Question regarding technical parameters of LPs.

[MusicNBeer]

I did not mean that the new wave was young in age. They mostly seem to be older people with degenerated hearing wanting to play the horribly recorded music of their youth.

70s and early 80s is mostly well recorded with the fresh masters cut to LP. Many of these were not transferred to CD with the same care as the original LP mastering.

 

[Soniclife]

"Playability" is probably not the right term, but I mean "changes to the sound in a negative way that made it less forgiving of pressing flaws and affected my desire to listen to records."

That's what I thought you meant, as what I was talking about as well. I never really liked lesser cartridges on anything ever, they always sound like they are struggling to trace the grove properly or something, and I never really relaxed listening to them, but now I find it 'just works'.

 

[Robin L]

70s and early 80s is mostly well recorded with the fresh masters cut to LP. Many of these were not transferred to CD with the same care as the original LP mastering.

Initially, as the LP masters and duplicate copies were used for CDs, those early CDs often had faulty mastering. The Simon & Garfunkel catalog is a good example. The re-masters that came later corrected those errors, albeit there were a number of remasters of these older recordings that had too much compression, I.E. brick walling.

 

[digitalfrost]

My experience with 4th generation advanced styli is that what you gain in high frequency resolution you lose in ease of alignment and play-ability across a wide range of LPs.

I found myself going nuts with the fussiness that special line contact and Fitz Gyger styli required for precision in alignment, SRA, and azimuth, and the variability from record to record. With ellipticals, "good enough" is fine.

I was unsatisfied with cartridge performance towards the end of the groove until I went with advanced stylus shapes. I prefer line contact stylii like Jico SAS or Audio-Technica Microlinear. I printed my own alignment protractor with DIN inner grooving and yes, I bought a USB microscope later.

For me this was the only way to get good inner groove performance.

 

[watchnerd]

That's what I thought you meant, as what I was talking about as well. I never really liked lesser cartridges on anything ever, they always sound like they are struggling to trace the grove properly or something, and I never really relaxed listening to them, but now I find it 'just works'.

Who makes Pathfinder Line contact? I've never heard of it.

 

[watchnerd]

I was unsatisfied with cartridge performance towards the end of the groove until I went with advanced stylus shapes. I prefer line contact stylii like Jico SAS or Audio-Technica Microlinear. I printed my own alignment protractor with DIN inner grooving and yes, I bought a USB microscope later.

For me this was the only way to get good inner groove performance.

I agree the advanced styli are great for IGD, but I swap carts pretty regularly and I'm just not patient enough to spend the time needed to get 4th gen styli dialed in each time I switch.

If I was going to use the same cart for years, it would be a different matter.

 

[digitalfrost]

Sounds like you need a turntable with multiple arms

 

[Robin L]

I agree the advanced styli are great for IGD, but I swap carts pretty regularly and I'm just not patient enough to spend the time needed to get 4th gen styli dialed in each time I switch.

If I was going to use the same cart for years, it would be a different matter.

The best way to deal with IGD is to play the digital file that was sourced for the LP. Mind you, that file before the LP pre-mastering. Then you will have no IGD.

 

[watchnerd]

Sounds like you need a turntable with multiple arms

Mine is multi arm capable, actually, and I have the extra arm board, but damn it ruins the looks....

 

[watchnerd]

The best way to deal with IGD is to play the digital file that was sourced for the LP. Mind you, that file before the LP pre-mastering. Then you will have no IGD.

Yeah, I don't listen to vinyl rips for pleasure.

It just doesn't have the same reverb in my room as real time playback (unless I made the rip myself, in which case, it does).

Plus, I'm a record collector first and foremost. I play stuff I collect. Playing vinyl rips sort of defeats the whole purpose of my having vinyl.

If I'm going digital, I just go ripless.

 

[Soniclife]

Who makes Pathfinder Line contact? I've never heard of it.

https://www.dynavector.com/products/cart/e_xx2mk2.html
Probably their name for something else.

 

[watchnerd]

https://www.dynavector.com/products/cart/e_xx2mk2.html
Probably their name for something else.

Those look like the same dimensions as the line contact used in my Nagaoka MP-500; I think that stylus is a Namiki product?

 

[MattHooper]

I've been getting in a twist at sites like Stereophile lately concerning LPs.

Yes, I noticed. I think some of that twisting is self-inflicted ;-)

I'm "RH" on the stereohpile comments section, and unfortunately you didn't really seem interested in trying to understand the vinyl phenomena, but instead simply dismiss those of us not directly in-line with your own opinion as obfuscating and "reality deniers":

https://www.stereophile.com/content/stereophiles-products-2019#comment-589442

That's not a good look. I hope things go better here, and that you show more openness to reading a different take.

What's getting me in a twist is how LP advocates deny the reality that the LP format is limited in the ability to accurately reflect artistic intent.

Except that on the stereophile site you erroneously diagnosed at least some people (e.g. me) as "ignoring reality" and refused to interact with arguments showing why your take on the worth of vinyl was problematic. That's a real problem if you really want to understand why vinyl has made such a comback and why it continues to appeal even to many audiophiles (which you find apparently puzzling).

