Why vinyl?


I understand the thoughts of a lot of you that digital is harsh and bright and has an edge. I know that analog has a warmer fuller sound, otherwise why would so many people put up with the inconvenience of records, cartridges, cleaners, tone-arm adjustments, etc. I used to be there. Of course all I had was a Garrard direct drive turntable. If the idea is to get as close as possible to the original source, why has not open-reel tape made a huge comeback. After all that's how most of the stuff was recorded in the first place. Very few were direct to disk recordings. Why would dragging a stylus through a groove be better than the original? There used to be a company out there called In-Synch that used the original masters and sold cassettes of them, dubbed at 1:1 ratio. I was the happiest person in the world when CD's came out and I could throw out my disk-washer and everything else that went with it, including the surface noise and the TICKS and POPS. Just something I've wondered about.
elmuncy
Hey Marakanetz...15ips and 30ips are both used. It depends on who's doing it, what equipment they have, what kind of music they're recording, what sort of sound they want, and how many reels of tape they can afford to buy. :-) I've read interviews where guys said they preferred 15ips for rock because they liked the way it compressed certain instruments, even though 30ips was *technically* better.

Elmuncy...I think the main reason people still prefer the sound of analog to digital (and I happen to be one of them, but I still love the sound of my CD player and listen to it more often than LPs) is the fact that the 16 bit, 44.1khz CD technology is dated and compromises the sound to a certain degree (and it is noticeable on good systems). I don't think people will mind digital as much when(if??) a good high-resolution technology is widely adopted and executed properly. Although there is a sentimental side to vinyl that will probably never be replaced, and there is a certain "something" that the physical needle on vinyl contact provides...something that digital never will, no matter how high the resolution.
Post removed 
blkadr ... you're right. Sound quality aside, LPs are much more treasured posessions than CDs. And LPs look so cool spinning on a good deck.
As for sound I like both. CD for classical (because of low background noise) LP for rock (AC/DC, Zeppelin etc etc).
I belive there is a happy medium and both can co exist quit nicely.
I have over 800 Lp's the cost to replace them made my choice to buy a Turntable a no brainer.
When I want to get the best out of music I spin Viynl, When I want convinince I load up the 7 CD music bank and away I go.
Nice to have the best of both worlds.
I have been into digital for the entire time I have really been into 2 channel audio.

Only recently did I decide to get a turntable. I got a Basis 1400 with a RB300 tonearm and Micro Benz cartridge.

Listening to analogue is different than digital. I know this is painfully obvious, but those that have never heard a half decent turntable setup really have little to NO idea what good analogue sounds like. So they just might asume it is worse or maybe better than digital.

My initial analysis of Vinyl v. CD

CD
-Blackest background, little to no background noise depending on the recording
-better dynamic rage for the most part
-more consistant sound, CDs are not affected by dirt and dust
-Digital in some ways has a clearer soundstage and in some cases a cleaner sound. This is to be expected. Whenever the analogue wave is sampled and filtered the end result is cleaner sound. Just listen to MP3's. MP3's are even cleaner than CD's in a lot of ways due to the way they are sampled eith less frequency than CD's.
-Digital only covers the frequency range of 20hz-20khz.
-Some people say digital is harsh or has an edge. I think this judgement has to do with the fact that digital is a cleaner sounding medium than Vinyl. In a lot of ways Digital does sound bright when compared to Vinyl.

Vinyl
-Difficult to maintain. This we all know.
-Vinyl play the complete audible analogue wave. This is what will always separate Vinyl from Digital. Something happens when you play back sound this way. It seeming has details and qualities that digital has not been able to pull out of the music. Sonic textures and layerings pop out that are just obscured in digital. Instruments seem to have a more organic quality to them. Voices seem to be more real...

Anyway these things being said, I am one to say that those who make judgements saying Vinyl is superior to digital or vice versus are DELUDING themselves and just being SILLY.

There should be room in every audiophile/music system for both formats. Each has it's pros and cons. But until I hear a system that can produce live unamplified music perfectly from ANY source, I reserve judgement as to what source is better.

I would state this though... Listening to Audio at home is a surreal experience that has some subjectivity to it. We try to reproduce music the best we can; however, everyone has slightly different tastes and slightly different ways they want to hear music. IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO TOTALLY DISCOUNT EITHER FORMAT, VINYL OR CD BECAUSE THERE IS CERTAIN MUSIC YOU CANNOT GET ON ONE FORMAT OR THE OTHER (OR SOUNDS BETTER ON ONE OR THE OTHER). For example... You really have not heard the Beatles until you hear them on vinyl... or Hendrix for that matter. Then there are several modern artist and recordings that are not being released on vinyl (only on CD).

Anyway... my 2C

Peace.

KF