# 78s, LPs, CDs, or digital files: What's your pleasure?



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

So how do you feed your music acquisition habit these days? For myself, I have forgone physical media and mostly stick to MP3s, unless there's a particular recording I want that's not available that way. Then I look for a CD, preferably a used one, which I rip ASAP and promptly forget.

You?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

CD's , DVD'S and LPs I have nothing on files.
The thought of not going to the shelf's and search for my daily doses of musics scares me.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

CDs. Uncompressed digital files are fine with me, but I'd rather just load a CD in my CD player than deal with a media server. I have a few classical LPs, but it's my least preferred option. I don't mind cassettes, but I like CDs better.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

CD's. Even my digital downloads, I burn to CD or DVD for playing.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

You mean there's something better than wax cylinders?


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

MarkW said:


> You mean there's something better than wax cylinders?


Yeah, you have not heard about the magnetic wire recording revolution? Get your Webcor or Wilcox-Gay wire player ready for some high-fidelity! :lol:


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

YouTube, from where one can nowadays download almost anything. I can't afford CDs anyway. Of course, it does have the downside that when my laptop gives up the ghost, as sooner or later it must, my music collection goes with it.


----------



## mathisdermaler (Mar 29, 2017)

78s! Does anyone have a player fit for playing those, let alone still listen to them? The only thing I would want to listen to on 78's is delta blues


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

I spent many years burning all my digital files to CD, but as I reached peak CD storage space I realised I needed to be going in the opposite direction and I converted all my original CDs to MP3. I've never looked back (almost literally! the CD shelves are behind me as I sit at my laptop). Occasionally I buy a second-hand CD but that immediately gets ripped. Other than the car, I can't remember when I last listened to a CD on a dedicated CD player.


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

I got into SACDs a year ago and now stereo seems a biit flat. I still like historical performances on 78 and LP but listen to these on CD. The quality of some modern transfers is superb.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

In my case, analog reproduction remains my prime listening means:

Long Live LP !


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

I'm totally ripped. Including SACDs (which are a pain to rip).

(Except for my half dozen Blu-Ray audio discs for which I don't own the ripping hardware or software, and two of my SACDs, which would not rip.) 

I also purchase files, CD quality or better, from online sites.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

CDs for me, but ripped to digital for ease of access. But I like to have the CDs just because it is more real than mere kilobytes.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

I buy CD's mostly, but I can be tempted by cheap MP3 sets from Amazon. I rip my CD's onto my computer and hardly ever use the CD's after that (95% of my listening is on my computer or on my phone.) I regard the CD's as durable backups. I like having the CD's because I've had enough hard drives fail on me to feel comfortable having only digital files. I do keep two separate full backups of the drive I keep my music on. But still.

I fully admit that there's also an irrational side of me that just feels like CD's are more "real". I like having the physical medium, with the artwork, etc. I'm also just a tad too young to have any real emotional connection to LP's, though I do have some (all purchased cheaply at second hand stores, and in kind of rough shape).

I know the world is moving on, and CD's are a dying format, but I'm happy to be stuck in the past. That doesn't bother me.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

CD's. I'm also into SACD's even if I don't have multiple speakers - they just sound so good to me, even from two speakers. LP's are all right but I usually have some children's books stacked on the player. 

I should probably seek a psychiatrist, but listening to music on Youtube feels to me like drinking from a huge bowl of soup where thousands of people have been spitting into. Just revolting, and completely irrational.


----------



## Omicron9 (Oct 13, 2016)

CDs, always always.


----------



## Adamus (Aug 30, 2015)

MarkW said:


> You mean there's something better than wax cylinders?


live music, the real thing :tiphat:


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Xaltotun said:


> CD's. I'm also into SACD's even if I don't have multiple speakers - they just sound so good to me, even from two speakers. LP's are all right but I usually have some children's books stacked on the player.
> 
> I should probably seek a psychiatrist, but listening to music on Youtube feels to me like drinking from *a huge bowl of soup where thousands of people have been spitting into*. Just revolting, and completely irrational.


That aptly describes about 99 percent of the stuff (not just music) that is on You Tube.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

I was listening to Tristan und Isolde on Youtube (Carlos Kleiber) only to have it interrupted every half hour or so by a series of inane 15-second ads for Groupon.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

In the office, CD's. At home, CD's and an occasional LP.

In the car and at the gym, digital files, in MP3 format.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2017)

In order: CDs/SACDs, hi-res files, LPs. I guess the convenience of CDs is a very attractive aspect. Files are good in that regard, but I can't remotely pause or change tracks. LPs, if well recorded, probably offer the most realistic sound, but they are less convenient and have a more limited repertoire.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Kontrapunctus said:


> LPs, if well recorded, *probably offer the most realistic sound*, but they are less convenient and have a more limited repertoire.


 I can't agree with that at all!


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

LPs and lossless AIFF files ripped from CDs. Both listened to with my Sennheiser headphones and Schiit Magni headphone amp. 

I use digital downloads for popular music, but for classical the sound quality isn't up to snuff for me. YouTube is good for watching live performances, but I don't use it as a serious listening medium.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2017)

Klassik said:


> I can't agree with that at all!


These posts are not offered for your approval.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

For home base, multiple speaker listening and movies, I like CDs and SACDs, and also DTS and DVD audio. Also the occasional LP just for the ritual and nostalgia.

For vehicles and portability, MP3s are OK; I use copy CD-Rs for the car (in case of mechanical failure) and MP3s for my i-pods. 

I still love beautiful packaging and good liner notes in the CDs.

Also, I like to smoke my cigars outside, and use a portable boom-box CD/radio for that. I quite enjoy it, and it gives a new perspective to listen on a small system.

I think that as I get older, and closer to death, files are looking more attractive; but I don't want to have to be on-line or subscribe to any service. Just the files, with no baggage. You can't take it with you, after all.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Kontrapunctus said:


> These posts are not offered for your approval.


Fair enough. But in case anyone stumbles upon this thread looking for educational information, I'm not agreeing with your statement.


----------



## Melvin (Mar 25, 2011)

I'm sick of dealing with computers. I would get home from work, and all I wanted to do was play some music... But here I have to wait 20 minutes for my crappy computer to boot, and then I would probably have to troubleshoot some technical issue, before I could actually get to listen to music..

A CD player will never let you down! 

Also I'm lucky to have a very good library system, where I get access to large selections of classical CDs 
And I am very careful my income so that I am able to buy CD's!

For LP's... only if I have to. There is lots and lots of stuff that was issued once on LP and has never since been re-released. LP's can be a hassle, but nothing as bad as trouble shooting a PC  plus LP's are just fun.

But the big problem is space.


----------



## agoukass (Dec 1, 2008)

Most of my collection is CDs, but there are times when I buy MP3's for single CDs because they are cheaper and I can listen to them whenever I go outside without a CD player.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

> Also, I like to smoke my cigars outside, and use a portable boom-box CD/radio for that. I quite enjoy it, and it gives a new perspective to listen on a small system.


I bought a decent Bluetooth speaker to support my cigar habit.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

A combination of LPs, CDs and a growing number of Hi Res files.

Most of my listening currently is CD's, followed by LP's. Most of the LPs are recordings that were not released on CD, or that the CD is inferior.

Since I got a DAC that has he ability to play DSD, the only thing holding me back from purchasing more DSD files, is price. The few double and quad DSD files I have, sound better than the PCM version of the same recordings.

As someone else mentioned, I still like the idea of searching through physical media. I can't count the number of times I've come across some gem that I forgot I have.

