Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
All you have to know is that it failed to replace its predecessor.
Usually when a new technology demonstrates its superiority, the result is that within a short time it supplants the older (obsolete) technology.
In time, the obsolete technology is gone from the marketplace and becomes an artifact of museums.
Side valves in internal combustion motors have long since been replaced by overhead valves and no looking back.
The last really commercial 78 was produced in 1956 (Doris Day).
There are many more!
The marketplace seems to determine what is working and what is not. Beta could have been a lot more successful if Sony had not been so precious about their technology...
Anyway, vacuum tubes are still somehow with us despite being declared obsolete in the 1960s. Heck, they've been 'obsolete' for longer than they were the only game in town! The market keeps them for a reason- they have certain applications for which the succeeding technology somehow failed.
The same is true with the LP; its is still very much around after being declared obsolete in 1987. 1992 was the year of the least production of vinyl worldwide. Its sales have been on the rise ever since. Last December saw its sales eclipse that of digital downloads in the UK. While the CD has been dying, the LP continues to sell, now showing up in Barnes and Nobles, Best Buy and Target.
Best Buy sells turntables and Technics has even released a new completely redesigned-from-the-ground-up SL1200. For which they were asking $4000, and to my understanding is nearly sold out. LP mastering houses and pressing plants in the US are backed up, pressing plants in particular often have 6 month leadtimes on new projects. There are even new pressing machines available; something not seen in decades.
If digital were really bringing home the bacon, the analog/digital debate would simply not exist and neither would the LP!
I could care less, its been more then satisfying for me for many many years.
.....must be true because there's a company that makes them. They're so popular they're out of stock. ;-)
CROSLEY says it all
Too much is never enough
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
Article from 2012 linked below
(we operate an LP mastering operation, in addition to making amps and preamps)
The artist is local and pretty popular (Monica LaPlante). I really doubt anyone will be buying her vinyl just to put on the wall.
People are still riding horses.
Prop planes are still in mass production
Sail boats are ever popular
Polaroids are making a comeback
It means nothing.
Oh and 78 rpm records are still being made.
As have others on this thread.
start at the link below.
that is still around because the market likes it. Such tech is not considered obsolete. Its just old.
Tubes are a good example. They do something transistors have really troubles with: good linearity and soft clipping, so less odd ordered harmonics. By rights they should be loooonnnnnggg gone!
Just because there is a market for older technology doesn't mean the newer technology is not "delivering." Jet engine airplanes most certainly do "deliver." So do automobiles and cameras that do not use polaroid film technology.
To understand how it didn't (or doesn't) deliver, you have to understand the history.
In 1987 RCA/BMG declared the LP obsolete and asserted that they would no longer produce vinyl.
The CD had been declared 'perfect sound forever' several years earlier by such players as Marantz.
During the years that followed, the record industry in the US actively attempted to shut down vinyl production (despite at the time many people putting the various labels on notice that the new product was not sounding right).
So 1992 was the year of least vinyl production. But the demand never dropped off. Some LP titles pressed in the early and mid 90s command crazy high prices on ebay owing to their rarity and desirability to this day.
At any rate, this was an example of the industry attempting to influence the market, rather than the other way 'round. Because the demand never faltered, LP sales were on the rise all through the 90s and succeeding decades, to the point that one of the top selling bands of a few years ago (Arcade Fire) could be found on LP almost anywhere. They were on an independent label!
Now had the early assertions of the record and audio industry not in fact existed, things could be seen as different. But the fact is those assertions are well-known, and despite the industry trying to stamp out the LP (as in get rid of it, not make more :)...), it survived because it was doing something that made it worth keeping. As a manufacturer I often hear of audiophiles that regret having sold their LP collection early on. I know a few that bought them back at tremendous expense!
That all points to the CD not making good on the promise and as time has gone by, we've seen digital improve, belying the obviously ridiculous 'perfect sound' assertion.
