Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[computer-audiophile]

Technics gives the 1200G and 1200GR exactly the same performance specs.

In the German Audio-Analog forum, where I had opened a very long thread about the new Technics DD's, there were some members who own both models side by side. They don't sound exactly the same but ultimately very similar. That was the consensus.

 

[killdozzer]

What has that got to do with the science of SOTA music reproduction in 2023 ???
All it tells me is boys, (and some girls) of any age still like to play with useless toys.

When you mention toys... It goes along with what I often see as annoying about records, since @mglobe mentioned polarizing. I met a few people who simply love it and don't care much for the fact it has a lot of shortcomings. They just enjoy it and don't really preach it.

The other lot is just as annoying as any form of smug and this is what makes people react. If you care to talk to vinyl-lovers, you'll sooner or later, arrive at the conclusion that it is almost Freudian object-relation, as silly and as oversimplified as that may be, but indeed, it's often just as simple as that.

These people talk about themselves when they talk about their possessions. It's always about how it makes "ME" look like. "I prefer vinyl 'cause I have this insight into a deeper knowledge". "MY taste is far more refined and superior and it allows me to understand/enjoy how putting sound of music through an imperfect machine magically transforms it into a superb experience". "I'm more classical". "I'm a part of the older, better world when they used to make'em right". "I'm far to sensitive and refined for this artificial, soulless age".

I find the first group far more appealing and the second one outright annoying which often inspires me to hand out a few good ol' stabs and digs.

But it has nothing to do with records. This type of smug behaviour is something I generally don't like. It can be any field or hobby you choose. It can also be substantiated unlike the vinyl BS. For example, if someone had a far more superior audio equipment than mine, but he uses this fact for the aforementioned behaviour, I'd treat him just the same.

 

[computer-audiophile]

When you mention toys... It goes along with what I often see as annoying about records, since @mglobe mentioned polarizing. I met a few people who simply love it and don't care much for the fact it has a lot of shortcomings. They just enjoy it and don't really preach it.

The other lot is just as annoying as any form of smug and this is what makes people react. If you care to talk to vinyl-lovers, you'll sooner or later, arrive at the conclusion that it is almost Freudian object-relation, as silly and as oversimplified as that may be, but indeed, it's often just as simple as that.

These people talk about themselves when they talk about their possessions. It's always about how it makes "ME" look like. "I prefer vinyl 'cause I have this insight into a deeper knowledge". "MY taste is far more refined and superior and it allows me to understand/enjoy how putting sound of music through an imperfect machine magically transforms it into a superb experience". "I'm more classical". "I'm a part of the older, better world when they used to make'em right". "I'm far to sensitive and refined for this artificial, soulless age".

I find the first group far more appealing and the second one outright annoying which often inspires me to hand out a few good ol' stabs and digs.

But it has nothing to do with records. This type of smug behaviour is something I generally don't like. It can be any filed or hobby you choose. It can also be substantiated unlike the vinyl BS. For example, if some had a far more superior audio equipment than mine, but he uses this fact for the aforementioned behaviour, I'd treat him just the same.

I'm not sure I understand the objection correctly. But when it comes to practical experience (including knowledge), you can only speak of yourself. Also advice should be based imo on own experience and knowledge.

Or do you have a better suggestion?

 

[mhardy6647]

sort of, kind of on topic.

source:

 

[MattHooper]

When you mention toys... It goes along with what I often see as annoying about records, since @mglobe mentioned polarizing. I met a few people who simply love it and don't care much for the fact it has a lot of shortcomings. They just enjoy it and don't really preach it.

The other lot is just as annoying as any form of smug and this is what makes people react. If you care to talk to vinyl-lovers, you'll sooner or later, arrive at the conclusion that it is almost Freudian object-relation, as silly and as oversimplified as that may be, but indeed, it's often just as simple as that.