I also still like the idea of going to brick and mortar stores and coming across something that I may have never thought of buying. It is a completely different experience than shopping for files, since I am much more likely to only searching for things I already have on a list to buy.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

At home I often play CDs cos I can't be bothered powering the computer and HD up to play my massive collection of lossless files. In the car, where I play most of my music, it's MP3s ripped from CDs and converted from FLAC files. I use a 64MB USB stick, in the car, which is half rock and half classical.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

I'm pretty much a Youtuber now-a-days because free. I pick up quality, unblemished CDs when I can (which is pretty semi-regularly) from Goodwill and Salvation Army stores (my classical collecting has a certain "thrill-of-the-unknown-every-time-is-like-Christmas" quality to it).

Hey, I'm frugal. You know how copper wire was invented? Two Scotsmen were fighting over a penny!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Yes, and you can still come across "gems" that you would never otherwise get, at Goodwill. If it's in decent shape.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

CDs, mostly, nowadays. You can't beat the thrill of purchasing an actual physical new disc with all the artwork and notes. I buy fairly moderately, about 50-100 discs a year if you include box sets and charity shop bargains.

Over the last few years I have replaced many of my LPs by buying or *ahem* 'acquiring' flac or high resolution mp3 files of the same recordings, where available. All of my PCs have external DACs for use with headphones or to feed an amplifier of one sound system or another.

I do still have about 170 classical LPs but find the sound quality limited and the 'snap, crackle and pop' on some discs intolerable. It's a pity I invested so much in a record deck in the last days of steam. 

I also use Spotify's free service to preview things I might go on to purchase.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

CDs and radio. My large collection of tape cassettes (nearly all home made recordings from LPs) sits idle, particularly as my car no longer has a tape player.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

Largely CDs. A few downloads on the Kindle Fire. Some CDs recorded from vinyl, of which I must do more.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Mine are mainly CDS, but I also use a music server, and also many SACDs, Blu Rays, and DVD-A. My downloads are a relatively small part of my collection. I do have about 50 albums as MP3 which I use for portable listening


----------



## dillonp2020 (May 6, 2017)

CDs(1200ish), LPs(200-300), and DVDs(including operas about 5ish).
I have some mp3's on my iPhone that I bought out of pure desperation because the cd couldn't come fast enough (yes I have amazon prime 2day shipping). When I saw Murray Perahia perform Beethoven's Piano Sonata no.32 op. 111, I was so enthralled I immediately bought four different performances of it on cd, but the CDs couldn't come fast enough so I bought Uchida doing nos. 30-32 on iTunes. Only desperate situations like this force me to but mp3s.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

CDs rule. Now almost exclusively played back on two systems at home with floorstand and bookshelf speakers. When travelling or neighborhood jaunting, I seldom do portable listening (via automobile CD player or Sony CD Walkman). "Classical music listening vacation" gives me a chance to enjoy others and other things.

That said, maybe this thread could be moved to HiFi, so that some of the "new posters" here could be encouraged to participate there. :tiphat:


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

I'm still very committed to CD's and have many 1000's. But several months ago I resurrected my turntable and rediscovered the joy of listening to vinyl. Have bought some new albums since, Bernstein's 15LP Mahler set, Mozart's Don Giovanni, Rachmaninov's Piano concertos Ashkenazy/Previn amongst others. Fortunately there are still few releases on vinyl compared to CD as I would be broke in a short space of time. I have no interest in downloading, ripping or other modern technology at this moment in time.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

alan davis said:


> I'm still very committed to CD's and have many 1000's. But several months ago I resurrected my turntable and rediscovered the joy of listening to vinyl. Have bought some new albums since, Bernstein's 15LP Mahler set, Mozart's Don Giovanni, Rachmaninov's Piano concertos Ashkenazy/Previn amongst others. Fortunately there are still few releases on vinyl compared to CD as I would be broke in a short space of time. I have no interest in downloading, ripping or other modern technology at this moment in time.


Oh dear, you just brought me one step closer to the buy button on that set.


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

Pugg said:


> Oh dear, you just brought me one step closer to the buy button on that set.


Pugg I have no regrets what so ever about my purchase. I can't compare them to the CD edition that sells for a fraction of the price or I would offer you some advice. If you're not quite sure yet just wait to some reviews come up on Amazon. The LP's have been out for a few weeks now so it can't be long until they are reviewed. Either way I'm as "happy as Larry".


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

alan davis said:


> Pugg I have no regrets what so ever about my purchase. I can't compare them to the CD edition that sells for a fraction of the price or I would offer you some advice. If you're not quite sure yet just wait to some reviews come up on Amazon. The LP's have been out for a few weeks now so it can't be long until they are reviewed. Either way I'm as "happy as Larry".


How does € 110.00 for 15 L.P.S sound in you ears?


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

I prefer CDs and digital files.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

CDs. Thousands of the damn things. Like Art Rock, I even burn digital downloads to CD for listening (lossless only, no mp3s for me). But that's probably because I do a lot of my musical listening in the car due to having to travel around a lot for business purposes.


----------



## LP collector (Aug 6, 2016)

I converted to CD from LP mid 1980's selling all my LP's for a pittance. I then converted back to LP from CD in the mid 1990's selling a fairly large collection of CD's for a pittance. I have been wedded to the LP record ever since and amassed a collection of 6000 odd. A couple of points, the old chestnut of "crackle and pop" points to the fact that the system used for playing the records is inadequate or a poor setup. With a well balanced system and a high quality cartridge/tone arm/turntable with the correct geometry surface noise disappears. I have been told many times that due to the LP record being finite there is a lack of choice. As long as you know where to look I have never found this to be true as I am making as many new discoveries as I did twenty years ago. The best bit though, collecting classical LP's is fun.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I really enjoy historical recordings. I've always had a thing for 78's and on a wider note I couldn't care less if it's mono or stereo, some things are better in mono anyway. I particularly enjoy old lp's picked up from charity shops. 50's, 60's & 70's lp's all do it for me.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

I still think a good clean LP is musically more satisfying than CD or any other source.

However - for sheer convenience + quality, CD is my preferred format these days - partic for car listening (the only car based record player I ever saw was in a Laurel and Hardy film)

at home while working I use youtube for listening.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

stomanek said:


> I still think a good clean LP is musically more satisfying than CD or any other source.
> 
> However - for sheer convenience + quality, CD is my preferred format these days - partic for car listening (the only car based record player I ever saw was in a Laurel and Hardy film)
> 
> at home while working I use youtube for listening.


A serious audiophile once told me that a CD can't match the first 100 plays of a record on a good system for sound quality. CDs are a lot easier to use though, more portable and aren't being destroyed every time one plays them.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

chill782002 said:


> A serious audiophile once told me that a CD can't match the first 100 plays of a record on a good system for sound quality. CDs are a lot easier to use though, more portable and aren't being destroyed every time one plays them.


I don't know. LPs are not as prone to wear as some people make them out to be as long as they are played back at a reasonable tracking force. Having said that, classical LPs are prone to suffering from other maladies like inner grove distortion which can really make for a disappointing end to a final movement of a longer symphony or something like that (a lot depends on how much music the label put on each side of the disk). Pop music would not suffer from this. Records are interesting, but they are much better for pop music than for classical music IMO.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

LP collector said:


> A couple of points, the old chestnut of "crackle and pop" points to the fact that the system used for playing the records is inadequate or a poor setup. With a well balanced system and a high quality cartridge/tone arm/turntable with the correct geometry surface noise disappears.


i am using a professionally set up Linn LP12 with an Ortofon 520. Many discs are virtually noise free - many are certainly not.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

Klassik said:


> I don't know. LPs are not as prone to wear as some people make them out to be as long as they are played back at a reasonable tracking force. Having said that, classical LPs are prone to suffering from other maladies like inner grove distortion which can really make for a disappointing end to a final movement of a longer symphony or something like that (a lot depends on how much music the label put on each side of the disk). Pop music would not suffer from this. Records are interesting, but they are much better for pop music than for classical music IMO.


