Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[early rejecter]

And if you didn't mean to imply it was somehow a facet of "all" vinylphiles - why did you specifically direct the comment at "Hooper et al" - what has it got to do with him/them - if you are not somehow lumping everyone together?

For what it’s worth, I thought he was actually making a distinction between Hooper/other ASR vinyl fans and a particular subset of the “vinylphile” community, not lumping them together — perhaps trying to explain (I wouldn’t go so far as to say apologize for) the often misdirected frustration shown here towards people who simply enjoy listening to records and don’t make claims about sonic superiority.

 

[MattHooper]

There's nothing to retract. See post number eight thousand two hundred and thirty three of this absurd bedamned thread.

Saying “Because Hooper et al. seem continually aggrieved by what they perceive as senseless/gratuitous anti-vinylphilia”

Is clearly different from the statement you made that I’ve been addressing, which tied me to bogus technical arguments and “thrashing nonsense.”

And of course you have not shown a single argument of mine that amounts to “ thrashing nonsense.”

Basically, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too: insult a member of the thread while being too cagey and lazy to back it up.

If the thread is so absurd as to bring out this behaviour in you, why bother posting in it?

 

[drewdawg999]

If you have EQ in your system, and you fiddle with it to get a particular recording to sound better, you are introducing a euphonic effect. There’s nothing wrong with talking about that.

Likewise, a speaker may have a distortion along the frequency response, perhaps a little bit of smile EQ or a little peak in the highs that someone might find euphonic. And it may “heighten the illusion” of greater clarity, more vivid cymbals, heightened vocal presence, clarity of guitar picking or whatever.

It’s just as possible for other distortions to have similar effects: for instance, the particular frequency response of a cartridge, or the mastering for vinyl, someone might find more euphonic than the digital version.

In my own system, I find vinyl tends to have a certain texture that slightly increases the sense of presence and density of instruments. I find that quite euphonic, and I will say so if I want to ;-)

We're so on the same page here Matt. I'm reminded of the saying, "The projectionist has final cut." And at home, I have final cut on my musical enjoyment. I most certainly use EQ on my all digital headphone system, and it certainly enhances my musical enjoyment. I'm not after neutrality, I wanna rock out! So I guess I'm not being faithful to the original master tape if I use EQ, I prefer smiley face most of the time. On the big rig though, no EQ or room correction, just what's there and often digital sounds a bit flat. Which is what it is, flat and neutral, nothing wrong with that. Enter the vinyl, a decidedly colored sound but one that I love, despite the warts. I guess there's some kind of statement on perfectionism implied here, that you don't have to be the best to be good. Maybe I still have Olympic fever but plenty of silver and bronze medalists happy with what they got.

I guess I've reached some euphonic euphoria with my analogue system at this point. It just sounds so awesome and rapturous, thrills me to no end so I feel the need to profess my love from the rooftops. Took a bit of coin though, which is a major barrier to most here but hey, YOLO, you can't take it with you. There's nothing else I'd rather spend money on than my stereo system and my record collection, it's that important to my way of life. The most valuable possessions I have (besides house and car) are my turntable and my Korg SV-2 stage piano. And the record collection, which is monstrous and unwieldy, but hey I love it anyways.

 

[MattHooper]

Closing this thread would be the best thing since sliced bread, for the rational audiophile.

We won’t allow you that satisfaction

And there you go again with your imperious
“ I’ll tel you THE rational choices for audiophiles ” act.

It’s funny that you continually complain about this ongoing thread, while constantly contributing to it anyway. In that respect you are your own worst enemy.

 

[Newman]

Why not? It's [euphonic distortion] been discussed here before, I'm not just pulling it out my butt.

That's right, it was Hiraga who pulled it out of his butt in the 70s. Everyone since then has been pulling it out of his butt.

