The Truth About Vinyl Records

[Newman]

I didn’t notice anyone making a “No Damage” argument.

Only trying to provide some context for the significance of the wear caused by playing the record.

Post #865, “There is no objective evidence that playing a record permanently deforms the groove much less does so in a way that reduces the amplitude of musical transients.”

That is the No Damage argument to which SuicideSquad and I were ultimately reaching.

 

[Brian Hall]

There's always that background roar of stylus in contact with vinyl and it does obscure detail like the studio ambience around individual tracks in the mix.

I never hear that. I guess I was fortunate to come up with a setup that "isn't sufficiently resolving" while still sounding great. There really is a sweet spot!

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

776 years was their mean life expectancy for CDs at average room temperatures and humidities, or 17 times longer if treated correctly ie stored in conditions equivalent to their standard storage vaults.

Great so on top of worrying about record wear I have to worry about this too. Time to build a storage vault. CDs just got a whole lot more troublesome

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Post #865, “There is no objective evidence that playing a record permanently deforms the groove much less does so in a way that reduces the amplitude of musical transients.”

That is the No Damage argument to which SuicideSquad and I were ultimately reaching.

That was my post and no it was not a no damage argument. Deforming a groove in such a way in that it would reduce peaks which would in effect be a substantial change in the lateral and horizontal excursion of the groove wall does not equal a claim of no damage.

 

[Newman]

So, playing a record does permanently deform the groove?

 

[Brian Hall]

So, playing a record does permanently deform the groove?

Almost no affect at all if you have things set up right and balanced. Think about it. A tiny stylus tip with almost no weight on it can't affect the grooves much at all.

Strapping a 5 pound brick to the tonearm is a bad idea and you should avoid that. That would deform the groove and destroy your stylus. A real two-for-one.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Mr Atma says he's got records so quiet the only noise one hears from them is the analog master tape hiss.

Not what he said. But anyway.

But that means if the master 'tape' is a digital recording... <mind blown>

No. Again not what he said.

I dunno why do they? This atmaspheric nugget of hyperbole has been laying here since Monday: "I already showed that LPs have wider bandwidth than digital with distortion and noise much lower than most people realize."

Of all the things he talked about you chose to fixate on these trivial points.

There is nothing mysterious about the bandwidth of vinyl or any digital media. And there is nothing worth arguing about since none of the various media are hampered in any meaningful way because of the bandwidth of our ears and even more so by the content of the vast majority of commercial recordings.

Looks to me like tribalistic chest pounding to make bandwidth a sticking point as well as a passive aggressive attempt at an ad hominem logical fallacy.

It’s the very fodder I was speaking of that poisons any level headed objective discussion of vinyl.

I see he also cites a 1980s LoC study he claims says CDs won't last 100 years. I have quite playable ones that are hitting 40 this year, should I start to worry? (Not to fear: they are all redundantly backed up with identical copies.)

Yeah you should worry just like I should worry about the wear of a single play of an LP

For a mere $495, it appears one can achieve final Alignment, which in audiophilia, beats Enlightenment any day.

Enlightenment?

The very person you are trying to drag into a pissing contest has actually offered up some interesting information on vinyl production. None of which you seem to have taken notice of.

What is the more enlightened strategy for excellence in sound? (Note excellence in sound, not convenience and not economy) The inclusion of vinyl as a medium and with that inclusion diligence in investigating how to optimize the technology and finding unique masterings not offered on any digital media as an option?
Or to engage in a crusade against vinyl in pursuit of tribalistic toxic fanboy gate keeping?

I’d say using cutting edge technology and methods to achieve optimal stylus alignment is a form of enlightenment. Dismissing it out of hand to try to mock other peoples’ preferences and interests doesn’t strike me as particularly enlightened.

And is yet another example of the very thing I was lamenting.

Deweydm's phrase 'the blast radius of repeated LP plays" is my favorite of the week. It's new, whereas the rest of this thread is 99% recycled content, if you've been in this hobby long enough.

And how would you rate your batting percentage?

I would hope that on a science based forum JR’s work on stylus alignment would be a subject of thoughtful discussion not mockery and dismissal

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

So, playing a record does permanently deform the groove?

Do protons decay?

 

[Newman]

Almost no affect at all if you have things set up right and balanced. Think about it. A tiny stylus tip with almost no weight on it can't affect the grooves much at all.