LPs sound much better than any digital source and last much longer than many can expected provided that they are handled with care.

Listening to LPs through a proper setup for a whole afternoon on Sunday is merely a pleasure but I simply cannot stand digital reproduction for over 4 hours ut:


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

ww129 said:


> LPs sound much better than any digital source and last much longer than many can expected provided that they are handled with care.
> 
> Listening to LPs through a proper setup for a whole afternoon on Sunday is merely a pleasure but I simply cannot stand digital reproduction for over 4 hours ut:


That's the point, some people spend not to much on their set nowadays, and saying CD is everything.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Pugg said:


> That's the point, some people spend not to much on their set nowadays, and saying CD is everything.


Isn't that the point? With CD, you get everything good the LP offers (except aesthetics and hipster street cred) when it comes to classical music playback and so much more. All for significantly less money!

I understand that there is a certain personal pride factor with records. It does take more money and effort to get records to playback well compared to a CD player. I can understand that and respect that from a hobby perspective as I am an analog tape enthusiast myself, but don't slam an incredibly good format like CD (or digital files) just because you enjoy your hobby.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Klassik said:


> Isn't that the point? With CD, you get everything good the LP offers (except aesthetics and hipster street cred) when it comes to classical music playback and so much more. All for significantly less money!
> 
> I understand that there is a certain personal pride factor with records. It does take more money and effort to get records to playback well compared to a CD player. I can understand that and respect that from a hobby perspective as I am an analog tape enthusiast myself, but don't slam an incredibly good format like CD (or digital files) just because you enjoy your hobby.


I don't slam nothing thank you very much.
Just saying people are not spending on equipment.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Pugg said:


> Just saying people are not spending on equipment.


Us classical fans are wise people!


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

CD mainly as they are user friendly and give give good audio, also the odd LP from my remaining collection, not really interested in digital files unless high quality such as FLAC, but I do still listen to a lot on the old steam radio and still hear stuff that is new to me.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Although I started this thread, my list was quite incomplete. It should have included, at a minimum:

Needle traces (soot on glass)
Cylinders
78s
Mono LPs
45s
Stereo LPs
8-track tapes
Reel-to-reel tapes
Cassette tapes
CDs
SACDs, etc.
Lossless files
Lossy files
Streaming
Brain implants

That's 15, just right for a poll!


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

KenOC said:


> Although I started this thread, my list was quite incomplete. It should have included, at a minimum:
> 
> Needle traces (soot on glass)
> Cylinders
> ...


I would like to see the outcome for sure.


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

When I was buying a little phono stage several months ago to resurrect my turntable, the owner of "Challenge Hifi" here in Adelaide described listening to music playback thus: "vinyl is like having the musicians in the room : CD's is like having the musicians in the next room : streaming etc. is like having the musicians outside."


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

alan davis said:


> When I was buying a little phono stage several months ago to resurrect my turntable, the owner of "Challenge Hifi" here in Adelaide described listening to music playback thus: "vinyl is like having the musicians in the room : CD's is like having the musicians in the next room : streaming etc. is like having the musicians outside."


It sounds like he's trying to pad the bill!


----------



## Melvin (Mar 25, 2011)

I've been playing my LP's all day today. Here is the problem with LP's for me... it's like going down the rabbit hole! You can keep it simple if you want to, or if you are finicky such as myself, it can become infinitely complex! Is my turntable good enough? Is my cartridge good enough? Is my stylus clean enough? Are my records clean enough? Should I get a new cartridge to use on my mint records; and use the old cartridge on my messy records?

What about the arm balance and pressure and all of that pel-mel? I am but a layman. Do I need a Phd just to listen to music?

I look on vinyl forums, and everything just seems to become so much more complex than I had ever bargained for.

I've read that if you don't have the proper set up, you might be causing undue wear on your records... This is an anxiety inducing notion to me!

Now this is seeming more complex then trouble-shooting a PC ever was...

Way too many variables!

Sometimes during a sustained note, I will notice only then that there is a slight warp to the record... this is very upsetting!

It is so relieving to be able to play a CD and not have to worry about ANY of that! Let me tell you....




On the other hand... I just today came across an 8 LP box set of Eugene Ormandy w/ Philidelphia Orchestra at the used record shop for only $15. 
Plus I have several Jacques Hétu pieces on LP that have never been made available on CD. 
...So it seems I have no choice!


----------



## alan davis (Oct 16, 2013)

Klassik said:


> It sounds like he's trying to pad the bill!


Been shopping at "Challenge Hifi" for decades. He's got plenty of money out of me over the years and most of it having nothing to do with vinyl playback. So I like to believe little bill padding goes on.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

alan davis said:


> Been shopping at "Challenge Hifi" for decades. He's got plenty of money out of me over the years and most of it having nothing to do with vinyl playback. So I like to believe little bill padding goes on.


Maybe you're right. All I know is that I would not go to the car dealer and ask them if they have something better than what I already have! :lol:

There's a lot of money to be made for the industry when it comes to LPs/turntables. That does mean that they are bad, but you really have to use your own logic to determine what's real and what's nonsense. A lot of the people pushing analog now are the ones calling it rubbish before. And, if given enough time, they'll probably push "new digital greatness" when the LP/turntable market saturates.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Melvin said:


> I've been playing my LP's all day today. Here is the problem with LP's for me... it's like going down the rabbit hole!... Is my cartridge good enough?


Like with music, this is largely a subjective question. For example, a lot of people love Audio-Technica's cartridges, but I find many of them to sound excessively bright. To the turntable geek, this means there's a lot of fun to be had experimenting with different cartridges. To someone wanting good sound on a relatively tight budget and without much hassle, well, it's a bit of a guessing game and maybe one will just have to be happy with what they have unless there are obvious issues.



> On the other hand... I just today came across an 8 LP box set of Eugene Ormandy w/ Philidelphia Orchestra at the used record shop for only $15.
> Plus I have several Jacques Hétu pieces on LP that have never been made available on CD.
> ...So it seems I have no choice!


My advice is to digitize these records. You can either burn them to CD or keep them as digital files on your computer/server/portable device. For all the talk about how "bad" digital is, I think you'll find that even a relatively amateur job of digitizing to 16/44.1 WAV/FLAC will yield sound that sounds just like the record itself. Anyway, digitizing will allow you to keep playing these albums without wearing out the LPs and so forth. You can keep the LPs and play them on special occasions.


----------



## classical yorkist (Jun 29, 2017)

I transfer any classical lp's I buy to lossless audio files immediately. It's the perfect solution, no more degradation of the record but a straight rip to play over and over again.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

Melvin said:


> I've been playing my LP's all day today. Here is the problem with LP's for me... it's like going down the rabbit hole! You can keep it simple if you want to, or if you are finicky such as myself, it can become infinitely complex! Is my turntable good enough? Is my cartridge good enough? Is my stylus clean enough? Are my records clean enough? Should I get a new cartridge to use on my mint records; and use the old cartridge on my messy records?
> 
> What about the arm balance and pressure and all of that pel-mel? I am but a layman. Do I need a Phd just to listen to music?
> 
> ...


Life is complicated and complex in reality. Perhaps that's why analog playback sounds so real.

Btw, from where I come from, audiophiles always talk about how great and superior their high-value digital audio system performs.

They said, "The playback is so nice and real that it seems like listening to LP !"


----------



## LP collector (Aug 6, 2016)

TurnaboutVox said:


> i am using a professionally set up Linn LP12 with an Ortofon 520. Many discs are virtually noise free - many are certainly not.


Agreed. Visual inspection does not tell the whole story. A worn or damaged LP will sound like that no matter what played on. There is little point keeping them. It is surprising though how well the generation of classical record collectors from the 1950's to 1980's looked after their records.


