Why CDs May Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl

[Ducatista47]

Forgive me if this this has already been linked here. It is an old piece from February. The people interviewed should know what they are talking about. The salesmen and enthusiasts I have heard at the shows, on the other hand, tend to encourage whatever is selling.

http://www.citypages.com/music/why-cds-may-actually-sound-better-than-vinyl-6626055

[Wagner]

Forgive me if this this has already been linked here. It is an old piece from February. The people interviewed should know what they are talking about. The salesmen and enthusiasts I have heard at the shows, on the other hand, tend to encourage whatever is selling.

http://www.citypages.com/music/why-cds-may-actually-sound-better-than-vinyl-6626055
I am going to be 100% honest and tell you that I did not and am not going to read your article.
I skimmed it and saw towards the bottom: Neil Young, Jack White, PONO and everybody knows what's best except those who don't know anything, right there in the sub-title of the piece and restated a second time at the bottom. That's enough for me.
Life is too short.

I do not and never have understood the incessant noise on the "subject". It barely qualifies as a mental exercise or debate and it's certainly not an interesting one. It's a "them or us" conversation for many and a "why, I have some of BOTH that I think are great" "why there'e nothing wrong with having BOTH" (the calming position of the Audio Peace Makers on the boards when the flames start to fly) and can go no where, yet people (some) will "fight the fight" to prove who's "right" forever or so it seems.

99.9% of the gibberish posted over at the Hoffman forums (a place where this "discussion" will thrive until the plug is pulled, along with "how many copies of "The White Album" is too many?") seems to eventually get back to the question eventually, as if one were to "debate" it long enough a universal consensus would be reached. That, or the unwashed (as viewed by either side) would become converts or surrender and confess the error of their ways.
That's even if the thread started life as one about a turntable or a cartridge.....................OR a particular CD player currently trending........
Borders on a religious fanaticism at times. Someone's always on the lookout for a soul to save when it comes to this topic.

The way I see it, around 1982 or so a technology came along that in a fairly short period of time took the ready availability of something familiar (and LOVED for decades) away from a bunch of folks due to market forces, and some of them have been REALLY pissed off about it ever since, BUT, this change made a LOT of folks happy, so much so that they (both sides of this coin) will babble and argue endlessly on a subject that they, in reality (most of them) actually know very little about (the technology side of things).

I already had to live through the Lp versus CD fight of the early '90s amongst fellow music lovers.........and the biggest unreported skirmish of them all, "which format makes for a better cassette recording"! But it was early on in The Format Wars and was a friendly sort of picking, like ragging on a friend for his love of a football team other than yours..................it didn't come with charts, graphs and measurements. Seems like it was still more about the music then too..............those early days of the "digital revolution"........

I personally love and prefer Lps in most instances. The only thing I really like about CDs is the fact that I can handle them while drinking heavily (used to) with little to no worries and they're portable (though even that's no longer the case by today's standards). So "old skool"; "physical media" they call it.

Reality and what's available on what format has caused me to buy and own many titles on CD. I'm glad to have them. For many many many titles the choice isn't even applicable (although that seems to be changing as of late due to the current trend of the Vinyl Renaissance)
I probably have, percentage wise, just as many Lps as CDs that sound like shit to my ears, so go figure. If I had MY choice................but then again, and nowadays, I just don't.........
I also PREFER rotary telephones (W.E. and S-C for sound quality and the ability to deliver it for an ENTIRE conversation), land lines and answering machines that are intelligible (use a tape) but for the most part with regards to THAT preference I'm just shit out of luck as well. Can't "dial 1" for English.
Like I said, never saw the point and to each his own. Exactly the same as "what tastes better?".

Talk about :dead_horse:

[gferrell]

DITTO Wagner!

[BMWCCA]

Perhaps if you'd spent as much time reading as you did writing . . . ?

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." - A. Lincoln

Clark, thanks for the article link. It makes sense and of course it explains why I feel the way I do about digital reproduction. I always appreciate your contributions, whether it's a recommendation for a jazz artist, or an interesting book on the history of recorded sound. Keep it up and don't mind the comments from those who only speak to hear themselves talk.
:banghead:

[Wagner]

DITTO Wagner!
Thank you

[hsosdrum]

Since back the 1970s (before CDs), the things I always hated about listening to music on vinyl LPs were:

1) The music never ever issued from complete silence. There was always some background "hash" present in the quiet (not to mention silent) passages, no matter how new/clean the LP or how good the player.

2) I've never heard an LP side play all the way through (and I've heard some top-flight LPs and players in my nearly 40 years in audio) that didn't produce at least a few ticks, pops or other extra-musical sounds. Whenever these occur they instantly destroy my emotional involvement with what I'm hearing, reminding me that at that moment I'm only listening to an electro-mechanical system and not real human beings.

3) Having to flip the record over to hear a complete symphony. It makes me an errand boy instead of an emotionally-involved listener.

Of course the LP format has other annoyances (restricted dynamic range, the competition between bass performance and the time available on an LP side, that 'sonic soup' that passes itself off as a three-dimensional soundstage) but the three above are the biggies for me.

As soon as CD came along I replaced my vinyl as quickly as I could afford and have never looked back. I just plain enjoy listening to music on CDs more than I ever did when the best the industry could come up with was to drag a rock along the surface of a piece of soft plastic.

[SEAWOLF97]

Ford v Chevy
direct drive v belt
auto v manual
mm v mc
North v south
dem v repub

etc,etc , etc.

there is NO correct answer, it's whatever you like best. You aren't going to convert me and I
won't try with you.

Neither format is even near live/real . Each has their own problems.
I was maxed with CD until a new deck with super DAC , now the balance has tipped back that way , but maybe a new super turntable cartridge will sway it the other way ?

This is yet another subject for bored people who like to argue. :(

[Wagner]

Since back the 1970s (before CDs), the things I always hated about listening to music on vinyl LPs were:
3) Having to flip the record over to hear a complete symphony. It makes me an errand boy instead of an emotionally-involved listener.

So dramatic!

Man! That post was so full of good information about how much Lp playback sucks I'm going to go throw all of mine out on the curb right now! Don't know what in the hell I was thinking; buying and listening to music off of all these shitty old records for all of these years!
Thanks!

But seriously, why didn't you spring for a pro grade reel to reel machine? That's what most of the serious classical music aficionados I knew used for serious playback, "since back the 1970s (before CDs)", better yet, why in the heck were you engaged in an activity that you "always hated" and found so unappealing?
Sort of counterintuitive, wouldn't you agree? That, or a situation that would have led to you becoming a fine musician. Is that the case? Are you a musician?
Or are you going to tell me the part now that you were just a poor kid with a paper route who could only afford a BSR Stack-o-Matic with a ceramic cartridge and who just happened to have a hankering for the Old Warhorses, four uninterrupted movements at the time?
"Der Ring des Nibelungen"? (how do you think Wagner fans feel still there good buddy, huh?) CD didn't do shit for us. http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/smile.gif

All kidding aside, glad Red Book made all your dreams come true; you know what they say: "Perfect Sound Forever"!
(and thank you for demonstrating my postulate on "whenever this subject comes up")

[Wagner]

Ford v Chevy
direct drive v belt
auto v manual
mm v mc
North v south
dem v repub

etc,etc , etc.

there is NO correct answer, it's whatever you like best. You aren't going to convert me and I
won't try with you.

