Popdose: What’s So Great About Vinyl, Anyway?
eric
· 1 year ago
I can't tell which part here is just humor and which part is serious. A USB turntable? Unless there's a product out there I haven't seen, those things are junk, judged by the rips I've been downloading from the internets. Vinyl rips from USB turntables will convince people that vinyl is complete hype, because they sound poor.
I would much prefer high definition digital to vinyl. But those formats just haven't caught on. MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality. And as more people embrace this format, it ruins sound quality for people who appreciate it, as producers mix albums to sound good in the compromised format.
Ah well, if you just want slam and bam and roar and sizzle, you're welcome to it. (Though frankly, MP3s don't even sizzle very well -- there is an inevitable softening and smearing of the high frequencies.) Vinyl has many problems, and I hardly buy it or play it anymore. But whenever I get out some of my old direct-to-disc or MFSL records and play them, or even the WAV files I've made from ripping them, my jaw just sort of drops, after months of listening to CDs and MP3s. There's no explanation for how a hard rock sliding down a plastic groove can sound that clean. But it does.
The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves.
But honestly, play the current CD release of Abbey Road, then play the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab vinyl, and then tell me there are no virtues in vinyl.
Ted
· 1 year ago
Eric: You're so right on the money about USB turntables. I bought one, and I can't EQ the songs correctly to even come close to warming the sound up -- and I'm using ProTools and Peak LE, and not Audacity.
I'm sure there's an interface I can buy so I can use my Technics SL 1200, and I should probably look into it, 'cause every time I make a digital copy of a vinyl recording on the USB turntable, I'm wincing at the sound.
mojo
· 1 year ago
Griffin iMic? Or does that mess up the quality?
Ted
· 1 year ago
I just looked at that online, and it seems like it would work. The needle on my USB turntable is crap, so I think that's part of the problem, too.
Allen
· 1 year ago
There is no doubt that there is a difference in fidelity between the open sounds of vinyl, the cruddy hiss of cassette and the compressed sound of digital. None of that matters, though. The public has spoken. Convenience over quality. I would direct you to a Sound Opinions episode, two actually, one is all about the fidelity war but, more recently, DeRogatis and Kot had some record exec from Warners talk about the renewed dedication to Vinyl issue and reissue. Basically it came out of a listening/lecture from Neil Young but due to that corporate interest, vinyl sales are up something lik e77%. There are THAT many buying it but, for the time being, those that are are being served.
Darren
· 1 year ago
This article makes me wanna go back and record my favorite vinyl cuts over an old Foghat eight-track tape so I can play it in my '79 Chevy Blazer's stock stereo system while that beautiful ol' rust bucket wobbles down the freeway, memorizing every KER-CHUNK as the track changes between songs.
Sadly, I'm stuck listening to digital discs in a Rav4 that doesn't even know the meaning of the word "rust", and an iPod full of megabyte after megabyte of shit I can't believe I honestly thought I'd ever willingly listen to again.
GrayFlannelSuit
· 1 year ago
"Digital is closer to the original sound the performers made in the studio."
Um, how do you figure that, especially for music recorded to tape?
Ted
· 1 year ago
I was trying to find the actual quote, but Paul McCartney was commenting on Let It Be...Naked saying that what the engineers did with ProTools came close to what they (the Beatles) were hearing when recording the music. I'm not talking about the playback, but what they were hearing in the headphones as they were laying down the tracks.
Matt Johnson (i.e., The The) said in the mid '80s that CDs were like having really good copies of the master recordings. CDs were certainly had a cleaner sound, but to me CDs basically made mediocre speakers sound better. Setting your EQ so CDs and vinyl would have a similar sound was pretty tough when doing a DJ gig. I had some presets to punch in when going from one format to the other, but if I forgot to punch the preset when going to a CD, the crowd would cover their ears because it was so skewed toward the high end. Once the EQ was adjusted, however, people calmed down and stopped asking for my head on a platter.
eric
· 1 year ago
Judging by the sound quality of McCartney's recent album, I wouldn't trust any statements he made about ProTools. I think John Vanderslice's article Pro Tools Mix Plus 24: Work of The Devil? (http://tinytelephone.com/html/tapeop.html) gives a balanced view from someone who works with tape and vinyl every day in his recording studio.