----------



## LP collector (Aug 6, 2016)

I steer away from the analogue v digital debate as to me it is like comparing apples with oranges. Most of comments on this thread relating to vinyl playback are true, at least partly. It is expensive - although a one-off expense with exception of cartridges and setup requires a steady hand and lots of patience. CD is just about the music which really is as it should be. The one thing I would say is that an analogue signal is linear where as a digital signal is chopped up like salami. Can we hear that?


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

LP collector said:


> CD is just about the music which really is as it should be.


This is very true IMO!



> The one thing I would say is that an analogue signal is linear where as a digital signal is chopped up like salami. Can we hear that?


No, it's not an audible problem. Moreover, limitations with the grooves means that LPs aren't exactly "continuous" as you say either. I can't remember the parameters off the top of my head, but it's not really of importance anyway.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Another major drawback to vinyl LP's is the size and weight of them. I have over 3,000 CD's (jewel cases discarded) stored on two fairly small bookshelves that take up maybe five feet of horizontal space, with room left over for my collection to grow. LP's are just huge in comparison, and they weigh a ton.

Even if LP's had marginally "truer" sound, the storage issue would be enough to make me stick mainly with CD's.


----------



## Adamus (Aug 30, 2015)

truckload of LP's, a record cleaner okkinokki. All in the shed. Ripped cd's, some https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Backup-Portable-External-STDR4000100/dp/B00ZTRXFBA, NUC Roon Rock http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2...re-you-have-not-the-hardware-you-have-to-buy/

touch&go


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

I used to have a substantial LP collection. This came to an end when CDs became available. Later I underwent a major, job related, move and sold and donated my LPs. 

All my music has since been ripped into iTunes.

Now, most of my purchases are downloads. I would prefer to buy all as CDs, but being located most of the time in Playa del Carmen, this is not possible; No shops carrying CDs anymore. Buying CDs online and sending them to Mexico is not an option. Shipping costs, taxes and possible theft renders this out of the question.

Downloads work well, especially as I can now get most CDs in lossless format. This also works well, as all my music is listened to via my computers, iPad and iPhones.

During my travels to the US or Europe I will buy real CDs. I still prefer to go to brick and mortar shops, but as these are now almost all gone, I have to order CDs on line. The one place I go to every time I am in London is Foyles. They still sell CDs in the store and most often I can find interesting box sets. The drawback is having to wait until I get home in Playa to rip them. 
My newer Laptop has no CD drive any more.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

distantprommer said:


> I used to have a substantial LP collection. This came to an end when CDs became available. Later I underwent a major, job related, move and sold and donated my LPs.
> 
> All my music has since been ripped into iTunes.
> 
> ...


You can always buy a slim portable DVD/CD USB drive. They aren't very expensive. Also, if you're ever here in Houston, check out Joel's Classical Shop. They have a lot of classical CDs.


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

Hello Klassik.

I have a portable USB CD drive. However, I already carry much junk with me: Varied camera gear, backup hard disk drive, laptop, iPod, earphones and my day to day medications all need to fit into my carry-on.

Anyway, the anticipation of the new CDs is rather exciting.

I have never been to Houston. In the US my travels bring me mostly to suburban Atlanta, Washington DC, Los Angeles CA and, once in a while, New York City.

Mostly I go to the UK. London multiple times a year. Hence Foyles.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

distantprommer said:


> Hello Klassik.
> 
> I have a portable USB CD drive. However, I already carry much junk with me: Varied camera gear, backup hard disk drive, laptop, iPod, earphones and my day to day medications all need to fit into my carry-on.
> 
> ...


Also try GRAMEX (used CDs) next time in London. I haven't been to since they downsized, but I imagine it's still good. The last time I was in, a classical music reviewer from one of the major newspapers had just dropped off a bunch "like new". A common practice, I was told.

http://www.gramex.co.uk/


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

apricissimus said:


> Another major drawback to vinyl LP's is the size and weight of them. I have over 3,000 CD's (jewel cases discarded) stored on two fairly small bookshelves that take up maybe five feet of horizontal space, with room left over for my collection to grow. LP's are just huge in comparison, and they weigh a ton.
> 
> Even if LP's had marginally "truer" sound, the storage issue would be enough to make me stick mainly with CD's.


This is very true. 
There is no free lunch in real world. If you wanna have "truer" sound, you have to pay a price for it. It is indeed the same when people paying $250,000 for a high-end audio system when the same music can be reproduced by a mini hifi set costing $300. There is audible difference between the two, for sure, though some people may call it subtle. It all depends on whether you strive for the best or not.


----------



## Adamus (Aug 30, 2015)

diminishing return....


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

LP's still rule for me


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

distantprommer said:


> Hello Klassik.
> 
> I have a portable USB CD drive. However, I already carry much junk with me: Varied camera gear, backup hard disk drive, laptop, iPod, earphones and my day to day medications all need to fit into my carry-on.
> 
> ...


I have spent many happy afternoons in Foyles over the years. Very good for jazz as well.


----------



## chill782002 (Jan 12, 2017)

Vaneyes said:


> Also try GRAMEX (used CDs) next time in London. I haven't been to since they downsized, but I imagine it's still good. The last time I was in, a classical music reviewer from one of the major newspapers had just dropped off a bunch "like new". A common practice, I was told.
> 
> http://www.gramex.co.uk/


I've lived in London for 20 years and I've never heard of this place! Thanks very much for the tip, will try and check it out next week.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

ww129 said:


> This is very true.
> There is no free lunch in real world. If you wanna have "truer" sound, you have to pay a price for it. It is indeed the same when people paying $250,000 for a high-end audio system when the same music can be reproduced by a mini hifi set costing $300. There is audible difference between the two, for sure, though some people may call it subtle. It all depends on whether you strive for the best or not.


Keep in mind that many lp reissues now are using digital files as their source, due to deterioration of master tapes, which imo renders the issue of lp vs digital as moot


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

I am about to get a bricks and mortar Amazon store around the corner from where I live. I know it's basically a bookstore, but I hope it'll sell music as well.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

Triplets said:


> Keep in mind that many lp reissues now are using digital files as their source, due to deterioration of master tapes, which imo renders the issue of lp vs digital as moot


It's an open secret among LP lovers in my place to avoid getting digital remaster reissue LP. Indeed, this has boosted up the price of some second hand LPs in near mint condition a lot. Some are now even more expensive than all new reissue LP.


----------



## Annied (Apr 27, 2017)

Am I the only one here who goes back as far as cassette tapes?! I often used to record from the radio way back and I also liked making my own compilations of favourite tracks or particular singers, not necessarily opera, so I have quite a few cassettes that are irreplaceable if they should break or become otherwise unplayable.

I have a mixture of vinyl, cassettes and CDs. I'm currently trying to rationalise and get the vinyl and cassettes onto CDs as the latter is my preferred medium.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Annied said:


> Am I the only one here who goes back as far as cassette tapes?! I often used to record from the radio way back and I also liked making my own compilations of favourite tracks or particular singers, not necessarily opera, so I have quite a few cassettes that are irreplaceable if they should break or become otherwise unplayable.
> 
> I have a mixture of vinyl, cassettes and CDs. I'm currently trying to rationalise and get the vinyl and cassettes onto CDs as the latter is my preferred medium.


I love cassettes. Of course, CDs are better, but I have a thing for cassettes. I actually prefer them to LPs for classical music. Yes, there is the hiss, but usually the music is not so dynamic that anything gets lost in the noise floor. I prefer a consistent noise to the random noises on LPs. Plus, there's no inner-groove distortion on tape that ruins the end of a great piece like there can be on LPs.