Neither format is even near live/real . Each has their own problems.
I was maxed with CD until a new deck with super DAC , now the balance has tipped back that way , but maybe a new super turntable cartridge will sway it the other way ?

This is yet another subject for bored people who like to argue. :(
It's all about the recording/pressing brother, either or
And we're going to assume a reasonably decent quality machine for either as well

[Doctor_Electron]

Since back the 1970s (before CDs), the things I always hated about listening to music on vinyl LPs were:

+1

I have CD's that sound like crap, CD's that possess amazing audio qualities, and CD's that fall somewhere in between.

The production of excellent sounding CD's is dependent on excellent mastering and the availability to the mastering engineers of excellent master tapes to work from.

To each his own, though

[Ducatista47]

+1

I have CD's that sound like crap, CD's that possess amazing audio qualities, and CD's that fall somewhere in between.

The production of excellent sounding CD's is dependent on excellent mastering and the availability to the mastering engineers of excellent master tapes to work from.

To each his own, though

Indeed, that is why I posted the link. The main sources of information in it are illustrious mastering and recording engineers, not celebrities with opinions. Their final words? (I have to add that your statement ignores digital recording. No master tape is necessary.)



Many audio engineers disagree. Scott Metcalfe, for example, says that recording to analog tape isn't any purer than recording music digitally. But the distortion and pitch variation that analog tape adds to the recording are preferred by some artists and audiences.

"I think there are few people who would tell you that recording classical music to analog tape has any benefit at all," Metcalfe says. But for some artists, he says -- particularly in rock -- those layers of distortion are preferable.

Ludwig says he mastered White's Lazaretto on analog tape not because it's a better way to master but because "it's what [White] wanted."

"For many world-class mixers," Ludwig says, "mixing to analog tape has no advantages if what comes out of the console is exactly what you want." However, for a less skilled mixing engineer, mixing to analog tape can "'glue' the music together in the most wonderful way," he says.

Whether it's analog tape versus digital recordings, or vinyl versus CDs, objective quality is not the conversation: It's about which one the artist and listener prefer.

"Every way you can measure it, digital is going to be superior," Metcalfe says. "It really does come down to the preference of the end user."

Or, as Kees Immink says: "Some people like marmalade and some people like mustard. If people like to listen to vinyl, do so, enjoy life. But don't say that the sound is better."


I spend what I do and toil as I have done with my system to hear what is on the recording. Euphonic presentation is another goal entirely and what I am frankly tired of is not listeners' taste, which is unassailable by definition, but rather the unscientific confusion between the two. In the science of sound, indeed all science, beliefs don't matter. As Neil Degrasse Tyson says, science is not changed by whether you believe in it or not. No audio reproduction is objectively perfect, but science can tell us what is closer to it. And what is not.

Welcome to your opinions; it is the science that matters to me. That statement is also as unassailable.

Thank you to everyone who participated here, but a special thanks to those who actually read the feature.

[hsosdrum]

But seriously, why didn't you spring for a pro grade reel to reel machine?

Because either 1) you had to make recordings of LPs, which didn't solve any of the format's problems (except for side-flipping), or 2) you were stuck with the extremely limited selection of pre-recorded tapes offered by record companies. Neither made the format attractive to invest in.


better yet, why in the heck were you engaged in an activity that you "always hated" and found so unappealing?
Sort of counterintuitive, wouldn't you agree? That, or a situation that would have led to you becoming a fine musician. Is that the case? Are you a musician?

Yes, I've been a musician since I was 10 years old. A fine one? I think so. I was able to make a living at it for a while, but that's a whole other story. And in spite of the LP's deficiencies, it was the best format available at the time, so I was stuck with it. Nonetheless, I still hated its limitations. And I guess that's what this is all about: the CD's limitations don't get in the way of my enjoyment of music, while the LP's always did. YMMV.


Or are you going to tell me the part now that you were just a poor kid with a paper route who could only afford a BSR Stack-o-Matic with a ceramic cartridge and who just happened to have a hankering for the Old Warhorses, four uninterrupted movements at the time?

Fortunately, good sound didn't become important to me until I could afford decent gear. When I was a kid I listened on the system my father built (Eico kits, a Garrard turntable, home-built speakers with Jensen drivers), so the seed was definitely planted early.


"Der Ring des Nibelungen"? (how do you think Wagner fans feel still there good buddy, huh?) CD didn't do shit for us.

Wagner? (the composer, not you) Can't stand his stuff. Wouldn't get up to put the needle on the beginning of the record, let alone change sides. Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Copland? That's a whole different story. Music deserves to be heard as the composer intended, and if four movements were written, they were meant to be heard in succession.


All kidding aside, glad Red Book made all your dreams come true; you know what they say: "Perfect Sound Forever"!

Not perfect, but for me a much more satisfying listening experience than LP can offer. 'Perfect' is playing my instrument; creating music in the moment.

[Wagner]

Yes, I've been a musician since I was 10 years old. A fine one? I think so..............Wagner? (the composer, not you) Can't stand his stuff. Wouldn't get up to put the needle on the beginning of the record, let alone change sides......................
:lol_fit:


...........'Perfect' is playing my instrument; creating music in the moment.
As it always always "issues" from complete silence I'm sure!

[hsosdrum]

:lol_fit:


As it [music I create] always always "issues" from complete silence I'm sure!

In my studio? You bet your ass it does. It's quieter in there than any LP ever was while playing a "silent" passage, that's for sure.

[Mr. Widget]

Ticks, pops, and analog S/N ratio are well known issues with LPs and can definitely be distractions from the music. Beyond that, I agree that the theoretical and very real technical advantage that digital has in the bass region can be a real benefit.

I think the article was spot on with:

"That said, every audio engineer we spoke to said it's not hard to find LPs that sound better than CDs. Mastering, production and manufacturing variables can drastically tilt the scale either way."


Widget

[Wagner]

In my studio? You bet your ass it does. It's quieter in there than any LP ever was while playing a "silent" passage, that's for sure.
You running a newspaper?

[Doctor_Electron]

Indeed, that is why I posted the link. The main sources of information in it are illustrious mastering and recording engineers, not celebrities with opinions. Their final words? (I have to add that your statement ignores digital recording. No master tape is necessary.) I don't know if the engineers who participated in that discussion are illustrious (or not). But there are mastering engineers who can do excellent work and the results are quite audible. This is equally true when mastering to vinyl also, as well as to any medium. Garbage in, ... , or the opposite. :D In my comment re master tapes, I should have explained that I was thinking of music originally recorded when vinyl as the predominant end product was the norm. I was really considering "re-mastering" to CD of those musical works. Which is a very large industry / market still as far as I know. Not thinking of more modern tech sans analog magnetic tape "in the loop ". There you have it, that's how far in the past my thinking is buried. So digital audio in itself is not the resident evil? Is music in some instances recorded, stored on hard disk or SS drive digital media, and then mastered to vinyl? Whoa, does that slightly boggle the mind? Seems somehow odd to me, but if done properly what's wrong with that? I'm not knocking vinyl or anything at all as long as the result is musicality. IMO that's the grail.

