Vinyl is still KING

[DMK]

According to the latest Absolute Sound's Wayne Garcia, anyway. I don't normally read the audio mags but there was a nice article about high rez digital in it that I found interesting. Also, a nice review of the new Sota Cosmos - a turntable that I am still kicking myself over selling 5 years ago. I use that 'table as my reference against most of the problems the anti-vinyl advocates use, problems that are more theoretical than actual. I sold it because it was getting long in the tooth and I was unsure whether I'd ever be able to get it fixed since Sota went out of business. Now, of course, they're back and I could have upgraded mine to the latest iteration for a small price. Instead, I bought a Basis 2500 which I also sold and then I downgraded. The Sota is the one piece of audio gear that I wish I had back. It was the best I've ever owned. Read the article - it'll make you wish you had one!

Anyway, Mr Garcia states that vinyl is still the closest there is to the sound of live music. I have to agree. I certainly haven't delved deeply enough into high rez digital to know for sure but so far it doesn't conquer King Vinyl.

[hifitommy]

well dan,

ive forgotten which tt you now have but you could probably recover most of the cosmos sound with a sapphire. when i first heard a sapph, which seems like about 20 yrs ago, i felt like it was the most grounded (physically) and solid table sound i'd ever heard. still, damk hard to beat.

i too read the sacd article and need to reread it to capture exactly what sound it was about sacd that he objected to. in the meantime, sacd does so much right that i find it worth the effort of embracing it.

[DMK]

ive forgotten which tt you now have but you could probably recover most of the cosmos sound with a sapphire.

I could still go buy a Cosmos, I suppose. It's just that I HAD the dang thing in my possession and I let it slip away. You know how that goes!

As of now, I have a VPI HW-19 Jr with the mk III platter and one piece clamp. I'm not complaining about the sound too much. Personally, I like the table better than the several times more expensive Basis the VPI replaced - but I do miss the Graham arm that I had on the Basis (and the Cosmos).

I, too, embrace SACD. I bought the Sony player you recommended and if DVD-A takes off, I'll try to find a cheap player for that rather than a universal at this point. Perhaps later I'll check out a decent universal player. So far, SACD is considerably better sounding than RBCD. The hybrid discs are nice for comparative purposes!

[hifitommy]

NONE of the uni players sound good on both formats. THATS universal. better to buy separate dvda and sacd units that sound good.

[Pat D]

Anyway, Mr Garcia states that vinyl is still the closest there is to the sound of live music. I have to agree. I certainly haven't delved deeply enough into high rez digital to know for sure but so far it doesn't conquer King Vinyl.

Mr. Garcia is entitled to his preferences but how can vinyl, with its compression, extra noise, distortion, and non-flat FR be the closest to the sound of music?

That doesn't even make sense since surely the master tape is closer to the music, and since a digital copy can be made closer to the master tape than the vinyl can, then a digital copy can be closer to the music than vinyl.

Of course, I take it that Mr. Garcia and you are really just expressing your preference for vinyl.

[DMK]

Of course, I take it that Mr. Garcia and you are really just expressing your preference for vinyl.

Yes. It's always been a preference and no dispute about that. The dispute seems to be WHY we have that preference. He and I are in agreement that (from the article) "vinyl reproduction is still the standard of comparison to home playback as vinyl still comes closest to the absolute sound of live music". Also, red book digital is "crude, emotionally flat and uninvolving". In simple terms, we prefer vinyl because it is closer to the sound of live music and live music is the standard to which we judge recordings and audio gear- in our opinion, of course!

As for your question, I don't really know why the above is so based on the measurements you cited. Perhaps measurements don't correlate to sound. Perhaps the distortions of vinyl are simply less objectionable than those of CD. I have no idea. But as I posted on A/R earlier, if you doubt the superiority of vinyl, check out the 45 RPM reissue of the Fantasy catalog. I have the Bill Evans "Saturday at the Village Vanguard". If you want master tape sound, you'll find it here, not on any CD I've ever heard. Vinyl still reigns supreme, to my ears. I've heard too much live music (jazz) to be anything but a vinylphile. Perhaps it's different with classical which is played (recorded) in a large hall, I don't know. But for the live sound of jazz from a small venue, vinyl is King.

