Cd wees wees over vinyl ?

[Mikeandvan]

Hi, its mikeandvan, not much work these days, so just mike I guess. But been having loads of time to listen to music. So, I've been quite busy on the cart front lately, trying AT 95 en and the VM 540ML (inc. Rigsby version, Miss Jones, Miss Jones), was using the 540ml until it really started to grate, picks up loads of surface noise, quite sharp, became unlistenable, so got a new stylus for the 95 EN and that's easier on the ear. Then a few days ago I played the 70s reissue of Mingus' 'Black saint and dinner lady', on Impulse, and I was dissatisfied with the sound, especially towards the end of the record, I believe there's a name for this, 'end of side distortion'? I mean that in itself is enough to make you wanna ditch the vinyl! So I thought, get this LP on CD, on to Ebay, CD now here, in a nice GF cardboard sleeve, rather than one of the regular crappy CD cases, who's hinges so often break. And lo and behold its ****ing amazing!! So, kudos to Macca, CD does indeed beat vinyl hands down, no contest, wees wees all over it like a chav beating the crap out of someone and then displaying his dominance. But but, I can't get rid of all my vinyl, I'm so attached to it, the spinning of the record, the covers, the sheer build quality of those 1210s!!

Well, this is outstanding, listening now, and the depth of sound is outrageously good, I fear now listening to vinyl is just like why?

So off to Ebay I guess now, shall i track down absolutely every vinyl I own on CD? Do they all sound better on CD?

[Barry]

Oh - you have opened up a whole can of worms there Mike.

I started with vinyl, so in the beginning there was nothing to compare it with (apart from prerecorded tapes, which were inconvenient to use). Then along came CD (we will ignore prerecorded music cassettes, which I only used for in-flight entertainment), and initially I thought them poor sounding.

But with improved CD players (for me it was the Philips CD104B) the sound became acceptable and I started to buy CD.

CDs are far more convenient to use; and whilst the marketing slogan of "perfect sound forever" is an exaggeration, I now only buy CDs. When stored the spines are easier to read than are those of vinyl LPs.

Vinyl LPs on the other hand are a crude storage medium. They are fragile, the signal needs to be modified so as to be able to be stored, and even then the distortion can be several percent. However being almost wholly second order it is euphonic and acceptable. Vinyl is fragile, easily damaged, have to handled with care and cleaned and 'fussed' with when played. The only advantage for me is the size of the sleeve, which allows you to admire the cover artwork and easily read the sleeve notes; unlike the miserable little booklets that come with a CD.

At the moment my music inventory stands at 2,000 CDs and about the same number of LPs.

Anyway that is my take on the topic. No doubt others will post with equally strong, yet divergent opinions.

[Macca]

Hi, its mikeandvan, not much work these days, so just mike I guess. But been having loads of time to listen to music. So, I've been quite busy on the cart front lately, trying AT 95 en and the VM 540ML (inc. Rigsby version, Miss Jones, Miss Jones), was using the 540ml until it really started to grate, picks up loads of surface noise, quite sharp, became unlistenable, so got a new stylus for the 95 EN and that's easier on the ear. Then a few days ago I played the 70s reissue of Mingus' 'Black saint and dinner lady', on Impulse, and I was dissatisfied with the sound, especially towards the end of the record, I believe there's a name for this, 'end of side distortion'? I mean that in itself is enough to make you wanna ditch the vinyl! So I thought, get this LP on CD, on to Ebay, CD now here, in a nice GF cardboard sleeve, rather than one of the regular crappy CD cases, who's hinges so often break. And lo and behold its ****ing amazing!! So, kudos to Macca, CD does indeed beat vinyl hands down, no contest, wees wees all over it like a chav beating the crap out of someone and then displaying his dominance. But but, I can't get rid of all my vinyl, I'm so attached to it, the spinning of the record, the covers, the sheer build quality of those 1210s!!

Well, this is outstanding, listening now, and the depth of sound is outrageously good, I fear now listening to vinyl is just like why?

So off to Ebay I guess now, shall i track down absolutely every vinyl I own on CD? Do they all sound better on CD?

Just take care as to what mastering you are buying - remasters tend to be more compressed than the original release. Not really a problem with Jazz since it mostly escaped the 'loudness wars'. But rock and pop check out the DR Database first https://dr.loudness-war.info/

Ignore the ratings for vinyl, the algorithm used gives artificially high DR for vinyl.

I've duplicated about 200 of my vinyl albums on CD. Do they all sound better? No, but I can think of only two where I'm not convinced the CD 'sounds better.'

Important to get the gain-staging of your system right, if it's wrong then CD will either sound thin and flat, or thick, stodgy, undynamic and maybe a bit harsh.

vinyl can sound very good with a good pressing, properly clean. But CD is just more consistent. I can play a record and it sounds great, then the next one up is lousy. End of side distortion is annoying I agree, and that constant background roar of stylus in contact with disc does obscure the acoustic information around instruments and vocals to an extent, if not entirely.