I have a collection of some expensive sealed blank audio cassettes. I also have some higher end cassette decks including Luxman and Denon 3-head decks and a Nakamichi 2-head deck. Cassettes are a fun hobby, but I prefer CDs for actual music listening.


----------



## Annied (Apr 27, 2017)

alan davis said:


> When I was buying a little phono stage several months ago to resurrect my turntable, the owner of "Challenge Hifi" here in Adelaide described listening to music playback thus: "vinyl is like having the musicians in the room : CD's is like having the musicians in the next room : streaming etc. is like having the musicians outside."


When I was buying a new turntable recently I asked about the difference between the ones in the store and what justified the higher prices of some of them. They were very patient with me and spent some time explaining. At the end I said that I doubted my ear was good enough to hear the difference and got the reply "You're very lucky". I'd never looked at it that way before!


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

ww129 said:


> This is very true.
> There is no free lunch in real world. If you wanna have "truer" sound, you have to pay a price for it. It is indeed the same when people paying $250,000 for a high-end audio system when the same music can be reproduced by a mini hifi set costing $300. There is audible difference between the two, for sure, though some people may call it subtle. It all depends on whether you strive for the best or not.


I think I understand what you're intimating. For many years 70's to 90's, I noticed I could "buy in" for about $700--2CH receiver, eventually to integrated amp, plus TT eventually to CD player, plus floorstands. Each time the equipment had evolved to better. The exception in this chain was CD player. At this price point, a decent CD player wasn't produced until late 80's.

Now, if I had to, I think it would cost double ($1400) to buy in (but let's not forget the equivalent in 70's to 90's money), and that would have to include a discounted price point. The equipment would be integrated amp, Blu-ray player, floorstands. IOW no way would a $300 set-up emulate anything but another $300 set-up.

It's my view (and also from experience with friends' higher-end systems) re LP play vs CD play, that one must spend considerably more on amplification and TT, to get most of what can be got out of an LP. If one can do that, then LP has the opportunity to surpass CD in playback gratification. With just about any spin, much of HiFi still has great value. Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## Annied (Apr 27, 2017)

Klassik said:


> I love cassettes. Of course, CDs are better, but I have a thing for cassettes. I actually prefer them to LPs for classical music. Yes, there is the hiss, but usually the music is not so dynamic that anything gets lost in the noise floor. I prefer a consistent noise to the random noises on LPs. Plus, there's no inner-groove distortion on tape that ruins the end of a great piece like there can be on LPs.
> 
> I have a collection of some expensive sealed blank audio cassettes. I also have some higher end cassette decks including Luxman and Denon 3-head decks and a Nakamichi 2-head deck. Cassettes are a fun hobby, but I prefer CDs for actual music listening.


I've got a B & O Ouverture that's now 17 years old. I've been told somewhere along the line that B & O had developed their own system for tapes. Far better ears than mine have been unable to tell whether I'm playing a tape or a CD on it, so it does seem as though that might be the case. Sadly, after they came up with it tapes were then phased out.

I'm definitely finding that recording onto CDs isn't as flexible as recording onto tape used to be. On the other hand, opening up a cassette to splice a snapped tape back together wasn't my favourite way of spending an afternoon either.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Annied said:


> I've got a B & O Ouverture that's now 17 years old. I've been told somewhere along the line that B & O had developed their own system for tapes. Far better ears than mine have been unable to tell whether I'm playing a tape or a CD on it, so it does seem as though that might be the case. Sadly, after they came up with it tapes were then phased out.
> 
> I'm definitely finding that recording onto CDs isn't as flexible as recording onto tape used to be. On the other hand, opening up a cassette to splice a snapped tape back together wasn't my favourite way of spending an afternoon either.


B&O made some good cassette decks. It's hard to hear the hiss on loudspeakers especially with good noise reduction. Type II tapes help too, although in many ways I prefer Type I cassettes.

Recording to CD is different than recording to tapes. One has to keep the levels below 0 dB. The home CD recording decks were finicky and unreliable too. I always prefer going through the computer when doing digital recording/burning.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I have almost totally converted to digital files played on my iPhone or iTouch. This is after many years of vinyl LPs and then CDs. I like to be able to take my music wherever I go. That was possible with CDs, but carrying around a portable CD player just doesn't work as well as an iPhone you can slip in your pocket.

As for all the talk about LPs. If people prefer them then good for them, but they shouldn't kid themselves about the quality of sound vs. digital. Many of the limitations of vinyl have already been mentioned: ticks and pops, inner groove distortion, vulnerability to scratches and warping -made worse with low quality vinyl, wow and flutter, destruction of grooves from worn needles, requirement for the highest quality needles, cartridges and turntable to keep vinyl limitations to a minimum and quality to the maximum. Yes, one can tackle these obstacles individually, but it's like playing Whac-A-Mole.

One thing that isn't mentioned is the RIAA Equalization Curve. A sign that a recording/playback medium has limitations is the need for electronic intervention to give the best frequency/playback experience possible. Vinyl LPs require it (RIAA equalization curve) as do cassette tapes (Dolby B/C).

The RIAA equalization curve applies a reduction of very low frequency sound (to allow narrower inner grooves on the LP) and a raising of high frequency sound during the recording/master process. On playback, the preamplifier (either in the turntable or, more often after the turntable, separately or as part of a preamp/amplifier setup) restores the lower frequencies and reduces the high frequencies, the latter to decrease vinyl hiss (not to be confused with tape hiss). Unfortunately, this restoration of the deep bass tends to emphasize turntable rumble which can only be dealt with by using the highest quality (read expensive) turntable.

Incidentally, one of the reasons that people who were used to vinyl did not like and criticized early CDs is because they sounded overly bright and sometimes shrill. There was truth to that complaint because the microphones and electronics used in the recording process in those earlier CD years tended to emphasize the high end to overcome the limitations of tape and vinyl.


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2017)

I buy CDs and then rip them onto a terabyte portable hard drive. I've also borrowed a lot of CDs for that purpose. I have between 2 and 3000 CDs ripped onto this thing. That way I can take it with me anywhere and listen to anything I want. Right now, i'm in an internet cafe listening to Alfred Cortot. Before that, it was Charley Patton. Before that, some ambient stuff. Anything I want. I wouldn't waste two cents paying for downloads. That's a total rip-off. I find the recordings online and download them with software you get off the internet for free and I make my own albums of that stuff. I have old ragtime and jass recordings--hundreds--I pulled off the internet and stuffed into a folder on my hard drive. Didn't pay a cent for them. As far as I am concerned--streaming services are stupid. You can get better stuff for free. 

I tried to tell some guy about some stuff I pulled off the internet--entire albums that are now hard to find. He said he already had that stuff on vinyl and he can listen to it anytime he wants. Really? Can he listen to it in his car or while he's walking around or at work? I can. Good luck taking your turntable with you. While I generally consider myself old school, some old schoolers are just plain stupid sometimes. When the technology makes it easier, you take it. Don't give me this "I'm-set-in-my-ways-so-don't-try-to-change-me" crap. You're just being stubborn and dumb. If I can get you to start using this new technology, you'd suddenly realize how great it is and you'd never stop raving about it.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

DaveM said:


> I have almost totally converted to digital files played on my iPhone or iTouch. This is after many years of vinyl LPs and then CDs. I like to be able to take my music wherever I go. That was possible with CDs, but carrying around a portable CD player just doesn't work as well as an iPhone you can slip in your pocket.
> 
> As for all the talk about LPs. If people prefer them then good for them, but they shouldn't kid themselves about the quality of sound vs. digital. Many of the limitations of vinyl have already been mentioned: ticks and pops, inner groove distortion, vulnerability to scratches and warping -made worse with low quality vinyl, wow and flutter, destruction of grooves from worn needles, requirement for the highest quality needles, cartridges and turntable to keep vinyl limitations to a minimum and quality to the maximum. Yes, one can tackle these obstacles individually, *but it's like playing Whac-A-Mole.*
> 
> ...