Strapping a 5 pound brick to the tonearm is a bad idea and you should avoid that. That would deform the groove and destroy your stylus. A real two-for-one.

The question is whether there is damage, or no damage.

When I said that some people are putting forth a No Damage argument, Matt disputed this.

So I quoted a recent post saying "There is no objective evidence that playing a record permanently deforms the groove..." (or worse).

Then the author of that post jumps up and says that doesn't constitute a No Damage argument. (!)

So I ask if it is a damage argument.

Then you chip in and say "almost" no damage. And carry on as if I said something about 5 pound bricks.

All I am asking is: did someone, or didn't someone, say that there is no objective evidence of permanent deformation (ie damage) from playing a record?

Because if they did say that, then it would be really weasel-wordy to say that "no objective evidence of permanent deformation" is somehow not saying there is No Damage.

It's like shadow boxing, honestly! Just look at the post above if you don't believe me.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

The question is whether there is damage, or no damage.

Why is *that* the question? What useful information comes from answering *that* question?

When I said that some people are putting forth a No Damage argument, Matt disputed this.

So I quoted a recent post saying "There is no objective evidence that playing a record permanently deforms the groove..." (or worse).

Then the author of that post jumps up and says that doesn't constitute a No Damage argument. (!)

So I ask if it is a damage argument.

This looks really pedantic. What is the goal here? To gather and consider meaningful information about vinyl and its longevity or to win a tribalistic pissing contest?

Black, white, nothing in between, zero nuance or consideration of the complexity and variables.

Nothing lasts forever. Nothing falls apart in one play. Record wear and damage should be the subject of careful objective studies that look to honestly assess the issue and consider all the meaningful aspects of vinyl production and playback.

Or more to the point something informative and useful.

“Yes or no have always been a _________ “ (fill in the derogatory description) type gotcha questions really have no value

 

[Newman]

Why is *that* the question? What useful information comes from answering *that* question?

==
This looks really pedantic. What is the goal here? To gather and consider meaningful information about vinyl and its longevity or to win a tribalistic pissing contest?

Black, white, nothing in between, zero nuance or consideration of the complexity and variables.

Nothing lasts forever. Nothing falls apart in one play. Record wear and damage should be the subject of careful objective studies that look to honestly assess the issue and consider all the meaningful aspects of vinyl production and playback.

Or more to the point something informative and useful.

“Yes or no have always been a _________ “ (fill in the derogatory description) type gotcha questions really have no value

Wow, pot/kettle/black dude.

Just amazing, that all this shadow boxing and self contradiction, by several players answering for one another and tripping over each other, makes ME look like the pedant in the end for trying to unravel it!

I'll take it as read between the lines (in the slippery absence of anything in the lines themselves) that you think that there is a small, non-zero amount of permanent deformation/damage done to a record when it is played, and that your earlier insistence that there is no objective evidence of it was over-reach.

And that any quicksilver-like ducking and weaving in response will officially seal your fast-hardening status as the real pedant here. Or, to use your exact words, tribalistic pissing contestant. I would definitely not be proud of that sort of discourse.

 

[Brian Hall]

The question is whether there is damage, or no damage.

Objects which exist are constantly taking "damage". Entropy is real. Everything causes damage. Everything is constantly being hit by cosmic rays. Everything outside a strictly controlled environment is constantly being affected by temperature and humidity changes. Touching a vase to move it cause some slight damage. Dusting a table wears down the surface of the table. Walking across the floor or up and down stairs over years and years. Flipping a switch or adjusting a volume control. Everything causes wear.

What matters is the degree of damage although normal wear and tear might be a better concept. A decent turntable setup with a good stylus that is balanced correctly will not produce enough damage/wear and tear to make a noticeable difference for a long time / many plays.

Vinyl LPs are more fragile than CDs without a doubt, but they aren't fragile enough to be seriously damaged by playing them on a good system. Playing them on a bad system like an old 78 player with a big thick stylus with a heavy tonearm would cause rapid and obvious damage.

That would be like trying to play a CD with a high powered industrial laser cutter.

That said, CDs are obviously a superior format to vinyl LPs and in general a well mastered recording on a CD can and will sound better than the vinyl LP version.

Here comes the big BUT. Some CDs are not created using a well mastered recording. The vinyl LP version of the same album might be created with a better mastered recording giving it the potential to sound better than the CD.

I recently experienced this with the vinyl version of a new album sounding better than the CD and streaming version. That is rare in my experience at least with the type of music I prefer.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Everything below 50 Hz is poorer and everything below 30 Hz is mostly fiction in vinyl replay. Digital has no realistic low frequency limit.

Aside from organ music and orchestral bass drum, quite a lot of acoustic music can comfortably fit in to the low frequency limit of vinyl. Quite a lot of what's below 50 Hz in acoustic recordings is HVAC or traffic rumble. But it is still part of the archive of the event of recording.

Most rock bands produce very little valuable sound below 50 Hz, so much classic rock is a poor test for subwoofer and low frequency replay performance.

Electronic music and organ music demonstrate the largest difference I can hear between my LP and digital playback sources. Vinyl is just poor at low frequencies.

 

[Sal1950]

Think about it. A tiny stylus tip with almost no weight on it can't affect the grooves much at all.

That "tiny" stylus at say 1g of force translates to thousands of lbs per square inch.
I've no real measured size of contact area to do the math from and which would vary from needle style to style.
But still the actual pressure exerted by the stylus on the groove is very easy to drastically underestimate at first blush.
From Shure,
"We could find no temperature measurements in our engineering records. However, we did find this information: At 1 gram of tracking weight, the average pressure on the groove wall in contact with the stylus is estimated at 30,000 to 60,000 pounds per square inch."

https://service.shure.com/Service/s/article/temperature-of-stylus?language=en_US

More solid info from one of the top sources.

https://service.shure.com/Service/s/article/stylus-wear-and-record-wear?language=en_US

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

That "tiny" stylus at say 1g of force translates to thousands of lbs per square inch.
I've no real measured size of contact area to do the math from and which would vary from needle style to style.
But still the actual pressure exerted by the stylus on the groove is very easy to drastically underestimate at first blush.
From Shure,
"We could find no temperature measurements in our engineering records. However, we did find this information: At 1 gram of tracking weight, the average pressure on the groove wall in contact with the stylus is estimated at 30,000 to 60,000 pounds per square inch."

https://service.shure.com/Service/s/article/temperature-of-stylus?language=en_US

More solid info from one of the top sources.

https://service.shure.com/Service/s/article/stylus-wear-and-record-wear?language=en_US

It’s interesting. There must be something to the scale of things. If you put 30,000 lbs of pressure on an actual square inch on any part of the human body it would cause serious damage. Utterly destructive. Take it further. Imagine and actual square foot of any part of us under 4.5 million lbs of pressure. Instant death. Hard to imagine. I’m thinking Gallagher and a watermelon times 100. How would you even generate that kind of force? And yet a micro-ridge stylus at 2 grams tracking force can barely be felt on one’s finger.

 

[Newman]

Objects which exist are constantly taking "damage". Entropy is real. Everything causes damage. Everything is constantly being hit by cosmic rays. Everything outside a strictly controlled environment is constantly being affected by temperature and humidity changes. Touching a vase to move it cause some slight damage. Dusting a table wears down the surface of the table. Walking across the floor or up and down stairs over years and years. Flipping a switch or adjusting a volume control. Everything causes wear.

Yes, and we would want to be clear about one format being highly sensitive to wear in terms of performance (if cosmic rays are wear, then so is static, and yet it is instantly audible on vinyl, not to mention how faint a scratch needs to be in order to practically ruin a record), whereas the other format is inherently designed to be insensitive to wear in terms of performance (you actually have to change 1’s to 0’s or vice versa, and the reading surface is protected, and whole strings of 1’s or 0’s have to be changed, despite not being stored in consecutive order, plus two levels of correction or compensation needing to be exceeded before performance is audibly affected). So although everything causes wear, the level of sensitivity turns out to be the real issue.

What matters is the degree of damage although normal wear and tear might be a better concept. A decent turntable setup with a good stylus that is balanced correctly will not produce enough damage/wear and tear to make a noticeable difference for a long time / many plays.

Vinyl LPs are more fragile than CDs without a doubt, but they aren't fragile enough to be seriously damaged by playing them on a good system.

To an extent I agree, but one doesn’t want to understate it either. What you say, yes, should be true, but the reality of vinyl damage can be perplexingly capricious. I treat my vinyl in a sensibly careful manner: they live in the covers in antistatic sleeves, and go straight to the spindle, brush, play and reverse. But from time to time, rarely but not rarely enough, some little scratch turns up that wasn’t there last time. What the…? It’s perplexing and very disappointing when it happens. The fact that I can sometimes cause that with no awareness and constant care, is not cause for celebration…or deflection.

Playing them on a bad system like an old 78 player with a big thick stylus with a heavy tonearm would cause rapid and obvious damage. That would be like trying to play a CD with a high powered industrial laser cutter.

Argumentum ad absurdum? I get your point, but some people require authenticity of experience and that dictates that they use said equipment. But no CD is, or was, meant to be played with high powered industrial laser cutters.

That said, CDs are obviously a superior format to vinyl LPs and in general a well mastered recording on a CD can and will sound better than the vinyl LP version.

Yep.

Here comes the big BUT. Some CDs are not created using a well mastered recording. The vinyl LP version of the same album might be created with a better mastered recording giving it the potential to sound better than the CD.

Yep. This is typically agreed by all involved in every discussion of this kind of topic. Me too. IMHO those specific cases are the one situation that justifies the retention of a record player, even when the audiophile is format-agnostic and solely seeking the best replay of the best productions, and I have said as much in numerous such threads.

We also get those cases where no good recording production is available for a treasured performance. Toole advocates the use of a well-implemented tone control for these situations. Make one’s system outstandingly true to the original production in order to capture the nuance and glory of benchmark productions, then when playing treasured performances on lesser productions, tweak the tone control to at least make it sonically bearable enough. Don’t grit one’s teeth and suffer it just because of some purity principle.

I recently experienced this with the vinyl version of a new album sounding better than the CD and streaming version. That is rare in my experience at least with the type of music I prefer.

Thanks for the very balanced contribution. I could have written it meself!

 

[Axo1989]

It’s interesting. There must be something to the scale of things. If you put 30,000 lbs of pressure on an actual square inch on any part of the human body it would cause serious damage. Utterly destructive. Take it further. Imagine and actual square foot of any part of us under 4.5 million lbs of pressure. Instant death. Hard to imagine. I’m thinking Gallagher and a watermelon times 100. How would you even generate that kind of force? And yet a micro-ridge stylus at 2 grams tracking force can barely be felt on one’s finger.

Yes, total load matters, not just load/area. When we are crushing mammals. Or plastics. And the specific properties of materials. Not sure about the weight of mataphors.

 

[DSJR]

Almost no affect at all if you have things set up right and balanced. Think about it. A tiny stylus tip with almost no weight on it can't affect the grooves much at all.

Strapping a 5 pound brick to the tonearm is a bad idea and you should avoid that. That would deform the groove and destroy your stylus. A real two-for-one.

The huge pressure of the tiny contact area on the vinyl DOES deform said vinyl. Fortunately, it springs back after.

What DOES damage records often permanently is a mistracking stylus played at too low a downforce rattling around in said groove and also rinding over dust and so on, supposedly pushing the dust int the groove. Research was done decades ago when it really mattered and that's one reason why the chace for ever lower downforce and ultra low mass tonearms came to an abrupt end in the early 80s or so.

Just keep the stylus clean and get it checked every 500 hours of use or so if possible under a proper microscope (not a loupe).

 

[Sal1950]

It’s interesting. There must be something to the scale of things. If you put 30,000 lbs of pressure on an actual square inch on any part of the human body it would cause serious damage. Utterly destructive. Take it further. Imagine and actual square foot of any part of us under 4.5 million lbs of pressure. Instant death. Hard to imagine. I’m thinking Gallagher and a watermelon times 100. How would you even generate that kind of force? And yet a micro-ridge stylus at 2 grams tracking force can barely be felt on one’s finger.

Well, I didn't post the numbers, one of the biggest names in the history of the LP, cartridge manufacturer "Shure" did.
What I find most comical is the constant denial that LP's wear.
I never hear anyone try to deny that the needles wear, and they're made of diamond, the hardest natural mineral on earth.

 

[MattHooper]

I certainly don’t have any problem believing that playing a record builds up wear that eventually would become audible.

How long for audible wear to occur, presuming a decent turntable and cartridge set up and otherwise taking good care of records, is to me the more relevant question.

I also agree with Newman’s earlier observation that you can endeavour to take care of your records with nice sleeves etc. but nonetheless they can pick up almost mysterious scratches and stuff.

It’s a damned finicky medium and if somebody isn’t OK with that it’s not the medium for them.

My turntable-loving pal, who never gave up records, often says vinyl playback is so finicky it practically changes with the weather.