I find CD gives a consistently good experience every time, without either of those issues.

[Pigmy Pony]

I could very well be corrected here, but my understanding of 'end of side distortion' is to do with the arc that the cartridge follows when on a pivoted arm, whereby the stylus can at some point be at a less than ideal angle to the groove. Apparently this effect is lessened when using a 12" arm, but I recently read somewhere that other undesirable things can happen with those arms. I imagine linear trackers overcome the issues.

Another concern is the cost of cartridges/styli. My current cartridge set me back about £300 or so, and that's as much as I'm prepared to spend. The thought that using a £1000 cart might mean that playing records could cost about 50p per side is a worry I don't want to take on.

Is vinyl worth all the faff? Probably not. But it's what I grew up with, and I won't be abandoning the format completely. Even though most of my music purchases these days is CD.

I really can't argue with Macca's logic - he might have spent big on his CD transport, but it's not much more than a couple of decent MC carts.

[Mikeandvan]

Just take care as to what mastering you are buying - remasters tend to be more compressed than the original release. Not really a problem with Jazz since it mostly escaped the 'loudness wars'. But rock and pop check out the DR Database first https://dr.loudness-war.info/

Ignore the ratings for vinyl, the algorithm used gives artificially high DR for vinyl.

I've duplicated about 200 of my vinyl albums on CD. Do they all sound better? No, but I can think of only two where I'm not convinced the CD 'sounds better.'

Important to get the gain-staging of your system right, if it's wrong then CD will either sound thin and flat, or thick, stodgy, undynamic and maybe a bit harsh.

vinyl can sound very good with a good pressing, properly clean. But CD is just more consistent. I can play a record and it sounds great, then the next one up is lousy. End of side distortion is annoying I agree, and that constant background roar of stylus in contact with disc does obscure the acoustic information around instruments and vocals to an extent, if not entirely.

I find CD gives a consistently good experience every time, without either of those issues.

What on earth is gain staging and how can I get it right? I just have an integrated amp and a cd player, I connect them together, what else can I do?

[Mikeandvan]

I could very well be corrected here, but my understanding of 'end of side distortion' is to do with the arc that the cartridge follows when on a pivoted arm, whereby the stylus can at some point be at a less than ideal angle to the groove. Apparently this effect is lessened when using a 12" arm, but I recently read somewhere that other undesirable things can happen with those arms. I imagine linear trackers overcome the issues.

Another concern is the cost of cartridges/styli. My current cartridge set me back about £300 or so, and that's as much as I'm prepared to spend. The thought that using a £1000 cart might mean that playing records could cost about 50p per side is a worry I don't want to take on.

Is vinyl worth all the faff? Probably not. But it's what I grew up with, and I won't be abandoning the format completely. Even though most of my music purchases these days is CD.

I really can't argue with Macca's logic - he might have spent big on his CD transport, but it's not much more than a couple of decent MC carts.

I agree cds are easier to find! But I know my vinyl collection pretty well, as it only numbers around 200 LPs! Enough for me actually, many of them are new additions, I went through a huge recycling of my collection last year, lucky I beat the HMRC Ebay thingy or they would have thought I was a dealer!!

[Barry]

It is ensuring the output from your CD player does not overload the input of the preamp; requiring you to have the volume control set very low, and hence subject to poor signal to noise ratio in your amplifier.

[Mikeandvan]

I could very well be corrected here, but my understanding of 'end of side distortion' is to do with the arc that the cartridge follows when on a pivoted arm, whereby the stylus can at some point be at a less than ideal angle to the groove. Apparently this effect is lessened when using a 12" arm, but I recently read somewhere that other undesirable things can happen with those arms. I imagine linear trackers overcome the issues.

Another concern is the cost of cartridges/styli. My current cartridge set me back about £300 or so, and that's as much as I'm prepared to spend. The thought that using a £1000 cart might mean that playing records could cost about 50p per side is a worry I don't want to take on.

Is vinyl worth all the faff? Probably not. But it's what I grew up with, and I won't be abandoning the format completely. Even though most of my music purchases these days is CD.

I really can't argue with Macca's logic - he might have spent big on his CD transport, but it's not much more than a couple of decent MC carts.

My thinking exactly, why spend ££ss on a disposable cart, something you can destroy in an instant if you've just bought a new AT 440ml for £450, had hay fever, and f***ed it in a hazy fit of rage!! Better off spending big on a CD player, I must admit this Meridian G08 I have is rather tasty, and only £650 used, it hasn't let me down yet, it is a bit fussy on what you put inside it though! So I guess I'm comparing that with a 1210GR with a standard cart - the AT 95EN (actually a decent cart), which isn't that cheap when you consider its apparently only good for 300 hours, £85 for a replacement stylus, so about £250 compared to a standard 1000 hour stylus.

[Mikeandvan]

The improvement in sound I heard today of the cd over the vinyl version of 'black saint dinner lady' was gob smacking, and I'm thinking, life's short, why waste it listening to inferior versions of music you love.

[narabdela]

...life's short, why waste it listening to inferior versions of music you love.