[Ducatista47]

I don't know if the engineers who participated in that discussion are illustrious (or not). But there are mastering engineers who can do excellent work and the results are quite audible. This is equally true when mastering to vinyl also, as well as to any medium. Garbage in, ... , or the opposite. :D In my comment re master tapes, I should have explained that I was thinking of music originally recorded when vinyl as the predominant end product was the norm. I was really considering "re-mastering" to CD of those musical works. Which is a very large industry / market still as far as I know. Not thinking of more modern tech sans analog magnetic tape "in the loop "...IMO that's the grail.

Sorry, my intention was not to be snarky, if that is how it came off. The digital age is always in my mind because, despite being born in 1947, a lot of my favorite music has been recorded in the last twenty years.

The mastering engineers featured in the article do happen to be an august group. They are looked up to by their peers.

As far as the grail, mine has evolved. My listening began with 1950s technology and indeed I was sucked into the tube and vinyl revival years - decades - later. As my system increased in resolution and presentation, I no longer enjoyed the limitations of vinyl. I returned to the original intent of modern sound reproduction. To reproduce the recording with as little distortion as possible. Gone are the tubes (except as high voltage sources for Stax headphones) and the deliberately euphonic methods and equipment. I have grown to completely prefer enjoying music as close to the recording as possible. It is not a theoretical quest, I like the presentation better. No "warming it up" for me these days. To each his own, certainly, but I personally grow tired of deliberate distortion. There is enough already without adding more by using older technology that had no choice in the matter. I crave music, not nostalgia.

So the digital era and current capabilities appeal to me. If all I have of a 1930s recording I like is a low rez mp3, I enjoy that. But is a better version is available I do seek it out. Since at least half of my listening is post 1990 recordings, it is not a difficult thing to do anymore.

[Mr. Widget]

As my system increased in resolution and presentation, I no longer enjoyed the limitations of vinyl.I, like the august group of engineers who were interviewed for the article take issue with this notion and again I quote the article:

"That said, every audio engineer we spoke to said it's not hard to find LPs that sound better than CDs. Mastering, production and manufacturing variables can drastically tilt the scale either way."

This is not a statement in defense of either format, but rather to point out that either format can achieve superior results and it isn't necessarily the format that is responsible for superior sound. Both formats have potential pitfalls that need to be contended with and in the right hands either can yield outstanding or unfortunate results.


Widget

[JeffW]

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones that can enjoy albums or CDs, no need for either/or.

[Krunchy]

Good article Clark, I found it very informative and even learned some things about vinyl I did not know before, thanks for posting. There were some very good points all around and a lot of which we all seem to agree upon in one way or another.

Going to listen to some music now :).

[Ducatista47]

Since I have been accused of beating a dead horse, I might add that "Well done vinyl beats badly done CDs" and "Recording and mastering are more important then the media" are two more. Which are obvious and off topic, having nothing to do with the fact that "Properly done CDs and digital have greater fidelity than properly done vinyl. The potential is greater, and apples to apples there is no contest." To quote my own point and the reason I linked to the article in the first place.

Perhaps the article would have better been titled "Why CDs Can Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." I'm done with this topic, becoming sorry I started it. Of course a well mastered vinyl can sound better than a badly mastered CD or digital file. Which has nothing to do with the greater capabilities of digital recording and media than tape or vinyl media. That is what I have been talking about. Sheesh!

And thanks, Fred, and a good idea.

[Ed Zeppeli]

I, like the august group of engineers who were interviewed for the article take issue with this notion and again I quote the article:

"That said, every audio engineer we spoke to said it's not hard to find LPs that sound better than CDs. Mastering, production and manufacturing variables can drastically tilt the scale either way."




Widget

Well I think this goes without saying. Of course vinyl can sound better than a lousy CD but when eliminating the variables of mastering and comparing apples to apples it would appear that the 'bobs' quoted in the article were dismayed by the information lost when translated to vinyl. Isn't a large part of our hobby trying to replicate what was heard by the creators of the art initially? Isn't this why many of us pursue speakers/monitors with flat frequency response?

Since I'm not privy to the master tapes or their listening room I'll take their word for it.

[Wagner]

Since I have been accused of beating a dead horse, I might add that "Well done vinyl beats badly done CDs" and "Recording and mastering are more important then the media" are two more. Which are obvious and off topic, having nothing to do with the fact that "Properly done CDs and digital have greater fidelity than properly done vinyl. The potential is greater, and apples to apples there is no contest." To quote my own point and the reason I linked to the article in the first place.

Perhaps the article would have better been titled "Why CDs Can Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." I'm done with this topic, becoming sorry I started it. Of course a well mastered vinyl can sound better than a badly mastered CD or digital file. Which has nothing to do with the greater capabilities of digital recording and media than tape or vinyl media. That is what I have been talking about. Sheesh!

And thanks, Fred, and a good idea.
If "recording and mastering" are "off topic" in a thread comparing the sonic virtues of two different formats that arrive at their finished form via these two activities as part of the process, then what exactly constitutes a "properly done CD"?

And rather than your suggested title of "Why CDs Can Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." just go for your true and original intent and title it "Why CDs DO Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." and be done with it..............
...............because that's been your point all along anyway

I understand. It's always nice and reassuring to find one's own feelings on matters, whatever they may be, validated by others in "print", especially when those others are "experts" and even "illustrious" as you put it.

And that is FINE if you feel that way, I am happy you are happy.....................but that article?
It's a bull shit fluff piece written by some non-audio person for a kids' "alternative" rag and reflects nothing in large part but opinions, Bob Ludwig's included (there were a few points of fact such as who did what and where and who said what)

You and others have missed no opportunity to put some sort of qualification or condition on the playback quality of Lps and to point out it's limitations in areas such as "dynamic range" and how much "better" digital "measures" in any number of areas, with every remark and "observation" made............as if those who prefer the sound of vinyl are just "wrong" and won't acknowledge the "proof" that "science" has to offer OR maybe that they'll convert and beg redemption if only shown the error of their ways and ignorance..............just one more time?

The agenda is clear, and I'll say it again, that's fine. You need to drop the word "better" and possibly use the words "potentially more accurate representation" and even THEN the finished product, on any given one of millions of playback systems may still not "sound better" to a given pair of ears and a brain..............be it an Lp or a CD

The conversation is absurd; you (as in anyone) cannot "tell" another Human being what is "better", whether it's which barbecue place to go to, or burger or beer or cigar or Lp or CD..............or blonde or brunette.........or guys who like fat girls.................it's ALL subjective once the verb SOUNDS is followed by the adjective BETTER

SONY and Philips made EVERY POINT flailed at in that "article" and then some. The WORLD for the large part bought it. What else do you want?

