Can you imagine a world without vinyl?


Can you imagine a world without vinyl?
I have been into vinyl for 49 years - since the age of 8 & cannot imagine a world without vinyl.
I started out buying 45's & graduated to 33's (what is now considered LP's).
I have seen 8 tracks come & go, still have a kazillion cassettes, reel to reel & digital cassettes - have both the best redbook player & SACD players available, but must listen to my "LP's" at least 2 hours a day.
I play CD's about 6 hours a day as background music while I'm working, but must get off my butt every now & then & "just listen to real music".
I admit to being a vinyl junkie - wih 7 turntables, 11 cartridges & 8 arms along with 35K albums & 15K 45's.
For all you guys who ask - Is vinyl worth it - the answer is yes!
Just play any CD, cassette, or digital tape with the same version on vinyl & see/hear for yourself.
May take more time & energy (care) to play, but worth it's weight in gold.
Like Mikey says "Try it, you'll like it!"
I love it!
Convert?fit=crop&h=128&policy=eyjlehbpcnkioje1mdg1mte0ntysimnhbgwiolsicmvhzcisimnvbnzlcnqixx0%3d&rotate=exif&signature=66136e1ad701441f060e6c67c0d2a53d0437c0e53447fd9982cccecda958ae0d&w=128paladin
Paladin,

I admit to being a vinyl junkie - with 7 turntables, 11 cartridges & 8 arms along with 35K albums & 15K 45's.

I don't know how you have any room with that many LP's on hand !

Tell you what, I'm willing to come to your home and carry off a significant quantity of those old LP records, just because I'm a nice guy.

:^).
I am presently at a point with my analog set-up, in which I am not even tempted to play cds. I am grateful for the continuing release of new vinyl; re-issues, as well as the current. Without vinyl playback I likely would have lost interest in high end. My love for music, especially contemporary jazz performances, demands I continue buying cds,and I do enjoy those Japanese mini lps.

I could not agree more...extra work...declaratively worth it.
No I can't! And you are my new hero. I wonder how much your collection weighs?? Incredible system too. You must be the kid in the vinyl candy store.
Paladin, I'm with you.

My only question is, at this point, how do you really know that you have 50,000 33s and 45s? That would entail about 14 hours of non-stop counting assuming counting 1 per second!
Yeh, well, when you get a decent hifi system like the new bose super surround concert in a box with noise elimination headphones you'll realize what you've been missing. When you do I will be happy to store your old unusable LP's for you to celebrate your discovery of modern technology. Yeh, that's what I'll do.
WOW! What a collection. Anytime you need anyone to come by, clean a few records, make sure that they still work, you let me know. I'll buy a plane ticket and sleep in the garage.

MY only question is how do you possibly enjoy it all? Assuming an LP is 40 minutes long, that is 1,400,000 minutes = 23333 hours = 972 days = 2.66 YEARS.

Oh, and how in the world do you know what you have? I mean, is there anything you see in a record store and know that you don't own it?
I hate this...in the never ending, self deluding, not quite successful (my vinyl days are 30 years behind me, but I still rememember!) battle of trying to convince myself I can live without vinyl, along comes this utterly convincing, inarguable & oft repeated, (now I KNOW I'm missing something) argument.......where do I start?
Paladin,

