|
||||||||
Jazz on Vinyl Revival? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
I understand all that but those costs would be done before they even made it to the shelves. What i'm saying is, Amazon and HMV because other than WH Smith online, YES WH SMITH!!!!!!! THEY DO SELL VINYL lol. We don't have a lot of other ways to judge record prices in this country apart from the indies. They proved it can be done. They proved they can sell releases at £8.99 and £9.99 and £12.99. Amazon pre orders many times are in the £12.99 range for new releases before they start climbing up. What i'm saying is they aren't doing that to lose money. [b]They must make something off of that so if they can do that and can afford to do it then why not do it more often?
are you comparing like for like at the same time, or comparing indie releases from before the increase in sales, to the current period? costs change due to demand. when businesses have a lack of demand they will often lower prices to gain sales, then when demand is higher they can charge more also indie labels will often have lower costs of creating product and promotion than major labels. cheaper studios, artists paid less, etc, so these things will also reflect in the end price Quote:
I'm not saying Iphones shouldn't sell at £600 plus but that's because Apple sell them at that price and probably sell them wholesale somewhere close to that because they know shops can't really go higher than that because people wont spend more than that in mass numbers. With vinyl it's became a thing where people now expect to pay over £20 for a new pressing but with Universal and Warner Bros and Sony owning most of the catalogues and then like i say, on webstores and those times on HMV and Amazon prove they can sell the albums a hell of a lot cheaper, why are shops like the indies and HMV and Amazon selling at those prices? Quote:
Surely if the money on advertising and promoting has to be made back it would be the labels charging a fortune on their end to make the money back but they prove time and time again that they can do it, they can sell albums cheap so in theory there should be no difference from a reissue of an album 30 years ago to the new One Direction album on vinyl because all those costs will have been factored in when the distributors sell them but i bet you that album will be cheaper than a new 180 gram pressing of an album that is 25 years old. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Quote:
who are the "they" you refer to? are you grouping a large number of different businesses together?
are you comparing like for like at the same time, or comparing indie releases from before the increase in sales, to the current period? costs change due to demand. when businesses have a lack of demand they will often lower prices to gain sales, then when demand is higher they can charge more also indie labels will often have lower costs of creating product and promotion than major labels. cheaper studios, artists paid less, etc, so these things will also reflect in the end price retailers prices are based on both the cost price and demand, and competition. the most popular chart titles often have a lower profit margin due to competition from other retailers, but they will usually sell high volume at low margin as I mentioned before, chart titles often retail at lower prices for a reason. record companies often offer deals to retailers so they will stock more and in turn sell more, so the artist charts. with reissues there isn't the same requirement to do this. remember vinyl is a very limited market of only 5% sales, and reissues are often bought by the same fans who already have the album. the albums have proved popularity so don't need to be discounted I'll clean up my reply as this is "a family board." I said; "This all very commendable, but in the end, four-fifths of naff-all, is still naff all." It's the same with vinyl, it ain't going to be "re-born," yes there's been dramatic increases in sales, but the novelty will soon wear off. Other methods of listening to music are so much more convenient. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,700
|
The numbers are still decent for the format. If the Beatles and Pink Floyd can still sell 50,000 copies of one album in the year 2015 then Adele shifting 22,000 vinyl LPs of her album 25 in one week is decent. Apparantly that figure is now over 40,000. No one said it will be the format it once was but it is still decent.
I for one never stopped buying records. I was always a huge singles person. Up until 2010 pretty much the entire top 40 chart was available on 7" or 12" and then the revival started and now very few singles due to the backlog and everything is now albums. The truth is it will never go away. I never understood the Itunes thing, i will never ever pay for a digital file that is available for free online, I'm not the only one but an invisible file is not something you own and listening to music on these cheap little imported plasticy earbuds is certainly not the right way to listen to music. Anyone telling themselves otherwises is just kidding themselves. The only excuse anyone should have for listening to digital files on a phone or any other digital device is maybe living in a small flat not big enough for a hifi stereo or just lack of cost. Anyone fooling themselves into thinking MP3s and little earbuds and paying 99p for a song that is invisible has my sympathy, what a waste of money and enjoyment and I bet you the artists would tell you that themselves, slogging away months in a recording studio for the end result to be mp3 files and earbuds. Just dissapointing and of course the kids copy from the parents, the kids copy what they are being brought up around so they will grow up not questioning the parents behaviour and think this is the right way and really its just an absolute mess. Grown men and women forking out hundreds for phones and infact you know what, it reminds me of the gripes i have at the cinema, grown men and women standing in line for popcorn and ice cream. It just gets my back up. If i say anymore i'll be here all day but just oooooh, annoying. Then again it's not my money so who am i to judge what people waste their money on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
Other methods of listening to music are so much more convenient.