But the thing is, despite much higher scan rates, word lengths, MQA and the like, the simple fact is the LP is still very much alive when it was supposed to be supplanted. Jack White just opened a new pressing plant using a new pressing machine, something that no-one thought possible even 10 years ago.
As I have pointed out in other posts, the issue has to do with how the ear/brain system perceives sound. In that regard, two factors are in play; the first being that the ear converts distortion into tonality (in the case of digital, this is the source of the brightness or crispness for which it is known) and the other is that the ear uses higher ordered harmonics to gauge sound pressure, which causes it to be more sensitive than the best test equipment in detecting certain forms of distortion.
That is why we see perfectly flat frequency response on the bench, but for some reason its bright. Its not a frequency response error, its distortion, but in trace amounts that are hard to measure and easy to hear.
Until the digital industry wakes up to that fact, the LP will continue to thrive.
clearly was not delivered back when it was used as a marketing slogan. But it's not unusual for any technology to mature. Digtal clearly has amtured. Now we do actually have audibly transparent digital recording and playback. But here is the thing that no one was able to forsee. Perfect transparency doesn't equate with best asthetic performance. Digital did eventually deliver on the promise of audible tranasparency. We just found out it wasn't what we all wanted in the first place.
I find that one must increase the sample rate at least to 88khz in order to minimize the brickwall filter (digital or not) phase induced funkiness.
Hi-rez can sound very good to these ears. :)
But please correct me if my math is wrong.
Weren't we talking about CDs? They sample at 44.1 khz.
"(perfect sound forever) clearly was not delivered back when it was used as a marketing slogan. But it's not unusual for any technology to mature. Digtal clearly has matured. Now we do actually have audibly transparent digital recording and playback. But here is the thing that no one was able to forsee. Perfect transparency doesn't equate with best asthetic performance. Digital did eventually deliver on the promise of audible tranasparency. We just found out it wasn't what we all wanted in the first place."
When I refer to "digital" I include other digital formats beyond red book CD and include 24/96. Sorry for any confusion.
IMO based on some very careful blind comparisons I have found 24/96 can be completely audibly transparent.
The "Perfect sound forever" format, aka Redbook, has never been either. :)
IMO based on some very careful blind comparisons I have found 24/96 can be completely audibly transparent.
I just thought high-end was about sound quality -and as soon as we move to the next level, we can't go back. Like standard-def TV. I know CRTs are making a (small) comeback. But this is more about screen-size than 'wanting' lower resolution. For many folk, old (or new) TV shows, shop-TV or the news, the old screen-size is better.
Ralph thinks young-ins are buying LP. That means 40-50 year olds are streaming but kids half their age are playing vinyl. Doesn't make sense. Does he mean DJs ? They are, but this small group (always) spun records.
I understand Pro-ject sold a lot of players in recent years. But who bought them ? Could be India, China or small emerging markets. Without proof of (U.S.) player sales, we have *no way* of knowing if there was a 'vinyl comeback'. For playing discs, not collecting that is...
You continue to ignore facts at a trumpian level.
A quick search for "my vinyl collection" on YouTube will reveal hundreds of videos posted by LP fans from ages 14 and up. The younger ones are largely buying new releases, although some also crate dig (and most of them are actively ruining said records by playing them on shitty equipment).
Now do a search for "my MP3 collection." Crickets.
Anytime you want to find out what's really going on in the world, YouTube is your source.
Despite my posts here, I actually support retro-comebacks. The current wave started in the 90s with classic baseball stadiums (w/ real grass). It continues with the pay phone, pinball machines, old brand names and roller skates.
New restaurants are going brick-and-wood w/ higher ceilings. New homes include porches.
That said, it doesn't mean these items are sweeping the country. Hundreds of vinyl videos could be from 100 people.
It's sound quality, not retro-ness that concerns these forums. And IMO reviewers got it right -99% of them have digital while most of (these) prefer it to LP.
