CD v Vinyl - My preference.

I've been thinking about this a lot today. However what I have bugan to realise is there is certain types of music I only by on CD and others only on vinyl.

I think generaly speaking Vinyl does sound better however with simpler music such as folk (Simon and Garfunkel, John Denvor, Carol King etc) I think a well mastered CD sounds better because you don't get any surfice noises and it just seems to sound more convincing.

However for more complex stuff such as Joy Division or REM then I think vinyl comes into its own, you can't here the surfice now because the bass lines and drunms donimate the low frequencies.

Do you agreee?

P.S Sorry if this is a bit random, I am just trying to get put off my assingments even further....

 

i like cds cos you can skip to tracks etc etc

i wanted to get into vinyl but its not for me i dont think

 

It would be interesting to find out what peoples music tastes are what their chosen format it.

I would imagine most indie and dance fans would prefer vinyl but people that have more poppier tastes would prefer CD. I think the beegee's earlier stuff sounds better on CD.

 

To me EVERY type of music sounds better, more real, more musical and more ALIVE on vinyl - except of course for some absolutely dreadfully recorded digital recordings and remasterings, which seem better suited (?) to CD (can someone explain the logic of digitally remastered music on LP!?). Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-digital at all - I have around 700 CDs and over 500 DVDs, but analogue to me IS music, whereas digital is, how can I put it, some kind of re-presentation of music, if that makes any sense Until digital is perfected (I'm sure it will be someday) analogue is where the real musical draw is for me.

 

the ironic thing is that most vinyl pressings have been through a digital delay line at some point during manufacture. also most recording is done digitally and / or digital processing is used at some point during mixing / production. this just makes me believe that the 'vinyl sound' is nothing more than euphonic distortion that some people happen to like, an unpopular opinion with some i'm sure.
i've listened to a couple of decent tt setups and compared them to cd a number of times and to be honest it's all much of a muchness to me.
i listen to a broad cross section of music, for example today i started off with lab4 then went on to some iron maiden, then some metallica and finished off with some moby. about the only music i actively loathe is opera, even some of ssb's death plinque sounds good to me, all on cd.
cheers


julian

 

My tastes are predominantly classical - and at the heavy end of that, where pieces are generally quite long and have huge dynamic range. My preference is pretty much on practical grounds:

1) CDs have a snesible side length (up to 80 mins) which avoids having breaks in the vast majority of pieces. I still do double takes either when listening to CDs or in live concerts when the music doesn't stop in the middle of certain movements for a side break
2) CDs have a far higher dynamic range than LPs
3) related to 2 - CDs generally have lower background noise than LPs
4) CDs take up less space than LPs
and nowadays
5) there's a wider range of stuff available on CD than LP (even given the vast back catalogue) - and old analogue recordings are being given a fantastic new lease of life with top quality digital processing (and engineers who do know their job)

With top notch equipment and a following wind, analogue can improve on CD for subtler pieces, but 1) is a real killer for LP for me.

May still get a TT sometime though (the good ones do look sexier)

(Julian - it was absolute heaven on Saturday - got in over 7 hours of Wagner! )

 

With newer digital recordings then yes I can't tell much difference between vynil and the CD version, I like the 'clean' sound of CD, however for sheer musicaly (especialy those analogue recordings ) I think vynil still wins. Now I have a new CD player the gap has closed and I have realised that CD has a lot to offer, CD seems to be very good at bringing out the vocals and the subtle details, but then I have a CD6000OSE LE and a Project Debut II, the CD player is probably the better peice of kit.

I have been using Love Will Tear Us Apart as a reference and no matter what it sounds better on vinyl. Stephen Morris's snappy drum beats just sound so much faster and real. It just seems to have more energy.

To conclude my opinion I don't think either format is better, they both offer different things and CD probably wins for day to day use.

 

Wasn't it Ivor Tiefenbrun, Linn founder, who said that digital processing completely killed the life of music? He was tested in public using early 80's Sony digital processing (well, it was the early 80's ) and proved conclusively that he was completely unable to tell when an ADC-DAC loop was inserted into the source output Anyone for a 20-page DBT thread BTW? :MILD:

 

Well Pete, Ivor is welcome to send round the tune dem nazi's too see if they can pick a tune of me cdp if he likes.

 

General rule of thumb for me is:-

If the music was produced pre 82/83 then vinyl is my preferred choice

If the music was produced post 86/87 then I'll generally go for the CD

If its between those dates then I'll consider either.

There are of course exceptions to those rules as I'll tend towards vinyl for classical the vast majority of the time

 

As a predominantly classical listener, I have no preferences - to me, one sounds as good as the other - I have never heard this alleged vinyl superior musicality or different presentation (I'm not even sure what that means) - so I'm happy with both. I therefore prefer CD purely on convenience grounds and find I use the CD players more than I do the LP12.

 

Yup.
And within a year Linn had launched a CD player.

The vast majority of CD buyers have no idea just how good a well set-up mid-price turntable can sound. For example, my wife. When we met she bought mostly CDs. They sounded way better on her midi system than her handful of old LPs played on the same systems horrible plastic turntable.
After nine years together she is still blown away by the sound of my old Roksan Xerxes.

The vast majority of Vinyl addicts have no idea just how good a mid-price CD player can sound. For example, my best mate has a Linn and a Garrard. He previously owned Roksan and Systemdeck turntables. He gets very pissed off when I demonstrate my old Micromega DAC fed from a Philips CD walkman....Because it sounds just as good, except that there is no surface noise or clicking and popping.

I have 450 LPs and around 400 CDs. I buy new and used CDs and used LPs indiscriminately. No preference. CDs are less vulnerable and more convenient. LPs are cheaper used.

