Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[Frgirard]

Electronic comb filtering due to the bass in mono.
Irregular pitch making the vinyl unsuitable for reproducing a piano
Wear
Offset
Requires a ritual.
Impossible to make comparative discographies.
For me, never more vinyl (I'm 55)
In the era when vinyl was the standard, the first thousand were used to adjust the presses and throw away because they were deemed unsuitable for sale.
Today they are selling them to you.

And of course the selling price.

The limited dynamic range of vinyl is not a problem in a world where 20 dB is considered a lot (14 dB for bob katz)

 

[IPunchCholla]

Electronic comb filtering due to the bass in mono.
Irregular pitch making the vinyl unsuitable for reproducing a piano
Wear
Offset
Requires a ritual.
Impossible to make comparative discographies For never more vinyl (I'm 55)
In the era when vinyl was the standard, the first thousand were used to adjust the presses and throw away because they were deemed unsuitable for sale.
Today they are selling them to you.

And of course the selling price.

The limited dynamic range of vinyl is not a problem in a world where 20 dB is considered a lot (14 dB for bob katz)

Do you have any links to the comb filtering issue? That is a new one to me.
Vinyl seems like it would be a terrible medium for classical, chamber, maybe jazz (as it is often played now, not what it represented culturally when invented). But works just fine for many other genre's. I'm listening to vinyl Kid Amnesia by Radiohead right now. The pianos, saxes, horns sound fine as they are used in that recording, the difference from lossless streaming is audible, but the two are very close (as blind A/B tested). In the end the test takerpreferred the vinyl.

On a side note I have been playing around with creating my own music in Logic Pro. This is based on late 1970s early 1980s Post Punk mixed with Industrial. Playing around with the compression filter makes those compositions sound so much better, right up until it makes it sound terrible. It is one of those tools with its heart in the right place, but easy to abuse. It allows the quiet bits to be heard in less than ideal locations while still retaining relative loudnesses. Compression/loss of dynamic range is a mastering issue that arises out of a one size fits all mentality. What we need are multiple masters that are designed for multiple different sound environments. At home with a low noise floor? play the master designed for that environment. In your car? play the version for that sound environment. Given the progress of AI, it might not be that long until our playback systems dynamically compress (or not) music based on the environmental noise they are playing in.

As an aside, I live by an airfare base and use a swamp cooler for cooling, which means my window need to be open in the summer. The cargo planes at the base idle for hours before taking off. The Osprey practice hovering and landing frequently. One or the other just turned off/took off. It is suddenly much quieter here, so I am going back to composing since I can actually hear the quiet bits now.

 

[Frgirard]

Do you have any links to the comb filtering issue? That is a new one to me.
Vinyl seems like it would be a terrible medium for classical, chamber, maybe jazz (as it is often played now, not what it represented culturally when invented). But works just fine for many other genre's. I'm listening to vinyl Kid Amnesia by Radiohead right now. The pianos, saxes, horns sound fine as they are used in that recording, the difference from lossless streaming is audible, but the two are very close (as blind A/B tested). In the end the test takerpreferred the vinyl.

On a side note I have been playing around with creating my own music in Logic Pro. This is based on late 1970s early 1980s Post Punk mixed with Industrial. Playing around with the compression filter makes those compositions sound so much better, right up until it makes it sound terrible. It is one of those tools with its heart in the right place, but easy to abuse. It allows the quiet bits to be heard in less than ideal locations while still retaining relative loudnesses. Compression/loss of dynamic range is a mastering issue that arises out of a one size fits all mentality. What we need are multiple masters that are designed for multiple different sound environments. At home with a low noise floor? play the master designed for that environment. In your car? play the version for that sound environment. Given the progress of AI, it might not be that long until our playback systems dynamically compress (or not) music based on the environmental noise they are playing in.

As an aside, I live by an airfare base and use a swamp cooler for cooling, which means my window need to be open in the summer. The cargo planes at the base idle for hours before taking off. The Osprey practice hovering and landing frequently. One or the other just turned off/took off. It is suddenly much quieter here, so I am going back to composing since I can actually hear the quiet bits now.

The sumation stereo to mono occurs an electronic comb filtering.
It's the case for all sub. But the sub are cut at 80 Hz.

For me is audible. For me!

I have digitized vinyl (linn lp 12 used) and remasterings made with vinyl. The bass is always dirty, muddy.

All comparisons must be do with the same equalization.
Compare vinyl digitized and the original : there are no difference.

 

[antcollinet]

Lets consider looking at facts.