If we are actually talking about sound quality and looking to the market as any kind of indicator then you obviously have to look to the audiophile market. And when you do the indicators are quite clear. Vinyl dominates that market. Personally I don't look to market trends as meaningful evidence of quality but if one wants to make that argument vinyl is the clear winner.
LP is all but gone from high-end audio. It's hard to find reviewers who prefer it to digital. I go to them because it's the best evidence we have. We obviously can't know every consumer's system.
But even here, look around, go to your audio societies, etc. -it's all digital.
Reviewer Jim Austin said it best: it's been 'more than decade' since LP left (high end) as a reference. Even Art Dudley and Herb Reichert, two of the remaining 'vinyl-first' people, have been reviewing a LOT of digital.
In the past 2 years -so much that they seem to be listening to digital full-time, due to constantly-new samples coming in. Why are they doing this if digital is not their beat ?
Reviewer Jim Austin said it best: it's been 'more than decade' since LP left (high end) as a reference.
Kindly post a link to that quote. You've clearly demonstrated in this thread alone a decided inability to read and understand content.
Does he know fellow reviewer Mikey Fremer? :)
While I'm not a Valin fan, he continues to update Harry Pearson's "Super LP" list. You can find it here . Jacob Heilbrunn continues to review record playing gear and even when reviewing stuff like Odin 2, he references his vinyl library.
As a long term friend of HP, I can tell you that he regularly spun vinyl on the Clearaudio until the end.
No, the burden of *proof* is upon you to support your silly assertion (referencing only a handful of names) if you want to be taken seriously.
You can read Jim's thoughts on a thread (I started) called 'Reviewers with LP -how many are there' ? For Jim, LP is now second-choice. The 'decade ago' thing was the decline of LP, in high-end audio, in his words.
If you do the work, let me know how many reviewers use LP as a primary source. I found 10 (and even listed them). But there are 130, maybe 150 U.S. reviewers ! Some don't review much, so it's hard to get an exact number.
And even this could be off -vinyl lovers Dudley and Reichert are reviewing a *lot* of digital these days. When it's not even their beat to do so.
You can read J.m's thoughts on a thread (I started) called 'Reviewers with LP -how many are there' ?
I followed the thread and perhaps I missed it, but I find no link to his printed words.
Kindly link them again. Surely that should be an easy task.
...can't help you there !!
Let's review your claim from this post:
"Reviewer J.m Austin said it best: it's been 'more than decade' since LP left (high end) as a reference."
There is a search engine which provides the ability to locate any text sequence. Try it for yourself. Paste the text "more than a decade" into the "exact phrase" dialog and see what you find.
Are you really that delusional?
For those who are able to count both their fingers and their toes, here is the *alleged* post.
This is what you actually find:
"I do not find one technology innately, sonically superior to the other; excellent music in excellent sound is available in analog and digital form. "
It is indeed impossible to quote text that no one has ever written.
Perhaps you should lay off the recreational drugs for a while. :)
So you couldn't find it but NOW you can....
Jim was disagreeing with those who say "LP is superior". Then said "things have changed" (twice !). Read between the lines.
that you are delusional, free from the boundaries of facts and reality...
"LP is all but gone from high-end audio." Wrong
"It's hard to find reviewers who prefer it to digital." Wrong
"I go to them because it's the best evidence we have." Wrong
So once again you got it all wrong. Next you will ask me to prove it and I will and then you will try to spin it away or ignore it. Do some homework for a change and try to get some facts right. Your parade of objectively wrong assertions is getting boring.
Alright big guy prove it.
do your own homework for a change. If nothing else you are predictable. can't help yourself?
I just thought high-end was about sound quality -and as soon as we move to the next level, we can't go back.
Sure - if the move doesn't involve any back stepping like it did with the CD. For decades of music released before either CD or high resolution formats were available, vinyl still offers audible advantages.
For many folk, old (or new) TV shows, shop-TV or the news, the old screen-size is better.