You are definitely the highwater mark for all of us. How many hours a day do you listen to vinyl?
I'm all in- Lps rule. A few weeks ago i presented a dear friend with a rebuilt Lenco. There were abot 30 people at the birthday party and everyone said they were going to start buying LPs again. Well, almost everyone.
One person who I met at the party left my listening room about an hour ago. But most imprtantly, he left me with 6 old Duke Ellington Lps, 4 T Bone Walker LPs (Barney Kessel played on a couple, I didn't know that), 3 Ben Venuti LPs, Louie Armstrong. He has tons more which he will be bringing over!
My neighbor who is in his late 70s, has a fantastic collection of jazz Lps to grace his Dynalab amp and Linn table. He can't stand digital sound- way too harsh/grainy in the highs and uninvolving.
Yes, I prefer LPs and I like changing the music after one side. CDs seem boring in comparison.
Lps sound fantastic on my Lenco/RB300/Denon 103R!
I'm an audiophile of 30 years who became a home based dealer for many fantastic products. My reference system is the Evolution Acoustic speakers (finest I ever experienced) , DarTZeel amp/pre-amp, EMM Labs new 1 box CDSA, Grand Prix isolation and the Grand Prix Monaco table / Dynavector 507II and XV1S cartridge. This new EMM player is so superb that I can still enjoy listening to digital (serious listening I mean) even after playing vinyl. However, my analog front end is a whole other animal. Definitely superior in many very important ways. In a nutshell, it sounds organic, palpable and very real. Of course, most don't have a front end of this quality so they can't realize the potential of vinyl. Collecting and using vinyl is a totally different mindset and dedication over digital. I thought I had a lot of LPs (2500), but 35K is quite staggering. I have seen things come and go, but as digital has improved, so has analog playback, so I'm into vinyl for the long haul and very thrilled about it.
PS - Records definitely sound better after being cleaned on my Loricraft machine vs being cleaned on my previous VPI machine. The LPs got a bit quieter (only sometimes) after being cleaned on the VPI, but with the Loricraft, WOW!!!!! Noticably blacker background, much better sense of depth and space, more clarity and resolution.
I am going to filter block ebay-I can't keep spending $25-$30.each on the new releases I want.Will the record companies PLEEEASE get their s**t together and realize we music buyers want this stuff? Stop forcing us to buy it as imports? Who knows,might even save the Ipod/MP3 stricken failing music industry by generating profit from people that actually still buy music!
I had a friend over the other evening and re-introduced him to the joys of vinyl. Played a few Mercuary Living Presence, London & EMI from the 60's, MOFI, Nautilas, and a few other jems.

His ears will never be the same!
Of course, but not a world without music.
Great string! I have been listening since late 50's (my dad owned a zenith HiFi)and never have gotten out of vinyl. For many years my trusty dual 721 table had served me well but until I moved up to a different table (dual finally died)and purchased a moving coil, I really did not fully appreciate what great detail vinyl will offer if presented properly. After 40+ years, I continue to be impressed what this media can deliver. I was sad when the CD craze moved the recording industy to ignore this wonderful venue. Thanks to the diehards who have never given up! It is delightful also to see the younger generation discovering vinyl. My daughter (19) is into this bigtime going by thrift stores and garage sales picking up some classics. She is in love with the big band era and beams when Frankie or Glenn is on her system. The industry may listen to us afterall and bring this medium back.
i've been a serious vinyl collector since 1966 (12 years old)...not from the standpoint that i believe it to be somehow superior fidelity....i just think lp's and 45's are cool. turntables are fun too....growing up, the serious audiophiles owned massive tape recorders (reel to reel), on top of owning turntables which were more for joe public. our local record store (remember those) stocked tons of jazz and classical on reel to reel....when reel to reel began to fade as a purist media, my father and his audio buddies mourned its demise. i could have cared less. in my mind, my friends and i related to rock music and it's primary medium..the vinyl disc. today, my wife and daugher, and most friends and associates could care less about my records. they love music, in an shape or form. its about access to music, music appreciation, and the media does not matter. hundreds of thousands of cd titles are gonna disappear slowly over the next decade...as much as my first love is vinyl..i will miss the cd too. the music you like is who you are, not the media.
Pawlowski, why would it be hard to count if you had uniform shelving and counted one unit of a rack of vinyl and multiply....and how do you have time to even wonder that? :)
It took my father over 10 yrs to get through his collection of music wich was total about 9,000 or so........ he goes in Alphabetical order, now during that time he added countless new tittles in my head I figure it will take atleast 15 years this time and he is still on the "A" tittles.
I could frankly give a hang about the audio angle of vinyl or turntables -- it's a significantly flawed medium from the sonic standpoint (among others) and is not synonymous with the word "analog" as many audiophiles carelessly assume it to be, and I have nothing against digital in principle -- but I certainly love vintage records and good record collections, because it's all about passion for the music, the artists, and the times. Always nice to learn of another Agonner who collects and plays vintage 7" 45's, the medium whose demise (replaced, badly, by the music video) signalled the beginning of the end of rock's golden age. Now if I can just quintuple the size of my collection I'll be hot on Paladin's heels (though one turntable should continue to suffice, jukebox excepted).
This is just an exercise in masochism. Just stick red-hop pokers in my eyes and be done with it. Fortunately the Truth will out, and the LP is making a comeback! Off to the growing number of record shops in my area! CDs, DVDs, SACDs and various other waterproof discs make great coasters.
I can easily imagine a world without vinyl. It would be a world in which excellent sound would be achieved without the sonic compromises of digital or the convenience and many other compromises of vinyl. Both formats are clearly seriously flawed and hardly to be lauded as some ultimate achievement as the poster seems to suggest. While 99% of my listening is vinyl because of its sonic superiority (particularly for the 50's and 60's Jazz that I listen to), I would switch in a nanosecond to an alternative digital format that provided analog quality sound without the many disadvantages of vinyl like surface noise, inner groove and other tracking distortions etc. What's amazing to me is that vinyl, as primitive as it is, has not been bettered in over 50 years. It's time we move on.
Another view? Yes, I could live without vinyl. The cost of high end vinyl and LPs of sufficient quality is too high. We can approach vinyl for less money. I am tired of the surface noise and lack of frequency response at both ends. If I bought a turntable and cartridge worth many thousands, a phono stage worth thousands and bought new LP pressings at $25+ each to replace all my records, I could surpass CDPs. In the meantime I continue to search for CDPs that reproduce life-like music. By using tube output stages, reclocking, CD treatments, plus tube amplification it is possible to achieve most of what LPs offer, at lower cost and an easier to keep medium. Sorry, but I had to interject. This LP lovefest was just too much.
What we need is a hyperanalog format. The challenge is to find a high storage, robust physical format for recording and playback. As long as we insist on using ones and zeros in music, that's all we'll get.