To play a CD, it's much the same procedure except the CDs live in a cupboard. To play a download, switch on TV and switch to AV2, fire up Apple TV box, select the Music app, find the album I want to listen to, click on it, switch on the hi-fi, select the correct input, then switch off the TV again so I can listen to the music without annoying onscreen graphics. I'm sure there are people who have everything done virtually so they just say "Hey Siri, play Somethin' Else" and as if by magic, Siri says "I found a Simon Ellis in Acton" and rings the local cake shop. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,784
|
Quote:
I keep my vinyl albums in an open-fronted unit beneath the turntable. To play an album, take it out of the unit, take the vinyl out of the sleeve and put it on the turntable, switch on, lower the stylus on to the record and that's it.
To play a CD, it's much the same procedure except the CDs live in a cupboard. To play a download, switch on TV and switch to AV2, fire up Apple TV box, select the Music app, find the album I want to listen to, click on it, switch on the hi-fi, select the correct input, then switch off the TV again so I can listen to the music without annoying onscreen graphics. I'm sure there are people who have everything done virtually so they just say "Hey Siri, play Somethin' Else" and as if by magic, Siri says "I found a Simon Ellis in Acton" and rings the local cake shop. Brilliant
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Quote:
I keep my vinyl albums in an open-fronted unit beneath the turntable. To play an album, take it out of the unit, take the vinyl out of the sleeve and put it on the turntable, switch on, lower the stylus on to the record and that's it.
To play a CD, it's much the same procedure except the CDs live in a cupboard. To play a download, switch on TV and switch to AV2, fire up Apple TV box, select the Music app, find the album I want to listen to, click on it, switch on the hi-fi, select the correct input, then switch off the TV again so I can listen to the music without annoying onscreen graphics. I'm sure there are people who have everything done virtually so they just say "Hey Siri, play Somethin' Else" and as if by magic, Siri says "I found a Simon Ellis in Acton" and rings the local cake shop. For me it's "the nostalgia experience." I can also choose YouTube on my TV. I've got a memory stick in the side of the TV, with a few thousand mp3s on it. Just have to press Viera Tools on the TV remote and select the music option. Then scroll through the selections, without having to move from my comfortable chair. "No phones necessary." |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,572
|
Quote:
Other methods of listening to music are so much more convenient.
(I think I'll go and play that record now...) |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
The numbers are still decent for the format. If the Beatles and Pink Floyd can still sell 50,000 copies of one album in the year 2015 then Adele shifting 22,000 vinyl LPs of her album 25 in one week is decent.
Quote:
Apparantly that figure is now over 40,000. No one said it will be the format it once was but it is still decent. I for one never stopped buying records. I was always a huge singles person. Up until 2010 pretty much the entire top 40 chart was available on 7" or 12" and then the revival started and now very few singles due to the backlog and everything is now albums. The truth is it will never go away. Quote:
I never understood the Itunes thing, i will never ever pay for a digital file that is available for free online, I'm not the only one but an invisible file is not something you own and listening to music on these cheap little imported plasticy earbuds is certainly not the right way to listen to music. Quote:
Anyone telling themselves otherwises is just kidding themselves. Quote:
The only excuse anyone should have for listening to digital files on a phone or any other digital device is maybe living in a small flat not big enough for a hifi stereo or just lack of cost. sometimes these digital devices, including phones, cost over £500 Quote:
Anyone fooling themselves into thinking MP3s and little earbuds and paying 99p for a song that is invisible has my sympathy, what a waste of money and enjoyment and I bet you the artists would tell you that themselves, slogging away months in a recording studio for the end result to be mp3 files and earbuds. Quote:
Just dissapointing and of course the kids copy from the parents, the kids copy what they are being brought up around so they will grow up not questioning the parents behaviour and think this is the right way and really its just an absolute mess. Grown men and women forking out hundreds for phones and infact you know what, it reminds me of the gripes i have at the cinema, grown men and women standing in line for popcorn and ice cream. It just gets my back up. If i say anymore i'll be here all day but just oooooh, annoying. Then again it's not my money so who am i to judge what people waste their money on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
i play digital files on my phone whilst travelling or sometimes at work. it was a complete nightmare trying to set my turntables up to work on the bus and the needles kept jumping all over the place
What vinyl has in its favour is that it's the right format for serious listening. You put on a record and for 20 minutes you do nothing apart from listening to the music. Or maybe you could read a book whilst the music played. That's how vinyl is going to hold on to a small sector of the market, by appealing to people who want a different experience when they listen to music, without the distractions of Facebook or Twitter or someone standing too close on the bus. Reissues like these jazz albums will appeal to that market. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
Vinyl is never going to be the most popular format again. It's impractical, expensive and it cannot adapt to the modern world where people can share music instantly without ever owning any physical media.