That's certainly not my preference. All of the TVs in my household are now 16x9 capable. When stuck, however, with 480p content old tubes look better to these eyes.
edit: I do hate it, however, when folks distort the image by stretching 4x3 content into a 16x9 presentation. My father-in-law can't tell the difference. :)
as I am pretty much with you, but there are other examples which relate as much to preference, style and nostalgia as much as any technical reason or basis of superiority.
1. Smokeless power or revolvers (I have two revolvers)
2. Mechanical watches (I love my Omega Speedmaster "Moon" watch)
3. Manual transmissions (I enjoy shifting the 6 speed in my S2000)
4. Fountain pens
5. Manually ignited charcoal grills (I have a Green Egg)
And so on...
That is why the market keeps them around!
There is a Wiki page on the subject, but the subject line of this post is really what that's about. The LP is older too, but not gone because its not obsolete and the newer art does not eclipse it.
If somehow a digital watch really was a good idea :), mechanicals would be long gone!
The market still exists for thes things because some people like them despite being obsolete. It's not always about utility. Markets are driven by numerous forces.
no longer produced or used; out of date.
Clearly LPs and analog and the other examples you gave are produced and are used as soon as they are made. So at least as far as the dictionary is concerned, the word does not apply in this case.
'older tech' seems more apropos...
no longer in general use; fallen into disuse:
an obsolete expression.
of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date:
an obsolete battleship.
(of a linguistic form) no longer in use, especially, out of use for at least the past century.
Lot's of uses for the word
unless there is an alternate definition of which most of us were previously unaware :)
then we are talking about different things.
So the best I can make out is you have an alternative definition.
How about you define what you mean by 'obsolete'.
"no longer in general use"
"no longer produced or used"
Interesting because I see a huge difference between "no longer in **GENERAL** use. and "no longer produced or used"
Every example I gave is no longer in "general" use but still is produced or used. You don't see a big difference between those two definitions?
When you can find LPs at Target, its general use.
Keep in mind its kids, not audiophiles, the fuel LP sales.
I understand that. But it was my other examples that you claim supported your argument that I was really thinking of here. Niche markets for older technology does not point to a failure of the newer technology to deliver on the promise of improved performance. It's a non sequitur argument. There are too many examples of it not being true.
The continued production of prop planes does not prove a failure of jet planes to deliver superior performance.
The continued production of sail boats does not prove a failure of motorized ocean vessels to deliver superior performance.
The revival of polaroid cameras does not prove a failure of digital photography to deliver superior performance to that of polaroid photography.
The continued interest in equestrian sports is not proof that the automobile has failed to deliver a superior means of transportation.
regardless of any subjective opinions about the relative aesthetic merits of vinyl v. digital media your argument in and of itself fails. The vinyl revival is not proof of a failure in digital technology delivering on performance.
My company is very engaged in the local music scene, so we get a lot of contact with kids (20-30 somethings) and like myself they say the reason they buy LPs is because they sound better. Mind you, from what I can tell most of them have pretty inexpensive systems but they still say that.
That is what has led me to my initial assertion as I very much doubt this is a local phenomenon.
IME when all else is equal vinyl sounds better than digital on my system with my vinyl playback rig. But rarely is all else equal. We have few examples of recordings that were transfered both to the cutting lathe and the A/D converter off the exact same feed. I find that one has to take it on a title by title basis when looking for the best sounding versions of a given recording and often there is no definitive winner with tradeoffs ruling the day.
Are the reason why most CDs are compressed more than LPs. For this reason when cutting a project we always ask for the original files rather than those used to master the CD. There's no expectation the LP will be played in a car.
LPs also have more bandwidth in record and playback; 35khz is no worries. This helps to reduce phase shift, essential to proper soundstage reproduction.
Despite the fact that each of my examples of newer technology can "demonstrate its superiority", they hang on for other reasons.
Those reasons are the market like it.
The market like it because there is something about it that the newer tech didn't satisfy. So the older tech remains current.
Do you know of anyone making CRT-based TVs?