01-29-07: Tgrisham
Another view? Yes, I could live without vinyl. The cost of high end vinyl and LPs of sufficient quality is too high. We can approach vinyl for less money. I am tired of the surface noise and lack of frequency response at both ends. If I bought a turntable and cartridge worth many thousands, a phono stage worth thousands and bought new LP pressings at $25+ each to replace all my records, I could surpass CDPs.
I agree with Tgrisham. He stated it very well, IMO.
In another thread, I stated the outcome of my vinyl experiment and it is everything Tgrisham said. There can be lots of overlap between analog and dgital if you take the rest of the system into account.

Arthur
Let's consider the various responses written in response to this "love-fest". First we have Jyprez, who writes: "While 99% of my listening is vinyl because of its sonic superiority (particularly for the 50's and 60's Jazz that I listen to), I would switch in a nanosecond to an alternative digital format that provided analog quality sound without the many disadvantages of vinyl like surface noise, inner groove and other tracking distortions etc. What's amazing to me is that vinyl, as primitive as it is, has not been bettered in over 50 years. It's time we move on." This is an admission that vinyl IS the superior medium, and that the only real problem with vinyl, which again remains the superior format, is noise. Noise was made an issue by the Digital Brigade, who inflated the issue out of all proportion to a Neurosis/borderline psychosis as a means of promoting digital formats. So, lets throw the baby (music) out with the bathwater (noise). Plus, parallel-tracking tonearms eliminate end-of-side and tracing distortion if it is so bothersome (isn't to me, in all properly set-up pivoted tonearms/cartridge combos it is either inaudible or barely worth mentioning), and quality turntables eliminate or reduce noise drastically, and more if one chooses cartridges which are quite in the groove, seeing as it's such a problem.

