Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[MattHooper]

And isn’t that the quote that Axo was paraphrasing and turning back on Toole? I took as an attempt at ironic humor…

I do think it seems to have gone over some people's heads. Axos does not deny, or as far as I remember denigrate, Toole's valuable body of work. Axos DOES, I observe, take exception to Toole acolytes who take Toole as unquestionable holy writ or who may make dubious arguments from citing Toole.

In any case, it's interesting that Toole is cited to re-enforce the division between those who care about the original artistic recording. Yet Toole has said he also enjoys upmixing stereo to surround as well. So are we to declare Toole among those "content not to hear the art as it was created?"

I'm not going to say that. I agree with Toole: upmixing stereo to surround can be wonderful. I do it all the time.

When possible I prefer not to make divisions regarding the accuracy issue that imply mind-reading someone's "intent" or "contentment" or not, or carry some implicit value judgment on how someone gets the musical message from the artist.

 

[Robin L]

Look him up, this man literally made HiFi audio, HiFi audio today.

Before him, loud speakers will designed willy nilly . . .well, some manufacturers still willy nilly it.

I do believe Jaxjax is pulling your chain.

 

[CleanSound]

I do believe Jaxjax is pulling your chain.

If so, the sarcasm can be viewed by some as diminishing the importance of Dr. Toole's life work, which is the bedrock of today's HiFi audio. And that would just be disgusting.

 

[tmtomh]

Regarding what is "Hi-Fi" and "Sound Quality differences" and "preference" I have a couple of level matched clips to compare if any one is interested. These are 2, 30 second clips from Steely Dan's 1977 album "Aja", the song is "Black Cow". One is from a clean first pressing (AB version) of the LP and the other is from the Original Japan for US CD, these versions are considered to be among the best for this recording. These are level matched in Audition but an ABX program like Foobar2000 ABX will the make comparison easier.

Box

app.box.com

My questions would be:

1. Would you consider either or both of these clips to be "Hi-Fi" ?
2. Can you reliably ABX the two clips?
3. Can you tell which one is the LP and which one is the CD?
4. If you can reliably tell a difference do you have a preference?

First off, thank you for providing these samples, and thank you for level-matching them - much appreciated!

1. Yes absolutely, I would consider both to be hi-fi.

2. I don't currently have an ABX setup I can easily use with my main speakers, but the difference was obvious because the LP rip has surface noise and there's an obvious difference related to the sound of at least one aspect of the percussion. (I can be more specific about what that is, but I don't want to ruin the test for others.) That said, the LP is lovely - nice record you have there, and clearly a very nice turntable playback setup too!

3. See #2 - yes, immediately. However, the sample I listened to first happened to be the LP (or at least the one I'm confident is the LP), and so I listened to the other sample once as well, just to make sure what I was hearing was not just a part of the original tape source.

4. Yes, I have a preference for the CD. No disrespect - as noted above, I think the LP version sounds very nice too.

 

[Platypus20]

"Don't You Know Who I Am????!!!"

I was in a grocery store, where a stylist well dressed woman wanted someone to put groceries in her car, the checkout girl said they did not do that, the woman started cursing at the girl and yelled “ do you know who I am?”, the girl looked at her and said no, then asked the woman “do you know who I am?”, the startled woman said no, the girl then responded, “I guess that makes us f*#King even then”. The woman left, stunned and silent.

 

[AdamG]

Newman has come in and been personally insulting numerous times in this thread. Others have as well. But they get passes because they’ve been here for a long time. The mods have flatly stated it. Rules should apply to everyone. It’s never ok to be an asshole just because you’ve been an asshole for a long time.

Toole’s comment about disrespecting the art is offensive to me. It means only someone with the absolutely most hi-fi setup is a true appreciator of music.

To your first part. What we have and have not stated is for us to say. Your interpretation of our words and deeds are misguided and maybe slightly jaded. What we have said repeatedly is the more senior you are the more credibility you have with the Administration Team. It means you have a proven track record with us as a faithful and productive member. New and relatively new members have not earned this respect and forgiveness for a minor slip up. What you also are completely unaware of is how we handle these events when they happen. We try to do all this in private for respect and courtesy (as you are about to learn)

To your second comment. Again you are speaking from an uninformed position and are just speculating and trying to make others look bad or ineffective. This comment was cause for action and a Warning was issued and the poster was given a few days off. Next time you think you know about things that you don’t. Let me suggest that you either hold your thoughts and maybe send a Pm to one of the Mods and ask us how we felt about something and if we did anything about it.

Let’s stop being so sensitive and letting every little thing get to us. This thread is a source of a great deal of grief. Stop misinterpreting people’s words and ask for an explanation first. Give folks the benefit of the doubt. We’re Human and we all make mistakes and speak words that are interpreted differently than we intended.

Thank you for your understanding and support.

 

[Robin L]

Of course it's the same thing as comparing an analogue source with a digital source, because a properly done digital rip of an LP can capture all the musical information - and for that matter, all the mechanical and electrical effects of the LP and playback gear that make it into the analogue output.

What we're getting with @levimax's LP sample here is a comparison of a digital source with Levimax's analogue source - his particular LP, as it sounded played back with his particular turntable, tonearm, cartridge, stylus, and phono preamp. So it's not a "universal" analogue source, and therefore the comparison cannot be applicable to all LP-CD comparisons one might do. But Levimax never claimed it could, and that's fine - it's still an interesting and instructive comparison.

If there's something absurd about it, it's not the fact that the LP source is being supplied to us in the form of a digital recording of that source.

I'm sorry for not making myself clear. I'm thinking of the sorts of "audiophile" adherents of everything analog is good, everything digital is evil.

Unless something goes horribly wrong, the digital needledrop of Levimax's analog chain should sound exactly like Levimax's analog chain. Try telling that to Michael Fremer.

 

[drmevo]

Regarding what is "Hi-Fi" and "Sound Quality differences" and "preference" I have a couple of level matched clips to compare if any one is interested. These are 2, 30 second clips from Steely Dan's 1977 album "Aja", the song is "Black Cow". One is from a clean first pressing (AB version) of the LP and the other is from the Original Japan for US CD, these versions are considered to be among the best for this recording. These are level matched in Audition but an ABX program like Foobar2000 ABX will the make comparison easier.

Box

app.box.com

My questions would be:

1. Would you consider either or both of these clips to be "Hi-Fi" ?
2. Can you reliably ABX the two clips?
3. Can you tell which one is the LP and which one is the CD?
4. If you can reliably tell a difference do you have a preference?

I’ll play:
1. I would consider both Hi-Fi
2. I didn’t, but at least with headphones I’m confident I could tell the difference. Not sure if I could tell as reliably through speakers
3. Yes (through headphones at least)
4. No strong preference - the reverb is perhaps less “artificial” sounding on the vinyl version, but the CD is just a bit tighter/cleaner-sounding.

Side note - that recording artifact on the beat 3 hit towards the end of the clip is unfortunate - I think it’s in every version I’ve ever heard, though.

 

[tmtomh]

I'm sorry for not making myself clear. I'm thinking of the sorts of "audiophile" adherents of everything analog is good, everything digital is evil.

Unless something goes horribly wrong, the digital needledrop of Levimax's analog chain should sound exactly like Levimax's analog chain. Try telling that to Michael Fremer.

Thanks for clarifying, and of course I agree with you 100% (including the futility of trying to tell it to Fremer! )

 

[Axo1989]

I found the outrage over that comment really surprising, to the point that I had wonder for a moment if there was some sort of language barrier or reading comprehension issue.

I'm not sure if the outrage was genuine or contrived, I guess that depends on the person. Poe's law is always in play. I did think my humour was more than sufficiently blatant, but nothing is foolproof.

In essence, there's nothing revelatory in pointing out that digital is higher fidelity than vinyl...we know...we all know. Maybe there are one or two people who have snuck into the thread to say or suggest otherwise, but theirs would be far from the prevailing viewpoint of those who enjoy vinyl in this thread. The need by some to constantly strawman this issue by claiming there are legions of vinyl fans on ASR boasting that records are superior to digital, or even just equal fidelity, is mind-boggling. Saying records are enjoyable, or even that sometimes they produce enjoyable effects, is quite obviously not the same as saying they are equal or higher fidelity compared to digital.

I don't think I can put it better than that.

Right on. If artists didn't want consumers to listen to their work on vinyl...they wouldn't release it that way! This whole gate-keeping, purity thing is kind of gross. It's cool to strive for the most accurate reproduction possible if that's what you want to do, and of course, that's a major focus of this site, but to judge and look down on others for not holding the same standards all the time (most of us who like vinyl also listen to a ton of digital, in my case much more), is BS.

