-
Will Vinyl Save The iPod Gen From Crappy Sound?
Interesting little article from the NYT -
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/ny...2&ref=nyregion
I personally think it is a bit of a fluke - but maybe not. Maybe a $100 turntable doesn't sound that bad?
What say you all? I know there is a bit of a push from the emo/hipster/fixie bike/ crowd with vinyl. But it can't be that big. I'm the only person of my age group I know that owns a turntable. Not that I hang out with people in my age group. I'm still trying to learn how to tie my shoes and all.....
-
No, Vinyl will not save us from 'crappy sound'. Lossless and better yet... High Resolution Downloads will...
Vinyl will continue indefinitely as a niche product... It may even triple its market share to less than 3% of total album sales, but it will never be a dominant format again... CD, SACD, DVDA, BluRay Audio will all fade out before the light extinguishes on Vinyl... The reason simply being that all those formats are digital (like the downloads they compete with)... while Vinyl is both analog and fun (to hold, look at and collect)....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
No, Vinyl will not save us from 'crappy sound'. Lossless and better yet... High Resolution Downloads will...
Vinyl will continue indefinitely as a niche product... It may even triple its market share to less than 3% of total album sales, but it will never be a dominant format again... CD, SACD, DVDA, BluRay Audio will all fade out before the light extinguishes on Vinyl... The reason simply being that all those formats are digital (like the downloads they compete with)... while Vinyl is both analog and fun (to hold, look at and collect)....
Don't get me wrong. I don't think vinyl will ever be dominate. I'm just curious if it will help spur a new generation of audiophiles. Realizing there is better sound than an mp3.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Don't get me wrong. I don't think vinyl will ever be dominate. I'm just curious if it will help spur a new generation of audiophiles. Realizing there is better sound than an mp3.
I think it might contribute but I don't believe it will be the major factor...
An interesting point that was raised on the Stereophile Forums the other day was whether the "new generation of audiophiles" already exists!
Someone pointed out how massive the movement on Head-Fi is... That there are many younger persons purchasing high end headphones and going to Canjam meets etc...
So it may just be that the traditional view of what an audiophile is has changed, with the new gen... New Gen seem to want portable, convenient, affordable and good quality....
Another possibility is that these headphone lovers will buy speakers, as the earn more income later on in life...
Ironically, without even intending to, I ended up being in the headphone crowd, along with my generation, based on the fact that it was the cheapest way to get real high-end sound + it was portable...
And when you really think about it... it makes sense that a generation raised on iPods would seek out high end headphones, instead of high end speakers...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
I know there is a bit of a push from the emo/hipster/fixie bike/ crowd with vinyl. .
Dude, that is SO funny!! I laughed out loud....oh man, so true. Or should I say, so rad.
Vinyl won't save anyone from anything except maybe having to buy a frisbee occasionally. I think the people you've described so well have no clue about fidelity. They want vinyl cuz it's totally cool.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Don't get me wrong. I don't think vinyl will ever be dominate. I'm just curious if it will help spur a new generation of audiophiles. Realizing there is better sound than an mp3.
I think the problem isn't the fact that vinyl sounds better, it's that to listen to it you actually have to sit and listen when you do. Most people now rarely just sit and listen to music. There's just so many distractions from so many other different forms of entertainment that music gets put into the background. Audiophilia has been steadily contracting even as the technology gets better. Witness the failure of DVD-Audio, or the minor inroads of SACD on CD. People simply do not spend the time or effort to actually hear the difference, so why pay a premium to get better quality? I know it's a pretty cynical view of the audio scene , but I'm just calling it as I see it.
-
All I can say is that all the independent music stores in the Twin Cities (at least the one's that I visit) have huge Vinyl sections and business is booming!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Dude, that is SO funny!! I laughed out loud....oh man, so true. Or should I say, so rad.
Vinyl won't save anyone from anything except maybe having to buy a frisbee occasionally. I think the people you've described so well have no clue about fidelity. They want vinyl cuz it's totally cool.
Dood - you know what is sad. I have a fixie. But I don't dress like a hipster and I take showers every day.
You know what is funny though. I went to a hipster music show a month or so ago. And besides from smelling a lot less than punk rockers, and a bit diff dress and sound, it was pretty much the same scene.
