LP VS CD
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,620
Likes: 0
From: Newtown,PA
Originally Posted by THEOLDMAN,Feb 14 2006, 08:39 AM
Vinyl outscores CD anytime, especially if it's heavyweight vinyl (most audiophile recordings are). It also helps to have a good cleaning system. A good belt drive turntable and a good cartridge will outdo a CD anytime. I tested my son and his friends once with a record and a CD of the same recording...everytime they thought it was the CD they were wrong. Then I tried several others and they continued to fail the test. I was using MoFi (Mobile Fidelity) recordings both vinyl and CD, so it was one audiophile recording against another audiophile recording.
Another one test like that is bud light coorslite and millerlite lol
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 5,729
Likes: 2
Here's a scenario/analogy:
First case...Two excellent (ideal) drivers (drivers = conditions in this case), one in a 2000 Mustang GT 5 Speed Coupe, and one in a 2000 S2000. They race (play a song), and the S2000 wins. This is the case of Vinyl sounding better, because it has more potential, AND more room for error.
Second case...Two FAIR (NOT ideal) drivers (drivers still = conditions), they are in the same two cars (media). They race, and the Mustang GT wins. This is the case of Digital Audio sounding better because the conditions (for both media) are not ideal (perfect).
Two scenarios; two outcomes.
First case...Two excellent (ideal) drivers (drivers = conditions in this case), one in a 2000 Mustang GT 5 Speed Coupe, and one in a 2000 S2000. They race (play a song), and the S2000 wins. This is the case of Vinyl sounding better, because it has more potential, AND more room for error.
Second case...Two FAIR (NOT ideal) drivers (drivers still = conditions), they are in the same two cars (media). They race, and the Mustang GT wins. This is the case of Digital Audio sounding better because the conditions (for both media) are not ideal (perfect).
Two scenarios; two outcomes.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,869
Likes: 2
From: Minneapolis, MN
Arguing distortion in the case of vinyl is a difficult thing to do, CD's have plenty of distortion. Any digital signal is a sampled signal there are always errors in sampling, when an error in made in sampling the signal is aliased and the inaccuracy smoothed over. Granted in the case of CD's this isnt typically going to be audible but it's just as similar to the raw imperfections in a good vinyl recording.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,869
Likes: 2
From: Minneapolis, MN
Arguing distortion in the case of vinyl is a difficult thing to do, CD's have plenty of distortion. Any digital signal is a sampled signal there are always errors in sampling, when an error in made in sampling the signal is aliased and the inaccuracy smoothed over. Granted in the case of CD's this isnt typically going to be audible but it's just as similar to the raw imperfections in a good vinyl recording.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
Former Moderator
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,449
Likes: 0
From: Between Hell/Ann Arbor
The source portion of my audio system at the time of the test with my son's friends consisted of:
AR turntable "THE AR Turntable" circa 1984, I am still using this.
Sumiko Tonearm
Sumiko Blue Plate Special High Output Moving Coil Cartridge.
CD player: American Audio Labs P-12, this was a tweeked second generation Magnavox CD player. This player lasted 16 years, before the drive gave out.
So you can see these aren't top of the line items, not now and not then.
AR turntable "THE AR Turntable" circa 1984, I am still using this.
Sumiko Tonearm
Sumiko Blue Plate Special High Output Moving Coil Cartridge.
CD player: American Audio Labs P-12, this was a tweeked second generation Magnavox CD player. This player lasted 16 years, before the drive gave out.
So you can see these aren't top of the line items, not now and not then.
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 14
Originally Posted by ImportSport,Feb 14 2006, 02:44 PM
Arguing distortion in the case of vinyl is a difficult thing to do, CD's have plenty of distortion. Any digital signal is a sampled signal there are always errors in sampling, when an error in made in sampling the signal is aliased and the inaccuracy smoothed over. Granted in the case of CD's this isnt typically going to be audible but it's just as similar to the raw imperfections in a good vinyl recording.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
Human perception is drawn toward a slightly noisy signal. This is why reverberant recordings are typically the most enjoyable and why we think we can sing in the shower. For many listeners the nosie floor on an old recording is warm and enjoyable, a thing that CD's do not have unless it's intended.