I like that analogy.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Annied said:


> Am I the only one here who goes back as far as cassette tapes?! I often used to record from the radio way back and I also liked making my own compilations of favourite tracks or particular singers, not necessarily opera, so I have quite a few cassettes that are irreplaceable if they should break or become otherwise unplayable.
> 
> I have a mixture of vinyl, cassettes and CDs. I'm currently trying to rationalise and get the vinyl and cassettes onto CDs as the latter is my preferred medium.


No your not the only one - as well as turntables (i used two TT's in two systems now as new house does not have room for my third system which I have stored away) Tape decks ah love-em I started out with a TEAC V700 3 head which I used for years but kids when younger (now 23 and 26) endlessly pushed its buttons until it worked no more) Now I have a Nakamichi RX202 (one that flips tapes) and I late model Yamaha KX530. I mostly use the Nak to record music off Youtube  which works well and is a great source of free music  which i can then play back when even i want and with Auto Reverse on the Nak is very easy listening............... So I use old tech to abuse new tech!


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> No your not the only one - as well as turntables (i used two TT's in two systems now as new house does not have room for my third system which I have stored away) Tape decks ah love-em I started out with a TEAC V700 3 head which I used for years but kids when younger (now 23 and 26) endlessly pushed its buttons until it worked no more) Now I have a Nakamichi RX202 (one that flips tapes) and I late model Yamaha KX530. I mostly use the Nak to record music off Youtube  which works well and is a great source of free music  which i can then play back when even i want and with Auto Reverse on the Nak is very easy listening............... So I use old tech to abuse new tech!


I still have my Nakamichi RX505 (reversible) set up. I was heavy into cassette Dolby C recording during the 'era' and have over a hundred carefully created compilations of favorite movements and arias. I use the Nakamichi to help transfer those tapes to digital formats. What a wonderful unit!


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

DaveM said:


> I still have my Nakamichi RX505 (reversible) set up. I was heavy into cassette Dolby C recording during the 'era' and have over a hundred carefully created compilations of favorite movements and arias. I use the Nakamichi to help transfer those tapes to digital formats. What a wonderful unit!


Nak Rx505, nice I'm jealous, must have cost a pretty penny in the day.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Dolby “S” eliminated 95% of tape hiss I still have a tape deck (dolby B,C and S) but it is playing up so remains unused and as vaneyes mentioned to get the best out of vinyl you do need well above average TT and if you can afford that you will of course have a good set up to match. The CD remains King as far as I am concerned and if you are a true music lover then a really good set up is essential.


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

Vaneyes said:


> Also try GRAMEX (used CDs) next time in London. I haven't been to since they downsized, but I imagine it's still good. The last time I was in, a classical music reviewer from one of the major newspapers had just dropped off a bunch "like new". A common practice, I was told.
> 
> http://www.gramex.co.uk/


Thanks for the tip about Gramex. I had never gone there and so tended to ignore it. I shall look it up next time I am in London, possibly early August.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

> DaveM said:
> 
> 
> > Many of the limitations of vinyl have already been mentioned: ticks and pops, inner groove distortion, vulnerability to scratches and warping -made worse with low quality vinyl, wow and flutter, destruction of grooves from worn needles, requirement for the highest quality needles, cartridges and turntable to keep vinyl limitations to a minimum and quality to the maximum. Yes, one can tackle these obstacles individually, but it's like playing Whac-A-Mole.........
> ...


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

Vaneyes said:


> It's my view (and also from experience with friends' higher-end systems) re LP play vs CD play, that one must spend considerably more on amplification and TT, to get most of what can be got out of an LP. If one can do that, then LP has the opportunity to surpass CD in playback gratification. With just about any spin, much of HiFi still has great value. Cheers! :tiphat:


IMHO, a decent turntable combo in proper set up, not necessarily expensive, can out-perform many CD players already. Of course, the gist is people must have the knowledge to properly set up an analog system. Indeed. I have come across some salespersons of high-end hifi shops in the past few years who gave all sorts of non-sense when talking about turntable setup. Though these salespersons are of the new generation and may not even have the chance to play around with LPs, they should better equip themselves with the necessary knowledge before meeting any clients. After all, setting up a turntable properly is not so complicated and difficult.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

Dan Ante said:


> Dolby "S" eliminated 95% of tape hiss I still have a tape deck (dolby B,C and S) but it is playing up so remains unused and as vaneyes mentioned to get the best out of vinyl you do need well above average TT and if you can afford that you will of course have a good set up to match. The CD remains King as far as I am concerned and if you are a true music lover then a really good set up is essential.


dbx could really reduce noise, but I didn't like the resulting sound. Piano recordings in particular sounded terrible to me. Dolby S was great. I had a Kenwood deck that was purchased new in 1995 that had it. Too bad the deck was a POS, but I liked Dolby S. Dolby made a good call on restricting Dolby S licensing to only decks that had features like auto tape calibration. The nullified a lot of the complaints that held Dolby C back.

I have a mid-1990s Pioneer cassette deck that has a digital NR system. It does not need any special encoding, it works via playback. It really cuts the hiss out without it negatively impacting the sound too much. The deck also has the awesome AutoBLE auto tape calibration feature and FLEX which adds a treble boost to worn out/badly recorded tapes. The build quality on Pioneer decks from that era were pretty bad, but my deck is still working.



ww129 said:


> The argument between Analog and Digital format can go on forever. To me, the digital format has its merits, like convinenent, signal accuracy, easy to use and maintenance free. Yet, for the past decades, audiophiles continue to complain about the sonic quality of digital reproduction and it is factual that the sales figures of LP are resurrecting in many parts of the world in the past few years. These are some of the questions that those prefer digital format should think about.


Homeopathy, anti-vaccination parents, and facial tattoos are becoming more popular too. Should I go get some ink done while I go pick up some "vinyls" in order to avoid the tyranny of digital audio? Jenny McCarthy is probably no dumber than many audiophiles, but she is more aesthetically pleasing than "vinyls" at least.

The properties of audio formats are not rocket science, but it is a science with some complexity to it. Anyone with simplistic answers is almost certainly wrong with their conclusions.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

> The properties of audio formats are not rocket science, but it is a science with some complexity to it. Anyone with simplistic answers is almost certainly wrong with their conclusions.


Of course audio formats are not rocket science, but neither is it a simple, straight-forward matter.

I am a music lover, not a technical man. As such, I do not care much about which format is superior to another. I only concern how well and "natural (or real)" the music is reproduced from the source. Again, this is not, and should not be, a scientific evaluation, otherwise I am pretty sure digital format will be the only one that remains on earth and analog playback should be gone forever since the 80s. In reality, this is not what we see today.

For music and other fine arts, the judgement between different presentation media is absolutely subjective depending on a lot of human and environmental factors. If a person prefer digital formats, it is fine. The interesting thing is that audiophiles around the world and even some high-end hifi manufacturers are still talking about how "vinyl-feel" their systems are !


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

ww129 said:


> I only concern how well and "natural (or real)" the music is reproduced from the source. Again, this is not, and should not be, a scientific evaluation, otherwise I am pretty sure digital format will be the only one that remains on earth and analog playback should be gone forever since the 80s.


Bingo!



> For music and other fine arts, the judgement between different presentation media is absolutely subjective depending on a lot of human and environmental factors.


Bingo again. I know of people (non-audiophiles for sure) who prefer listening to those Crosley all-in-one vintage style console radios, whether it be with CD or records, over a traditional Hi-Fi system. Clearly the audio quality is worse, but they still love it due to non-audio reasons. Someone may prefer the sound of a cassette or LP over very high quality digital for some reason even if it's less accurate. That's fine, it's their decision.

