CDs are better than vinyl and most people listen to music on systems that sound dreadful
CDs are better than vinyl and most people listen to music on systems that sound dreadful
CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don't wear out by being played. The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad. The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good and streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you're served or whether it'll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media.
The vast majority of people listen to music using equipment that produces audio of poor quality, especially those that stream using ear buds. It makes me very sad when people don't care that what they're listening to could sound so much better, especially if played through a hifi from a CD player, or using half decent (not beats) headphones.
There's plenty of good sounding and well produced music out there, but it's typically played back through the equivalent of two cans and some string. I'm not sure people remember how good good music can sound when played back through good kit.
-
The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.
Not really. It's a sign that Vinyl has turned into a symbol of support for the creative ideals of musicians and romance for a bygone era, while CDs, superior as they are (except in the case of records in good repair being played on high quality turntables), are "just" things that hold digital music. They sold in insane numbers because they were the standard format until streaming truly took over. Sure, Vinyl sales are up to 40 million or so in the US, but the bigger thing is that the 37 million CD sales are down from almost a billion in each of 1999 and 2000.
-
Vinils also have huge art that look good as decoration.
-
I like vinyls because they're basically posters that I can listen to
-
This is why when I want to support an artist I purchase vinyl. I get better art than the CD and it looks better on a shelf than a CD. Vinyl isn't about audio quality. It's about collecting, supporting the artist, and the experience.
-
-
As a vinyl dork who a huge music fan, it's definitely a way to support artists but let's not pretend that vinyl sound better, technically CDs will always be more clear, but I happen to enjoy the warmth of vinyl even if it's not as perfect as CD audio.
-
symbol of support for the creative ideals of musicians and romance for a bygone era
i think this is happening to CDs as we speak.
see: op
-
I see your point, but I don't think you're going to see quite the same reverence, precisely because it doesn't have that visceral connection to the music and its creation that vinyl does. There has to be computing technology as an intermediary to get sound waves onto CDs, so at that point why not skip the middle man? Vinyl is also a more tactilely "old" technology, that's still modern enough to have a practical setup around it. Think fountain pens or muscle cars with carburetors and no electronics. Then, there's the fact that it's deeply connected even to the terminology of the music industry. "Record," "album," "track," even "single" all come from vinyl itself. The cultural cachet is unmatched.
People switched to CDs en masse because they were easier to live with than vinyl and a huge improvement over cassettes in every way (except height and width, LOL), but it was very transactional, so CDs were always apt to being replaced again if something even more convenient came along. Even in their heyday, there were people pining for the days of vinyl, and it's the spiritual descendants of that crew that are keeping records alive. CDs will not disappear, and there will be a certain crew that appreciates all the things that made them a good mass market distribution medium, but I don't think they're going to inspire tastemakers the same way vinyl does.
I am getting old now, and I could be wrong, but it's fun to predict. :-)
-
-
-
You're mistakenly thinking people are buying vinyl records for sound quality, and there may be a few misguided people out there, but the vast majority aren't.
For many it's about simply supporting their favourite artists, and getting a cool item to enjoy. I'd say most vinyl record gatefolds often have a load of extra interesting stuff going on compared to a CD jewel case release. It also lends itself to forcing you to be more deliberate about listening, you need to pay attention to flip the record, you need to physically interact with the thing—I imagine the majority that still buy CDs end up just ripping them to another device and then basically never open the case again. Which I'd say encourages entirely different kinds of listening experience. Neither are invalid ways to engage with an album.
I guess that leads onto the other thing to point out, which is most of the modern records I buy come with a code to download FLACs of the album, sometimes even at higher quality (24-bit/96khz) than a CD release (16-bit/44.1khz). This is also more convenient for increasing numbers of people that simply don't have a way to play CDs at all any more, let alone on a hi-fi or something.
I'll agree though that most people are listening with mediocre equipment. But FWIW, there are fantastic quality "ear bud" style IEMs out there (I like Shure's range) that'll blow a lot of non-professional headphones out the water.
-
Foreword: I only stream my music, from FLAC preferably. I don't own vynils but mostly i don't own CD's anymore either.
CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That's the whole point.
Vynil instead gives you the experience of listening, with all the associated crap/fun depending on your POV.
So while there is a case for vynil today, but I don't share it, there is zero case for CDs. Just download the bits. Don't waste plastic and shit with a polluting and degrading medium that make no sense today that downloading a full quality uncompressed audio file takes seconds.
-
Compartmentalized optical media is a really nice way of storing things, though. I'm way more likely to listen to an album from start to finish if it's from a CD than a folder of files on my PC. Plus CDs are dirt cheap now more than ever. I get used CDs for like $2-5 each.
-
Yeah, a CD? Incredible, can hold Twelve songs!!
I'd even prefer a cassette.
-
Moreover... ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ
-
-
CD is dead and should be dead. Rip it and stream it, full stop. No need or reason to keep a degrading digital format when you can just rip it (full quality and store as FLAC) and stream it. That's the whole point.
This sentiment is somehow hostile to both artists and listeners. That's not the whole point. The whole point is that when I buy a thing (book, music, video), I own the thing and can store, backup, and transfer ownership as I see fit, not according to the whims of future licensing deals. I don't want to buy what is basically an NFT of the music. I want to buy the physical object. I want to be able to physically transfer that object.