These people talk about themselves when they talk about their possessions. It's always about how it makes "ME" look like. "I prefer vinyl 'cause I have this insight into a deeper knowledge". "MY taste is far more refined and superior and it allows me to understand/enjoy how putting sound of music through an imperfect machine magically transforms it into a superb experience". "I'm more classical". "I'm a part of the older, better world when they used to make'em right". "I'm far to sensitive and refined for this artificial, soulless age".

I find the first group far more appealing and the second one outright annoying which often inspires me to hand out a few good ol' stabs and digs.

But it has nothing to do with records. This type of smug behaviour is something I generally don't like. It can be any filed or hobby you choose. It can also be substantiated unlike the vinyl BS. For example, if some had a far more superior audio equipment than mine, but he uses this fact for the aforementioned behaviour, I'd treat him just the same.

Sounds pretty strawmanny.

 

[killdozzer]

I'm not sure I understand the objection correctly. But when it comes to practical experience (including knowledge), you can only speak of yourself. Also advice should be based imo on own experience and knowledge.

Or do you have a better suggestion?

I agree with the part where you say you don't understand.

 

[beagleman]

When you mention toys... It goes along with what I often see as annoying about records, since @mglobe mentioned polarizing. I met a few people who simply love it and don't care much for the fact it has a lot of shortcomings. They just enjoy it and don't really preach it.

The other lot is just as annoying as any form of smug and this is what makes people react. If you care to talk to vinyl-lovers, you'll sooner or later, arrive at the conclusion that it is almost Freudian object-relation, as silly and as oversimplified as that may be, but indeed, it's often just as simple as that.

These people talk about themselves when they talk about their possessions. It's always about how it makes "ME" look like. "I prefer vinyl 'cause I have this insight into a deeper knowledge". "MY taste is far more refined and superior and it allows me to understand/enjoy how putting sound of music through an imperfect machine magically transforms it into a superb experience". "I'm more classical". "I'm a part of the older, better world when they used to make'em right". "I'm far to sensitive and refined for this artificial, soulless age".

I find the first group far more appealing and the second one outright annoying which often inspires me to hand out a few good ol' stabs and digs.

But it has nothing to do with records. This type of smug behaviour is something I generally don't like. It can be any filed or hobby you choose. It can also be substantiated unlike the vinyl BS. For example, if some had a far more superior audio equipment than mine, but he uses this fact for the aforementioned behaviour, I'd treat him just the same.

I have noticed many that try to make all kind of huge claims for vinyl and or analog being far superior.

I have ripped vinyl and to me and the few I played it back for, it sounded for all intents, identical to the original vinyl.
So to me that says, analog and digital are capable of very similar sound.

 

[mppix]

My vinyl setup is hum free at sane listening levels. Most of my records are scratch free and quiet as I use a good vacuum record cleaning machine on them. The Hana SL cartridge withe the Shibata profile diamond set up correctly helps with the lack of surface noise. The ifi Zen phono is particularly hum free.

Ok, we started this discussion saying that high-quality vinyl playback remains expensive .. but your $3-5k vinyl playback system is hard to tell apart from CD. This is shown by finding the system "hum-free" at "sane listening levels".
It is great that you like your system but I am not sure how any of this holds up.

 

[mppix]

In terms of technical data, it is hard to rise above this level. Despite this, the turntables do not all sound exactly the same (with the same cartridge and the same level). I have already participated in many comparisons and shootouts and have a lot of experience listening to different turntables I owned in 60 years. The 1200 GR, for example, tends to a rather bright sound, which has an influence on my choice of cartridge.

How did you asses that the SL-1200GR tends to be "rather bright sounding"?
I would think turntables have SnR, WoF, and resonances but I am not sure how they could elevate highs - there is just not much happening on a table above 1000Hz. On the other hand, cartridges tend to elevate highs, phono preamps may have incorrect/patial RIAA compensation, and historical records may have varying mastering quality...

 

[computer-audiophile]

How did you asses that the SL-1200GR tends to be "rather bright sounding"?

