Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[Doodski]

So, what drives your interest in vinyl playback?

It's a interesting format in that the physics of it and the fidelity is pretty good and it has lasted this long as a format.

 

[fpitas]

Some of us NEED to get up every 20 minutes (and do something, anything) to keep from having one foot in the grave.

It's been proven that sitting for extended periods is bad for anyone. So now you have a valid scientific reason to get up. You're welcome.

 

[fpitas]

It's a interesting format in that the physics of it and the fidelity is pretty good and it has lasted this long as a format.

It's amazing how good it sounds, given all the limitations.

 

[Doodski]

It's amazing how good it sounds, given all the limitations.

It really is. There are so many things that could or do go wrong and like speakers they do sound different from cartridge and turntable changes.

 

[Digby]

Most of the perceived-as-coming-from-the-vinyl attributes are actually the usual sighted-listening misattributions, and aren't in the sound waves at all.

I thought you were someone who believes vinyl sounds markedly different/inferior, if so, why would the vinyl attributes not come from the sound?

 

[fpitas]

It really is. There are so many things that could or do go wrong and like speakers they do sound different from cartridge and turntable changes.

A lot of very bright people worked for many years developing the format. The RIAA curve, the choice of materials etc etc. It started as lacquer 78s, and no one ever said they sound good!

 

[Bob from Florida]

It really is. There are so many things that could or do go wrong and like speakers they do sound different from cartridge and turntable changes.

After 38 years of no vinyl playback, I find it amazing you can remember differences in playback by different cartridges. Audio memory is a funny thing. I can remember coming to conclusions about different cartridges when I had multiple head-shells for quick changes, but would be hard pressed to duplicate that now due to mounting and dismounting time.

 

[Doodski]

A lot of very bright people worked for many years developing the format. The RIAA curve, the choice of materials etc etc. It started as lacquer 78s, and no one ever said they sound good!

Considering it originated from wax cylinders and evolved to the flat format we have today it has served us very well.

 

[Doodski]

After 38 years of no vinyl playback, I find it amazing you can remember differences in playback by different cartridges. Audio memory is a funny thing. I can remember coming to conclusions about different cartridges when I had multiple head-shells for quick changes, but would be hard pressed to duplicate that now due to mounting and dismounting time.

O' for sure. I started with a 78 wind up old antique in the living room that we used sometimes and used every time the electricity went out then onto a ceramic type turntable and then when I got my first moving coil cartridge I was very pleased. I had some good mentors that guided me through it all and saved me the experimental stuff that would have wasted my expendable cash.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I've wondered about EQing a CD system to sound like a turntable/LP

Which one? As any mechanical transducer they have differences in the way they measure, so their sound is different, unlike digital files played trough a dac that will sound always the same, not sure why you would want to use a CD system. The records themselves also have variations due to manufacturing variation that also can be measured, hence also be audible.
As for the so-called “vinyl sound” so dear to vinyl defenders and digital defender alike, as an audiophile regularly listening to both records and digital files, I have no idea what that is. Different recordings and/or different mastering of the same musical piece sound vastly different, as to be recognizable just by playing one or the other, but if I do not know if it is played on my TT or my DAC, if the record does not have audible defects, as most of my records are free from, I do not know what plays because the difference only appear from an attentive and extensive AB comparison. Listening to music, not so much.
Both medium are perfectly adequate in communicating what the recorded music as to offer and do not differ as much as pro and con vinyl or pro and con digital would like it be.
Measurable differences? Absolutely. Audible differences? Absolutely. Enough to make it that one would Only use one or the other medium? Not in a million years.
Let me know if you ever succeed in digitizing that famous “vinyl sound” I will be the first one to want to hear it.

 

[Doodski]

Let me know if you ever succeed in digitizing that famous “vinyl sound” I will be the first one to want to hear it.

I think it would work but the issue with the process is that every cartridge in question would need to be used to make a reference calibration for each of them.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I think it would work but the issue with the process is that every cartridge in question would need to be used to make a reference calibration for each of them.