Some people do, and spend a fortune doing it. There's nowt so queer as hi-fi folk. :scratch:

[Mikeandvan]

CD continues to excel, listening now to Depeche Mode, Black celebration, stunning.

[Enossification]

And of course there is vinyl's serious low frequency limitations too. As for me, I'll continue to use both because they are just so different.

[Ubi]

Hi, its mikeandvan, not much work these days, so just mike I guess. But been having loads of time to listen to music. So, I've been quite busy on the cart front lately, trying AT 95 en and the VM 540ML (inc. Rigsby version, Miss Jones, Miss Jones), was using the 540ml until it really started to grate, picks up loads of surface noise, quite sharp, became unlistenable, so got a new stylus for the 95 EN and that's easier on the ear. Then a few days ago I played the 70s reissue of Mingus' 'Black saint and dinner lady', on Impulse, and I was dissatisfied with the sound, especially towards the end of the record, I believe there's a name for this, 'end of side distortion'? I mean that in itself is enough to make you wanna ditch the vinyl! So I thought, get this LP on CD, on to Ebay, CD now here, in a nice GF cardboard sleeve, rather than one of the regular crappy CD cases, who's hinges so often break. And lo and behold its ****ing amazing!! So, kudos to Macca, CD does indeed beat vinyl hands down, no contest, wees wees all over it like a chav beating the crap out of someone and then displaying his dominance. But but, I can't get rid of all my vinyl, I'm so attached to it, the spinning of the record, the covers, the sheer build quality of those 1210s!!

Well, this is outstanding, listening now, and the depth of sound is outrageously good, I fear now listening to vinyl is just like why?

So off to Ebay I guess now, shall i track down absolutely every vinyl I own on CD? Do they all sound better on CD?

You have put a AT95 (various bodies) and a AT540 on a turntable and come to the conclusion that vinyl is inferior to CD?

May be a little premature to conclude this, especially in terms of vinyl replay being judged on rather lowly carts such as those. It may be more pertinent to maybe suggest that cd is better than your current vinyl replay system?

Your end of record distortion is due to alignment. All vinyl replay has inner or outer groove distortion. It cannot be avoided, but if it's audible, your setup is wrong. It may be worth also making sure your setup is correct before heading off to eBay for CDs.

[Macca]

All alignments are a compromise. I'm always amazed linear tracking tonearms are not more popular since they at least solve one problem. But then good ones are expensive and difficult to implement.

Still it does puzzle me that even decks costing £100K plus don't use them.

Also notice many vinyl enthusiasts tend to concentrate on more nebulous things like 'Musicality' and are not at all bothered by the noise, distortion and variable pitch. Which is fine, but some of us are bothered, and can't 'unhear' those issues.

Although I grant that on a good set up they're not bad enough to spoil the enjoyment of good music, the question still remains why do it when the alternative is better and a lot cheaper and easier?

[Lawrence001]

I've always assumed that all the mechanism required to make a linear tracking arm work makes it sound worse than a standard arm of the same cost. Like a mechanical auto return arm but much worse.

There is that very fancy one doing the rounds at high end shows but it is very expensive.

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

[Macca]

I've always assumed that all the mechanism required to make a linear tracking arm work makes it sound worse than a standard arm of the same cost. Like a mechanical auto return arm but much worse.

There is that very fancy one doing the rounds at high end shows but it is very expensive.

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

At the same cost that's probably true.

[AJSki2fly]

The improvement in sound I heard today of the cd over the vinyl version of 'black saint dinner lady' was gob smacking, and I'm thinking, life's short, why waste it listening to inferior versions of music you love.

This is a can-of-worms topic as stated in many other threads before.

CD can be better that Vinyl and Vinyl can be better than CD, Streaming can be better still and also worse that both, digital files on are local server down loaded using a good/clean SP/Internet connection can be better than all.

BUT!!!!

1. There are many, ,any, many variables? (the following assumes the same Pre-Amp, Power Amp cables and speaker combination used through out)

2. Is the CD replay systems as good as the vinyl(turntable.arm, cartridge and phono stage combo) and visa versa?

3. Assuming the 2 above is reasonable/good parity, then is the source, CD and Vinyl from the same original master recordings? If not forget the comparison.

4. If CD and Vinyl are from the same original master recordings, then has each media been mixed in the same way, ignoring final compression for CD or Vinyl in producing the media. If either has been change again forget making comparisons.

5. Taking a reasonably simplistic view then 1-4 are satisfied positively then it is fair to consider comparing the sound from CD to Vinyl. BUT they may intrinsically actually sound different after all that because that each medium uses different compression techniques and rendering to get back to the analogue output through amp and speaker.

The same issues apply when considering other media for comparison, streaming(file type and resolutions), Tapes,reel to reel, Cassette(playback speeds, SQ ie. Dolby dB filtering, tape band-width ), Downloaded files(files types and resolutions)


So the answer is not a straight forward one, I have learn that some CDs do sound as good or better the vinyl and visa-versa, but it can be a complete lottery, and near impossible to know if you have the definitive version in terms of SQ.

