|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.114.173.253
In Reply to: Thumb in bum, mind in neutral. Come on chaps clean up your act. posted by Olly on April 19, 2007 at 23:18:11:
and anyone who disagrees has drunk the vinyl coolaid.
I have a feeling too many are not being real with themselvesI really doubt that folks with low end turntables are really passing digital sound.(Even the sound of cheap CD players) I know this thought may not be popular on this board, but I have feeling it's a bit more "real" than many of the fantasies people have here.
We hear people posting things like:"That cartridge is TERRIBLE it sounded digital to me"
"Digital is not musical"
What a load of *$*&!!^&
Follow Ups:
I remember going into a local record store 22 years ago (its still around, and I've moved back), and the proprietor told my friend and I how digital sounds terrible, because "you can't turn music into 1's and 0's and expect it to come back properly".I was budding physicist, who knew all about the Nyquist criterion, and the theoretical noise level of 16-bit sampling (hey, I even took a hifi course from a well respected researcher in the field - John Vanderkooy). So, I felt a certain feeling of superiority, and dismissed the vendor's comments. That wasn't to say that I didn't love my vinyl setup, but I was looking forward to the lack of ticks and pops on digital, and the full frequency response, and not having to buy new cartridges.
Well, then I got my first CD player, and a copy of Phil Collins' "No Jacket Required". It sounded terrible -- thin and uninvolving. Okay, I thought it was just the recording. Later I found some listenable albums.
I spent a lot of time searching for good CD sound, which I never found (though I have heard pretty good sound on good-quality recordings on top-shelf units like DCS -- but I can't afford). I have heard great sound on SACD and DVD-A and 24/96 DAD. But, those formats seem dead, or relegated to classical (in SACD's case).
In the last year, I've tried out vinyl, and am addicted. Even mediocre recordings from the past at least have a life, naturalness, soundstage, and emotional involvement to them.
But all is not perfect. I recognize drawbacks to vinyl. It requires careful setup. Currently my imaging seems to wander from outer to inner track. I sometimes hear distortions in the highs that wouldn't be there in high-res digital. The bass isn't as accurate. I still hate surface noise. But in the end, I listen to every instrument and every sound, and just freakin' enjoy it!
So, I don't argue that digital is better or worse. I recognize that high-res digital (that we have little of), done at its best, both in playback and recording is likely the ultimate. But, it is rare to find (in software), and rarer to afford (in hardware). Until then, I'm enjoying ALL music on LP. Whether that is because of LP-specific distortions, or because LP is inherently better, I don't really care :)
My current theory is that LP both masks some bad aspects of recordings, and adds a bit of euphonic distortion. But, it also does many things right. However, I also think that CD messes up the high frequencies so much, that it makes far too much music unlistenable at any volume, on a revealing system. Why listen to music if you can't enjoy it? So, long live LP (the original high-res medium), and high-res digital. Let's have the death of CD and MP3 (should I write a manifesto now, lol?).
I'm enjoying ALL music on LP. Whether that is because of LP-specific distortions, or because LP is inherently better, I don't really care :)
I should have said this in a different way. It was a bit harsh.Many people here LOVE vinyl.(Myself included) They obsess about how incredible vinyl is and continually post how if outperforms digital in everyway.
Many people here act as if digital is completely unlistenable. The laugh and mock digital like many mock Bose. Come on now...Is this really true? Is it that bad? I've found the opposite and am quite surprised.
***but I have feeling it's a bit more "real" than many of the fantasies people have here.*******
I would say this differently with a bit more sensitivity if I was to post again, but I still think it to be true. Many people here are so heavily biased that they are not being real. I love vinyl and am being REAL WITH MYSELF. I want it to win, but FOR ME it is not. If you experience is different, no need to get bent out of shape.
There IS A LOT OF FANTASY here....I'm trying to find the truth. If vinyl is beating digital for you, maybe you can help to do the same. I'm still trying.
The vinyl/CD comparison is sometimes nulled by the recording. I have some recordings that are virtually indestinguishable. They tend to be newer rock recordings, but the Norah Jones LP I bought for a friend wasn't distinguishable from the CD on his system. This is rare though in my experience.When my buddy first got back into vinyl, he fixed up his B&O and we did many comparisons. A basic B&O table, basic B&O cartridge, and the phono stage in an Audio Analogue integrated. CD was a Meridian 506. Not many were even close, and the investment in CD player was many times that of the turntable. I myself had the "entry level" DCS 3 piece stack at home for a weekend a few years back. It was the best digital I've ever heard in my life, and by far the best ever in my system. Absolutely incredible, but my turntable/phono stage combo still got the best of it more often than not.
Just my experience, and that of most of the guys I hang out with.
Space
"Tax the rich, to feed the poor, 'til there are no, rich no more" Ten Years After
well, what is so bad about that? it is the VINYL asylum."....I'm trying to find the truth." And what would the truth look like? Pick one:
1. digital is better than vinyl
2. vinyl is better than digital
3. both are the same with differencesIn looking at that list it is obvious how ridiculous it is.
"Many people here are so heavily biased that they are not being real. I love vinyl and am being REAL WITH MYSELF. I want it to win, but FOR ME it is not. If you experience is different, no need to get bent out of shape."
There you go again ... claiming that the heavily biased are out of shape.
And your followup post was meant to do what? Clear things up? ;-0 It is merely a reiteration of your first post ... which caused John Elison to lose his grasp on reality.
-----------------
no hard feelings on my part...the written word is a very poor communications medium..no eye contact,voice inflection or tone..no body language..no facial expressions etc. These all help us understand the senders intent and true meaning.
Regards
Ernie
He is stating his experience not pushing it on to anyone else and this is my point.
OLLY
I've no problem with different opinions..
what was the purpose of calling peoples views "fantasies" and "loads of *$*&!!^&" .. that will certainly sway opinion in your favor.
The phrases "I have a feeling" and "I really doubt" are opinions. Everything you've presented from the original poster shows he is expressing his opinion.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: