I think the "problem" with digital recording and playback is that it is measures "too well". People coming to this site "to learn" are going to be surprised that a digital recording is provably 3,500 time quieter and even better in terms of distortion and speed stability compared to analog. This is going to be hard to reconcile with their real world experience listening to LP's, RTR and analog sourced digital recordings. Their reaction is going to be yea digital is quieter and maybe a little clearer but it is not "thousands of times better" than my analog recordings and sometimes it even sounds worse so those measurement people are missing something. This opens them up to all the "stair steps", "there are things that can't be measured", and other BS. This cuts both ways though as there are a lot of "objectivists" that go by the numbers and have never even heard a decent analog system and concluded since their digital sources measure "thousands of times better" than analog sources that analog must sound terrible and anyone that listens to analog is an uneducated deaf fool. This creates a perfect set up for an endless thread. My perspective is that people over estimate their hearing abilities and while digital is better our ears and brain can not take advantage of it's potential so in the real world analog and digital is not the most important thing and the performance and recording quality are what really matter.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Why do records sound so much better than digital?
- Thread starter don'ttrustauthority
- Start date
- Status
JP
Major Contributor
Does it matter?
Well only that the word "belief" makes it look like you believe that "belief" has no basis or is, itself, irrational. And the only "belief" I can see that might fit is an incorrect belief in the superiority of the sound from vinyl. Which MH has pointed out (close to 100 times it feels like) he does not hold.
Bob from Florida
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,320
- Likes
- 1,221
I don't notice these issues on playback. Perhaps my turntable is accurate enough for my listening needs.
JP
Major Contributor
Belief/desire/whatever. Not the point.
Newman
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 3,556
- Likes
- 4,412
Lower-distortion thread summary:
OP: “Why is vinyl way better sounding than digital?” (Corrected to more like the real OP title)
All: “It isn’t. At least not technically.”
Some: “Yeah but I like the sound of it better so how’s that?”
Science nuts: “Cognitive bias, most of the time.”
Self-Appointed Defenders of the Faith: “Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is better sounding just not in measurements. Vinyl is the effin bees knees now get off my back!!!!! You’re stupid lab-coated measurebators who never listen to The Music! It’s not worse. It’s not! It’s not!”
Repeat 500 times.
Robin L
Master Contributor
Yeah, I know some people don't hear it. I pick up on issues like this. Also surface noise. But a badly damaged groove is the worst.
My first Jazz LP was a remaindered ($2) copy off the Thelonius. Monk, John Coltrane, Art Blakley, etc. session for Riverside. Side two having the off-centeredness syncing up with Monk as to make it sound like string-bending on a Blues Guitar coming from the piano. Very woozy record.
Currently own the SACD, don't want to take any more chances.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,441
- Likes
- 12,525
^^^ Some more insight in to why communication is so difficult (at times) on the subject.
The idea that's an actual accurate summary of the position put forth by most ASR members in this thread who listen to vinyl is...surreal.
You can say something coherent, but you can't control what someone else's mind does with it.
How many people can you point to who say they "like the sound of it better" compared to those who are aware that it doesn't, but enjoy the format anyway?
People like you and @Sal1950 - consistently ignoring and misrepresenting** what MH says are the reason the thread is as long as it is.
**over and over and over again ad fucking infinitum. The reason I generally try to ignore this thread. This evening I have failed.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,441
- Likes
- 12,525
Thanks for elaborating. I can see now what you mean. Though I don't agree.
Yes! Of course! The same for everyone.
Because, just as I've said, it depends on the individual's goals and preferences.
If Sal enjoys motorcycles as a method of transportion, he could acquire a motorcycle that would suit that goal, so that action is rational. (So long as it doesn't thwart other overriding goals or beliefs he holds).
Since I hate motorcycles, the same action - buying a motorcycle - would be irrational for me. Buying a car, which I prefer, would be the rational action
GIVEN my preferences and goals.
Similarly: If Sal has the goal of listening to (generally speaking) the most accurate source, and perhaps also seeks convenience, dislikes fiddling with vinyl gear etc, then his choosing a digital source is a rational choice. It suits his taste and goals.
Whereas if I am less concerned about always listening to the most accurate source, and if I actually very much enjoy all sorts of aspects of vinyl - the physical objects, the turntables, and other things I've listed before - then it's entirely rational for me to acquire a turntable and to play records.
People have different values, tastes, goals, which means an action for one person will make sense for them, but not for another with a different goal.
It means we are "both right" insofar as our different actions coherently fulfill our desires.
How is that not obvious? What is confusing about this?
No, not just "anything." Note the caveat for an action to be a"coherent" connection between our beliefs and desires.
As I elaborated in another reply: "Yes, you can do something that is irrational insofar as it directly thwarts an immediate goal, or some wider goal you hold more important. But if it doesn't...it's perfectly rational."
So...if you desire a beer, and have the belief that the only beer on your property resides in your fridge, concluding that taking the action of going outside and looking for it in your garden is clearly irrational. So in that sense, no not just "anything you do" makes it rational.
Similarly, it should be coherent with your wider set of beliefs and desires.
If for instance you are struggling to maintain your recovery from alcoholism, you may have a desire for alcohol that gives you a motivation to reach for the beer, but you also have the faculty of surveying how this motivation fits in to your wider system of beliefs and desires - for instance your desire to remain sober, which is connected to fulfilling all sorts of other important desires and your beliefs about what will fulfilll or thwart your other desires (e.g. holding down a job, keeping your family life together, or whatever).
So it might be rational in a coherent sense for me to have a beer, but it might not be for the recovering alcoholic.
