Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[Balrog]

I'm a member of a couple of reddit audiophile threads where people post pictures of their rigs and most of the time they include turntables and every time I see one my mind is blown because I outgrew vinyl only a few years after buying my first CD player in the '80's. Back then I had a tape deck, a turntable and a CD player but once I heard digital I knew they was no going back yet people en mass are and I find it baffling given all the benefits of youtube. The first and most obvious benefit is, it's free. Secondly, youtube has an almost endless catalog of music, with the original music video, the karaoke versions of songs, live versions and videos that include the lyrics. Thirdly, the convenience of simply clicking my mouse a few times and opening up a world of music is pretty alluring. I always wondered about the sound quality though so I bought a CD a few years ago to compare youtube to CD and couldn't hear any difference. LP's on the other hand can only be played one at a time, require time, money and effort to obtain and play and also require money and effort to maintain and as your collection of LP's grows it obviously becomes more expensive and takes up space-something youtube doesn't yet most reddit audiophiles are flocking to them

Does the vinyl renaissance make sense to you because it sure doesn't to me

When the renaissance kicked off, I found myself googling around for a the top shelf TT from the 70's. It also happened to be the very model my next-door neighbor had during my youth. Memories matter. Some people love books more than others - the touch, smell, the lack of backlighting. The same goes for vinyl. We emotionally pair bond with music in our childhood/late teens. Eventually the itch for vinyl faded, but the urge to feel young again never really leaves us.
CD quality was horrific in its first decade. Both production and reproduction reflected its infancy. The growth of DVD quality hasn't been much better, show me more channels and I'll show you more possibilities for production mediocrity.

 

[Newman]

CD quality was horrific in its first decade. Both production and reproduction reflected its infancy.

Funny….CDs made during that period often sound just great today from a production standpoint, with a normal amount of variability in production standards. And players from that era still sound transparent today.

Perhaps you got sucked in to the reactionary side of things.

 

[deweydm]

CD quality was horrific in its first decade.

No, there are great sounding CDs from the eighties. Often quiet, but great if you’re playing with a home stereo you can turn up. Most recent example I found:

Led Zeppelin - Physical Graffiti 2xCD, Album, RE Swan Song, Swan Song SS 200-2, 200-2 1987 US

 

[Snoopy]

I like vinyl. I like digital. I listen to both equally. I grew up with digital. I started to buy vinyl mostly classic jazz in about 2004, probably before it was a thing again. All those records that were sitting at shops and at the shows are now back in peoples collections… so mostly buy new now and on occasions original issues if not stupid money. I haven’t bought a CD in probably 5 or 6 years. I stream everything now, local and off Apple Music. Don’t buy too much, have about 500 records and space will be an issue at some point.

I prefer jazz on vinyl. Why? I think it can sound “nicer”. Maybe it’s the earlier releases or the mastering.. Those Toshiba EMI japanese blue note pressings from late 70s early 80s are dead silent and sound amazing. I dunno. Maybe the nostalgia too. I like to read the covers. Etc. That too… the smell of old sleeves. Having to get off my ass every 20 mins is good too?

Most new pressings are terrible, the blue note tone poet and some of the other prestige, few other jazz releases seem quite good.

This is a fun record, pulled off the shelf last night… don’t find these anymore in the store.


View attachment 330214
View attachment 330215

Funny enough there is a massive market for used Japanese LPs from the 60-80s and if it’s not something super niche or a collectors item, prices are actually pretty good.

I have seen 2009 Japanese jazz CDs going for 100+ bucks on discogs but a VG+ or even NM LP is available for 10-30 usd.

Those where all ridiculous cheap LPs that sound really good. Are clean and in great condition.

 

[Balrog]

Are you familiar with the standard curve? (AKA the "bell" curve) Some people went the extra mile to create excellence. Another musical plague has been the use of compression (AKA the loudness war)

No, there are great sounding CDs from the eighties. Often quiet, but great if you’re playing with a home stereo you can turn up. Most recent example I found:

Led Zeppelin - Physical Graffiti 2xCD, Album, RE Swan Song, Swan Song SS 200-2, 200-2 1987 US

 

[deweydm]

Are you familiar with the standard curve? (AKA the "bell" curve) Some people went the extra mile to create excellence. Another musical plague has been the use of compression (AKA the loudness war)

Specific example I gave isn't an outlier in my experience. Most older CDs of popular releases, prior to say ~1993, are usually mastered pretty well, without brick walling. Of course not all of them were mastered well, but your assertion that CD quality was horrific in its first decade is just false I think. Have many great sounding older CD's.

 

[Robin L]

Meanwhile in the land of antique and venerable CDs, the local library had its bimonthly book sale. This means it also had its bimonthly sale of other media, such as CDs. The classical CDs, most in mint condition, were going for 10 cents a pop. They had hundreds. I bought 34, they rounded the total off to 30. To paraphrase Steely Dan: the things people value, I can't understand. When I was working at a specialty classical CD store some 30 years ago some of these titles were going for as much as $20 a pop.

 

[Sal1950]

CD quality was horrific in its first decade. Both production and reproduction reflected its infancy. The growth of DVD quality hasn't been much better, show me more channels and I'll show you more possibilities for production mediocrity.

Oh brother, here we go again. Another line of BS
My original 1985 Warner Bros CD release of Dire Straits - Brothers In Arms still sounds as incredible today as it did the first time I played it on my Magnavox CDB 560 player way back then. DR16 and not a single snap, crackle, pop, It sonically crushes every piece of vinyl ever pressed.

 

[Axo1989]

I can't believe it's taken me 313 pages, but there's real childhood trauma being forced to eat Rice Krispies when all you wanted was Cocoa Puffs.

*returning here from the "let's be nicer" thread, I've even translated: they were/are sold as Rice Bubbles and Cocoa Pops here, which explains why I got my pops regardless.

 

[Sal1950]

I can't believe it's taken me 313 pages, but there's real childhood trauma being forced to eat Rice Krispies when all you wanted was Cocoa Puffs.

 

[Angsty]

Now were are talking!

398,107% 'better.'

And an even greater victory for distortion measurements.

Let's give that huge victory to the anti-vinyl canaries and they can relax, basking in the objective betterness of CD and be content.

(Your post is wonderful, worthy of wine, chit chat, and record playing in a convivial environment.)

Actually, the measured difference is misleading. Human ears are not good at distinguishing the differences with the same accuracy as an AP analyzer. We tend to be less discriminating to distortion significantly less than 1% THD, varying with the frequency.

Human ears are quite adaptable to SNR in various environments, so the perceptible difference between 70 dB and 96 dB SNR may be much less than the calculated value, even if the difference is notable.

I’m no vinyl apologist, but a number like 398,107% ‘better’ is patently absurd when talking about psychoacoustics.

 

[Anton D]

Actually, the measured difference is misleading. Human ears are not good at distinguishing the differences with the same accuracy as an AP analyzer. We tend to be less discriminating to distortion significantly less than 1% THD, varying with the frequency.

Human ears are quite adaptable to SNR in various environments, so the perceptible difference between 70 dB and 96 dB SNR may be much less than the calculated value, even if the difference is notable.

I’m no vinyl apologist, but a number like 398,107% ‘better’ is patently absurd when talking about psychoacoustics.

Yes, it is.

 

[EJ3]

Performance of a 2023 Civic R from Car and Driver. I am pretty sure this is faster than any car made in the US in 1961 in stock form. For sure faster than the stock 409 mentioned.

C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.9 sec
100 mph: 12.1 sec
1/4-Mile: 13.5 sec @ 106 mph
140 mph: 28.3 sec
Results above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 9.4 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.4 sec
Top Speed (mfr's claim): 169 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 153 ft
Braking, 100–0 mph: 308 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft
Skidpad: 1.02 g

My 1979 Trans Am (mods/changes from stock picked or designed and implemented by me) THIS CAR APPEARS AND SOUNDS STOCK!
meets 1981 (50 State) emissions without Catalytic convertors,
meets 1996 Calif New Car Emissions [including evaporative] with one CAT per cylinder bank:
(Each CAT has a 3.5" inlet, 2.5", 2 CATs total), NOT FUEL INJECTED but CARBURETED (Fuel injection is scheduled for some point in the future)
Can't give you all the specs but can give you enough (with me at the wheel) to sorta compare:
1/mile: 12.2 sec @ 112 mph (at this speed, still in 3rd gear [out of 5])
Data from the traps at the drag strip (run on the street tires, not slicks, after driving 22 miles to the track)
Top speed: 188 mph (drag limited) observed by RADAR
Braking, 70-0 mph; 148 ft
Roadholding; 300-ft
Skidpad: 0.95 g
Supple but firm ride, no hard thumps on freeway expansion strips & no groove wandering.
MPG (yep, the 2023 CIVIC R has me beat)
city: 16-18 mpg Hwy: 21.7 mpg (from 75-90 mph)::::

55 mph=18 mpg::::110 mph=18 mpg

Did the 55 mph speed limit on the interstate, instituted by the government, because of the fuel crises in the 1970's, actually save gas)?

It did NOT on any street legal vehicle that I have ever owned. YMMV!

Bonus Info:
Can take off in 1st or 2nd gears, smoothly idle @ 5 mph in 1st, 9 mph in 2nd, 12 mph in 3rd and smoothly accelerate from that speed in those gears to the 6800 rpm red line
Total cost involved (including the original cars purchase price to me in 1986) approximately $25K.

 

[Robin L]

Why didn't you tell him the truth, that CD, SACD, DVD-A, BluRay music is heads and shoulders better sound and he'd be wasting his money only to follow a fad.

The reality is that streaming has taken over to the point that the physical media you're citing are very hard to find these days. Particularly the multi-channel formats you adore. I haven't found BluRay audio in stores in years and DVD-A was phased out a long time ago. The only new SACDs I'm seeing are classical. I've got examples of all those formats, bought a fair number when the formats first appeared. I just found a SACD of Beethoven's symphonies at a library sale last week for 10 cents. All I need to play back those discs in full surround is three more speakers. But I don't have the room.

People aren't buying those forms of physical media because of streaming. And if the sales of LPs increase year after year, then it isn't a fad. I don't know why you are so angry, but you practically foam at the mouth on the subject. You're not about to change the minds of fans of LPs, so why don't you give it a rest?

 

[EJ3]

Can we argue about Ford vs Chevy next? I see Chevy adopted the old Ford intake runner pattern...

And when FORD built the 351 Cleveland (one of their truly great engines [the best iterations were the Australian Adaptation of the 2BBL inlet version to the 4BBL combustion chamber]), they whole sale adopted the Big Block Chevy "porcupine" valve train design.

It is quite common for one automotive manufacturer to pay royalties to another & visa versa for what they want.

Here is an example of 1 compete transmission designed and built for one division of General Motors Corporation being used by many other automobile manufacturers:

The Turbo Hydra-Matic 400 (TH400), for instance, was used in many other brands & makes of vehicles:

TH400 was commonly used by domestic manufacturers for applications that required a sturdy automatic transmission.
Why re-invent the wheel, so to speak, when some one else was making exactly what you needed?:

1981-1982 Avanti II
1975-1982 Checker
1965-1979 Jeep

The TH400 was strong enough to be used on 4WD vehicles as well, showing up as original equipment on 1976-1979 Jeep CJ series trucks.
These were mated to an AMC engine at the front, and to a Borg-Warner Quadra-Trac transfer case at the rear.
The earlier full-size Jeeps, which were equipped with the Buick 350 engine, had the conventional Buick, Cadillac, Oldsmobile and Pontiac
bolt pattern on the bellhousing for their TH400s. GM used the TH400 in 4WD applications into the Nineties.