Oooh! I forgot another important part of the equation, Vinyl SQ can vary greatly between pressing runs (even where the same master has been used), get a record pressed near the start of a 10K run and if it is pressed properly there is a good chance it will be good, get one near the end then the edge of the SQ may be lost due to stamper wear. Another aspect is Vinyl manufacturers are known for changing Vinyl chemical composition of the years, as supplied from vinyl pellet manufacturers, so release 1 of a pressing may be excellent in terms of recording, and vinyl composition, but a later release may have still the same SQ in recording bu inferior vinyl composition affecting SQ, or maybe better giving a better overall SQ than release1. In my experience if you find a record you love to be noisy or sound compressed(assuming others played sound great in your system) or just plain odd then research a bit and find a recommended release that is NM and see if it is better, I have done this severel times and always been please. A good example of this was Genesis - 'and Then There Were Three", the first copy I had was just awful, noisy from the start, and the inner tracks were nearly unplayable to due to mid and upper distortion. This is record with about 55 minutes squeezed onto it. After some research I discovered in the UK and US that there were extensive release runs with many copy done in each, but in Canada only a couple of runs at a good pressing plant each with less than 10K records, I order one from CA and it proved to be excellent throughout.

[Macca]

Good post.

Excessive limiting is really the enemy of digital but it is an artistic choice.

Happily for my music tastes I rarely buy anything contemporary - still too much music from the 70s through to the 90s to get to know - and so I seek out the original release CDs from the 1980s (sometimes to replace the vinyl record I bought at the time. Sometimes because it's one I never got round to then).

It's rare these are not superior in terms of dynamic range to every other mastering or format as many are just a flat transfer from a master (with the warning in the booklet that you might hear the tape hiss!)

Most recently 'Back In Black' - no bother at all to get a decent example of the original CD - and it cost less than a fiver.

[Mikeandvan]

You have put a AT95 (various bodies) and a AT540 on a turntable and come to the conclusion that vinyl is inferior to CD?

May be a little premature to conclude this, especially in terms of vinyl replay being judged on rather lowly carts such as those. It may be more pertinent to maybe suggest that cd is better than your current vinyl replay system?

Your end of record distortion is due to alignment. All vinyl replay has inner or outer groove distortion. It cannot be avoided, but if it's audible, your setup is wrong. It may be worth also making sure your setup is correct before heading off to eBay for CDs.

The end of side distortion is only present with certain discs, some of my vinyl sounds fantastic, even with these so called budget carts (I wonder what makes a £1000 cart cost more to produce than a £100 cart?). My set up is a straight up 1210GR, so I don't see where along the signal path the set up can be wrong, though I'd be happy to know where if so. I use a Slee phono stage into the Suggie. In the end faffing about with a so called high end TT and a £1000 cart that could easily break (just like I did once in a hayfever induced accident on a £440 AT cart), is a luxury only a few can afford, seems rather pointless when you can bang an album in a high end CD player, which costs the same as a high end cart, yet isn't a 'consumable'. I still love playing vinyl, and have more of it than CD, and I like banging on a record, and not worrying about being too careful with the stylus (I don't mean reckless of course), but you know, can't be bothered with arm cueing and all that.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625055063_6fd6ff43c3_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625182369_e6f8b2b025_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625194414_49e264a971_z.jpg

[Macca]

Cool deck. Although I see your point about not wanting to worry about an expensive needle I'd still want something better than an AT95 on that thing. They're okay, but I think they're a bit 'scratchy'.

What about a Nagaoka MP100? Or have you been down that road already?

[Barry]

I said this would open up a can of worms and it has.

To do an A/B comparison between vinyl and CD is virtually impossible for the reasons Adrian has mentioned. The number of variables that arise with the pressing of Vinyl are many: for example how many copies are pressed from a stamper; early pressings will be better than later pressings. Then there is the quality of the vinyl itself. Some of you may remember the oil crisis of the late '60s when LPs used less vinyl than before and the records were much thinner. PVC was sometimes recycled, ether from the trimmings after pressing, or even from scrapped LPs that had been chipped up. The trouble is that PVC is a thermosetting plastic; once set it will not soften and flow on reheating. This means that if used PVC scrap is added to new, the overall mix is inferior to that of virgin vinyl.
There are other factors involved: the pressure, temperature and time in the mould are all important. Get them wrong and a perfectly good looking sample from the press may have internal stresses which result in the record warping in time; something with which very little can be done afterwards.

So that is the manufacturing side of things. Now there is the playback. The idea of dragging a tiny piece of diamond through a wiggly goove of the record is on the face of it absurd - but it works sufficiently well to be practicable. How this moving diamond is supported and allowed to track the record is the next problem. The great majority of tonearms (a misnomer from the days of acoustic gramophones, where the arm was the first part of a loudspeaker horn) are pivoted. It is impossible for a pivoted arm to exactly match the motion of the lacquer cutter: the arm moves in an arc, the cutter radially. Fortunately the acoustic distortion from these geometrical errors are second harmonic, so benign and euphonic. Even radial tracking arms are not without their problems - one of which is the requirement to use as short an arm as possible ( usually at least 6"), so as to prevent any yawing motion as the arm moves. A short arm means any warp wow is exacerbated.
Finally there is the cartridge. Regardless of the type of electro-mechanical generator used, the shape of the stylus and material used for the cantilever are important. The stylus profile has to approximate the triangular cross section of the cutter and the cantilever has to be as stiff and rigid as possible. The grinding and polishing of ever exotic stylus profiles and the machining of exotic materials (boron, and even sapphire or diamond) for the cantilever is difficult and hence expensive. Again the unwanted deviation from linearity are predominantly second harmonic (several percent in magnitude), so are again audibly benign and euphonic.

After all that it is remarkable that vinyl replay sounds as good as it does. IMO it can sound good, very good, but again IMO it cannot better CD for absolute fidelity. Furthermore good vinyl playback requires relatively expensive equipment, the records are fragile and need to be handled carefully and kept clean, whereas CD replay can use a relatively cheap transport, any expense occurs with the sophistication of the DAC.

[Mikeandvan]

Thanks Barry, but my understanding of hifi only goes so far as the What Hifi star system.

[Lawrence001]

Thanks Barry, but my understanding of hifi only goes so far as the What Hifi star system.You'll be destined to a lifetime of disappointment then [emoji23]

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

[Pigmy Pony]

Thanks Barry, but my understanding of hifi only goes so far as the What Hifi star system.

Star systems don't set the bar very high - I got a star at primary school for learning to tell the time :)

[ianlenco]

I like both depending on my mood/situation. Actually I don't use CD's at all as they've all been ripped and accessed from my streamer along with Qobuz. Great for when I'm multitasking like watching cricket on the TV and listening to music :lol: but for relaxation I do like to settle down to a bit of vinyl which sounds just as good and sometimes better than digital sources.

[The Black Adder]

I use both formats as and when I feel like it. CD's are great, but some of the pressings are truly awful sounding, but they have memories attached to them so I still play them now and then.

In the 80's, CD's were king for me... Although, I did still buy the vinyl version when I could.

Vinyl is superior sounding for me.

I used to stream music through my system but I can't be arsed now. It was great for a while but it just doesn't give me the same pleasure of something physical. So, system streaming for me streaming has gone along with the DO-DO. But streaming whilst in the car still seems to be okay... I still want to slot a cassette in now and then, though... :( There really isn't anything wrong with Cassettes.

[Barry]

I use both formats as and when I feel like it. CD's are great, but some of the pressings are truly awful sounding, but they have memories attached to them so I still play them now and then.

In the 80's, CD's were king for me... Although, I did still buy the vinyl version when I could.

Vinyl is superior sounding for me.

I used to stream music through my system but I can't be arsed now. It was great for a while but it just doesn't give me the same pleasure of something physical. So, system streaming for me streaming has gone along with the DO-DO. But streaming whilst in the car still seems to be okay... I still want to slot a cassette in now and then, though... :( There really isn't anything wrong with Cassettes.

In what way is vinyl superior sounding?

[The Black Adder]

In what way is vinyl superior sounding?I just find it more organic, maybe it's just how I was brought up with things and the times too. Being in-between the analogue and digital revolutions has made me more pivotal to nostalgia.

It's a strange one, all of my CDs lived in the garage and now they're here in my living room... Never play most of them but it feels nice to physically 'put' some music on rather than use an app. The latter seems bereft of meaning in some ways. But handy in less convenient situations. Like junk food ... Lol

Sent from my BBC Microcomputer 32K

[Ubi]

The end of side distortion is only present with certain discs, some of my vinyl sounds fantastic, even with these so called budget carts (I wonder what makes a £1000 cart cost more to produce than a £100 cart?). My set up is a straight up 1210GR, so I don't see where along the signal path the set up can be wrong, though I'd be happy to know where if so. I use a Slee phono stage into the Suggie. In the end faffing about with a so called high end TT and a £1000 cart that could easily break (just like I did once in a hayfever induced accident on a £440 AT cart), is a luxury only a few can afford, seems rather pointless when you can bang an album in a high end CD player, which costs the same as a high end cart, yet isn't a 'consumable'. I still love playing vinyl, and have more of it than CD, and I like banging on a record, and not worrying about being too careful with the stylus (I don't mean reckless of course), but you know, can't be bothered with arm cueing and all that.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625055063_6fd6ff43c3_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625182369_e6f8b2b025_z.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53625194414_49e264a971_z.jpg

The turntable is beyond concern in my opinion which is good, but a £100 MM cartridge and integrated phonostage in a sugden Integrated amplifier is not the pinnacle of analogue reproduction for which to make an absolutist statement about digital weeing on vinyl.

That is all the point I am making.

