Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[beagleman]

I read that as he enjoys the sound of vinyl more in his system, for whatever reason. It's perhaps nostalgic or he likes something about his vinyl stack more than his digital reproduction equipment. Is he saying that vinyl is a superior reproduction method in terms of accuracy (fidelity)? I don't get that from what he's saying. He fully acknowledges it is his subjective feeling and seems to acknowledge in a later post that digital is capable of higher fidelity.

Maybe I'm wrong, and if so, sorry I missed that one guy. What are some other examples you think I might have missed (since there are a lot)?

I get what you are saying and agree, but just found it funny, I hope you get the humor?

I really could not say what pages I found examples on now. It would take hours to scour all the comments.
We are literally up to about 160 pages and 3100 comments.

I was not posting that example to prove you wrong, but merely to show how easily things can be interpreted one way or the other.
I am not in here to troll anyone and I think we all have a similar love of music, and digital AND analog, at least I do.

I love older open reel stuff, but realize it is not perfection today. I get the vinyl thing to a huge degree, but just poking fun at some of the posts.

I hope we can all get along and not take this stuff so damn seriously. I think we are mostly all on the same page in the end!

 

[drmevo]

I get what you are saying and agree, but just found it funny, I hope you get the humor?

I really could not say what pages I found examples on now. It would take hours to scour all the comments.
We are literally up to about 160 pages and 3100 comments.

I was not posting that example to prove you wrong, but merely to show how easily things can be interpreted one way or the other.
I am not in here to troll anyone and I think we all have a similar love of music, and digital AND analog, at least I do.

I love older open reel stuff, but realize it is not perfection today. I get the vinyl thing to a huge degree, but just poking fun at some of the posts.

I hope we can all get along and not take this stuff so damn seriously. I think we are mostly all on the same page in the end!

Ha, fair enough. Since we're poking fun, though, it's weird how all of the other examples (of which there are a lot, apparently!) are suddenly hard to find when pressed.

 

[Sal1950]

Please don't take this personally, because I know you are doing your job as moderator in good faith. My position is that I don't like gatekeepers. Period. Calls for civility, whether online or in the real world, are often a way -- mostly unintended -- to stifle discussion.

Someone else mentioned Audiophile Style (formerly Computer Audiophile). They are a good example of a forum which technically knowledgeable people helped build up. And then the owner decided that these technical people were upsetting all the newbies. So they were sent packing.

This seems to be the life cycle of forums: They start off bold, and grow based on that boldness. But as they become bigger, they grow incrementally more cautious. Eventually, the inevitable calls for civility arise and get progressively louder. The last act is that the OG posters are cast out.

I know that most people don't agree with my "let it all hang out" attitude. Perhaps it's because I'm a New Yorker and I have a thick skin.

Anyway, this is where I am on this. (BTW, personally I have never insulted anyone in my posts. At least not so far! )

Thanks for listening.

Not sure I agree with the no-holes-bared approach. I was the Admin of a large Linux website for 8+ years and
know only too well how difficult it can get, but your mostly 100% right on target.
What happened to us at Audiophile Style (formerly Computer Audiophile) was a damn shame.
But at some point making money from advertising for the high end companys and snake-oil peddlers
became more important than any truth on technical subjects and we were silenced. Now the owner has a million dollar
surround system with 11+ Wilson Audio speakers and other high end components plus a huge Wilson Audio banner at the top of the page.
The same path was taken at HeadFi some time before that.
And for those newbies that don't know, our leader here Amir, was banned and locked out of his
own site (WhatsBestForum) by his partner (Steve Williams) for publishing measurements and graphs. That partner was hell bent on taking the site in a more subjectively friendly path and he had to go. When I simply asked why, I was promptly banned, as were many others. Then Amir started ASR and within the week, I and half dozen other escapee's of subjective rule were here.
Adam does a great job with a hard job, and I know my style of "straight talk, no BS" posting pisses a lot folk off.
But if you come here looking to post any anti-science BS on the superior listening qualities of vinyl, I'll be here
to post the facts on its crippled 1950s technology.
Till I'm not, then I'll move on. Been there, done that, Oh Well.
Thank You.
Sal1950

 

[pseudoid]

I can't imagine how that claim could be true and I'd like to see some substantiation.

We need to decipher your brain-wave activity at your pleasure-points in a blind-A/B test.
But first, we will need to invade your privacy and deep thoughts by instrumenting your brain and establishing a baseline PQ (pleasure quotient).
IMHO: I'd gladly take your word and your LP-commitment that it gives you deep pleasures... at least you are not out and about robbing banks or draining some old peeps' bank accounts!

