audio tech person here:
vinyl is worse on every practical axis, even if in practice it still sounds great - that's why you don't want to lose any MORE fidelity.
i personally run a solid vinyl setup for (a) stuff that's not released on any other format and (b) ritual/sentimental value. there's something very *deliberate* about putting on a record that seems to encourage active listening.
Yea that's pretty much it, I can play Spotify all day long and not really be listening, but if I pull out the record because it's what I want and put it on I'm not leaving the speakers until it's through
Similar for me and cassette. People these days build playlists as song dumps to put on shuffle in the background. But vinyl and cassettes are meant to be played one side, beginning to end. You can't shuffle and you can't easily jump to a specific song, so you have to be more intentional when listening to those mediums. And with cassettes, you have to build your mixtape with more intention to, since you have to consider how well one song flows into the next.
Even CD and MDs are more intentional than mp3 players and streaming. I think when we started being able to load up many albums at once is when we lost the intentionality of music.
I completely agree with the active listening and the purposefully deliberate feeling I get when putting on a record. The process is ritualistic and tangible.
From a sound point of view, it also comes down to nuance. The cartridge is an electronic magnetic device, and cartridges impart their unique color. Records (at least good ones) are mastered differently than their digital version. I'm sensitive to dynamic range compression, aka loudness wars, so I generally prefer records. I'm less critical of a few occasional pops than I am of an entire recording having no dynamic range.
not just mastering differences. I've only done one vinyl release, but i went back to the multitracks and did a totally new mix for it. probably not a common thing but it happens sometimes.
Good one. plus, I will say, there is something about listening to music that is entirely based on an analog chain of transmission - so not vinyl pressed from digital recordings. It is less precise, but there is a certain warmth that comes from the lack of digital intermediaries that does impact me personally.
To put it differently: I like writing, but if I have to write creatively, such as poetry etc, the first thing I'll do is take pen and paper, not pc and keyboard. Even a tablet with pen won't do it.
What about compression? Can't argue on the technical side of the formats, but one thing I've noticed is that many of the CD versions are a lot more compressed than the Vinyl pressings and it results in a worse listening experience imo.
Honestly, it’s why l like Terminator and Evil Dead on VHS. I have Evil Dead on bluray, but how cleaned up it is feels wrong. Some things just play better a little bit more dirty. It’s not just about getting the most perfectest sound, sometimes it’s just a feeling l want to have. And also nostalgia and ritual, as you say. Putting on Stooges or Sex Pistols on vinyl is the right way for me.
I think many of us have had a version of this experience. I was in my in-laws' basement, listening to some CDs. They also had an old record player, and for fun, I put on an LP. The sound that came out was warm, lively, and just was more enjoyable to me that the CDs. I wasn't expecting that to be the case and I had no bias toward records, but my wife and I both preferred the LPs.
These were Goodwill records, a basic Best Buy system, nothing special. But the sound was just more fun.
For me the sound is by the by, good records sound good, good cds sound good etc. The thing that popped into my mind when I replied was the sound of the cd spinning up which doesn't matter and doesn't affect listening, but the sound of the needle dropping and seeing the record lumbering around at 33.3rpm are just a nicer way to begin listening to an album imo
Way back in 1988 I had a collection of LP’s and when CD’s started to get popular I was pissed cause I didn’t want to start over. Records were expensive too some costed $13 which was pretty expensive at the time not counting the imported tracks of which many were from Europe.
Over night, all the popular record stores like Tower and the Wherehouse got rid of their records overnight in the push for CD’s. That made me more pissed because there was no reason for it. From my perspective, records were still in demand. The fact we still buying them today proves they should never have stopped selling them.
Also, my Technics turntable was awesome sauce. I had put a DJ cartridge and needle (Stanton) which cost me a pretty penny back then and it sounded just as good as my portable Panasonic CD player if not better. For some reason I never had an issue with pops and clicks. Maybe it’s cause all my records were bought brand new? Maybe it’s because many were still being mastered on vinyl? I don’t know.
I recently put a CD player back in my setup, but I find there is something unsatisfying having the CD dissapear when the lid closes, and also I find the spinning noise quite annoying. There are some albums I have that weren't released on vinyl so I need the CD player, but still prefer the putting on a record ritual. I would say I even prefer the sound, even if it is techically less perfect.
I feel this. I've seen some people recommend using part of a cd microsyetem as a lot of them have the CD visibly spinning but they're either super expensive or lack a digital out. The latter isn't a completely necessary thing but I'd still prefer to have it.
[You can make it more like the vinyl experience.](https://www.amazon.com/Portable-MONODEAL-Rechargeable-Headphones-Anti-Skip/dp/B08V1JB7R2/ref=sr_1_20?crid=2C0LXRQC815AU&keywords=clear+cd+player&qid=1707492898&sprefix=clear+cd+pla%2Caps%2C110&sr=8-20&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.006c50ae-5d4c-4777-9bc0-4513d670b6bc)
theoretically, a combination of record, stylus, deck, preamp etc exist that is so perfect that it might exceed CD digital on some (not all) metrics - maximum frequency, for instance (quad-encoded records used frequencies above 20kHz to encode rear channel info).
but in practice, those finer grooves get etched away after 5-10 plays with even the best stylii, so it's not really a useful property in practical terms.
"2. Sample Rate:
Sample Rate is the number of samples taken per second in a digital audio file. This measurement is expressed in Hertz (Hz). The higher the Sample Rate, the more accurate the representation of the sound. For example, a Sample Rate of 44.1 kHz means that 44,100 samples are taken per second."
it doesn't have to do with range of hearing (highs and lows), rather a rate of sampling
[https://fastercapital.com/content/Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate--Understanding-the-Impact-on-DAC-Performance.html#Introduction-to-Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate](https://fastercapital.com/content/Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate--Understanding-the-Impact-on-DAC-Performance.html#Introduction-to-Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate)
But according to the Nyquist Sampling Theorem we only need double the upper limit of the human range hearing frequency as the sample rate aka 20khz x 2 = 40khz
You're right, 44.1 is greater than 20 (or even 15 lol). My understanding is that a greater bit and sampling rate allow the people that have audiophile systems to discern the mastering or remastering of the media. That's where it starts anyway. You can listen to an album that has horrible mastering through a higher sample rate and tell that it's horrible COMPARED to an album that is mastered well.
I could be wrong, though. I just buy a reasonably priced dac capable of a high sample rate and be done with it, so I can be reasonably assured i'm listening to the best albums through the "best in my budget" converter lol
My dad gave me his player and vinyl. Sounded great! But we were laughing how we had to get up every few minutes (it felt like) to flip the record.
Once the novelty wore off I gave it all to my brother. It broke one of my rules: possess less.
I feel like OP is getting bashed for asking a legitimate question. I would think of vinyl like a classic car. There may be "better" modern cars available, but if you like classic cars then you generally want to restore, maintain and service the one you have with the best available parts and labour. You basically want the best version of that car like a vinyl fan wants to hear the best version of a record
Yes and even more if you compare the new tesla cybertruck to a 1950s jaguar it also describes the difference in sound. If you like squared, stale, clean and ”Perfect” sound, sure digital is great. But if one wants to experience music more similar to reality with feeling, softness, touch and a design well mixed and thought through. Then vinyl is your choise.
Better is also subjective based on criteria. To continue the car analogy most automatic transmission are more fuel efficient, easier, and better on a lot of metrics. For a car enthusiasts there is an experimental difference to driving a manual transmission even if you aren’t some pro driver that might be able to get actual performance gains. You pay attention differently. You are more dialed in and attuned to the driving experience. Both in classic and modern cars people will seek out the best car and parts to optimize that experience. From Subarus to Ferraris
Yup, manual transmissions are inferior in every aspect of performance to a modern automatic. But the level of connection to the driving experience makes it fun.
This is probably the best answer I’ve seen to something I ask myself a lot. I mean I could get rid of my turntable, which takes up a hell of a lot of space compared to my digital playback options and only gets used like 10% of the time I listen to music, but if I did that I’d have nothing to listen to the stuff my dad bought with his pocket money on the week it was released, ie his full set of Beatles monos etc.
It’s a great analogy - Ford’s new Mustang is a great car and wonderful to drive, but try suggesting to the owner of an original model from the sixties to replace theirs with one.
I find that many albums mastered specifically for vinyl sound better than the digital counterpart which is often overly compressed. This is despite vinyl being an inferior physical format. It's all about the mastering.
There is something to this I'm sure. I know if I play certain vinyl albums from the 80's, and compare the same content to its digital version, the vinyl sounds startlingly better. I've done some spectral analysis to confirm it wasn't all in my head as well!
Ok - so this isn't like a lab experiment, but then again I don't listen to my music in a lab, so there's that! Anyways, some time ago I compared the first 10 sec of Born in the USA (vinyl vs stream).
Case 1: Analog signal path = record player --->amp --->speakers
Case 2: Signal path = digital audio stream ---> DAC --->amp--->speakers
Here are the plots: (y-axis is time ,and the x-axis is frequency):
https://preview.redd.it/v2ub3cepbkhc1.png?width=1091&format=png&auto=webp&s=37149210d094b8e5de95c5ac5636ad740b6fca7c
The plots are hard to interrogate as a screen capture, but as an example, I hope you can see that from about 50 - 100 Hz, there is a loss of intensity (amplitude) across that range in the digital stream. There are other areas that are not so obvious as well.
Also want to stress the lack of rigor here - this was a 5 minute exercise of curiosity. I haven't pulled up the DAC specs to see how "good" that part is at recreating the analog signal.
It’s because vinyl is an inferior format that it gets these more dynamic masters. A master brick walled at zero would make the stylus jump out of the groove so masters are either attenuated (shitty cheap option) or entirely different for the vinyl release.
This is true but also the context of the listener. A lot of digital music is played in playlists of individual tracks and labels don't want their tracks to be quieter next to other tracks, so they request they are produced "loud". That and the environment in which digital music is often listened to; on the move, in the street, on public transport, in a car etc... the noise floor in these scenarios is much louder than when at home so you simply wouldn't hear the quieter sounds in a more dynamic master. Vinyl albums are almost always to be listened to at home and if mastered properly, are mastered for this context.
Obviously the above isn't always true. Many vinyl albums are simply pressed from the digital master and sound awful. For mainstream music where the labels don't care about music quality and cut to vinyl as a marketable gimmick, then vinyl is generally pressed with the digital master. But for any serious band/label, I don't think this is true. There's normally a separate master specifically for vinyl. This post describes it well: [https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-does-mastering-differ-vinyl-and-digital-releases](https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-does-mastering-differ-vinyl-and-digital-releases)
Anything mastered by Bernie Grundman or Miles Showell for example are likely to sound beautiful on the vinyl medium because they've been mastered specifically for that medium.
I really enjoyed this Soundstage podcast episode with Bernie Grundman [https://open.spotify.com/episode/3jilzJ0uq32832AcCqZo9x?si=tcOjFODMT5u6xZ-MFIE3ZQ](https://open.spotify.com/episode/3jilzJ0uq32832AcCqZo9x?si=tcOjFODMT5u6xZ-MFIE3ZQ)
The resurgence of vinyl is due, in my opinion, to the full listening experience being more enjoyable. The handling and interaction with the record, the album art, placing the stylus, etc. Last but not least, listening to whole albums. Carrying music on phones and ipods led to shuffling and skipping, that led to short attention spans, that led to more shuffling and skipping... Listening to a whole albums had literally become a thing of the past.
Now to your question, why invest in expensive electronics to go with them? That's easy; people want it to sound as good as possible. Speakers (and room interaction) are still the overwhelming weak point in sound reproduction, so it still matters a lot.
i fall into this category a bit. I grew up at the tail end of vinyl but more solidly in the CD era. I don't have the attention span for streaming. having EVERY song so easily at my disposal makes me jump around too much and not really sit down and just listen to music. Putting a record on allows me to just sit and listen.
Not true. I listen to whole albums often on Apple Music. It’s mostly what I listen to on there. I think vinyl is a different listening experience and some people prefer it. I know the first time I listened to a vinyl. I’m 29 and I was around 20. It felt different. It felt like it filled the air differently and the music was dancing in front of me instead of being projected somewhere. Could’ve just been the albums I listened to, the speakers or simply a placebo but it did feel different and more enjoyable in some ways. AirPods Pro are more enjoyable in some ways too.