The deal's been sealed since the early '80s, tired of hearing the damned sales pitch still; I think everyone on the planet, with the possible exception of some lost aboriginal tribe, heard it the first time. Even all the Sub-Saharan Africans heard it.
The marketing and the format both proved to be very successful, but interestingly, not successful enough to eclipse compact cassettes until well into the first half of the '90s
Now THAT'S a navel you can contemplate

It's funny how quickly and rabid this all became after the initial launch of the CD, and NOT just with audiophiles. What passion, what zeal! The "digital revolution" had begun; evolve or get out of the way! And that arrogance has persisted to this day.

CD eclipsed vinyl in unit sales DECADES ago and yet this insistence on touting it's technical virtues over that of the Lp persists to this very day, a day by the way that is seeing the CD sales on a rapid decline

What a crock of shit, telling someone what's "better" when it involves one of the Five Senses. I especially love it when it comes from folks who don't even own the one they're banging on, be it the CD player or the turntable camper, happens a lot.

Who gives a shit what Bob Ludwig says is better?

You come to the party with some cobbled together opinion piece (on a topic which remains "hot button", again I have no idea why), throw it out there and then get all huffy puffy when you don't get unanimous agreement on just how "right" it is? I mean what did you expect? You state you have been an audio enthusiast for decades, so you know the nature of this topic and the responses it elicits (ergo: :dead_horse:) and yet you persist to whine that not everyone will agree with you and your article?!

You are either trolling or naive. And to make matters worse, I think nearly every post here has acknowledged the fact that we all own and enjoy numerous examples, both good and bad, of BOTH formats in our Music collections. A remarkable amount of restraint and maturity has been demonstrated here, especially if one were to make just a cursory comparison of how this one lights up on other forums..............

So, exactly what is the response you are looking for or need to hear?

[Hoerninger]

So, exactly what is the response you are looking for or need to hear?

For me the thread started with a hint without any special intentions.
Some answeres have been "suprising" for me and I am inclined to add another completely different contribution:

" It is impossible to describe the actual sublime sound produced by ... horn which can only be referred to as “holographic” to the extent that the artists and instruments appear to be in the same room as the listener---a totally magical and unique experience. The absolutely pure quality of the sound is unsurpassed. The playing of every record is an event. "

I have no reason to disagree with this subjective statement.
It has far more to do with vinyl than with CD.

it is not about an unrepeatable audiophile voodoo session,
it is not about the latest JBL studio monitor.

But read yourself (last paragraph in text):
http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=15076
___________
Peter

[Krunchy]

Interesting article Hoerninger, I for one would love to hear such a machine, just for the experience, the "event" as it were :D. As fortunate as I am to own some fine musical equipment I just really enjoy listening to music and would be quite happy with the cheapest set up I own which is still light years from what I owned when I was in high school, which was next to nothing.
Right now I am listening through a Pioneer SX-1080 with 4430s and I really like the sound the old receiver produces. It has some very unique characteristics which I find appealing, some people maybe would not, but thats fine.

I'll probably leave it in place for a few months and switch it out with something else, for me thats part of the fun of it all.


Well I think this goes without saying. Of course vinyl can sound better than a lousy CD but when eliminating the variables of mastering and comparing apples to apples it would appear that the 'bobs' quoted in the article were dismayed by the information lost when translated to vinyl. Isn't a large part of our hobby trying to replicate what was heard by the creators of the art initially? Isn't this why many of us pursue speakers/monitors with flat frequency response?

Since I'm not privy to the master tapes or their listening room I'll take their word for it.

Yes, I think you are right there Ed. I think we all pursue these goals in our own way, like some of us here I also enjoy the "chase" of it all, but I think that is getting off topic.

[Wagner]

For me the thread started with a hint without any special intentions.
Some answeres have been "suprising" for me and I am inclined to add another completely different contribution:

" It is impossible to describe the actual sublime sound produced by ... horn which can only be referred to as “holographic” to the extent that the artists and instruments appear to be in the same room as the listener---a totally magical and unique experience. The absolutely pure quality of the sound is unsurpassed. The playing of every record is an event. "

I have no reason to disagree with this subjective statement.
It has far more to do with vinyl than with CD.

it is not about an unrepeatable audiophile voodoo session,
it is not about the latest JBL studio monitor.

But read yourself (last paragraph in text):
http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=15076
___________
Peter
Clearly a serious enthusiast!
I own two acoustic machines but nothing that ambitious
I am wondering how he is playing some records from the electric era using thorn and steel needles and not destroying them?
Do you know?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlWEvEUYqr4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m750qT1rhhc

[hsosdrum]

Well I think this goes without saying. Of course vinyl can sound better than a lousy CD but when eliminating the variables of mastering and comparing apples to apples it would appear that the 'bobs' quoted in the article were dismayed by the information lost when translated to vinyl. Isn't a large part of our hobby trying to replicate what was heard by the creators of the art initially? Isn't this why many of us pursue speakers/monitors with flat frequency response?

I think this is the crux of the biscuit. Given a master recording unrestricted in dynamic range and containing unrestricted bass information, it is impossible for even the most skilled mastering engineer to transfer it to vinyl without compromise, whereas that same skilled mastering engineer could indeed transfer that master to CD with minimal (or no) compromise. The engineers quoted in the article are concerned with fidelity to a work of art (which the master recording is) and lamenting the compromises required to create a copy of that work in the vinyl medium.

The first time I was able to compare a master recording with its commercial vinyl transfer was back in 1974 at Westlake Audio. (The recording was "California 99", a concept album by Jimmie Haskell, with guest musicians like Joe Walsh and Denny Doherty.) Listening to the master recording on a set of top-of-the-line Westlake Monitors (all JBL components, BTW) was one of those goosebump-inducing experiences that I've carried with me ever since; the clarity, bass performance and dynamics were absolutely breathtaking. Listening to the vinyl pressing on the same playback system was hollow and extremely disappointing—the dynamic impact and bass performance had completely vanished, and we had to struggle to discern individual instruments and voices that had been crystal-clear on the master. The vinyl release doesn't even hint at how fabulous the master recording sounds.

[Wagner]

I think this is the crux of the biscuit. Given a master recording unrestricted in dynamic range and containing unrestricted bass information, it is impossible for even the most skilled mastering engineer to transfer it to vinyl without compromise, whereas that same skilled mastering engineer could indeed transfer that master to CD with minimal (or no) compromise. The engineers quoted in the article are concerned with fidelity to a work of art (which the master recording is) and lamenting the compromises required to create a copy of that work in the vinyl medium.