 

[computer-audiophile]

Not sure I agree with the no-holes-bared approach. I was the Admin of a large Linux website for 8+ years and
know only too well how difficult it can get, but your mostly 100% right on target.
What happened to us at Audiophile Style (formerly Computer Audiophile) was a damn shame.
But at some point making money from advertising for the high end companys and snake-oil peddlers
became more important than any truth on technical subjects and we were silenced. Now the owner has a million dollar
surround system with 11+ Wilson Audio speakers and other high end components plus a huge Wilson Audio banner at the top of the page.
The same path was taken at HeadFi some time before that.
And for those newbies that don't know, our leader here Amir, was banned and locked out of his
own site (WhatsBestForum) by his partner (Steve Williams) for publishing measurements and graphs. That partner was hell bent on taking the site in a more subjectively friendly path and he had to go. When I simply asked why, I was promptly banned, as were many others. Then Amir started ASR and within the week, I and half dozen other escapee's of subjective rule were here.
Adam does a great job with a hard job, and I know my style of "straight talk, no BS" posting pisses a lot folk off.
But if you come here looking to post any anti-science BS on the superior listening qualities of vinyl, I'll be here
to post the facts on its crippled 1950s technology.
Till I'm not, then I'll move on. Been there, done that, Oh Well.
Thank You.
Sal1950

Thanks for the background information. I think it's all pretty bad when financial interests come into play.

 

[Sal1950]

 

[Mordor]

Well i can`t scientifically prove that people dance better under vinyl. Last time i talk about this was in.....1989 i think with a friend that introduce-me to audiophile world.
About the comment 2 pages i think before, about vinyl been better, when expensive:

Last time i ear a vinyl with quality was in a friend house, with a Linn Akito, Audio tecnica 9 head and the rest i can`t remenber.

Lets just say i couldn`t ear my system for 3 days......and my plastic s*** Pioneer was.....nothing.

I also ear a turntable from....Zaratruska i think in a showroom This was 30 years ago, so maybe im a little out of time........

Apart my comments, personal for me vinyl is better than digital. Thats my own opinion.

 

[Robin L]

" . . . Folksingers, jazz artists and classical musicians made LPs, long playing records with heaps of songs in the grooves---they forged identities and tipped the scales, gave more of the big picture. LPs were like the force of gravity. They had cover, back and front, that you could stare at for hours. Next to them, 45s were flimsy and uncrystallized. They just stacked up in piles and didn't seem important . . . "
Bob Dylan, Chronicles.

There was something flimsy about CDs from the get-go, starting with the fragile cases and continuing with the skinny, lightweight discs. Whatever the sound quality might be in a double-blind test, there was a lack of gravity in the physical format itself. People collecting the physical format itself doubtless feel there's more "there there" with LPs than CDs or streaming.

 

[MattHooper]

There was something flimsy about CDs from the get-go, starting with the fragile cases and continuing with the skinny, lightweight discs. Whatever the sound quality might be in a double-blind test, there was a lack of gravity in the physical format itself. People collecting the physical format itself doubtless feel there's more "there there" with LPs than CDs or streaming.

I agree, that's how I feel. Though some people say they get something similar out of CDs as a physical medium too.
I think CD actually ushered in something of a golden age for liner note stuff at one point. Since many albums were being re-mastered for CD they were often accompanied
by the original liner notes plus some new info on the mastering and often some additional info or commentary. That's one of the things I loved when buying soundtracks
on CD.

Ultimately, yeah, the little booklets that came with CDs didn't feel as substantial as what you get with an LP, but I still appreciated them.

(And remember when virtually all movies on DVDs came with extras and commentary? I actually rarely bothered with those during the DVD hey-day, but find myself actually
looking in to them more these days when I have physical copies, but bad timing for me: there's no longer the emphasis on extras as there once was, due to everything going to streaming).

 

[antcollinet]

Not sure I agree with the no-holes-bared approach. I was the Admin of a large Linux website for 8+ years and
know only too well how difficult it can get, but your mostly 100% right on target.
What happened to us at Audiophile Style (formerly Computer Audiophile) was a damn shame.
But at some point making money from advertising for the high end companys and snake-oil peddlers
became more important than any truth on technical subjects and we were silenced. Now the owner has a million dollar
surround system with 11+ Wilson Audio speakers and other high end components plus a huge Wilson Audio banner at the top of the page.
The same path was taken at HeadFi some time before that.
And for those newbies that don't know, our leader here Amir, was banned and locked out of his
own site (WhatsBestForum) by his partner (Steve Williams) for publishing measurements and graphs. That partner was hell bent on taking the site in a more subjectively friendly path and he had to go. When I simply asked why, I was promptly banned, as were many others. Then Amir started ASR and within the week, I and half dozen other escapee's of subjective rule were here.
Adam does a great job with a hard job, and I know my style of "straight talk, no BS" posting pisses a lot folk off.
But if you come here looking to post any anti-science BS on the superior listening qualities of vinyl, I'll be here
to post the facts on its crippled 1950s technology.
Till I'm not, then I'll move on. Been there, done that, Oh Well.
Thank You.
Sal1950

I did not know that history - thanks for letting us more recent recruits know about it. Makes this place feel even more important.

