DS Forums

 
 

There is more vinyl than CDs just now!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-10-2016, 21:12
JurassicMark
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 5,537
Ah... Depeche Mode. Violator on SACD is especially rare and expensive these days. I didn't know DM had released on Blu-ray Audio? Which album(s)? You're about to cost me some money aren't you....

Blu-ray Audio, frankly, has an even better chance of success than SACD or DVD-Audio IMO. It's cheaper and easier! All you need for that format is the cheapest supermarket special Blu-ray player, and you're ready to go. The BD player just acts as a digital transport, and feeds its data via HDMI to a nice amp and speakers. Here, you can concentrate your budget on said amp/speakers rather than the playback device. No need for an expensive multi-format player anymore.

Did you know that Arcam now sell a 2 channel HDMI equipped amplifier? Check it out:
Linky
It's a digital HiFi stereo amplifier for the HDMI generation.


If you don't own Steely Dan:Gaucho on SACD you owe it to yourself to grab a copy. The sound, is just wonderful. Thanks to you, I was listening to it at 12:30 this morning!
Depeche Mode released this Live In Berlin - (Deluxe Boxset) which had the odd combination of having the live concert on DVD only but had their 'Delta Machine' album in 5.1 audio on blu-ray. Cost me £20.99 when I bought it.

Hope blu-ray audio does take off but I'm just not seeing much customer interest, apart from your good self I can't remember discussing this with anyone else on this forum and I have mentioned multi-channel audio a few times. Have been to a few hi-fi and home entertainment type shows but have not seen anyone demonstrating multi-channel audio, I may not have got into it myself if it wasn't for Depeche Mode. Perhaps FMs reading our posts will spark an interest and we'll gain a new fan of multi-channel audio, but probably not.

Will look out for that Steely Dan SACD.
JurassicMark is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 08-10-2016, 22:25
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
Digressing a bit.
But as Steely Dan has been mentioned.

This is my favourite cover of a Steely Dan tune, by Jeff Lorber (keyboards) and Warren Hill (alto sax). I've got this CD. It's about sixteen years old now. Timeless.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frMQYIgD9tA
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 22:30
ianradioian
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 24,307
Well, it's tidier.

I sometimes go to friends' houses and they are immaculate: no books, no LPs, no CDs, just... tidiness. If that's what gives them pleasure, fine, but I would rather take an album out of its sleeve and put it on a turntable than have to search for it on a device and then stream it to a tiny wireless speaker that at best produces a vague approximation of the original recording.

But then I get more enjoyment from music than I do from seeing nice tidy rooms.
I'm the same; all my records and cds are in a cupboard but my leviathan of a Technics hifi stack is there next to it and my giant AE speakers.
I've never stopped playing my records- why?
I do download music to my phone and play it on my car radio for convenience, but if I'm keeping the music, I want it on a "hard copy" - record or CD
ianradioian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2016, 23:22
Dan Sette
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cornwall (at last!)
Posts: 5,641
I would never say vinyl is 'superior' to CD because, all things being equal, it isn't.
But that's the point. They never will be equal. Using a very broad brush, CD will have better dynamic range than vinyl. LPs will have greater frequency range - you pays your money …...
Dan Sette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 09:32
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
That's fair enough. I think we could be in the minority nowadays though (listening to a whole album). The point I was trying to make was, I think technology has changed the way many people listen to music. The concept of listening to an entire album, start to finish may not be something as popular as it used to be, whatever the medium.
I also think that not as many people actually sit down and listen to an album (or even a single piece) and give it their full attention anymore.

(I could be wrong, I'm just guessing that's all)

In other words, for a lot of people (not necessarily yourself), listening to music is now just relegated to having something on in the background. Peoples lives are just too busy, just too full of distractions nowadays, to sit down and play an entire album...

...which is kinda at odds as to why vinyl has become popular again. As its a cumbersome, expensive, fragile format.