I would also safely argue that 8/10 people have never heard a "very" good vinyl recording on an appropriate system.
I sound just as good in the shower as I do in my car
BTW, I was told in a physics class that people get a feeling that they sing better in the shower b/c the humidity softens up the vocal cords making them sound better or cover a greater range or something like that.
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
From: Fair Oaks
There is a factor that has not been addressed. Dynamic range, or how much of a difference between the loudest and quietest signal can be recorded on the media. For vinyl, it is about 55 dB. For CD media it is about 95. Rock music and symphonic music has greater than a 55 dB range, which means that the music must be "compressed" to get it on to the record. The loud passages are not quite as loud as they should be, and the quiet passages are a little louder than originally intended.
A second factor that comes in to play is that most CD's are recorded from analog input (tape). The final recording cannot be better than the original, other than editing unwanted noise.
All that aside, what limits music (in practice) is the mixing engineer and his equipment.
I have high-end equipment for playing vinyl, reel to reel and cd media. In reality, CD's win out mainly because of ease of use. That being said, most recordings (of all types) leave a lot to be desired. I have a few CD recordings that come close to rivaling analog recordings, so it is possible, but the industry is not compelled to produce high quality recordings when 99.99% of the consuming public does not have equipment that will show the difference, or listens to types of music where fidelity is not an issue.
A second factor that comes in to play is that most CD's are recorded from analog input (tape). The final recording cannot be better than the original, other than editing unwanted noise.
All that aside, what limits music (in practice) is the mixing engineer and his equipment.
I have high-end equipment for playing vinyl, reel to reel and cd media. In reality, CD's win out mainly because of ease of use. That being said, most recordings (of all types) leave a lot to be desired. I have a few CD recordings that come close to rivaling analog recordings, so it is possible, but the industry is not compelled to produce high quality recordings when 99.99% of the consuming public does not have equipment that will show the difference, or listens to types of music where fidelity is not an issue.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,620
Likes: 0
From: Newtown,PA
Originally Posted by FO2K,Feb 14 2006, 01:20 PM
There is a factor that has not been addressed. Dynamic range, or how much of a difference between the loudest and quietest signal can be recorded on the media. For vinyl, it is about 55 dB. For CD media it is about 95. Rock music and symphonic music has greater than a 55 dB range, which means that the music must be "compressed" to get it on to the record. The loud passages are not quite as loud as they should be, and the quiet passages are a little louder than originally intended.
A second factor that comes in to play is that most CD's are recorded from analog input (tape). The final recording cannot be better than the original, other than editing unwanted noise.
All that aside, what limits music (in practice) is the mixing engineer and his equipment.
I have high-end equipment for playing vinyl, reel to reel and cd media. In reality, CD's win out mainly because of ease of use. That being said, most recordings (of all types) leave a lot to be desired. I have a few CD recordings that come close to rivaling analog recordings, so it is possible, but the industry is not compelled to produce high quality recordings when 99.99% of the consuming public does not have equipment that will show the difference, or listens to types of music where fidelity is not an issue.
A second factor that comes in to play is that most CD's are recorded from analog input (tape). The final recording cannot be better than the original, other than editing unwanted noise.
All that aside, what limits music (in practice) is the mixing engineer and his equipment.
I have high-end equipment for playing vinyl, reel to reel and cd media. In reality, CD's win out mainly because of ease of use. That being said, most recordings (of all types) leave a lot to be desired. I have a few CD recordings that come close to rivaling analog recordings, so it is possible, but the industry is not compelled to produce high quality recordings when 99.99% of the consuming public does not have equipment that will show the difference, or listens to types of music where fidelity is not an issue.
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
From: Fair Oaks
Originally Posted by Gink5,Feb 14 2006, 05:27 PM
Is this because they can't get the physical "bumps" high or low enough on the record?
In the sixties I had a test record that was recorded so loud, that the tone arm would jump out of the groove. I don't remember who made the recrding, but the person narrating the thing said "base drum level four" just before the needle left the record.
At the time I thought it was pretty cool.