May not be "making them" yet but clearly there is a market for CRT TVs
check out the other articles before reaching for a check book
LCD/LED monitor based screens look marvelous when running in their native high resolution. As is the case with computer monitors, they rapidly lose clarity at anything lower than native. While our cable service offers many HD quality stations, not all of them are offered.
Plain old TV still looks sharper to me on CRT displays than with flat screens.
Not to mention the dumping of tube based televisons! That went FAST and no looking back.
The dog who was starting it in the prior set of threads had been dealt with.
Now, immediately we here have a cat trying to get more action going...
I guess the cat and dog fights still have active shooters....
I tried really hard to stay away from opinion in the opening text. Everything stated is easy enough to verify.
Its one thing to be trolled; its another to state fact.
I admit to a bit of a bias- I run an LP mastering operation. The act of getting into that field caused a lot of my own misconceptions about the media to be dashed. For example I found the actual noise floor of a lathe cut is a lot lower than most people think- easily in the -80s and no question rivaling the noise floor of digital. The surface noise crops up in the pressing process.
And that's just one example...
Wow,, -80 , Really ! Stamper vs Vinyl .....?
So far, QRP is the lowest noise, with the results being not unlike the lathe cut, in that the electronics are the noise floor, not the vinyl.
I don't think you have made any kind of case for this.
Can you explain why the LP is still around?
My point was that the market wants it. Pretty simple and there should be no argument there.
Where there might be a bit of an argument is the why of it. Clearly the size is helpful for artwork, but IME with local musicians and the local music scene here in the Twin Cities is that the local bands like the LP because it sounds better. Sure- they will do CD too, but in this town, you've not really 'arrived' unless you have vinyl.
So that could simply be a status thing. But its going on all over the US. And almost any article you can find about the resurgence of the LP usually mentions the smoother 'rounder' (if you'll pardon the expression) sound of the media. So the sound seems to have something to do with it.
Of course I can explain why the LP is still around. But the fact that the LP is still around does not mean that "digital does not deliver." That is a non sequitur argument. Also...we really haven't delved into what *you* mean by "deliver."
If digital was doing its job, there would be no LP production!
you will have to do better than that
I recently purchased a vinyl album with a gatefold cover at a garage sale. I didn't inspect it all that closely because I was buying it for the cover to replace the seriously worn one I owned. When I got home and opened it up, two pot seeds and a piece of stem rolled out. Ahh, memories! A plastic CD case can never offer what a gatefold LP cover as much comvenience as you roll along. No wonder vinyl sounds better.
It's not really a question of digital "not doing its job" if that has anything to do with reproducing high quality music.
It largely has to do with other factors such as:
1. Nostalgia and nurturing fond memories of yore
2. Leveraging existing equipment investment
3. OCD enjoyment of the playback ceremony of looking at, handling, cleaning, and cueing vinyl
4. Collector status of large physical media with artwork
I'm in no hurry to sell or replace my collection of
fortyfifty years and still have two turntables, but then I haven't purchased a new title in years. Especially since all of them would be digitally sourced, why?
I was in Chicago a couple of weeks ago and visited a cool record store that actually had some new content including a soundtrack that I already have in 24/44. I just couldn't think of a good reason to buy it.
edit: An analogy would be Harley-Davidson motorcycles. There is not a single performance parameter in which they excel vs modern designs. Except for the low volume Porsche designed V-Rod, all of them use antique 45 degree V-twin motors that are inherently out of balance, have poor cooling and less than stellar reliability as compared with rest of the industry. What made sense in 1906 with the twin producing 7 HP vs 4 HP for the single motor is no longer relevant in any evaluation of performance or ride quality. Racing? They can only compete with themselves on dirt tracks.
And yet, they thrive. Why? Nostalgia. Image. Perceived prestige. Cool guy status. Tim Allen grunt envy . "I want to have my fillings shaken loose with a hardtail!" Overweight dentists wanting to don their steed wearing a do-rag. And lots of accessories including H-D logo panties for the little lady.