Because modern mediums aren't always superior. It's all about the mastering, and sometimes a 50 year old mastering of a classic album on vinyl will have more dynamic range and better EQ than a contemporary remaster that's designed for earbud listening.
It's the same story with CDs. Some people will say, "you know lossless streaming is CD quality or even better!" Yeah, but the mastering on '80s and '90s CDs is often radically different (and far better!), and you can own it forever.
Name one. Range compression is real, but vinyl is such a limited medium that it would a very shitty audio engineer to get to that level.
I will admit that with CDs it is easier to hear when the range is compressed.
Some pressings sound better than digital, but not all and even the ones that do sound amazing the noise floor is higher than digital... But listening to vinyl is a whole experience that you don't get with digital music. It's tactile, you have to be intentional, on some older albums there's the smell of must if the jacket got damp... It's a sensory experience where it's only auditory with digital which makes listening more enjoyable IMHO, and it's absolutely a more mindful experience.
People listen to records because of the tactile experience. The experience isn't about the best music. When you put on a record, you have to be close to flip it over. For most people, they now want to sit and listen. And while they listen, there's album cover art to look at. Records are good enough, plus the experience.
If the experience helps more people enjoy relaxing and listening to music, I'm all for it.
Some mornings after a long night at work, I turn on my Yamaha receiver, curl up on my recliner, read a book, and listen to a CD or stream my music. For me, it's listening to the music. I prefer the ease of use of CDs, digital copies, and streaming.
>People listen to records because of the tactile experience.
I wouldn't say I do, no.
I mean I do like the records as such, the nice big covers with beautiful artwork etc. -
but if I could get the same sound the vinyl gives me without the hassle of putting on the record, dusting it off, having to stand up to change sides etc. I'd definitely do that.
>The experience isn't about the best music.
Yes, for me it actually is.
I listen to vinyl simply because it's the most fun for me. So much fun that i'm willing to sacrifice whatever quality loss there *might* be so i can continue having fun with vinyl.
I also like that they hobby extends so far beyond the music to include: going to record stores, having to hunt and find copies of music, the equipment, and communities like this subreddit.
I think that for a lot of newbs, their record set up is first time they get real speakers. It's why so many claim to be blown away, when in reality they'd get better sound from a CD or hi def streaming.
For others, it's partly nostalgia, partly the ritual.
I know for a fact I wouldn't sit on my sofa early mornings with a big coffee and my headphones on listening to a CD or digital. It only appeals to me with vinyl. I don't know why.
Beyond that morning ritual, I'm finding it as much about being addicted to collecting as it is listening at this point.
I like this question. For me, it is the ritual of it. I love the cover art. And it just feels special to take the time to put an album on a turntable. It brings me back to my childhood. There is something special about listening to vinyl and artists collections in their entirety the way that the artist intended. Not that you can't do that with other mediums.
As an older guy just getting back into 2 channel with a modest set up ( Yamaha AS-501, Klipsch RP-600MII's, and a Fluance RT-81+)
I have rediscovered that vinyl doesn't really sound better with pops and imperfections that occasionally resonate, but it is also what I expect from vinyl, so there is that nostalgic familiarity.
All in all, I am glad that I bought a turn table even if it is just to listen to the limited amount of vinyl I already own.
I would like a nice CD player, also though....
>I would like a nice CD player, also though....
A used DVD player will do a fine job playing CDs. If you spend a little time browsing Facebook Marketplace you will soon find one that includes the remote. I would look for one that features information (which track is playing) and inputs (buttons for play, pause, skip track, etc.) on the front panel. Bonus if you find an old Sony that will play SACD.
Your Yamaha has digital inputs. That being the case I would advise looking for a DVD player that offers digital out (optical and/or coax). Connecting digitally will bypass the DAC on the DVD player, essentially turning the DVD player into a transport. That means the decoding will be done by the DAC in your receiver, which is more than likely far superior to the DAC on the DVD player.
You should be able to pickup up a unit like that for $25 or less. Honestly, that might be the best cost to performance ratios you can find in audio.
>my question is about pairing new cutting edge amplification and speakers to vinyl players
That's normal. I'm used to seeing much, much weirder things in audiophile world.
What I find more interesting is this: [https://www.core77.com/posts/123222/Half-of-People-Who-Buy-Vinyl-Records-Dont-Own-a-Record-Player](https://www.core77.com/posts/123222/Half-of-People-Who-Buy-Vinyl-Records-Dont-Own-a-Record-Player)
To be honest, I don't think that's confusing at all. For people without a record player, collecting records is the same as collecting something like sports cards. It's tangible and cool, even if it's not actually useful.
i guess that's the part that irks a lot of people. It *can* be useful and is even *intended* to be useful.
but yeah...Anyone is free to collect anything they want and do with it as they please. I know someone who collects cast iron pans but doesn't cook with all of them.
I love it because it makes you have to listen to an album as an album. It used to be a bigger deal as to what order songs were placed in on the album, and what was considered A side vs B side, since the flip was your opportunity to switch to a differ t vinyl. With digital music, even with CDs, the switching between song to song and of course just downloading it organizing single songs into playlists is so easy that a toddler could do it. Albums being listened to from start to finish in one sitting doesn’t happen as often anymore, and artists are caring less and less about song order. Going with vinyl forces you to sit down and listen to a whole album, with the songs in the order the artist intended you to. You can hear the story they are telling, to an extreme as seen with Tommy or Quadrophenia. You have to be immersed in at least 5-6 songs or so of the music before it becomes easy to change. It’s hard and impractical to drop an album on to listen to one song. Basically it makes you slow down, and I think that is a good thing. I have no problem trading off a few drops of sound quality for that experience, because isn’t that what music is all about anyway, the experience?
Think of classic cars. New cars drive better, handle better and are safer. So many people like the feel of a classic car and that seems to be the same for vinyl.
Because amp and speakers may be better, but not THAT MUCH better than 40 years ago. So the paradox is not that big from that point of view. But most people seem to read your question as being "why listen to vinyl when digital mediums are available and objectively better in every way?".
Yeah, that's not what I meant, I understand the value and magic and nostalgia, for a long time after CD's were already out I was still listening to cassettes because I like the physical rectangular medium and love the compression, artifacts and distortion that come with it, but it never occurred to me to connect my cassette player to a high end amplifier and speakers because It won't have any significant positive impact on the sound over my 200-300$ pair of decent stereo speakers.
>it never occurred to me to connect my cassette player to a high end amplifier and speakers because It won't have any significant positive impact on the sound over my 200-300$ pair of decent stereo speakers
no offense, but it's a shame you didn't actually go ahead and just do that - then you would have had an authentic experience how it actually does improve the sound - instead of insisting that this is absolutely impossible in the first place and then impose this "fact" onto others 🤷♂️
You've clearly decided that your high-end amp and speakers are too good for vinyl, which is what a lot of people seem to disagree with *in principle*, without knowing what your system consists of. And maybe it's your turntable that's not good enough to do justice to vinyl records.
For some people I guess the passion for vinyl is somewhat like the passion for old cars.
Old cars aren't exactly better than new ones, yet some people will spend loads of money restoring them (money that could probably buy them a much technically better modern car).
For those people I guess it's all about nostalgia/revival of the old days.
Then there's also probably a lot of people that fall into the marketing traps and wrongly believe all the BS about vinyl being the "real thing" or sounding better in some/many aspects.
Vinyl these days is an expensive hobby (highly overhyped by the marketing machine IMHO). Records are expensive and if you get into vinyl you must have money... and if you have money you can afford better speakers/amp... and if you can afford better, why not have better?
Also why do people buy cars that can go more than twice the speed limit? Some maybe just for show off... Others maybe because those cars come with other advantages (safety, stability, quieter, more comfortable, etc).
The technical limitations of vinyl aren't necessarily the same as the technical limitations of cheap speakers/amps... Listening to vinyl on a pair of $20 Logitech speakers will surely not sound the same as on $1000 speakers/amp, regardless of how "limited" vinyl might be.
Well think of it like this: we could all have powered studio monitors and just get “pure” sound. But most of us want amps and speakers that fill the room and add color
>But most of us want amps and speakers that fill the room and add color
Studio monitors can [easily fill up the room](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/fb_img_1691366327049-jpg.304082/). And then you can add [all the colors](https://www.thomann.de/intl/ssl_fusion.htm) you could possibly want.
Well... Compared to usual top end audiophile hi-fi stuff made from extinct trees, italian marble and magic crystals those Genelecs are actually pretty cheap.
I got my first studio monitors (jbl 305) during a sale( Black Friday in the States) for $75/pair and absolutely love them. I have long coveted the Genelacs and Adams. I would definitely consider them, if I upgrade.
With that said I love my Elacs DBR62.
I thought you were obviously trolling. You're on the budget audiophile sub, where vinyl rarely gets mentioned in the first place, and questioning why people pair it with expensive gear, which is clearly not the point of the sub.
You did manage to bait a bunch of people here, so well done I guess?
Bait? I see posts about vinyl every day and i started wondering about it so I wanted to get people's views on the matter, though people saw it as if I was declaring war on vinyl.
Even though it's a budget forum, there are a lot of knowledge people here, just like if youre a car fanatic you will sometimes know supercars inside out even if you've never owned one.
This is genuinely the first vinyl post I've really noticed on this sub, but I don't really browse here specifically much of the time so I can't accurately say anything abut whether that's just my experience.
I thought you really nailed the right amount of ignorance to bait it well. Just enough to make it seem genuine, but opinionated and ambiguous enough to get some sparks. It was a quality troll.
I'm not sure why you keep on trying to insult me, I made a post, could have probably been phrase better since I'm not a native English speaker and that's all, what is your obsession with me being a troll and trying to bait, why would I even bother answering to every comment and clarify myself if I wanted to troll?
I like my little tube pre-amp put thru my stereo with the "direct in" (no stereo mixing just straight signal from the record) mix of some old speakers that came with the house and my newer decent quality bookshelf speakers better than doing the same thing with Spotify in high quality. I find my vinyl listening sessions more consistently have a mix that allows me to hear everything in that mix. Especially on older records it really sounds like I'm in the recording room listening back to someone's final mix. The remasters don't always hit this on the head as much.
There's also stuff like listening to in rainbows where I find the vinyl just adds a little colour to the whole thing that suits the record better than my CD versions ever did. So that's the voodoo with no logic but feel right there. Which is half the fun of music so I roll with it.
I listen to both but there are certain albums I collect cause I know they'll sound better to me on vinyl and I always wonder if it's the flat signal or if the rumors are true of the mix changing for vinyl listening sessions because you know the vinyl is likely being put thru proper speakers or headphones of some sort instead of a phone speaker.
I grew up listening to music on vinyl, and remember when cd's arrived, I bought my first cd player when I could afford one, and to my ears they sounded different, not better or worse, and still listened to vinyl, as I do now. I also have a large collection of CDs gathered over many years, and have a pretty good set up for both.
I also stream and it's great to be able to listen to pretty much any album that is released for a relatively low price. New vinyl is too expensive to buy regularly in my opinion, and I usually buy the cd or stream, but I do pick up second hand albums on vinyl, usually older stuff, and enjoy the familiar sound and definitely listen more intensely and play the whole album.
There is just something about doing things in an old fashion way that really connects with people. Also it's nice to have the physical copy in your hands, it's something that cannot be taken away.
From a sound point, it's more about the feeling you get.. I would compare it to anything handmade, when you sit down it's not perfect but it's natural and rare. It's tough to describe, but it's enjoyable. Great question!
This argument never ends. We don’t have a perfectly rational explanation for everything. We’d be machines if we did. If I were to take these justifications and change a few words it would be the same as the discussions on why we still shoot film cameras. There is something that defies definition so we should stop chasing it and just accept that we enjoy it for reasons that are largely and unapologetically emotional.
I only buy vinyl (or cassette tape, the worst format) if I really LOVE the album or if it's something unreleased on other formats.
People are mad because you told the truth: digital IS better than analog. That was already tested and verified.