The first time I was able to compare a master recording with its commercial vinyl transfer was back in 1974 at Westlake Audio. (The recording was "California 99", a concept album by Jimmie Haskell, with guest musicians like Joe Walsh and Denny Doherty.) Listening to the master recording on a set of top-of-the-line Westlake Monitors (all JBL components, BTW) was one of those goosebump-inducing experiences that I've carried with me ever since; the clarity, bass performance and dynamics were absolutely breathtaking. Listening to the vinyl pressing on the same playback system was hollow and extremely disappointing—the dynamic impact and bass performance had completely vanished, and we had to struggle to discern individual instruments and voices that had been crystal-clear on the master. The vinyl release doesn't even hint at how fabulous the master recording sounds.
Your anecdote proves nothing, absolutely nothing
Just more :bs: opinion from the pro digital gallery; "well, I ate a red apple and that red apple was so good I had an orgasm and then I ate a green apple from the green apple tree next door and it didn't do jack for me, so, "the crux of the biscuit" is, those green apples from that green apple tree can't and never will be able to get me off like those red apples can, they are just not as good at producing orgasms and I know and I say so because that's what happened to me................and anyone else who claims that the green apples gave them an orgasm and that they like them even better than the red apples is either lying, in denial OR just doesn't know what they are talking about AND they don't know what an orgasm is"

Sounds pretty silly, huh?

That's all you've said dude. I wish those who want to beat a drum for either would look up three vocabulary words:
THEORETICALLY
OBJECTIVELY
SUBJECTIVELY

Keep in mind too that the aural memory is the shortest there is, so whatever it is that you've "carried" ever since has nothing to do (now) with anything you heard that day other than the emotional/physiological reaction you felt and enjoyed

I wonder how many people here, once they had a system of their dreams put on a beloved recording from their youth, a recording they had most likely first connected with via the "low-fi" experience................only to be very disappointed when the "hi-fi" rendering wasn't at all what they had remembered it to be

Back to your day in the studio, maybe the cut job sucked. Ever think of that before you make your meaningless proclamation to the world? Do you have any real idea of how much lathes and cutting have evolved/advanced since the '70s? Now, with the aid of powerful microscopes and computers?

The more some people talk the more they demonstrate to me that they know very little about today's state of the art mastering for Lps..................very little if anything at all (like the "article" which made at least one reference back to the '60s with it's comparisons)

[Ed Zeppeli]

I am going to be 100% honest and tell you that I did not and am not going to read your article.
I skimmed it ...
Life is too short.




For someone with such precious little time you sure waste a lot of it spewing your bias here in this otherwise civil thread.

[Wagner]

For someone with such precious little time you sure waste a lot of it spewing your bias here in this otherwise civil thread.
That article has been in circulation amongst the CD fanboys since the first of the year
I read it over at Hooffie's place 9 months ago
It's "spewing bias" when someone dares to disagree with the group think? Or at least the little CD/digital fanboy cluster?
And not even that; I'm only trying to point put that when you speak in such absolutes you are the one exhibiting the "bias"

I do know this, they can't get enough presses up and running to fill the demand for vinyl

JVC and EMI just shut down and sold off what was left of the U.S.A.'s largest CD production facility
So, they "spewing bias" too? PERCENTAGE wise, NOT UNIT SALES, the Lp is kicking the CD's ass right now, so SOMEBODY likes it (I'm sorry, thinks it "sounds better", 'cause this "Catcher in the Rye" in the back pocket blow off insult, little hipster comparison/explanation shit to explain the comeback in popularity of the format is getting old (and only accounts for a part of it) Plus, if you open yur eyes, you will see and learn that those little hipsters ARE catching on and seeking out better and better performing turntables, cartridges and arms. Those sales are up substantially as well. Is that "spewing" my bias for me to point that out?

Don't babble with your lay speak pseudo science (YOUR personal knowledge) in an attempt to dismiss a large segment of Humanity's feelings about one of their five senses, not yours or Bob Ludwig's opinion means jack to those who just don't agree with you..................it's just that simple. All you are doing is burping up things you've read and heard

I don't understand why you and others can't understand what it is I am attempting to get across here good buddy, I could give a shit which format you love or think is better............and as for those beating the digital drum the loudest, there's a definite conflict of interest/hurt feelings at work here. The CD's been kicked in the nuts, the kids want them less and less, if at all, but they have embraced vinyl and are gobbling it up like crack...........plus, the tens of thousands of Lp fans world wide that never gave up

You cannot KNOW or speak to what "sounds better" to ANOTHER Human being, so give it up.............yeah, in my dreams...................:dead_horse:

[brutal]

I am going to be 100% honest and tell you that I did not and am not going to read your article.
I skimmed it and saw towards the bottom: Neil Young, Jack White, PONO and everybody knows what's best except those who don't know anything, right there in the sub-title of the piece and restated a second time at the bottom. That's enough for me.
Life is too short.

I do not and never have understood the incessant noise on the "subject". It barely qualifies as a mental exercise or debate and it's certainly not an interesting one. It's a "them or us" conversation for many and a "why, I have some of BOTH that I think are great" "why there'e nothing wrong with having BOTH" (the calming position of the Audio Peace Makers on the boards when the flames start to fly) and can go no where, yet people (some) will "fight the fight" to prove who's "right" forever or so it seems.

99.9% of the gibberish posted over at the Hoffman forums (a place where this "discussion" will thrive until the plug is pulled, along with "how many copies of "The White Album" is too many?") seems to eventually get back to the question eventually, as if one were to "debate" it long enough a universal consensus would be reached. That, or the unwashed (as viewed by either side) would become converts or surrender and confess the error of their ways.
That's even if the thread started life as one about a turntable or a cartridge.....................OR a particular CD player currently trending........
Borders on a religious fanaticism at times. Someone's always on the lookout for a soul to save when it comes to this topic.

The way I see it, around 1982 or so a technology came along that in a fairly short period of time took the ready availability of something familiar (and LOVED for decades) away from a bunch of folks due to market forces, and some of them have been REALLY pissed off about it ever since, BUT, this change made a LOT of folks happy, so much so that they (both sides of this coin) will babble and argue endlessly on a subject that they, in reality (most of them) actually know very little about (the technology side of things).

I already had to live through the Lp versus CD fight of the early '90s amongst fellow music lovers.........and the biggest unreported skirmish of them all, "which format makes for a better cassette recording"! But it was early on in The Format Wars and was a friendly sort of picking, like ragging on a friend for his love of a football team other than yours..................it didn't come with charts, graphs and measurements. Seems like it was still more about the music then too..............those early days of the "digital revolution"........

I personally love and prefer Lps in most instances. The only thing I really like about CDs is the fact that I can handle them while drinking heavily (used to) with little to no worries and they're portable (though even that's no longer the case by today's standards). So "old skool"; "physical media" they call it.

Reality and what's available on what format has caused me to buy and own many titles on CD. I'm glad to have them. For many many many titles the choice isn't even applicable (although that seems to be changing as of late due to the current trend of the Vinyl Renaissance)
I probably have, percentage wise, just as many Lps as CDs that sound like shit to my ears, so go figure. If I had MY choice................but then again, and nowadays, I just don't.........
I also PREFER rotary telephones (W.E. and S-C for sound quality and the ability to deliver it for an ENTIRE conversation), land lines and answering machines that are intelligible (use a tape) but for the most part with regards to THAT preference I'm just shit out of luck as well. Can't "dial 1" for English.
Like I said, never saw the point and to each his own. Exactly the same as "what tastes better?".