I'm also sympathetic to @IPunchCholla's view here, most artists are unlikely to demand the highest of hi-fi before accepting a listener, ffs. Maybe some are oddball sticklers! And in many genres I enjoy vinyl is de rigueur—we can be fairly certain those artists aren't vinyl-phobic. I've already said it, but I reckon most gatekeeping around strict technical SoTA as prerequisite for good sound and/or maximum enjoyment is the narcissism of small differences in play.

 

[levimax]

I did think my humour was more than sufficiently blatant, but nothing is foolproof.

I laughed when I read your comment originally and was surprized but the reaction. It just goes to show that there is more to communication than the typed out words. Peace.

 

[mhardy6647]

Since this is a leap year, I certainly hope this thread gets to 366 pages.
Seems only fitting.


Carry on, y'all.

 

[deweydm]

It’s about love of collecting Beatles and Taylor Swift records. And the holy grail, Prince’s The Black Album.

Discogs collectors… 750 Million Albums

 

[Axo1989]

I laughed when I read your comment originally and was surprized but the reaction. It just goes to show that there is more to communication than the typed out words. Peace.

Thank you, I'm glad someone enjoyed it.

And isn’t that the quote that Axo was paraphrasing and turning back on Toole? I took as an attempt at ironic humor…

Yes, exactly. Certainly an attempt, it didn't work for everyone of course.

I do think it seems to have gone over some people's heads. Axos does not deny, or as far as I remember denigrate, Toole's valuable body of work. Axos DOES, I observe, take exception to Toole acolytes who take Toole as unquestionable holy writ or who may make dubious arguments from citing Toole.

To hose down doubts on my view of fundamental research by Toole et al, this is a decent précis. I think he is a living (inter)national treasure. That doesn't mean I agree with every single nuance, opinion or perspective he has ever offered of course. And I don't think it "disgusting" "denialistic" or "despicable" or "crossing a line" to have a little fun with his use of "historical memorabilia". The humour wasn't aimed at Toole however, it was really a send-up of the idea that just because something is older (like turntables or LPs) it is automatically valueless, superseded or useless, using Toole as a counterpoint.

Maybe this is a translation issue, but it came across very disrespectfully.

I appreciated you pausing judgement there. Yes I think @drmevo pointed this out effectively: Australian humour is often sarcastic and very deadpan/dry. That moment where your brain shifts from taking a statement literally and then realising it points in the opposite direction and/or has a quite different subtext is the key to the joke, and that doesn't always translate. We also use sarcasm toward people/things we like/respect/admire, and formality toward things we don't, which can be quite confusing (notably for US-ians, I went to high school there for a bit, so I should know). This being an international forum, I generally tone it down, but I can't suppress it entirely. Those times when I do a quick post on the phone and don't elaborate are the more risky ones.

 

[MattHooper]

The humour wasn't aimed at Toole however, it was really a send-up of the idea that just because something is older (like turntables or LPs) it is automatically valueless, superseded or useless, using Toole as a counterpoint.

That's how I took it. But didn't want to put words in your mouth about that specific joke.

I think leaping on your comment as "disgusting" etc comes from not trying to understand someone's view, and taking the least charitable interpretation to justify some internal righteous indignation. It is very clear from anyone who paid attention to your posts on the forum that actually denigrating Toole and his work wasn't going to be your intent, and so the the interpretation you just pointed out was the obvious one to me.

 

[Newman]

Since this is a leap year, I certainly hope this thread gets to 366 pages.
Seems only fitting.


Carry on, y'all.

Well, we are on page 356 now, and the last 10 pages took 8 days. You can relax.

 

[mhardy6647]

Well, we are on page 356 now, and the last 10 pages took 8 days. You can relax.

We could be goin' asymptotic!

Not to be confused with asymptomatic -- no issue with that among the vinylista.

 

[Newman]

I'm not disrespecting Toole. I'm disagreeing that the quote you cited actually addresses the arguments I (and some others) have been giving. And I carefully took the quote apart to explain why. To conflate disagreement as disrespect suggests a rigid mindset, and we should avoid that don't you agree?

How do you see good science and pedagogy, Newman? Let's say an expert makes a claim, and someone voices disagreement. Is the correct scientific/pedagogical response from the expert simply to show outrage and "Don't You Know Who I Am????!!!"

There is correct appeal to authority, and there is fallacious appeal to authority. You seem to have a personal problem with the former.

Or, is it a better idea for the expert to actually address points of possible critique, and point out any error in the disagreement? Surely the latter, right? Because the former is more like a fallacious appeal to authority, and mirrors dogma and heresy-mongering, rather than a scientific, thoughtful mindset.