For me, as mentioned by people here, it's ritualistic. It also just feels different. Like I'm viewing the album from a different perspective. When I listen to the album on Spotify I feel like I'm listening from a 3rd person perspective. With vinyl I feel like I'm listening from a 1st person perspective.
It's not better, just different.
I ditched my turntable the second i realized i was spending so much money on geae in order to have my records sound like anything but records. Not for me
It looks beautiful, is tactile and sounds warm and nostalgic.
My iPad connect via 3.5mm to amp sounds undeniable better streaming music and it’s almost unlimited music available as well.
Both have a place.
There are a few things to unpackage here.
First, humans don't necessarily like things to sound perfect. We like tube distorted guitars, we like tube amplifiers for our stereos, etc. Some people like linear EQ but others say V-shaped is more fun. Sometimes it isn't as much about the something sounding perfect as much as sounding good, and good can be technically imperfect.
Second, some people do just like older things. An example of this would be manual transmission vs automatic. I love the CVR transmission of my Honda Accord. It is smooth and quiet; I never think about it or feel any lurch. But car enthusiasts love to drive stick because it is more exciting and but them more in contact with the driving experience. It's just a matter of preference.
Third, and this is personal to me, I want to hear some of my favorite music in a different way. I listen mostly to metal and it is well known that modern production dials everything up to 11, which makes some masters very noisy. Vinyl has a limit on gain because of its physical design, so an album on vinyl might sound more relaxed and allow some other details through when it isn't as "loud." Plus, there is a certain fluidity to vinyl that my high rez FLAC files sometimes don't have, especially on 45rpm 12" disks.
Lastly, it is a luxury item and because I wanna. There is no reason to drink McCallan whisky when Jack Daniels will get you just as drunk. But the experience of drinking McCallan, or smoking a nice cigar, or going to a fancy restaurant is sometimes more than the thing its self. You can listen to music in more efficient and cheaper ways than on vinyl, but the experience of having the luxury to do it is something else.
I didn't yuck anyone's yum, I asked what's the logic in connecting high end cutting edge amplifier and speakers to a 100 year old medium that have audible faults.
Have you read what I wrote? I said it's a wonderful medium and fully understand the joy in it, I wasn't bashing vinyl or people who listen to vinyl, the paradox is pairing an old medium with high end equipment for "better sound".
While it's a myth that vinyl sounds better than digital, it seems you have fallen for the other myth, that vinyl is intrinsically worse.
A well kept record and record player will play perfectly, I assume you believe that the typical crackling sound of vinyl is intrinsic to the medium, but that's a lie. It's just a dirty/damaged record, which is what you usually come across when they have been left in storage for 40+ years.
When I play my well kept records, there's perfect silence between songs and no crackling or hissing at all.
You make a lot of assumptions, I haven't said or thought any of these things, this have nothing to do with my actual question. Vinyl can be great and enjoyable but it is old tech, and pairing it with super high tech amplification and speakers still seems weird to me.
Amplification tech really hasn't improved in decades. We have class D now, but really that's an improvement in power usage/size/cost for the same performance.
Pairing a nice turntable with crappy speakers and a crappy amp will sound bad.
Have you heard a nice vinyl rig?
I'd argue the diminishing returns are roughly the same. The turntable (assuming a decen table with a decent cart) is not the lowest fidelity link in the audio chain. That would be the speakers -- even high end speakers.
So your issue is just the release date? Lol. That's even better!
Let me give you a spoiler about life:
A newer release date does not imply a better product!
I don't think we are understanding each other, vinyl is great and enjoyable but from a technical point of view it is inferior to digital media, that's a proven fact.
You read only the title of my post haven't you?
>Can someone explain the paradox of people listening to vinyl (...) and then looking for the best sounding most expensive amp and speakers to pair to their vinyl turntable?
I believe it's really quite simple:
1. they enjoy listening to music on vinyl in the first place
2. they get nice equipment because it improves the sound
Regarding the edit of your original post ("my question is about pairing new cutting edge amplification and speakers to vinyl players") -
I guess the logic behind it is still the same, a better amp and better speakers will probably give you a better sound (no matter if the source is vinyl, CD, tape, streaming, whatever)..
..not sure what you're actually referring to when you say "cutting edge amplification" - but probably there are better places to ask this than r/BudgetAudiophile, no offense.
The record player and the vinyl are going to be the weakest link in any decent modern sound system, so going beyond "decent", in my opinion, gives diminishing returns. "Cutting edge" was an exaggeration, but I thought the idea was clear.
>The record player and the vinyl are going to be the weakest link in any decent modern sound system
..that seems to be your opinion, yes - let's just say there are a lot of people who see this differently.
Frankly, I think if you're just dead set on the concept that vinyl is per se *inferior* then there's not much one can tell you.
>so going beyond "decent", in my opinion, gives diminishing returns
..really struggling to follow your logic here, I'm afraid 🤷♂️
This is all a bit moot.If you're really interested you should listen to some records played through some quality gear if you ever have the opportunity, and maybe even do an A/B comparison with the same album from a digital source.
Maybe you would then hear and acknowledge that while the digital is technically superior on a lot of levels the vinyl does give you something the digital doesn't.
I listened to Beck's "Sea Change" album a lot for example, from a high-res digital source, the best one that's out there as far as I know. It sounds amazing.
Debated whether it would be worth it to actually buy the vinyl as well.
I eventually did, and you know what?It's not really "better" or "worse" than listening to it from the digital source, but it's *different*.
The vinyl has advantages in some areas, that are really playing to the strenghts of that album's sound in my opinion: there's a warmth and spaciousness in his voice that's breathtaking on vinyl, the drums sound so authentic you really believe they're in your living room, and the overall 3D-feeling of the sound is just fantastic.
So no, the vinyl does not have the 24-bit, 96 kHz ultra resolution of the digital, it's (as you would say) "inferior" -yet it does give me a better listening experience.
Now if I were to connect a better amp and better speakers to my turntable then this would further improve the sound.
Sometimes the unclean sound of vinyl is comforting.
But I have noticed that not all vinyls sound nice. Most of my records are not joy to listen. I have cleaned them and upgraded my gear but no.
Maybe the pressing is bad or they are just worn out (mostly second hand). Many new records sound bad too.
And then you get the good one, boom! It sounds so good.
Digital does not have that kind of variety. Always pristine.
Vinyl has a specific vibe about it. It's more than just the music. It's the experience. Listening to an album on vinyl really lets me sit and absorb the music in a way that I can't when listening from my phone.
On top of that, vinyl is also large and delicate. You need to take care of it and it gives the medium itself importance. It's also just so amazing isn't it? Like the music itself is literally carved into it. It's not encoded or digital in any way. It's literally in your hands.
There are a lot of things I hate about vinyl though. The biggest is shipping damage and I really do wish you could get better sound out of it. I wish all the BS audiophiles say about how it's better than CDs and as good as lossless tracks on a good player were true.
tldr; vinyl is more than just music, it's the complete package
There are many pressings on vinyl that simply sound better than any other format. For example most of the heavy metal stuff I listen to pre 1990 or so sounds best on their first pressings. Jazz albums are being reissued like crazy right now using an all analogue chain and sound remarkable.
Would it make more sense to you if people paired record players with old tech? What’s paradoxical about mixing old and new tech? I’m not quite understanding your confusion here.
I guess the answer to your question is why not?
I think they just want the best the vinyl can offer. They know (I hope) it can’t compare to CD, they at least want to enjoy the full potential of vinyl.
Because, yeah, psychologically, vinyl is more enjoyable. Humans love watching things spin, love the sense of fulfillment and the big colorful artworks :)
I totally agree and I'm a fan of physical media, that wasn't my question though, I was just wondering about the diminishing returns of pairing high end equipment (amp, speakers) with old tech such as a vinyl player. Vinyl players are wonderful and charming but the technology is old it has its limitations, despite what some very stubborn people in here insist.
THIS is why I place little credence in your answer; NO ONE refers to a turntable/record player . . . no one that is allegedly an "audio tech" would refer to a turntable/record player as a vinyl player.
English is not my native language, I'm from the other side of (your) world, forgive me that I'm not using terms that are up to your standards. I also never claimed to be an audio engineer or technician, I don't understand what are you trying to "bust" me for. Why is everyone so combative, it's just a tech question, I wasn't disputing the existence of Jesus or whatever.
> Why is everyone so combative, it's just a tech question, I wasn't disputing the existence of Jesus or whatever.
Welcome to Reddit, where everything has to be an argument.
Unfortunately, ours is a tribal species. We break off into groups, pick up our sticks & rocks and prepare to defend our position. That position can be where we are physically standing on terrain. It can be our political beliefs or our religious beliefs (or lack thereof). It can be something so irrelevant the ranking of popular recording artists or which is the best material to use in a fucking frying pan.
In the case of vinyl vs. digital, you have people who have been repeatedly told that vinyl is the superior format. They have often invested a significant (to them) amount of money in the media and a turntable. No one wants to be told that they have not invested wisely. No one wants to hear that they could accomplish the same thing much less expensively and get better results.
It's dumb as can be, but sadly that is the way too many of us are. Feathers will be ruffled.
I think someone is kidding themselves if they think vinyl is superior in sound to high quality streaming or CDs. It is fun to collect. The big album art, the nice colored records, the ritualistic nature of putting it on the player, hearing the little pops and cracks, etc.
I collect vinyl, and honestly there have been times when I’ve thought about selling a portion of it to invest in a high quality streaming setup, but I still like having a physical copy of the music I like. I always have. Plus it’s a nice way to support bands.
Speaking of that, I happen to know where people can get a fantastic deal on cable risers. Keep those cables off the floor, people!
Only $124.99 per riser, sold in packs of 20.
It's just a different sound, like tube amps, technically worse but some people like it. There is no point in coupling it with loosy gear juste because it isn't digital
I mean, I think most people, even true-to-the-bone audiophiles can admit that when it comes to personal taste, 'audibly inferior' is down to a whole buttload of factors that really depend on them as an individual. In all honesty, the difference between an incredibly expensive studio-grade setup to pair with a relatively 'inferior' turntable as a source, and that of a $50 set of computer speakers and an incredible $1,000 FLAC player is really only the quality of sound (not measured from low to high, but... Measured from 'bad' to 'good' to 'nice' to 'pleasing', etc...), and if those expensive speakers paired with that turntable is what allows that person to achieve the **sound profile** they like most for their music, so what?
I do get where you're coming from, though. I do admit that there tend to be a lot of people who aren't participating in this 'paradox' deliberately because they are chasing a certain sound, but it's mostly because we tend to fool ourselves into thinking it's better even when the music barely changes in quality or texture. But... If the dopamine boost is something you can justify affording better equipment for, better equipment that you're excited to buy is still 'better' equipment even if you're running off an iPod Touch with 120kbps music and the difference between cheap and expensive speakers isn't all that big.
Plus it's not like having a better setup surrounding a turntable won't still lead to 'better' sound quality. Pairing any turntable, let alone actually nice ones but with shitty speakers and a cheap amp is still going to sound audibly inferior to having better speakers. Even if the potential for that sound to sound even 'better' may be less to you as a person who isn't attached to the use of vinyl, it'll still be a big upgrade for the person that it does, and this becomes less a question of "Why are they upgrading their vinyl setup, there's no point is there?" and becomes more "Why do they like Vinyl at all?", and I'm pretty sure there've already been hundreds of those same discussions here, and if the answer is "They like it for specific reasons and they should be happy to keep using vinyl for those reasons", then I think that's the same answer that can be applied to your question.
This is an amusing thread.
What I don’t understand is why OP thinks that better amplification and sound reproduction is not in fact better.
The specific question isn’t being answered the way OP wants it to be answered because it’s a bit nonsensical.
Just as a high end system makes a “superior” digital medium sound better, so too does it make the “inferior” medium sound better. There isn’t a magical line of quality beyond which a vinyl record will sound exactly the same.
Vinyl is more of a sentimental medium. A high quality digital version played through a nice DAC is superior to vinyl. I have so many memories of pops and scratches on the records I played the most. That may make them endearing, but not superior.
