When and how did you, if at all, realize vinyl is better?

mferland65
1 posts
my first post...
why is it I record a vinyl LP onto digital, and yet the playback has that emotional connection of vinyl that so many report here?

That is interesting. I find, similarly, that "digitally remastered" cassettes have more emotional impact than their CD counterparts. Digitally remastered cassettes such as Kind of Blue have more air, greater dynamic range and more of that certain, je ne sais quoi, let’s call it expressiveness or musicality. Digital rain striking the ground doesn’t sound like real rain, nor does digital applause sound like real applause. Not as liquid, not as coherent. Not even close.

Lowrider nailed it - this is sonic bliss:

"playing a record on a rotating platter, then passing the vibrations picked up by the stylus through the electromagnetic field of the cartridge, and finally sending the signal up the tonearm (which can resonate) results in distortions being generated. The sound now has colourations which we perceive as being warm. These harmonic distortions are different than those produced by digital playback and are more pleasing to to the ear."

Really enjoying the comments and observations since I got involved with audio starting in the early 70's and worked at a nice audio store during college through 1979.   Between manufacture reps coming to the store and going to several Electronic Shows, one source that I wish had been a commercial success was pre-recorded reel-to-reel tapes.  Even quarter-track stereo recorded at 7.5 ips with dolby was great, but the medium has much room for improvement with 2-track at 15 ips encoded with dbx.  Astonishing sound.

A major difference, as has been brought up as one of the reasons vinyl has a certain sound, is going from tape directly to tape eliminated the need for RIAA equalization.  If you've really looked at how extreme the dB range is to compensated for the physical limitations of vinyl, it will surprise you, like me, how those LP's can sound so good.  

But even vinyl had room for improvement and I see they are starting to sell them again - LP size records cut at 45 rpm.  If they are anything like those from the 70's I heard, well worth the extra money and shorter play time.

Either way, both the turntable and reel-to-reel required your attention and gave you an involved, tactical relationship with a quality piece of equipment that made the listening experience all that much more enjoyable.  I feel a bit sorry for the younger listeners that will never get past the convince of hitting a button on their iPhone or portable digital audio player, no matter how good the source is.

I realized that vinyl is not better, but that many recordings on vinyl are better than those on CD and that vinyl is more forgiving of not as good recordings then is CD.

gregkohanmim
Lowrider nailed it - this is sonic bliss:

"playing a record on a rotating platter, then passing the vibrations picked up by the stylus through the electromagnetic field of the cartridge, and finally sending the signal up the tonearm (which can resonate) results in distortions being generated. The sound now has colourations which we perceive as being warm. These harmonic distortions are different than those produced by digital playback and are more pleasing to to the ear."

What’s perhaps even funnier is the whole concept of a nano scale laser beam attempting to stay on the nano scale data spiral under the duress of a fluttering, flopping disc and all manner of seismic and acoustic and other mechanical vibrations. Even the rather clever laser servo cannot possibly keep up. Something’s missing’ all right. What’s sounds like hyper detail is actually over-etched synthetic junk. And that’s what makes untreated CDs played on unisolated and un-tweaked systems so gol durn irritating, infuriating... unlistenable, really.

😛