Tgrisham writes that the cost of vinyl is too high. Again this is entirely misleading. I rarely if ever buy expensive vinyl, and again, a turntable of sufficient quality (and I'm talking a starting point of only a Rega P3) makes of used vinyl in good condition at a few bucks a pop - MUCH cheaper than digital formate, even used - very listenable and quiet. The trick is to buy used vinyl in decent condition, it's not all hacked-up Sally Ann disasters. He admits that we can only aproach vinyl. Lack of frequency response?!? Since when? Get a better turntable and tonearm. Digital cheaper?!? If it means that you have to use "tube output stages, reclocking, CD treatments, plus tube amplification" to achieve ONLY "most of what LPs offer" - and where are the compromises made, perhaps musicality? - then where are the savings, where are the advantages?

All of these objections are also admissions the LP is superior, and misleading in all kinds of ways - exaggeration of noise and distortions, exaggerations of cost, and deliberate diminution of abilities (frequency). Get over the noise fellow neurotics, and concentrate on the music. Back in the days of gramophones people listened ecstatic at the music emanating - with FAR more noise and distortions - from their lacquers on a steel needle through a horn. Why and how? Because the Digital Brigade has not yet raised noise to the level of a neurosis (same as various industries built on creating previously unrecognized problems in order to sell their solutions), and so they simply heard the music and were glad, in fact, ecstatic.

Me, I've decided to stop throwing good money after bad, trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, a computer's approximation of music. There is a way of improving the sound of vinyl: try alternate solutions with what we already have: better tonearms (need not be more expensive, consider the MG-1) better cartridges (need not be more expensive), better turntables (need not be more expensive). Address your various individual problems, keep the baby, clean up the bathwater, don't let yourselves be manipulated by a cynical industry (cynicism DEFINES current industry, Big Business). For the Here and Now, vinyl IS the superior medium. Let's improve IT, there are many ways which already exist.
As I use vinyl (i.e. I listen to vinyl as well as the many digital formats) I wouldn't really want a world without it:)
Anyway, I grew up buying vinyl...

Of course things are volatile and vinyl users are very much dependant on continued availability of, say, cartridges. Also availability of LP's -- but if the collection is large enough (say, 1/10th of Albert Porter's :)), there's no immediate problem there.
CD is better than it has ever been.

LP Is better than it has ever been.

Both formats taken to their limit, LP is better. I don't think there is any doubt about this. Ask those with EMM labs and Rockport or EMM labs and Walker.
Gregm makes an excellent point that I neglected, which is an owner's existing vinyl collection. A substantial vinyl collection (user defined...as the definition varies from individual to individual) will warrant a larger expenditure on an analog playback system.

Regarding acquiring new music, it's helpful to compare apples to apples. For example, anyone can easily and quickly buy new or used CDs that are of equal quality.

On the other hand, finding and buying quiet and clean used vinyl takes time (driving, looking through bins, searching second hand stores and garage sales, etc). Low cost, good vinyl can be found, but not as readily as low cost, quiet digital. So, the cost of acquiring acceptably quiet vinyl (cost = time and dollars) is considerably higher than the cost of finding and purchasing the same music on CD, SACD or DVD-A.
Albertporter...That depends on the definition of "better".
Johnnantais...You are quite correct that there is great potential for improvement of vinyl-based audio. I know that, because I had DBX records and playback electronics, and I found that all the well known problems of vinyl were drastically reduced by this system. Audiophiles missed the boat on this one, although stupid marketing by DBX played a role. If I had to describe DBX records in a nutshell, I would say that it amounts to dynamic equalization to replace the RIAA curve.
Well I agree with the vinyl-o-philes. When great vinyl recordings and pressings are played back over a great system they absolutely destroy CD's.

And this occurred so seldom (and I will honestly admit I lost a bit of interest in the music I had on my LP's) I took down my system. It wsn't worth the space it was occupying. I had ventured out and bought 'used stuff' and for the most part it was rarely both in good condition and was music I wanted.

I bought newly pressed reissues which I found, for the most part, as often plagued by pressing issues as the vintage stuff (which drove me to distraction in the late 60's and 70's) and often the sound was rarely improved in anyway by the re-mix and process.

What little I think I actually lose from loss of a vinyl playback system, I think I gain from no longer revisiting this issue of format superiority during playback of CD's. CD playback can sound dammed fine, and certainly it is not worthy of the denegration it recieves when the vinyl folks enter the arena. It was in the '80's, and to a lesser degree in the '90's, but thats no reason to rag on it now. If a person does it serves to say far more about themselves than the format!

The recorded music industry as we have know it is dying, the interest in major music formats is dying, the interest in serious stereo systems is dying, and yet we are engaging our energies in picking the bones of bodies in the desert. Go figure.
Newbee gets right what Johnnantais misses in my opinion: It's typically the rabid vinylphiles who exagerate the shortcomings of CDs vs. what average digital-friendly audiophiles usually state about the shortcomings of vinyl.

Both formats have their limitations and strengths, but these days the most overheated claims about the inferiority of the other format are promulgated by the vinyl side. So too are most of the rationalizations, omissions, or dismissals of problems inherent in their own pet format also to be found on the vinyl side, as Johnnantais' comments above illustrate -- noise, quite real, is hardly the only such problem with records -- or his and Stevecham's cliched but meaning-free quips about computers and ones and zeroes. (The fact is that the major problems audible with CD sound are analog in origin: jitter- and filter-related primarily. But the basic theory of digital conversion is well-proven, and the remaining practical difficulties are known and addressable.) On the digital side at least work continues to be done in trying to establish higher-rez consumer protocols to supercede Red Book, which implies in part a more honest appraisal of the CD's sonic shortcomings, among other more marketable factors, and that evolution will be ongoing as the physical silver disk increasingly becomes a thing of the past.

And don't for a second try to tell me that the high end industry marketing to audiophiles what is essentially being treated as a 'new' format from a sales standpoint doesn't both drive and feed off much of the vinyl propaganda, same as when CD was first promoted to the general public, only much more expensively (it's not called the high end for no reason after all). Not since then has the high end seen such a bonanza of audiophiles lining up to be convinced once more that they must re-buy their music in a more costly audiophile format yet again, plus all the new gear to play it on. Just witness today's profusion of me-too turntables -- talk about cynical. But that's fine -- I don't have a problem with what is still a cottage industry in the larger scheme of things reaping the benefits of rich boys wanting to play with new toys; that's what the high end is all about.

Let's just not get carried away from reality by all the rhetoric. No matter how much you want to expend on their playback, and no matter how much we might enjoy or fetishize them, records cannot faithfully transmit the sound of a mastertape. Digital has that possibility, as well as more relative practical advantages than you can shake a tonearm at.
Albertporter...That depends on the definition of "better".

Big opinions as always from Eldartford. This has become a multi thread, multi year experience with Dart seeking out LP forums to place his jabs.

Those that have both formats at state of the art agree LP is better, but that doesn't stop Eldartford (who never got it right) from remaining steadfast to his position.

I get really tired of the smart ass attitude and smug assertions, especially from someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.

I guess I need to start going to every forum on digital and abuse everyone about their music instead of interjecting comments that digital has made headway.
Dear Richard: +++++ " Can you imagine a world without vinyl? " +++++

Yes, I can imagine what I can't imagine is a world without MUSIC ( somebody posted about ).

50K records in 45 years?, that's mean that for 45 years you buy at least 3 records each single day over those 45 years!!!!!!!. You are a extremely music/record collector. Congratulations!!!!!! I own only 6K but normally I'm around 200-300 ( maybe less ) to hearing.

Now, it is obvious ( like other of you posted ) that we need a better medium/way of music home reproduction for the future recordings. I agree that for what are already recorded the LP is the best medium/way till today and I think that the LP reproduction audio items ( that we know/using ) most be improved ( because it can ), we are losting yet " music " from/in our audio systems, there is ( fortunately ) a " road " to improvements in the way of sound reproduction ( like somebody posted ) with better future designs ( I hope that. ): cartridges/tonearms/TT's/Phonolinepreamps/amplifiers/speakers/etc/etc.

Let me tell you these: over the last 30 years I don't know any single tonearm design ( and there are several very good today designs out there ) that could beat " vintage " tonearms designs like Micro Seiki MAX 282, Technics EPA 100MK2, Audiocraft AC3300, Lustre GST 801, SAEC, SME, etc, etc. In the same way we have very good cartridges new designs, but a real whole improvement over some " vintage " cartridges?, I can tell you, too, that ( unfortunately ) these new designs are not whole better than the older ( some cartridge manufacturers have better cartridges today but are better because their old designs were not good enough. ): I can't think/know any single today cartridge that could beat ( whole ) the Fidelity Researh MC702 or the Technics U205CMK4 ( MM ) or the Goldbug Brier or the Audio Technica ATML 180OCC or Micro Acoustics MA630 or Fulton HP or many others.
In the same way are the TT's, example: Micro Seiki, not only the top of the line SZ-1TVS+SZ-1M but the SX or RX series: IMHO I don't know any today TT ( and I don't hear all yet ) that really beats the Micro Seiki stuff.

Today, we all are paying " dream money " for tonearms/cartridges and TT's that give us/return a very small real " satisfaction " for what we invest on it and certainly almost all can't give us/return a real whole improvement over the very old " vintage " gear. Please, if you don't believe in what I'm saying: you can buy ( today ) on e-bay a MM cartridge ( new. ) like the Empire EDR.9 for less than HUNDRED DOLLARS ( they are on special!!: two cartridges for 135.00 dollars !!!!!) give 50 hours of play and then make a serious " hearing " from it, you can't believe how a MM cartridge for that " absurd " price could perform that nice!!!!! and at almost the very same level of any of those 3-5K new cartridge designs.

We have to ask/push/beg to the " new " TT/cartridge/tonearm very good designers to improve ( a real/big improvement ) their today designs. I think that we have to let to applaud with so paramount enthusiasm those every day newcomers designs till they be a real/whole quality sound reproduction improvement design, not only different but whole better.

In less proportion, we have to ask/push/beg to all the very good electronics and speaker designers. Why do you think that José and I work hard for many years to design/build our Essential 3150 phonolinepreamp? and why do you think that we are on the amplifier and tonearm design?: because we really think that we need a serious improvement in the quality sound reproduction of what we have and of what it is out there, we are trying it and we hope we could achieve that in the near future.

If we take a look in the last years the prices on the audio items go really fast ( higher ) against the quality improvements: the audio item price wins the " race " ( right now ), it is fair that we ( all customers ) ask for better audio item quality performance.

Last but don't less important is that the whole recording process could " suffer/change " for the better with new recording approaches: miking/mastering/edition/recording machines/cables/consoles/mixers/recording enginnering/producers/etc/etc. This subject is critical because is the SOURCE. I think that the recording manufacturers can do it but they are not interested on it, unfortunately.

Waiting for a better future!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Zaiks:

Let's just not get carried away from reality by all the rhetoric. No matter how much you want to expend on their playback, and no matter how much we might enjoy or fetishize them, records cannot faithfully transmit the sound of a mastertape. Digital has that possibility, as well as more relative practical advantages than you can shake a tonearm at.

I usually agree with you but you are 100% wrong, except for your comment that digital has made headway. I've posted that same response dozens of times here at Audiogon over the years.

The fact remains that LP provides better music.

If you disagree it's because you have not pushed both formats to the limit. If you wish to argue on the basis of money, digital wins.

If you wish to argue on the basis of absolute quality, cost no object, then LP wins. I find it interesting that those that argue against LP are always the ones that want to economize. Just speak the truth, you are unwilling to go to that much effort for the difference. That argument I will accept.
I still say there can be a lot of overlap in quality between analog- and digital-sourced systems today. This is why this thread will go on forever, like all the other vinyl vs. CD threads with 100s of posts.