Or maybe that's precisely why its back in fashion? It's a rare opportunity (these days) to sit back and focus ones attention on something for a while, and do nothing else...
Maybe it's a nice escape from busy modern life...?

I've had a busy, stressful week. I haven't listened to any music at home all week. But it's Friday, and I'm definitely going to spin Back to Black on vinyl when I get home and can relax.

But thanks to Mr Jurassic's post, I think I'm gonna blast out Tears for Fears: Songs from the Big Chair in its stunning 5.1 remix too!

remember tho that music as "albums" is only a relative recent thing from the last 100 years or so. likewise many things that people often moan about as not being the same anymore. in real terms it's only been about the last 50 years where people started listening to music in that way as anything like the norm. until around the 60s most people would listen to the radio or singles for their music fix. these days people can listen to a lot more music as they can listen whilst they travel and have it on in the background at work, in addition to sitting down and listening, or dancing and lisening
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 09:53
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
But that's the point. They never will be equal. Using a very broad brush, CD will have better dynamic range than vinyl. LPs will have greater frequency range - you pays your money …...
in practice however CD usually has a higher frequncy range due to the technical limitations of vinly, especially on the low end spectrum where most frequencies are mono rather than stereo under the 100hz range and high end frequencies usually cut off at the 18khz range. anything heard over that is usually just unintended distortion that wasn't on the original recording

remember of course the limitations of analogue tape that would normally limit recordings to 20khz which is why CD audio has similar limitations. digital recordings can have considerably higher frequencies
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 10:00
Inkblot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,301
One of the factors in vinyl's popularity could be listener stamina. A vinyl album lasts around 20 minutes per side. A CD is intended to hold up to 74 minutes of music. That's a long time to maintain an interest in anything and there aren't many albums that are all killer, no filler for the whole length of a CD. Conversely there are a lot of albums that are just superb at under 40 minutes. If you listen to music whilst reading, writing, ironing, whatever, 20 minutes is a handy time to take a break and stretch your legs as far as the kitchen or bathroom, or just walk across the room to turn the record over.
Inkblot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 10:14
gomezz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buckingham
Posts: 28,534
I dunno about that. I found having to flip an LP every 20 minutes while revising for my uni finals was a pain. Mind I would come round from concentrating to realise the record had finished and I could not remember hearing any of it.
gomezz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 11:09
Inkblot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,301
I dunno about that. I found having to flip an LP every 20 minutes while revising for my uni finals was a pain. Mind I would come round from concentrating to realise the record had finished and I could not remember hearing any of it.
I remember reading that having music playing whilst you revise actually increases your concentration level. Strangely I can "sing" things like saxophone or even drum solos from albums I listened to as a student 40 years ago, so maybe we retain the music we listen to whilst studying even if we don't notice it at the time.
Inkblot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 12:29
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
I remember reading that having music playing whilst you revise actually increases your concentration level. Strangely I can "sing" things like saxophone or even drum solos from albums I listened to as a student 40 years ago, so maybe we retain the music we listen to whilst studying even if we don't notice it at the time.
People working in environments where background music is constantly played, often say they don't notice it.
It's the same with anything. I remember in my teens working on a car belonging to a friend outside his parent's house at the end of a cul-de-sac in Chiswick. The District Line is on a high embankment at the end of that avenue, just yards away.
I asked him if the noise of the trains bothered him, as one had just clattered past.
He replied "What train?"
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 15:59
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,274
People working in environments where background music is constantly played, often say they don't notice it.
It's the same with anything. I remember in my teens working on a car belonging to a friend outside his parent's house at the end of a cul-de-sac in Chiswick. The District Line is on a high embankment at the end of that avenue, just yards away.
I asked him if the noise of the trains bothered him, as one had just clattered past.
He replied "What train?"
That's kind of the aesthetic Eno was thinking about with 'Discreet Music' and his notion of ambient music generally. It's music to complement environments.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 17:54
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
Still digressing.