 

[antcollinet]

Though some people say they get something similar out of CDs as a physical medium too.

Speaking as someone who has just invested (£21) in a new (old) CD player - and have been listening to CD's for a few days, the first time in around 15 years....I concur. Oh, that £21 is around 1/25 what I put into my Rega P3 turntable - and gives better (absolute) sound quality.

Good thing I still have that one precious vinyl album that belonged to my Dad, or I might be re-thinking strategy.

 

[mppix]

I guess we are discussing what is high-fidelity or also what is good enough.
On one hand, some say that absolute audio quality has to be the dominant criteria.
On the other hand, some insist that context matters and that high-quality exists also within the limitations of a format, or situation.

However, the first is not really practical as we it would require banning/bashing all "objectively uncompetitive" components including phono preamps, bluetooth devices, in-wall speakers, or portable headphone amps, car radios, ... The world is very lonely on the top.

Also, ASR can do A LOT more for the community if it measures these components.
For example, I am sure people would be interested in measuring turntables and debunk ridiculous high-end turntable myths.

Experienced folks are very welcome to the discussion. I am sure they have strong opinions on what are better/worst ways to go about things - or how to measure well in the first place.

PS. yes, I have SL1200 and yes, happy to challenge any high-end turntable owner to an AB blind test

 

[Sal1950]

There was something flimsy about CDs from the get-go, starting with the fragile cases and continuing with the skinny, lightweight discs. Whatever the sound quality might be in a double-blind test, there was a lack of gravity in the physical format itself. People collecting the physical format itself doubtless feel there's more "there there" with LPs than CDs or streaming.

Imaginations are powerful things.
And very wasteful of finances.

However, the first is not really practical as we it would require banning/bashing all "objectively uncompetitive" components including phono preamps, bluetooth devices, in-wall speakers, or portable headphone amps, car radios, ... The world is very lonely on the top.

When they suck, Amir is happy to crown them with a decapitated Panther, happens all the time.
Stereophile will be happy to give you "good news only" reviews.

 

[mppix]

Imaginations are powerful things.
And very wasteful of finances.

When they suck, Amir is happy to crown them with a decapitated Panther, happens all the time.
Stereophile will be happy to give you "good news only" reviews.

Every phono preamp or CD player would get a decapitated panthers if bench-marked against SOTA DACs.

 

[Sal1950]

Every phono preamp or CD player would get a decapitated panthers if bench-marked against SOTA DACs.

Phono maybe. CD player no.

Review and Measurements of Oppo UDP-205 UHD Player

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Oppo UDP-205 UHD player's audio subsystem, specifically its DAC performance. It is on loan from a kind member. The retail price of UDP-205 used to be $1,300. Alas, Oppo has discontinued the unit so it is no longer for sale as a new unit. I...

www.audiosciencereview.com

"There is no getting around it: the Oppo UDP-205 nails the measurements and almost across the board beats its competitors. It delivered the best measured performance of any DAC I have tested to date! Of course it earns my strong recommendation."

Try this search

Search results for query: phono preamp

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[mppix]

Phono maybe. CD player no.

Review and Measurements of Oppo UDP-205 UHD Player

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Oppo UDP-205 UHD player's audio subsystem, specifically its DAC performance. It is on loan from a kind member. The retail price of UDP-205 used to be $1,300. Alas, Oppo has discontinued the unit so it is no longer for sale as a new unit. I...

www.audiosciencereview.com

"There is no getting around it: the Oppo UDP-205 nails the measurements and almost across the board beats its competitors. It delivered the best measured performance of any DAC I have tested to date! Of course it earns my strong recommendation."

Try this search

Search results for query: phono preamp

www.audiosciencereview.com

Literally the first sentence, quote: "This is a review and detailed measurements of the Oppo UDP-205 UHD player's audio subsystem, specifically its DAC performance."

There is no need for this argumentation style. This is not a Linux forum.