[Elgen]

I'm excited about the great history and variety of vinyls out there and to resurrect my old pile of vinyls I ordered as the first in Sweden a Laserturntable, ELP LT-1XRC.

It has a sweet analogue sound but are computer controlled and has five laserbeams plus convinience of of programmability and a remotecontrol.
With lasers there's no wear on the record and no pickupresonances.
No tangency errors and it can even play broken records.
I ordered the version that plays 78's when I find them, why can't that be standard on ordinary turntables? With the great heritage of vinyls out there?
But to utilize the quality of reproduction u have to be careful to clean the records and I got the recordcleaner VPI HW-16.5 for free!
Check out this unik device here www.laserturntable.com

[DMK]

[QUOTE=Elgen]I'm excited about the great history and variety of vinyls out there and to resurrect my old pile of vinyls I ordered as the first in Sweden a Laserturntable, ELP LT-1XRC.

Supposed to be a good one - enjoy! If the technology ever becomes more affordable, we might be able to get rid of those atrocious CD's once and for all! Ha Ha! I think we lost that battle already. But the Laser Turntable does seem to make CD's most endearing quality - convenience- a moot point.

I'm sure you'll love your new 'table and you'll be on your way to appreciating the superiority of LP's!

[skeptic]

"vinyl reproduction is still the standard of comparison to home playback as vinyl still comes closest to the absolute sound of live music".

As for your question, I don't really know why the above is so based on the measurements you cited. Perhaps measurements don't correlate to sound. .... But as I posted on A/R earlier, if you doubt the superiority of vinyl, check out the 45 RPM reissue of the Fantasy catalog. I have the Bill Evans "Saturday at the Village Vanguard". If you want master tape sound, you'll find it here, not on any CD I've ever heard.

I remind you that rb performed an at home experiment which proved at least to him and his wife that a cd dubbed from a vinyl record was indistinguishable. Therefore, when you are making judgements of vinyls versus cds, you may actually be comparing recording engineers techniques of yesteryear with those used today and with the slapdash reissues where they get 'em in, through, and out as cheap and fast as they can because they are only catering to the nostalgia crowd.

And you are entitled to your opinion of course but for me, the shortcomings of vinyl are so objectionable that I'll take a well made cd over a phonograph record every time.

I find it amusing that record lovers always seem to have to justify their preference to other people while those of us who like cds better, possibly the vast majority, rarely if ever feel the same compulsion. As for why there are audible differences that make some vinyls sound better than some cds to some people, we've been over that ground too many times before to make it interesting for me to discuss it again.

[rb122]

I remind you that rb performed an at home experiment which proved at least to him and his wife that a cd dubbed from a vinyl record was indistinguishable. Therefore, when you are making judgements of vinyls versus cds, you may actually be comparing recording engineers techniques of yesteryear with those used today and with the slapdash reissues where they get 'em in, through, and out as cheap and fast as they can because they are only catering to the nostalgia crowd.

And you are entitled to your opinion of course but for me, the shortcomings of vinyl are so objectionable that I'll take a well made cd over a phonograph record every time.

I find it amusing that record lovers always seem to have to justify their preference to other people while those of us who like cds better, possibly the vast majority, rarely if ever feel the same compulsion. As for why there are audible differences that make some vinyls sound better than some cds to some people, we've been over that ground too many times before to make it interesting for me to discuss it again.

I've done the same experiment as rb with somewhat different results. And I've heard all the arguments about CD's shortcomings being the fault of everything but the medium and, while I can possibly accept those reasons, it doesn't change the fact that most CD's I've heard are sonically compromised.

As for justifying our preferences, it's possibly because the CD lovers make up the vast majority but also because said people have never convinced vinyl lovers that they've ever maximized vinyl's potential. Most of the ones I know or who have posted on this board that prefer CD's took horrible care of their vinyl, used sub-standard equipment or simply enjoyed CD's convenience. Better than CD sound is out there and we're just trying to help folks who have been duped by the marketing ploys of the CD.