Keith Howard, who is a respectable technical writer on audio topics, wrote a nice article that discredits the claim.
He includes sighted listening tests that I wish were more controlled, but the key irrefutable point he makes before his listening tests, and which is independent of his listening tests and derives from earlier research, is this: Any device that introduces harmonic distortion on a sinusoidal input will also produce amplitude intermodulation distortion—sum and difference frequencies—on a complex input like a music signal. These intermod components are generally dissonant, and, what's more, they very quickly become the dominant component of the distortion as signal complexity increases. (my emphasis)

No, claims that euphonic distortion is well-established don't hold up.

Amir doesn't seem to like it but I believe JJ mentioned that it's been studied and it is in fact a thing. And like it or not, tube gear exists and introduces distortions that plenty of people have a right to like. It's not comp sci, but it's still scientific to study these things. Personally, I took this distortion test on YT and THD didn't start bothering me until like 8%. That must be some ugly low SINAD, but my tolerance for distortion must be high. Perhaps it's a slight case of tinnitus that makes me find distortions pleasing, as someone once brought that to my attention.
I did a shootout between the SACD and vinyl of Waltz for Debby, same Analogue Productions mastering, and preferred the vinyl. It was a subtle difference but came down to soundstage and presence, which one can say are artificially heightened by euphonic distortion. Artificial or not, I have a right to like it if it enhances my enjoyment of the music.

You have simply fallen deeply into the Sighted Listening Effect. You are most likely experiencing confirmation bias.

Even if, for example, there were evidence of such a preference for high levels of distortion of a certain configuration, the following caveats would still apply:-

1. Most people having a positive experience during sighted listening with such an amp would be perceiving confirmation bias more than anything caused by the sound waves themselves.
2. A distortion generator module, with adjustable parameters, would be a vastly more effective way of achieving the right amount and configuration of 'nice errors', personally tuned to the individual's needs.

So-called euphonic distortions always fail the common-sense “I wish the live instruments had some more of those euphonic distortions added” test. Come off it. Even where a carefully controlled listening experiment were to show this preference for vinyl/tube errors added to clean recordings, there is bound to be something else unlikable in the recording, mixing, mastering, speakers, room or calibration used for the test, that the addition of vinyl/tube errors happens to be masking, in that one particular experiment. We do not wish that live music had vinyl/tube errors added so we could like it more, so the claim that we actually prefer the errors is false. A case of false attribution.

No, no no. Until people making these claims convincingly demonstrate that they have controlled their personal listening tests for non-sonic biases, those very biases will remain the go-to explanation for their claims. That’s basic science.

cheers

 

[Holmz]

Because it's the exact opposite of High Fidelity
Introducing distortion or whatever into a signal path is whats done during the creation of music.
Home reproduction is intended to be transparent to the source.

It was the original purpose of home reproduction.

Of course if you want to plug in a mixer board to your stereo, that's your business, many are doing similar.
But that's still in no way what this passion was designed to do.

I would argue that the passion is also wrapped up in marketing and sales.

another scientific questions, is "is there any scientific evidence that distortion is more enjoyable for many people?"

Yes - it is a question.
It seems from the bevy of equipment being sold, that many are choosing the equipment with some additional distortion.

 

[MattHooper]

You raise some good points in your post, but about this…

So-called euphonic distortions always fail the common-sense “I wish the live instruments had some more of those euphonic distortions added” test. Come off it.

Musicians are often adding euphonic distortions. What do you think guitarist are doing when playing with all sorts of guitar tones, tube amps, distortion modellers, reverbs, etc?

Even a muted trumpet is a type of euphonic distortion.

I’m adding euphonic distortions all the time in my work.

But the above quoted statement about trying to improve on live instruments misses the general point about euphonic distortion added in the reproduction point.

But you get at it here:

. Even where a carefully controlled listening experiment were to show this preference for vinyl/tube errors added to clean recordings, there is bound to be something else unlikable in the recording, mixing, mastering, speakers, room or calibration used for the test, that the addition of vinyl/tube errors happens to be masking,

Yes, that’s more to the point. One way we can prefer euphonic distortion is that it makes a recording “sound better” (to an individual) - whether it’s tubes, EQ or whatever.

If we’re talking about the euphony of live instruments as a reference: it’s my view that most recordings of instruments and voices, along with the nature of most sound systems, impose an artificiality. Recordings of a trumpet, acoustic guitar, or what have you, tend to be less harmonically Rich sounding, And tend to sound squeezed, tight, more mechanical sounding, less body and less of the organic quality of the real thing. These are, of course, just generalizations of my own subjective impressions. But I have cared about listening to real instruments And judging them against reproduce sound from many years, and I’ve also done my own live instrument versus reproduced tests, which have helped form these impressions. Just the nature of recording reproduction, mixing etc. tends to yield such results (as well as the liabilities of the reproduction system - stereo yielding a more ghostly sense of sonic images than the real thing).

To that end, at least in principle, Some euphonic distortion could aid somebody’s perception of hearing something a little bit more like the real thing if that is their goal.

That has been my own perception of what my tube amps bring to my system. Subtle alterations that remind me more of some of the characteristics I like in live musical sounds.

I’m talking in principal, so you don’t need to accept my anecdotal claims.

That said..,,

Until people making these claims convincingly demonstrate that they have controlled their personal listening tests for non-sonic biases, those very biases will remain the go-to explanation for their claims.

At least in the case of my tube preamp, my blind testing seemed to support my sighted impressions.

(And some ASR members in my blind test thread pointed out that stereophile measurements of my preamp, supported the plausibility of my test results)

Cheers

 

[Sal1950]

I would argue that the passion is also wrapped up in marketing and sales.

Sure, that's exactly what got us to where we are today. Top shelf marketing for everything from cables, to tubes, and then back to vinyl because it has proven to be such a cash cow.
Read my signature one more time everyone please, it's this kind of crap being accepted as Great Hi Fi that got us where we are today.
This is 2024 my friends, If the measurements say the component is garbage, it's garbage. I couldn't give a rodents behind how much you may enjoy listening to garbage, that's your right. But it still remains to be garbage that your listening to. If you prefer to go to McDonalds after closing and eat out of their garbage cans, that's also your right, it's just definitely one freedom I'll choose to pass by on. There's just so much better Food and High Fidelity Component paths to follow.

 

[Steven Holt]

I'm going to add this, I don't know if it's truly relevant, or if it's been covered (if it has, my apologies). I'm a former economics teacher, and I can tell you that owning records, or CD's for that matter, makes very little economic sense. Let's assume that the SQ is equal between records and streaming (yes, yes, I know...). So, you spend $25 on your favorite album. Take it home, enjoy the hell out of it for about 5 times. Put it in your record rack and forget about it. Did you really get your money's worth? Really?? OK, so you go down to your record shop and try to sell it. You'll be lucky to get $5 for it. You've had a little satisfaction and you've lost $20. Does that make sense? And then there's the hassle cost. Say you move. If you have 20 LP's, no problem. But if you have 500, BIG PROBLEM. Those things can get heavy, and u have to lug them around, place to place. Who wants to do that? Same with CD's. And, if you pass away (HOPE YOU DON'T!!) where are they going? They are going to be someone else's problem, that's what. The only reason people put up with it for so long? Records and CD's were the only game in town. That said, every now and then I buy an album. But streaming is the way to go, by far. And if you factor in the superior sound quality, it becomes very clear.

 

[MattHooper]

I'm going to add this, I don't know if it's truly relevant, or if it's been covered (if it has, my apologies). I'm a former economics teacher, and I can tell you that owning records, or CD's for that matter, makes very little economic sense. Let's assume that the SQ is equal between records and streaming (yes, yes, I know...). So, you spend $25 on your favorite album. Take it home, enjoy the hell out of it for about 5 times. Put it in your record rack and forget about it. Did you really get your money's worth? Really?? OK, so you go down to your record shop and try to sell it. You'll be lucky to get $5 for it. You've had a little satisfaction and you've lost $20. Does that make sense? And then there's the hassle cost. Say you move. If you have 20 LP's, no problem. But if you have 500, BIG PROBLEM. Those things can get heavy, and u have to lug them around, place to place. Who wants to do that? Same with CD's. And, if you pass away (HOPE YOU DON'T!!) where are they going? They are going to be someone else's problem, that's what. The only reason people put up with it for so long? Records and CD's were the only game in town. That said, every now and then I buy an album. But streaming is the way to go, by far. And if you factor in the superior sound quality, it becomes very clear.