I remember my mother having the TV test card music on whilst she did her housework. They had daily "themes" with different genres of popular music each day. She said it "helped" as it relieved the boredom and there was no "disc jokey chat."
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 08:54
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
i'd rather take a properly mastered CD over a properly mastered vinly anyday as the cd will reflect the original recording more accurately
Where have I said otherwise?

However the point remains that often the "remastered" CD is of poorer quality than the vinyl original, for the reasons I have already mentioned.

iwhat you want to do, what you want to play it's up to you. what people prefer soundwise is up to them. however when it comes to technical aspects and facts, a cd can produce sound more accurately than vinly, and as a fan of music i prefer my reproduction to sound as accurate as possible and things like touching covers etc don't concern me as those are seperate things to the sound being created during playback
Again I'm not disagreeing, a CD should always sound better than the vinyl original, but, again, that isn't always the case.

The artwork that goes with an album may be a separate thing to you, but to a great many people they are integral.

If I see the artwork for, say, Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon, I think of tracks like Money, Time. etc, and not "Oh yes, a graphical representation of light refraction through a prism..."

To me you can't separate the two.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 09:31
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
Where have I said otherwise?
where did i say you said "otherwise"?


However the point remains that often the "remastered" CD is of poorer quality than the vinyl original, for the reasons I have already mentioned.
prove it with facts

the fact however is that comparing like for like, with properly mastered discs, the CD will more accurately reflect the original recording

there are "remasters" or "new pressings" of vinly now that have used CD as the basis for the master. an actual CD as opposed to the masters used for CDs. there are just so many factors into vinly that adversely affect the quality of sound, including playing it, with dust specks melted into the vinly creating pops and clicks permanently on the record




Again I'm not disagreeing, a CD should always sound better than the vinyl original, but, again, that isn't always the case.
of course. but comparing like for like the CD can be technically superior


The artwork that goes with an album may be a separate thing to you, but to a great many people they are integral.

If I see the artwork for, say, Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon, I think of tracks like Money, Time. etc, and not "Oh yes, a graphical representation of light refraction through a prism..."

To me you can't separate the two.
i can. i'm a big pink floyd fan so i know hipgnosis created much of the artwork, not the band. roger waters used a pen and a ruler to make the wall cover, but gerald scarfe did the great drawings. floyds art was the music, the cover art is someone elses in most cases - talking about all music in general. they are two things entirely. what you are describing is an emotional attachment to the two. i seperate the audio from everything else. my ears don't hear the artwork. the artwork doesn't let me hear the music
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 09:47
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
i can. i'm a big pink floyd fan so i know hipgnosis created much of the artwork, not the band. roger waters used a pen and a ruler to make the wall cover, but gerald scarfe did the great drawings. floyds art was the music, the cover art is someone elses in most cases - talking about all music in general. they are two things entirely. what you are describing is an emotional attachment to the two. i seperate the audio from everything else. my ears don't hear the artwork. the artwork doesn't let me hear the music
Which for most people is the case, there is an emotional attachment between the two.

It is that emotional attachment that also contributes to the resurgence in popularity of vinyl, something it seems to me you will never understand.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 13:24
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,274
Which for most people is the case, there is an emotional attachment between the two.

It is that emotional attachment that also contributes to the resurgence in popularity of vinyl, something it seems to me you will never understand.
There can be emotional attachment to the music and to the album cover. I have that with Joy Division, The Beatles, Eno, Sigur Ros, Van, Roxy, U2...not every album but some. I also feel the same about many songs and their accompanying videos. Album covers and videos are different art forms but one can enhance the other.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 07:16
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
Which for most people is the case, there is an emotional attachment between the two.