Oh, and one of the bands was using a tape deck, old keyboards, and old equipment. It was such a throw back in the days of software. I swear my other friend who is a real musician but does most of his work on the Mac could have played their whole set with a click of the space bar and it would have been better. Shiat, There was probably more processing power in my cellphone than in the pounds and pounds of old equipment they used.
Anyways....just a little rant.....
But I do hope that through the resurgence of vinyl there maybe birthed some real audiophiles who are willing to sit, listen, buy, and enjoy good equipment.
-
Just a fad.
I am from the days when records were serious, with shelves of records, zillions of record stores, and a lot of turntables to choose from.
I spent my gas money on Physical grafitti once.
But those days are gone, the pleasant surprize to todays kids that something sounds better than an 128 kbs MP3 to the contrary.
I have a turntable, one reason I started with Integra/Onkyo is their inclusion of phono preamps, but there is ONE place to buy records in this town, hanging on by its toenails.
That is just the reality, and I hate it, but records will die out eventually.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
You know what is funny though. I went to a hipster music show a month or so ago. And besides from smelling a lot less than punk rockers, and a bit diff dress and sound, it was pretty much the same scene.
Funny I was talking to Troy about this not too long ago. Years ago I roadied for my friends band, Shotmaker. Nick Pye, bass player. We came through Cali twice, once with Fugazi and another tour with Quicksand and Sparkmarker. We stopped in Oakland for one night with Fugazi. They played a club called the Music Hall, or something like that. Long time ago...
I've seen scenesters in almost every major city in N America. They are all the same. Arms crossed, possibly earplugs, don't look too happy or impressed, could possibly nod to the beat if the band starts cookin...
Sound familiar? By the end of any tour with these guys I was SOOOOO sick of the "scene".
OK, I put in my rant...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
What say you all? I know there is a bit of a push from the emo/hipster/fixie bike/ crowd with vinyl.
HHhhmmmnnn...interesting question. Swishy is a consumate hipster and, despite being a notorious skinflint, is willing to spend some cheese on righteous wax. That's a plus. Finch is a biker dude but is completely into buying CDs in volume via the 50 cent bins...a wash...
Then there's the Emos...eventually a few of them will have to grow up and recognize the level of pretentious douchebagedness involved in wearing all black with pink and purple spiked hair while drinking Starbucks lattes in their mom's Saab amidst lamentations of suburban angst. These developing youth will eventually eschew all remnants of their embarassing past lives and create a boomerang effect. We may be seeing the last spike in vinyl sales right now.
Unfortunately, there are more goth wannabes than Swishies....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsticks
Then there's the Emos...eventually a few of them will have to grow up and recognize the level of pretentious douchebagedness involved in wearing all black with pink and purple spiked hair while drinking Starbucks lattes in their mom's Saab amidst lamentations of suburban angst. These developing youth will eventually eschew all remnants of their embarassing past lives and create a boomerang effect. We may be seeing the last spike in vinyl sales right now.
.
Ha! Well put.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Interesting little article from the NYT -
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/ny...2&ref=nyregion
I personally think it is a bit of a fluke - but maybe not. Maybe a $100 turntable doesn't sound that bad?
What say you all? I know there is a bit of a push from the emo/hipster/fixie bike/ crowd with vinyl. But it can't be that big. I'm the only person of my age group I know that owns a turntable. Not that I hang out with people in my age group. I'm still trying to learn how to tie my shoes and all.....
Pathetic. That's my reaction to the vinyl fad. Yes of course, LPs are going to sound better than 128kbps download. And I suppose it's true that popular music is typically severely compressed on CD, (from what I'm told since I listen most to classical). But there is no technical, economic, or rational reason why such a compromised medium as the LP should continue to be used.
Doubtless a properly engineer CD is superior in terms of fidelity to the LP equivalent. The same may be said for digital files that are lossless 16/44.1 or even 320kbps MP3. They will also sound better played using a good player, properly configured computer, and/or DAC. Granted, these conditions met too infrequently.
As Geoffcin mentions, the necessities of handling LPs tends to make people to listen with more attention. It's damned true that you will like a piece of good music better if you listen with degree of concentration -- if you don't like it better, the music is crap.
