36 things vinyl collectors love
- Thread starter Botch
- Start date
Flint said:
That's because CDs suck. They sound to tinny and digitized. Get with the program man! :teasing-neener:
There's a lot of that I love as a CD collector. For instance, 3,4,5,6,14,15,16,17,18,21,24,27,30, 34 (sub pits for grooves), and 35 and 36
(sorry, old pic)
I'm not a vinyl junkie, but the biggest thing I like about vinyl is there's a lot of music out there that still hasn't made a release on CD. That's the kind of stuff I'm getting into. That, and I just love record/CD stores in general. I'm hoping to hit a few record shows next year. I've got a couple of buds at work that's as heavy into music (if not more) than I am, so I'm hoping we can take a day off and hit a few stores. Lats time, Ben and me hit some places in Knoxville and had a blast!
I'm not a vinyl snob either, but back in the 80's I spent a lot of money on Mobile Fidelity, Telarc etc, and had a pretty decent cartridge (Shure V15 Type 5) for a college student. Those discs did sound better than standard vinyl (and I'm sure most of us loved that old "1812 Overture" with the cannons!).
However, once I heard my first CD, I never looked back. Maybe a vinyl disk has a "warmer", "more organic" sound (no one's given me a strict engineering definition of what those words mean) but I definitely can hear the rumble, pops, clicks, tics and occasional wow on even the best vinyl, that the CD format does not have.
It's been interesting to read "Dr. AIX"s rants about how bluray audio sounds "better" than, say, SACD, for original recordings (ie not a re-recording of a 30-year-old stereo tape master of a bestseller album) but I haven't had the opportunity to hear back-to-back copies of the same freshly-recorded performance on both SACD and bluray.
I do have Steely Dan's Gaucho on both SACD and DVD-A, but the two formats were mixed/mastered differently so its not a valid comparison.
I'm pretty sure my age already limits my ability to hear any differences between the top formats anyway; I'm just damn happy I lived at a time in history to enjoy virtually noise-, wow-, and defect-free music in Surround. :music-listening: :music-listening: :music-listening:
However, once I heard my first CD, I never looked back. Maybe a vinyl disk has a "warmer", "more organic" sound (no one's given me a strict engineering definition of what those words mean) but I definitely can hear the rumble, pops, clicks, tics and occasional wow on even the best vinyl, that the CD format does not have.
It's been interesting to read "Dr. AIX"s rants about how bluray audio sounds "better" than, say, SACD, for original recordings (ie not a re-recording of a 30-year-old stereo tape master of a bestseller album) but I haven't had the opportunity to hear back-to-back copies of the same freshly-recorded performance on both SACD and bluray.
I do have Steely Dan's Gaucho on both SACD and DVD-A, but the two formats were mixed/mastered differently so its not a valid comparison.
I'm pretty sure my age already limits my ability to hear any differences between the top formats anyway; I'm just damn happy I lived at a time in history to enjoy virtually noise-, wow-, and defect-free music in Surround. :music-listening: :music-listening: :music-listening:
D
Deleted member 133
Guest
Botch said:
Ummm...
This thread http://www.theaudioannex.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2738&start=300
Last page.
Razz' Sat Mar 31 , 2012 7:25pm post. Pics 5 & 6.
Big guy. Top row. Second from the right.
The Rope Challenge.
Ringing any bells yet?
Ok so maybe it wasn't some brand new fancy schmancy recording, but it must surely have been an omen that you heard Tom Sawyer on your way to the airport! I mean we conducted a 100% foolproof scientific test - didn't we?
Or maybe, as Snowman noted, we were all too drunk or hungover to tell the difference.
Any of you guys remember this video?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J6OmXaLdKE[/youtube]
I would love to tour this guy's collection, if he still has it (the video was uploaded back in 2009). From 1948-1966, only 17% of the music from his collection saw a CD release. I would love to see/hear his collection.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J6OmXaLdKE[/youtube]
I would love to tour this guy's collection, if he still has it (the video was uploaded back in 2009). From 1948-1966, only 17% of the music from his collection saw a CD release. I would love to see/hear his collection.
JeffMackwood said:Ummm...
This thread http://www.theaudioannex.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2738&start=300
Last page.
Razz' Sat Mar 31 , 2012 7:25pm post. Pics 5 & 6.
Big guy. Top row. Second from the right.
The Rope Challenge.
Ringing any bells yet?
Ok so maybe it wasn't some brand new fancy schmancy recording, but it must surely have been an omen that you heard Tom Sawyer on your way to the airport! I mean we conducted a 100% foolproof scientific test - didn't we?
Or maybe, as Snowman noted, we were all too drunk or hungover to tell the difference.
Well, again, I said
That was comparing a SACD and a bluray copy of an old stereo tape master; I'm still believing that the noise, compression, and freq response of the tape itself would mask any differences, if you could even hear them, between bluray and SACD.
That WAS a fun exercise, however! :handgestures-thumbup:
malsackj
Well-Known Member
From another point of view I have worked with some of the local sound guys here around DC and some are not happy with the sound of the new Digital mixers used for live band work. Presonus, Yamaha, Soundcraft, have been compared to analog counterparts.
Three of the sound guys have been in agreement that the digital mixers do not have the warmth of the analog mixers. Sounds like a discussion about tubes and transistors.
Sorry that might stir up the pot of another sore subject.
There is also some discussion in the mastering of some music that is done to transfer to tape and back to digital to impart the warmth of the old tape and analog world?
Three of the sound guys have been in agreement that the digital mixers do not have the warmth of the analog mixers. Sounds like a discussion about tubes and transistors.
Sorry that might stir up the pot of another sore subject.
There is also some discussion in the mastering of some music that is done to transfer to tape and back to digital to impart the warmth of the old tape and analog world?
malsackj said:
In production, every single piece of the chain could contribute to the sound. However, that sound is CREATED with the contributions. This isn't a case or reproducing something, instead it is a case of the gear being the instrument of the sound.
In that way, we have become accustomed to the noise and distortions that even the best analog gear of the past added to the recordings we love. That noise and distortion is like a special effect on the recording that made the sound of the recording what it is. If we remove the noise and distortion by using what is effectively noise free gear, then we think something is missing.
Now, that's the theory.
In practice, a PA or recording process is all about producing something people like to hear. If people like to hear a "warm" compressor like the old optical compressors from the 1960s, then we can either digitally model that noise, or we can just add one of those compressors to the signal chain. Since the ratio of old compressors compared to the need for them is high, it is often much easier to just add one to the mix than it is to recreate that sound by programming a DSP. The same goes for PA systems. All the gear is a tool and/or instrument in the final product.
At home we are attempting to reproduce something which has already been recorded. Some, like me, argue that we should attempt to recreate the recording as perfectly as we can without adding any artifacts at all. That way we hear the brilliance of the artists who made the recording the way they heard it. Every decision they made we should hear the way they did. Others argue that they just like the added noise and distortions of certain imperfect reproduction systems, like LP or Tape. They love to always hear their music through the filter of their reproduction chain - its like wearing rose colored glasses all the time.
So, there is a very important difference between producing music and reproducing it.