2. analog
  3. 1312079140

CD's vs Vinyl - Finally hear the difference

About 2 years ago, I decided to get back into vinyl. I had some old albums I wanted to play, so I blew the dust off my 35 year old TT and fired that mutha up. It took me about 13 months to get my accousic vibration problem licked and to put together some decent analog euipment-some new, some used. Anyway, I started listening to ONLY vinyl. I was surprised how well my albums had been preserved and how well the new ones I purchased sounded. I had read the vinyl purist's comments about how much better records sounded than CD's, but I must admit-I was doubtful. I had put together a fairly good Digital system with a tubed Kora Hermes II DAC. Anyway, I had a friend over the other day and for the first time in almost a year, I put on a CD. I have to say-there is absolutely no comparison how much better vinyl sounds than CD's. CD's sound as though they were recorded in an anechoic chamber. There is no ambience, no warmth, no soul. The music is accurate, but it isn't alive. You simply have to hear it to understand. All the years I wasted listening to CD's! I guess they have their place if you're on the go in cars, boats etc, but if you are wanting to really listen to good quality recorded music, there is only one choice.
handymann
plato
1,543 posts
 
I kind of agree with Elizabeth... why do we need to turn everything into a contest and then dump on the "loser."

In my considerable experience with both CD and vinyl (and I started with vinyl many years ago and was sad when CD became the medium of choice) I have to say that they both have their pro's and con's.

The one you prefer will always depend on which one your system is optimized for. I've found it truly difficult to get both formats to sound their best in the same system at the same time and have been going back and forth with my preference for years.

As it is now I have two nice Michell turntables with very expensive, high-dollar MC cartridges and good phono preamps, but I spin a lot more CD's than I do LP's. And I believe it is because my systems are more optimized for CD playback, its convenience and user-friendliness.

Most comparisons one would make depend highly on the recording quality of the respective formats... In most cases, if you research it, you'll find you're not comparing apples to apples.
dev's avatar
dev
832 posts
 
Plato, I feel sorry for you in away but it you won't be the last to feel the way you do and that's okay.

I have listened to allot of systems in the past and present and found most with vinyl either it's the associated pces or just don't have them set-up properly and I prefered my red-book set-up by far, what can I say they just didn't have it happening. As per my earlier post above the first table I got was okay but I still preferred my red-book as a whole but once I got my second table well that was a whole different story.

I went and heard a members set-up today who has 4 tables and Red-Book player and reading his numerous threads was really expecting to hear something special but in the end I was left scratching my head because it was far from being so, now I know. First of all the set-up was out of phase, once we got that sorted out listening I found the speakers were so far from being coherent was left wondering how one can make any comparisons etc.

Plato when you said "The one you prefer will always depend on which one your system is optimized for."

I don't agree with that statement, from my experience anyone preferring Red-Book just hasn't heard a proper vinyl set-up.

halcro's avatar
halcro
2,664 posts
 
I agree with Syntax and Rodman.
What I also don't discount, is that there are certain people who hear the distortions in digital in a way that may not offend other people?
I'm not saying these people can hear 'better'......simply that their hearing receptacles may be wired slightly differently.
It is simply impossible for me to sit through more than an hour of serious listening to digital reproduction.......and I don't care how much money you throw at it :^)
dgarretson
2,599 posts
 
Dev, the OP's statements about the unconditional superiority of vinyl invited controversy. Digital technology has marched foward with increasing over-lap in quality with analog front ends, particularly as experienced in the broad middle of the hobby. It's unfortunate that so many superlatives have historically been heaped on what was in reality slow, incremental progress in RBCD playback. This legacy obscures the point that in some implementations at least, the technology has recently been moving faster: reduced jitter affects, much less synthetic sounding, closer to the realism of vinyl, and above all, astonishingly far from presumed limitations.

One thing that gets tiresome is attempts by vinyl esthetes to defend the format with anecdotes about deficits in set-up skills that they identify everywhere but in their own systems. Such anecdotes actually prove the opposite point: that vinyl as experienced by all but the self-elected expert is compromised. Operating under such biases, the "expert" may comfortably discount the experience of everyone but himself as subjective.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,299 posts
 
You can't make valid generalized statements regarding format based on a single system case.

My stance these days is they both sound good and sound best when they both sound mostly the same.
More to discover