That is my personal impression as a owner. But I am not alone in this judgment. Some other experienced colleagues of the Audio Analog Forum for example agreed. You can try it yourself, make your own experience, or you just do not believe it - it's your choice. I don't mind.

 

[computer-audiophile]

I have noticed many that try to make all kind of huge claims for vinyl and or analog being far superior.

I have the impression that are rather very few, even among those who still like to listen to vinyl records. There are many reasons to do it.
Who has claimed it, for example, here in this thread? I have not found it.

 

[computer-audiophile]

The SL 1000R is among the world's best. I might buy it if I were a millionaire.

 

[mppix]

That was my personal impression. But I am not alone in this judgment. Some other experienced colleagues of the Audio Analog Forum for example agreed. You can try it yourself, make your own experience, or you just do not believe it - it's your choice. I don't mind.

So .. the reviewers just did not get the memo?

 

[mppix]

The SL 1000R is among the world's best. I might buy it if I were a millionaire.

It would be fun to blind test with the GR

Technics specs for the SL-1200GR | SL-1000R are
Wow and flutter: 0.025% | 0.015% (W.R.M.S.)
Rumble: 79dB | 92dB (IEC 98A weighted)

Hifinews.com Lab Reports for the SL-1200GR | SL-1000R
Turntable speed error at 33.33rpm: 33.33rpm (–0.006%) | 33.33rpm (–0.006%)
Time to audible stabilisation: 1.5sec | <1sec
Peak Wow/Flutter : 0.02% / 0.02% | 0.01% / 0.01%
Rumble (silent groove, DIN B wtd): –70.7dB | –74.9dB
Rumble (through bearing, DIN B wtd): –72.9dB | –74.1dB
Hum & Noise (unwtd, rel. to 5cm/sec): –62.8dB | –59.9dB
Power Consumption: 4-17W | 6W (<1W idle)
Dimensions (WHD) / Weight: 453x173x372mm / 11.5kg | 531x188x399mm / 40.2kg

 

[Mean & Green]

I have some of the same stuff on vinyl and CD’s ripped to my music server. As long as the levels are closely matched and the record is clean, it is very difficult to say which is digital. The mastering may be different, but actually labeling the vinyl source accurately- if you are conducting a blind test, is not easy. This kind of “good enough“ is more than adequate for me to enjoy all my sources of music.

I can also say that I have some material which shares the same master both on vinyl and digital and when listened to level matched A/B I cannot tell a difference so long as the vinyl is a good pressing and clean.

I‘ve never been into the analogue vs digital thing. Objectively digital is superior in every way, but subjectively the two can be very similar IME if the source material is equal.

 

[Newman]

I have ripped vinyl and to me and the few I played it back for, it sounded for all intents, identical to the original vinyl.
So to me that says, analog and digital are capable of very similar sound.

It also says that the digital ‘data container’ is bigger than, and ‘contains’, the vinyl data container. Even a 16/44 rip.

 

[killdozzer]

I have noticed many that try to make all kind of huge claims for vinyl and or analog being far superior.

I have ripped vinyl and to me and the few I played it back for, it sounded for all intents, identical to the original vinyl.
So to me that says, analog and digital are capable of very similar sound.

Weeeell... To put it more precisely, it means that a digital rip can contain the entire signal of the record and reproduce it with no discernible difference.

But it doesn't work the other way around.

 

[killdozzer]

Few of you here probably visit the AudioBS group on FB. So, about the vinyl renaissance, Mrs. Swift is doing her part by "vinyl-izing" the entire catalogue.

A turd on a stick. I'm telling you, you'd find at least someone to buy it.

 

[computer-audiophile]

Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?​

In any case, the vinyl renaissance cannot be explained by expressing displeasure with it or by trying to discredit vinyl lovers.
I would like to see more constructive contributions.

 

[beagleman]

I have the impression that are rather very few, even among those who still like to listen to vinyl records. There are many reasons to do it.
Who has claimed it, for example, here in this thread? I have not found it.

Mostly on other forums to be honest!