Michael Fremer is more biased -- definitely biased in favor of analog and vinyl -- but I have to say I have some sympathy for what he said about ProTools in his review of the latest Kathleen Edwards album:
"If this isn’t a ProTools recording I’ll eat a reel of Ampex 456 (that’s a cop-out because no one in their right mind would allow one to be destroyed). It has all of the dark, congealed, airless ProTools sonic fingerprints. ProTools sucks. It is an abomination. It is the musical equivalent of the burnt beans Starbucks passes off as gourmet coffee. It is the music business’s poison pill. It repels people who don’t even know they are being repelled. It is why people hardly listen to music anymore. They hear it but they don’t really listen. ProTools is literally unlistenable."
mojo
· 1 year ago
The vinylphiles have spoken. Which of you want Dream After Dream, again? Heh
Seriously, however, keep the comments coming. I don't have to be right, you don't have to be wrong. I like the debate.
Two comments below, I think, shed light on my arguments: "The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves."
So, I think we're pushing the debate away from vinyl v digital to audiophile vinyl v everything else? So most records could be ripped from USB turntables to MP3 without hearing much difference?
and: "MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality."
I would submit that too-low-sampled MP3s are worse than AM radio not quite tuned in. Bigger files = Better music.
Mojo has spoken. Feel free to pound on me some more, that's what I'm here for.
Ted
· 1 year ago
I agree about the sample rate. 192 is cutting it close in terms of good audio quality, but 256 or 320 is pretty much my standard for mp3s.
Like I said, my USB turntable has a shitty needle, so the digital conversion is somewhat worse than vinyl copy. If I play the same record on my old skool turntable (i.e., the Technics sl 1200), it sounds great - which is why I want to get a digital interface that works with it.
mojohater
· 1 year ago
For once, I totally agree w/ Mojo! Way to go...I can't stand all these "vinyl's making a comeback" articles...yeesh.
Tom
· 1 year ago
Hear hear! I heartily agree, and I think I'd file myself right alongside you in terms of "audiophileness." Vinyl is not worth the effort and worry for me. I appreciate the masterings that made them so great, many of which wound up on early CDs, but I don't want to deal with the ritual.
As for that Mudcrutch album, you'd better give the audiophile CD that comes with the vinyl a listen. It blows away the standard CD. Like I mentioned above - same mastering as the vinyl. It is lovely sounding.
Thom / Atlanta
· 1 year ago
I buy the new releases on vinyl and play them on an entry-level Project 1.2. I also have a Bellari phono preamp (w/ headphone jack) so that I can play the records thru any tape/cd/dvd/aux jack on my cheap Onkyo reciever.
If you can't hear that a lot of new releases these days are mastered one way for the vinyl and a different way for the cd, then you truly do need more than pricey equipment. If they hadn't started squashing dynamic range out of existence on new release cds I might not have resorted to the change. But they did, and I had to dodge the problem or listen to nothing new.
(owner of 5500 lps and 400 cds)
rockrdude
· 1 year ago
Some CDs sound better than vinyl. Some vinyl sounds better than CD. A lot depends on the mix, the quality of the vinyl, the audio system the music is being played through, yada yada.
I prefer both, but I admittedly have a fondness for vinyl. I admit the degradation of quality is a concern, but I'd still take vinyl over a poorly mastered CD anyday.
And heck.. I'd actually enjoy owning "Dream After Dream" on vinyl again. I'd even play it and smile. :)
(But.. I also might compare it with the Japanese remastered CD to see which sounds better.)
All Comments
I would much prefer high definition digital to vinyl. But those formats just haven't caught on. MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality. And as more people embrace this format, it ruins sound quality for people who appreciate it, as producers mix albums to sound good in the compromised format.
Ah well, if you just want slam and bam and roar and sizzle, you're welcome to it. (Though frankly, MP3s don't even sizzle very well -- there is an inevitable softening and smearing of the high frequencies.) Vinyl has many problems, and I hardly buy it or play it anymore. But whenever I get out some of my old direct-to-disc or MFSL records and play them, or even the WAV files I've made from ripping them, my jaw just sort of drops, after months of listening to CDs and MP3s. There's no explanation for how a hard rock sliding down a plastic groove can sound that clean. But it does.