I will acknowledge, however, that they do excel at one thing: resale value. :)
1. Nostalgia and nurturing fond memories of yore
2. Leveraging existing equipment investment
3. OCD enjoyment of the playback ceremony of looking at, handling, cleaning, and cueing vinyl
4. Collector status of large physical media with artwork
Kids fuel the market. That's not why they are buying :)
Overall business was up about 10% from 2015 and the winners and losers are quite clear.
Streaming market share of revenue went from a third to half at the expense of downloadable and physical media.
LP revenue share fell about half a point to 5.5% of total. The future direction is pretty clear.
Forecasts of the demise of the LP have so far been pretty inaccurate.
for years to come. It seems that you're able to continue the pressing enterprise just fine.
Growing in popularity enough to move the meter? Don't think so.
For better or for worse, interest in physical media is continually waning.
Just curious; the LP has had a lot of attention in the mainstream press as of late and the major forces that drive the music market are kids who have been the main reason the LP has survived. In the Twin Cities ( as I mentioned before) your band has not arrived unless it has vinyl. IOW it's a status thing. That's going on all over the U.S. and in Europe. When all the pressing houses in the country are backed up (and have been that way for several years), that definitely moves a needle, not yours obviously but the market does not care what you or I think.
Market share. Murmurs of its second coming haven't materialized.
That dwindling space which it has occupied for the past couple of decades. But then one could reasonably say that about the high end audio community as a whole.
...that definitely moves a needle, not yours obviously but the market does not care what you or I think.
I'm merely making objective observations about market statistics.
The period of least vinyl production was 1992-3, a quarter of a century ago. The graphic shows none of that, in addition does not show current sales. Weird.
seeing the light green traces across the chart through the last date it covers - 2013. They are indeed tiny.
The data is presented in inflation adjusted dollars.
The numbers are higher now than in 1993 but the graphic does not reflect that. It's clear erroneous.
The numbers are higher now than in 1993
The last date presented in the RIAA sourced graph is 2013, not 2016.
Indeed there have been relative *spikes* since then which leads to the previously documented massive 2016 contribution of 5.5% of revenue, a drop over 2015.
You can niggle over the data, but if you really believe that vinyl's contribution of revenue to the entire market will ever return to even a fraction of its former glory, I think you're in for a big disappointment.
well c'mon. anything less is technically a fraction. fact is all estimates have vinyl fetching over 1,000,000,000 dollars in total revenue for 2017. That a pretty big "niche" market. Of course it will never be what it was when LPs were the only way to buy music. But that is a ridiculous comparison.
You'll find that your billion dollar speculation is more than double the actual $427M answer.
Which represents 5.5% of the total market in terms of revenue. Call that tiny percentile what you wish.
Nope. RIAA fails miserably to track sales.
The thing with sales numbers when comparing vinyl is that to be fair to vinyl most of the sales are SECOND HAND copies that according to E-Stat don't get tracked.
I'm not dumping on digital at all here just to say that most people who buy vinyl are buying second hand. Even here in HK where the giant HMV resides - they have half a floor dedicated to vinyl and 95% of the albums being sold are second hand copies. Because you just can't get a new vinyl print of most 70s and 80s music.
If we conservatively estimate that for every new vinyl album sold 50 second hand vinyls are sold - then factoring this in - vinyl is probably doing astoundingly better than the RIAA numbers would suggest.
50% of the hipsters who buy NEW vinyl never listen to it. Or even take it out of the shrink wrap.
That's not really an argument unless there is something to quasi back it up. People download music and listen to it once and may never listen to it again.
To be fair to digital there is a lot of listening going on via free illegal downloads from various Bitorrent sites and just listening to new music on youtube connected from your computer into a receiver. Free.
I've never understood the fascination with format wars. If you like vinyl then buy vinyl - if you like computer digital or CD or r2r tape then buy it. Why does everyone get so uptight over sound quality and try to push everyone else into buying the format.