Arthur
Albert,

"If you wish to argue on the basis of absolute quality, cost no object, then LP wins"

Well said. There is a cross-over point where spending less buys better music with digital, and more, better music with analog, at least for me. I can't find great quality used LPs. Occasional new ones, but even those are rare. The pops and clicks drive me crazy! I wonder about the dolby and dbx tape systems I used to have and how they might compare now. If I could go from master tape to home machine tape, would it be better, especially using today's technology? Hmmmm.....
Well said. There is a cross-over point where spending less buys better music with digital, and more, better music with analog, at least for me.

I agree. I just don't understand why those of us that bust our ass to make analog work get hammered by the digital guys. I have owned top line CD players ever since they were introduced, I am a MUSIC guy.

I burns me up to push and work and save and make my system the VERY best it can be, no matter what it takes. I pride myself in that, the same drive that's won me tens of dozens of awards in my career of photography.

When I raced cars I held the track record. I did not get it by bullshitting, it took a lot of money and staying up the whole night before to make sure everything was 100%. Otherwise you saw the other guys tail lights.

So what's different about today? Everyone want's to have the "best" but only provided it's easy, cheap or convenient.
If you wish to argue on the basis of absolute quality, cost no object, then LP wins. I find it interesting that those that argue against LP are always the ones that want to economize.
Absolutely. I can say without hesitation that my Yugo analog rig (Thorens TD160 MK II/Shure V15 III/Lehmann Black Cube SE) makes music equal to, or better than, most CDs in my system, disregarding the surface noise on the LPs.

I can imagine the sonic superiority of a reference vinyl playback system over a reference digital playback system (although I have yet to hear the new APL NWO 2.0 digital player).

For me, it's largely about the economics of digital versus analog, and in this regard the digital formats win.
For me, it's largely about the economics of digital versus analog, and in this regard the digital formats win.
Absolutely, and there are thousands of titles on CD that will never be on LP.
Dear Zaikesman: +++++ " reaping the benefits of rich boys wanting to play with new toys; that's what the high end is all about. " +++++

I respect your point of view but I think that you really don't know nothing about, you don't know what " moves " almost all of us about LP/analog reproduction. First you have to understand these before you go on.

+++++ " records cannot faithfully transmit the sound of a mastertape. Digital has that possibility, as well as more " +++++

I respect your point here but you don't know nothing about: till today analog or digital can't transmit the sound of a mastertape and the " possibility " is on the digital and analog too.

This is what I posted on other thread:

+++++ " I don't think that your question: +++++ " Is Digital actually better than Analog? " +++++, could have a precise answer because both mediums are totally different and you can't compare apples with bananas or a car with an airplane: it does not have sens.

Today, both mediums have its own advantages and disadvantages and both can live together in an audio system and we can use it often depending our CD or LP priorities.

95% of the recorded music comes through CD technology and this fact tell us that it does not matters about CD vs LP if we want that music then we have to buy CD and we have to have a decent CDP, no question about. " +++++

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Albertporter...Texas is the land of big everything...even, I notice, opinions! I thought we agreed that some aspects of digital, like convenience, to pick a non-controversial aspect, are "better" than vinyl. I really don't see why people who can't agree with your view need to be personally vilified.
Well I guess I will chime in. I have had the pleasure to hear a few very good vinyl rigs but none was good enough to my ears to convince me to buy a turntable. My 150+ albums will remain in storage. But to those who love it fantastic I am happy for you as this hobby is all about the enjoyment of music and equipment. I must confess though as a mechanical engineer some of those turntables are absolutely drop dead gorgeous. Mmmmmmm On second thought maybe I will buy one.

Chuck
Dart:
Albertporter...Texas is the land of big everything...even, I notice, opinions! I thought we agreed that some aspects of digital, like convenience, to pick a non-controversial aspect, are "better" than vinyl

I have always stated that digital was more convenient, and that it was cheaper.

Do you remember our group member named Dave Kemp. You and he exchanged email's on the topic of classical music. Dave was found dead in his N. Dallas apartment three days ago. His brother says it was a heart attack and that he likely did not suffer too much.

