Is a vinyl rig only worth it for oldies?

Dear Lacee: ++++ " I don't hear the distortions you refer to in my vinyl rig nor in my friends vinyl rig.

I am not aware of added distortions that interfere with the music, or that add harmonious colourations pleasing to my ears and the ears of others who have listened to my system or his.
" +++++

well if you and your friends can't hear all those added distortions developed through more than 20 playback different stages that contribute to the signal degradation then is useless to continue about because IMHO and with all respect or all of you are " deaf " or simple: you can't understand what happen in each of those different 20 stages in the anlog rig during playback .

+++++ " I have heard a lot of noisy distortions on lesser vinyl gear, perhaps this is what you are more familiar with. " ++++

could be. Btw, I'm " familiar " with each link in your analog rig ( including the Steelhead. ).

+++++ " Somehow the well recorded lp's played thru good vinyl systems despite all the distortions you attribute to them " +++++

I don't attribute nothing those are facts I'm not speculating or invented nothing: facts, only that.

+++++ " Why are the best digital systems always touted as "analog like"? " +++++

by ignorance.

+++++ " Distortions are everywhere,except perhaps in your perfect digital world. " +++++

I never say that, so don't put " words in my mouth ". I was very specific: both alternatives have its own TRADE-OFFS !!!

Lacee, for my part I think is enough and as I posted twice: I will go to enjoy both alternayives. Bye!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

The original recordings were done so well that those master tapes can still be used to make modern pressings that can be better than the originals.

They may be a bit expensive,but the same used original lp's are costing more,and by used I mean less than pristine.

I've gone that route and it's getting harder to find treasures.

I would rather bite the bullet and buy re-issues from quality re-issue labels.

So I think we have to re-think the term "oldies" to include modern pressings of the cream of the crop recordings.

My first source was vinyl, back in the late 1960's.
I never abandoned it,never sold off my lp collection and some of my collection has become sought after and the values have increased.

I don't think we can say the same for any of my cd's in my digital collection.
I wish the same good fortune for those who are entrenched in the digital camp, but I fear I won't be around that long to find out.

Vinyl has survived and is flourishing, despite all the flaws and mechanical inaccuracies attributed to it that some folks like to point out.

If vinyl replay is such an inferior medium, why has it lasted so long and continues to flourish, while cd seems to be on the wane?

It can't just be the nostalgia ticket, becasue cd's have been around for quite some time.

I really believe that for anything to have legs in this hobby, it has to sound good.

If not it will be forgotten .

Quads, Ls3/5a, Acoustats, to name a few classics that I have owned and enjoyed, still sound good and can hold their own to most of today's speakers.People still want those things.

Perhaps they have the kinds of distortions and inaccuracies, that a lot of people find very pleasing.
Maybe just vinyl lovers like them?

I have nothing against trying to strive for accuracy in an audio system,and I try my best to rid my system of electrical and mechanical nasties that can mask the accuracy or what has been recorded.

But accuracy has to go hand in hand with realism,so that the mechanicals do not stand in the way of the music.
Some call this the great accuracy vs musical sound debate.

I don't think one should suffer for the other, there should be a balance struck somewhere, so that accuracy doesn't intrude upon or rob the music of it's ability to suspend our beliefs that what we are listening to happened not yesterday but more than a half century ago.

As well, the system or medium shouldn't be so coloured with pleasant harmonic distortions that we can't distinguish individual hand claps for what they are,and not background noise.

Ignorance is a pretty harsh word to use.Personally it's insulting and demeaning and reeks of arrogance.
It implies that the multitudes of people who enjoy vinyl over digital just don't have a clue or don't "get it" or lack the intellect to understand that the sound they enjoy is full of inaccuracies.

Well call me a dummy if you will, but I am in good company.

At the end of the day we vinyl loving dummies will place another flawed lp on our flawed turntables and listen as that flawed needle gouges out some more shreds of vinyl and sit in awe and enjoy the music as it envelopes around us.My 50 year old lp's should not be tolerable to the ear,yet they have few pops or snaps.

I do use a VPI 16.5 to clean them, and a Hammond bulk tape eraser to demag them.

But I only started to use those for the last 4 years.

Tonite,the ignorant amongst us, those who don't know any better,will be transported to another era or place and get so lost in the music that nothing else matters to them.
The destination not the means to get there is foremost on their minds.

Yup, time to cue up another 5 buck Ray Charles mono lp.