I had someone tell me once that he liked his vinyl rig better than his computer hi-res rig (and these are class A+ Stereophile computer rigs where the computer cost $8,000 and the DAC was over $30k. But he said - vinyl was too much of a pain in the ass. It's as if the guy felt some weird audiophile shame that he chose a less sounding digital system because of convenience. No shame in that. It's perfectly fine to have the money for a Ferrari - love Ferrari and choose to buy a mommy mobile mini-van. And if you choose CD over vinyl for convenience or computer audio for convenience - there is no problem with that.
The number of sales of a format doesn't or should not persuade you or anyone else that A is better than B. A Gourmet restaurant selling the best hamburger on the planet sells far less such hamburgers than McDonald's and Bose sells more speakers than whatever everyone in this forum happens to own. And we're not calling Bose the best sounding product or McDonald's the best tasting or healthiest hamburgers.
Vinyl I am amazed does as well as it does. E-Stat noted they have 5% of the sales - that is astounding to me! This is a huge pain in the butt format with a steep learning curve.
Owning Vinyl IMO borders on the obnoxious. You have to buy the big bulky disc. You can't touch the thing anywhere on the playing surface. You have to buy a big bulky machine to play the damn things. You have to be super careful with the needle - any mistake or heavy handedness likely ruins your record or the stylus/cartridge. They always get dirty from basically being exposed to the air for 20 seconds.
After 1000 hours (if that) your stylus is crap and probably destroys your records. You have to spend on some sort of cleaning apparatus for the records and the stylus. Solution that is usually pricey these days because it's not sold at economies of scale.
Then you only get half a disc of play so you have to be constantly vigilant ready to flip the side. Or 3 times for a double LP.
Then there is the fact that so many new albums are made poorly with warp or too much leftover grunge in the tracks making a vacuum cleaning machine almost necessary - there is $500 just for that.
Oh and most new vinyl is just a digital transfer anyway so they're not going to sound better than the Redbook CD version.
I keep on trying computer audio playback because I like that I can just call up any song from any artist from one of my many multi-terabyte hard drives and listen to something instantly or have it play for 8 hours (or basically 24/7 7 days a week until the drive dies).
And it doesn't cost jack squat to get into computer audio. Once you have it set up then it's just a matter adding music to it (music that never degrades with play either).
Having said all that I can't help walk away from virtually all of these digital rigs feeling dissatisfied. They don't glue me to the chair and get me into the music. It's continuously a banal experience for me. Background music while I cook or clean the house or for throwing a party. But just sit and listen - meh.
I am hopeful that at the California Audio Show - someone will have a rig with hi-res that will excite me. It doesn't even need to be as good as Vinyl - just good enough to make my toes tap and get me involved in the music.
"Only 52% of UK adults who reported buying vinyl in the last month said they had a turntable they currently use."
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Was there a point you're trying to make? The one where I, we, anyone should be taking cues from Millennials? Gee I wonder why it sells. Kid gets phone from mommy and daddy - cost? Zero. Download song from iTunes - $0.50-$0.99 no hardware required. Mommy/daddy probably pay kid an allowance to buy those. Probably get free downloads when buying certain cereals.
I don't think the Lp will ever do what it was, all this time I've simply been saying is that if digital were really better the LP would be long gone.
"Not gone" -classic cars and pinball machines. LP follows suit -a niche-market item. Unique in feel/touch and rubber-meets-the-road w/ DJ/underground.
My gripe was how this retro-format was touted as sounding "better than (any) digital". By a few famous reviewers, not just the one I posted on.
Maybe the music *they grew up with* sounds better this way. But IMO, it's like saying "CRT offers a better image than high-def".
getting rid of my Speedmaster any time soon.
I keep it set with my $9.95 atomic clock. :)
What E-Stat is indicating is despite a decade and a half-long resurgence, LP is still a tiny percent of the market. Then, surveys show only half of LP buyers are playing them. Half are collecting.
We need U.S. turntable sales over the past 10-15 years to know if there was any comeback.