Talk about :dead_horse:


I'm going to be 100% honest and tell you that I won't bother reading any thread I see you posting in.

Seriously dude, you're ruining LHF for me and I only pop in here once in a while as of late. All I ever see is you berating and belittling the fine folks of this forum and you pounding your chest.

Talk about :dead_horse: give it a flippin rest with the negativity and belligerence!

[Ian Mackenzie]

If "recording and mastering" are "off topic" in a thread comparing the sonic virtues of two different formats that arrive at their finished form via these two activities as part of the process, then what exactly constitutes a "properly done CD"?

And rather than your suggested title of "Why CDs Can Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." just go for your true and original intent and title it "Why CDs DO Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." and be done with it..............
...............because that's been your point all along anyway

I understand. It's always nice and reassuring to find one's own feelings on matters, whatever they may be, validated by others in "print", especially when those others are "experts" and even "illustrious" as you put it.

And that is FINE if you feel that way, I am happy you are happy.....................but that article?
It's a bull shit fluff piece written by some non-audio person for a kids' "alternative" rag and reflects nothing in large part but opinions, Bob Ludwig's included (there were a few points of fact such as who did what and where and who said what)

You and others have missed no opportunity to put some sort of qualification or condition on the playback quality of Lps and to point out it's limitations in areas such as "dynamic range" and how much "better" digital "measures" in any number of areas, with every remark and "observation" made............as if those who prefer the sound of vinyl are just "wrong" and won't acknowledge the "proof" that "science" has to offer OR maybe that they'll convert and beg redemption if only shown the error of their ways and ignorance..............just one more time?

The agenda is clear, and I'll say it again, that's fine. You need to drop the word "better" and possibly use the words "potentially more accurate representation" and even THEN the finished product, on any given one of millions of playback systems may still not "sound better" to a given pair of ears and a brain..............be it an Lp or a CD

The conversation is absurd; you (as in anyone) cannot "tell" another Human being what is "better", whether it's which barbecue place to go to, or burger or beer or cigar or Lp or CD..............or blonde or brunette.........or guys who like fat girls.................it's ALL subjective once the verb SOUNDS is followed by the adjective BETTER

SONY and Philips made EVERY POINT flailed at in that "article" and then some. The WORLD for the large part bought it. What else do you want?

The deal's been sealed since the early '80s, tired of hearing the damned sales pitch still; I think everyone on the planet, with the possible exception of some lost aboriginal tribe, heard it the first time. Even all the Sub-Saharan Africans heard it.
The marketing and the format both proved to be very successful, but interestingly, not successful enough to eclipse compact cassettes until well into the first half of the '90s
Now THAT'S a navel you can contemplate

It's funny how quickly and rabid this all became after the initial launch of the CD, and NOT just with audiophiles. What passion, what zeal! The "digital revolution" had begun; evolve or get out of the way! And that arrogance has persisted to this day.

CD eclipsed vinyl in unit sales DECADES ago and yet this insistence on touting it's technical virtues over that of the Lp persists to this very day, a day by the way that is seeing the CD sales on a rapid decline

What a crock of shit, telling someone what's "better" when it involves one of the Five Senses. I especially love it when it comes from folks who don't even own the one they're banging on, be it the CD player or the turntable camper, happens a lot.

Who gives a shit what Bob Ludwig says is better?

You come to the party with some cobbled together opinion piece (on a topic which remains "hot button", again I have no idea why), throw it out there and then get all huffy puffy when you don't get unanimous agreement on just how "right" it is? I mean what did you expect? You state you have been an audio enthusiast for decades, so you know the nature of this topic and the responses it elicits (ergo: :dead_horse:) and yet you persist to whine that not everyone will agree with you and your article?!

You are either trolling or naive. And to make matters worse, I think nearly every post here has acknowledged the fact that we all own and enjoy numerous examples, both good and bad, of BOTH formats in our Music collections. A remarkable amount of restraint and maturity has been demonstrated here, especially if one were to make just a cursory comparison of how this one lights up on other forums..............

So, exactly what is the response you are looking for or need to hear?

Intentional or not the racist remarks in this post are un acceptable.

Please refrain from posting or accept harsh consequences.

[Ian Mackenzie]

If "recording and mastering" are "off topic" in a thread comparing the sonic virtues of two different formats that arrive at their finished form via these two activities as part of the process, then what exactly constitutes a "properly done CD"?

And rather than your suggested title of "Why CDs Can Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." just go for your true and original intent and title it "Why CDs DO Actually Sound Better Than Vinyl." and be done with it..............
...............because that's been your point all along anyway

I understand. It's always nice and reassuring to find one's own feelings on matters, whatever they may be, validated by others in "print", especially when those others are "experts" and even "illustrious" as you put it.

And that is FINE if you feel that way, I am happy you are happy.....................but that article?
It's a bull shit fluff piece written by some non-audio person for a kids' "alternative" rag and reflects nothing in large part but opinions, Bob Ludwig's included (there were a few points of fact such as who did what and where and who said what)

You and others have missed no opportunity to put some sort of qualification or condition on the playback quality of Lps and to point out it's limitations in areas such as "dynamic range" and how much "better" digital "measures" in any number of areas, with every remark and "observation" made............as if those who prefer the sound of vinyl are just "wrong" and won't acknowledge the "proof" that "science" has to offer OR maybe that they'll convert and beg redemption if only shown the error of their ways and ignorance..............just one more time?

The agenda is clear, and I'll say it again, that's fine. You need to drop the word "better" and possibly use the words "potentially more accurate representation" and even THEN the finished product, on any given one of millions of playback systems may still not "sound better" to a given pair of ears and a brain..............be it an Lp or a CD

The conversation is absurd; you (as in anyone) cannot "tell" another Human being what is "better", whether it's which barbecue place to go to, or burger or beer or cigar or Lp or CD..............or blonde or brunette.........or guys who like fat girls.................it's ALL subjective once the verb SOUNDS is followed by the adjective BETTER

SONY and Philips made EVERY POINT flailed at in that "article" and then some. The WORLD for the large part bought it. What else do you want?

The deal's been sealed since the early '80s, tired of hearing the damned sales pitch still; I think everyone on the planet, with the possible exception of some lost aboriginal tribe, heard it the first time. Even all the Sub-Saharan Africans heard it.
The marketing and the format both proved to be very successful, but interestingly, not successful enough to eclipse compact cassettes until well into the first half of the '90s
Now THAT'S a navel you can contemplate

It's funny how quickly and rabid this all became after the initial launch of the CD, and NOT just with audiophiles. What passion, what zeal! The "digital revolution" had begun; evolve or get out of the way! And that arrogance has persisted to this day.

CD eclipsed vinyl in unit sales DECADES ago and yet this insistence on touting it's technical virtues over that of the Lp persists to this very day, a day by the way that is seeing the CD sales on a rapid decline

What a crock of shit, telling someone what's "better" when it involves one of the Five Senses. I especially love it when it comes from folks who don't even own the one they're banging on, be it the CD player or the turntable camper, happens a lot.