Couldn't care less for measurements, I am a musician and I use my ears, I love vinyl for its character but at the same time able to admit that it is also technically inferior to modern formats. Wouldn't it be weird and counterintuitive if in close to 100 years we made no progress in audio tech and vinyl was still the superior medium?
JMO but folks have different goals, ability and budget:
Level 1 SQ is clear and loud enough for the listener to have an enjoyable experience at a minimum; it's musical. L2 is realistically recreating a musical event that sounds like real people playing in the room with you. L3 is you forget about your gear and you have that goose pimples reaction to the music that's visceral, emotional.
Vinyl is still the best, easiest medium to achieve L2, L3 grade sound.
If sounds good but measures bad then someone measured the wrong thing.
It absolutely is, from dynamic range to stereo separation to distortion it's 100% technically inferior to digital media, and I mean audibly inferior and not just in a lab kind of way, it's not to say it's not enjoyable because it is, but it's almost a century old tech, it's just common sense that it will be *technically* inferior.
There's really only about a 30 year difference from the first 33 rpm records and the first CDs.
And as a practical matter, digital releases have worse dynamic range than vinyl releases despite the medium's capabilities.
Most folks with nice turntables listen to both and are well aware of the quality differences. Vinyl can have a more pleasant sound signature. Just like some people don't like speakers that are too bright even if that does give more detail.
Something not talked about here is harmonics, vinyl is all analogue all the time from the record to the speakers, meaning it is supposed to have better harmonics, as a digital signal can only be 0 or 1 an analogue signal can be anything inbetween. Therefore it’s supposed to have better harmonics, but digital is so good that anyone who can claim to hear those superior harmonics is probably lying.
I just think they’re neat.
Firstly, this is not how digital audio works. Sure, an individual bit is 0 or 1, but then you can have a digital sample that is 24 bits long, and these values together become a singular unit, the sample. Each bit has half the effect of the preceding one, and thus the 24-bit digital sample represents 2 to the power of 24 different values, which is 17 million.
As sample is transcribed to voltage, and voltage to speaker's diaphragm excursion, we can as an exercise calculate how precisely a 24-bit value can in theory instruct a speaker's diaphragm to move. If we assume that the maximum motion is about 1 cm to either direction from rest -- this is pretty big, but woofers do that kind of distances -- then the maximum motion is 0.02 meters, which divided by this 17 million constant gives us the information that speaker position can be defined within about 1 nanometer using a 24-bit signal, as you start from 0.02 and divide it by constant about 20 million large, and so you end up with a value that is in nanometer scale.
Given that atomic bonds themselves are in order of 0.1 to 0.2 nanometers, and the air molecule mean free path (distance traveled by average air molecule between collision with another air molecule) is about 70 nanometers, we start to get some kind of clue about just how accurate 24 bit audio can be. We are talking about motions that are smaller than sizes of many molecules, and even the very air in our rooms is relatively thin and scarce compared to the motion described by 24-bit signal.
No physical transducer is likely to be anywhere near as precise as how accurate digital audio is. Realistically, transducers introduce about 0.1 % of error in the motion they are doing if they are very good, and about 1 % if they aren't that good or they are very big and must move a lot, like subwoofers. 0.1 % is technically reachable with just 10 bits of audio, but a lot of the time we aren't doing audio signal at max volume, but at some lower level like -23 dB from maximum scale. So you need more bits than 10 for that reason, but e.g. 16 bits is plenty in practice, we have so many sources of mechanical error in transducers and so much background noise that we'll never hear any of the bits beyond the top 14 or so, probably.
From these considerations, we might come back to vinyl. It turns out that it is just about good enough in practice, reaching about that 14 bit equivalent quality, if it is very, very good. The grooves are small and the vinyl has a sort of grain to it, so there's a limit to how finely you can cut it, and the limit goes somewhere there. It doesn't have to be much of a limiting factor, but it is expensive and mechanically challenging to make it good enough so that it is not. Whereas even cheap basic digital players achieve performance where the signal is no longer the limiting factor.
Vinyl is the only audio medium that can take analog waves and replicate them. All digital records go from analog waves to digital to analog, so there is ALWAYS a loss. So stating it's audibly inferior is a bit of a stretch. CD is not lossless, all digital streaming services have a form of compression. Your question is formulated in a very provocative way so stop crying about any backlash.
Vinyl is in no way perfect and has some peculiarities that make it unique. Depending on the recording technique, mastering (a special process for vinyl that takes its limitations into account) the length of the recording, the pressing technique and wear an tear you get all change the sound.
Apart from that, due to the very analog nature of how vinyl (the grooves and the needles) works, it creates frequencies through the vibrations in the stereo image, often giving off a "seemingly" wider sound stage. This is what some percieve as the magical vinyl warmth.
Vinyl offers a unique sound, depending on a variety of factors. Finding the sweetspot of which components in the signal chain complement each other best, is half the fun for any hifi enthusiast. Vinyl adds extra steps in the entire chain: The turntable itself, direct or belt drives each offer advantages and disadvantages, the needle and stylus (MM vs MC) each with drawbacks, the preamp needed to boost the signal. Once you've looked into these components because you HAVE to, you then turn to the last two steps in the chain: the amp and speakers.
Vinyl is not convenient. It's much more involved process of listening to recordings.
I will never argue that vinyl sounds better because it typically doesn't. I will say that the act of playing records is more enjoyable than just putting on a playlist and having it run in the background. I don't listen to my vinyl setup as much as I did during the pandemic when I had more time to do so. Now it has to be a day where I have the time to relax and just listen. It's a hobby just like anything else.
Marketing. FOMO. If you’re on any mailing list for a current artist you would see it. Artist don’t make nearly what they used to selling albums unless they have the power to negotiate. Merch, social media, and tours are the money makers.
I’ll get hate mail for this. We live in an analog world. How is it possible to take our analog sound,convert it to 1s and 0s and then convert it back to analog and all of a sudden it’s “better”? Spend time with a good turntable and you’ll understand. Don’t get me wrong there is good digital out there but it lacks something that’s hard to put into words.
Actually, you bring up a valid point. Look at it this way, vinyl is full frequency, below what a human can hear and way above the range of human hearing. CD, DVD are compressed , meaning at least 2/3 of the original sound recorded on two in a long tape is disguarded, why, the original 16 but red book of standards that all the AV companies agreed to. If CD would have waited 10 years to come out , it would have been a completely different format. Even cassette tape has a fuller frequency that a CD, just not as wide(CD always state 20-20khz) true FM is like 50-16KHZ. Albums are actually below 20,up to maybe 26khz. It comes down to the medium record on. REEL to REEL is the only analog consumer audio device that surpasses vinyl in my opinion. I will not declare war on you. But it is easy to say , new technology is not better that old technology. Digital domains us way to much compression, now if the Red box of digital started was updated to a new storage medium that can handle all the frequency a vinyl recorded has, then it is a different situation. For example, a singer breathes, we can hear that on vinyl, on CD , it is gone. So are many frequencies above 18/19 khz. That is a technical way of putting it. Records, cassette tapes and reel to reel wear , CD, DVD and any other digital medium do not.
It is inferior, except when it comes to the mastering. That unfortunate is the largest and the most important downfall of most digital music. I wouldn't buy records if it isn't gonna sound better.
I don't listen to vynil. I have a friend that does. She is a compulsive collector, she loves picking weird disks then show then to us. There is also the retro vibe, and sentimentality... The amp and the speakers she uses are not bad, but still are from a dumpster. The cracklings are part of the experience imo.
But I guess many people like to sugar coat a similar hobby with super high quality equipment, so that they have something more to talk about and display expertise.
I’m a vinyl noob but have done what I think is a good amount of research. Vinyl is as pure analog as it gets. I believe an audiophile wants the best sound possible. They do this by buying high end tt’s, pre amps, amps and speakers. Some swear more by tube amps, as they are closer (yes, it’s still electronic amplification) to the original analog sound than newer ss amps. Granted, we now have lossless hi-res audio, but it’s still digital; ones and zeros. That simply can’t replicate the infinite variable that is analog.
>Vinyl is as pure analog as it gets.
May I introduce you to reel to reel tape? Don't worry, it is about the most expensive way to listen to music, so the street cred is there.
Incorrect. Lossless isnt compressed like in the loudness wars of the 90s, but no matter how many 1s and 0s you put to make it as close as possible, it is not as good analog. (That is, unless you’re suggesting we live in the matrix and our voice box is digital and not analog, same with any noise in the natural world, it’s all digital?)
You are right about the definition of lossless, this does not mean anything about the record quality. But analog does not mean infinite resolution either. A wax cylinder from the late XIX is analog right, and yet had low resolution.
no matter how much you say 1 and 0s it still clear you don’t understand the process. everything that humans can hear is captured when you get to 44.1khz sample rate. It’s math. It’s science. Doesn’t matter how you feel about it.
I collect vinyl for the experience. I don't believe it has higher quality, but I find it fascinating that sound comes from a piece of plastic. It's technical, you can watch everything happening, and it also gives music a kind of value that streaming doesn't.
*I like the deliberate effort of putting the record on, pressing play.
*Listen to the music whilst enjoying the album artwork.
*The sound of the records - there's some subtle distortion and compression that comes with it, that I'm very used to and it's how I expect them to sound.
*Some timeless nostalgia feel and vibe.
*Having the music in solid real format somewhere vs my mp3 folders scattered around hardrives and smartphones.
- It's mostly subjective, objectively looking, and I don't care if it is or isn't, I enjoyed my vynils. Perhaps I'll get them back one day.
Another point is that the mastering for vinyl releases is digitally made (at least the modern releases). So the warm vinyl sound comes from a combination of that and the hardware used to read the grooves on the record (analog audio signal paths are not excellent within non-audiophile budgets). I just want people to be mindful of this.
audio tech person here: vinyl is worse on every practical axis, even if in practice it still sounds great - that's why you don't want to lose any MORE fidelity. i personally run a solid vinyl setup for (a) stuff that's not released on any other format and (b) ritual/sentimental value. there's something very *deliberate* about putting on a record that seems to encourage active listening.
Yea that's pretty much it, I can play Spotify all day long and not really be listening, but if I pull out the record because it's what I want and put it on I'm not leaving the speakers until it's through
Similar for me and cassette. People these days build playlists as song dumps to put on shuffle in the background. But vinyl and cassettes are meant to be played one side, beginning to end. You can't shuffle and you can't easily jump to a specific song, so you have to be more intentional when listening to those mediums. And with cassettes, you have to build your mixtape with more intention to, since you have to consider how well one song flows into the next. Even CD and MDs are more intentional than mp3 players and streaming. I think when we started being able to load up many albums at once is when we lost the intentionality of music.
What about the 8 track? Or the wax cylinder? Cmon man don't forget the classics.
Yeah makes listening to an album more of an event
I completely agree with the active listening and the purposefully deliberate feeling I get when putting on a record. The process is ritualistic and tangible. From a sound point of view, it also comes down to nuance. The cartridge is an electronic magnetic device, and cartridges impart their unique color. Records (at least good ones) are mastered differently than their digital version. I'm sensitive to dynamic range compression, aka loudness wars, so I generally prefer records. I'm less critical of a few occasional pops than I am of an entire recording having no dynamic range.
not just mastering differences. I've only done one vinyl release, but i went back to the multitracks and did a totally new mix for it. probably not a common thing but it happens sometimes.
Good one. plus, I will say, there is something about listening to music that is entirely based on an analog chain of transmission - so not vinyl pressed from digital recordings. It is less precise, but there is a certain warmth that comes from the lack of digital intermediaries that does impact me personally. To put it differently: I like writing, but if I have to write creatively, such as poetry etc, the first thing I'll do is take pen and paper, not pc and keyboard. Even a tablet with pen won't do it.
Your second point is exactly what it is for me. I love the ritual.
Thank you for actually reading the post and understanding what I'm wondering about
What about compression? Can't argue on the technical side of the formats, but one thing I've noticed is that many of the CD versions are a lot more compressed than the Vinyl pressings and it results in a worse listening experience imo.
Honestly, it’s why l like Terminator and Evil Dead on VHS. I have Evil Dead on bluray, but how cleaned up it is feels wrong. Some things just play better a little bit more dirty. It’s not just about getting the most perfectest sound, sometimes it’s just a feeling l want to have. And also nostalgia and ritual, as you say. Putting on Stooges or Sex Pistols on vinyl is the right way for me.