[Mikeandvan]

The turntable is beyond concern in my opinion which is good, but a £100 MM cartridge and integrated phonostage in a sugden Integrated amplifier is not the pinnacle of analogue reproduction for which to make an absolutist statement about digital weeing on vinyl.

That is all the point I am making.

You missed the Slee atop the cd player.

[Barry]

The turntable is beyond concern in my opinion which is good, but a £100 MM cartridge and integrated phonostage in a sugden Integrated amplifier is not the pinnacle of analogue reproduction for which to make an absolutist statement about digital weeing on vinyl.

That is all the point I am making.

So which of the two formats do you prefer? And what equipment do you use?

[Enossification]

The turntable is beyond concern in my opinion which is good, but a £100 MM cartridge and integrated phonostage in a sugden Integrated amplifier is not the pinnacle of analogue reproduction for which to make an absolutist statement about digital weeing on vinyl.

That is all the point I am making.

Good point.

[Pigmy Pony]

Perhaps the thread title should be "CD wee wees over vinyl on a sound per £ basis" Probably no disputing that. I play both records and CDs, and enjoy both formats, but the vinyl front end cost fifteen times more than the CD player. And then there's the cost of the music...

[Lawrence001]

Perhaps the thread title should be "CD wee wees over vinyl on a sound per £ basis" Probably no disputing that. I play both records and CDs, and enjoy both formats, but the vinyl front end cost fifteen times more than the CD player. And then there's the cost of the music...So that's a £10 Eclipse Richer Sounds special vs a Project Debut?

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

[Pigmy Pony]

So that's a £10 Eclipse Richer Sounds special vs a Project Debut?

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

Ooh that sounds tempting, I was thinking of upgrading :)

[Pete The Cat]

If you look at this from the equipment end of the process, then in my opinion a budget CD player is better than a budget vinyl player.

BUT

The years have told me you need to look at it from the mastering end of the process also, since player v player isn't the full question.

Compression and loudness are indiscriminatory but have blighted CDs more than records in my experience. I know that dynamic range measurement isn't the be-all-and-end-all but it's a damn good indicator. This month I've bought three CDs: the new Judas Priest album (DR7, bearable but noticeably spoiled); last year's KK Priest album (an abominable DR5, like playing a worn cassette in a car on a motorway with the windows down - and the Tidal download is the same); and for those of you who think that's only to be expected with heavy metal, then The Smile's "Wall Of Eyes" was also DR7.

Of course, the record companies are still presenting digital music for the benefit of the person who listens on their Beats cans on the street and doesn't want to have to keep changing the volume; but I also suspect that they're content to impair the performance of CD to force people to buy the more expensive vinyl version. I submit that the vinyl versions of these three albums are DR14, DR12 and DR10 respectively!! It's pretty certain that the vinyl copies will be the better of the two formats.

Pete

[Jimbo]

Mastering of many digital copies from analogue originals leaves a lot to be desired. I have been so disappointed many times when trying to replace the original with a digital copy. However I find most of the digitally recorded and mastered material I have is very good indeed.....on vinyl. Again not sure why it's not always great on CD, maybe they master the digital recording different again for CD? Or is it that we have to use DACs to unscramble it and there in lies the issue? That last digital step can be the fatal one.

I know one record engineer/producer who records at high level DSD rate onto a Korg MR2000S which records at double the quality of SACD and they say the recording sounds stunning at DSD level but has to be mixed down to PCM and then the quality drops a little. If we could buy recordings and listen to them at this level before too much mastering then I think vinyl would struggle to compete.

But as I have found CD and in fact most digital music sounds inferior to the vinyl I listen too. I must admit I do cherry pick what I listen to on vinyl as I can't abide poorly mastered stuff on that too!

[Pigmy Pony]

If you look at this from the equipment end of the process, then in my opinion a budget CD player is better than a budget vinyl player.

BUT

The years have told me you need to look at it from the mastering end of the process also, since player v player isn't the full question.

Compression and loudness are indiscriminatory but have blighted CDs more than records in my experience. I know that dynamic range measurement isn't the be-all-and-end-all but it's a damn good indicator. This month I've bought three CDs: the new Judas Priest album (DR7, bearable but noticeably spoiled); last year's KK Priest album (an abominable DR5, like playing a worn cassette in a car on a motorway with the windows down - and the Tidal download is the same); and for those of you who think that's only to be expected with heavy metal, then The Smile's "Wall Of Eyes" was also DR7.

Of course, the record companies are still presenting digital music for the benefit of the person who listens on their Beats cans on the street and doesn't want to have to keep changing the volume; but I also suspect that they're content to impair the performance of CD to force people to buy the more expensive vinyl version. I submit that the vinyl versions of these three albums are DR14, DR12 and DR10 respectively!! It's pretty certain that the vinyl copies will be the better of the two formats.

Pete

That all makes sense to me, Pete - The idea that the record companies might "steer" us toward a particular format by making the alternative sound shit seems entirely plausible. Or maybe I'm being cynical, and perhaps it is just a case of horses for courses - people listening to vinyl at home expect a certain standard, while music 'on the move' favours a greater degree of compression for the reason you state.