It could just be a Twin Cities/Seattle phenomenon. Vinyl wasn't 'pressed' that much in the 90s or 2000s and LPs don't last forever. So there was a demand for LP in DJ/underground music circles by 2008-10. Timed just right for a retro-movement in the U.S. (like pinball machines in Chicago, old brand-names coming back, etc.)
We never get the whole story.
and even begin to understand the very sources you've cited in this thread, I actually agree with you in this case. :)
I find no need for endless remastering of oldie content.
Sorry Ralph but I am afraid that your comment does not stand up to close examination . Yes LPs may have grown in sales last year but the really big growth is in streaming. Unless you know how to stream vinyl per se though the internet then I have to consider that streaming = digital.
I am also not convinced that the whole vinyl revival thing isn't just a fashion blip so let's look at it again in, say, five years. No, vinyl sales have not been on the increase since 1992, only recently.
BTW . I continue to use both LP and tubes. Also digital and transistors. In fact anything whereby I can get the music as that is important and ultimately formats aren't.
Sorry, that is simply not true. I was online in mid-90's arguing with one Arnie Krueger about the fact that vinyl had started increasing one or two years before. His argument then was the same as yours ..... just a "fad". A fad that has now lasted for more than ten years.
Thanks for your comment . I am impressed that you must have been reading the Critics forum intensley to respond to a month old posting from me.
What you say about the mid 1990s showing a vinyl sales increase isn't the case. Not because I have an opinion about it but because the facts say so. In fact vinyl sales declined year by year until 2007.
I will just take a couple of dipstick figures but the show what was going on. These are official IFPI numbers:
LPs 1996 compared to 1995 -33%
2000 compared to 1999 -13.3%
2005 comppared to 2004 -8.5%
However your second point that vinyl growth has now lasted for 10 years is accordingly true ( albeit from a very low base). Perhaps I should revise my opinion about a fad.
Nevertheless I would like to look at vinyl sales by age group but cannot find stats. There is a potential that the continuing growth may not be sustained long term. I have recently been seeing anecdotal evidence that what had originally been portrayed in the press as an interest in the medium by young people (causing my potential fad idea) is not the whole picture. It seems that a considerable part of the growth is old guys re-living their youth. A bit like retirees buying their first Harley Davison. Unfortunately those who form part of the latter group of vinyl buyers are inevitably a dying breed. I guess that I'm amongst them except that I never abandoned LPs.
What I said was that the LP had outsold digital downloads for the first time in the UK; it was widely reported:
Thanks for you response.
I am, and have been, very aware of the sales figures for various audio media both in my own country and internationally. However I believe that you ( and some of the journalists that you link to) are assuming incorrectly that a unique correlation exists between the decline in CD sales and the increase in LP sales. This stance completely overlooks the actual driver for the decline in CD sales (and downloads); streaming which (for the UK) increased by 68% (2016 over 2015).
Yes vinyl continued to grow. However sales for 2016 in the UK totalled 3.2 million units. This is against 123 million total album equivalent sales overall. So 3 million vinyl against 120 million digital (various digital formats). Not figures that would lead me to conclude that digital isn't performiing.
That is not to minimise vinyl's increasing success but it is from a very low starting point. Nor does it overlook the decline in CD and downloads. However the slack caused by the latter has been largely taken up by the digital medium of streaming and not by vinyl which remains a minority interest according to the above figures.
Those are annual figures. However the articles linked by you refer to the Christmas period( wk 48) which is not necessarily a good indicator for a market overall (if it were then turkey would be the number one preferred meat throughout the year :-).
On the other hand you have Michael Fremer you know of analog corner at Stereophile magazine declaring that of the five best sounding big systems at CES 2001 four were digital systems, not analog. So it goes....
In terms of music sales and what media is in use, kids do (for a given value of 'kid' :) ).
IOW, the continuing increase in vinyl sales does not have much to do with audiophiles at all. Its because kids want it and buy it.
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: