• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

The Vinyl Frontier

don'ttrustauthority

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
377
Digital largely allows the "search for good kit then listen to music" end of the spectrum to achieve their goal, or at least it did until we got an irritating (to me) plethora of different file types and sizes - which I suppose does allow the equipment enthusiast side of the hobby something to do with the digital part of their system.
If all you want is the best audible experience, get a Schiit stack or Topping stack as they all are measuring identically so far as human hearing is concerned. Any differences are the result of your impressions not the gear.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
If all you want is the best audible experience, get a Schiit stack or Topping stack as they all are measuring identically so far as human hearing is concerned. Any differences are the result of your impressions not the gear.
I already have an audibly transparent set of electronics, so no need for change.
I find the least "hifi" way to listen to music is on headphones, unless you think having micro musicians in a row inside (and maybe just outside) your head moving about when you do to be natural, believeable or comfortable. Using speakers makes things more complicated but much much more like real life.

Also I am in England and have bought mainly locally made equipment over the last 50 odd years.
I am one of the people who dislikes dicking about with kit when I could be listening to music. I did a big investigation nearly 25 years ago and still use most of the stuff I bought then. I haven't heard anything enough better to be worth buying since.
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
Vinyl medium and HiFi playback: All the cleaning finicketyness and transport and tracking tweaks will not get near the capability of Redbook $50 CD transports and CD capability.

Enjoy vinyl for what it is but don't oversell it.
images11.jpg
 
Last edited:

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
Vinyl medium and HiFi playback: All the cleaning finicketyness and transport and tracking tweaks will not get near the capability of Redbook $50 CD transports and CD capability.

Enjoy vinyl for what it is but don't oversell it. View attachment 119501
Yes, it really is mainly attractive for having an excuse to try lots of expensive toys :)
 

sergeauckland

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,440
Likes
9,100
Location
Suffolk UK
Did the DCMs have the RIAA curve built into them? That would certainly make them sound odd if played without the RIAA correction found in phono preamps.

Rick “easy to add digitally these days” Denney
No, normally the RIAA curve is built in to the cutting lathe. The DCM had various EQ, compression, HF limiting and bass adjustments built-in, which is what made them sound odd when played back flat, either on a tape machine or onto a CD.

Not every record company used DCMs, and not every remote cutting engineer cut from the DCM flat, some would tweak to 'improve' on the DCM, and of course remote cutting lathes and local metallurgy and pressing plants weren't identical, so LPs pressed in different plants often were different, but the theory of the DCM was reasonably sound. One pays for a very skilled and expensive cutting /mastering engineer only the once.

S
 

Soniclife

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
4,500
Likes
5,417
Location
UK
Ironically DCM makes even more sense in the digital world, where you don't need to worry about generation loss, and the resulting files can be sent instantly to multiple pressing plants.
 

Bob from Florida

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
1,257
Likes
1,164
Vinyl playback is like making coffee with a Cona Vacuum Pot or a Chemex pour over. Very involved but very tasty.
CD playback is using a Mr. Coffee. Quicker and encourages more coffee drinking.
Music Server has a Robot bringing you your Mr. Coffee. Your consumption can become excessive.

Which is best? Depends on your taste and whether you feel like getting up ever 20 minutes, 73 minutes, or only for bathroom breaks.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
Vinyl playback is like making coffee with a Cona Vacuum Pot or a Chemex pour over. Very involved but very tasty.
CD playback is using a Mr. Coffee. Quicker and encourages more coffee drinking.
Music Server has a Robot bringing you your Mr. Coffee. Your consumption can become excessive.

Which is best? Depends on your taste and whether you feel like getting up ever 20 minutes, 73 minutes, or only for bathroom breaks.
Ha-ha.
Vinyl is like making coffee with chicory like my grandma did in WW2, a reasonable brew but only approximately like the real thing ;)

OTOH I have no idea what a Chemex is or Mr. Coffee either :)
 

rdenney

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
2,235
Likes
3,856
Ha-ha.
Vinyl is like making coffee with chicory like my grandma did in WW2, a reasonable brew but only approximately like the real thing ;)

OTOH I have no idea what a Chemex is or Mr. Coffee either :)

Chemex makes a fancy version of the $5 Melitta plastic pour over filter holder that I use.

Having descended from Southeast Texas stock somewhat within the Cajun Louisiana Culinary Influence Zone, I know about chicory-laced coffee. o_O

I think your analogy works better with coffee ground two years ago filtered through an old sock. (Treasured, but still old.) And it was roasted to ash to survive the shelf life and sock routine.

But if that’s the coffee of your youth, there will be an undeniable warmth of nostalgia descending over you when you make and drink it, and if the old sock disintegrates, you may spend a lot on new socks trying to recapture that warmth.

Rick “who would not be doing the LP thing if he didn’t already own a bunch of them—which is probably a lie” Denney
 

rdenney

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
2,235
Likes
3,856
Yes, it really is mainly attractive for having an excuse to try lots of expensive toys :)

Not necessarily. I doubt I spent more for my current turntable, fully restored, than I spent for my CD player, and with both the main driver was having stuff that I can reliably sustain in service as long as possible.

I’m using the least expensive turntable from a reliable company (Thorens), with the stock tonearm and a decent Audio-Technica moving-magnet cartridge. It was old and I restored it mechanically, which I did enjoy doing. And I added a power supply that lets me adjust the speed, but that was so I could tune the pitch to something I can play along with. Having restored it back to factory spec, I just enjoy it for playing the LPs I own.