What, if anything, do you disagree with in any of the above?
Cheers.
Yes! Of course! The same for everyone.
Because, just as I've said, it depends on the individual's goals and preferences.
If Sal enjoys motorcycles as a method of transportion, he could acquire a motorcycle that would suit that goal, so that action is rational. (So long as it doesn't thwart other overriding goals or beliefs he holds).
Since I hate motorcycles, the same action - buying a motorcycle - would be irrational for me. Buying a car, which I prefer, would be the rational action
GIVEN my preferences and goals.
Similarly: If Sal has the goal of listening to (generally speaking) the most accurate source, and perhaps also seeks convenience, dislikes fiddling with vinyl gear etc, then his choosing a digital source is a rational choice. It suits his taste and goals.
Whereas if I am less concerned about always listening to the most accurate source, and if I actually very much enjoy all sorts of aspects of vinyl - the physical objects, the turntables, and other things I've listed before - then it's entirely rational for me to acquire a turntable and to play records.
People have different values, tastes, goals, which means an action for one person will make sense for them, but not for another with a different goal.
It means we are "both right" insofar as our different actions coherently fulfill our desires.
How is that not obvious? What is confusing about this?
No, not just "anything." Note the caveat for an action to be a"coherent" connection between our beliefs and desires.
As I elaborated in another reply: "Yes, you can do something that is irrational insofar as it directly thwarts an immediate goal, or some wider goal you hold more important. But if it doesn't...it's perfectly rational."
So...if you desire a beer, and have the belief that the only beer on your property resides in your fridge, concluding that taking the action of going outside and looking for it in your garden is clearly irrational. So in that sense, no not just "anything you do" makes it rational.
Similarly, it should be coherent with your wider set of beliefs and desires.
If for instance you are struggling to maintain your recovery from alcoholism, you may have a desire for alcohol that gives you a motivation to reach for the beer, but you also have the faculty of surveying how this motivation fits in to your wider system of beliefs and desires - for instance your desire to remain sober, which is connected to fulfilling all sorts of other important desires and your beliefs about what will fulfilll or thwart your other desires (e.g. holding down a job, keeping your family life together, or whatever).
So it might be rational in a coherent sense for me to have a beer, but it might not be for the recovering alcoholic.
What, if anything, do you disagree with in any of the above?
Cheers.
JP
Major Contributor
TLDR
Bob from Florida
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,320
- Likes
- 1,221
Wow and flutter - it is apparently low enough on my turntable I don't hear it. Same with tracking errors - I have the tools for good alignment and use them. I have been known to toss records with scratches. Vast majority of my LP's are scratch-free. Perhaps I am not picky enough with my listening or am picky enough when it comes to setup and component matching.
Bob from Florida
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,320
- Likes
- 1,221
Maybe you just don't listen closely enough, or chose to ignore the weaknesses that people have complained about for decades
Amen, but he never see's it that way.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,441
- Likes
- 12,525
Sorry about that.
To help me out, could you suggest what threshold for attention might be. Single sentence? Two? Three? Would like to give a ballpark for future possible discussions?
I have to say, again, that your responses leave me puzzled from someone with your tagline - the Adam Gopnik quote about avoiding strawmen.
I mean...I politely ask you for clarification on your view so as to understand and not strawman your position. That's a good thing, right?
And then you strawman my argument - "So anything I do to fulfill a desire is a rational action? That's... optimistic."
I put some effort in to clarifying my claim...so you don't end up strawmanning my argument again. I see that as a sign of respect and a desire for intellectually honest communication. But...it turns out you don't really want to understand the thing you are arguing against, if it demands your attention for a few paragraphs?
Have you considered another tag-line ?
Bob from Florida
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
- Messages
- 1,320
- Likes
- 1,221
I upgraded my Dual turntable - to a Merrill Heirloom back in 1988. Then replaced the Merrill with a modern Clearaudio 2 or 3 years ago. So I have not had a crappy turntable since the Dual. The Dual had hum issues that drove me nuts trying to solve. Since getting rid of it I have been much more satisfied with the replacements. Honestly, I don't hear most of the stuff people complain about.
JP
Major Contributor
I never misunderstood your claim, I simply didn't agree with it. You took umbrage with that but subsequently admitted the point that "rational" in the given context wasn't universal but individual. Is it then such a leap of logic that someone doesn't share your rationale?
Circular conversations are sure-fire.
This is an intriguing line of argument, and probably the reason why vinyl lovers and SINAD lovers will hate each other despite their supposed love for music.
I am a motorcycle lover, I admit, but I completely agree cars have a superior practicality element of them. That said, I adore the ritual of motorcycles: the dynamics, the involvement... and the occasional unforgiveness. When you love something, you better also accept the darker side, because loving in ignorance is about the dumbest thing you can do in life.
The funny thing is that in this case, the vinyl is the motorcycle - you may love the ritual, but there's no doubt there are way more risks with limitations out there, way more ways to fail.
It also invites the discussion about what is "better" when it comes to a shared discussion between motorcycle and car advocates (and never forget many collectionists love both). There's little point in boiling it down, there are both cars and motorcycles designed for insane singular performance goals, and then there are others designed for everyday practicality.
I am sure no one will dispute digital beats vinyl when it comes to everyday practicality. Big time. I am sure no one will dispute vinyl doesn't measure like digital nor that unwelcome noise factors come into play regularly with vinyl.
I can understand if someone however states that to them, the ritual and overall "sound' of vinyl makes them feel better and hence sounds better, net.
But that's because we're using utterly different measurement scales - but more importantly, totally different priorities.
- Status
Similar threads