It is that emotional attachment that also contributes to the resurgence in popularity of vinyl, something it seems to me you will never understand.
i do understand it, and i can articulate and explain it better than most

it's just not something that appeals to me. i still buy vinly and have a huge collection, but i'm a collector and mainly buy vinly for specific reasons, such as to obtain tracks otherwise not available on cd, to which i think rip the track to digital to keep the vinly in the best condition possible, as each play causes permanent damage to the disc, unlike CD

i don't fall for the emperors new clothes type marketing which is pretty much what many people are falling for, buying shitty suitcase record players from clothes shops and new pressings of records taken from digital masters, and then wrecking them permanently with the first play, and then many of those records will end up in circulation in the second hand market in the future, making second hand buying of quality discs a potential minefield in years to come
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 07:22
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
There can be emotional attachment to the music and to the album cover. I have that with Joy Division, The Beatles, Eno, Sigur Ros, Van, Roxy, U2...not every album but some. I also feel the same about many songs and their accompanying videos. Album covers and videos are different art forms but one can enhance the other.
this is seen a lot in many discussions on these forums in particular, especially with particular artists whos success is very much helped or dependant on visual appeal - music videos, mimed tv and live performances, posters, magazine photos etc, rather than the actual music

before the advent of MTV and cable/sat multichannel tv, most people experienced the first chance to hear new music from radio, so opinions were based on sound alone. when listening to a new album opinions were based on the music being heard more than anything else. now most people see music videos, teasers, trailers and all sorts of non audio stuff before hearing the music. we have ridiculous trailers of music videos, which were intended to be adverts for the music, with a single being an advert for an album and a video being an advert for the single and album. peoples attentions are being taken away from the music and towards other things, so make a good music video and you can have a hit single with a shit song. make a great track with no video and it may go largely unheard
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 07:52
Inkblot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,301

i don't fall for the emperors new clothes type marketing which is pretty much what many people are falling for, buying shitty suitcase record players from clothes shops and new pressings of records taken from digital masters, and then wrecking them permanently with the first play, and then many of those records will end up in circulation in the second hand market in the future, making second hand buying of quality discs a potential minefield in years to come
According to a review some of those record players "track" at over 7g, because they need to keep the stylus in the groove when the speakers are blasting out immediately below it. A DJ cartridge designed to play in a much more challenging environment might track at 5g but with the correct alignment and a good quality stylus - and it will still damage the vinyl if it's not used carefully (which is unlikely to happen in a club).

However is it likely that the people buying these toy record players will be buying records anyone will want to play in 50 years' time?
Inkblot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 09:48
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
According to a review some of those record players "track" at over 7g, because they need to keep the stylus in the groove when the speakers are blasting out immediately below it. A DJ cartridge designed to play in a much more challenging environment might track at 5g but with the correct alignment and a good quality stylus - and it will still damage the vinyl if it's not used carefully (which is unlikely to happen in a club).

However is it likely that the people buying these toy record players will be buying records anyone will want to play in 50 years' time?
Can't understand why the "over 7g." for these "crapaphones."
My two vintage vinyl jukeboxes each have two 12" base speakers a few inches away from the turntable, which can blast away if I choose, where the tone arm tracks at between 3-5g.
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 10:16
Inkblot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: West London
Posts: 24,301
Can't understand why the "over 7g." for these "crapaphones."
My two vintage vinyl jukeboxes each have two 12" base speakers a few inches away from the turntable, which can blast away if I choose, where the tone arm tracks at between 3-5g.
Bad, cheap cartridges? I read somewhere that good quality ceramic cartridges (which is what you need to keep the price down for a mass-market record player) are no longer made so your average fashion-shop record player has a cheap and nasty cartridge that needs a lot of downforce to stay in the groove.
Inkblot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 10:31
Doghouse Riley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North-West England
Posts: 25,838
Bad, cheap cartridges? I read somewhere that good quality ceramic cartridges (which is what you need to keep the price down for a mass-market record player) are no longer made so your average fashion-shop record player has a cheap and nasty cartridge that needs a lot of downforce to stay in the groove.
That might be it.
The cartridges in my jukeboxes are made by Shure and they are magnetic. Built to be pretty durable. They are M44MRs, probably of the same generation to the M75 ED used in my vintage hi-fi system.