Also a lot of people simply like the rituals of handling vinyl. BTW, this was never my problem: I was a early convert to CD largely because I hated what was required to properly handle LPs. For that matter I no longer have much patience for handling CDs and listen instead to ripped copies.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
[
Doubtless a properly engineer CD is superior in terms of fidelity to the LP equivalent. The same may be said for digital files that are lossless 16/44.1 or even 320kbps MP3. They will also sound better played use a good player, properly configured computer, and/or DAC. Granted, these conditions met too infrequently.
.
Fair enough. That's your opinion. You didn't address the potential of analog when properly set up though. Have you heard a high end Linn table? Believe me, it has a magical sound that digital could never hope to reproduce.
Clearly, you enjoy accuracy with your music Feanor. For that digital is fantastic. But analog has a soul...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Clearly, you enjoy accuracy with your music Feanor. For that digital is fantastic. But analog has a soul...
Not to attack you poppaC, but WTF does that mean???
Analog and tube Lovers are perplexed as to why digital and Solid State audiophiles often regard them as lunatics...instead of trying to focus on the kind of measurements that would show why "analog sounds better" than digital, they instead choose to dismiss measurements (and science in general) and refer to witchcraft and mysticism in their explanation of why Analtube is better...
Why won't the Analtube Manufacturers stop being so lazy and start designing their own test measurements to show why "Analtube is better"...
I have no doubt that any real differences can be measured, but it's up to someone to show the initiative and start measuring...
SS/Digital have already designed measurements that support their position, so it's more than overdue that Analtube does the same...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Fair enough. That's your opinion. You didn't address the potential of analog when properly set up though. Have you heard a high end Linn table? Believe me, it has a magical sound that digital could never hope to reproduce.
Clearly, you enjoy accuracy with your music Feanor. For that digital is fantastic. But analog has a soul...
I love the sound of good analog, but it is too much trouble to get to that good sound. Too much tinkering, too much cleaning, too much care in storage, it is all just too much. Also much like digital, not all analog is equal, and just like digital you run into far too many warts before you get to that rare spine tingling recording.
For far to many years we have been using the CD format as a comparison to good analog. The problem with that comparison is that digital has not been taken to the level that analog has. We(as in recording engineers) have not taken advantage of the lower noise floor and wider dynamic range, and only a few of us are recording, editing, and mixing on high quality digital equipment. Analog has had far more years for both recording engineers and end users to tinker with, tweak, and perfect. Only now do we engineers have the tools to create truly good digital recordings, but the adoption of the format that can best carry it out is slow in catching on in music only applications.(Bluray disc)
To be honest, I have never heard a analog recording (regardless of the cost of the equipment) that sounded quite as good as TrondheimSolistene: Divertimenti on Bluray disc. The recording, musicianship and music quality is breath taking.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Fair enough. That's your opinion. You didn't address the potential of analog when properly set up though. Have you heard a high end Linn table? Believe me, it has a magical sound that digital could never hope to reproduce.
Clearly, you enjoy accuracy with your music Feanor. For that digital is fantastic. But analog has a soul...
Soul you say?? Pardon me but that is really a weary cliché. I've never understood what it meant.
Well, maybe I've never listened to high-end analog setup -- or maybe I did but it just didn't make much impression. But so what? For me it's irrelavant because classical music is basically completely unavailable in vinyl; (please don't talk to me about flea market bargins: these virtually not extent nowadays even if they were 10-15 years ago). Is it an odd coincidence that classical, the most demanding musical form, isn't available on vinyl? Maybe not.
-
OK, Terrence. That was an earful. You are a passionate guy, I like that. I know you're a man of audio science, and I am not. I only know what I hear. Digital has a harshness about it that at least to my ears, analog does not.
You could very well be right. I very well may be living in an audio fantasy land of my own creation. But what can I tell you? It's what I enjoy. I also LOVE the interaction with the discs and tables. It's a big point of pride for me knowing my LP's are in top shape, and my tables are set up correctly. I don't think that pride exists for CD lovers, but I could be wrong about that.
I also haven't heard the greatest offerings of digital format. I am familiar with studio work, as I am a musician and have been in a few studios. Realistically, digital will lead audio into the future. I'm sure the Blu-Ray sounds great. What makes it better than CD? Less compression? School me daddy-o, in layman's terms please.
As far as my reply to Feanor goes, I didn't feel that he was giving the potential of analog a fair shake.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Pathetic. That's my reaction to the vinyl fad.
:eek: Wow Feanor, tell us how you really feel? :mad5:
While I agree on several points, I do feel that sitting down and listening to an album on vinyl isn't a pathetic thing.
One of the things I think is driving the resurgence in vinyl is the fact that people are interested in how things were in the past. We're more than a generation into the "Digital revolution" and people are curious about how music sounded in the past. More than a few are surprised to hear that the compressed ultra-limited CD's they are used to have nothing in common with quality vinyl. Sure high rez digital formats, or even a well engineered CD will eclipse vinyl, but give the kids the props for at least trying to find good recordings.
Of course there's always the element of "She'll think I'm cool with my retro-sound system" But that's been going on since time began. Heck, I've even done it back in the day. (hey baby, wanna hear my cool 6ft tall speaks?) :wink5:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Soul you say?? Pardon me but that is really a weary cliché. I've never understood what it meant.
Well, maybe I've never listened to high-end analog setup -- or maybe I did but it just didn't make much impression. But so what? For me it's irrelavant because classical music is basically completely unavailable in vinyl; (please don't talk to me about flea market bargins: these virtually not extent nowadays even if they were 10-15 years ago). Is it an odd coincidence that classical, the most demanding musical form, isn't available on vinyl? Maybe not.
OK, I won't use "soul" since it has everyone in an uproar. I will simply say that it has a sound that digital cannot replicate. Unless of course you've ripped an LP, but even then, not the same.
I enjoy digital just fine, so don't think I am against it. I have owned many dac's and have a small collection of CD and digital files.
My real love is for vinyl though.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Not to attack you poppaC, but WTF does that mean???
Analog and tube Lovers are perplexed as to why digital and Solid State audiophiles often regard them as lunatics...instead of trying to focus on the kind of measurements that would show why "analog sounds better" than digital, they instead choose to dismiss measurements (and science in general) and refer to witchcraft and mysticism in their explanation of why Analtube is better...
Why won't the Analtube Manufacturers stop being so lazy and start designing their own test measurements to show why "Analtube is better"...
I have no doubt that any real differences can be measured, but it's up to someone to show the initiative and start measuring...
SS/Digital have already designed measurements that support their position, so it's more than overdue that Analtube does the same...
No, I don't feel attacked at all. I have no numbers for you, but do you have any numbers for me? Personally, I don't care too much about numbers anyhow. I will trust my ears to tell me, and believe me, I am open minded.
I am not over the vinyl deep end. I just get sick of people taking a giant crap on the format. Infact, I am weary of extreme vinyl lovers who over tweak their tables with voodoo type changes. As I have said, I listen to all kinds of digital and like it fine. I probably wear my portable every other day, 320 kb MP3.
-
I really don't think vinyl will go away but I think the future of high end audio is in music servers running lossless file formats that will have sound equal and probably superior in many ways to vinyl. Analog has came to the end of improvement level and vinyl is the best analog can bring which is fine and sounds great. But I think digital is just starting to show its ability to convey the same good things that analog brings with the lower signal to noise and distortion numbers of digital. I think physical media in any form has a limited time left for the new comers to this hobby. I do think there will be vinyl lovers around for a while but at some point the file based non physical media will be the next audiophile media. Just my opinion.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
OK, Terrence. That was an earful. You are a passionate guy, I like that. I know you're a man of audio science, and I am not. I only know what I hear. Digital has a harshness about it that at least to my ears, analog does not.
I agree with you chubbs. Digital does have a harshness to it.
Best Regards,
Stan
-
In my line of work, I believe most of us are guilty of not only liking our own way of doing things but also of expecting our colleagues to like it, too...or else they're just plain wrong. In audio, I see the same thing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
...
But what can I tell you? It's what I enjoy. I also LOVE the interaction with the discs and tables. It's a big point of pride for me knowing my LP's are in top shape, and my tables are set up correctly. I don't think that pride exists for CD lovers, but I could be wrong about that.
...
