stereo CD/SACD that I enjoy immensely and I am stunned by what they were able to capture on 35mm magnetic tape at the time. And I realize that choice and position of microphones in the recording room are most likely much more important than digital resolution or 16 vs 24 bits. Recordings before that area are historic and mostly the hiss and distortion are so distracting for me that I don't push myself to make the effort to listen beyond these obvious short comings. There are lot's of other recordings in much better sound quality available as alternative. Interpretation, passion and sound quality make up the recording, if one of these is unacceptable than it's a no go for me. I might miss out on some rare stuff but I am completely OK with that.

 
Yes, that's correct. Hence I said getting vinvyl setup may be worthwhile "if you have a decent digital setup already."

 

[CanadianMaestro]

So what's the relative difference in cost to produce a vinyl album vs. a digital medium product like a CD? I'm referring to those recordings currently available "only" on vinyl and not on CD.

 

[arnyk]

  So what's the relative difference in cost to produce a vinyl album vs. a digital medium product like a CD? I'm referring to those recordings currently available "only" on vinyl and not on CD.

 
Burn a CD - cost is pennies.
 
Make a LP - create master tape, lacquers, stampers, and actually press off a minimum run:
 
http://vinylcarvers.com/products.php?cat=7
 
https://www.onecutvinyl.com/

 

[jcx]

when you cost out burning a audio CD don't forget the tax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy