deepak Posted August 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 thought about going that route, but based on my reading buying something like that on eBay could easily turn into a major headache and money pit. i don't have the experience or patience to do it so i'd hire professionals to help me and it could easily exceed my budget. if i do vinyl again, i want an extremely easy set-it and forget-it turntable and rega for better or worse fits the bill. additionally, i can listen to what it sounds like before i pull the trigger and the P5 seems well suited for classic rock. i'm still undecided if i even want to go back down this road again. i sit and listen to my cdp-77 and think, why? I think a lot of it has to do with the mastering of the true source material- the music. A lot of CDs just sound like crap, and unfortunately audiophile companies like MFSL and SH/KG will sometimes only release stuff on vinyl. A lot of the classic rock we listened to were either reissues on Classic Records or Analog Productions. Their remastered CDs on Rhino, EMI, etc sound like shit. No CDP is going to make the Icky Thump CD sound better than the vinyl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
909 Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 so very true! mastering is key for cds and lps. i've heard bad masterings on both especially new releases and some reissues. vinyl is much more likely to have sound quality issues as a result of the pressing process. cds can get the life compressed out of them whereas vinyl can't get pushed as far and typically sound better. though, older original released cds sound pretty decent as do german and japanese pressings and some actually sound incredible especially played on the right source. buying new vinyl that's been digitally remastered or recorded in digital isn't ideal. most of my cds were purchased prior to 2000 and my favorites back around the late 80's so i am lucky in that fact and now i am really researching then hunting down the best release i can find. i would love to hear MFSL, SH, and KG on vinyl, yet fine tuning a vinyl rig can be a challenge in that one has to match table, arm, cart, phono stage, etc to ensure it sounds right. i've heard expensive vinyl rigs with noticeable roll off and bloated bass among other issues. i am not familiar with that thump cd and vinyl, but i would sure like to compare my source against a mid-level vinyl rig proper set-up to hear it back-to-back then make a conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted August 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 so very true! mastering is key for cds and lps. i've heard bad masterings on both especially new releases and some reissues. vinyl is much more likely to have sound quality issues as a result of the pressing process. cds can get the life compressed out of them whereas vinyl can't get pushed as far and typically sound better. though, older original released cds sound pretty decent as do german and japanese pressings and some actually sound incredible especially played on the right source. buying new vinyl that's been digitally remastered or recorded in digital isn't ideal. most of my cds were purchased prior to 2000 and my favorites back around the late 80's so i am lucky in that fact and now i am really researching then hunting down the best release i can find. i would love to hear MFSL, SH, and KG on vinyl, yet fine tuning a vinyl rig can be a challenge in that one has to match table, arm, cart, phono stage, etc to ensure it sounds right. i've heard expensive vinyl rigs with noticeable roll off and bloated bass among other issues. i am not familiar with that thump cd and vinyl, but i would sure like to compare my source against a mid-level vinyl rig proper set-up to hear it back-to-back then make a conclusion. Icky Thump is The White Stripe's latest album, it's pretty good. But the CD was destroyed by compression. SH/KG did the vinyl which was straight from the master tape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
909 Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 that's something i would really like to hear and unless something is wrong the vinyl without question should sound superior. reading about the SH/KG stuff makes me want a TT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhd812 Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 Icky Thump is The White Stripe's latest album, it's pretty good. But the CD was destroyed by compression. SH/KG did the vinyl which was straight from the master tape. i had the cd sitting around until todau i put it there a speaker rig with these demo speakers..holy fuck is the cd good for being screwed..if the cd sounds liek this I must have the vinyl...esp off Hoffman...omg can i order it now? is it out yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhd812 Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 ordered it with the nat king cole lp also..thanks for the infossssss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 I think a lot of it has to do with the mastering of the true source material- the music. A lot of CDs just sound like crap, and unfortunately audiophile companies like MFSL and SH/KG will sometimes only release stuff on vinyl. A lot of the classic rock we listened to were either reissues on Classic Records or Analog Productions. Their remastered CDs on Rhino, EMI, etc sound like shit. No CDP is going to make the Icky Thump CD sound better than the vinyl. And the sad thing is that in todays recording/mastering climate, I have absolutely no qualms with paying $30 + shipping for a