[FYFL]

Which as @IDrinkLava stated is your subjective opinion, NOT fact!

Of course it’s not! The topic is posted in Sound Science and does NOT mention subjective opinion. And it does NOT mention TTs, it asks about DACs and amps.

No one has stated vinyl sounds bad, just that it’s inferior to digital. So what are you arguing about?

1. Yes but well mastered stuff sounds even better on digital.

2. And, there are plenty of modern (and not so modern) digital recordings that “blows out” older era music recordings.

A dozen or even a few dozen is not “plenty”. However, no one is disputing that vinyl can sound good and some younger consumers may not realise how good the pinnacle of analogue music distribution was. That still does not change the fact that digital is even higher quality and at a fraction of the cost.

But that’s NOT “simple facts”, it’s just an observation of a particular “inner circle”. I’ve worked my whole adult life in the music and audio production business, have known thousands of people with that background and only a very tiny minority own vinyl. However, that is still just an observation and NOT a “simple facts”! The actual fact was quoted earlier in this thread, a controlled blind study of musicians between vinyl and digital. As well as countless other controlled tests done over the years since digital audio was invented.

Your “simple facts” are contradicted by the actual facts! Not to mention the obvious “simple fact” that digital audio (CDs) very quickly replaced LPs as the hi-fi format of choice, even in the audiophile world.

G

And now, a simple fact is that vinyl replaced CDs at equally fast pace. Lol
I guess people are bamboozled with this “inferior” way to enjoy music…. right?
And don’t get me wrong, all those folks and family with music or production background listen and work with digital on daily. However, vinyl seems to be their poison for down time, music enjoyment.
Don’t remember the last time they asked me to seat down and listen to a new CD they just bought.
Quite opposite with their new LP additions.
I don’t have the answer as to why. All I know is that they really seem to enjoy their growing vinyl collection and experience that goes with it.

You can argue against it or for it. It really doesn’t matter. How they enjoy/consume music seems to matter to them.

 

[bigshot]

However, I had plenty of what you called “average consumers” over my house and have them listen to vinyl. And all of them had exactly the same reaction. Meaning, they had no idea that vinyl can sound so good.

I’ve had the same reaction from people when I play a Caruso 78 from 1910 on my acoustic Victrola. People don’t expect old recordings to sound good. Music can come through clearly on all kinds of playback formats. That doesn’t mean that old recordings have the same degree of fidelity as modern digital recordings though. It’s more a testament to the musicality of the artists of the past that their artistry can transcend even primitive sound reproduction technology. That’s why musicians are open to the sound of records. They aren’t listening to the recording, they’re listening to the performance. Ultimately, the performance is what matters. A great performance with high fidelity recording is icing on the cake.

And let’s be real… Vinyl hasn’t replaced CDs. CDs have dropped in popularity down to the level of vinyl. Streaming has replaced all other formats. Streaming is the format of choice, and for good reason. It provides incredible convenience with no loss of perceived sound quality.

Come over to my house and I’ll sit you down and play you some streamed music that will knock your socks off. The format doesn’t matter.

For example, I can go to my record racks and pull an original Capitol pressing of Abbey Road. You’ll be impressed at how good it sounds. Then I can play my MFSL half speed mastered copy of Abbey Road and you will be impressed at how much better it sounds than the Capitol. Then I can play you the CD and it will sound just like the half speed mastered LP, just without any surface noise. You’ll think they all sound good. But then I’ll log into my Apple Music account and I’ll stream Giles Martin’s multichannel mix in spatial audio on an Apple TV, and it will make you completely forget all the other versions.

All things being equal music-wise, the engineering matters, not the format.

 

[gregorio]

You are the ones that started debate with digital superiority over the LP out of thin air.

I didn’t start that debate and it wasn’t out of thin air!

And now, a simple fact is that vinyl replaced CDs at equally fast pace. Lol

Oh dear, another “simple fact” that’s false. CDs are being replaced by downloads/streaming digital audio, not by vinyl. I’m not sure what you hope to achieve by making obviously false assertions and calling them “simple facts”. “Lol”

I guess people are bamboozled with this “inferior” way to enjoy music…. right?
And don’t get me wrong, all those folks and family with music or production background listen and work with digital on daily. However, vinyl seems to be their poison for down time, music enjoyment.
Don’t remember the last time they asked me to seat down and listen to a new CD they just bought.
Quite opposite with their new LP additions.
I don’t have the answer as to why.

Your guesses, your family’s “poison”, what you remember them asking you or what you don’t have the answer to, obviously does not constitute “facts”.

All I know is that they really seem to enjoy their growing vinyl collection and experience that goes with it.

And that’s why we have science: So that we don’t make false statements of “simple facts” based only on “all I know” but instead on what’s reliably evidenced and/or proven!

G

 

[IDrinkLava]

No one has stated vinyl sounds bad, just that it’s inferior to digital. So what are you arguing about?

Clarification: my argument was not that vinyl sounds objectively inferior. My argument was that if an LP uses a digital master with some low-cut filters to play back correctly on a TT, then there is no real point to listening on vinyl over any other format.

 

[bigshot]

Unless someone likes the ritual of cleaning and playing, the high end rolloff and inner groove distortion, and the larger album cover that you don't need glasses to read. I think all of those are valid reasons to choose vinyl as long as the person is honest about it and doesn't try to argue stair step theories and magical qualities to analog sound we can't measure.

 

[hakunamakaka]

Unless someone likes the ritual of cleaning and playing, the high end rolloff and inner groove distortion, and the larger album cover that you don't need glasses to read. I think all of those are valid reasons to choose vinyl as long as the person is honest about it and doesn't try to argue stair step theories and magical qualities to analog sound we can't measure.

or you can't find good alternative for stuff like below and maybe it's not even present in any digital domain

 

[bigshot]

I gave you a good source for that music and you ignored what I told you about.

http://radio.garden/visit/ikeja/qJ7EGNTP

 

[gregorio]

I gave you a good source for that music and you ignored what I told you about.

He’s like a broken record

Or should that be: He likes a broken record?

G

 

[sonitus mirus]

or you can't find good alternative for stuff like below and maybe it's not even present in any digital domain

As you provide a digital source that probably has better fidelity than most vinyl that still exists today.

 

[FYFL]

I’ve had the same reaction from people when I play a Caruso 78 from 1910 on my acoustic Victrola. People don’t expect old recordings to sound good. Music can come through clearly on all kinds of playback formats. That doesn’t mean that old recordings have the same degree of fidelity as modern digital recordings though. It’s more a testament to the musicality of the artists of the past that their artistry can transcend even primitive sound reproduction technology. That’s why musicians are open to the sound of records. They aren’t listening to the recording, they’re listening to the performance. Ultimately, the performance is what matters. A great performance with high fidelity recording is icing on the cake.

And let’s be real… Vinyl hasn’t replaced CDs. CDs have dropped in popularity down to the level of vinyl. Streaming has replaced all other formats. Streaming is the format of choice, and for good reason. It provides incredible convenience with no loss of perceived sound quality.

Come over to my house and I’ll sit you down and play you some streamed music that will knock your socks off. The format doesn’t matter.

For example, I can go to my record racks and pull an original Capitol pressing of Abbey Road. You’ll be impressed at how good it sounds. Then I can play my MFSL half speed mastered copy of Abbey Road and you will be impressed at how much better it sounds than the Capitol. Then I can play you the CD and it will sound just like the half speed mastered LP, just without any surface noise. You’ll think they all sound good. But then I’ll log into my Apple Music account and I’ll stream Giles Martin’s multichannel mix in spatial audio on an Apple TV, and it will make you completely forget all the other versions.

All things being equal music-wise, the engineering matters, not the format.

No argument there. Recording will always be as good as the weakest link. Often it comes down to lazy or mediocre post production and mastering. And in my opinion, thriving for "perfection" and those meaningless references such as "as artist intended" are nothing more than fool's gold. Just enjoy the music the way that makes most sense to you, whatever the format or budget that you are working with. It's like argument which one is better, 1970 Chevy Chevelle 502ss or Tesla S Plaid..... That's where we are, unfortunately.

 

[bigshot]

Practicality is a goal that is too often ignored among audiophiles. Over and over again they opt for the least convenient option... splitting components up into sub components, buying non standard equipment that limits their choices for other components in the chain, choosing combinations that require changing settings on more than one component to make a simple adjustment, spending much more money than they need to in hopes that will improve sound quality. I admire a person who is able to put together an ergonomic system on a budget more than someone who creates something complicated that costs as much as a Porsche.

There was a time when mastering was a big issue. But in the past five years or so, I haven't seen as much badly mastered music. But that might be because I don't listen to a lot of ephemeral pop music.

 

[FYFL]

Practicality is a goal that is too often ignored among audiophiles. Over and over again they opt for the least convenient option... splitting components up into sub components, buying non standard equipment that limits their choices for other components in the chain, choosing combinations that require changing settings on more than one component to make a simple adjustment, spending much more money than they need to in hopes that will improve sound quality. I admire a person who is able to put together an ergonomic system on a budget more than someone who creates something complicated that costs as much as a Porsche.

There was a time when mastering was a big issue. But in the past five years or so, I haven't seen as much badly mastered music. But that might be because I don't listen to a lot of ephemeral pop music.

Practicality is a factor for sure. And if that's the criteria or determining factor in your music enjoyment then sure, nothing beats streaming. As to separates vs all-in-one solution.... That's another topic and there are pros and cons to both approaches. Like everything else in life.

 

[bigshot]

If the practical choice is also the one that meets the threshold of audible transparency, there shouldn't be any pros and cons left. At that point, one should just worry about transducers and take the easiest way for the rest. And once transducers are settled, then the only thing worth dealing with is the music.

 

[FYFL]

If the practical choice is also the one that meets the threshold of audible transparency, there shouldn't be any pros and cons left. At that point, one should just worry about transducers and take the easiest way for the rest.

Depends what your goals are and your interpretation of "transparency". I would argue that both, cheap vodka and expensive Chateau will get you the " fix" you're looking for. Which one you prefer or can afford is personal.
People often make those funny analogies, comparison to live music events. Don't really know why, because sound at those events is far from exceptional. In many cases, it's quite awful. Back in the days as P/T gig I was part of stage setup so yeah, I have heard plenty of those . lol
However, people don't go to concerts, live events to get their dose of "audiophile" transparency fix but for the "experience". And in the essence that's what music is all about.

​

 

[bigshot]

Audible transparency is the point where human ears can’t hear any difference any more. The source signal is identical to the output. A wire with gain. Unless you’re putting together a sound system for your pet bat or dog, that’s all you’d ever need. It’s very easy to achieve that goal without spending a lot of money. That’s why it’s best to focus on transducers and music, not amps and DACs.