You'll own nothing and like it I guess. Not me though. I've lived through too many failing companies, disappearing websites and services, hostile licensing deals that alienate and disenfranchise artists and fans, and general corporate greed. Let me buy the CD as directly from the band as possible. Let me take it from there and use whatever I choose for equipment, format, or software to enjoy it.
For the last few decades, very few people that have declared a popular media format dead have turned out to be correct.
-
You want to purchase a vibration of the air?
a sound?
I understand why you want a physical object to hold, but owning the music to me means no DRM, then the bits are mine and I can do whatever I want with them.
Indeed go buy posters, lyrics, any physical item you want from your band. Caps, cups, t-shirts, any form of art.
But I still don't see a reason for CDs. Then buy vinyls, at least the art is far bigger!
-
-
You rip those CDs to get rid of degrading physical storage.... onto a hard drive that can also fail. A hard drive being degrading/corruptable physical storage.
-
It's pretty unlikely that all your harddrives fail at the same time. Just back them up regularly, it's pretty easy compared to a physical CD or vinyl collection.
That said, most of my music collection is stored in high quality mp3, not lossless. Lossless would make the backup process quite a bit more expensive.
-
We actually have the technology to make Audio CDs that last 100s of years, but the manufacturers refuse to use it in CDs, reserving it for DVD-R and BD-R discs for archiving. It doesn't even cost much more to produce (but they certainly charge more for it).
So I rip all my audio CDs to Flac and then burn them to a single 100GB M–Disc for archival.
-
We could print to stone maybe, with redoundancy and CRC codes embedded, using chisels.
That could last a bit longer, maybe.
/s
-
-
I've just realised you spelled vynil correctly and everyone else has been either spelling it wrong or pronouncing it wrong since its conception
-
-
My amplifier has all the streaming services available and some of them like Tidal stream at higher bitrates than a CD. CD's are obsolete these days, I don't know anyone who still has a CD player. So obviously sales decline.
Vinyl on the other hand is an (analog) experience by itself. In my experience there is nothing like crate digging for unique samples at the local record shops, sampling them with my AKAI S-1100, the warm dynamic sound of it, the noise floor bringing harmonic distortion, the ticks and cracks that add to the groove.
-
Yeah, vinyls would die if it was only about sound quality. So as would heating food over campfire when there are perfect convection ovens, effective microwaves, etc
-
I really like the campfire analogy. It's worse on purpose because that's the experience they want.
-
-
Another AKAI S-1100 chad. respect
-
I don't know anyone who still has a CD player.
It's me, hi. I'm the problem, it's me.
-
-
You're making multiple arguments here and trying to wrap them up into one.
CDs are in every way better than vinyl records. They are smaller, much higher quality audio, lower noise floor and don’t wear out by being played.
Most of these aren't universal positives for most people.
Economy of space is not a big concern for me when it comes to physical media. Playing physical media is a ritual more than anything for most folks, and I want to hold that giant 13"x13" cardboard sleeve in my hands while listening to the music, not toss around a little plastic jewelcase.
On audio quality: that has been debated on audiophile forums for decades now and the most political conclusion to it is that: music sounds best on the format it was mastered for. Not all music was (properly) mastered for digital.
The bit about LPs "wearing out" is overstated to say the least and 99/100 times, that degradation comes from poor setups. Other than that, you're kind of just describing a alluring fault of analog media. The fact that a piece of plastic can change with you over time as you listen to it, at the exact pace you set it to and in an environment you create, humanizes it and helps build a connection in a way that files on a computer don't really do. Let's not act like disc rot isn't a thing, either.
The fact you can rip and stream your own CD media is fantastic because generally remasters are not good
Funny, because CDs were one of the first examples of shitty remasters in the 90s. You can also rip LPs with minimal effort, too.
streaming services typically only have remastered versions, not originals. You have no control on streaming services about what version of an album you’re served or whether it’ll still be there tomorrow. Not an issue with physical media
None of this supports "CDs are better than vinyl records."
On the rest of your post, none of that really supports CD > Vinyl, either. If you're talking about how people interact with their music and the equipment they do it through, there's far more support for analog setups than CD.
With analog, you can actually make real, physical, adjustments to the audio output. On digital, you're effectively just messing with a bunch of 1s and 0s inside a computer. The whole process is much less authentic.
👊🎤
-
The whole process is much less authentic.
I remember reading a letter to the editor in Stereophile magazine 30 years ago, when tube amps were coming back into style after decades of transistor and semiconductor amps. The reader pointed out that the language used in a review to describe the benefits of tube amps was ridiculous, and that calling the output "warm" or "intimate" (or dare I say, "authentic") compared to semiconductor amps was simply an admission that the tube amps were making a change to the audio output that was not part of the original recording.
The function of an audio reproduction and amplification system, the author pointed out, was to reproduce the audio signal as accurately as possible to capture the content of the original recorded signal. Full stop. Anything else is nonsense.
-
There is no discussion about audio quality. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. You can talk about the format, cds being less nice to handle with that awkward plastic box which always breaks. But not about the audio quality. Its measurable.
Yes, perfectly pressed vinyl can sound fantastic on very hq hifi. But it will crack. It will hiss. It will degrade each time you play the record. Thats not up for debate. How much, or how little, that is up for debate. And also, how you store your vinyl has a big impact on how they age. (but the medium will always age) Anyway :thats what you are referring too. How much. But how much isn't the issue: it is, unmistakenly, always there. It's physics. You can't deny it.
On the same hq hifi setup a hq hifi (super) cd player will at the very least sound equally good. It will never hiss. It will never crack. It will never pop. It will not degrade.
Most times it will sound better. It will always sound cleaner. But we don't like cleaner. We like stuff that creeks. We, people, like things which seem to "live". It makes it easier to relate too. It's why we cannot say goodbye to big steamengines of bygone eras. Its why we loooove the sound of high octane ICE's and still use them a lot while we all know electric is probably better in every way. And the same applies to music: the pops and hisses make it sound more authentic, more alive. And this is where science goes of the rails and feelings take over. Its a slippery slope.
Op is talking about the loudness war. Look it up, its a real thing, but reading your comment you must be aware already. "remasters" these days are all most always oversteered in every way possible because... Reasons. I recently listened to a vinyl remaster of a 90s dance record: horrible on hifi. But sufficient on a Bluetooth phonogram player.
Like you said: nobody plays on hifi anymore. So its getting remastered more and more for shit setups. Sonos. Bluetooth headphones and the likes. And while sounding nice, that is a far cry from hifi.
When playing your original cd's you get the original remaster. Not that oversteered shit on apple music, youtube or Spotify which sound horrible on a hifi setup. There is a very definite difference. Easy to spot.
And tbh: I'm guilty too. I chose the comfort (ease of use) of sonos over the sound quality of a hifi setup. In the end it costed the same and my wife is happier without the cabling. Living (together) is always compromising ;).
I get why people chose vinyl. It's the experience. It's like smoking cigars in a lounge with some friends while drinking brandy. But like those cigars vinyl is not the best choice. But I do like cigars and brandy anyway...
And lastly: no. Ripping LPs is a tough job taking at least the playtime of the album. Cd's can be ripped and the files automatically named in minutes.
Is ripping LPs complex? No. But it takes a good setup and it takes a lot of time. You dont need neither when ripping cd's.
So, anyway: physics, science, support the statement "cds are superior to vinyl". It's measurable. You may not like it, you may miss the authenticity but the dynamic range coming of a cd vs lp setup (of the same cost, mind you) is almost always better.
But hey, I'm no bob Dylan. Who never was and still isn't a fan of anything digital. He swears he misses something. I don't. I look at the science and see better numbers for cds.
And I do believe that analog recordings of anything (sound and vision) can always be superior to digital. Digital always has a max. So many pixels. So many kbit. Analog does not have that problem. The only problem analog has, is the medium on which it is set on. That has limitations. And those limitations always always result in a lower quality then what you can easily achieve with digital. At home. (for a reasonable cost) add a megapixel. Add a mbit. In the end it will and has crossed the anolog boundaries of the used mediums far and wide.
-
Oh boy you made me bust out the desktop and keyboard for this one
Yes, perfectly pressed vinyl can sound fantastic on very hq hifi. But it will crack. It will hiss. It will degrade each time you play the record.... It’s physics. You can’t deny it.
I mentioned this in my parent comment. The medium will respond to the environment that you listen to it in. For many, that connects you to the music. This has long since been acknowledged as a feature of analog media, not a shortcoming. Digital media comes with a sense of imposition, authority, that's off-putting to people who have relationships with their music.
(super) cd player will at the very least sound equally good... It will always sound cleaner.
I'm going to strongly disagree with this and say that you weren't around in the early 90s when all the classics were getting "Digitally Remastered" (butchered) for the first time, when producers were pushing every band as high as they could get away with because "louder is better." It was hell with tracks peaking with distortion from disrespectful engineers. You even mention the Loudness War in your comment. How you can know about that and still conclude that CD is the universally superior format makes no sense to me. That goes back to my above point that music sounds best in the format it was mastered for. That format isn't always CD.
We like stuff that creeks. We, people, like things which seem to “live”. It makes it easier to relate too... the pops and hisses make it sound more authentic, more alive. And this is where science goes of the rails and feelings take over. Its a slippery slope.
I touched touched on this in another reply, I won't repeat myself but I'll say that your idea that science says that there's a best way to listen to music is ridiculous. There never has been a scientific way to measure how good music is and there never will be. You can measure bitrates, fiedlity, all you want, but the best way for art to exist will never have a universal answer. I assume you think oil on canvas painting is a waste of time because MS Paint exists?
He swears he misses something. I don’t. I look at the science and see better numbers for cds.
I'm just going to turn this around on you and leave it at that. You see better numbers, you think it's better. I see a format that builds a relationship between the medium and user in a way that the other does, I think it's better.
-
-
Like, I get your points but
With analog, you can actually make real, physical, adjustments to the audio output. On digital, you're effectively just messing with a bunch of 1s and 0s inside a computer. The whole process is much less authentic.
That's just damn ridiculous. The signal gets converted into audio, otherwise you wouldn't be able to hear it.
-
Well, yes, but I'm referring to the process of converting that audio and the active participation that it takes from the user to get to that point. I'm reminded of this one minute clip of Jeremy Clarkson where he talks about Charles Babbage's 'alluring uncertainty of machinery', which I kind of alluded to in my parent comment. The process of setting up, adjusting, equalizing, etc., an analog setup just feels more real in a way that's hard to explain. Obviously Clarkson is talking about cars in the video, but I think it applies just as well to any sort of machine whose output is essentially "built" by you. Knowing my audience on Lemmy, it's the difference between Windows and Linux. One might perform out-the-box better than the other, but the other is yours in a way that the first one never will be. That's the difference between experiencing music through an analog or digital setup.
-
-
Also, CDs degrade much faster than vinyls (not with use, just by themselves, over time).
Only reasonable way at the moment to archive digital media for a long time is to periodically keep copying it with error checking.
Or just upload it as torrents and hope enough people keep sharing it.
-
Well put
-
-
This is 100% correct, but I don't think most people buy vinyls because of the audio quality. I own plenty of vinyls, but I know for a fact that my CDs and even higher bitrate FLACs stomp all over it for audio quality. Records are just kind of fun and nostalgic.
-
and make you feel like you are more authentic than people who don't own vinyl.
all my record owning-friends love to go on about how they are the only folks who 'really' appreciate music...
-
Nah, that's silly. I just think its a cool thing to collect and listen to. I still do most of my music listening on high end headphones while I work, but records are fun too.
-
They are probably just noobs experiencing the process of listening to an album as if that's a novelty. Most kids these days just listen to streaming selections of various artists and probably mostly hits. Listening to an album seems old-school now, when it used to be the norm when CDs and tapes were the dominant music media format.
-
-
-
Some of my 25+ year old cd’s appear to have started “rotting” inside and playback has been compromised / ruined in many cases.
-
Can I ask how they were stored? I've got 30+ year old CDs that run great. Only ones that I have issues with are those that are scratched.
-
Same here, I have many that are 30+ years old and haven't found any that don't work yet.
-
Of course you can… normally kept on shelves in houses. Occasionally bagged in garages. I did a quick web search for “rotting cd” after I posted. Scanned the “discogs” and Wikipedia boxes. It is a thing. They also mention that the manufacture of the disc might play a part - regardless of how they are looked after. I always believed that (some?) discs were made by sandwiching a vegetable component between the two plastic discs and it is this layer where the zeros and ones get written.
-
-
-
I mean, if we're just talking high bitrate digital audio then yeah, convenience and sound wise digital beats the pants off of analog any day. CDs in particular though? Nah. Gimme that solid state no moving parts convenience I get from packing 50GB of flac, aac or vorbis rips onto my phone and a Chromecast audio to plug into my sound system.
-
Kind of late to the party here, but I'm going to offer my take anyway.
You're right, and you're wrong. CDs are better than vinyl records in terms of sound quality, but CDs are absolutely pointless. Instead of a CD, go to Bandcamp, send some money to your favorite artist, and download the audio files in FLAC format. You own the media (albeit digitally) and it can never be taken away from you as you make sure it's saved to a safe location. You may even be getting better quality audio than you would on a CD.
On the other hand, while I recognize that CDs are better quality, I am an avid collector of vinyl records, at least for a few specific genres. I've spent thousands of dollars on my HiFi setup, built my own tube amplifier, and I can say as a point of pride that there are absolutely no solid-state components in the signal path between the record and my speakers. While owning your own media makes sense in the era of streaming, owning physical media is in no way practical, but it's just fun. When I want to listen to a record, it's an event. I'll remove the record from its sleeve, maybe take it over to my record cleaner if it's a bit dusty or has some static charge. At the same time, I've just switched on my isolation transformer, and the tubes in my preamp and power amp are warming up. Then I'll place the record on the turntable, start the motor, drop the needle, and sit back in my recliner to enjoy the music.
If I'm sitting at my desk working, I'll put on some bluetooth headphones and play some music from my phone. But I'm not listening to music, I'm working and putting on music to pass the time, help get me motivated, whatever. If I want to listen to music solely for the joy of listening to music, I'm going to play a record.
-
You may even be getting better quality audio than you would on a CD.
Not disagreeing, but "may" is the operative word here. But it's always worthwhile to support your favorite artist when and where you can. :)
Here's the rub: It's possible to have way more lossless resolution than 44khz/16bit (CD audio) with FLAC, but that depends on what the artist is going to ship. And don't forget that your playback device also matters - not everything has a DAC that natively supports higher resolution audio, forcing some loss to perform playback.
-
Yep. That's exactly what I was referring to when I said "may." In my experience, most artists release 44k/16 files, but I have some 24-bit versions.
I would venture a guess, though, that given the same audio hardware, no human being can tell the difference. I can hear differences between lossy compression at "moderate" nitrates and lossless audio, but I feel like anything over 256k MP3 is getting into placebo territory.
That doesn't keep me from downloading 24-bit FLAC, though, because I'm s huge data hoarder.
-
-
-
Have you not heard of FLAC? You can get files at higher bit rates and sampling frequencies than CDs. That being said I much prefer vinyl collecting. No it doesn't always sound the best but I feel more in touch with the album. No ability to skip tracks, having to flip it over or change disks is more engaging than just pressing play.
-
You can still choose your tracks on vinyl, it's just more manual.
Look at the grooves, and in-between them there'd be thin almost ungrooved flat lines going into the centre: those are the track separators. Hover the tonearm above those and drop it in to play the track you want.
I used to do this with some records I wouldn't have a big care about with preservation (compilations such as Now That's What I Call Music!), since it would mean those tracks would have more wear than the record as a whole.
-
-
Lol -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
I'm doing my part!
-
You should have put that in bold.
-
I was searching for this comment. Good work soldier.
-
-
I listen to 128.kb mp3's on my phone speaker.
-
I feel sorry for you.
-
-
I can easily get equal or higher quality than CDs online.
I'd rather support artists by buying a nice vinyl so I can appreciate the artwork.
-
Higher quality than CD is a pretty dubious claim. CD quality is so good, the industry had nothing better to throw into the market. As video went from VHS, to DVD, to Blu-ray, CD simply couldn't be topped.
https://www.33rdsquare.com/do-cds-sound-better-than-spotify-yes-cds-still-provide-superior-fidelity/
-
CD is PCM audio of 16-bit samples at 44.1khz
I have many FLACs that came as downloadable versions with vinyl records funnily enough. Some stick to CD quality, many to go to 24-bit audio at 96khz, and I think I've got a couple of 24-bit/192khz albums knocking about.
Higher quality than CD has been around for a while, it's just apart from that brief couple of years with SACD, it never made it onto physical media.
Edit: correct sample rate
-
Qobuz offers higher than CD quality, I think Tidal does too.
The difference isn't as noticeable as video though, so I expect CDs were just good enough and not worth it to upgrade for a niche market.
-
-
-
Did you just wake up from a coma that started in 1985?
CDs are better than vinyl for every reason that MP3s are better than CDs. That’s not news to anyone.
Vinyl is not “better” by any of the metrics you mentioned, but I prefer it because if I feel like buying a physical medium for the purpose of collecting music, I want my music to actually be physical. I don’t want a collection that boils down to 1s and 0s, I want one that more closely replicates the original source of the music.
That’s the reason I like vinyl, even if I do listen to digital music far far more.
-
Nope, mp3 is not "better" than CD since its a lossy format. It uses how we perceive audio so we notice it as little as possible, but you definitely loose details
-
Which is why I buy from sources like BandCamp when possible, that offer lossless download options.
-
Absolutely! With half decent very affordable headphones and my middle aged hearing it is possible to tell MP3 from FLAC pretty accurately.
-
-
CDs more closely represent the original music than vinyl though and are physical media you can collect.
-
mp3s are objectively inferior on all fronts except file size
-
-
Permanently Deleted
-
If it’s a matter of ownership, CDs physically smaller and less fragile, but the digital bits seem to rot over time… does vinyl have a similar problem with longevity if stored properly?
-
-
If I'm going to listen to digital music, it may out may not come from a CD. Vinyl provides a different experience that digital provides. CD's are just a way to distribute digital content.
-
CDs aren't just mp3 files though. While they're digital, the way the waveform is recorded onto the disc is very high quality and is going to be indistinguishable from the Vinyl unless the vinyl is dirty or degraded, in which case the CD sounds better.
If you play a recording of a vinyl and record it onto CD at the same time, then play that recording back, the 2 recordings will sound identical to anybody on the planet.
-
-
Yes, but vinyl is fun.
CDs are boring.
-
Vinyl uses a metal rod to poke the grooves in the disk like a blind caveman.
CD uses friking lasers like it's superman and spins that fucker until it warps.
-
Vinyl has a fun spinny disk, and a cool needle you can tinker with, a CD player has a cradle you put the CD in, it goes into the machine, and music comes out.
If you can see the CD, you just see a blur.
Don't get me wrong, CDs are clearly the superior format for audio quallity and convenience.
But vinyl is just more fun (:
-
-
I find CDs fun, and vinyl overpriced. I can afford to have a pretty sizable CDA collection. I can't afford shit when it come to vinyl, the prices are nuts.
-
You are perfectly allowed to enjoy CDs, and if I wanted to rip the music, I would get them as well, I just find LPs more fun.
-
-
-
When I'm buying vinyl, I'm not buying it to listen to - I'm buying it cos I want to support the band or want a souvenir from a concert. I own a few dozen albums, none of which have been played more than a handful of times; if I want to listen to one of them I'll stream it, either from a paid service or off my own machine using versions ripped from elsewhere
-
The fact that CD sales are behind vinyl is a sign that the world has gone mad.
I mean... CD sales are only behind vinyl because vinyl has become collectible, while CDs offer no practical advantage over stored files on a hard drive or high-quality streaming.
And before you say, "but what about compression?", the fact is that even lossy compression is good enough that most audiophiles can't tell the difference. Audiophile publications started doing blind comparisons back in the 90s, and it quickly became clear that somewhere around 192kbps MP3 the ability of humans to statistically discern the compressed vs. uncompressed versions started to disappear.
-
Permanently Deleted
-
-
I'd say nostalgia is a big factor in what keeps technically inferior sound quality in the market
-
Repressing are the top sellers ... yeah
-
-
I think most vinyl purchasers nowadays buy it for the novelty and as collectibles rather than quality. The ones who would die on a hill arguing that vinyl is superior quality are a minority. As for the second point, a lot of people can’t afford high quality audio gear, and some are not tech literate enough to know that Beats by Dre are cheap junk on the inside.
However, you also have to remember that music nowadays is mixed with the lowest common denominator in mind, which is cheap audio gear. Competent sound engineers know to make sure to test that their mixes also sound good on mid-low tier audio gear, which is the vast majority in the market. Unless you’re Christopher Nolan who insists mixing his movies for high tier cinema equipment only when most people will watch them on a tv and maybe with a soundbar, so it sounds terrible.
-
Permanently Deleted
-
-
People who listen to vinyl enjoy the sounds of distortion and static. It's a much "warmer" sound, they claim. They are buffoons. Lossless audio files are the best way to ensure a quality, clean audio source.
-
Amen
-
How about using both? I have a vinyl collection AND a FLAC one I play on my iPod classic. I still like buying and playing vinyl.
-
-
Yes and you can get all your calories and nutrients from a processed paste, that's much more dense than regular food so you don't need to eat as much and can fit into a small tube so is much more convenient than regular food.
The fact people prefer normal food to Hugh density nutrition paste is proof the world has gone mad.
-
I don't think that's a good example.
The answer is simple: there is no "correct" way to enjoy art. Anyone saying vinyl is higher quality than digital is deluding themselves, but that doesn't make vinyl a worse way to listen to music.
It's more convenient to beat a video game on easy, and yet, many people find greater satisfaction in playing harder difficulties. It depends on how you would rather spend your time.
-
-
Vinyl has better artwork.
Vinyl requires more effort to listen too, forcing the listener to be a part of the listening experience.
-
In addition to the arguments mentioned before and yours:
CD's wear out just by existing
Vinyl looks better in every way
BUT
CD's have a usable index for those times that you are not listening to a whole album
CD's are so much lighter
If you rip the CD's to FLAC's the weight reduction is increased multifold
CD's take up way less space
ALSO
I don't like the smell of either
I listened tape all the way up to my discman D201
-
Track placement matters more with vinyl, too (or tapes for that matter).
The song "Back in Black" is in the middle of album of the same name --- but it's the first track of the second side on vinyl. Like you said, it's a part of the listening experience.
-
-
Just wanna say Beats are the definition of half-decent. They're not awful (I got given some) but not amazing either, they just cost a lot more than something of that quality should
-
I don't listen to vinyl, but I have a few of them because I like the larger album art and liner notes. My most prized one is a copy of The Kinks "Lola Versus Powerman and the Moneygoround" which includes records of when it was played on the radio.
-
Post your system or stfu.
-
My hifi is: Audiolab 6000A integrated amp Second hand NAD C541i CD player Wharfedale Pacific Evo 40 floor standers I've had 20 years
Connected to my PC I have a studio monitor setup, but that's mostly as I run my guitar though it. Prior to that I had a second hand NAD C320 amp and Wharfedale 9.1 bookshelf speakers. All bought for about £165 and sounded fantastic.
-
Native headphone jack on laptop. The power supply noise is just awful for everything, except it's the native and approximate era-appropriate sound for late 1990's low bitrate MP3 files.
-
-
You're probably right, I'm not an audiophile.
-
Nor am I.
-
-
Apologies in advance for a long, perhaps boring, old man story. Feel free to skip it if you’d like.
Somehow, I mostly bypassed the vinyl era—not on purpose, just by how timing worked out. My parents and older siblings had vinyl records, which I found fascinating and played whenever I could. We also had a few 8-track tapes, but like many, we quickly realized they were not great and stopped using them.
When I was old enough to buy my own music with my fast-food job earnings, cassette tapes were the go-to choice. I wanted to listen to music on my Sony Walkman or the cassette player in my hand-me-down car, so cassettes made the most sense. My friends and I would drive around, wasting gas but having a blast singing along to our favorite tunes and bonding over our shared love of music.
I ended up with about 25 or 30 cassette tapes. When CDs came out, they were a game-changer. They were superior in almost every way, so I replaced most of my tapes with CDs and expanded my collection to about 300 at its peak. I enjoyed my CDs for years, often playing them when we had friends over for dinner and drinks.
Then came the mp3 revolution. I painstakingly ripped my entire CD collection to mp3 format, which took ages, but I kept the CDs for a while, much to my wife’s annoyance, before donating them to a local charity.
These days, I sometimes find music on YouTube, but I’ve never let go of my personal mp3 library. I have multiple copies on SSDs for safety and occasionally add new tracks, though my taste in music is mostly set. I’m not very interested in new releases, not because they’re bad, but they’re just not to my taste. I might make an exception for a movie or game soundtrack or if a younger friend recommends something.
When vinyl made its big comeback, it seemed bizarre to me. I couldn’t understand the appeal of going backward. But as it persisted, I began to get it. With so much content digital and cloud-stored, it can feel ephemeral. Streaming services can disappear or change, leaving you with nothing. Owning a physical object with your favorite music makes sense; it’s something tangible, something truly yours. Though I stick with my mp3s, I understand the allure of vinyl now.
There’s also something to be said about the quirks and flaws of older technology. The grain of film, the pops of a record player, or the imperfections of an analog guitar amp become endearing over time. When a perfect digital replacement comes along, it can feel “cold” to those accustomed to the imperfections. There's an entire industry dedicated to reintroducing those analog quirks into the digital realm, recreating that familiar, comforting imperfection.
-
I kept the CDs for a while, much to my wife’s annoyance, before donating them to a local charity
I took them out of the jewel cases and put them into a binder, 4 CDs per page. It hasn't exactly been a burden to carry it around for the last 20 years.
I couldn't tell you how old my oldest MP3s are, except to say that a significant portion of my music library consists of MP3s I made myself with the Fraunhofer DOS command line encoder, and the Cassady & Green SoundJam software for MacOS. Of course, SoundJam is the software that Apple purchased and re-badged it "iTunes".
-
-
I agree that cds are better. Mostly because they didn't degrade or make pop or crack noises. Sort of sucks that we didn't have physical flat storage for FLAC. Those are the real deal. But then it depends on the studio mix and recording.
-
Permanently Deleted
-
Strong magnet?
Most CDs use aluminum or an aluminum alloy as the reflective layer. A polycarbonate layer holds the data. I suppose it's possible that a strong enough magnet could pull up the metal reflective layer off the disc if it was indeed a ferrous metal, but personally I have never experienced a magnet ruining a CD.
-
-
-
I have a portable record player that I Bluetooth stream to my wireless earbuds and I think you’re wrong.
I consider myself an audiophile.
-
I have a high-end turntable and playback system (very nice speakers, as well as planar magnetic headphones), and I listen to my vinyl both directly and vinyl-ripped-to-digital (i.e. a CD). I do like what vinyl does to the sound, often combined with the better mastering that was done back in the day, as compared to the brick-wall mastering most albums are put through nowadays.
I have done a few experiments in the past where I play vinyl "live" and switch (a/b/x) to a a vinyl->CD rip, and I cannot tell the difference. Nor can my friends.
I consider myself an audiophile.
-
-
Sure, but its also easier to push 320kbps mp3s from my tablet via Bluetooth to my Sony soundboard than it is to try and figure out wiring my living room for 7.x dolbydhsdtsxxx audio.
If you feel like coming over and helping with that, I'm open on Thursdays.
-
I got you first step don't read any instruction and second step say why isn't this working it should be working...
-
Dad?
-
-
I just have a stereo setup. Anything more us home theater imho
-
-
I do agree with the sound quality of a CD vs vinyl. Any flaw in the vinyl (including just being a bit dusty) makes popping, hissing or other unwanted noise. CDs aren't as easily damaged and don't introduce unwanted noise unless you hella scratched that shit or had something go wrong with burning it so the data itself was fucked up.
But most musicians putting out vinyl these days are doing so without a middle-man, so you buy the vinyl to support the artist and not some mega corporate label or venue. I don't even have a turn table; I just display the records.
The sales thing tho... That's just because of paragraph 2 and the fact that CD players aren't the norm; digital media and streaming are. Compare vinyl sales to digital sales and not CD sales. Shit, man, I don't even know where you would find CDs for sale these days outside of a big music warehouse that sells used stuff. My local Target doesn't even carry those lame background flute CDs anymore.
-
Permanently Deleted
-
-
MP3 is lossy, WAV is not. And that "warmth" you get with vinyl is just because analog sounds fuzzy.
-
In terms OF bad equipment you're right. however, good audio equipment is expensive and the Vast majority of people don't want to spend that much just on some headphones to hear something they aren't really paying attention to.
-
But people pay a fortune on branded headphones that sound bad. Put the same or less money in to good sounding gear.
-
Audio equipment is a little daunting for the lay person, especially with all the goofy marketing. You can find gold plated wiring that's actually carbon nano tube NASA^TM space age technology, but it perceptively doesn't do jack. Also, when I was younger I didn't do so well taking care of my hearing so a good sounding gear isn't always "worth" it for me.
Edit: I don't regret the raving, but take care of your ears people.
-
People are not very clever nor perceptive and easily swayed by marketing trickery.
More news at 11
-
That may be true(I don't know the costs and quality for music equipment).
-
-
-
There's also funfactor in having physical media and limited choice. A phone with an entire collection on it is just. . plain. standard. even boring. And the handicapped phone UI ruins the rest of the smartphone experience if you wanna do other things with the phone other than listen to music.
Modern CD players also read newer formats, unlike the old-stock CD players off of ebay from 30+ years ago that only read raw CDA tracks
-
For a second I thought I was back on reddit.
-
Also, porque no los dos? I buy whatever I find in a store or online that grabs me.
-
-
Man, you've got multiple opinions in here that are popular and unpopular in different contexts. In an audiophile community, that opening would be very unpopular
But you also get steaming involved, which is digital rather than CDs in a direct sense.