I'm aware of the reasons you and others have cited for why some vinyl may sound better than some CD's. While certainly many of them may be accurate, what really matters is that most LP's sound better than most CD's, IMHO. And I've found over the years that the more accurate one's audio gear, the more glaring (pun intended!) the shortcomings of redbook CD's are. Just my opinion, of course. You and anyone else are free to disagree.

[skeptic]

I've found over the years that the more accurate one's audio gear, the more glaring (pun intended!) the shortcomings of redbook CD's are. Just my opinion, of course. You and anyone else are free to disagree.

Yes I do disagree. While it's true that the mass market pop, rock, and nostalgia reissues are ground out with even more appalling sound than their original vinyl couterparts were, the creme de la creme and most demanding music is of course without any doubt classical. And the clarity, quiet backround, timbral accuracy, frequency and dynamic range and overall pleasure of well made cds can't be even closely matched by vinyl. Yes there are many shoddy poorly recorded new discs and badly remastered reissues there too. Not disagreeing there. But the pleasure of knowing you won't hear any pops or clicks or rumble on a recorded performance of Debussy or Ravel, or that a big crecendo in a Tchaikowsky symphony will reproduced without any harmonic distortion from mistracking or overmodulation or lack of impact from compression really augments my pleasure in hearing of recorded music. And the accuracy of human voices whether solo such as Pavarotti or massed such as the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is far more interesting than the best comparable vinyls. The added benefit of convenience, lack of fragility, portability, and fine inexpensive players just makes it all that much better.

[E-Stat]

Anyway, Mr Garcia states that vinyl is still the closest there is to the sound of live music. I have to agree.

While the redbook CD standard is superior to the vinyl format in most respects, it still has two challenges to overcome: high frequency accuracy and low level resolution. The absolute brickwall "nyquist" filter takes its toll on the top octave(s). Similarly, while analog resolves even through a low noise floor, 14 bit PCM goes deaf at the lowest levels. If you think differently, then debate the many engineers behind the SACD and DVD-A formats that seek to address these remaining shortcomings.

I have several recordings on the Windham Hill label in both analog vinyl and digital formats. With these minimally miked, very good recordings using Studer mics, I find the analog versions have a slight advantage when it comes to reproducing natural overtones with solo piano and twelve string guitar.

Having said that, I find the best redbook units such as the Burmester 969/970 to be supremely accurate reproducers of music, shortcomings aside. And there is no question that the lack of surface noise, ticks, and pops is more enjoyable.

rw

[DMK]

Yes I do disagree. While it's true that the mass market pop, rock, and nostalgia reissues are ground out with even more appalling sound than their original vinyl couterparts were, the creme de la creme and most demanding music is of course without any doubt classical. And the clarity, quiet backround, timbral accuracy, frequency and dynamic range and overall pleasure of well made cds can't be even closely matched by vinyl. Yes there are many shoddy poorly recorded new discs and badly remastered reissues there too. Not disagreeing there. But the pleasure of knowing you won't hear any pops or clicks or rumble on a recorded performance of Debussy or Ravel, or that a big crecendo in a Tchaikowsky symphony will reproduced without any harmonic distortion from mistracking or overmodulation or lack of impact from compression really augments my pleasure in hearing of recorded music. And the accuracy of human voices whether solo such as Pavarotti or massed such as the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is far more interesting than the best comparable vinyls. The added benefit of convenience, lack of fragility, portability, and fine inexpensive players just makes it all that much better.

That's fine - you're free to have your own opinion. My only disagreement is... let's see... I guess I need to make a list

1) Classical music being the creme de la creme and most demanding music.
2) Clarity of CD
3) Quiet background... no, that's ok. The distortions of CD are bred into the music rather than in the background. So I agree there.
4) timbral accuracy... I've rarely heard this on CD. I've found CD's to be incredibly inaccurate.
5) Frequency range - I'm betting you can't hear anything above about 14 khz. I know I can't. So I'm not sure how you enjoy it. Hmmm... must be something to those ultrasonic frequency arguments since 15 khz may as well be an ultrasonic frequency to me!
6)"...can't even be closely matched by vinyl." I find the opposite to be true.