You could make a similar economic and “hassle” argument against deciding to have children. you can even find examples of people who regret having kids . But most people find the expense and hassle ultimately worthwhile.

Same , it seems, with a majority of vinyl enthusiasts. You can find the occasional person who begins to experience some regret. But most are very happy with the choice. I have about 1000 records. I certainly didn’t get into buying them as an investment that I expected any return on.
But they totally injected a lot of freshness and fun into my audiophile and music hobby. No regrets. It’s all good. And that is pretty much the gist of what I’ve seen from most people who got into the “ vinyl Renaissance.”

 

[HammersRocco]

I'm going to add this, I don't know if it's truly relevant, or if it's been covered (if it has, my apologies). I'm a former economics teacher, and I can tell you that owning records, or CD's for that matter, makes very little economic sense. Let's assume that the SQ is equal between records and streaming (yes, yes, I know...). So, you spend $25 on your favorite album. Take it home, enjoy the hell out of it for about 5 times. Put it in your record rack and forget about it. Did you really get your money's worth? Really?? OK, so you go down to your record shop and try to sell it. You'll be lucky to get $5 for it. You've had a little satisfaction and you've lost $20. Does that make sense? And then there's the hassle cost. Say you move. If you have 20 LP's, no problem. But if you have 500, BIG PROBLEM. Those things can get heavy, and u have to lug them around, place to place. Who wants to do that? Same with CD's. And, if you pass away (HOPE YOU DON'T!!) where are they going? They are going to be someone else's problem, that's what. The only reason people put up with it for so long? Records and CD's were the only game in town. That said, every now and then I buy an album. But streaming is the way to go, by far. And if you factor in the superior sound quality, it becomes very clear.

master of the obvious - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.wiktionary.org

Argument from authority - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(own)

 

[Brian Hall]

Ah, I’m merely one of the “ worst transgressors.”

Wouldn't "worst transgressor" mean you were not very good at transgressing and so you really aren't transgressing much at all?

I would think someone would have to say "best transgressor" to try to accurately accuse someone of being "problematic".

 

[Sal1950]

The only reason people put up with it for so long? Records and CD's were the only game in town. That said, every now and then I buy an album. But streaming is the way to go, by far. And if you factor in the superior sound quality, it becomes very clear.

Ah, how old did you say you are?
The most important point you've missed from either side is our ability to chose exactly which masters we have in our collection. You have little to no choice with streaming.

 

[Brian Hall]

The most important point you've missed from either side is our ability to chose exactly which masters we have in our collection. You have little to no choice with streaming.

I've seen the opposite problem with streaming. For some albums there are too many choices/versions. (Remaster (201x), (Remaster (202x), Deluxe, Deluxe remastered, Remix by X, etc.

 

[Doodski]

Ah, how old did you say you are?
The most important point you've missed from either side is our ability to chose exactly which masters we have in our collection. You have little to no choice with streaming.

I stream or download multiples of the same song and find the good sounding ones.

 

[Brian Hall]

I stream or download multiples of the same song and find the good sounding ones.

Yes. I listen to the versions and save the "best" to my library. It can take a while to go through the virtual pile and some are so similar I can't hear any differences. I wish the services would do a better job at curating their collections and cut back on the extra versions.

 

[Doodski]

Yes. I listen to the versions and save the "best" to my library. It can take a while to go through the virtual pile and some are so similar I can't hear any differences. I wish the services would do a better job at curating their collections and cut back on the extra versions.