 

[Newman]

As I pointed out earlier - he is describing his own personal perception ("what I heard", "every record I played") of the quality of the sound. No-where is he stating it is objectively better, or that anyone else should or will hear the same. People do love reading their own biases in others words though.
And, lets say there are some individuals here who both think and state that vinyl is objectively better. Take it up with them! Explain to THEM why they are wrong. But do it respectfully.

I disagree with this idea that when someone says vinyl is objectively worse but subjectively better, then they are not saying it sounds better to anyone but them.

They are actually hinting, and often saying outright, that there is a disconnect between measurements (which they correlate with “objectively”) and the listener experience. Hence the post #8 making reference to “toe-tapping” and “engaging”. Things that they think measurements are missing.

We see huge discussions on ASR where people insist that the fact that they (and everyone else who is like them) prefer the sound of something that measures worse, means that one or more of these must be true:-

1. We are measuring the wrong things.
2. Personal preference can’t be measured.
3. Everyone’s sonic preferences are unique and different.
4. (And note that all 3 above have been demonstrated wrong via careful experimentation)

These people are saying that vinyl does indeed sound better, and not just to themselves as one individual. They will point to how many people agree with them that vinyl sounds better. I have had the personal experience (and seen others put through the same experience) of saying I get the most listener satisfaction from digital compared to vinyl, and be subjected to a forensic examination of my vinyl gear (if my record player is good enough, I will prefer it to digital), my setup skills (once I get good enough at setting up the music will ‘snap into focus’ like magic), and ultimately my listening ability and experience/judgement in relation to sound quality being questioned (vinyl definitely sounds better, so if you disagree there must be something underdeveloped or unrefined in you). In other forums.

Think of it this way: what does “sounds objectively better” mean to you? Do you think it’s an oxymoron? It is not an oxymoron. And for that reason, when someone says that vinyl sounds better (to them and to everyone who agrees with them), they believe that they are making a statement about the objective sound waves coming from vinyl.

cheers

PS Note that post #8 was raised as an example. To forensically deconstruct the words and intended meaning of post #8 is to miss the point. To ask “where in this thread“ is also to miss the point. Not everyone who reads, posts. Not everyone who posts, posts their true beliefs in the strongest terms. We know those views are out there, and it’s fair to expect people with those views are reading threads about vinyl and especially vinyl vs digital.

 

[Newman]

Every phono preamp or CD player would get a decapitated panthers if bench-marked against SOTA DACs.

So would every loudspeaker.

I think ASR reviews (and the panther assignment) are benchmarked against same type of product.

What we don’t want to see, IMHO, is quarantining each technology within each product type. That would lead to ‘golfing panther’ for best tube DAC….with 85 dB SINAD.

 

[mppix]

Th

I disagree with this idea that when someone says vinyl is objectively worse but subjectively better, then they are not saying it sounds better to anyone but them.

They are actually hinting, and often saying outright, that there is a disconnect between measurements (which they correlate with “objectively”) and the listener experience. Hence the post #8 making reference to “toe-tapping” and “engaging”. Things that they think measurements are missing.

We see huge discussions on ASR where people insist that the fact that they (and everyone else who is like them) prefer the sound of something that measures worse, means that one or more of these must be true:-

1. We are measuring the wrong things.
2. Personal preference can’t be measured.
3. Everyone’s sonic preferences are unique and different.
4. (And note that all 3 above have been demonstrated wrong via careful experimentation)

These people are saying that vinyl does indeed sound better, and not just to themselves as one individual. They will point to how many people agree with them that vinyl sounds better. I have had the personal experience (and seen others put through the same experience) of saying I get the most listener satisfaction from digital compared to vinyl, and be subjected to a forensic examination of my vinyl gear (if my record player is good enough, I will prefer it to digital), my setup skills (once I get good enough at setting up the music will ‘snap into focus’ like magic), and ultimately my listening ability and experience/judgement in relation to sound quality being questioned (vinyl definitely sounds better, so if you disagree there must be something underdeveloped or unrefined in you). In other forums.

Think of it this way: what does “sounds objectively better” mean to you? Do you think it’s an oxymoron? It is not an oxymoron. And for that reason, when someone says that vinyl sounds better (to them and to everyone who agrees with them), they believe that they are making a statement about the objective sound waves coming from vinyl.

cheers

PS Note that post #8 was raised as an example. To forensically deconstruct the words and intended meaning of post #8 is to miss the point. To ask “where in this thread“ is also to miss the point. Not everyone who reads, posts. Not everyone who posts, posts their true beliefs in the strongest terms. We know those views are out there, and it’s fair to expect people with those views are reading threads about vinyl and especially vinyl vs digital.

Is may be helpful:

 

[Newman]

I am not big on youtube, what does he say?