Vinyl records outsold CDs for the first time since the 1980s

[Uncle Al]

no, it's not a documented "fact". why even lie about it? just say it like it really is: some people like the old school sound.

Obviously you have not yet learned to read ..... come back when you are more educated on what constitutes a "fact".

 

[trgz]

This is a trap, I'm going to tell you what I use, and you will ignore it, and scream that your $1000 plus headphones sound so much better, but they don't, you just think it because you paid more. This is what I use SENNHEISER HD 599

No, fair choice - I've a pair of modded HD558s and a pair of HD600s, but they definitely do sound different ;-) - generally I run them off my FiiO X5iii, & E2K amp, that I bought as much for it's capacity/functionality as it's quality. I guess what you play them with will make a difference too.
Forgive my curiosity. And for honesty, I'm 57 and I know my hearing has dropped, but it's not always about the top-end freqs.
I've done blind tests on myself comparing those silly HiRes 24-bit/96kHz to SD FLACs/ALACs(ie16-bit, 44kHz) and honestly cannot see (or hear) what people are on about, but I will add that I have done side-by-side CD/MP3/Vinyl comparisons (using brand new Vinyl on a Rega Planar 2/Bias/A&R P77 setup ) and the CDs won out (the MP3s coming second!), so when it comes to the CD vs MP3 issue I can say that I've already been there (I did this before I re-ripped all of my 2000+ CDs). That said, I'm currently downsampling a bunch of FLACs to 320AAC (to save some space - I only have 640GB on my FiiO!) that would fall into my world of 'shuffled' music as opposed to those albums that I'd sit down to properly listen to and want the best listening experience.
Anyway, I've not got Spotify premium, but I understand it's 320kbps, and this thread (including your comments) has genuinely got me poised to give the FLAC/320kbps comparison another go soon.

 

[lesovers]

It's more about the audio gear you are using, much more than the format of the music. The best music source however is still uncompressed digital (CD, WAV files etc) or Vinyl on a good system.

The Naim CD5x CD player and custom power supply I have is still not as good as my Rega RP8 using a Naim Stageline phono preamp and Denon DL-110 HOMC cartridge on a custom power supply for example. Both have exceptional playback however the same music on Vinyl is just more organic and natural and does not fatigue the listener over an extended time period.

All new and most old Vinyl are engineered for the best possible playback as LPs are sold at a premium price and buyers expect great music quality. Digital music engineering however is often marred by a volume arms race, which leads to fatiguing, hyper-compressed songs that squish out the dynamics and textures that give recordings their depth and vitality.

My advice is to actually try Vinyl on some very good gear and compare; there is a reason why most music buffs have a record player now.

 

[Puiu]

Obviously you have not yet learned to read ..... come back when you are more educated on what constitutes a "fact".

I work in facts all day. If you are going to argue that vinyl is better then show the freaking objective proof. Otherwise all I can see are some nostalgia colored opinions.
It's like saying that analogic TV is better than digital TV.

 

[Underdog]

It's more about the audio gear you are using, much more than the format of the music. The best music source however is still uncompressed digital (CD, WAV files etc) or Vinyl on a good system.

The Naim CD5x CD player and custom power supply I have is still not as good as my Rega RP8 using a Naim Stageline phono preamp and Denon DL-110 HOMC cartridge on a custom power supply for example. Both have exceptional playback however the same music on Vinyl is just more organic and natural and does not fatigue the listener over an extended time period.

All new and most old Vinyl are engineered for the best possible playback as LPs are sold at a premium price and buyers expect great music quality. Digital music engineering however is often marred by a volume arms race, which leads to fatiguing, hyper-compressed songs that squish out the dynamics and textures that give recordings their depth and vitality.

My advice is to actually try Vinyl on some very good gear and compare; there is a reason why most music buffs have a record player now.

Digital is popular because of convenience. Vinyl is making a comeback because it has so much more to offer than convenience. You buy it. You own it. You look after it. You sit down and pay attention to the music. And if you have invested in a good system and decent speakers you FEEL it as well. The only downside is that apart from a few niche labels, the quality of new vinyl is rubbish. Have a read of comments on Discogs to understand how many copies have to be bought before finding one that's not warped straight out of the sleeve. Production all but stopped after CDs took over and the presses and the men who knew how to operate them are all but extinct now. This sad state of affairs is why a lot of old pressings in good condition are making stupid money these days.