 

>>>The vast majority of Vinyl addicts have no idea just how good a mid-price CD player can sound. For example, my best mate has a Linn and a Garrard. He previously owned Roksan and Systemdeck turntables. He gets very pissed off when I demonstrate my old Micromega DAC fed from a Philips CD walkman....Because it sounds just as good, except that there is no surface noise or clicking and popping.


Disagree, I run a have decent CD player and have heard some of the best at most price points. Your mates decks, or the rest of the system are fundamentally flawed. Nothing I have heard from CD challenges my belief that Vinyl sounds better. I can enjoy music on CD but I can't chop and change formats, this could be at least partly explained by the differences in cost and quality between my front ends but I based the decision to purchase a serious record player on the relative performance of the turntable.

I think simple music also works better on vinyl, yes the noise is higher but the realism of a plucked string, a vocal, a struck drum or cymbal from vinyl is higher than from CD ... my tuppence worth.

Cheers

Jason

 

I've said it before, but it's about access to music, rather than sound quality (although, to my ears, a decent analogue recording played on a good turntable consistently makes better music than even an uber-expensive CDP). If you have esoteric or broad music tastes, and buy a lot of second hand music, not owning a decent TT is daft.

-- Ian

 

Yep - and it's a world acknowledged (well in MY world anyway) fact that he's deaf. He'd have to be to market something that sounds as bad as an LP12, or as flat and dull as a CD12. Linn suck. I don't care - slag me off and say I'm deaf, but I've only heard ONE LP12 that I'd even consider listening to. Overrated junk.

I prefer vinyl - but not always. I got Licensed to Ill on vinyl recently and it sounds awful - the pressing (180 gsm) sucks - really sibilant and distorted. But then it's a double edged sword, as my cheapo Emerson Lake and Palmer record I got last weekend kicks arse - and I've run out of inner sleeves so can't clean them!

Any vinyl made post 1979 (I believe) does indeed have a digital stage in it - the cutting lathe uses one - I guess to iron out wow and flutter in the cutting lathe turntable. My late 70s Beatles Blue album might be pancake thin, but it sounds awesome. My late 80s Sgt Pepper sounds no better than the CD (and that's not saying much).

Euphonic distortion does play a lot in vinyl's sound. A very accurate turntable doesn't actually sound that far removed from CD, but with smoother sound.

I reckon simple acoustic is FAR better on vinyl - it sounds more "chunky" and realistic. Classical should theoretically be better on CD as there's less distortion during climaxes, but I still reckon vinyl beats CD here as well - so long as you can deal with massed strings on worn vinyl EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEKKKKKKKKK!!! Yuk.

Screaming electric guitars always work better on vinyl because of the mild euphonic distortion - it's easier to air guitar to vinyl!

I wish CDs had come in caddies (the same size as a CD jewel case, with the booklet within the caddy), but that's off topic!

BTW - my original 1983 RCA pressing of Hunky Dory on CD sounds amazing; better than the 1999 EMI remaster by a country mile. And this is on a disc that's so old, there's no catalog number or matrix on the disc itself, and the inner tray on the jewel case only has the CD logo at the top right. Oh - and the whole package weighs about double what a modern CD weighs.... Nice thick lacquer that WOULD survive the Tomorrow's World jam challenge...

 

Dom, you have never heard a well-set-up LP12. I bought a pair of briks recently (for a friend) and the guy selling them had an LP12 + Ekos + van del hul Grasshopper, Krell preamp and Theta dreadnought poweramp. Expensive, hi-end system? Should sound pretty darn good?

He chose 'Hotel California' from 'Hell Freezes Over' for the demo...he specifically liked the 'awesome tom-tom drum' sound from this track, which I had never heard before. He lent me the record, and delivered the briks to my place the next day.

We played the track on my deck. The look on his and his mate's face when he realised that it is quite obviously a bass drum, not a tom-tom, was something else.

I took a spirit level over to his place. The platter on his LP12 was not even close to being level...and that was just scratching the surface of the set-up problems which he had. Some people just don't realise what a huge difference to the sound decent set-up will bring.

 

I'm sure you're right, but since the damn thing is so fiddly to use, set up, maintain and all that just to play a record, forget it. If I was going suspended chassis I'd go for the far better engineering stance that Michell take - having all the weight sitting on the springs isn't exactly the best idea.

I have said that I'm open to hearing a well set up LP12, but I'd still never want to own one.

Oh - and re the old chestnut of "CDs take up less space than vinyl" - rubbish. I bet you if you calculate in terms of VOLUME rather than 12x12 v 5x5.25 inches, it'd be about evens stevens. Certainly the ~450 LPs+45 Laserdiscs on the bottom two shelves on my bookcase take up less space than the ~550 CDs on the rack next to them....

 

All turntables need to be level and carefully set-up. Once it's done, it's done.

There's a myth going around sites like this one that LP12s need a lot of maintenance. It's a myth.

CD players, amps and speakers benefit from careful set-up, too.

 

Managed to pick up 'Hell Freezes Over' on vinyl a few weeks ago at the Bristol Show. It's definately worth buying if you're an Eagles fan and a TT owner!

 

Just done an aproximate "back of an evelope" calculation and it suggests that a single 12" inc cover takes up roughly 1.5 times the volume of a CD inc jewel case. Therefore in an ideal space that holds 100 12" records, that space, if ideal, would hold approx 150 CDs

In reality a space thats ideal for vinyl will never be ideal for CD (vice versa also) so there will be some loss there plus the figures don't take the "no matter how tightly the vinyl is packed there's always space for one more" phenomenon into account

Figures based on 304x304x3mm for vinyl and 125x142x10mm for CD