But I'm truly glad you're happy with CD's. Basically, I am, too. I do find them sonically challenged in comparison to even a "good" LP let alone the "best" LP's but in the grand scheme of things, they're fine.

[Beckman]

I use both a cd player(Cambridge D500SE) and a tuntable(technics). I honestly can say that my mint condition "House of the Holy" LP sounds better than the cd version. At the same time I find many of the digitaly remastered Greatful Dead cd's sound quite good. I think a well recorded cd played on a good cd player can sound quite good. At the same time $5 LP's on my $50 turntabe also sound quite good.
I think if one were to compare a $500 turntable to a $500 cd player it would come down to how well the recordings were done. That is how well the analog signal was converted to digital and put on the cd and the condition of the LP.

As for SACD and DVD-Audio, I hope one or the other catches on and people decide to sell their records and cd's for cheap.

[hifitommy]

is far and away better sounding than the same on cd. so much more infrormation comes back on vinyl, the sonds of the venue, the body of the istruments, the sound of many individual instruments being played en masse.

it wont matter how successful sacd/dvda is , i'm keeping all my music regardless of format. and rock/pop/jazz/world musics are all better rendered on vinyl as well. there ar few superiorities of cd that could convince me to go away from LP.

there ARE those that focus on the artifacts of vinyl who cant get away from the the distractions. a friend is that way but he just bought a vinyl player to take advantage of the vinyl he cant get on cd and sacd. he has also heard that vinyl CAN be quiet eonoug for him to appriciate.

i dont expect to convert him entirely, but he can see the advantage to having a decent vinyl player. time will tell.

[jbangelfish]

I too appreciate music from vinyl more than CD. I plan to take the plunge into SACD soon out of curiousity. I don't know if vinyl is truly king of the heap but it has always sounded better to me. rb's test of recording from LP to CD says something about the state of rbcd that it is likely possible to create excellent rbcd. For many of us, in the music that we like, it just doesn't get done often enough. I have very few CD's in my collection that make me feel the way that vinyl does during listening.
I absolutely hate scratches and pops that come with worn LP's but who doesn't? Pristine vinyl sounds better to me than anything but live music 99% of the time. If the engineers can ever get their **** together and produce RBCD or SACD that sounds as good as the original LP, I'll be the first to unload all of my analog collection, turntables and cartridges. I for one, believe that it is possible but for some reason, it does not happen. This has been discussed to death, the how's and why's. I don't care why, it just isn't available yet in what I like to listen to.
It's nice to hear a supposed expert who agrees with us but there are plenty of experts on both sides of the fence. I still trust my own ears over anyone else's and they still tell me that vinyl reigns supreme 99% of the time. It is just unfortunate that the CD makers don't take the time to do a better job on ALL recordings. Perhaps this will get better over time. I'm hoping so as I am reasonably convinced that the potential is there to be as good as or MAYBE even better than vinyl.
For now, I have to do my best to take good care of my LP's so that I can continue to enjoy them for another 30 years or so or until someone decides to make good CD's for me.
Bill

[DMK]

is far and away better sounding than the same on cd. so much more infrormation comes back on vinyl, the sonds of the venue, the body of the istruments, the sound of many individual instruments being played en masse. .

That's my experience as well. I got lucky about a year ago and found about 30 Deutsche Grammophon LP's and had about 6 of them on CD. A comparison of those 6...well, I'm sure you can guess the outcome. The vinyl KILLED the CD's in all cases. The CD's just seemed to suck the life out of the recording. I could still hear the notes being played and they were the same as on the LP but it's like the diff between a player piano and a human pianist. One was technically perfect but cold and sterile. One, the LP, was much more lifelike - or "live-like" might be a better term.