Having said all of this, there's a lot of discourse about how "vinyls are better than X." Then a lot of bad, totally inaccurate reasons are given to justify this (often by so-called audiophiles who actually know nothing). There's reasons why a record might sound better than a CD that have absolutely nothing to do with analog or digital (in a direct sense at least). In the pop music world, a lot/most/practically all labels master their music for CD in a way that makes the sound quality bad. They can do this because CD allows for a linear frequency response even at loud levels. In this regard, a positive for CD's technical capabilities are actually a negative for sound quality in the end because of human decisions. LPs can be mastered badly too (often in a similar way to CDs in recent times) of course.

Fortunately, classical music CDs are generally mastered well. Some are mastered very well. The issues that we often hear about pop CDs are simply not a problem with classical music. We're very lucky. Some people may read bad science about CDs and get scared of buying classical CDs, but there's nothing to worry about in most cases. If a label is mastering a classical CD poorly, they're probably doing the same to their LPs.

In some ways, the discourse about audio formats is a lot like political discourse. A lot of "fake news" is spread around. This, combined with poor logic and "team" mentality, causes people to make foolish decisions. I don't want to steer this discussion in that direction, but it's the clearest analogy I could think of at the moment. And, of course, audio labels/manufacturers want to sell products (especially ones with high profit margins) so of course they're going to talk up the benefits of a format that people don't already have.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

1. Perhaps a high-end vinyl-based setup can sound pretty good up against a cd-player system when listening using speakers, but try comparing them using top-quality headphones and vinyl will lose all the time. I think I know because I've had/have both.

2. The vinyl resurgence, more accurately 'resurrection' because it was almost dead, is still a niche and will remain so because of it's limitations and the complexity of the equipment compared to digital. It is of particular interest to jazz listeners, maybe because every gumshoe/detective on TV (latest being Bosch) or in movies seemed to have a large vinyl collection. It's of some interest to pop-music listeners and of mild interest to classical listeners (just try to sell your classical records for more than a buck or two).

3. Putting together, maintaining and listening to a vinyl-based system and collecting vinyl records can be a fun hobby/pastime. I must admit I have some nostalgia for those days. So, if you're into it, rock on!


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

Victor Redseal said:


> I buy CDs and then rip them onto a terabyte portable hard drive. I've also borrowed a lot of CDs for that purpose. I have between 2 and 3000 CDs ripped onto this thing. That way I can take it with me anywhere and listen to anything I want. Right now, i'm in an internet cafe listening to Alfred Cortot. Before that, it was Charley Patton. Before that, some ambient stuff. Anything I want. I wouldn't waste two cents paying for downloads. That's a total rip-off. I find the recordings online and download them with software you get off the internet for free and I make my own albums of that stuff. I have old ragtime and jass recordings--hundreds--I pulled off the internet and stuffed into a folder on my hard drive. Didn't pay a cent for them. As far as I am concerned--streaming services are stupid. You can get better stuff for free.
> 
> I tried to tell some guy about some stuff I pulled off the internet--entire albums that are now hard to find. He said he already had that stuff on vinyl and he can listen to it anytime he wants. Really? Can he listen to it in his car or while he's walking around or at work? I can. Good luck taking your turntable with you. While I generally consider myself old school, some old schoolers are just plain stupid sometimes. When the technology makes it easier, you take it. Don't give me this "I'm-set-in-my-ways-so-don't-try-to-change-me" crap. You're just being stubborn and dumb. If I can get you to start using this new technology, you'd suddenly realize how great it is and you'd never stop raving about it.


Every so often you should pay some money to real living, breathing musicians to make sure that all of this can continue.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

apricissimus said:


> Every so often you should pay some money to real living, breathing musicians to make sure that all of this can continue.


I quite agree being a musician himself Victor Redseal should know better but he must have some that he paid for.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

DaveM said:


> 1. Perhaps a high-end vinyl-based setup can sound pretty good up against a cd-player system when listening using speakers, but try comparing them using top-quality headphones and vinyl will lose all the time. I think I know because I've had/have both.


If the listening environment does not permit the use of speakers, that's fine to use headphone. Otherwise, with due respect, I cannot understand why people wanna use it. It is simply like pouring food into a duck to make it fat.


----------



## Klassik (Mar 14, 2017)

ww129 said:


> If the listening environment does not permit the use of speakers, that's fine to use headphone. Otherwise, with due respect, I cannot understand why people wanna use it. It is simply like pouring food into a duck to make it fat.


I'm not a headphone fan either especially with records and cassettes. Having said that, acoustic feedback can be a problem with turntables and loudspeakers depending on volume and the positioning of equipment.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

Klassik said:


> I'm not a headphone fan either especially with records and cassettes. Having said that, acoustic feedback can be a problem with turntables and loudspeakers depending on volume and the positioning of equipment.


Acoustic feedback and listening environment can be problematic no matter it is an analog or digital playback. As I said, it is totally understandable to use headphone if the listening environment does not permit the use of speakers, otherwise .........
I simply cannot imagine audiences of concert to wear headphone listening to live music because the acoustic treatment of the concert hall is not ideal.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

ww129 said:


> If the listening environment does not permit the use of speakers, that's fine to use headphone. Otherwise, with due respect, I cannot understand why people wanna use it. It is simply like pouring food into a duck to make it fat.


I like to use headphones because it blocks out some of the ambient noise all around me.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

apricissimus said:


> I like to use headphones because it blocks out some of the ambient noise all around me.


----------



## T Son of Ander (Aug 25, 2015)

Early in my collecting, I bought CDs. Those have now been converted to mp3 mostly, though I have made lossless files of a few for comparison. I have now gotten rid of most of the CDs. These days, I mostly buy digital. The only time I buy CDs is if I find a great deal on a box. Then I convert them. Everything is stored on my computer and two different portable hard drives, so I've got multiple back ups. No losing my collection.

I have not listened to a CD in many years.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

ww129 said:


> If the listening environment does not permit the use of speakers, that's fine to use headphone. Otherwise, with due respect, I cannot understand why people wanna use it. It is simply like pouring food into a duck to make it fat.


I have no idea what that means.

I think you missed the point that while a high-end vinyl-based system using speakers can compete fairly well with a digital system, listening with headphones will quickly point out vinyl's limitations. The other underlying facts are that the high-end vinyl system is more complicated and expensive to put together and maintain and a relatively inexpensive digital system can more than compete with high-end vinyl. In other words, headphone listening was never the point.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Just put my new vinyl copy of Jimi Hendrix experience Smash Hits Lp's on the HIFi Nad 1020B pre & Nad 2140 power Mantra Manticore Turn Table with Denon DL103 cart and Mission Tonearm with refurbished AR93 speakers and cranked it...... its the only way to go with classic old records........


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Just put my new vinyl copy of Jimi Hendrix experience Smash Hits Lp's on the HIFi Nad 1020B pre & Nad 2040 power Mantra Manticore Turn Table with Denon DL103 cart and Mission Tonearm with refurbished AR93 speakers and cranked it...... its the only way to go with classic old records........


I'll bring some black-light posters and Mary Jane.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

DaveM said:


> I'll bring some black-light posters and Mary Jane.


Cool the record even came with a reproduction of the original poster too:lol:


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

DaveM said:


> I have no idea what that means.
> 
> I think you missed the point that while a high-end vinyl-based system using speakers can compete fairly well with a digital system, listening with headphones will quickly point out vinyl's limitations. The other underlying facts are that the high-end vinyl system is more complicated and expensive to put together and maintain and a relatively inexpensive digital system can more than compete with high-end vinyl. In other words, headphone listening was never the point.


To me, it is against nature listening to music by covering both ears by a headphone. If the limitations of a playback system, be it analog or digital, can only be detected through headphone, so be it.