Who gives a shit what Bob Ludwig says is better?

You come to the party with some cobbled together opinion piece (on a topic which remains "hot button", again I have no idea why), throw it out there and then get all huffy puffy when you don't get unanimous agreement on just how "right" it is? I mean what did you expect? You state you have been an audio enthusiast for decades, so you know the nature of this topic and the responses it elicits (ergo: :dead_horse:) and yet you persist to whine that not everyone will agree with you and your article?!

You are either trolling or naive. And to make matters worse, I think nearly every post here has acknowledged the fact that we all own and enjoy numerous examples, both good and bad, of BOTH formats in our Music collections. A remarkable amount of restraint and maturity has been demonstrated here, especially if one were to make just a cursory comparison of how this one lights up on other forums..............

So, exactly what is the response you are looking for or need to hear?

Intentional or not the racist remarks in this post are un acceptable.

Please refrain from posting such comments or accept harsh consequences.

[Allanvh5150]

There are racist remarks in the post?

Allan.

[Ian Mackenzie]

References to some lost Aboriginal tribe or both derogatory and racist.

The fact is he used the indifference to make a point tells me this Th I s poster does not belong here.

[speakerdave]

Personally I think Jack White is a genius.

Quoting myself from a 2009 thread (Why not? Has something new been said?)


For me vinyl is:
--all those records I already had
--all those records that were at garage sales, thrift stores and used vinyl dealers, from the people that wanted only the latest technology (the early CD's that I found literally unlistenable)
--the jazz reissues that are still available for about ten, twelve bucks, like right now, Leeway with Lee Morgan, Jackie McLean, Bobby Timmons, Paul Chambers and Art Blakey
--the spendy remastered heavy vinyl reissues that are very good-sounding
--sometimes ticky and poppy, which I seem better able to overlook than the machine glier of poorly done digital
--high maintenance
--subject to noticebly greater inner groove distortion.
--only at its best when played on equipment I will probably never own

Redbook CD's are:
--for some reason better than they were at the beginning
--often revealed to be better than you think when played on a better player
--probably the medium for which playback is most reasonably near-optimized, and that with a decent transport and an outboard DAC, but in truth are also
--at their best when played on equipment I will probably never own

SACD is:
--overall the best medium, which, unfortunately very few people ever actually heard do what it could;
--a victim of many bad decisions about how best to deploy a brilliant new technology
--an experience which sometimes makes me wish the world were run by holy poet kings who could say, "This is good; let's do this, do it right and forget this other stuff."
--at its best played on equipment I will probably never own

[Wagner]

References to some lost Aboriginal tribe or both derogatory and racist.

The fact is he used the indifference to make a point tells me this Th I s poster does not belong here.
I seriously resent your accusation friend, "intentional or not". There was not a modicum of "racism" intended with my use of that word to make my point; in fact, I was a bit stupefied when I read your spurious accusation, like "what in the hell is this guy talking about?"

If Allan had not asked the question and you had not responded, I would have never known!

What is racist about the phrase "lost aboriginal tribe"? To convey a sense of isolation, separation and distance from the modern world?..............explain to me how the word aboriginal is racist

I'd love to know how it's a "racist" word in any other context for that matter??????? Please explain

And "derogatory"? You've lost me with that one as well as with "The fact is he used the indifference to make a point". Indifference to what? I have no idea what in the hell you are talking about. It's bizarre.

Used to convey separated/isolated/uninvaded upon by the "electrified"/mechanized/"Western" world friend, as in out of earshot.............absolutely, positively NOTHING racist in, meant or intended by that example.............a way to describe out of earshot or coverage reach

"Racist", you have to be kidding me, and "used the indifference"? Again, exactly what does that mean, please.

Thomas

[Wagner]

There are racist remarks in the post?

Allan.
No, there are not, I assure you

Thomas

[Wagner]

Someone starts a thread which leads to the inevitable CD vs. Lp "discussion" and by page three folks are talking about "spewing" "bias" "name calling" and even accusing some of being racists and threatening them with consequences.................when does Godwin's Law kick in?

Thomas

[speakerdave]

If there were a lost aboriginal tribe, who would know?

[Wagner]

References to some lost Aboriginal tribe or both derogatory and racist.

I'll say it again as plainly as I can, as you appear to "read things in" that are not there:
That statement is absurd, not true and you owe me an apology.

[Wagner]

If there were a lost aboriginal tribe, who would know?
Exactly, and they would have been spared the "Perfect Sound Forever" blitz as well! :)

On a serous note, they do turn up from time to time. I think the last of which I am aware are a small group of people deep in the jungles of South America near the river
Allegedly, until this documentary was filmed, they had not had contact with "modern" man for more than 5000 years

[Wagner]

I'm going to be 100% honest and tell you that I won't bother reading any thread I see you posting in.

Seriously dude, you're ruining LHF for me and I only pop in here once in a while as of late. All I ever see is you berating and belittling the fine folks of this forum and you pounding your chest.

Talk about :dead_horse: give it a flippin rest with the negativity and belligerence!
You click on my name "Wagner" click "profile" in the little bubble, my page will come up, you look at the left side of the page and you will see "ignore this member"
Click on that
It will ask you, "are you sure"? Tell them "yes"
After that, you will never see another word written by me again
You're problem will be solved
I've used it quite a few times, extremely effective

[JeffW]

You click on my name "Wagner" click "profile" in the little bubble, my page will come up, you look at the left side of the page and you will see "ignore this member"
Click on that
It will ask you, "are you sure"? Tell them "yes"
After that, you will never see another word written by me again
You're problem will be solved


Not quite. Any of your posts that are quoted will still show up.

Ron White, on being arrested for public intoxication:

"I had the right to remain silent - but I didn't have the ability"

Food for thought?

[SEAWOLF97]

All I ever see is you berating and belittling the fine folks of this forum and you pounding your chest.


not completely. there is occasionally some wheat mixed in with the chaff. TW is a smart guy and does have good info/perspective to share ... tho could dial back the chaff some ?

we all go through grumpy times , everything cycles ....

[Wagner]

not completely. there is occasionally some wheat mixed in with the chaff. TW is a smart guy and does have good info/perspective to share ... tho could dial back the chaff some ?

we all go through grumpy times , everything cycles ....
I don't see what's chaff here friend
Every post I've made here in this one has been an attempt to get some of these guys to just give up on trying to speak for the whole world and everybody in it, on a subject like "what's better"
Talk about "bias", and yes, it's escalated; group think and herd mentality is :bs: (or is THAT what "racist" means?)

And somehow, I'm the dick? I have stated clearly I own both, enjoy both and own good and bad with both.............yet the smart ass knocks on vinyl continue based on nothing...........it's a disservice to the current state of the format and it's condescending ignorance at best

Happens every time this subject comes up, every time

[Wagner]

Not quite. Any of your posts that are quoted will still show up.

