Vinyl Reason


I am setting my first stereo system which consists of turntable, amp and speakers. I wonder why people make a decision to go vinyl. In my case I just wanted to revoke that something I had in past....to feel myself the way I felt 20 years ago when I was a teenager...to expirience that ritual of landing LP on a turntable disk, starting the motor, pulling tonearm...whatching it spinning...
But for many people it could be quite different reason. Is it maybe because the quality of vinyl sound is "different"?..just like tube amp sounds differently from SS...
sputniks
I suspect I qualify for that distinction. About 6000 LP's, assuming an average of $10.00 each ( I have one worth over a thousand dollars) makes $60K software collection (not counting CD or tape).

That is certainly more than my LP playback rig, but I fail to see how that makes either of us correct in deciding which format is superior, at least based on the "mine is more expensive than yours" concept.

Still, I prefer LP.
Albert: Yes, you are one whose collection exempts you from my critique. But I wasn't refering to which format is 'superior' (IMO a hierarchy which can't be bluntly stated for all instances - even at their respective best, both formats have their strengths and weaknesses), but rather to my list of reasons for why I suspect many audiophiles have been drawn to the 'analog revival' (meaning vinyl strictly speaking, not analog per se - a distinction which you as a reel-to-reel owner are also eminently qualified to comment on :-)

I just don't feel that sound is the primary reason why we're seeing so much activity in this market segment these days, though some will no doubt disagree with me. My postscript was just in case anyone might get the impression that I personally prefer digital for sonics, when it's been my experience that many neuvo-vinylistas drop more on their rig than they have actual records to play. I don't prefer digital - or analog; I prefer music, and prefer to see audiophiles get into vinyl so that can expand their musical horizons and opportunities, not so that they can listen to the same 200 audiophile-approved recordings in another format at $30 a pop.
For sound quality, and the $1-per-record used classical records. It's a great way to augment my CD collection. The record player more than pay for itself in that regard. It takes a cetain connoisseur to be able to certain and play records in this day and age. That is a fun aspect as well.

Oh, and Zaikesman I believe I qualify for your statement as have spent more on vinyl in the past 8 weeks than my whole front end is worth. But then again, I have a $200 record player! I sorely need something better! So do I spend my 'Forced Savings Program(R)' (read: tax refund) on a Teres turntable or do I just buy more records, CDs, and a build a computer instead?
Zaikesman,
I only have 200 or so records. Many of these are also on CD. Hi-Rez or not,I made up my own mind about what I prefer.
Vinly is a superior format to my ears.
I have about 1500 LPs which by any calculation makes them worth more than my TT/arm/cartridge. Some of the LPs date back to the mid 70's when I first started buying music, but I probably spent $500 at CES on Audiophile approved recordings too.

I listen to my TT because I like the music selection, but even more because it sounds better than my Sony SCD 777es. Digital is fine, but it's shortcomings are more and greater than that of analog.

Zaikesman, do you really think audiophiles are soo dumb that they jump on any bandwagon to come along regardless of whether or not it has anything to offer?

Aroc, therein lies the conundrum. Balance is the issue. A better playback system will preserve the quality of your collection, but you can buy a pig of a lot of LPs for the cost of a decent TT.