I have consumed a lot of time bookmarking YouTube music videos. Now I have 3188 on file and I am tickled pink. I appreciate getting more bookmarks from our music thread.

 

[drewdawg999]

That's right, it was Hiraga who pulled it out of his butt in the 70s. Everyone since then has been pulling it out of his butt.

Keith Howard, who is a respectable technical writer on audio topics, wrote a nice article that discredits the claim.
He includes sighted listening tests that I wish were more controlled, but the key irrefutable point he makes before his listening tests, and which is independent of his listening tests and derives from earlier research, is this: Any device that introduces harmonic distortion on a sinusoidal input will also produce amplitude intermodulation distortion—sum and difference frequencies—on a complex input like a music signal. These intermod components are generally dissonant, and, what's more, they very quickly become the dominant component of the distortion as signal complexity increases. (my emphasis)

No, it doesn't hold up.

Thanks for linking that article. I enjoyed it and will think things over a bit. I should be careful with further buttplay, checking out Hiraga a bit. I'm actually not a fan of tube gear anymore, mostly because of weight and inconvenience. My gear is mostly ASR approved, save for the vinyl side of things, and the little Maggies. But hey, I'm in a state of becoming something else, coming from the subjective world. As much as I've gained from ASR, I still choose to trust my ears and what I hear from my vinyl is not dissonant. On the contrary, it sounds quite harmonious and glorious. I'm unable to explain it scientifically... it's just that electricity generated by the cartridge when the needle's in the groove, it just does it for me. Sexy ass transducer.

You have simply fallen deeply into the Sighted Listening Effect. You are most likely experiencing confirmation bias.

Even if, for example, there were evidence of such a preference for high levels of distortion of a certain configuration, the following caveats would still apply:-

1. Most people having a positive experience during sighted listening with such an amp would be perceiving confirmation bias more than anything caused by the sound waves themselves.
2. A distortion generator module, with adjustable parameters, would be a vastly more effective way of achieving the right amount and configuration of 'nice errors', personally tuned to the individual's needs.

So-called euphonic distortions always fail the common-sense “I wish the live instruments had some more of those euphonic distortions added” test. Come off it. Even where a carefully controlled listening experiment were to show this preference for vinyl/tube errors added to clean recordings, there is bound to be something else unlikable in the recording, mixing, mastering, speakers, room or calibration used for the test, that the addition of vinyl/tube errors happens to be masking, in that one particular experiment. We do not wish that live music had vinyl/tube errors added so we could like it more, so the claim that we actually prefer the errors is false. A case of false attribution.

No, no no. Until people making these claims convincingly demonstrate that they have controlled their personal listening tests for non-sonic biases, those very biases will remain the go-to explanation for their claims. That’s basic science.

cheers

I try to be an objective person, as much a scientist as Robert Pollard I guess. Hell I have an engineering degree ffs, and took the CD class as an elective, but still I understand the brain can play tricks. I would love to make it a DBT but don't have the means. I would love for digital to whup dat ass on vinyl and ditch the inconvenience, but it simply doesn't. It's a close race aurally even if it isn't on paper. I'm married to my turntable at this point, it is end game and I expect it to last me the rest of my life, to offset the substantial cost. It's either/or, where both is an option and I must have both analogue and digital sources, I just got to.

 

[Newman]

Thanks for your very well worded reply, @drewdawg999

 

[Sal1950]

I've seen the opposite problem with streaming. For some albums there are too many choices/versions. (Remaster (201x), (Remaster (202x), Deluxe, Deluxe remastered, Remix by X, etc.

Great! In the cases where that occurs all the better, but I still would worry about a situation that I have no control over. I constantly hear of cases where various mixes come and go for no given or understandable reasons. I'm exclusive to Apple streaming now, simply for the 1. Low Cost, 2. The Large catalog of Atmos immersive mixes. But I'd say 99% of my listening comes off of my stored files, all Atmos are files are ripped DolbyTrue HD. I really only use streaming to preview new music I don't already have. But that's "just me".