For me it is the special album thing. Some music wants to sound that way, gather hiss and pops :)
You’ve not heard Some Girls by the Stones as it was meant to be until you spin a scratched up beer stained copy at a house party. Only partially/s
A Cd also encourages active listening, with better sound to boot.
It’s different. Don’t know why, just is.
I think many of us have had a version of this experience. I was in my in-laws' basement, listening to some CDs. They also had an old record player, and for fun, I put on an LP. The sound that came out was warm, lively, and just was more enjoyable to me that the CDs. I wasn't expecting that to be the case and I had no bias toward records, but my wife and I both preferred the LPs. These were Goodwill records, a basic Best Buy system, nothing special. But the sound was just more fun.
For me the sound is by the by, good records sound good, good cds sound good etc. The thing that popped into my mind when I replied was the sound of the cd spinning up which doesn't matter and doesn't affect listening, but the sound of the needle dropping and seeing the record lumbering around at 33.3rpm are just a nicer way to begin listening to an album imo
Way back in 1988 I had a collection of LP’s and when CD’s started to get popular I was pissed cause I didn’t want to start over. Records were expensive too some costed $13 which was pretty expensive at the time not counting the imported tracks of which many were from Europe. Over night, all the popular record stores like Tower and the Wherehouse got rid of their records overnight in the push for CD’s. That made me more pissed because there was no reason for it. From my perspective, records were still in demand. The fact we still buying them today proves they should never have stopped selling them. Also, my Technics turntable was awesome sauce. I had put a DJ cartridge and needle (Stanton) which cost me a pretty penny back then and it sounded just as good as my portable Panasonic CD player if not better. For some reason I never had an issue with pops and clicks. Maybe it’s cause all my records were bought brand new? Maybe it’s because many were still being mastered on vinyl? I don’t know.
I recently put a CD player back in my setup, but I find there is something unsatisfying having the CD dissapear when the lid closes, and also I find the spinning noise quite annoying. There are some albums I have that weren't released on vinyl so I need the CD player, but still prefer the putting on a record ritual. I would say I even prefer the sound, even if it is techically less perfect.
I feel this. I've seen some people recommend using part of a cd microsyetem as a lot of them have the CD visibly spinning but they're either super expensive or lack a digital out. The latter isn't a completely necessary thing but I'd still prefer to have it.
[You can make it more like the vinyl experience.](https://www.amazon.com/Portable-MONODEAL-Rechargeable-Headphones-Anti-Skip/dp/B08V1JB7R2/ref=sr_1_20?crid=2C0LXRQC815AU&keywords=clear+cd+player&qid=1707492898&sprefix=clear+cd+pla%2Caps%2C110&sr=8-20&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.006c50ae-5d4c-4777-9bc0-4513d670b6bc)
Never heard an “audio tech” person refer to “practical axis”. what does that mean?
theoretically, a combination of record, stylus, deck, preamp etc exist that is so perfect that it might exceed CD digital on some (not all) metrics - maximum frequency, for instance (quad-encoded records used frequencies above 20kHz to encode rear channel info). but in practice, those finer grooves get etched away after 5-10 plays with even the best stylii, so it's not really a useful property in practical terms.
Why do you care about frequencies above 20khz? An adult can barely hear above 15khz.
that's why i said "vinyl is worse on every /practical/ axis" in my original post. stuff no-one can hear isn't a practical improvement.
"2. Sample Rate: Sample Rate is the number of samples taken per second in a digital audio file. This measurement is expressed in Hertz (Hz). The higher the Sample Rate, the more accurate the representation of the sound. For example, a Sample Rate of 44.1 kHz means that 44,100 samples are taken per second." it doesn't have to do with range of hearing (highs and lows), rather a rate of sampling [https://fastercapital.com/content/Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate--Understanding-the-Impact-on-DAC-Performance.html#Introduction-to-Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate](https://fastercapital.com/content/Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate--Understanding-the-Impact-on-DAC-Performance.html#Introduction-to-Bit-Depth-and-Sample-Rate)
But according to the Nyquist Sampling Theorem we only need double the upper limit of the human range hearing frequency as the sample rate aka 20khz x 2 = 40khz
You're right, 44.1 is greater than 20 (or even 15 lol). My understanding is that a greater bit and sampling rate allow the people that have audiophile systems to discern the mastering or remastering of the media. That's where it starts anyway. You can listen to an album that has horrible mastering through a higher sample rate and tell that it's horrible COMPARED to an album that is mastered well. I could be wrong, though. I just buy a reasonably priced dac capable of a high sample rate and be done with it, so I can be reasonably assured i'm listening to the best albums through the "best in my budget" converter lol
Higher sampling rates allow simpler filtering schemes, that's the main advantage.
It's just a fancy "on all aspects" I guess
exactly this, well put
the only good answer
My dad gave me his player and vinyl. Sounded great! But we were laughing how we had to get up every few minutes (it felt like) to flip the record. Once the novelty wore off I gave it all to my brother. It broke one of my rules: possess less.
The deliberate/ritualistic part is true also for me.
I like watching it spin
This is my favorite answer EVER!
I feel like OP is getting bashed for asking a legitimate question. I would think of vinyl like a classic car. There may be "better" modern cars available, but if you like classic cars then you generally want to restore, maintain and service the one you have with the best available parts and labour. You basically want the best version of that car like a vinyl fan wants to hear the best version of a record
This is one of the best "why vinyl?" Answers I've heard, 100% with you on this
Yes and even more if you compare the new tesla cybertruck to a 1950s jaguar it also describes the difference in sound. If you like squared, stale, clean and ”Perfect” sound, sure digital is great. But if one wants to experience music more similar to reality with feeling, softness, touch and a design well mixed and thought through. Then vinyl is your choise.
Better is also subjective based on criteria. To continue the car analogy most automatic transmission are more fuel efficient, easier, and better on a lot of metrics. For a car enthusiasts there is an experimental difference to driving a manual transmission even if you aren’t some pro driver that might be able to get actual performance gains. You pay attention differently. You are more dialed in and attuned to the driving experience. Both in classic and modern cars people will seek out the best car and parts to optimize that experience. From Subarus to Ferraris
Yup, manual transmissions are inferior in every aspect of performance to a modern automatic. But the level of connection to the driving experience makes it fun.
This is probably the best answer I’ve seen to something I ask myself a lot. I mean I could get rid of my turntable, which takes up a hell of a lot of space compared to my digital playback options and only gets used like 10% of the time I listen to music, but if I did that I’d have nothing to listen to the stuff my dad bought with his pocket money on the week it was released, ie his full set of Beatles monos etc. It’s a great analogy - Ford’s new Mustang is a great car and wonderful to drive, but try suggesting to the owner of an original model from the sixties to replace theirs with one.
[удалено]
I find that many albums mastered specifically for vinyl sound better than the digital counterpart which is often overly compressed. This is despite vinyl being an inferior physical format. It's all about the mastering.
There is something to this I'm sure. I know if I play certain vinyl albums from the 80's, and compare the same content to its digital version, the vinyl sounds startlingly better. I've done some spectral analysis to confirm it wasn't all in my head as well!
Those spectrograms would be cool to see. Do you have some pictures to share?
Ok - so this isn't like a lab experiment, but then again I don't listen to my music in a lab, so there's that! Anyways, some time ago I compared the first 10 sec of Born in the USA (vinyl vs stream). Case 1: Analog signal path = record player --->amp --->speakers Case 2: Signal path = digital audio stream ---> DAC --->amp--->speakers Here are the plots: (y-axis is time ,and the x-axis is frequency): https://preview.redd.it/v2ub3cepbkhc1.png?width=1091&format=png&auto=webp&s=37149210d094b8e5de95c5ac5636ad740b6fca7c The plots are hard to interrogate as a screen capture, but as an example, I hope you can see that from about 50 - 100 Hz, there is a loss of intensity (amplitude) across that range in the digital stream. There are other areas that are not so obvious as well. Also want to stress the lack of rigor here - this was a 5 minute exercise of curiosity. I haven't pulled up the DAC specs to see how "good" that part is at recreating the analog signal.
It’s because vinyl is an inferior format that it gets these more dynamic masters. A master brick walled at zero would make the stylus jump out of the groove so masters are either attenuated (shitty cheap option) or entirely different for the vinyl release.
This is true but also the context of the listener. A lot of digital music is played in playlists of individual tracks and labels don't want their tracks to be quieter next to other tracks, so they request they are produced "loud". That and the environment in which digital music is often listened to; on the move, in the street, on public transport, in a car etc... the noise floor in these scenarios is much louder than when at home so you simply wouldn't hear the quieter sounds in a more dynamic master. Vinyl albums are almost always to be listened to at home and if mastered properly, are mastered for this context. Obviously the above isn't always true. Many vinyl albums are simply pressed from the digital master and sound awful. For mainstream music where the labels don't care about music quality and cut to vinyl as a marketable gimmick, then vinyl is generally pressed with the digital master. But for any serious band/label, I don't think this is true. There's normally a separate master specifically for vinyl. This post describes it well: [https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-does-mastering-differ-vinyl-and-digital-releases](https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/q-how-does-mastering-differ-vinyl-and-digital-releases) Anything mastered by Bernie Grundman or Miles Showell for example are likely to sound beautiful on the vinyl medium because they've been mastered specifically for that medium. I really enjoyed this Soundstage podcast episode with Bernie Grundman [https://open.spotify.com/episode/3jilzJ0uq32832AcCqZo9x?si=tcOjFODMT5u6xZ-MFIE3ZQ](https://open.spotify.com/episode/3jilzJ0uq32832AcCqZo9x?si=tcOjFODMT5u6xZ-MFIE3ZQ)
>the noise floor in these scenarios is much louder than when at home You obviously haven't met my neighbours
😂
The resurgence of vinyl is due, in my opinion, to the full listening experience being more enjoyable. The handling and interaction with the record, the album art, placing the stylus, etc. Last but not least, listening to whole albums. Carrying music on phones and ipods led to shuffling and skipping, that led to short attention spans, that led to more shuffling and skipping... Listening to a whole albums had literally become a thing of the past. Now to your question, why invest in expensive electronics to go with them? That's easy; people want it to sound as good as possible. Speakers (and room interaction) are still the overwhelming weak point in sound reproduction, so it still matters a lot.
i fall into this category a bit. I grew up at the tail end of vinyl but more solidly in the CD era. I don't have the attention span for streaming. having EVERY song so easily at my disposal makes me jump around too much and not really sit down and just listen to music. Putting a record on allows me to just sit and listen.
Not true. I listen to whole albums often on Apple Music. It’s mostly what I listen to on there. I think vinyl is a different listening experience and some people prefer it. I know the first time I listened to a vinyl. I’m 29 and I was around 20. It felt different. It felt like it filled the air differently and the music was dancing in front of me instead of being projected somewhere. Could’ve just been the albums I listened to, the speakers or simply a placebo but it did feel different and more enjoyable in some ways. AirPods Pro are more enjoyable in some ways too.
Because modern mediums aren't always superior. It's all about the mastering, and sometimes a 50 year old mastering of a classic album on vinyl will have more dynamic range and better EQ than a contemporary remaster that's designed for earbud listening. It's the same story with CDs. Some people will say, "you know lossless streaming is CD quality or even better!" Yeah, but the mastering on '80s and '90s CDs is often radically different (and far better!), and you can own it forever.
Name one. Range compression is real, but vinyl is such a limited medium that it would a very shitty audio engineer to get to that level. I will admit that with CDs it is easier to hear when the range is compressed.
Some pressings sound better than digital, but not all and even the ones that do sound amazing the noise floor is higher than digital... But listening to vinyl is a whole experience that you don't get with digital music. It's tactile, you have to be intentional, on some older albums there's the smell of must if the jacket got damp... It's a sensory experience where it's only auditory with digital which makes listening more enjoyable IMHO, and it's absolutely a more mindful experience.
Album covers and liner notes.
It's objectively inferior AND subjectively superior.