As far as my reply to Feanor goes, I didn't feel that he was giving the potential of analog a fair shake.
That part I believe. Basically that's what I said earlier: some people actually like these rituals. For me they hold no charm.
When I got into audio circa 1971, analog was all there was; actually apart from cassettes (which were very new and very crappy) LPs were all there was. In fact I had a pretty good setup: the sort that would cost ~$2k today. But in the dozen or so years before the advent of CD I'd had my fill of pampering LPs and was ready to move on.
Actually, my first CDP sounded pretty awful; really the stereotypical CD sound; it was relatively bright, harsh, etc., compare to vinyl. However never so bad as digital haters made it out to be. But that was then. Today, digital nasties are largely a thing of the past.
Hey, if you want smooth, try 256 kbps; a lot of people actually prefer its sound to full 16/44.1.
-
Your title seems to imply that vinyl by default sounds good and digital files sound "crappy," which is not always true and actually closer to false if you're talking about those budget USB turntables that have flooded the market.
The sound quality variation in vinyl playback is much much much wider than with any digital format. Back in the vinyl heyday, most record players sounded MUCH worse than what you currently get with 128k MP3 files.
The typical record player used in those days included an integrated non-replaceable cartridge, unbalanced tone arm, spherical sapphire stylus, along with a drop spindle changer used for stacking multiple LPs for uninterrupted playback. All of those factors conspired to create horrid sound quality, poor tracking (which many consumers solved by taping a coin to the headshell to weight it down), and premature wear on both the records and needles.
Differences between CD players work within much narrower range -- consider that nearly all of them can produce a near flat frequency response between 20 Hz and 20 kHz with minimal wow and flutter. And while MP3 sounds can be bad in their own right, their level of bad does not even approach how horrible vinyl can sound under less than optimal conditions. Plus, if you bump up the bitrate on MP3, it can gradually become nearly indistinguishable from the original.
Audiophiles have largely forgotten about how lousy much of the vinyl market actually was when it still reigned as a mass market format. The revisionist history getting passed around right now idealizes an audio paradise that never existed.
Vinyl CAN sound better than a CD version if you got a good turntable, a very good cartridge, took the time to counterbalance and adjust the tonearm overhang, and have an LP that was mastered and pressed well. The cheap USB turntables that I've seen in stores does not look like the stuff that can reveal the best that vinyl has to offer. In fact, the build quality looks more reminiscent of those wretched record changers from decades past. A decent cartridge alone (which is fundamental to getting decent sound out of vinyl) will cost more than what these USB turntables cost.
I've been hearing about the hype about the vinyl revival since the early-90s. As much as I love my vinyl, it will never amount to much more than a niche hobby. Just look at the LP sales. 2.1 million LPs sold is the highest level in nearly two decades, yet the sales from just one hit CD will easily eclipse that total.
The difference between the vinyl market today and how it was two decades ago when it crashed is that LPs today cost about 3X more than they did back then. In college, I kept my turntable going because it was simply cheaper to buy LPs than CDs. The motive for a college student today to go with vinyl would obviously be way different.
-
$
As much as I like my vinyl, the idea of keeping a turntable going because LPs are cheaper than CDs is still part of my motivation. I'll sometimes buy something on vinyl that I could have gotten on CD for the same or less money, but for the most part I like coming home with a handful of records for about a dollar or two each. So far, the records from the mono days have sounded better than the CDs in the cases where I've had the chance to compare. That's not the fault of the medium, though. They've apparently just been remastered badly.
Beyond my own collection of around 700 LPs I was given a collection of a few hundred records, from which I culled about 100 classical LPs in mint or near-mint condition before donating the rest. Those 100 alone were probably worth the price of my humble turntable scored on eBay, although the gift records came with a nice free turntable, too.
I do feel certain that vinyl isn't really coming back. I've never understood how we could get excited about it doubling (from a drop in the bucket to two drops in the bucket).
-
I'd like to get a decent TT in the near future, but looking at the price of vinyl is putting me off.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
I'd like to get a decent TT in the near future, but looking at the price of vinyl is putting me off.
Start looking for second hand resources. Online and off. Ebay and GEMM, Amazon too. Check around for local shops that carry used stuff. Buying vinyl shouldn't have to be expensive. There's tons of near mint/mint vinyl sitting around in people's attics and basements....