Dear Lacee: IMHO you simple lost my/the point. We are talking of different " things ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

My answer to the OPs question: "is vinyl only good for older pre-80s music when mastering was still analogue and not all digital?"
I switched from vinyl to CDs in 1985 but at the start of 2012 I purchased a new TT/cart and started buying a lot of vinyl again. Some old used 50s to 80s stuff, audiophile reissued LPs and many others.
From what I have experienced so far I have to say it is much like CDs in that each record has to be taken on its own merits and no generalisation can be made. Some newer recordings on vinyl are very good and have that nice open sound while others have that dense digital feel to them. So it is a gamble. Shelby Lynne “ Just a Little Lovin’ is a 2008 vinyl release which is an example of a newer recording on LP that sounds really good, and only cost me $12.99USD new from Sound Stage Direct.
What I have noticed is that many older recordings (that have not been digitally fudged) sound great.
As far as the vinyl vs. digital debate I have found that in general vinyl is just nicer to listen to. When doing an A/B comparison of the same music, initially the CD sounds more impressive, clearer and more detailed in the short term, but lacks the warmth and bottom end of vinyl.
For example I have Fleetwood Mac “Rumours” on 2009 reissue vinyl and 2001 Japanese SACD. The SACD is very clear and detailed but the vinyl just sounds right and I prefer to listen to the vinyl than the SACD.
Vinyl definitely has a different sound and feel to it and I think it comes down to personal taste as to which is “superior”.
If you have not heard of Speaker’s Corner Records you need to check out their reissues. I have purchased many of them and they are spot on. I am amazed at how dynamic some of these older recording sound. Ella Fitzgerald “On The Sunny Side of The Street” is a gem, the horn hits are explosive and Ella’s vocals are great. Another beauty is Perez Prado “Prez”, a snappy Latin LP recorded in 1958.

"Vinyl definitely has a different sound and feel to it...."

Rockpig ,apparantly you are not bothered by the inaccuracies of vinyl,and acknowledge that there is something going on that is missing in the digital domain.

It's the "different sound" from the same master tapes that gives vinyl the edge, the certain something that only a good vinyl system brings to the table.

There are roadblocks to good vinyl replay, like worn out stylus, improper cartridge set up, mismatch of arm and cartridge,poor speed accuracy, vibration induced problems from the TT or it's proximtry to vibration inducing gremlins, not to mention poor quality control at the time of pressing,and poor hygene in storing and handling of lp's.And a host of other things that Mr.R would like to add I'm sure.

So many things that can go wrong singularly or all at once can make for a less than pleasing vinyl experience, and make the novice run for cover without ever trying it, or just give up when less than satisfactory( "my cd still sounds better")results come from dipping one's toes into the black licorice discs for the first time.

If you don't know what you're doing or have inferior sources, even the best original or re-issues will perform worse than digital.

But that's the way with everything in this hobby.

Loudspeakers of any stripe can only perform at their best when care and attention is taken to place them properly in a room and strap them to a compatible amplification device, which also has to have it's special needs addressed.Let's not forget about room treatment or the lack of it,in most cases.

There are very few free lunchs in this hobby.

To get better than "good enough " sound you have to work a bit.
Some folks stay on the merry go round , buying and selling one perfectly good system after the other, and never being satisfied.Then out of frustration they give up, blame the high end for ripping them off for selling them snake oil, and retreat to the safety of cheap shoddy gear under the guise that "it's all about the music afterall".

Well it's always been about the music.
That's why the good stuff is out there at all price levels.

But if it's not set up properly or you don't work at finessing it,then it is just a waste of time and money afterall.

This hobby is what "you" make of it.
It's all your fault, don't blame the gear or the reviewers or the mags or the manufacturers for your displeasure.
Cancelling your subscription to TAS or Stereophile isn't going to fix your problems.

Speaking of problems,there's a lot of things that a cd player needs to make it sound as good as it can.It's not exempt from the benefits of better fuses, power cords, balanced power and separate dedicated line.CD players are also not immune to vibration issues.They need a proper stablized platform to work their best.

The chances however of getting decent sound from a basic cd set up are much better than they are with first attempts at a vinyl set up.However some modern companies do have excellent entry level ,plug and play systems that have done most of the heavy lifting for you.
You may pay a bit more than what you would pay down at the thrift shop, but you'll get a sound that is closer to what some of us vinyl lovers are talking about, with a lot less frustration as a bonus.
The gap narrows in this instance.

People have tried to write off vinyl since 1984,( a coincidence?)yet it's still with us and will be for some time into the future.

I upgraded my turntable from the Rega P9 to an SME 10, SMEv,in the last few months.

Both are fine set ups , not the world's best, not even as good as my friend's vinyl set up,yet the sound is just so pleasing that whatever distortions or inaccuracies there are , they aren't noticeable , and none of us are deaf.
If I were deaf, both tables would sound the same,yet they don't to my ears or those of my audio friends(one of which purchased my Rega as an upgrade to his older table).
I didn't move backwards or sideways, only upwards in sound quality.That was the concensus.

Perhaps the SME system has more distortions, and that's what thrills us so about it?
I'm starting to like distortions the more I get of them.

As long as those distortions are the ones that were there at the time of the recording and not thrown away with the bath water.
I want the baby to come out just as intact as when he went into the bath, I want the original with all the bits and pieces and not a replica.

I recently read a review of a new DartZeel amplifier, and was surprised to find out that some of my "distortion" musings, may have some merit afterall.

Vinyl recordings and replay systems may have a few things going against them, that, firsthand, would look like it's a medium to shy away from.
The folks who are fixated on the specs and not the actual sound would never give vinyl the time of day.

Which is just sad.