But I do enjoy restoring machines to their former polish, even if that polish is a bit cloudy. It has become my favorite old sock.

Rick “it’s good enough for me” Denney
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
Not necessarily. I doubt I spent more for my current turntable, fully restored, than I spent for my CD player, and with both the main driver was having stuff that I can reliably sustain in service as long as possible.

I’m using the least expensive turntable from a reliable company (Thorens), with the stock tonearm and a decent Audio-Technica moving-magnet cartridge. It was old and I restored it mechanically, which I did enjoy doing. And I added a power supply that lets me adjust the speed, but that was so I could tune the pitch to something I can play along with. Having restored it back to factory spec, I just enjoy it for playing the LPs I own.

But I do enjoy restoring machines to their former polish, even if that polish is a bit cloudy. It has become my favorite old sock.

Rick “it’s good enough for me” Denney
All 4 of my turntables are old and I keep them because I have a lot of LPs and each has a particular strong point.
The Goldmund Reference is what I have connected all the time. AFAIK there hasn't been one produced since then which is significantly better in any way. It is almost 40 years old now!
I have an EMT direct drive - because it is an EMT direct drive :)
I have a B&O 8002 because of the clever arm and motor.
I have a Roxan Xerxes because of its "different" isolation strategy.

I rebuild them as and when necessary, I rather enjoy doing so :)

I do find I play LPs less and less frequently though.
 
Last edited:

MattHooper

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 27, 2019
Messages
7,195
Likes
11,808
Not necessarily. I doubt I spent more for my current turntable, fully restored, than I spent for my CD player, and with both the main driver was having stuff that I can reliably sustain in service as long as possible.

I’m using the least expensive turntable from a reliable company (Thorens), with the stock tonearm and a decent Audio-Technica moving-magnet cartridge. It was old and I restored it mechanically, which I did enjoy doing. And I added a power supply that lets me adjust the speed, but that was so I could tune the pitch to something I can play along with. Having restored it back to factory spec, I just enjoy it for playing the LPs I own.

But I do enjoy restoring machines to their former polish, even if that polish is a bit cloudy. It has become my favorite old sock.

Rick “it’s good enough for me” Denney

I started off with "it's good enough for me" as well, with a good micro seiki turntable (donated to me by a father-in-law who ditched LPs for CDs).
And for a long time it was certainly good enough and quite pleasurable. But being an audiophile that only lasts so long...;-)

The reason I changed anything was that I found I was getting so much pleasure out of buying and spinning records that they overtook my digital source in terms of use, becoming my main source of music. At which point I decided I wanted to optimize the sound, to the degree I could, understanding of course in terms of accuracy it would never be CD. But...can it be better?

I ended up with a beautiful looking over-built high mass turntable that did indeed seem to improve the sound quality. So now I have sound from records that can thrill me, plus I never get tired of how cool the turntable looks and the pleasures of operating a finely tuned device. Very glad I made that choice. But I sure understand anyone not wanting to throw money at vinyl.
 

elchupahueso

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Messages
15
Likes
27
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.
Wait until you have a chance to see 16x20 Polaroids. Seriously, 16x20 Polaroids. Some of the most amazing images i've ever seen. Sure, one can make a gigapixel image pretty easily, it becomes a question of output. If you're standing 20 feet away from a film print or a digital one, there can be zero difference. You get up close and it becomes immediately apparent which is which.
I worked as a professional photographic printer for about a decade right when film died. Don't get me wrong, digital is absolutely phenomenal. It does so many things better than film. It just feels different. Different strokes for different folks.
 

imnotdrunk

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
29
Likes
18
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I listen to a lot of crappily recorded music from the 70s, vinyl is a decent format for that anyways. A lot of the bands I like were at their best when they were broke and once they got to be recorded 'properly' the end result did not have that magic. Recording techniques can be intentionally lofi as well, and there's nothing wrong with that. Tin can sound can be a useful effect.

And I'm a music dork at first. I started my current hifi journey when I realized what I really want to do is find a good old pressing of Fun House by The Stooges and listen to it on great vintage gear. Gotta have me a hobby dabbling in what I like. And I like music more than bits.

However the digital part of my setup has seen the most growth recently. I kinda care about bits nowadays too I guess. It's easy to do simple recordings at home, at least for digital music, so I gotta have both worlds. Maybe some day I will reach zen and can get rid of my materialist tendencies but until then I will be guarding my Roky Erickson & The Aliens lp 24/7.
 

imnotdrunk

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
29
Likes
18
Location
Dublin, Ireland
That wasn't an argument vs anything in the thread btw just another point of view.

Analog sure gives people the wildest things to get fussy about. Do we have any experts who have a decent idea on the usage of water in record cleaning? While I can stretch my imagination into thinking the hard tap water in my house could not be ideal for record cleaning, browsing some other forums things get out of hand in three posts of a record cleaning thread. I had to close all my tabs after reading someones post about buying space fluff grade water for hundreds a gallon.
 

mcdonalk

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
60
Likes
35
I was going to add my own satirical diatribe about the obsolescence of vinyl, but I decided against it. For all of its benefits, too much of this forum seems to exist just to ridicule other audio enthusiasts. I decided not to add my contribution to rhetoric that I find of no benefit.
 
Top Bottom