2. analog
  3. 1340176293

Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

I have always been curious about vinyl and its touted superiority over digital, so I decided to try it for myself. Over the course of the past several years I bought a few turntables, phono stages, and a bunch of new albums. They sounded fine I thought, but didn't stomp all over digital like some would tend to believe.

It wasn't until I popped on some old disk that I picked up used from a garage sale somewhere that I heard what vinyl was really about: it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers. I had never heard anything quite like it. All of the digital I had, no matter how high the resolution, did not really come close to approaching that type of sound.

Out of the handful of albums I have from the 70s-80s, most of them have this type of sound. Problem is, most of my music and preferences are new releases (not necessarily in an audiophile genre) or stuff from the past decade and these albums sounded like music from a CD player but with the added noise, pops, clicks, higher price, and inconveniences inherent with vinyl. Of all the new albums I bought recently, only two sounded like they were mastered in the analog domain.

It seems that almost anything released after the 2000's (except audiophile reissues) sounded like music from a CD player of some sort, only worse due to the added noise making the CD version superior. I have experienced this on a variety of turntables, and this was even true in a friend's setup with a high end TT/cart.

So my question is, is vinyl only good for older pre-80s music when mastering was still analog and not all digital?
solman989
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,417 posts
 
Tdaudio...Excellent, rational answer.
stringreen's avatar
stringreen
6,474 posts
 
I tend to agree. The older albums sound great...Fleetwood Mac, Melonie, older Paul Simon...my new albums are congested, and generally fuzzy....the new Paul Simon, Norah Jones, etc.
salectric
755 posts
 
I have a somewhat different take on the issues raised by the OP. The issue that matters to me is not ticks and pops, which I am able to ignore for the most part, but rather the quality of the sound. The key point by the OP is when he said:

"It wasn't until I popped on some old disk that I picked up used from a garage sale somewhere that I heard what vinyl was really about: it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers."

By that measure, if you really want to duplicate that experience, then you need to stock up on LPs pressed in the 1950s through mid-1970s. Even reissues that were pressed during that time period can sound great. For some reason, the vast majority of recordings made after the mid-70s and indeed nearly all pressings made after the mid-70s, just don't have that magic. At the risk of sounding like a total curmudgeon, I almost always prefer the sound of older pressings to so-called audiophile reissues regardless of price.

If the OP really wants to hear smooth, dynamic, organic music, then he should try a mono jazz or rock LP pressed in the late 50s or early 60s, ideally with a true mono cartridge like a Miyajima mono. That can knock you over! Talk about lack of progress in half a century.
salectric
755 posts
 
Let me give a couple examples of LPs with organic sound. "Meet the Jazztet" is a 1960 recording on Argo that's available in both mono and stereo. Get the mono version since it sounds much better. This is the recording that first opened my eyes to the wonders of properly recorded mono jazz. A dedicated mono setup is not needed. I first heard it with a Benz Glider stereo cartridge. I was so mesmerized by the dynamics and warm, natural quality that I figured it should sound even better in stereo. Wrong! The stereo still sounds pretty good but the mono is the one with the magic.

Another great example is a Jim Hall LP "2 degrees East, 3 degrees West" which is a 1956 recording on Atlantic. The musicians are right there in front of you playing amazing music. You just won't get this kind of sound from a modern recording or a modern reissue.

Even much older recordings can have the magic. For example, the Charlie Christian studio recordings with the Benny Goodman Sextet and Orchestra date back to 1939, but they sound amazing.

Some people are apparently unable to hear past the occasional tick or pop in older vinyl. That's a shame because there is a lot of great music and great sounding music in these older records. And you will only get a glimpse of their sound potential if you listen to a reissue pressed in recent decades.
tbg
5,263 posts
 
Were vinyl not such a pain, I would only play vinyl, especially 45 rpm reissues. And it is not as though I have an inferior digital playback system. I have the Empirical Audio music server and even now have dsd sacds on my system as well as HD downloads. These are absolutely amazing relative to 44.1/16 cds. But vinyl is still king!

Recently I replaced the StillPoints Ultra SSs on a StillPoints Component Stand under my Bergman Sindre turntable with an Ortofon A-90 cartridge with the new and expensive Ultra Fives. To say that my jaw dropped at the first few notes is an understatement. I could not listen to additional albums fast enough. The quietness allowed information I had never heard to appear and the realism and precision of the soundstage made everything else worthless.

But changing albums every fifteen or twenty minutes, cleaning styli, demaging the record, and having to get up and lift the arm when getting a telephone call and to not be able to skip around is a pain.

At some point I want to transfer vinyl to my hard drive using Pure Vinyl with RIAA equalization done in digital. I want to do it absolutely as good as I can. I really don't think it will equal the vinyl played in analog, but I have to hear for myself.
More to discover