Ron White, on being arrested for public intoxication:

"I had the right to remain silent - but I didn't have the ability"

Food for thought?
So anyone who does not agree with you or go along to get along needs to "remain silent"?
Or, anyone who disagrees with the herd/pile on/hurt feelings crowd must be intoxicated?

Author's name is in BOLD print, right at the top of all quotes
When you see MINE, DON'T READ IT

Someone must love me if I'm quoted so often that that's a problem :)

As for "food for thought"; try taking your own advice and not fan the flames jumping in with facetious wisdom and smart remarks.

[1audiohack]

...

Ron White, on being arrested for public intoxication:

"I had the right to remain silent - but I didn't have the ability"

Food for thought?

HAHAHAHA! That's just one of the reasons I love you man!

Barry.

[Allanvh5150]

References to some lost Aboriginal tribe or both derogatory and racist.

The fact is he used the indifference to make a point tells me this Th I s poster does not belong here.

So he should have use wording more like "a white man standing on the top of Ayres rock"? Pretty sure the phrase was used in reference to people out the back of nowhere may or may not have heard something. In no way was it racist.

:(

[Wagner]

So he should have use wording more like "a white man standing on the top of Ayres rock"? Pretty sure the phrase was used in reference to people out the back of nowhere may or may not have heard something. In no way was it racist.

:(
Thank you, again

Thomas

[brutal]

You click on my name "Wagner" click "profile" in the little bubble, my page will come up, you look at the left side of the page and you will see "ignore this member"
Click on that
It will ask you, "are you sure"? Tell them "yes"
After that, you will never see another word written by me again
You're problem will be solved
I've used it quite a few times, extremely effective

I'll have to add condescending.

FWIW, you're not a dick, you seem more of a prick I'd say.

Good day sir.

[hsosdrum]

Your anecdote proves nothing, absolutely nothing.

The article that is the subject of this thread contains quotes from some of the best mastering engineers in the business about how disappointed they have been when listening to vinyl pressings of records they had mastered. I related an experience I had comparing a master recording with its vinyl pressing that mirrors the experience and opinion of the engineers quoted in the article. If nothing else, my anecdote proves that the experiences the engineers related in the article are not unique to them, and can be shared by anyone with access to a master recording, its vinyl copy and a top-flight playback system. I'm curious as to how many members of this forum have ever had such an opportunity.

[gferrell]

If there were a lost aboriginal tribe, who would know?

The last lost aboriginal tribe were the Tasmanian's ​the last one, a woman died back in the 1920's.

[Ed Zeppeli]

The article that is the subject of this thread contains quotes from some of the best mastering engineers in the business about how disappointed they have been when listening to vinyl pressings of records they had mastered. I related an experience I had comparing a master recording with its vinyl pressing that mirrors the experience and opinion of the engineers quoted in the article. If nothing else, my anecdote proves that the experiences the engineers related in the article are not unique to them, and can be shared by anyone with access to a master recording, its vinyl copy and a top-flight playback system. I'm curious as to how many members of this forum have ever had such an opportunity.

I wish!

I, for one, appreciated your anecdote and would love to audition some master tapes pre and post vinyl to make my own comparison.

[gferrell]

I wish!

I, for one, appreciated your anecdote and would love to audition some master tapes pre and post vinyl to make my own comparison.

It would certainly be a fun learning experience for me.

[Wagner]

The last lost aboriginal tribe were the Tasmanian's ​the last one, a woman died back in the 1920's.
When I used the term aboriginal I was referring to small groups of indigenous folks hidden away from the "world" in the jungles, forests and mountains of the planet, not just the "Aboriginals proper" of Australia.
There's still some folks out there "we" don't know about. And I doubt very seriously that they are aware of the CD versus Lp debate, much less "Perfect Sound Forever".
Planet Earth is still a big place.

This was my only point, it's ALL subjective; look at the date(s) spread on these articles, A LOT of people have been unhappy with CDs for a long time now and for a variety of reasons, the Vinyl Renaissance is NOT simply the product of hipsters with a copy of "Catcher in the Rye" in their back pockets or a bunch of baby boomers denying reality as they try to cling to their youths. (I mean hows that for a slight? Really?!)

What narrow minded arrogance, a classic "I'm right and you're wrong" scenario. That's not what the love of music and the audio equipment that delivers it up to us is supposed to be all about. Just difficult to believe the polarization this topic STILL induces, and the ugly talk.
Unbelievable; it'd be nice if folks were as passionate and could get as worked up over things that actually mattered:
http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl.html
http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl45.html

[Wagner]

The article that is the subject of this thread contains quotes from some of the best mastering engineers in the business about how disappointed they have been when listening to vinyl pressings of records they had mastered. I related an experience I had comparing a master recording with its vinyl pressing that mirrors the experience and opinion of the engineers quoted in the article. If nothing else, my anecdote proves that the experiences the engineers related in the article are not unique to them, and can be shared by anyone with access to a master recording, its vinyl copy and a top-flight playback system. I'm curious as to how many members of this forum have ever had such an opportunity.
It matters not one whit if the (Lp) pressing up for consideration/comparison is shit, not one whit.........or the cartridge, or the phono stage or or or.........the only weakness with Lps that gives me cause for concern (and at times, disappointment) is that whoever is manning the lathe will always be in a position to interject their own effects on the finished product. Then there's the metal parts, the quality of vinyl, the press operator etc etc etc and so it goes
I also noticed in that story not one detail (glaring absence) was provided as to the provenance of the Lp they used for the comparison; not very "scientific" wouldn't you agree?
Lps, although mass produced, are at the end of the day, truly "hand made" objects, not unlike violins or guitars.
And if someone were to proclaim, "I prefer CDs because they are more consistent, a little more predictable (in certain areas)", I'd have to say "well good, I'm glad that's working out for you and that you're happy with it". I wouldn't beat them over the head with a differing take on things. It's like a box of Cuban cigars (Lps), no matter how excellent the pedigree, some of them aren't going to draw properly. But exactly the same analogy can be applied honestly to CDs.
Digital DOES NOT inherently mean: correct, accurate, well done, reliable, perfect or any of the other attributes marketing has successfully attached to it in the consumers' mind, for a plethora of goods, not just CDs, rather the POTENTIAL with some goods COULD be had .....................so now we're back full circle. You cannot "tell" someone what's "BETTER SOUNDING" if what's "better" isn't what they like! And anyone with ears and a decent sized CD colection knows that's the truth.

There's plenty of jokers who THINK they can cut a disc but few that actually know how to do it.
Back in the day of Wilma Cozart Fine, Robert Fine and folks like Rudy Van Gelder, music lovers understood this.
The same applies for digital (CDs); there's plenty of ways to screw those up too.
Don't know why that is such a difficult reality for so many folks to accept; just because a recording was made or finalized in the digital domain is not an inherent guarantee of it's "superiority", nor is it a guaranty that it will be inferior or suffer in some way.
But that's what SONY and Philips pitched, right?
No matter what the writer for "City Pages" or Bob Ludwig has to say about the matter.

[yggdrasil]

Signal to noise ratio to low. Closing this thread.