----------



## Jacred (Jan 14, 2017)

I prefer CDs but can't always get my hands on them. My local library, though, offers digital service, so when I want to listen to a particular work, I can borrow it temperoraily on my phone (stays there for one week). Now there's a per month limit as to how much I can borrow....however, having a handful of library cards does the trick. 

So, aside from the CDs I have, my music collection is constantly in flux!


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

ww129 said:


> To me, it is against nature listening to music by covering both ears by a headphone. If the limitations of a playback system, be it analog or digital, can only be detected through headphone, so be it.


But it's not against nature to listen to electrical signal amplified, translated into vibrating cones, etc?


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

apricissimus said:


> But it's not against nature to listen to electrical signal amplified, translated into vibrating cones, etc?


Yes, it is.
That's why the most natural thing and the most preferable way to do is to go to concert hall listening to live music !

Putting the amplification aside, there is not a single mammal on earth that will deliberately cover her ears except human.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

ww129 said:


> To me, it is against nature listening to music by covering both ears by a headphone. If the limitations of a playback system, be it analog or digital, can only be detected through headphone, so be it.


You're missing the point again. A high-end vinyl system _where all the potential limitations are accounted_ for will compete well with a digital system if speakers are used. That means that there must be no wow and flutter, no rumble, no warped disks, no worn needles, the vinyl is top quality and there are no ticks and pops and so. If any of these weaknesses show up, the digital system which doesn't have any of these vulnerabilities, will provide the better experience.

However, it should be added that even under the best of circumstances the vinyl system may lose out if the recording used has a high dynamic range. Vinyl will never be able to compete with digital when it comes to providing maximum dynamic range.


----------



## Haydn man (Jan 25, 2014)

Digital files are my preferred route to music listening now
I think the debate about analogue and digital is the same debate car enthusiasts have about classic versus modern cars.
Same answer every time for me, I want the modern technology


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Bah Humbug Vinyl is best


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Bah Humbug Vinyl is best


Vinyl rules............................:guitar::trp:


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

DaveM said:


> You're missing the point again. A high-end vinyl system _where all the potential limitations are accounted_ for will compete well with a digital system if speakers are used. That means that there must be no wow and flutter, no rumble, no warped disks, no worn needles, the vinyl is top quality and there are no ticks and pops and so. If any of these weaknesses show up, the digital system which doesn't have any of these vulnerabilities, will provide the better experience.
> 
> However, it should be added that even under the best of circumstances the vinyl system may lose out if the recording used has a high dynamic range. Vinyl will never be able to compete with digital when it comes to providing maximum dynamic range.


Life is full of all sorts of noise, and there is no exception in concert hall. To me, truthfulness should be a close resemble of real live situation, nothing more and nothing less. If you cannot pick up a particular sound/dynamic range in concert hall during live performance, you shall not be able to notice it when playback by audio system even if it is there. Otherwise, it becomes "realer than real".

Of course, if accuracy of signal is the only thing that is important, reproduction of music by digital system should be way ahead of analog. However, music playback is more complicated than merely accuracy. Music reproduced should be able to gain the emotional involvement of people; to get people connected to the music; and to move our feelings.

Btw, not only turntable but also all sorts of tube amplifiers have distortion, hiss and wow, etc. They should also become extinct long time ago. Yet, they remain in production and people are willing to pay high price for a nice SET amplifier or even a quad set of NOS GEC KT88 or a pair of WE300B. Perhaps people are insane, but if the so-call "inferior" analog playback system remains after all these years and all advancement in digital technology, there must be some very good reasons.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

ww129 said:


> Yes, it is.
> That's why the most natural thing and the most preferable way to do is to go to concert hall listening to live music !
> 
> Putting the amplification aside, there is not a single mammal on earth that will deliberately cover her ears except human.


I would rather cover my ears in order not to hear (or at least minimize) the traffic outside, the dog barking next door, the kids playing basketball across the street, the ambulance siren a couple of blocks away, etc.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

ww129 said:


> Life is full of all sorts of noise, and there is no exception in concert hall. To me, truthfulness should be a close resemble of real live situation, nothing more and nothing less. If you cannot pick up a particular sound/dynamic range in concert hall during live performance, you shall not be able to notice it when playback by audio system even if it is there. Otherwise, it becomes "realer than real".
> 
> Of course, if accuracy of signal is the only thing that is important, reproduction of music by digital system should be way ahead of analog. However, music playback is more complicated than merely accuracy. *Music reproduced should be able to gain the emotional involvement of people; to get people connected to the music; and to move our feelings.*
> 
> Btw, not only turntable but also all sorts of tube amplifiers have distortion, hiss and wow, etc. They should also become extinct long time ago. Yet, they remain in production and people are willing to pay high price for a nice SET amplifier or even a quad set of NOS GEC KT88 or a pair of WE300B. Perhaps people are insane, but if the so-call "inferior" analog playback system remains after all these years and all advancement in digital technology, there must be some very good reasons.


Obviously many people are able to connect emotionally to purely digital music. I don't think they're all just too insenstive to know what they're missing.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

apricissimus said:


> Obviously many people are able to connect emotionally to purely digital music. I don't think they're all just too insenstive to know what they're missing.


Don't get me wrong. Both digital and analog music are capable to get people emotionally connected. It's simply a matter of degree.

As I said, I still buy and listen to CD even though LP remains my preference.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

ww129 said:


> Life is full of all sorts of noise, and there is no exception in concert hall. To me, truthfulness should be a close resemble of real live situation, nothing more and nothing less. If you cannot pick up a particular sound/dynamic range in concert hall during live performance, you shall not be able to notice it when playback by audio system even if it is there. Otherwise, it becomes "realer than real".
> 
> Of course, if accuracy of signal is the only thing that is important, reproduction of music by digital system should be way ahead of analog. However, music playback is more complicated than merely accuracy. Music reproduced should be able to gain the emotional involvement of people; to get people connected to the music; and to move our feelings.
> 
> Btw, not only turntable but also all sorts of tube amplifiers have distortion, hiss and wow, etc. They should also become extinct long time ago. Yet, they remain in production and people are willing to pay high price for a nice SET amplifier or even a quad set of NOS GEC KT88 or a pair of WE300B. Perhaps people are insane, but if the so-call "inferior" analog playback system remains after all these years and all advancement in digital technology, there must be some very good reasons.


You raise a good point regarding tube amplifiers. It also addresses one of the reasons analog playback systems remain. Vinyl listeners (I believe by far) account for use of tube amplifiers because they believe that, just as with vinyl, they deliver a warmer realistic sound. It's almost as if the tube is looked on as analog and the transistor as digital.

Btw, in the series, Bosch, his tube-based amplifier, turntable and jazz vinyl collection are front and center in his living room. This sort of thing influences people far more than people might be aware. Fr'instance, sales of the Nissan Rogue crossover sky-rocketed after the release of the Starwars Rogue One movie.


----------



## ww129 (Jun 7, 2017)

> DaveM said:
> 
> 
> > You raise a good point regarding tube amplifiers. It also addresses one of the reasons analog playback systems remain. Vinyl listeners (I believe by far) account for use of tube amplifiers because they believe that, just as with vinyl, they deliver a warmer realistic sound. It's almost as if the tube is looked on as analog and the transistor as digital.


Some modern-design tube amp is fast enough to be on par with solidstate/digital amp and they do not sound overly warm.

However, many audiophiles are playing digital sources with old-fashion tube amp because they wanna "tame" the brightness and harshness of digital music.

To me, it doesn't matter if one prefers analog or digital playback system or a mix as long as he can enjoy the music it delivers. At the end of the day, music matters, not the gears


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Tubes rock, what else can I say


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

These guys have worked it out......


----------