It's possible to have completely rational reasons to still collect vinyl and own a turntable, even for an audiophile, that go beyond simple, reductive explanations like "nostalgia." And which don't involve making false claims about the technical superiority of vinyl.

Note in that stereophile thread I argue against someone making bad arguments for the superiority of vinyl.

 

[Robin L]

Yeah, I don't listen to vinyl rips for pleasure.

It just doesn't have the same reverb in my room as real time playback (unless I made the rip myself, in which case, it does).

Plus, I'm a record collector first and foremost. I play stuff I collect. Playing vinyl rips sort of defeats the whole purpose of my having vinyl.

If I'm going digital, I just go ripless.

I made vinyl rips of the Beatles Mono LP reissues [2013?], had every one of those all analog remasters. Whatever "magic" was in those transfers didn't make it to my rips. I suspect that those reissues might have been "all that", but still liked the 2009 CDs better. Greater clarity and impact mostly. Didn't bother transferring that beautifully packaged top-loading "White Album" as I could hear the off-centeredness of one of the sides.

Fortunately, Robert Lambert gave me a good price for the whole set when he bought them for Tower District Records, Fresno.

 

[Robin L]

Yes, I noticed. I think some of that twisting is self-inflicted ;-)

I'm "RH" on the stereohpile comments section, and unfortunately you didn't really seem interested in trying to understand the vinyl phenomena, but instead simply dismiss those of us not directly in-line with your own opinion as obfuscating and "reality deniers":

https://www.stereophile.com/content/stereophiles-products-2019#comment-589442

That's not a good look. I hope things go better here, and that you show more openness to reading a different take.



Except that on the stereophile site you erroneously diagnosed at least some people (e.g. me) as "ignoring reality" and refused to interact with arguments showing why your take on the worth of vinyl was problematic. That's a real problem if you really want to understand why vinyl has made such a comback and why it continues to appeal even to many audiophiles (which you find apparently puzzling).

It's possible to have completely rational reasons to still collect vinyl and own a turntable, even for an audiophile, that go beyond simple, reductive explanations like "nostalgia." And which don't involve making false claims about the technical superiority of vinyl.

Note in that stereophile thread I argue against someone making bad arguments for the superiority of vinyl.

Things are going better here. Sorry if I was rude.

I invested so much time and energy in LPs, decades of working in record stores, playing LPs and CDs as a radio disc jockey, collecting, attempting to find a turntable that could make the records sound good, all those reasons cited as to why one would continue or start to collect LPs. And when I finally realized that I was banging my head against the wall attempting to get satisfactory results from a format that would never give me the results I was seeking, I switched polarity. I can understand why one collects, though the process of moving to a much smaller space late in life gave me good cause to clear out the clutter. And I'm pretty sure that I'm much more sensitive about the sound of disc eccentricity than most audiophiles. I'm sensitive to other aspects of sound reproduction as well, not quite ready to go all-in for the Measurements Uber Alles of ASR.

In any case, I decided to stop reading Stereophile and Analog Planet, as, ultimately, it was leaving me feeling upset and confused.

 

[MattHooper]

My issue is the current elevation of LPs as state of the art. Which it isn't.

Correct!

It's about $50.000.00 tonearms.

I find those prices ludicrous too.

Though I try to keep some perspective. Much of the gear many of us own here is a "ludicrous" price to people not in to audio as a hobby.
Value is subjective. But even so, I admit that I find myself actually going from eye-rolling to feeling angry at the pricing of much high end audio, $50,000 tonearms included.

it's about the ludicrous fawing over an obviously obsolete format

Well..."obsolete" is a loaded term. Has the sonic accuracy of vinyl been surpassed by digital? Yup. Has the convenience of digital surpassed vinyl? Yup. If you keep the viewpoint to those narrow parameters, you're good. But IF you are using THOSE parameters to dismiss the very value of vinyl itself, as if it means anyone still buying vinyl is just a naive dupe and should get-with-the-program and dump vinyl, THEN you are making a more problematic claim. Vinyl is clearly NOT "obsolete" as it is different in many ways from digital delivery, and in ways that fulfill values, desires and criteria many have that they do not find fulfilled by digital. That includes the standard elements of the physical aspect being more appealing (again...to those to whom it appeals!), how it seems to forge a more connected listening experience (again...for those for whom it is the case), how turntables are compelling to many people (like analog watches still appeal in the age of digital watches), and also in how the often *different sound* of vinyl can appeal to some listeners.

I've been almost all digital since the early 90's, and have been streaming my ripped CDs for many years. Arguments made by folks like Fremer and others for the "superiority of vinyl" were, and remain, bullshit as members here would agree. I loved listening to music on my digital system and still do. But recently I also got back in to vinyl, bought a nice turntable and good cartridge, and have found it rewarding in it's own way, and it scratches itches my digital sources didn't scratch. I also find that many vinyl albums sound absolutely amazing on my system (and I'm often going back and forth between my digital source and vinyl, so it's not like I've forgotten the sound of digital on my system).

My son was home from university and wanted to hear my new speakers. He only listens to digital, doesn't care a fig for vinyl. He listened to a variety of songs, of his choice, and said it all sounded great, but nothing touched how amazing the Michael Jackson sounded. That happened to be from the vinyl (Thriller). Does that mean vinyl is "sonically superior?" Of course not! It's just a reminder that in terms of perceived sound quality, vinyl can sound fantastic, sometimes to some people "better," and ultimately it's the recording quality/production that tends to prevail in importance over the delivery system (between LP and digital).

and the continued support, in Stereophile, Absolute Sound and Analog Planet, of overpriced gear and underperforming LPs.

Why pick out vinyl/turntables?

Your gripe has been the same many have had with those mags for decades concerning EVERY type of gear.

They continue to cover analog products like turntables etc because many people are still buying them and have an interest. And the crazy-priced "reference-level gear" often holds a reading-appeal to many. I think the pricing of many reference speakers is utterly ludicrous, but I enjoy reading about them. I think the same about analog gear. But I can enjoy reading the report of someone who actually gets to use it.

It's that publications theoretically devoted to the advancement of sound continue to push this cash-grab.

Magazines are almost ALL cash grabs! That's what they are about: making money. They want your cash. Again, why pick out vinyl out of all the other gear?

The publications you mention have always favored subjective impressions over objective assessment. So they aren't going to be advancing the state of the art in audio reproduction, whatever type of gear they review.

There are reviewers who honestly believe that "good vinyl sounds better than digital." And so that's what they write. They may certainly be incorrect in what they've assumed or what they claim, but in terms of motivation, there's no reason to presume that those writing about vinyl less scrupulous or more mercinary than the other subjectivist writers. I think for instance Fremer has propounded nonsense in defense of his love of vinyl, but I don't question the sincerity of his love for vinyl.

 

[MattHooper]

Things are going better here. Sorry if I was rude.

I invested so much time and energy in LPs, decades of working in record stores, playing LPs and CDs as a radio disc jockey, collecting, attempting to find a turntable that could make the records sound good, all those reasons cited as to why one would continue or start to collect LPs. And when I finally realized that I was banging my head against the wall attempting to get satisfactory results from a format that would never give me the results I was seeking, I switched polarity. I can understand why one collects, though the process of moving to a much smaller space late in life gave me good cause to clear out the clutter. And I'm pretty sure that I'm much more sensitive about the sound of disc eccentricity than most audiophiles. I'm sensitive to other aspects of sound reproduction as well, not quite ready to go all-in for the Measurements Uber Alles of ASR.

I totally understand where you are coming from.

It makes all the sense in the world to me. I dumped vinyl quickly for CD, and it made sense for me to do so.

My first really good turntable came from my father-in-law's cast-off. He's a classical music aficionado and as soon as CDs came along he was like "Wait? I can FINALLY listen to classical music without a background hiss? Without ticks and pops and scratches? Without the sound wearing down? With higher dynamic range? And with no wow or flutter? Sign me up!" He couldn't dump vinyl fast enough, despite that he'd had a huge collection since the 50's. I've seen the same sentiments expressed by many audiophiles "dumped vinyl and never looked back. Much happier with digital." It just makes complete sense to me.

My main concern is when we audiophiles take our own criteria as somehow the arbitor of rationality in this hobby, so that something we don't care for is seen to be strictly silly or irrational for anyone else. We need to be able to converge on clear concepts that can be tested and upon which we can agree on the results (e.g. technical deviations from a standard of accuracy), so we can call out untruths. But also should keep an open mind on the fact there is a fairly wide range of values among people, and so we can talk about characteristics *that actually exist* in varieties of audio gear that fulfill various things people may value.

 

[watchnerd]

But also should keep an open mind on the fact there is a fairly wide range of values among people, and so we can talk about characteristics *that actually exist* in varieties of audio gear that fulfill various things people may value.

This is why I find the comments equating listening to LP to owning a TotalDAC to be odd, from a number of angles.

I mean, I get that it's fun to poke fun at the LP users.

But if there is going to be ribbing, at least make the jokes funnier and with a punch line.

 

[Frank Dernie]

But if there is going to be ribbing, at least make the jokes funnier and with a punch line.

Well my record player isn't as good as a Totaldac and cost a great deal more.
I also almost never play anything on it, though i am having a Leonard Cohen fest since the arrival of his last CD so I may root out and play the first LP of his I bought over 50 years ago.
Then I may end up playing records all evening!
PS for me vinyl will always and only be the upholstery of 1960s cars...

 

[watchnerd]

Well my record player isn't as good as a Totaldac and cost a great deal more.
I also almost never play anything on it, though i am having a Leonard Cohen fest since the arrival of his last CD so I may root out and play the first LP of his I bought over 50 years ago.
Then I may end up playing records all evening!
PS for me vinyl will always and only be the upholstery of 1960s cars...

But the TotalDAC is a sham and your TT isn't.

Big difference when comparing engineering integrity across formats.