-
Even if vinyl doesn't hold the market these days, the interest of those like myself (and, no doubt, many others) in some of the "classic" recodings of yore will keep the LP lovers happy for a while, I reckon. Yes, CD's, etc. and the recordings of the present day are often very well recorded abd performed, but some of us still thrill to the sound of Beverly Sills, Bill Evans and other great musicians, whose obscure oeuvre may not make it to CD. Still others don't want to spend the extra money and are quite fond of pulling the old record out of its sleeve and sticking it on the record player....
I don't necessarily feel as poorly about the state of Audio and think that, although IPods and mp3 players, etc. have certainly made their presence known, many folks are just as interested in good sound as we once were. I have had many conversations with young people who quite like the thought of visiting friends with LP's and CD's in hand and sharing an evening with good music, wine and fellowship. I have spoken of my "Back Porch" sessions, which have become somewhat legendary amongst our friends....
So, will the LP wiggle its way into the mp3 crowd? Who knows....Just knowing that the love of music and good times is still alive nd kicking gives me hope, though....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Your title seems to imply that vinyl by default sounds good and digital files sound "crappy," which is not always true and actually closer to false if you're talking about those budget USB turntables that have flooded the market.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to open the can of worms that is vinyl vs digital.
What I really wonder is if there will be an causation effect.
100 people by Cheap turntables. 30 think there can be better - 15 buy better turn tables, go on to be part of the audiophile society. Do that a few hundred times over and more people, their friends that come over to listen and their offspring.
Something along those speculative lines.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to open the can of worms that is vinyl vs digital.
What I really wonder is if there will be an causation effect.
100 people by Cheap turntables. 30 think there can be better - 15 buy better turn tables, go on to be part of the audiophile society. Do that a few hundred times over and more people, their friends that come over to listen and their offspring.
Something along those speculative lines.
I love that expression! Where does one actually GET a can of worms?
Your calculus actually makes sense, but in a reverse way. If your looking for a TT it means that you think there's something wrong with your audio world already. These people are budding audiophiles whether vinyl grabs them or not. In any case just by making the effort to ckeck out vinyl they are likely to run into some seriously good audio rigs, and after you've been exposed to that, audio is never the same again.
-
Peronally, I think no matter what these IPods and what not are made of--whether they're plastic, aluminum, vinyl or whatever--they still won't play as well as the real thing!
(Ummm...)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to open the can of worms that is vinyl vs digital.
There are worse cans you could open...
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2781/...aa85e055_m.jpg
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02audionoob
As much as I like my vinyl, the idea of keeping a turntable going because LPs are cheaper than CDs is still part of my motivation. I'll sometimes buy something on vinyl that I could have gotten on CD for the same or less money, but for the most part I like coming home with a handful of records for about a dollar or two each. So far, the records from the mono days have sounded better than the CDs in the cases where I've had the chance to compare. That's not the fault of the medium, though. They've apparently just been remastered badly.
Yep, for all the energy wasted in the countless the vinyl vs digital debates, the point often lost is that a lot of recordings were optimized around the quirks of the vinyl medium. Those master recordings that produced great sound quality with LPs sounded horrible when transferred to CD. A lot of the remasters had to take a more careful read on the intended sound quality rather than simply taking a master tape and presuming that an unequalized playback was what sounds best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Start looking for second hand resources. Online and off. Ebay and GEMM, Amazon too. Check around for local shops that carry used stuff. Buying vinyl shouldn't have to be expensive. There's tons of near mint/mint vinyl sitting around in people's attics and basements....
But, not nearly as much good stuff as before.
Problem with the second hand market is that the vast majority of the product was produced more than 20 years ago. More and more of what I see in the used record bins is not in great condition. That's just simply because as time elapses, those used LPs might actually get played a lot and go through multiple owners, many of whom don't know how or care to properly maintain their LPs. It's a finite supply whose value partly depends on the condition, and that condition that will only get worse over time as the LPs get played and resold.
