What is your preference, Records or CDs?


I'm no expert on turntables but I believe my Quadraflex reference direct drive turntable is doing a fine job delivering an excellent sound. I have had some friends come over and they thought I was playing a CD. I'm not sure if this is a compliment. I love playing records and constantly seek them out. I know that some upcoming artists have even chosen to record their music on records and obvious it is not a dying media. I have seen some pretty exotic turntable designs on audiogon and my question is what to look for or what is important about it's design.
phd
I never understood the attraction of CDs. They only have the music on one side. How is that any improvement over an LP?

Seriously, vinyl is an archival medium. A century from now, you will still be able to play a record. (If you live that long!) Doubtful that many CDs will last that long.
"Mapman, you mentioned good speed control as one of the important factors for good vinyl reproduction. Do you think that direct drive as opposed to belt drive can maintain platter speed better?"

From my experience years ago selling many brands and models of both, I would have to say probably, by a very small margin. The biggest issue I found with belt drives was state of the belt itself. Worn belts are a problem, like in a car, and dirty belts are not uncommon and will affect speed stability if not kept clean.

I would also probably say that most people will not hear a difference between belt and direct drive when things are working well as they should. I think I am pretty sensitive to these things and personally I have no preference between the two in regards to sound quality. I have heard many cases of each sounding perfectly spectacular! There are many other factors as mentioned above that can vary widely and play a much bigger role in determining end results in practice.
Zd542, There's no doubt that CD in the 80's and some of the 90's couldn't compete with the best vinyl, but those days are over. I listened to a recent jazz CD on the ECM label last night, and the resolution and expansive lifelike soundstage could not be bettered by vinyl.
Its been shown that analogue mastertapes are lower in resolution than the highest resolution digital recordings. But I would agree that well-mastered analogue can sound better than poorly-mastered digital.
Psag, wow what an excellent response and its refreshing that you have offered no scientific measurements (which would of been ok on a different day) to support your claim and if I was sitting on the fence trying to decide which direction to go, you would have easily convinced myself that CDs are superior. I think what you have said holds alot of water. As much fun as it is to spin records the good news is that we can do both.
"I listened to a recent jazz CD on the ECM label last night, and the resolution and expansive lifelike soundstage could not be bettered by vinyl."

Well, I'm not so sure that the BEST vinyl might not still trump the best redbook CDs in this regard if measured, under ideal circumstances, but in practice, I would agree that it is a toss up case by case, recording by recording, these days.

The main reason I say this is that CD redbook format does have a defined limit for dynamic range whereas records do not, so it is possible for a record to trump any CD in regards to dynamic range and many better vinyl recordings may well do it. OF course, newer and higher resolution digital formats are a different case than CD, so results there might close the potential gap even more to the point where it does not matter at all in practice.