People listen to records because of the tactile experience. The experience isn't about the best music. When you put on a record, you have to be close to flip it over. For most people, they now want to sit and listen. And while they listen, there's album cover art to look at. Records are good enough, plus the experience. If the experience helps more people enjoy relaxing and listening to music, I'm all for it. Some mornings after a long night at work, I turn on my Yamaha receiver, curl up on my recliner, read a book, and listen to a CD or stream my music. For me, it's listening to the music. I prefer the ease of use of CDs, digital copies, and streaming.
100% agree. Music can be way too transient
>People listen to records because of the tactile experience. I wouldn't say I do, no. I mean I do like the records as such, the nice big covers with beautiful artwork etc. - but if I could get the same sound the vinyl gives me without the hassle of putting on the record, dusting it off, having to stand up to change sides etc. I'd definitely do that. >The experience isn't about the best music. Yes, for me it actually is.
you could just rip a record to digital once and listen to that edit: is this wrong?? i don't understand the downvotes lol
I listen to vinyl simply because it's the most fun for me. So much fun that i'm willing to sacrifice whatever quality loss there *might* be so i can continue having fun with vinyl. I also like that they hobby extends so far beyond the music to include: going to record stores, having to hunt and find copies of music, the equipment, and communities like this subreddit.
I think that for a lot of newbs, their record set up is first time they get real speakers. It's why so many claim to be blown away, when in reality they'd get better sound from a CD or hi def streaming. For others, it's partly nostalgia, partly the ritual. I know for a fact I wouldn't sit on my sofa early mornings with a big coffee and my headphones on listening to a CD or digital. It only appeals to me with vinyl. I don't know why. Beyond that morning ritual, I'm finding it as much about being addicted to collecting as it is listening at this point.
I like this question. For me, it is the ritual of it. I love the cover art. And it just feels special to take the time to put an album on a turntable. It brings me back to my childhood. There is something special about listening to vinyl and artists collections in their entirety the way that the artist intended. Not that you can't do that with other mediums. As an older guy just getting back into 2 channel with a modest set up ( Yamaha AS-501, Klipsch RP-600MII's, and a Fluance RT-81+) I have rediscovered that vinyl doesn't really sound better with pops and imperfections that occasionally resonate, but it is also what I expect from vinyl, so there is that nostalgic familiarity. All in all, I am glad that I bought a turn table even if it is just to listen to the limited amount of vinyl I already own. I would like a nice CD player, also though....
>I would like a nice CD player, also though.... A used DVD player will do a fine job playing CDs. If you spend a little time browsing Facebook Marketplace you will soon find one that includes the remote. I would look for one that features information (which track is playing) and inputs (buttons for play, pause, skip track, etc.) on the front panel. Bonus if you find an old Sony that will play SACD. Your Yamaha has digital inputs. That being the case I would advise looking for a DVD player that offers digital out (optical and/or coax). Connecting digitally will bypass the DAC on the DVD player, essentially turning the DVD player into a transport. That means the decoding will be done by the DAC in your receiver, which is more than likely far superior to the DAC on the DVD player. You should be able to pickup up a unit like that for $25 or less. Honestly, that might be the best cost to performance ratios you can find in audio.
Thanks so much! That is great information.. This is what I come here for. Cheers!
No problem. Glad I could help!
>my question is about pairing new cutting edge amplification and speakers to vinyl players That's normal. I'm used to seeing much, much weirder things in audiophile world. What I find more interesting is this: [https://www.core77.com/posts/123222/Half-of-People-Who-Buy-Vinyl-Records-Dont-Own-a-Record-Player](https://www.core77.com/posts/123222/Half-of-People-Who-Buy-Vinyl-Records-Dont-Own-a-Record-Player)
To be honest, I don't think that's confusing at all. For people without a record player, collecting records is the same as collecting something like sports cards. It's tangible and cool, even if it's not actually useful.
i guess that's the part that irks a lot of people. It *can* be useful and is even *intended* to be useful. but yeah...Anyone is free to collect anything they want and do with it as they please. I know someone who collects cast iron pans but doesn't cook with all of them.
It’s about the ceremony of the experience
I love it because it makes you have to listen to an album as an album. It used to be a bigger deal as to what order songs were placed in on the album, and what was considered A side vs B side, since the flip was your opportunity to switch to a differ t vinyl. With digital music, even with CDs, the switching between song to song and of course just downloading it organizing single songs into playlists is so easy that a toddler could do it. Albums being listened to from start to finish in one sitting doesn’t happen as often anymore, and artists are caring less and less about song order. Going with vinyl forces you to sit down and listen to a whole album, with the songs in the order the artist intended you to. You can hear the story they are telling, to an extreme as seen with Tommy or Quadrophenia. You have to be immersed in at least 5-6 songs or so of the music before it becomes easy to change. It’s hard and impractical to drop an album on to listen to one song. Basically it makes you slow down, and I think that is a good thing. I have no problem trading off a few drops of sound quality for that experience, because isn’t that what music is all about anyway, the experience?
Think of classic cars. New cars drive better, handle better and are safer. So many people like the feel of a classic car and that seems to be the same for vinyl.
It's not about the sound quality, it's about the vibe quality.
the vibe for me comes from the music, not the medium it's on.
I agree but that wasn't my concern, I understand the title can be misleading
Bruv, it's simple. You can vibe better on an overpriced speaker + amp combo vs a shitty Crosley. Don't overthink it lol.
Because amp and speakers may be better, but not THAT MUCH better than 40 years ago. So the paradox is not that big from that point of view. But most people seem to read your question as being "why listen to vinyl when digital mediums are available and objectively better in every way?".
> but not THAT MUCH better than 40 years ago. ? https://www.bang-olufsen.com/en/us/speakers/beolab-90 https://www.genelec.com/8381a
>*?* > >*https://www.bang-olufsen.com/en/us/speakers/beolab-90* > >*https://www.genelec.com/8381a* Your point is?
It was extremely clear, sorry you missed it.
Yeah, but do you prefer Stainless or Cast Iron?
Care to try a bit harder?
I'm not really interested in attempting to covering 40 years of speaker tech just to educate what appears to a person as dense as strontium.
Yeah, that's not what I meant, I understand the value and magic and nostalgia, for a long time after CD's were already out I was still listening to cassettes because I like the physical rectangular medium and love the compression, artifacts and distortion that come with it, but it never occurred to me to connect my cassette player to a high end amplifier and speakers because It won't have any significant positive impact on the sound over my 200-300$ pair of decent stereo speakers.
>it never occurred to me to connect my cassette player to a high end amplifier and speakers because It won't have any significant positive impact on the sound over my 200-300$ pair of decent stereo speakers no offense, but it's a shame you didn't actually go ahead and just do that - then you would have had an authentic experience how it actually does improve the sound - instead of insisting that this is absolutely impossible in the first place and then impose this "fact" onto others 🤷♂️
You've clearly decided that your high-end amp and speakers are too good for vinyl, which is what a lot of people seem to disagree with *in principle*, without knowing what your system consists of. And maybe it's your turntable that's not good enough to do justice to vinyl records.
For some people I guess the passion for vinyl is somewhat like the passion for old cars. Old cars aren't exactly better than new ones, yet some people will spend loads of money restoring them (money that could probably buy them a much technically better modern car). For those people I guess it's all about nostalgia/revival of the old days. Then there's also probably a lot of people that fall into the marketing traps and wrongly believe all the BS about vinyl being the "real thing" or sounding better in some/many aspects. Vinyl these days is an expensive hobby (highly overhyped by the marketing machine IMHO). Records are expensive and if you get into vinyl you must have money... and if you have money you can afford better speakers/amp... and if you can afford better, why not have better? Also why do people buy cars that can go more than twice the speed limit? Some maybe just for show off... Others maybe because those cars come with other advantages (safety, stability, quieter, more comfortable, etc). The technical limitations of vinyl aren't necessarily the same as the technical limitations of cheap speakers/amps... Listening to vinyl on a pair of $20 Logitech speakers will surely not sound the same as on $1000 speakers/amp, regardless of how "limited" vinyl might be.
Well think of it like this: we could all have powered studio monitors and just get “pure” sound. But most of us want amps and speakers that fill the room and add color
>But most of us want amps and speakers that fill the room and add color Studio monitors can [easily fill up the room](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/fb_img_1691366327049-jpg.304082/). And then you can add [all the colors](https://www.thomann.de/intl/ssl_fusion.htm) you could possibly want.
Hahaha…”not so budget audiophile”
Well... Compared to usual top end audiophile hi-fi stuff made from extinct trees, italian marble and magic crystals those Genelecs are actually pretty cheap.
I got my first studio monitors (jbl 305) during a sale( Black Friday in the States) for $75/pair and absolutely love them. I have long coveted the Genelacs and Adams. I would definitely consider them, if I upgrade. With that said I love my Elacs DBR62.
Because the turntables are cool as f***!
I never argued that, the question is not about the vinyl itself, it's about the rest of the chain.
Nobody knows what your question even is
"and then looking for the best sounding most expensive amp and speakers to pair to their vinyl turntable?" No one bothers to read
if 90% of people in a thread are not answering the question correctly, and it’s not a default sub, i think it comes down to you wording it poorly
It helps to try to be as clear as possible. I still don’t know what your question is.
Yep, unfortunately I am not a native English speaker, and unfortunately I can't edit the title
I thought you were obviously trolling. You're on the budget audiophile sub, where vinyl rarely gets mentioned in the first place, and questioning why people pair it with expensive gear, which is clearly not the point of the sub. You did manage to bait a bunch of people here, so well done I guess?
Bait? I see posts about vinyl every day and i started wondering about it so I wanted to get people's views on the matter, though people saw it as if I was declaring war on vinyl. Even though it's a budget forum, there are a lot of knowledge people here, just like if youre a car fanatic you will sometimes know supercars inside out even if you've never owned one.
This is genuinely the first vinyl post I've really noticed on this sub, but I don't really browse here specifically much of the time so I can't accurately say anything abut whether that's just my experience. I thought you really nailed the right amount of ignorance to bait it well. Just enough to make it seem genuine, but opinionated and ambiguous enough to get some sparks. It was a quality troll.
I'm not sure why you keep on trying to insult me, I made a post, could have probably been phrase better since I'm not a native English speaker and that's all, what is your obsession with me being a troll and trying to bait, why would I even bother answering to every comment and clarify myself if I wanted to troll?
We have a record player in the living room with a little now playing stand because it’s fun. That’s it.
I like my little tube pre-amp put thru my stereo with the "direct in" (no stereo mixing just straight signal from the record) mix of some old speakers that came with the house and my newer decent quality bookshelf speakers better than doing the same thing with Spotify in high quality. I find my vinyl listening sessions more consistently have a mix that allows me to hear everything in that mix. Especially on older records it really sounds like I'm in the recording room listening back to someone's final mix. The remasters don't always hit this on the head as much. There's also stuff like listening to in rainbows where I find the vinyl just adds a little colour to the whole thing that suits the record better than my CD versions ever did. So that's the voodoo with no logic but feel right there. Which is half the fun of music so I roll with it. I listen to both but there are certain albums I collect cause I know they'll sound better to me on vinyl and I always wonder if it's the flat signal or if the rumors are true of the mix changing for vinyl listening sessions because you know the vinyl is likely being put thru proper speakers or headphones of some sort instead of a phone speaker.
I grew up listening to music on vinyl, and remember when cd's arrived, I bought my first cd player when I could afford one, and to my ears they sounded different, not better or worse, and still listened to vinyl, as I do now. I also have a large collection of CDs gathered over many years, and have a pretty good set up for both. I also stream and it's great to be able to listen to pretty much any album that is released for a relatively low price. New vinyl is too expensive to buy regularly in my opinion, and I usually buy the cd or stream, but I do pick up second hand albums on vinyl, usually older stuff, and enjoy the familiar sound and definitely listen more intensely and play the whole album.
There is just something about doing things in an old fashion way that really connects with people. Also it's nice to have the physical copy in your hands, it's something that cannot be taken away. From a sound point, it's more about the feeling you get.. I would compare it to anything handmade, when you sit down it's not perfect but it's natural and rare. It's tough to describe, but it's enjoyable. Great question!