When the CD began its ascension, people were dumping their LP collections right and left. Many of these records were practically brand new, and the record stores could barely keep up with the flood of used LPs coming through their doors. One of the stores in my old neighborhood had days where they would sell LPs by the pound (as in weight, not the currency) to open up space on their shelves. Back then, you could find some bona fide gems in those mass selloffs. Definitely not the case now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auricauricle
I don't necessarily feel as poorly about the state of Audio and think that, although IPods and mp3 players, etc. have certainly made their presence known, many folks are just as interested in good sound as we once were. I have had many conversations with young people who quite like the thought of visiting friends with LP's and CD's in hand and sharing an evening with good music, wine and fellowship. I have spoken of my "Back Porch" sessions, which have become somewhat legendary amongst our friends....
I agree with the assertion about the state of audio. I don't think it's all that different now, and might in fact be better overall. Like I mentioned in my previous post, a lot of audiophiles tend to idealize the LP era as a time when more people cared about sound quality. But, it's hard to take that assertion seriously when recalling how LPs primarily got played back on portable record players, all-in-one systems, spindle changers, and any number of other devices that would make an iPod sound like extreme high end audio by comparison.
Then, just as now, the majority of the market was not investing in full sized component-based systems. Yesterday's all-in-one systems serve the same function as today's mini-systems. Yesterday's portable record players and boomboxes have evolved into today's iPod docks.
The audio market has been in a long-term movement towards mobility. That's why the wretched sounding prerecorded cassette had already begun outselling the LP before the CD format was even introduced. Those who value sound quality have always sought out ways to optimize their listening experience. I think the difference is that today, it's actually a lot easier to get decent sound quality from lower end equipment. With digital formats, you're really starting at a higher baseline than with analog. Analog CAN sound better, but a lot more steps need to be optimized along the way and that typically costs more money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomicAdam
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to open the can of worms that is vinyl vs digital.
What I really wonder is if there will be an causation effect.
100 people by Cheap turntables. 30 think there can be better - 15 buy better turn tables, go on to be part of the audiophile society. Do that a few hundred times over and more people, their friends that come over to listen and their offspring.
But, on the flip side, you might have the other 70 thinking "What the hell have these audiofools been smoking? I'd rather listen to AM radio than this crap!"
One of the things about vinyl's exile to the wilderness fringes of the audio market is that it weeded out most of the lower end equipment. For a while, it was actually hard to find a bad record player. Now, with the USB turntables beginning to gain a market foothold, you're seeing the return of the low end turntable with absolutely no documentation about the cartridge that they use. For anyone wanting to see what all the vinyl hype is all about, this is bound to disappoint in a big way.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Now, with the USB turntables beginning to gain a market foothold, you're seeing the return of the low end turntable with absolutely no documentation about the cartridge that they use. For anyone wanting to see what all the vinyl hype is all about, this is bound to disappoint in a big way.
Yes - I worry about this as well. But also, what makes me giggle, is that I know some folks with some nice turntables, and some big homes in the hills, who say they like music, and then go buy the $199 USB TT to convert to mp3. Just makes me shake my head.
I don't know why though, someone would buy a USB turntable if they were just getting into vinyl.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
I agree with the assertion about the state of audio. I don't think it's all that different now, and might in fact be better overall. Like I mentioned in my previous post, a lot of audiophiles tend to idealize the LP era as a time when more people cared about sound quality. But, it's hard to take that assertion seriously when recalling how LPs primarily got played back on portable record players, all-in-one systems, spindle changers, and any number of other devices that would make an iPod sound like extreme high end audio by comparison.
Then, just as now, the majority of the market was not investing in full sized component-based systems. Yesterday's all-in-one systems serve the same function as today's mini-systems. Yesterday's portable record players and boomboxes have evolved into today's iPod docks.
The audio market has been in a long-term movement towards mobility. That's why the wretched sounding prerecorded cassette had already begun outselling the LP before the CD format was even introduced. Those who value sound quality have always sought out ways to optimize their listening experience. I think the difference is that today, it's actually a lot easier to get decent sound quality from lower end equipment. With digital formats, you're really starting at a higher baseline than with analog. Analog CAN sound better, but a lot more steps need to be optimized along the way and that typically costs more money.
Well said Wooch...