And do not forget the different arms, and the different settings VTA, antiskating, weight and the interaction with the preamp. which of those thousands of combination will be the reference?
Good luck, take your time, .
No rush for me here, I have so much music to listen to that I would need at list 10 life time to make it justice.

 

[fpitas]

I think it would work but the issue with the process is that every cartridge in question would need to be used to make a reference calibration for each of them.

Wouldn't the digital glare ruin everything?

 

[Doodski]

Wouldn't the digital glare ruin everything?

Lol... Just need Ray Bans for the ears.

 

[MattHooper]

BTW, as to the oft repeated claim that nostalgia is the main fuel for the vinyl renaissance:

1. Much of the sales are driven by people too young to have experienced the vinyl hey-day and so aren't experiencing "nostalgia" in the typical usage of the word. It's more that they have discovered records give them an experience they weren't getting from digital. (And yes discovering older artists is often included).

2. The people who DID live through vinyl's hey-day tend to be those most puzzled by the renaissance! That has been my observation. Certainly there ARE old fogy audiophiles who cling to vinyl with a combination of nostalgia and beliefs it sounds better or whatever. But if you are looking for people who tend to push back on vinyl records, it's often those who were old enough to have lived through the liabilities of vinyl and gratefully abandoned it for CDs. "Why would anyone still listen to records?" often comes from these people. I've been following the vinyl comeback for many years now, have read countless discussions, articles on it, paid attention to the comment sections, and that is a common thread among vinyl-nay-sayers. That theme seems to arise here too among those who growl about vinyl records - tends to be the old-enough guys who were familiar with vinyl and were happy to see it go.

 

[Newman]

I thought you were someone who believes vinyl sounds markedly different/inferior, if so, why would the vinyl attributes not come from the sound?

For the same reason perceived speaker attributes often don’t come from the sound: sighted listening.

We really need to do controlled listening to determine what are the perceived attributes coming from sound waves alone. When we do that, vinyl versions of the same master are detectably different from that master, and (a) that difference is in itself undesirable if we agree that preserving the studio master sound is a goal, and (b) there is nothing about that difference that is innately preferable to listeners, that I have seen. When we don’t do that, the reported attributes are dominated by sighted listening effects. That is all I said.

cheers

 

[MattHooper]

For the same reason perceived speaker attributes often don’t come from the sound: sighted listening.

We really need to do controlled listening to determine what are the perceived attributes coming from sound waves alone. When we do that, vinyl versions of the same master are detectably different from that master, and (a) that difference is in itself undesirable if we agree that preserving the studio master sound is a goal, and (b) there is nothing about that difference that is innately preferable to listeners, that I have seen.

Agreed.

 

[egellings]

After 38 years of no vinyl playback, I find it amazing you can remember differences in playback by different cartridges. Audio memory is a funny thing. I can remember coming to conclusions about different cartridges when I had multiple head-shells for quick changes, but would be hard pressed to duplicate that now due to mounting and dismounting time.

Maybe it's not the S.Q. itself that's remembered, but the listener's impression of the sound that is remembered.

 

[Doodski]

Maybe it's not the S.Q. itself that's remembered, but the listener's impression of the sound that is remembered.

My turntable progression was basically as such:
- Metal needle 78 RPM wind up turntable.
- 1970s ceramic needle turntable.
- Technics turntable with MM Audio Technica for 1980's dollars in the amount of ~$40.
- 1980's dollars again in the amount of ~$200 for a MC on a direct drive quartz lock Technics was so obvious a improvement that I made a mental note to self.

 

[Holmz]

Of all places I was in Austria. I am not sure what meds they were on but they were obviously mistaking Salzburg, Austria for somewhere in Australia!
Maybe their travel agent mixed up their tickets. I tried to tell them that they needed geography lessons. I just had to quickly leave. Thank God I remembered some short cuts through the buildings & streets from my younger days of being there in my FUN later teen years. What a ridiculous scenario that was.

I alighted in Melbourne en route to North American for skiing, and had the skis.
The cab driver asked where i was headed.
I said Kitzbuhl.
He asked if it was near Flinder’s street station.
All I could do is says yes.
(Being from the subcontinent I suspect he never saw skis.)