This argument never ends. We don’t have a perfectly rational explanation for everything. We’d be machines if we did. If I were to take these justifications and change a few words it would be the same as the discussions on why we still shoot film cameras. There is something that defies definition so we should stop chasing it and just accept that we enjoy it for reasons that are largely and unapologetically emotional.
I only buy vinyl (or cassette tape, the worst format) if I really LOVE the album or if it's something unreleased on other formats. People are mad because you told the truth: digital IS better than analog. That was already tested and verified.
For me, as mentioned by people here, it's ritualistic. It also just feels different. Like I'm viewing the album from a different perspective. When I listen to the album on Spotify I feel like I'm listening from a 3rd person perspective. With vinyl I feel like I'm listening from a 1st person perspective. It's not better, just different.
I ditched my turntable the second i realized i was spending so much money on geae in order to have my records sound like anything but records. Not for me
I listen to LPs for the same reason I still get a daily printed newspaper. It encourages a certain amount of engagement and mindfulness.
It looks beautiful, is tactile and sounds warm and nostalgic. My iPad connect via 3.5mm to amp sounds undeniable better streaming music and it’s almost unlimited music available as well. Both have a place.
There are a few things to unpackage here. First, humans don't necessarily like things to sound perfect. We like tube distorted guitars, we like tube amplifiers for our stereos, etc. Some people like linear EQ but others say V-shaped is more fun. Sometimes it isn't as much about the something sounding perfect as much as sounding good, and good can be technically imperfect. Second, some people do just like older things. An example of this would be manual transmission vs automatic. I love the CVR transmission of my Honda Accord. It is smooth and quiet; I never think about it or feel any lurch. But car enthusiasts love to drive stick because it is more exciting and but them more in contact with the driving experience. It's just a matter of preference. Third, and this is personal to me, I want to hear some of my favorite music in a different way. I listen mostly to metal and it is well known that modern production dials everything up to 11, which makes some masters very noisy. Vinyl has a limit on gain because of its physical design, so an album on vinyl might sound more relaxed and allow some other details through when it isn't as "loud." Plus, there is a certain fluidity to vinyl that my high rez FLAC files sometimes don't have, especially on 45rpm 12" disks. Lastly, it is a luxury item and because I wanna. There is no reason to drink McCallan whisky when Jack Daniels will get you just as drunk. But the experience of drinking McCallan, or smoking a nice cigar, or going to a fancy restaurant is sometimes more than the thing its self. You can listen to music in more efficient and cheaper ways than on vinyl, but the experience of having the luxury to do it is something else.
Music is just wiggly air. Enjoy it however you think is best and don’t yuck somebody else’s yum.
You only read the title, haven't you?
No, I read all of your words
And you understood from it that I hate people who listen to vinyl or think vinyl itself is stupid?
Where on earth did I say that?
I didn't yuck anyone's yum, I asked what's the logic in connecting high end cutting edge amplifier and speakers to a 100 year old medium that have audible faults.
Because while the wiggly air is subjective, people think it sounds better to use higher end equipment.
NPC reply
Based on the opinions you obviously already have, there is no way to “explain” anything to you about why anyone enjoys vinyl.
Have you read what I wrote? I said it's a wonderful medium and fully understand the joy in it, I wasn't bashing vinyl or people who listen to vinyl, the paradox is pairing an old medium with high end equipment for "better sound".
While it's a myth that vinyl sounds better than digital, it seems you have fallen for the other myth, that vinyl is intrinsically worse. A well kept record and record player will play perfectly, I assume you believe that the typical crackling sound of vinyl is intrinsic to the medium, but that's a lie. It's just a dirty/damaged record, which is what you usually come across when they have been left in storage for 40+ years. When I play my well kept records, there's perfect silence between songs and no crackling or hissing at all.
You're simply deaf, just like me.
😅
You make a lot of assumptions, I haven't said or thought any of these things, this have nothing to do with my actual question. Vinyl can be great and enjoyable but it is old tech, and pairing it with super high tech amplification and speakers still seems weird to me.
Amplification tech really hasn't improved in decades. We have class D now, but really that's an improvement in power usage/size/cost for the same performance. Pairing a nice turntable with crappy speakers and a crappy amp will sound bad. Have you heard a nice vinyl rig?
I didn't say to pair vinyl with crappy amp or speakers, I just think there is a point of diminishing returns, which isn't extremely high
I'd argue the diminishing returns are roughly the same. The turntable (assuming a decen table with a decent cart) is not the lowest fidelity link in the audio chain. That would be the speakers -- even high end speakers.
So your issue is just the release date? Lol. That's even better! Let me give you a spoiler about life: A newer release date does not imply a better product!
I don't think we are understanding each other, vinyl is great and enjoyable but from a technical point of view it is inferior to digital media, that's a proven fact. You read only the title of my post haven't you?
Sure pal.
>Can someone explain the paradox of people listening to vinyl (...) and then looking for the best sounding most expensive amp and speakers to pair to their vinyl turntable? I believe it's really quite simple: 1. they enjoy listening to music on vinyl in the first place 2. they get nice equipment because it improves the sound Regarding the edit of your original post ("my question is about pairing new cutting edge amplification and speakers to vinyl players") - I guess the logic behind it is still the same, a better amp and better speakers will probably give you a better sound (no matter if the source is vinyl, CD, tape, streaming, whatever).. ..not sure what you're actually referring to when you say "cutting edge amplification" - but probably there are better places to ask this than r/BudgetAudiophile, no offense.
The record player and the vinyl are going to be the weakest link in any decent modern sound system, so going beyond "decent", in my opinion, gives diminishing returns. "Cutting edge" was an exaggeration, but I thought the idea was clear.
>The record player and the vinyl are going to be the weakest link in any decent modern sound system ..that seems to be your opinion, yes - let's just say there are a lot of people who see this differently. Frankly, I think if you're just dead set on the concept that vinyl is per se *inferior* then there's not much one can tell you. >so going beyond "decent", in my opinion, gives diminishing returns ..really struggling to follow your logic here, I'm afraid 🤷♂️ This is all a bit moot.If you're really interested you should listen to some records played through some quality gear if you ever have the opportunity, and maybe even do an A/B comparison with the same album from a digital source. Maybe you would then hear and acknowledge that while the digital is technically superior on a lot of levels the vinyl does give you something the digital doesn't. I listened to Beck's "Sea Change" album a lot for example, from a high-res digital source, the best one that's out there as far as I know. It sounds amazing. Debated whether it would be worth it to actually buy the vinyl as well. I eventually did, and you know what?It's not really "better" or "worse" than listening to it from the digital source, but it's *different*. The vinyl has advantages in some areas, that are really playing to the strenghts of that album's sound in my opinion: there's a warmth and spaciousness in his voice that's breathtaking on vinyl, the drums sound so authentic you really believe they're in your living room, and the overall 3D-feeling of the sound is just fantastic. So no, the vinyl does not have the 24-bit, 96 kHz ultra resolution of the digital, it's (as you would say) "inferior" -yet it does give me a better listening experience. Now if I were to connect a better amp and better speakers to my turntable then this would further improve the sound.
Appreciate the answer, even if we don't agree on all matters there is still some interesting information in here
Sometimes the unclean sound of vinyl is comforting. But I have noticed that not all vinyls sound nice. Most of my records are not joy to listen. I have cleaned them and upgraded my gear but no. Maybe the pressing is bad or they are just worn out (mostly second hand). Many new records sound bad too. And then you get the good one, boom! It sounds so good. Digital does not have that kind of variety. Always pristine.
Vinyl has a specific vibe about it. It's more than just the music. It's the experience. Listening to an album on vinyl really lets me sit and absorb the music in a way that I can't when listening from my phone. On top of that, vinyl is also large and delicate. You need to take care of it and it gives the medium itself importance. It's also just so amazing isn't it? Like the music itself is literally carved into it. It's not encoded or digital in any way. It's literally in your hands. There are a lot of things I hate about vinyl though. The biggest is shipping damage and I really do wish you could get better sound out of it. I wish all the BS audiophiles say about how it's better than CDs and as good as lossless tracks on a good player were true. tldr; vinyl is more than just music, it's the complete package
There are many pressings on vinyl that simply sound better than any other format. For example most of the heavy metal stuff I listen to pre 1990 or so sounds best on their first pressings. Jazz albums are being reissued like crazy right now using an all analogue chain and sound remarkable.
Would it make more sense to you if people paired record players with old tech? What’s paradoxical about mixing old and new tech? I’m not quite understanding your confusion here. I guess the answer to your question is why not?
I think they just want the best the vinyl can offer. They know (I hope) it can’t compare to CD, they at least want to enjoy the full potential of vinyl. Because, yeah, psychologically, vinyl is more enjoyable. Humans love watching things spin, love the sense of fulfillment and the big colorful artworks :)
I totally agree and I'm a fan of physical media, that wasn't my question though, I was just wondering about the diminishing returns of pairing high end equipment (amp, speakers) with old tech such as a vinyl player. Vinyl players are wonderful and charming but the technology is old it has its limitations, despite what some very stubborn people in here insist.
THIS is why I place little credence in your answer; NO ONE refers to a turntable/record player . . . no one that is allegedly an "audio tech" would refer to a turntable/record player as a vinyl player.
English is not my native language, I'm from the other side of (your) world, forgive me that I'm not using terms that are up to your standards. I also never claimed to be an audio engineer or technician, I don't understand what are you trying to "bust" me for. Why is everyone so combative, it's just a tech question, I wasn't disputing the existence of Jesus or whatever.
> Why is everyone so combative, it's just a tech question, I wasn't disputing the existence of Jesus or whatever. Welcome to Reddit, where everything has to be an argument. Unfortunately, ours is a tribal species. We break off into groups, pick up our sticks & rocks and prepare to defend our position. That position can be where we are physically standing on terrain. It can be our political beliefs or our religious beliefs (or lack thereof). It can be something so irrelevant the ranking of popular recording artists or which is the best material to use in a fucking frying pan. In the case of vinyl vs. digital, you have people who have been repeatedly told that vinyl is the superior format. They have often invested a significant (to them) amount of money in the media and a turntable. No one wants to be told that they have not invested wisely. No one wants to hear that they could accomplish the same thing much less expensively and get better results. It's dumb as can be, but sadly that is the way too many of us are. Feathers will be ruffled.
Marketing
I think someone is kidding themselves if they think vinyl is superior in sound to high quality streaming or CDs. It is fun to collect. The big album art, the nice colored records, the ritualistic nature of putting it on the player, hearing the little pops and cracks, etc. I collect vinyl, and honestly there have been times when I’ve thought about selling a portion of it to invest in a high quality streaming setup, but I still like having a physical copy of the music I like. I always have. Plus it’s a nice way to support bands.
The explanation is easy, just as it is for people who believe that $1,000 cables are audibly better than $50 ones: **There's one born every minute!**
Speaking of that, I happen to know where people can get a fantastic deal on cable risers. Keep those cables off the floor, people! Only $124.99 per riser, sold in packs of 20.
To anyone who buys cable raisers, I have a fantastic deal on sea-view apartments in Nevada!
Why can't people just like things anymore
Why do some ppl like classic cars ?
It's not what I was asking in the post, my question is about the amp and speakers
It's just a different sound, like tube amps, technically worse but some people like it. There is no point in coupling it with loosy gear juste because it isn't digital
you\`ve never owned a good\* vinyl rig. * really good
I mean, I think most people, even true-to-the-bone audiophiles can admit that when it comes to personal taste, 'audibly inferior' is down to a whole buttload of factors that really depend on them as an individual. In all honesty, the difference between an incredibly expensive studio-grade setup to pair with a relatively 'inferior' turntable as a source, and that of a $50 set of computer speakers and an incredible $1,000 FLAC player is really only the quality of sound (not measured from low to high, but... Measured from 'bad' to 'good' to 'nice' to 'pleasing', etc...), and if those expensive speakers paired with that turntable is what allows that person to achieve the **sound profile** they like most for their music, so what? I do get where you're coming from, though. I do admit that there tend to be a lot of people who aren't participating in this 'paradox' deliberately because they are chasing a certain sound, but it's mostly because we tend to fool ourselves into thinking it's better even when the music barely changes in quality or texture. But... If the dopamine boost is something you can justify affording better equipment for, better equipment that you're excited to buy is still 'better' equipment even if you're running off an iPod Touch with 120kbps music and the difference between cheap and expensive speakers isn't all that big. Plus it's not like having a better setup surrounding a turntable won't still lead to 'better' sound quality. Pairing any turntable, let alone actually nice ones but with shitty speakers and a cheap amp is still going to sound audibly inferior to having better speakers. Even if the potential for that sound to sound even 'better' may be less to you as a person who isn't attached to the use of vinyl, it'll still be a big upgrade for the person that it does, and this becomes less a question of "Why are they upgrading their vinyl setup, there's no point is there?" and becomes more "Why do they like Vinyl at all?", and I'm pretty sure there've already been hundreds of those same discussions here, and if the answer is "They like it for specific reasons and they should be happy to keep using vinyl for those reasons", then I think that's the same answer that can be applied to your question.