The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves.
But honestly, play the current CD release of Abbey Road, then play the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab vinyl, and then tell me there are no virtues in vinyl.
I'm sure there's an interface I can buy so I can use my Technics SL 1200, and I should probably look into it, 'cause every time I make a digital copy of a vinyl recording on the USB turntable, I'm wincing at the sound.
None of that matters, though. The public has spoken. Convenience over quality.
I would direct you to a Sound Opinions episode, two actually, one is all about the fidelity war but, more recently, DeRogatis and Kot had some record exec from Warners talk about the renewed dedication to Vinyl issue and reissue. Basically it came out of a listening/lecture from Neil Young but due to that corporate interest, vinyl sales are up something lik e77%. There are THAT many buying it but, for the time being, those that are are being served.
Sadly, I'm stuck listening to digital discs in a Rav4 that doesn't even know the meaning of the word "rust", and an iPod full of megabyte after megabyte of shit I can't believe I honestly thought I'd ever willingly listen to again.
Um, how do you figure that, especially for music recorded to tape?
Matt Johnson (i.e., The The) said in the mid '80s that CDs were like having really good copies of the master recordings. CDs were certainly had a cleaner sound, but to me CDs basically made mediocre speakers sound better. Setting your EQ so CDs and vinyl would have a similar sound was pretty tough when doing a DJ gig. I had some presets to punch in when going from one format to the other, but if I forgot to punch the preset when going to a CD, the crowd would cover their ears because it was so skewed toward the high end. Once the EQ was adjusted, however, people calmed down and stopped asking for my head on a platter.
Michael Fremer is more biased -- definitely biased in favor of analog and vinyl -- but I have to say I have some sympathy for what he said about ProTools in his review of the latest Kathleen Edwards album:
"If this isn’t a ProTools recording I’ll eat a reel of Ampex 456 (that’s a cop-out because no one in their right mind would allow one to be destroyed). It has all of the dark, congealed, airless ProTools sonic fingerprints. ProTools sucks. It is an abomination. It is the musical equivalent of the burnt beans Starbucks passes off as gourmet coffee. It is the music business’s poison pill. It repels people who don’t even know they are being repelled. It is why people hardly listen to music anymore. They hear it but they don’t really listen. ProTools is literally unlistenable."
Seriously, however, keep the comments coming. I don't have to be right, you don't have to be wrong. I like the debate.
Two comments below, I think, shed light on my arguments:
"The biggest problem with vinyl is that it was hardly ever done right. The pressings were often poor, unless you bought imports, and even then the cutting engineers would cut too close to the center grooves."
So, I think we're pushing the debate away from vinyl v digital to audiophile vinyl v everything else? So most records could be ripped from USB turntables to MP3 without hearing much difference?
and:
"MP3? It's a non-serious listening medium. Sample quality."
I would submit that too-low-sampled MP3s are worse than AM radio not quite tuned in. Bigger files = Better music.
Mojo has spoken. Feel free to pound on me some more, that's what I'm here for.
Like I said, my USB turntable has a shitty needle, so the digital conversion is somewhat worse than vinyl copy. If I play the same record on my old skool turntable (i.e., the Technics sl 1200), it sounds great - which is why I want to get a digital interface that works with it.
As for that Mudcrutch album, you'd better give the audiophile CD that comes with the vinyl a listen. It blows away the standard CD. Like I mentioned above - same mastering as the vinyl. It is lovely sounding.
I also have a Bellari phono preamp (w/ headphone jack) so that I can play
the records thru any tape/cd/dvd/aux jack on my cheap Onkyo reciever.
If you can't hear that a lot of new releases these days are mastered
one way for the vinyl and a different way for the cd, then you truly
do need more than pricey equipment. If they hadn't started squashing dynamic range out of existence on new release cds I might not have resorted to the change. But they did, and I had to dodge the problem
or listen to nothing new.
(owner of 5500 lps and 400 cds)
I prefer both, but I admittedly have a fondness for vinyl. I admit the degradation of quality is a concern, but I'd still take vinyl over a poorly mastered CD anyday.
And heck.. I'd actually enjoy owning "Dream After Dream" on vinyl again. I'd even play it and smile. :)
(But.. I also might compare it with the Japanese remastered CD to see which sounds better.)