What vinyl has in its favour is that it's the right format for serious listening. You put on a record and for 20 minutes you do nothing apart from listening to the music. Or maybe you could read a book whilst the music played. That's how vinyl is going to hold on to a small sector of the market, by appealing to people who want a different experience when they listen to music, without the distractions of Facebook or Twitter or someone standing too close on the bus. Reissues like these jazz albums will appeal to that market. I had a conversation with someone not long ago regarding vinyl and digital, and this was with someone who did seek to get the best audio quality by spending reasonable sums of money on equipment. they agreed with my view that what sounded better was subjective, and that technically you can get better quality sound via digital, but they said they liked vinyl due to an irrational mental throught process related to finding the record, taking the record out in it's dustbag, removing the record, putting it on the turntable, dust removal either before or after that, putting a clamp on the record, then turning on the amp and putting the turntable power on and putting the needle on the record, to listen. however you can sit still and listen to music regardless of if it's from record or tape or cd or digital download. likewise you can read a book or do dishes or cleaning or simply not pay much attention. the format is irrelevant this, as the irrational mental thought process alludes to, is similar to the same thoughts from some people that vinyl is better as it sounds "warmer", but it's not really warmer, the idea of warmer and warmer being good is based on memories of older setups playing vinyl with rolled off high end and muddy bass, or in other words reproduction that sounds less like the master recording than current technology allows personally I think artifacts that formats like vinyl and tape introduce can be distracting to the music. especially hissing, pops, clicks, rumble and wow and flutter. I want to hear the music as close as possible to the master recording. I understand other people get a mental kick from pops and scratches, but that's got nothing to do with the actual music |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,995
|
Everyone knows vinyl's limitations in terms of portability, ease of use and sharing but it always amazes me how some people can't just let others listen to vinyl if they wish to without going on about the merits of digital over vinyl and insisting the former is superior to the latter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
Everyone knows vinyl's limitations in terms of portability, ease of use and sharing but it always amazes me how some people can't just let others listen to vinyl if they wish to without going on about the merits of digital over vinyl and insisting the former is superior to the latter.
In an ideal world, we would all have high-end audio systems that were completely transparent in their reproduction of music, and the sound from the speakers would be indistinguishable from the source. But in the real world, no one has a system like that, so we buy whatever sounds good to our ears. On a well set-up turntable vinyl sounds as good, or even better, than a CD or a digital download. In terms of distortion, frequency response, wow and flutter etc it might not measure anything like as well, but we don't hear statistics, we hear music. |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Until the introduction of CDs, hanging on to well played vinyl copies of classic jazz LPs was essential, as even some of the best albums became deleted, or as some of us say, "were made of unobtainium." But in the late eighties a lot of these albums suddenly became available as they were re-issued on CD. I really can't think of a technical reason why a vinyl record should be more preferable than a CD.
