The Vinyl Frontier

[Zensō]

I don't think that anyone is arguing that a turntable setup costing many thousands of dollars can match the sonic fidelity of say, a $40 Raspberry Pi, but like a steam locomotive, it has it's own anachronistic charm which can engage your other senses.

 

[Old Listener]

I don't think of vinyl as a frontier. It is the "Old Country" from which I emigrated decades ago.

 

[JeffS7444]

I think it's a little more complicated in the photography world, especially if you're interested in making big prints.

But of course, when used as a means of personal expression, the desired outcome for a photograph is whatever the photographer wishes for it to be.

 

[Robin L]

But of course, when used as a means of personal expression, the desired outcome for a photograph is whatever the photographer wishes for it to be.

And it's conceivable that the sonic artifacts/flaws of the LP are exactly what the artist is seeking. Funny, but most of the times I've heard that happen, it was on a CD. The obvious example is Beck's "Odelay", with record groove noise added to the mix along with the funked up sound of all those turntable samples. This is the [commercial] high-water mark of Lo-Fi. Beck's previous issue, "Stereopathectic Soulmanure", is even more obviously Lo-Fi, and pretty clearly conceived as a 2 LP set, to be imbibed a side at a time.

 

[paulraphael]

But of course, when used as a means of personal expression, the desired outcome for a photograph is whatever the photographer wishes for it to be.

I'm talking about observable and measurable performance. You need a very expensive digital solution to compete with a large piece of film, if you're looking at that the areas where film does well. Especially if that film will then be drum scanned (which gets you around all the losses of secondary optical systems in a darkroom).

I used large format film for many years, and then switched to small format digital, and so I've had the opportunity to make side-by-side comparisons. I much prefer working with digital, but even with today's technology there are some tradeoffs. I don't think there are similar tradeoffs anymore in the audio world.

 

[TimW]

I first started with vinyl a few years ago. It was before I found ASR and I was listening to silly subjectivist reviewers that liked to talk about how the best digital sounds analog and how great a good vinyl setup could be. Of course this made me want to try it but I didn't want to spend a lot so I got a cheap setup (90's low end Sony stack) and bought some cheap records (old and very worn out). I mostly listened with headphones at that time so I plugged my headphones into the front of the Sony integrated amp (with high output impedance) and tried listening. Yuck, it was terrible. The noise and clicks were overpowering and even if I tried to ignore that the sound just wasn't right compared to digital, the music sounded bloated and lacking in detail.

So I forgot about vinyl for a while but when I would go to expos I would get to hear vinyl setups that sounded really excellent, with almost no annoying noise and no irritating frequency response anomalies. I also started hanging out at hi-fi shops where vinyl was played and I found it to sound much less irritating then I remembered from my initial experience. Eventually I started to enjoy the look and ritual of vinyl displayed at these places and so I gave in and invested in a better setup. It still didn't sound as good as I wanted it to, but with vinyl that was in good condition a lot of what bothered me about my initial experience was remedied. Like most vinyl addicts I wanted to see how good I could get this flawed format to perform. This led to large investments in better tables, better cartridges, better cleaning and alignment tools, better preamps, and lots of learning about what makes a good setup.

Now my vinyl collection and equipment are much better than where I started and I very much enjoy listening to vinyl. I usually listen to digital sources and It does sound different than the vinyl version but that doesn't bother me. In fact, the funny thing is that I can go back and listen to that first cheap vinyl setup I had (gifted to my brother) and not be bothered by its limitations at all. Now this may be because I don't listen to really worn out and damaged records anymore, but I think it's mostly because I have gotten used to the sound of vinyl and can enjoy it for what it is. If you just allow for Stockholm syndrome to set in, you too can enjoy vinyl.

 

[Hon]

Evolution does wonderful things. When the robots take over they'll likely be discussing the benefits of freedom from ears, eardrums, and those tiny bones rattling around inside the human cranium.

 

[JeffS7444]

You need a very expensive digital solution to compete with a large piece of film

How big are we talking? In terms of resolving power, it seems to me that pixels are pretty cheap nowadays, and with multiple stitched images, gigapixel resolution is not such a big deal anymore.

 

[Old Listener]

I don't think that anyone is arguing that a turntable setup costing many thousands of dollars can match the sonic fidelity of say, a $40 Raspberry Pi, but like a steam locomotive, it has it's own anachronistic charm which can engage your other senses.

Interesting analogy. It is easy enough to occasionally ride on a steam train that someone else bought and operates. It is a much bigger step to build your own railroad, stock up on coal and install water tanks along the tracks.

 

[JeffS7444]

Interesting analogy. It is easy enough to occasionally ride on a steam train that someone else bought and operates. It is a much bigger step to build your own railroad, stock up on coal and install water tanks along the tracks.

This one is more affordable than some audiophile cables: http://www.roundhouse-eng.com/billy.htm

 

[levimax]

Classic cars are a better analogy. Slower, more polluting, less efficient and more expensive than a new car but still fun to take for a ride on a sunny day.

 

[curiouspeter]

How big are we talking? In terms of resolving power, it seems to me that pixels are pretty cheap nowadays, and with multiple stitched images, gigapixel resolution is not such a big deal anymore.

I'm also into photography. Even a couple years ago I found even APS-C being superior to 645 color firm in practical use (ISO 200, handheld).

For black and white, I think 6x7 film may still be economical from the quality/value standpoint. Monochrome digital backs/cameras are very expensive and you take a big hit converting from a Bayer sensor.

 

[111db]

"The face in the water looks up, and she shakes her head as if to say that it's the last time you'll look like today." Genesis- Ripples (gorgeous song!)

That's my experience with LPs. Virgin (at best) only until played. I bought a TEAC reel-to-reel so that I could record the maiden voyages (after a bit of prenuptial hanky panky to set levels) and then shelved them. Now my take-up motor is weak, so game over. But no matter because digital and now HD streaming are fantastic. But I do miss browsing the cut-out bins.

The most annoying aspect for me is the off-center LP. People have suggested re-drilling the spindle hole, that never worked for me. There's low-level speed variation you might not notice unless you've got the recording in its digital equivalent or are a musician who is more familiar with the real thing than recordings. This applies to any kind of sound that is supposed to be absolutely steady, like a piano or digital keyboard. That speed variation might be due to an off-center record, or a warped record, or surfaces that are less than perfectly flat.

No truer words...
I recall vividly attempting to return an LP to a local shop due to an off-center hole. The guy behind the counter had never heard of such a thing. He spun it up and we watched together as the tonearm swayed in and out, but he was never able to hear the pitch variation nor understand the principle. Nevertheless, he skeptically refunded my money. In another case or two, I was successful in oblonging the hole with a rat-tail file and then marking the correct point of tangency to place against the spindle.

 

[paulraphael]

How big are we talking? In terms of resolving power, it seems to me that pixels are pretty cheap nowadays, and with multiple stitched images, gigapixel resolution is not such a big deal anymore.

I find that at 40" wide, the illusion of infinite detail will get broken with any small format digital camera, if you're stepping up and looking from within a foot or 2. Very large film can go a fair amount bigger than this. I'm talking about both formats being handled with real care—tripod, careful focussing, careful aperture selection, no wind blowing, etc. etc.. And with film, it needs to scanned and the post-processing and printing need to be digital for superior results. You really lose a lot during analog enlargement. Many photographers disagree with me on this, but I have prints to demonstrate.

For perspective, I find it's not very hard to get that infinite-detail illusion with prints up to 24" wide with a 36mp camera—something I wouldn't have imagined back when I was a student using 35mm film.

Stitching is theoretical possibility, but only for some circumstances. And it creates so much additional work, and new opportunities for mistakes. It's not something I would want to rely on for a whole project.

For our purposes here, what I find interesting is that there isn't an equivalent phenomenon with analog tape. I understand that you will improve your snr with fatter tape, but only up to a point. You can't take a 2-foot wide roll of tape and somehow get 100db.

 

[paulraphael]

For black and white, I think 6x7 film may still be economical from the quality/value standpoint. Monochrome digital backs/cameras are very expensive and you take a big hit converting from a Bayer sensor.

4x5 film is even affordable in B+W. If you scan it the performance is just bonkers. The problem is that high enough quality scans for big prints are themselves very expensive. I know some people who own (and maintain, and maintain, and maintain) their own vintage drum scanners. But I draw the line a few levels of crazy below that.

 

[curiouspeter]

4x5 film is even affordable in B+W. If you scan it the performance is just bonkers. The problem is that high enough quality scans for big prints are themselves very expensive. I know some people who own (and maintain, and maintain, and maintain) their own vintage drum scanners. But I draw the line a few levels of crazy below that.

Absolutely. But it's not fun to travel with a field camera.

I heard full-frame 645 monochrome backs are also very nice and they cost less than an MSB Select II DAC.

 

[MattHooper]

High Fidelity from vinyl, I think, misses the point.
Vinyl allows me to play music I don't have in any other form. It's also an intellectual exercise in seeing just how good I can get it, out of sheer cussedness.

And as you mentioned above, it makes me accept the limitations, pops and crackles and the physical fragility of it. That use to irritate the hell out of me when LPs was all there was, but now, I look on their imperfections with a certain fondness.

As to R-R tapes, I think analogue tape is the worst of all possible worlds. It's even more finnicky than vinyl for line-up and maintenance, it doesn't have results anything as good as even the cheapest digital, and it costs radically more than both. Having said that, I get my old Ferrograph out every now and then, just for the sheer pleasure of watching the reels go round, and the PPM twitch.

S.

^^^ This is a really excellent, insightful post about the quirky appeal of vinyl for some folks.

 

[111db]

But it's not fun to travel with a field camera.

Back in the day I did travel---and backpack---with a field camera of sorts... a "Baby" Century Graphic stripped down for "portability". Got some very high resolution shots with Linhof and Rodenstock glass on the front standard, but my minimum kit weighed 15lb! The best thing it did for me was to teach me selectivity, previsualization, and careful exposure. A week in the wilderness with only 60 or so total frames to burn will do that! Forget about bracketing!

I shoot digital now, of course, and have had a great deal of success with automated stitching of composites of up to 9 frames, given a reasonably stationary landscape subject---even a waterfall matched up surprisingly well! Adobe know their stuff.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.

 

[pjug]

I don't think of vinyl as a frontier. It is the "Old Country" from which I emigrated decades ago.

Ways of the old country still strong in some places, maybe?

 

[curiouspeter]

I don't think of vinyl as a frontier. It is the "Old Country" from which I emigrated decades ago.

But the Next Generation thinks of it as the Undiscovered Country.