"Thinks it sounds better" doesn't mean that its objectively better. Being an engineer in a field doesn't magically turn your opinion on a subject into fact.Junkhead said:But Tmoney knows better.Hagen95 said:
An engineer that works in the vinyl industry thinks it sounds better. Who would think like that?
So I have done a sort of Pepsi challenge myself and I think the organic tones thing is nonsense.Callate Donnie said:And here we go...Jasomania said:
The audio quality on vinyl is worse, full stop, if you care about quality over all else you'd pay for Tidal and get a setup that can handle HD streaming. Anyone who says vinyl is better is just trying to feel superior or justify spending too much money on their audio set up.
1. I agree owning CDs doesn't make much sense in the era of streaming. Still, I like owning CDs. I use / prefer them in my car (the signal never drops). I would, however, like to get a proper high-end streamer for when I have some drinks and don't want to take any chances with my table/vinyl, but still want to listen to music.
2. The argument that "anyone who says vinyl is better is just trying to feel superior" is flawed. Ya ya ya, I read the article from Bob Ludwig. If you are talking about accurate reproduction of a recording, including all dynamics and free of noise, then, yes, I agree that super high sampled digital audio is superior. BUT...vinyl produces organic tones in an analog format. The result is a different sound and aural experience as a whole. There is more to experiencing music than accurate reproduction of the recording. That said, if you prefer digital then have at it. But, go to a proper hi-fi shop and Pepsi challenge a legit analog pressing of a track to a 1411 kbps version of the same on the same rig if you haven't already. You might be surprised.
Junkhead said:
Please state your credentials in this field. Otherwise it may be time to put you on ignore.
One last thing. I never said that vinyl is superior to digital. I said that it can be in some instances and I proved it by doing a side-by-side comparison. Whether or not you want to believe that is 100% irrelevant.TMoney2007 said:
You are wrong for saying that because you prefer how vinyl sounds, it is objectively superior to digital sound.
Junkhead said:One last thing. I never said that vinyl is superior to digital. I said that it can be in some instances and I proved it by doing a side-by-side comparison. Whether or not you want to believe that is 100% irrelevant.TMoney2007 said:
You are wrong for saying that because you prefer how vinyl sounds, it is objectively superior to digital sound.
There's where you said it right there. You talked about an album. I generalized it. You disagreed with my generalization. That album isn't objectively better on vinyl. You preferred how it sounded on vinyl.Quote:Couldn't disagree more and countless music industry professionals would agree with me.Quote:
You preferred how that album sounded on that setup, it wasn't innately better... Vinyl adds coloring into the sound that takes it farther away from what the artist and intended for it to be.
You can prefer whatever sound you like, but to say an album on vinyl is objectively better than the same album on any other medium of sufficient quality is ridiculous.
Correct, I didn't do an A to A comparison.Callate Donnie said:
So, you didn't do an A to A comparison, is what you are saying?
Hey man, if you aren't partial to vinyl, that's cool. I really don't have any beef with those that prefer CDs/digi over vinyl. I like CDs. I can even get into 320k MP3s. I just prefer vinyl.
I don't understand why people get so upset when I try to explain why.
You could do that with cassettes and CDs too, although it started to fade out with CDs towards the end.EllisCoAg said:
the best thing about vinyl is being able to read all the notes, seeing who played what, and looking at the art work.
https://thehardtimes.net/news/pretentious-friend-listens-podcasts-vinylQuote:
CHICAGO Due to sound quality flaws in streaming and digital audio, one podcast aficionado now recommends listening to podcasts exclusively via vinyl records.
"Vinyl just gives that warm, smooth sound that adds heart to otherwise sterile and overproduced audio," argues Matt Sneed, the part-time sous chef looking to recapture the magic of high-fidelity. "Man. You just haven't lived until you've heard Bill Burr's earsplitting rants through a high quality turntable."
When asked how he accomplishes this feat, considering podcasts are not available on vinyl, Sneed replied, "Sure, it's kind of a pain in the ass to submit over 200 episodes of RISK! and Magic: The Amateuring to the pressing plant, what with all these ****ing major labels clogging up the system, but it's worth it for the warm undertones."
Sneed, who blamed compromised digital sound quality on "those fascists" at iTunes, first hit on the idea when debating what to do next with the settlement money he received after he was injured on the job (he was hit by a car, but his messenger bike is fine).
My man, I do this exercise for everyone that comes to my listening room. I have yet to have one tell me there is no difference. Just sayin.aTmAg said:
I do have doubts that you could tell on a Pepsi challenge from a CD to vinyl if the vinyl was really clean and had no pops associated with it.
That's pretty good.AggieChemist said:https://thehardtimes.net/news/pretentious-friend-listens-podcasts-vinylQuote:
CHICAGO Due to sound quality flaws in streaming and digital audio, one podcast aficionado now recommends listening to podcasts exclusively via vinyl records.
"Vinyl just gives that warm, smooth sound that adds heart to otherwise sterile and overproduced audio," argues Matt Sneed, the part-time sous chef looking to recapture the magic of high-fidelity. "Man. You just haven't lived until you've heard Bill Burr's earsplitting rants through a high quality turntable."
When asked how he accomplishes this feat, considering podcasts are not available on vinyl, Sneed replied, "Sure, it's kind of a pain in the ass to submit over 200 episodes of RISK! and Magic: The Amateuring to the pressing plant, what with all these ****ing major labels clogging up the system, but it's worth it for the warm undertones."
Sneed, who blamed compromised digital sound quality on "those fascists" at iTunes, first hit on the idea when debating what to do next with the settlement money he received after he was injured on the job (he was hit by a car, but his messenger bike is fine).
That CD was probably recorded from a lower quality source then. If somebody were to take your original pressed vinyl and make a high enough resolution recording of that, then you would not be able to tell the difference. Hell, make the resolution high enough, a dog wouldn't be able to tell a difference either. It's just physics.Callate Donnie said:My man, I do this exercise for everyone that comes to my listening room. I have yet to have one tell me there is no difference. Just sayin.aTmAg said:
I do have doubts that you could tell on a Pepsi challenge from a CD to vinyl if the vinyl was really clean and had no pops associated with it.
For reference: I use 10 cc Good Morning Judge off of Deceptive Bends. I have an original pressing on vinyl and have the CD. My room is acoustically tuned and seating is placed accordingly. For reference:
No you won't. But you may have some ******* tell you that one cannot be objectively better than the other.AustinAg2K said:
Within 5 years you will have people start claiming SD TV on their old CRT's is better quality than HD. You'll probably also have people claiming that waiting for their geocities page to load on a 56K modem leads to a better internet experience than fiber.
AustinAg2K said:
Within 5 years you will have people start claiming SD TV on their old CRT's is better quality than HD. You'll probably also have people claiming that waiting for their geocities page to load on a 56K modem leads to a better internet experience than fiber.
CastleRock said:
TMoney, show us on the doll where vinyl touched you.