I guess it's a personal choice, but I doubt if people of my generation are particularly bothered. I've had "Kind of Blue," on both vinyl and on CD and those tracks I've transferred to mp3. I checked what was the last vinyl record, I purchased. It was Miles Davis's "Rock n' Roll Band" as I call them, "You're Under Arrest." Sometime in the mid eighties. After that it was all CD albums, though I still occasionally buy vintage 45rpm records. He obviously had never forgiven his treatment by the NYPD, all those years before. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,572
|
Quote:
that may be your opinion. but it's not factually correct
I had a conversation with someone not long ago regarding vinyl and digital, and this was with someone who did seek to get the best audio quality by spending reasonable sums of money on equipment. they agreed with my view that what sounded better was subjective, and that technically you can get better quality sound via digital, but they said they liked vinyl due to an irrational mental throught process related to finding the record, taking the record out in it's dustbag, removing the record, putting it on the turntable, dust removal either before or after that, putting a clamp on the record, then turning on the amp and putting the turntable power on and putting the needle on the record, to listen. however you can sit still and listen to music regardless of if it's from record or tape or cd or digital download. likewise you can read a book or do dishes or cleaning or simply not pay much attention. the format is irrelevant this, as the irrational mental thought process alludes to, is similar to the same thoughts from some people that vinyl is better as it sounds "warmer", but it's not really warmer, the idea of warmer and warmer being good is based on memories of older setups playing vinyl with rolled off high end and muddy bass, or in other words reproduction that sounds less like the master recording than current technology allows personally I think artifacts that formats like vinyl and tape introduce can be distracting to the music. especially hissing, pops, clicks, rumble and wow and flutter. I want to hear the music as close as possible to the master recording. I understand other people get a mental kick from pops and scratches, but that's got nothing to do with the actual music I know which one I'd prefer though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
Everyone knows vinyl's limitations in terms of portability, ease of use and sharing but it always amazes me how some people can't just let others listen to vinyl if they wish to without going on about the merits of digital over vinyl and insisting the former is superior to the latter.
some people may want to ride in a new warm car with a smooth ride, others may want to drive about in an old cold car that has a bumpy ride. it's peoples choice |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
Until the introduction of CDs, hanging on to well played vinyl copies of classic jazz LPs was essential, as even some of the best albums became deleted, or as some of us say, "were made of unobtainium." But in the late eighties a lot of these albums suddenly became available as they were re-issued on CD. I really can't think of a technical reason why a vinyl record should be more preferable than a CD.
I guess it's a personal choice, but I doubt if people of my generation are particularly bothered. I've had "Kind of Blue," on both vinyl and on CD and those tracks I've transferred to mp3. I checked what was the last vinyl record, I purchased. It was Miles Davis's "Rock n' Roll Band" as I call them, "You're Under Arrest." Sometime in the mid eighties. After that it was all CD albums, though I still occasionally buy vintage 45rpm records. He obviously had never forgiven his treatment by the NYPD, all those years before. there's many technical reasons why a cd can be better than vinly, from sound quality, size, durability, etc. the laser doesn't damage the cd whilst playing, whilst a turntable can damage the vinyl permanently whilst playing. you don't have the same wow and flutter, no pops and clicks etc |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
You could also say that you would get as much nutritional benefit by drinking a sachet of Complan alone in a shed as you would from having a big steak dinner in a nice restaurant surrounded by friends and family. In fact you could say that drinking a Complan alone in a shed is better because it's quicker, cheaper and you wouldn't have all the saturated fat, alcohol and carcinogens that go along with the steak dinner.
I know which one I'd prefer though. with music however, many people prefer to listen to it in the best possible sound, and enjoy hearing it in the best possible sound. and things like taking records out of sleeves, and pops and clicks and hissing and rumble and all these other things vinyl playback adds to the sound that's not present on the original recording are often considered detrimental. so to some, the high definition clear sound would be the premium way of listening by far, and more enjoyable by far i wonder how many people who blab on an on about vinyl being better or their preferred choice actually have a decent setup at home to hear high definition audio properly, along with a decent turntable setup, so they could actually compare like for like. i have 3 turntables and two high definition setups in different rooms so i speak from experience |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
i have 3 turntables and two high definition setups in different rooms so i speak from experience
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Quote:
If you have three turntables and you get pops and clicks and rumble and wow and flutter then you bought the wrong equipment. It's well known that some turntables have better speed accuracy, and some cartridges cope with worn records better than others.