Many import cars that needed an automatic transmission that could deal with the power that they were making:

1977-1990 Ferrari 400i
1968-1990 Bentley and Rolls-Royce
1977-1985 Daimler Double Six
1977-1990 Jaguar XJS and XJ12
1973-1990 Holden cars

So, round & round it goes as to who has the best whatever.
(and it gets even weirder when you find that they have been picking through each others parts bins)

I know that the same scenario is played out in the parts of many things built in many fields.

 

[EJ3]

I would like to see that as well.

We have had some excellent threads in which your contributions have been integral, and it does get old when our standard handful of 'Vinyl Sucks' members feel the need to take a big stinky dump in the middle of what is an otherwise evidence based, enjoyable discussion.

Dealing with new members who show up and act a certain way is one thing, dealing with our 'OG' members is another. For those who have been part of this place from near the beginning we (admins) tend to view them as effectively having Tenure, and are very reluctant to get involved. I don't want my job to be looking after our members with thousands of posts, but I also don't want anyone to feel discouraged from exploring what is certainly a significant part of the hi-fi world.

I like playing records. I know the limitations.

I would like there to be an evidence based place to learn more about how to work with those limitations without being castigated for enjoying an outdated format, so if you are all up for it, so am I. If I have to buck up and have a private word with a member or two so we can try to get this working a little better, I can manage that. For those of you who tend to be swinging that 2x4 @JP mentioned, maybe ease up.

OK, this will probably get me slapped about the head a few times (& likely kicked some more, too):

But here goes:

I 100% agree and this is is, in fact, one of my MAJOR reasons for joining this site:

To find PROOF of what is the the best of the best (or the SOTA) of each format, not just what is SOTA for digital.

 

[EJ3]

The reality is that streaming has taken over to the point that the physical media you're citing are very hard to find these days. Particularly the multi-channel formats you adore. I haven't found BluRay audio in stores in years and DVD-A was phased out a long time ago. The only new SACDs I'm seeing are classical. I've got examples of all those formats, bought a fair number when the formats first appeared. I just found a SACD of Beethoven's symphonies at a library sale last week for 10 cents. All I need to play back those discs in full surround is three more speakers. But I don't have the room.

People aren't buying those forms of physical media because of streaming. And if the sales of LPs increase year after year, then it isn't a fad. I don't know why you are so angry, but you practically foam at the mouth on the subject. You're not about to change the minds of fans of LPs, so why don't you give it a rest?

I do not know where you shop:
but there are many places here that have CD's, DVD's, Blu Ray, 4K
And while many stream (I am not one of them), many more use more disks of some sort on a daily basis.

 

[Galliardist]

I do not know where you shop:
but there are many places here that have CD's, DVD's, Blu Ray, 4K
And while many stream (I am not one of them), many more use more disks of some sort on a daily basis.

Our local music and microwaves chain is halving space given over to audio and video discs - including LPs - to sell those plastic doll things with big heads, judging from a few recent trips to different branches.That tells me how vital digital discs are in our neighbourhood, at least.

And if you live somewhere where many more people use discs daily than stream I'd be surprised.

 

[EJ3]

Our local music and microwaves chain is halving space given over to audio and video discs - including LPs - to sell those plastic doll things with big heads, judging from a few recent trips to different branches.That tells me how vital digital discs are in our neighbourhood, at least.

And if you live somewhere where many more people use discs daily than stream I'd be surprised.

Well, I guess you are surprised then.
There is some quite heavy trade in used discs here, also.

 

[fpitas]

And when FORD built the 351 Cleveland (one of their truly great engines [the best iterations were the Australian Adaptation of the 2BBL inlet version to the 4BBL combustion chamber]), they whole sale adopted the Big Block Chevy "porcupine" valve train design.

Well, sort of. Canted valves were nothing new. And the BBC managed to f it up big time with goofy intake ports. At least now Chevy has the ZZ632, which corrects all the problems with the old Rat motors.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/exclusive-zz632-big-block-build-at-chevrolet-performance/

And the LS motors are a vast improvement in every way over the old SBC.