 

[lesovers]

Also in reference to some comments about high frequency roll off and noise of Vinyl here are some interesting facts;

The Denon DL-110 high output moving coil cartridge for example has a flat frequency response up to 45kHz much greater than CD audio which is flat to a maximum of about 20kHz. Vinyl has a frequency response up to 50kHz however many mainstream Vinyl mastering services often set the highest frequency to the 18kHz mark to prevent overheating of the cutting head. Given adult human hearing is limited to about 16kHz anyway both CD and Vinyl high frequency responses are fine.

Record noise depends on the size and shape of the cartridge stylus tip. The Denon DL-110 has 0.1 x 0.2mm special elliptical diamond stylus for example and therefore it travels deep in the groove which results in very low surface noise. The Naim Stageline phono preamp is also a discrete transistor amplifier design with extremely low electrical noise compared to typical op-amp designs. The very high slew rate of the transistors ensures the high frequency clicks and pops (large steep edges >20kHz) from the record is barely audible. Low grade phono preamps actually help generate the audible clicks and pops by using single low slew rate op-amps per channel and poor quality RIAA equalization feedback capacitors for example.

So high frequency roll off and noise is not an issue at all for high quality phono cartridges and preamps.

 

[lesovers]

Digital is popular because of convenience. Vinyl is making a comeback because it has so much more to offer than convenience. You buy it. You own it. You look after it. You sit down and pay attention to the music. And if you have invested in a good system and decent speakers you FEEL it as well. The only downside is that apart from a few niche labels, the quality of new vinyl is rubbish. Have a read of comments on Discogs to understand how many copies have to be bought before finding one that's not warped straight out of the sleeve. Production all but stopped after CDs took over and the presses and the men who knew how to operate them are all but extinct now. This sad state of affairs is why a lot of old pressings in good condition are making stupid money these days.

Good point about new records however a badly mastered CD is much worse than a poorly mastered/manufactured record. LPs are much more forgiving and more consist with great playback equipment than any digital recording. All my new LPs are great, only the Dark Side of the Moon is not as good as my original 1973 Quadraphonic Aussie pressing. Digital mastering from the studio tapes was too late for this 1972 recorded classic and other great recordings also.

 

[Puiu]

At this point we are just arguing on who masters their CD or Vinyl worse. All I can say is that if you want the best sound quality then go buy the best hardware that can play 24bit/192kHz FLAC audio files (as they were recorded) - especially if you dislike the 16 bit CD standard and can notice the difference.

 

[Danny101]

Vinyl must have the asthetics of experience and work that I think people are craving verses the immediate easy fix by modern digital sources. Quality of sound is a rationalizing argument and a mute point. Just say you like the experience and we can understand that.

There very well may be a technical argument that analog recording is better than digital because it's picking up in a waveform and able to pickup every nuance of sound and digital recording tends to chop off the bits of noise that can't be readily calculated. That is true. But being able to hear that difference is often negligible at higher digital lossless formats. It may be that quality vs quality...analog is cheaper. Multi-track analog tapes would seem to be the ticket versus vinyl IMO.

 

[captaincranky]

FLAC along with a high enough sampling rate could bring digital sound to within a hair's breadth of vinyl. It all comes down to having enough data to represent each and every step and nuance of the waveform that represents the sound.

44.1 kHz is the standard today but perhaps if you doubled that thus increasing the amount of data used to represent the sound, it would become closer to that of vinyl.

Do you have any idea wehat you're talking about, or are you just trolling?

The next thing you'll be telling us is that you can count the 24 fps on a feature film.

CD has a noise floor of >90 DB. That maxes out on vinyl at not more than 65 DB. The biggest differentiation between recordings and live music is dynamic range.

For example, a Fender Twin Reverb, is capable of delivering a maximum SPL of 122 DB. How on earth are you going to squeeze that onto a vinyl record?

Maybe your dog can hear the 44 Khz sampling rate, but you certainly can't.

The only real problem with modern CDs, are the a**holes at the recording consoles.