In here https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/13/tech/vinyl-records-cd-sales-riaa/index.html it says:


Note that that percentage equation would be:
(231.1 / (231.2+129.9) ) * 100%
… which looks like it could be a bit more than 20% ?

The market includes streaming. CD's are also a small percentage of the market.


EDIT - point already made above.

 

[antcollinet]

Where is the line for you? I am happy to acknowledge that there is no way vinyl measures as well as digital. I am also happy to acknowledge that vinyl is further from the recording than digital. But I often enjoy listening to vinyl more than digital. On those occasions the experience of vinyl is superior in that it creates more enjoyment. Is it acceptable for me to say "I like it better."? Can that be shortened to "It is better." Why or why not? Can I say "vinyl is superior at giving my music listening sessions a richer experience on occasion"? Can I shorten that to "Vinyl is superior, occasionally."?

I guess I'm wondering how much I have to caveat a statement of preference. Do I have to preface it with "While technically inferior," every single time? Why?

ETA: I wonder how much of this debate is just the way people use the words "better", "superior" and the like referring to either/both preferences and facts.

As someone who also plays vinyl

It is critically important (regardless of how we enjoy vinyl) not to spread misinformation that it objectively sounds better, because that (re-enforced by the audiophilliac press) may inform the purchasing decisions of those less knowledgable.

In other words - it is fine to say "I like it" "It is better for me because...." but:

1 - not claim any objective superiority - it simply, as a recording medium, is Not As Good As Digital.
2 - not muddy the waters of objectivity by shortening "it is better for me because...." to "it is better"

 

[IPunchCholla]

As someone who also plays vinyl

It is critically important (regardless of how we enjoy vinyl) not to spread misinformation that it objectively sounds better, because that (re-enforced by the audiophilliac press) may inform the purchasing decisions of those less knowledgable.

In other words - it is fine to say "I like it" "It is better for me because...." but:

1 - not claim any objective superiority - it simply, as a recording medium, is Not As Good As Digital.
2 - not muddy the waters of objectivity by shortening "it is better for me because...." to "it is better"

That is a nice clear, bright, line! And explains the why the burden should be carried.

 

[IPunchCholla]

"I like it" and "it is better" are totally different statements. I take no issue with the former. The latter is just objectively false.

I agree. I guess I am just curious about the way in which people use words and their inherent slipperiness and the ways in which better and superior are context dependent, as well as who gets to claim their context as supreme. I personally do always try to clarify that I like vinyl in certain circumstances, but it is less faithful to the source than digital (which I actually listen to more of).

 

[Inner Space]

... largely driven by hipster culture, bolstered by anti-technology backlash including love of ritual and old things, reinforced with inexcusable myth-making about 'sounding better' from the media ...

Yes, we're firmly in the realm of cultural anthropology here, where technical issues are easily subsumed by non-technical.

... the battle for factualists will be to continually point out that cognitive bias is causing fans to misrepresent 'sounds-better-to-me' as being something in the sound waves.

But the sound waves do carry something, which while technically inferior, are at least distinctive. Ages ago I mentioned on another thread that in the mid-1980s I was involved in vinyl -vs- CD testing, driven by anxiety among record companies because CD take-up was slower than they wished. One conclusion - ethereal and unprovable, thus offered here very tentatively - was that vinyl's flaws presented as subtly regular and periodic, at a rate of 33 1/3 times a minute, due to warp and eccentricity, which was judged to mimic the rate of resting human respiration and about half the rate of a resting human heartbeat, such that they were somehow relaxing and comforting on a physical level. I wonder if that contributes to the otherwise inexplicable appeal?

 

[killdozzer]

Here you go:

Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

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...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This was very funny. I actually laughed out loud.

 

[killdozzer]

Please post links to evidence that backs up your assertions

Members who expressed their views and opinions gave their real world reasons. There was no coercion nor misrepresentation. It was the actual records fans saying what they really like about records. And it's all there. I've listed the reasons many time so I won't repeat. Many of those reasons are also in all the articles and polls that have already been linked to ASR.

@Inner Space I really don't think it has anything to do with the resting human heart. How do you even imagine heart is aware of the fact? Do you think playing SexPistols at 33 1/3 would be relaxing and comforting? So, which is it then, the RPM or the freqs of the music? I hope you see what I'm getting at. Let's not add useless variables. There's enough work to rebut the acctual ones.

 

[Holmz]

The market includes streaming. CD's are also a small percentage of the market.


EDIT - point already made above.

Yep - got it.
We usually hit the local second hand shop for books on tape (CDs), and also buy CDs new and used… and I buy vinyl mostly new. The Mrs gets the CDs.