Vinyl has its own charms. Part of the "jukebox experience" for we enthusiasts, is depositing coins in the machine, the physical act of pressing the selector buttons, the "ding" of the latch solenoid after making your choice, the whirring of the record carousel, the sound of the gripper arm placing the record on the turntable, the sound of the amplifier mute coming off and then the anticipation as you hear the needle tracking in before the music begins. In fact, in some sophisticated modern systems, where mp3s are played instead of vinyl, the "track-in noise" can be added to enhance the experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
What you say is true to an extent, but any damage to the surface to a record will be transmitted via the stylus and cartridge to the amplifier. You can reduce the effect of this, but you can't actually completely cut it out, whatever you do will affect the overall reproduction.
Vinyl has its own charms. Part of the "jukebox experience" for we enthusiasts, is depositing coins in the machine, the physical act of pressing the selector buttons, the "ding" of the latch solenoid after making your choice, the whirring of the record carousel, the sound of the gripper arm placing the record on the turntable, the sound of the amplifier mute coming off and then the anticipation as you hear the needle tracking in before the music begins. In fact, in some sophisticated modern systems, where mp3s are played instead of vinyl, the "track-in noise" can be added to enhance the experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,031
|
Quote:
If you have three turntables and you get pops and clicks and rumble and wow and flutter then you bought the wrong equipment. It's well known that some turntables have better speed accuracy, and some cartridges cope with worn records better than others.
"buying the wrong equipment" is just a nonsense statement. I don't have thousands of pounds to spend on a laser turntable or one of the high end fifteen grand turntables. I buy equipment within my means. I could have bought a fifteen grand turntable, but then I would say that was the wrong equipment as it would be OTT for myself. it still wouldn't stop pops and clicks anyways |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Quote:
that's not true. recently I listened to a system that was worth about 12 grand, the turntable was about £2.5k alone. a record goes on and straight away pops and clicks, you could tell with your eyes closed it was a record being played. after that a cd was played on a player that wasn't cheap by any means, but cost less than the turntable. no pops and clicks, just the music and sounded much better in my opinion
"buying the wrong equipment" is just a nonsense statement. I don't have thousands of pounds to spend on a laser turntable or one of the high end fifteen grand turntables. I buy equipment within my means. I could have bought a fifteen grand turntable, but then I would say that was the wrong equipment as it would be OTT for myself. it still wouldn't stop pops and clicks anyways If you're going to send that sort of money, you're bound to convince yourself that you will have a much better experience, than with anything that plays CDs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,303
|
Quote:
that's not true. recently I listened to a system that was worth about 12 grand, the turntable was about £2.5k alone. a record goes on and straight away pops and clicks, you could tell with your eyes closed it was a record being played. after that a cd was played on a player that wasn't cheap by any means, but cost less than the turntable. no pops and clicks, just the music and sounded much better in my opinion
"buying the wrong equipment" is just a nonsense statement. I don't have thousands of pounds to spend on a laser turntable or one of the high end fifteen grand turntables. I buy equipment within my means. I could have bought a fifteen grand turntable, but then I would say that was the wrong equipment as it would be OTT for myself. it still wouldn't stop pops and clicks anyways I have old records that pop and click and I have new records that are quiet pressings with no scratches. By listening to different cartridges I've found the set-up that tracks the old albums with the fewest pops and clicks and plays the new ones with the most engaging sound. I'm not saying you couldn't tell the difference between a system playing vinyl and the same system playing a CD, but I would suggest that a well-chosen system would bring out the best in both formats and minimise the difference in quality. It would still all hinge on how well-mastered the discs were, vinyl or digital. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,700
|
My setup is a very good setup but the one thing I will say is this, people talk about hiss and pops and clicks from vinyl. The only records I have that do that are second hand ones. I'd go as far as saying every record I have bought new from the shops still plays the same today as it did then, it's all about how you take care of them. I've got records from 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago and even last week that play with complete silence. No surface noise. It really is all about how you take care of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,843
|
Quote:
My setup is a very good setup but the one thing I will say is this, people talk about hiss and pops and clicks from vinyl. The only records I have that do that are second hand ones. I'd go as far as saying every record I have bought new from the shops still plays the same today as it did then, it's all about how you take care of them. I've got records from 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago and even last week that play with complete silence. No surface noise. It really is all about how you take care of them.
But the "killer" for vinyl is a worn stylus. From the day you first use it, it will be starting to wear. It's about when you replace it and how well the replacement sits in the cartridge, even the slightest deviation of the angle of attack from true can have a unnoticed but long term detrimental affect on your records. But that's only to be expected with "vintage technology." |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:58.