But the whole "earbud" bit is just silly because the term is often used for IEMs, which can produce amazing sound, even compared to cans or great speakers. Like, my gear is all budget-ish, and my tin t2s hold up well against my beyerdynamics and sennheisers (again, entry tier gear across the board). I've even got those cheap Sony buds that can compare decently to much better IEMs (they don't make them any more, but they came with some of the Sony phones years ago).
So it's hard to tell exactly what you mean by "earbuds" making poor quality audio. It's all about how well made they are imo.
So, I didn't vote on the post, but I feel it is overall a fairly popular opinion outside of audiophile circles, which is where I think you're coming from.
I happen to agree with you on average though. I have a decent vinyl collection thanks to my parents giving theirs to me to add to my own. Sound wise, there's less clarity, more noise, and every play worsens that. They do last longer than CDs though. Some of mine are from the fifties and earlier, but I've had CDs from the nineties end up unplayable just from age. Even the oldest, most played record I have can still play.
I'm a digital guy for listening now though. Good lossless formats are essentially immortal, sound great, and are much easier to store. Rip CDs, enjoy forever :)
-
Add to that:
Solid State Class AB and modern Class D amplifiers are far superior to any Tube amplifier. At this point, I would go as far that higher end Class D amplifiers are better than most Class AB at this point. Hypex and IcePower have made great strides in the sound quality of their amps, which are extremely efficient as well.
You want a lot of 2nd order harmonics in your sound! Great, get it through a DSP that will duplicate it through a modern amplifier and stop heating your room up using tubes.
-
I dont think most people like vinyl today because of sound quality. They just like the ritual of playing it and things like big cover art. If you want convenience then just listen to flac files.
-
The only things I don't like about vinyl are the waste and off gassing.
-
The Library of Congress prefers vinyl because CD’s don’t last as long (with proper care).
At best a CD will remain uncorrupted for 20-30 years. In a climate controlled space-station like environment, maybe 100 years, but unlikely. Then it’s gone.
-
I have many 30 year old CDs. They’re fine. They’ve just been kept in a typical home storage environment. I just ripped a Toad the Wet Sprocket CD I bought in 93.
-
You claim induced me to do a little tidying on my CD collection. I just copied the oldest data CD that I own: the Hugo & Nebula Anthology 1993. It copied & verified no problem.
Unfortunately, that's probably the oldest proper test I can do. Although I was using CD-ROMs as early as 1986, e.g. in libraries, I didn't own any music or data CDs until about 1990. I could re-rip some of those old music CDs, I suppose, but I'm not sure it would tell us much as I'm not sure how to do a bit-for-bit comparison and I certainly don't want to listen to the files.
-
Same. I recently fucked up a server migration and lost my entire digital library, so I'm going through my CD collection and re-ripping them. Haven't had a single problem, and many are over 20 years old.
-
-
Right...I also have feelings on making music absurdly perfect when recording....I feel it becomes too sterile.
-
CDs are technically better for perfect reproduction. I still prefer vinyl for most pre-80s material because of the loudness war. Mastering of releases has warped the discussion entirely
-
Are you also sad when people buy $10 bottles of wine? Most people can’t hear the difference and many are getting other sensual benefits from listening to vinyl. Most people can’t afford an audiophile setup either. Just let people enjoy things.
-
Tbf I've never drank one of those boxes of wine when things are going well for me
-
I only drink boxes of wine when I want the fancy air pillow inside
-
-
-
Considering that vinyl is shaping up to be the final physical media that ANY art is distributed on on a mass scale, why the fuck are we arguing to dissuade people from it?
CDs are so fucking sterile, when I play one I feel like I should be wearing a lab coat and latex gloves. The machine slides the disc in gracefully, as if it were my butler. The mechanical whine of plastic being spun by a precision servo while a literal laser beam seeks for the opening bits requires any robot who views a video of it in Louisiana to submit ID to prove it’s age.
Yeah of course they sound better but the experience is not the same.
-
The myth of the superiority of vinyl, and the idea that vinyl is inherently Authentic in a way that digital formats aren’t is one of the most successful scams in corporate history. In one fell swoop, the recording industry persuaded music fans that they need to pay extra for a format that has measurably inferior fidelity, that cannot be copied (well, you can digitise it to a WAV, but then you get a murky, crackly sounding WAV; even if the sound coming out of the speakers is identical to how it would be from the record, the fact that you’re not playing a vinyl record diminishes it), and that wears out slightly each time you play it. Meanwhile, a lot of records never get released on CD, only vinyl and streaming, closing the digital ripping loophole. Well played, RIAA/IFPI.
-
The fact that you somehow don't know or pretend to not know the reasons people like vinyl makes this an easy downvote
-
The Bowers & Wilkins PI7 in my ears says you're wrong.
-
Hello there, most people
-
My library of tracks I personally encoded from lossless to v0 says you're most people.
-
-
-
CDs are better than vinyl in the same exact way reddit is better than lemmy: cheap, easier to manage, mainstream content. If you look for a sound that's not strictly higher quality but that gives you a more authentic vibe, vinyl is the way
-
"Authentic vibe" is a coping mechanism to justify spending more for less.
-
Well maybe, I think it might be an acquired taste: all the little imperfections derived by the industrial technique in which a vinyl is made make it sound a little weirder but that's the main reason you start to like it. Imperfection is something that might grow on you if yoh give it a chance
-
-