The main is reason is that when we play music in the car it is usually on a road trip, and there are dead spots all along many roads in rural country Australia.
So there is no effective streaming then… and the idea of renting the privilege of listening never sat well with me… but I stream when I am working in the workshop, or cleaning the house.
And it gets worse on a vacation, say to the states, as we then have some version of a burner phone chip… and that is limited in bandwidth and total bits-n-bytes.
Plus when we are in North America, we also routinely go to places that are a bit “off the grid”, like Yellowstone or the South West.
So it is either podcasts or music (from CD) in the iTunes library…

But let’s be real here… The kiddies are likely downloading a lot via iTunes, and music-o-holics (and audiophiles) are more likely using hi-def downloads or using vinyl.

There is a lot of the younger crowd that is into vinyl.

My offspring were asking about TTs, and I said, “you should consider CDs or streaming, the quality is much better.”
They said, “Dad, you have records and a nice TT, don’t bull$hit us, you know it is better.”

I mean, what could I do at that point?
I said, “yeah, but I like vinyl, and it costs a lot… a sensible person would consider CDs.”
They said, “yeah, Yu yeah, yeah, but the vinyl just sounds better.”

The son in law did not even want to consider a second hand SOTA TT and Audio Research phono stage… mostly because his TT was a present from his brother.

I tried and I gave up, and told them that when I ‘cark it’, they can fight over who gets the TT and the phone stage(s).

 

[Wunderphones]

Lets consider looking at facts.

In here https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/13/tech/vinyl-records-cd-sales-riaa/index.html it says:


Note that that percentage equation would be:
(231.1 / (231.2+129.9) ) * 100%
… which looks like it could be a bit more than 20% ?

But that ignores all the non-physical album sales.

 

[Digicile]

I don't care until people start popping off about how superior vinyl is.

Reading this thread impartially, I have seen very few people say that vinyl was technically superior. What they have said is that they enjoy it better, and it is a better experience for them. That's a big difference.

I wouldn't argue that vinyl is anywhere near the technical abilities of digital, but I and my friends enjoy it a LOT more, so it is better for our enjoyment.

 

[Digicile]

Please give it up people! From my age perspective, this discussion reminds me of a bunch of angry old men arguing whether the greatest band was "technically" The Grateful Dead or Led Zeppelin. It is all preference. And it is all irrelevant. The world has moved on and my generation has voted that they prefer vinyl, whether the old men like it or not. Now go back to your Lawrence Welk.

 

[Wunderphones]

Please give it up people! From my age perspective, this discussion reminds me of a bunch of angry old men arguing whether the greatest band was "technically" The Grateful Dead or Led Zeppelin. It is all preference.

It's all preference if you think of audio reproduction devices as musical instruments. But if you think of audio reproduction devices as more like a photocopier than a violin, then it's not all preference at all. Some devices make better copies than others, and we can find out which devices they are.

 

[Digicile]

It's all preference if you think of audio reproduction devices as musical instruments. But if you think of audio reproduction devices as more like a photocopier than a violin, then it's not all preference at all. Some devices make better copies than others, and we can find out which devices they are.

Don't look now, but you are proving my point. Lawrence Welk is in reruns, as I'm sure you know.

 

[Sal1950]

I wouldn't argue that vinyl is anywhere near the technical abilities of digital, but I and my friends enjoy it a LOT more, so it is better for our enjoyment.

It is the unstated reasoning here that muddy the waters. Why do you enjoy it more if it sounds inferior to CD?
Do you really enjoy it more because of all the ritual hassle cleaning the LP & Needle before every play?
Or because it makes you get up and down to change the side every 20 minutes or so?
Or because you can brag on how much you spent on it?

I enjoy CD more because it sounds a LOT more like the master tape. The truth of my statement is proven by the measurements of it's technical capability.

 

[Wunderphones]

Don't look now, but you are proving my point. Lawrence Welk is in reruns, as I'm sure you know.

I really have no idea what that means.

 

[Sal1950]

I really have no idea what that means.

I don't think he did either. LOL

 

[HarmonicTHD]

Reading this thread impartially, I have seen very few people say that vinyl was technically superior. What they have said is that they enjoy it better, and it is a better experience for them. That's a big difference.

I wouldn't argue that vinyl is anywhere near the technical abilities of digital, but I and my friends enjoy it a LOT more, so it is better for our enjoyment.

I think tonycollinet made the point above and summarized it nicely.

Post in thread 'Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?'
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...lain-the-vinyl-renaissance.32420/post-1309619