[DMK]

If the engineers can ever get their **** together and produce RBCD or SACD that sounds as good as the original LP, I'll be the first to unload all of my analog collection, turntables and cartridges. Bill

And I, for one, will be the first in line to take those LP's and stuff off your hands. Heh, heh

I'm with you - I've heard all of these "reasons" for why vinyl sounds good and CD's sound bad. They're sort of pathetic because why should anyone care WHY? The fact is, vinyl sounds better most of the time, to my ears. It might be nice to know the whys but ultimately, they are irrelevant. When redbook CD starts to sound better than vinyl, I'll be the first to recant my position. I should say that when "digital" starts to sound better than vinyl because redbook doesn't seem capable of doing so on a grand basis.

[maxg]

I, like many in this thread am a vinyl lover through and through. First and foremost these days, however, I am a classical music lover. The thought of going back to CD to listen to the music I have now on vinyl sends a shiver down my spine.

Not in any way, shape or form is CD better than vinyl can be when it comes to classical music. Now I will admit the following:

1. I use a fairly high end cartridge these days - a Shelter 901.
2. I am fairly selective about whose music productions I buy. I do not buy Deutche Grammaphone or Angel, for example (unless they are the only versions available of a piece I am trully desperate for).
3. A goodly proportion of my classical vinyl is audiophile re-issues.
4. Original vinyl pressings are mainly Living Stereo, Decca Full Frequency recordings, London and original Philips from Amsterdam.

Using these as my mainstays I am yet to find any CD (and I own some 150 classical CD's) that compares.

CD's do have their place (the car), but please lets not pretend they can live with the sonics of vinyl. That is why SACD and DVDa are here today (albeit failing to make any real inroads in the marketplace).

I should add that I do not believe this to be a digital issue. I have heard some of the very best SACD players out there (for example the new Accuphase player) and would contend that with certain recordings they can match standard vinyl's sound in quality with the added benefit of no surface noise). The problem is that the players at this level are extremely expensive and of course the medium is neither cheap nor extensive.

Nothing matches new audiophile pressings when they are good. Surface noise is non-existant and the quality of the sound inspires.

[jbangelfish]

I was looking at the Shelter MC's but found something for a lot less cash. Two NOS Fidelity Research LO MC's for $625 for the pair. They use one of the fine line (their term is line contact) styles of stylii and I'm amazed at what they pull from vinyl. Their super low output of .14 would not be for everyone but I'm very pleased.
You don't list your system, am curious what else is in it. Vinyl seems to capture everything in a very natural way and I've never heard CD do it quite as well. Some good but never great. Many disagree with this and I don't care to argue about it, we've done plenty of that already.
Bill

[Elgen]

I have now used the Laserturntable for two days and I state that it's cheap for $13300.
When I put my new Heifetz recording for the first time I regret that I couldn't afford a better amp and speakers.
But it's sounds fantastic, no pops or clicks just a wonderfull violin played in the skillfull hands of Heifetz.
It have a tremedous clarity and dynamic and transients sharp like a flash!
Vinyls definitly joins the league of DVD-A and SACD and there's a lot more vinyls out there.
There are bad recordings of wichever format, so bewere.
But on highquality recordings the vinyls realy outclass CD's.

And about the laserturntable ELP LT-1XRC:
I don't even have to leave the sofa to change tracks.
If there's anything wrong I've get an errormessage.
Electronic music isn't compromised because there's no surface noise or resonances.
Easy set up! just run the calibration record for 30sec.
Frequency response from 10Hz - 50KHz, just like SACD!
Remotecontrolled drawer wich allow you to put it under other equipment.
Blue LCD-displays with white readout, the coolest combination IMHO.
'nough of this rant, all in all it's fullpacked of features.
Wich makes it affordable in respect of the R&D behind this product.