single vinyl album that I know will be mastered and pressed superbly. I mean I didn't even think about preordering the KG/SH Aja. I just did it. And I'm glad I did! Then again I'm spinning an original WB vinyl pressing of Gang Of Four's "Entertainment" that I bought on ebay for $10. Sounds phenomenal, with a very real studio space permeating the recording. On the flip side of the coin, lets say I somehow downloaded a flac copy of The Wall MFSL and burned it on a mitsui mam-a gold archival CDR. Lets say it sounds absolutely stupendous. The bottom line is that, as a format, vinyl just makes it so much more difficult for the masterer to fuck up the sound. I mean, it can still be done, but not like with digital, where the possibilities for compression and maximization are endless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Preach on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 The bottom line is that, as a format, vinyl just makes it so much more difficult for the masterer to fuck up the sound. I mean, it can still be done, but not like with digital, where the possibilities for compression and maximization are endless. The flip side is that vinyl can never have the dynamic range that digital can have, even cd. And after just a couple of plays, you start to get clicks and pops that are far more annoying than overcompressed pop music. But I mostly buy cds from the likes of chesky, or I'm buying cds that sound the way they're supposed to sound. And you have to spend a fortune in turntables, cartridges, cleaners, vibration supression, media storage. It's all just not worth it. Listen to live music recorded by friends with good gear digitally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 The flip side is that vinyl can never have the dynamic range that digital can have, even cd. Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. CD's have only just barely gotten into the realm of fully utilizing their entire dynamic spectrum, whereas analog has had decades more development. In other words, most of the CD's you have do not have the same dynamic range that vinyl does. But yeah, if all you listen to is live music, it's kind of hard to get a record cutting machine into a concert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aerius Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Dynamic range of vinyl is a lot better than you think... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 And any new record has a digital step in between. But even something as simple as pachelbel's canon or the 1812 overture can't be captured accurately on vinyl. Just doesn't work. Even my 20 yr old cd of 1812 has better dynamics than vinyl is capable of capturing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hungrych Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 And you have to spend a fortune in turntables, cartridges, cleaners, vibration supression, media storage. It's all just not worth it. I save a ton of money because I can get so many great records for 2-3 dollars each. I thought the pops and clicks would annoy me, but they're usually just at the very beginning of the record. And even when they're not I don't really mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aerius Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 I save a ton of money because I can get so many great records for 2-3 dollars each. I thought the pops and clicks would annoy me, but they're usually just at the very beginning of the record. And even when they're not I don't really mind. Yup, one the local libraries cleared out a bunch of their records last week for 25 cents a pop. Most of them were in rather sorry shape, but some of them were real gems that don't even have a single pop or click on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hungrych Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 I should mention that I record my records onto my computer so I only have to clean them and rip them once. The convenience aspect doesn't bother me because of this. I haven't been able to compare a ripped copy to listening straight off the vinyl because of my equipment, but I will when I get my DBX quantum and better TT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 And any new record has a digital step in between. So? A modern modern record is probably being done at 24/96 or 24/192, which a CD can't handle. Whereas a record will capture all of it -- so just because it's done in digital, doesn't mean the end result should be digital. I know the pedants over at sh.tv were whining when they found out the record version of Pink Floyd's Echoes compilation was done off the same digital master tapes, but L -- it was 24/96 (IIRC), which should still sound pretty damn good.Even my 20 yr old cd of 1812 has better dynamics than vinyl is capable of capturing.Like I said -- you keep telling yourself that. I think you're speaking in over-generalizations. BTW, dynamic range <> transients. Yeah, those cannon shots would pop the needle out of the record. And it doesn't take as expensive a system as you're portraying to keep the rice krispies quiet. I'm pretty sure Hirsch's system (including cleaning machine) is only a couple thousand. I'm also pretty sure it can be done for even less (substituting a different table, and a more manual-intensive record-cleaning machine). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 And after just a couple of plays, you start to get clicks and pops that are far more annoying than overcompressed pop music. Bollocks. I have never had a record "develop" pops and clicks after ANY amount of plays, much less a couple. So long as your turntable is properly setup, what with the VTF and VTA and cart alignment and all those lovely things ( <3 kab integrated carts), no record will "develop" pops and clicks over its lifetime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Bollocks. I have never had a record "develop" pops and clicks after ANY amount of plays, much less a couple. So long as your turntable is properly setup, what with the VTF and VTA and cart alignment and all those lovely things ( <3 kab integrated carts), no record will "develop" pops and clicks over its lifetime. They will if you have a cat...and you leave your records out...or you hide your stash in a record jacket... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 So? A modern modern record is probably being done at 24/96 or 24/192, which a CD can't handle. Whereas a record will capture all of it -- so just because it's done in digital, doesn't mean the end result should be digital. I know the pedants over at sh.tv were whining when they found out the record version of Pink Floyd's Echoes compilation was done off the same digital master tapes, but L -- it was 24/96 (IIRC), which should still sound pretty damn good.Like I said -- you keep telling yourself that. I think you're speaking in over-generalizations. BTW, dynamic range <> transients. Yeah, those cannon shots would pop the needle out of the record. And it doesn't take as expensive a system as you're portraying to keep the rice krispies quiet. I'm pretty sure Hirsch's system (including cleaning machine) is only a couple thousand. I'm also pretty sure it can be done for even less (substituting a different table, and a more manual-intensive record-cleaning machine). A couple thousand bucks is not chump change. And even if records were maintenance free, you still have to stop every 25 minutes to flip them, have to store them, etc. I'll stick to my recordings on my file server. But you can keep repeating that records have better dynamic range, but just because some music on cd is poorly mastered doesn't mean that the medium is worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Anyway, I'm not invested in this debate, I really don't give a shit if people keep buying records. It's good that people are making good masters. But people are making good cds too. And I basically have no interest in anything that is on vinyl and never got released on cd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted August 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 I wish I could say the same about myself. But I'm still expanding my musical tastes and don't want to limit myself to one format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 ...you can keep repeating that records have better dynamic range, but just because some music on cd is poorly mastered doesn't mean that the medium is worse...It's got nothing to do with mastering. I've compared needledrops I've made myself -- I.E. with zero additional compression -- and have lost detail. Admittedly, it's not with an Apogee Rosetta or anything, but an Alesis Masterlink ain't no chopped liver. I recorded at 24/88 and downsampled/downmixed to CD. It's just not the same (although the 24/88 was perfectly adequate -- I honestly could not tell the difference). But I am specifically critical of CD, and not of digital in general -- I am a strong believer in digital, I don't even have a turntable set up right now. Don't confuse me for those extremists. Heck, most of my synthesizers are digital, I just prefer to mix them in the analog domain. I wouldn't mind going through the experiment again -- recording a record to high-res digital and 16/44.1 digital, and passing around the files, so that they could use whatever algorithm they like to create their own 16/44.1 digital files, and compare them. Thus eliminating 90% of the variables, but ... will have to be over christmas break or something, I'm swamped through October, at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 again, I don't begrudge anybody not wanting to spin records. it is a lot of work, and the needed accessories, even on a budget setup, are many. I have a dry brush, two wet brushes, a liter of cleaning fluid, then little cleaning fluid application bottles, a record cleaning machine, hundreds of lined paper sleeves, hundreds of outer record sleaves, and four plastic corrugated boxes which are just barely containing my vinyl collection. And all of that is just for maintenance and storage. but I continue to be shocked at what great sound I get out of my $400 direct drive. "if I could buy the world a technics..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Time is the most precious thing in my life. If I have to search out recordings on vinyl, I'm just not gonna hear them. If I have to fiddle with something to listen to it, I'm not going to. If I have to decide in advance what I'm gonna listen to, it's not gonna happen. I'm trying to figure out how to get my dvds on the fileserver, so I can put them away too. Somethign that requires less intervention on my part is key, not more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted August 17, 2007 Report Share Posted August 17, 2007 Don't confuse me for those extremists. Don't confuse me with those extremists either, and please keep in mind I have yet to hear a truly high end digital source, like 909's Reimyo or Rek's Capitole. I'd love to hear one of those or an Opus 21 someday. and of course there is SACD, which is amazing. But even those can be ruined, as the Genesis remasters proved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.