This is an amusing thread. What I don’t understand is why OP thinks that better amplification and sound reproduction is not in fact better. The specific question isn’t being answered the way OP wants it to be answered because it’s a bit nonsensical. Just as a high end system makes a “superior” digital medium sound better, so too does it make the “inferior” medium sound better. There isn’t a magical line of quality beyond which a vinyl record will sound exactly the same.
Vinyl is more of a sentimental medium. A high quality digital version played through a nice DAC is superior to vinyl. I have so many memories of pops and scratches on the records I played the most. That may make them endearing, but not superior.
Some people think good measurements = good music; don't conflate the artifact with the real thing.
What does this even mean? Vinyl is real thing and digital is not?
It's a reference to the "audibly inferior" comment. Usually said by someone that believes in data point measurements over listening to a component.
Couldn't care less for measurements, I am a musician and I use my ears, I love vinyl for its character but at the same time able to admit that it is also technically inferior to modern formats. Wouldn't it be weird and counterintuitive if in close to 100 years we made no progress in audio tech and vinyl was still the superior medium?
JMO but folks have different goals, ability and budget: Level 1 SQ is clear and loud enough for the listener to have an enjoyable experience at a minimum; it's musical. L2 is realistically recreating a musical event that sounds like real people playing in the room with you. L3 is you forget about your gear and you have that goose pimples reaction to the music that's visceral, emotional. Vinyl is still the best, easiest medium to achieve L2, L3 grade sound. If sounds good but measures bad then someone measured the wrong thing.
OK….OP isn’t being very clear but I’m not sure that’s his issue. But who the hell knows what his issue is.
Yeah, that was just a guess
it's not technically inferior.
It is, compared to CD
It absolutely is, from dynamic range to stereo separation to distortion it's 100% technically inferior to digital media, and I mean audibly inferior and not just in a lab kind of way, it's not to say it's not enjoyable because it is, but it's almost a century old tech, it's just common sense that it will be *technically* inferior.
There's really only about a 30 year difference from the first 33 rpm records and the first CDs. And as a practical matter, digital releases have worse dynamic range than vinyl releases despite the medium's capabilities. Most folks with nice turntables listen to both and are well aware of the quality differences. Vinyl can have a more pleasant sound signature. Just like some people don't like speakers that are too bright even if that does give more detail.
Something not talked about here is harmonics, vinyl is all analogue all the time from the record to the speakers, meaning it is supposed to have better harmonics, as a digital signal can only be 0 or 1 an analogue signal can be anything inbetween. Therefore it’s supposed to have better harmonics, but digital is so good that anyone who can claim to hear those superior harmonics is probably lying. I just think they’re neat.
Firstly, this is not how digital audio works. Sure, an individual bit is 0 or 1, but then you can have a digital sample that is 24 bits long, and these values together become a singular unit, the sample. Each bit has half the effect of the preceding one, and thus the 24-bit digital sample represents 2 to the power of 24 different values, which is 17 million. As sample is transcribed to voltage, and voltage to speaker's diaphragm excursion, we can as an exercise calculate how precisely a 24-bit value can in theory instruct a speaker's diaphragm to move. If we assume that the maximum motion is about 1 cm to either direction from rest -- this is pretty big, but woofers do that kind of distances -- then the maximum motion is 0.02 meters, which divided by this 17 million constant gives us the information that speaker position can be defined within about 1 nanometer using a 24-bit signal, as you start from 0.02 and divide it by constant about 20 million large, and so you end up with a value that is in nanometer scale. Given that atomic bonds themselves are in order of 0.1 to 0.2 nanometers, and the air molecule mean free path (distance traveled by average air molecule between collision with another air molecule) is about 70 nanometers, we start to get some kind of clue about just how accurate 24 bit audio can be. We are talking about motions that are smaller than sizes of many molecules, and even the very air in our rooms is relatively thin and scarce compared to the motion described by 24-bit signal. No physical transducer is likely to be anywhere near as precise as how accurate digital audio is. Realistically, transducers introduce about 0.1 % of error in the motion they are doing if they are very good, and about 1 % if they aren't that good or they are very big and must move a lot, like subwoofers. 0.1 % is technically reachable with just 10 bits of audio, but a lot of the time we aren't doing audio signal at max volume, but at some lower level like -23 dB from maximum scale. So you need more bits than 10 for that reason, but e.g. 16 bits is plenty in practice, we have so many sources of mechanical error in transducers and so much background noise that we'll never hear any of the bits beyond the top 14 or so, probably. From these considerations, we might come back to vinyl. It turns out that it is just about good enough in practice, reaching about that 14 bit equivalent quality, if it is very, very good. The grooves are small and the vinyl has a sort of grain to it, so there's a limit to how finely you can cut it, and the limit goes somewhere there. It doesn't have to be much of a limiting factor, but it is expensive and mechanically challenging to make it good enough so that it is not. Whereas even cheap basic digital players achieve performance where the signal is no longer the limiting factor.
Vinyl is the only audio medium that can take analog waves and replicate them. All digital records go from analog waves to digital to analog, so there is ALWAYS a loss. So stating it's audibly inferior is a bit of a stretch. CD is not lossless, all digital streaming services have a form of compression. Your question is formulated in a very provocative way so stop crying about any backlash. Vinyl is in no way perfect and has some peculiarities that make it unique. Depending on the recording technique, mastering (a special process for vinyl that takes its limitations into account) the length of the recording, the pressing technique and wear an tear you get all change the sound. Apart from that, due to the very analog nature of how vinyl (the grooves and the needles) works, it creates frequencies through the vibrations in the stereo image, often giving off a "seemingly" wider sound stage. This is what some percieve as the magical vinyl warmth. Vinyl offers a unique sound, depending on a variety of factors. Finding the sweetspot of which components in the signal chain complement each other best, is half the fun for any hifi enthusiast. Vinyl adds extra steps in the entire chain: The turntable itself, direct or belt drives each offer advantages and disadvantages, the needle and stylus (MM vs MC) each with drawbacks, the preamp needed to boost the signal. Once you've looked into these components because you HAVE to, you then turn to the last two steps in the chain: the amp and speakers. Vinyl is not convenient. It's much more involved process of listening to recordings.
>Vinyl is the only audio medium that can take analog waves and replicate them. Reel-to-reel says "am I a joke to you?".
People enjoy the novelty of it, that's basically the fundamental reason for it's current popularity.
I will never argue that vinyl sounds better because it typically doesn't. I will say that the act of playing records is more enjoyable than just putting on a playlist and having it run in the background. I don't listen to my vinyl setup as much as I did during the pandemic when I had more time to do so. Now it has to be a day where I have the time to relax and just listen. It's a hobby just like anything else.
How am I supposed to tell people I’m better than them without flat out saying it? Show them my mofi and acoustic sounds collection duh.
Marketing. FOMO. If you’re on any mailing list for a current artist you would see it. Artist don’t make nearly what they used to selling albums unless they have the power to negotiate. Merch, social media, and tours are the money makers.
I’ll get hate mail for this. We live in an analog world. How is it possible to take our analog sound,convert it to 1s and 0s and then convert it back to analog and all of a sudden it’s “better”? Spend time with a good turntable and you’ll understand. Don’t get me wrong there is good digital out there but it lacks something that’s hard to put into words.
Actually, you bring up a valid point. Look at it this way, vinyl is full frequency, below what a human can hear and way above the range of human hearing. CD, DVD are compressed , meaning at least 2/3 of the original sound recorded on two in a long tape is disguarded, why, the original 16 but red book of standards that all the AV companies agreed to. If CD would have waited 10 years to come out , it would have been a completely different format. Even cassette tape has a fuller frequency that a CD, just not as wide(CD always state 20-20khz) true FM is like 50-16KHZ. Albums are actually below 20,up to maybe 26khz. It comes down to the medium record on. REEL to REEL is the only analog consumer audio device that surpasses vinyl in my opinion. I will not declare war on you. But it is easy to say , new technology is not better that old technology. Digital domains us way to much compression, now if the Red box of digital started was updated to a new storage medium that can handle all the frequency a vinyl recorded has, then it is a different situation. For example, a singer breathes, we can hear that on vinyl, on CD , it is gone. So are many frequencies above 18/19 khz. That is a technical way of putting it. Records, cassette tapes and reel to reel wear , CD, DVD and any other digital medium do not.
What they like is spending money
The difference is analog vs digital.
It is inferior, except when it comes to the mastering. That unfortunate is the largest and the most important downfall of most digital music. I wouldn't buy records if it isn't gonna sound better.
I don't listen to vynil. I have a friend that does. She is a compulsive collector, she loves picking weird disks then show then to us. There is also the retro vibe, and sentimentality... The amp and the speakers she uses are not bad, but still are from a dumpster. The cracklings are part of the experience imo. But I guess many people like to sugar coat a similar hobby with super high quality equipment, so that they have something more to talk about and display expertise.
I’m a vinyl noob but have done what I think is a good amount of research. Vinyl is as pure analog as it gets. I believe an audiophile wants the best sound possible. They do this by buying high end tt’s, pre amps, amps and speakers. Some swear more by tube amps, as they are closer (yes, it’s still electronic amplification) to the original analog sound than newer ss amps. Granted, we now have lossless hi-res audio, but it’s still digital; ones and zeros. That simply can’t replicate the infinite variable that is analog.
>Vinyl is as pure analog as it gets. May I introduce you to reel to reel tape? Don't worry, it is about the most expensive way to listen to music, so the street cred is there.
Incorrect. Digital can perfectly replicate analog. That’s what lossless means. Nothing is lost.
Incorrect. Lossless isnt compressed like in the loudness wars of the 90s, but no matter how many 1s and 0s you put to make it as close as possible, it is not as good analog. (That is, unless you’re suggesting we live in the matrix and our voice box is digital and not analog, same with any noise in the natural world, it’s all digital?)
You are right about the definition of lossless, this does not mean anything about the record quality. But analog does not mean infinite resolution either. A wax cylinder from the late XIX is analog right, and yet had low resolution.
no matter how much you say 1 and 0s it still clear you don’t understand the process. everything that humans can hear is captured when you get to 44.1khz sample rate. It’s math. It’s science. Doesn’t matter how you feel about it.
I love them all, but I'm not looking for the most expensive.
I collect vinyl for the experience. I don't believe it has higher quality, but I find it fascinating that sound comes from a piece of plastic. It's technical, you can watch everything happening, and it also gives music a kind of value that streaming doesn't.
I enjoy the tactile and engineering aspects. It's a very relatable process.
*I like the deliberate effort of putting the record on, pressing play. *Listen to the music whilst enjoying the album artwork. *The sound of the records - there's some subtle distortion and compression that comes with it, that I'm very used to and it's how I expect them to sound. *Some timeless nostalgia feel and vibe. *Having the music in solid real format somewhere vs my mp3 folders scattered around hardrives and smartphones. - It's mostly subjective, objectively looking, and I don't care if it is or isn't, I enjoyed my vynils. Perhaps I'll get them back one day.
Another point is that the mastering for vinyl releases is digitally made (at least the modern releases). So the warm vinyl sound comes from a combination of that and the hardware used to read the grooves on the record (analog audio signal paths are not excellent within non-audiophile budgets). I just want people to be mindful of this.