[maxg]

I was looking at the Shelter MC's but found something for a lot less cash. Two NOS Fidelity Research LO MC's for $625 for the pair. They use one of the fine line (their term is line contact) styles of stylii and I'm amazed at what they pull from vinyl. Their super low output of .14 would not be for everyone but I'm very pleased.
You don't list your system, am curious what else is in it. Vinyl seems to capture everything in a very natural way and I've never heard CD do it quite as well. Some good but never great. Many disagree with this and I don't care to argue about it, we've done plenty of that already.
Bill

My system is in something of a state of flux right now and therefore rather bizzare.

I got into vinyl and just went and bought a TT from the first supplier I visited to get going. That table was the project RPM 4 equiped with the project 9 arm, the project K4 cart and the project phono box.

Over the past 2 years I have been swapping components out and basically improving things. right now I have:

The Shelter 901 Cartridge.
The Accoustic Signature Tango phono stage.
An upgraded project 9 arm with Clearaudio Sixstream cabling, better bearings and high quality connectors.
The original Project RPM 4 TT with a minor mod. I have removed the motor from the platter entirely and built a wooden box to house it in. It is connected to the TT using the subplatter (to keep the gearing the same) and the rubber band from the Project perspective.

The upgraded RPM 4 is an interim step towards a new table. I am trying to decide what to go for now. To be honest this has been put on hold for a while as the motor movement made such a huge improvement to things I dont feel the need like a used to.

I dont know - maybe I will stick as I am. There is something inherently cool about having a TT I had so much hands on playing with.

I would post a picture but for some reason I cant get either a link or an upload to work.

[jbangelfish]

Always curious what is in a vinyl lovers' system. What amp, preamp, speakers etc? I remember your post about the heavily modded tt. If it sounds great, why change? You have gone to an extent that you are probably getting about as much from vinyl as is possible. There's always something but there comes a point where it may not be worth the added expense or effort.
I use an old Sansui (1984?) direct drive with quartz lock, model SR929 which was their best. They also made an SR838 and these two were their foray into high end gear. The suspension and isolation of this tt is better than any I've ever owned, it is in a cabinet on a wood floor (carpeted) and I am able to walk around without disturbing it. I never wanted direct drive but someone convinced me to try it and I realize now that at least some dd's were made very well. It's a beast at about 40 pounds, has better specs than SOTA and appears to be a very well made tt. I replaced the original RB200 tonearm with a Syrinx PU2 and the sound improved noticeably as I don't think the Rega was up to MC. At any rate, for about $850, including tt, tonearm and cartridge, I have an excellent sounding rig. I have been told that the Syrinx arm compares with arms in the 1k to 2k range and the FR cartridge compares with 2k to 3k cartridges. I have no idea whether this is true but I have no reason to doubt it either.
Bill

[maxg]

My original plan was to upgrade the Project to something recognised as better. As you say, however, the reason for upgrading is diminished as the thing is just playing so well at the moment.

As an aside a friend with a very high end setup (Quad 989's, Accuphase, Accoustic-solid TT, same cartridge) just spent a week with my system as he was house sitting for me.

His reaction to my system floored me. He prefers the way it plays over his own system. In his words the classical (which he listened to all week) it just much more musical than his own system. Made my day to hear that, especially as he is one of those people who believe you have to spend big money to get good sound. 'Course as much as it pleased me I think it really hurt him to discover this...

Anyway the result it that the TT upgrade is now on indefinite hold. My system may not be very pretty but it plays a dream..

[jbangelfish]

When people listen to our systems and either sit in amazement or at least great pleasure, not realizing that it could be this good. Gives you that warm fuzzy feeling. I have no problem with not pretty to look at, the beauty is in the sound and this is where it belongs. I made the comment that I would buy the ugliest speaker in the world if it sounded great and the same is true for any component. If it looks good or interesting as well, that's just a bonus.
An acquaintence of mine has 3k or so in his entire system and is able to accomplish the same thing. He uses the same cartridge that I use, prefers vinyl and has access to master tapes. Of course, master tapes would be preferred over anything except live but you can't get all of them. He travels the world and is an amazing bargain hunter finding components in pawn shops, yard sales and NASA scrap yards. Combine this with the ability to rebuild or build his own components and he has built a system for much less than most of us are able to.
Happy listening,
Bill