I'm getting kinda tired of the cries of doom and gloom from audiophiles... The claims that the hobby is dying... The over-romanticizing of glory days of Vinyl and Tubes that never really existed... I remember the Turntable my parents had in the Living Room when I was a kid... In fact I even got one of those all in one turntable boomboxes that my dad had back in college, when I was young... All of those items were far far far inferior sonically to an ipod playing 256K AAC tracks (downloaded from the iTunes Store)....
Considering that we can't even count the number of High End manufacturers available today, and that number keeps on increasing.... I seriously doubt that the hobby is dying...
As I've mentioned earlier in this thread, just check out head-fi and then try claiming that young people don't care about sound quality... In fact, while so many still claim that "MP3 killed our hobby and that young people don't care about quality", they ignore the fact that the largest "MP3" seller (Apple) upgraded all of their files to Higher Bitrates early this year... so now all iTunes downloads are 256K.... WHY would they increase the quality, if young people don't care??? Why has Rhino Records started releasing their material online in Lossless and High Resolution formats???
The only way to claim the hobby is dying is if you define an Audiophile solely as being someone who listens to Vinyl/analog...
Like with most debates in Audio, it comes down to the simple attitude that "whatever type of equipment I like is real High End (sounds like live music), and anything else is crap"....
-
I'll jump on this one and suggest that the audio industry is in a state of flux. At the dawn of the Digital Age, when the CD was introduced, there was much hue and cry about the awful harshness and general sonic inferiority of that medium. Since then, manufacturers have risen to challenge to produce recordings and players that are pretty dern spectacular. Now that we are in the Internet Era, the audio industry has followed the according trends...Many of us are decrying the loss of quality and the deterioration of everything we hold dear. Eventually, I suspect these quirks and kinks will be worked out, and the mp14 players of the future and it's cousins will produce recordings of exceptional quality.
(Ahem.)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auricauricle
I'll jump on this one and suggest that the audio industry is in a state of flux. At the dawn of the Digital Age, when the CD was introduced, there was much hue and cry about the awful harshness and general sonic inferiority of that medium. Since then, manufacturers have risen to challenge to produce recordings and players that are pretty dern spectacular. Now that we are in the Internet Era, the audio industry has followed the according trends...Many of us are decrying the loss of quality and the deterioration of everything we hold dear. Eventually, I suspect these quirks and kinks will be worked out, and the mp14 players of the future and it's cousins will produce recordings of exceptional quality.
(Ahem.)
I agree to some extent.... I've always said that MP3 was a transitional format... and truth is that the original MP3s aren't even dominant anymore... 256K AAC is far superior to 128K MP3 (just check John Atkinson's comparison of formats - last year on the Stereophile forums I believe) and for many persons is an acceptable substitute for lossless/redbook....
Also, any iPod can play 256K AAC and Lossless (CD Quality) formats... so it's just a matter of filling your iPod with quality tracks (and not some 96K MP3 Crap that you stole from Limewire)...
The Tech is already there.... I'm just happy to see so many High End manufacturers finally embracing what the New Generation of Audiophiles are into...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
I agree to some extent.... I've always said that MP3 was a transitional format... and truth is that the original MP3s aren't even dominant anymore... 256K AAC is far superior to 128K MP3 (just check John Atkinson's comparison of formats - last year on the Stereophile forums I believe) and for many persons is an acceptable substitute for lossless/redbook....
Also, any iPod can play 256K AAC and Lossless (CD Quality) formats... so it's just a matter of filling your iPod with quality tracks (and not some 96K MP3 Crap that you stole from Limewire)...
The Tech is already there.... I'm just happy to see so many High End manufacturers finally embracing what the New Generation of Audiophiles are into...
Hmmm, maybe it's just me but it seems you are making some pretty tall claims also my friend. I said that analog has a soul, you say The New Generation of Audiophiles, isn't that Prince's backing band? Oh wait a sec....
I think we can re-visit the OP's article to find out that the new generation is looking past the predictable MP3 and portable route. The thing is, you are making some great points but you seem to have a hate on for analog. There's no room for it in your audiophile world or what? Not to be rude, but I am sensing that since you have not bothered to embrace vinyl or analog, you are rationalizing it out of the equation.
I indeed love my turntable more than my CDP, but I still acknowledge the benefits and reality of digital.
|