Wouldn't you expect the manufacturers of high-end CD playing systems to be jumping up and down though

[Macca]

Said this before many times but the trick with old analogue recordings is to get the original CD release from the 1980s. These were often a 'flat transfer' straight from a master tape. Back when the master tapes hadn't deteriorated much too.

Most of these will be better than any vinyl version for dynamic range by some margin. Plus no snap, crackle and pop.

Not a solution for a lot of stuff recorded after about 1999 although ensuring you have your gain staging set up properly helps. If you can't find a spot on the volume between too quiet and too loud that needs looking at.

I don't buy the idea that record companies are doing it to push people to vinyl. All physical format sales put together are a small fraction of streaming these days.

[Pigmy Pony]

Said this before many times but the trick with old analogue recordings is to get the original CD release from the 1980s. These were often a 'flat transfer' straight from a master tape. Back when the master tapes hadn't deteriorated much too.

Most of these will be better than any vinyl version for dynamic range by some margin. Plus no snap, crackle and pop.

Not a solution for a lot of stuff recorded after about 1999 although ensuring you have your gain staging set up properly helps. If you can't find a spot on the volume between too quiet and too loud that needs looking at.

I don't buy the idea that record companies are doing it to push people to vinyl. All physical format sales put together are a small fraction of streaming these days.

I do remember you saying this, but not where you get the information from nor how you identify 'correct' issues/reissues. Here's an example of something I might buy. (not this particular one, I already have it on vinyl :)) Looking at the 'used' copies for sale, how can I identify which one of these for sale might be best? This might be possible if you are at a record shop, charity shop or car boot, but when buying online, not so much.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gaucho-Steely-Dan/dp/B00004YX39/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1JVU4MJOWJQ7D&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.3TcejfSZ5oZPF0jBypGE-D-iEF4k5Oo73_UNtdQ7hF1St0o3HjKrCeRGxBraWVMb72lyfGAym nvCQ36OhmfsKMMBfKM-3D7ipitduKWjvILnCQ-aJGDcztEXWlJRl0DXZDEEr9LrYFZRUJ4d1258bulGflsElH8f7 1DxktixQW04J_Yi4OXmrJF0qdKg3ds2uCfZpVL-Bbc2x2-tcfSMuJFXVV3afwWAggHF85WrGFw.pMpyPAJN2v5NQDxhbAg0G S_ct_31-M6u1S2Tw3WZX7k&dib_tag=se&keywords=steely+dan+gaucho+cd&qid=1712762987&sprefix=steely+dan+gaucho%2Caps%2C130&sr=8-1

[mikeyb]

The vinyl version of the new Priest album is very good, better than I was expecting for a hard rock LP.

[Macca]

I do remember you saying this, but not where you get the information from nor how you identify 'correct' issues/reissues. Here's an example of something I might buy. (not this particular one, I already have it on vinyl :)) Looking at the 'used' copies for sale, how can I identify which one of these for sale might be best? This might be possible if you are at a record shop, charity shop or car boot, but when buying online, not so much.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gaucho-Steely-Dan/dp/B00004YX39/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1JVU4MJOWJQ7D&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.3TcejfSZ5oZPF0jBypGE-D-iEF4k5Oo73_UNtdQ7hF1St0o3HjKrCeRGxBraWVMb72lyfGAym nvCQ36OhmfsKMMBfKM-3D7ipitduKWjvILnCQ-aJGDcztEXWlJRl0DXZDEEr9LrYFZRUJ4d1258bulGflsElH8f7 1DxktixQW04J_Yi4OXmrJF0qdKg3ds2uCfZpVL-Bbc2x2-tcfSMuJFXVV3afwWAggHF85WrGFw.pMpyPAJN2v5NQDxhbAg0G S_ct_31-M6u1S2Tw3WZX7k&dib_tag=se&keywords=steely+dan+gaucho+cd&qid=1712762987&sprefix=steely+dan+gaucho%2Caps%2C130&sr=8-1

That one says it's a remaster at the top of the ad.

Had a look and can't see an original CD release for sale on eBay or Amazon, keep checking one will come up at some point. The 2000 remasters aren't bad. my Gaucho CD is from 2000.

Lots for sale on Discogs you could try there but there's a lot to trawl through to find an original.

Usually they say if it's a remaster. Or they give the release date. Anything mainstream had been released on CD by the end of the 1980s so if it gives a later date you know it's a remaster or re-release.

Early CDs 1983/1984 don't have barcodes which is a tell. I think they were introduced in late 1984.

Not all remasters are a disaster. I have a Ten Years After remaster which is excellent. But they can be shockingly bad. Use the DR Database to see which issue is the best. Ironically it's rarely the SACD.

[Pete The Cat]

I don't buy the idea that record companies are doing it to push people to vinyl.

That was a bit of a provocation on my part :) The problem is probably that many CDs simply get the same mastering as other digital files, so are compromised by a sound that's aimed at headphones, smart speakers, cars etc, whereas vinyl is being mastered separately just as you'd hope. But it's worth remembering how clever the record industry has been at getting us to re-buy or to upsell to us over the years - mysteriously a better version always seems to become available. How many folks here wonder how they came to have 5 copies of a favourite album?