The whole of the mechanism of a jukebox is supported on four springs to limit the affects of "customer attention."
Doghouse Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 11:16
mgvsmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belfast
Posts: 7,274
this is seen a lot in many discussions on these forums in particular, especially with particular artists whos success is very much helped or dependant on visual appeal - music videos, mimed tv and live performances, posters, magazine photos etc, rather than the actual music

before the advent of MTV and cable/sat multichannel tv, most people experienced the first chance to hear new music from radio, so opinions were based on sound alone. when listening to a new album opinions were based on the music being heard more than anything else. now most people see music videos, teasers, trailers and all sorts of non audio stuff before hearing the music. we have ridiculous trailers of music videos, which were intended to be adverts for the music, with a single being an advert for an album and a video being an advert for the single and album. peoples attentions are being taken away from the music and towards other things, so make a good music video and you can have a hit single with a shit song. make a great track with no video and it may go largely unheard
Image has been important in pop music ever since at least Elvis, so it didn't start with MTV but clearly the visual dimension became more important post MTV. And I wouldn't disagree that many artists have tried to use music videos to disguise poor musical recordings but there also many artists who make great use of video and album covers.

You do get artists like Kate Bush, Bowie, Peter Gabriel, Eno, MJ, Madonna, Beyonce who excel in a multimedia approach to their work. They use the visual to enhance the work especially in music videos.

When it comes to album covers, you get some great collaborations as well: Yes/Roger Deane, Joy Division/Pete Saville, Pink Floyd/Hipgnosis/Thorgenson, VU/Warhol....
Pink Floyd's cover for 'Wish You Were Here' is a work of genius and is an amazing statement about the nature of the business and complements the music perfectly.

The simple point is that the visual can be used to enhance and not displace the experience of the music. I agree that the quality of recordings on CDs is better than vinyl but the album cover was a great vehicle for some visual artists.
mgvsmith is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 11:53
Finny Skeleta
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,572
i don't fall for the emperors new clothes type marketing which is pretty much what many people are falling for, buying shitty suitcase record players from clothes shops and new pressings of records taken from digital masters, and then wrecking them permanently with the first play, and then many of those records will end up in circulation in the second hand market in the future, making second hand buying of quality discs a potential minefield in years to come
But then - apart from the digital masters bit - hasn't that always been the case with the second hand market? In the 60s and 70s many people would treat their records appallingly. I'm not talking about not storing them in an upright position or not cleaning them before and after playing either. I'm talking about people discarding the sleeves from 45s and cramming them into wire racks; stacking coins on the tone arm to make the tracking weight god-knows-what; passing through endless pairs of hands as they were swapped back and forth at school etc. They would be thrown about at parties and impregnated with beer and smoke... and this was all before they were forgotten about and dumped in an attic or a damp garage for two or three decades. There weren't too many amateur archivists during the glory days of music.

Compared to that, two or three turns of a 180g LP on a pretend record player before the novelty wears off followed by a couple of years on a shelf waiting for someone to buy it off Discogs seems particularly gentle.
Finny Skeleta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 13:43
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,030
According to a review some of those record players "track" at over 7g, because they need to keep the stylus in the groove when the speakers are blasting out immediately below it. A DJ cartridge designed to play in a much more challenging environment might track at 5g but with the correct alignment and a good quality stylus - and it will still damage the vinyl if it's not used carefully (which is unlikely to happen in a club).

[b]However is it likely that the people buying these toy record players will be buying records anyone will want to play in 50 years' time?
in 50 years time, who knows? who would have thought in 1990 that people would still be buying records 25 years from then, when CD was in it's prime?

but whilst those following the vinyl trend are likely to lose interest once the trend drops, other people who collect music will still likely want to keep on collecting music and buying vinyl, maybe not in 50 years time but in 5 or 10 years time after the trend dies, and then likely face that wrecked vinyl turning up in the second hand chain, making it a nightmare to find a decent copy of anything
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49.