This is what I have seen repeatedly on ASR threads, where an actual Authority and Expert speaks on their area of expertise:-

Authority and Expert: "You see, it's like this."
Matt: "I disagree. Here are a whole bunch of anecdotes and whataboutisms. Here are a whole bunch of questions for you to answer."
Authority and Expert: "Umm, in brief, it's such and such."
Matt: "I don't accept that. What about this? What about that? What about the other?"
Authority and Expert (noticing some paint drying on a nearby wall): "Umm, gotta go."
Matt: "How unsatisfactory. I guess we'll never know."
Audience (thinks): "Oh, we know."

You've done this with Amir. You've done this with Toole. You've done this with JJ. It doesn't work.

I wouldn't say that Toole is making that mistake. I think his quote at least suggests an issue I disagree with, as I articulated. But I presume Toole would not go on to shame anyone for disagreeing "because I Floyd Toole Have Said So." He's normally a cautious, thoughtful writer and that would be unlike him.
But YOU seem to be presenting his quotes as if they are sacred text, and daring to even articulate disagreement is a shame-worthy instance of "disrespecting" his authority. Even implying it is teetering around ban-worthy behaviour.
That is more like dogma and religion, not science, Newman.
So I leave it to you, as to whether you want to carry on the conversation in a way that actually addresses my argument, or instead treat this like religious heresy-hunting in which a Pope can not be questioned and turn the issue in to talk of "disrespect" rather than reasoning. Your call.

No, I'll leave it to you, as to whether you want to carry on with behaviour patterns that don't work socially, obfuscate audio truths and science, and get the above-mentioned results. Your call.

 

[MattHooper]

There is correct appeal to authority, and there is fallacious appeal to authority. You seem to have a personal problem with the former.

Assertion without evidence.

I'm quite aware of when appeals to authority are fallacious vs valid (this is a distinction I've had to make for creationists and evolution-deniers for decades), and I actually broke down that distinction and applied it in my argument against your quote.

Appeal to Authority Fallacy: Definition and Examples

When you need to support a claim, it can be tempting to support it with a statement from an authority figure. But if…

www.grammarly.com

What is the appeal to authority fallacy?​

The appeal to authority fallacy is the logical fallacy of saying a claim is true simply because an authority figure made it. This authority figure could be anyone: an instructor, a politician, a well-known academic, an author, or even an individual with experience related to the claim’s subject.


The statement itself may be true. A statement’s truthfulness has nothing to do with whether it’s fallacious or not. What makes the appeal to authority a logical fallacy is the lack of evidence provided to support the claim. It follows this format:


Individual, who is an expert in Y field, says X is true.

Therefore, X is true.

You used a quote from Toole in service of undermining the arguments, like mine, that the gulf between vinyl / digital sound quality can be exaggerated. I pointed how it did NOT undermine my arguments, and why it was a dubious quote to use. Your reply to my analysis of the Toole quote was absent of any additional evidence or counter-argument to my analysis. Instead your reply consisted of the form "How dare You Disrespect The Authority Of Floyd Toole!" and all sorts of ad hominem about my writing style.

A classic fallacious appeal to authority, instead of interacting with the arguments.

And still you refuse to address the counter argument.

This is what I have seen repeatedly on ASR threads, where an actual Authority and Expert speaks on their area of expertise:-

Authority and Expert: "You see, it's like this."
Matt: "I disagree. Here are a whole bunch of anecdotes and whataboutisms. Here are a whole bunch of questions for you to answer."
Authority and Expert: "Umm, in brief, it's such and such."
Matt: "I don't accept that. What about this? What about that? What about the other?"
Authority and Expert (noticing some paint drying on a nearby wall): "Umm, gotta go."
Matt: "How unsatisfactory. I guess we'll never know."
Audience (thinks): "Oh, we know."

You've done this with Amir. You've done this with Toole. You've done this with JJ. It doesn't work.

So, again, instead of actually addressing my argument, you make up your own dialogue as you imagine it with me and some authority. Of course, my actual arguments make no appearance in your strawman.

More ad hominem instead of addressing my argument. I wonder why.....

Well, I said it was your call as to whether you wanted to actually address the argument given, or go on with the appeal to authority stuff and ad hominem. Looks like you made your choice.

Too bad.

 

[droid2000]

There are many similarities between this thread and the ones for snake oil.

Because they are the same.