To the original question, I find CDs up to the mid 1990s are a good bet. After that the "loudness wars" make them risky and you end up having to scour forums and the DR database to decide whether to take a punt.

Pete

[Lawrence001]

The vinyl version of the new Priest album is very good, better than I was expecting for a hard rock LP.As in Judas? I didn't know they were still recording. I might have seen a gig advertised recently mind you.

Sent from my PCT-L29 using Tapatalk

[mikeyb]

As in Judas? I didn't know they were still recording. I might have seen a gig advertised recently mind you.

Sent from my PCT-L29 using TapatalkBest album they've released in years [emoji6]

[Barry]

Some interesting and thoughtful comments have been made concerning the relative dynamic range of vinyl vs. CD. The maximum theoretical dynamic range for vinyl is 70dB and for CD it is 95 - 105dB; though these figures depend on how the dynamic range is defined.

A very informative article on what recording engineers have to do to make the task of lacquer cutting possible can be found here:
Vinyl 101 How To Prepare Your Audio For Vinyl - Furnace Record Pressing
https://www.furnace.com

It also summarises all the limitations of vinyl replay and how with care some of them can be minimised at the mixing stage.
Despite being somewhat lengthy, it is well worth reading.

[Pete The Cat]

Despite being somewhat lengthy, it is well worth reading.

Thanks Barry - I enjoyed it with a cup of coffee :) The site shows what a craft record making is.

I didn't understand the criticality of mastering until I reached that puzzling moment when improvements in my system made some albums sound less satisfying. The difference between versions of the same album caused by varying mastering quality can be as great as making them sound like remixes. Even back in the vinyl heyday they didn't always get it right, eg I have Led Zeppelin II's from the 70s that range from phenomenally gutsy to bland, depending on the engineer.

Pete

[Macca]

I think 'quality' is the wrong term.

It's a deliberate decision taken when remastering classic recordings to reduce the dynamic range to next to nothing.

It's not due to incompetence, deafness, stupidity, bad equipment etc. It's how they wanted it to sound.

They could do it differently, but they often don't. It sells more if it's mastered that way. Sad, but true.

Most people who buy music are not concerned about sound quality. It doesn't even occur to them.

[Qwin]

I think 'quality' is the wrong term.

It's a deliberate decision taken when remastering classic recordings to reduce the dynamic range to next to nothing.

It's not due to incompetence, deafness, stupidity, bad equipment etc. It's how they wanted it to sound.

They could do it differently, but they often don't. It sells more if it's mastered that way. Sad, but true.

Most people who buy music are not concerned about sound quality. It doesn't even occur to them.

The old master tapes from the classic era of vinyl will have detreated somewhat by now.
When they remaster, they'll have to use so many digital filters to clean it up, take out background noise etc, it will kill the dynamic range.
Multiple filters has that effect, whether in the studio or in a DSP XO. One of those occasions where less really does equal more!

[dave2010]

This is a can-of-worms topic as stated in many other threads before.

CD can be better that Vinyl and Vinyl can be better than CD, Streaming can be better still and also worse than both, digital files on are local server down loaded using a good/clean SP/Internet connection can be better than all.

BUT!!!!

1. There are many, many variables?

ETC - much of which I agree with.One thing I'd be really peed off about would be streaming services which hiccupped because of network congestion. Probably doesn't happen too often - but it happens with video - so maybe does also happen with streaming audio.

You're just getting to the climax ..... and then nothing happens .... Yuk!

Another issue with streaming is that streaming services don't necessarily keep all the recordings you think you've paid to hear. They may be there one day, but removed a day or two later. At least with LPs or CDs you can control that aspect of music listening.

Which reminds me - I need to attend to one or two of the streaming/download sites I have subscribed to, and put them on hold or even cancel them.

[Paul-H]

It's all personal I know, so for me although I have a reasonably Turntable and a reasonable Vinyl collection, I nowadays tend to only buy CD's I know pre 1980's Vinyl might technically sound better due to the analogue mastering etc, but to my ears, and that is all that is important to me CD's sound better.

When it comes to Modern recordings which are nearly all digitally mastered there is no advantage in the Vinyl and comparing a £10 CD to a £40 Vinyl it's just a no brainer to me.

I am not cursed with Golden Hearing and am not deluded enough to think I can hear the difference between £1000 interconnects so for me it's now CD's all the way. (Mainly) I do sometimes buy CD and Vinyl of the same release to to compare the two formats but it's only about every 100 CD's.

As to the loudness wars which has ruined modern music and it the main reason I rarely buy modern music I am convinced it is applied to both CD and Vinyl these days.

Remember this is all my personal opinion yours will almost certainly be different 😉

[alex_baker89]

Some people do, and spend a fortune doing it. There's nowt so queer as hi-fi folk. :scratch:

Haha, too true!