Tomorrow night will be our first meeting without him. I'm probably not in the best spirit and certainly not in a friendly mood for attacks against analog.
I'm not sure by their responses that Albert and Raul totally get what I said above. I didn't say anything about the subjective sound of vinyl compared to CD or vice versa, at any limit you care to push the playback envelope, or at any budget, be it high or low, or anything about my own personal preferences. I'm just talking about the theoretical limits of closely approaching transmitting an exact copy of a mastersource using analog or digital means. (For those who may not know, my vinyl collection is over 10X larger than my CD collection at around 10,000 pieces. And no, I haven't come anywhere near pushing the envelope for playback of either format, and never will. All of which is irrelevent to my post.)
Check this website out; it being of very convenient coincidence. A local record store; lp's as well as cds, ran this website exploring the benefits of vinyl playback. Nothing really new, but telling considering the source. http://media.www.marquettetribune.org/media/storage/paper1130/news/2007/01/25/Marquee/Vinyl-2669616.shtml?sourcedomain=www.marquettetribune.org&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com
Albertporter...I am very sad to hear about Dave's death. We did have a most enjoyable conversation by E-Mail, and exchanged some CD's that we thought represented exceptional performances.

About vinyl...PLEASE don't consider any comment I might make as an "attack". There are few enough of us audiophiles that we don't need a circular firing squad. Debate, yes, but an argument, no.

Now I will go play the Joshua Bell/ Ashkenazy performance of the Tchaikovsky violin concerto which Dave sent to me, and raise a glass to his memory.
From the article:

Even if the sound quality of vinyl contains some surface noise, as the static of records notoriously attracts dust, the imperfection is still welcome to many.

And

He also welcomes the unique sound of records. "The surface noise adds to lots," he said. "It gives it weight."

That's the first time I've read an article where noise and pops on an LP are described as beneficial. If my system matched their description I think the "romance" would disappear in about 15 minutes.

Mine is DEAD silent. We get maybe one or two clicks during an entire session that show up unexpectedly within the music. Otherwise the presentation from my turntable is identical to my digital (noise wise).

To single out the one or two clicks a night during a music session that spans 3.5 to 4 hours of LP swapping would be like test driving a Porsche Carrera and complaining about the experience because a gnat splattered on the wind screen.

Music is about emotion. I follow what works, I don't care how much labor it requires or how inconvenient is it. I just want to be in love with the music and analog delivers that emotion, goose bumps, chills and all.

When it's right, it tears at your emotions like the love of a good woman. Digital pulls at your ears but not your heart. Both can be exciting but only one of them sweeps away the world and delivers the goods.
It's sad that truly great analog reproduction can be experienced by so few, but I suppose it's the same with any hobby...cars, flyfishing, RC airplanes...

Damn, I'm depressed.

I am a bit bewildered by all these Vinyl eulogies...rather nostalgic IMHO.

If Vinyl was so much better than other mediums then can someone expain why it has never been used as the reference storage medium for the audio industry. I mean why did the recording industry use analog master tapes and now digital masters if Vinyl was the ultimate?

Even before digital existed, I thought most people accepted that Vinyl was an imperfect replica of original studio analog tapes, especially the LP's which undergo a form of compression to achive their long play....

Come on everyone, lets not make Vinyl out to be something it is not. I'll be first to admit that great Vinyl sounds absolutely awesome...nirvanna perhaps, but it ain't the only one that "sweeps away the world and delivers the goods."

Sure some people prefer the sound of Vinyl and I respect that, but that there can only be one is the corny stuff of Highlander fantasy movie.
Albert, well put, with vinyl I get the goose bumps, the chills going up my spine when the emotion is felt. For instance, Herb Ellis, Joe Pass, Ray Brown and Jake Hanna playing Seven Come Elleven at Concord just burns with fire and passion. I have both CD and an LP. It's the LP that sets off the neurons and chemicals in my body to hyper sensitivity. I can hear and feel the guitar work, rythm and suspense, excitement in the crowd as they anticipate the musics next movement. I'm not much of a classical music fan, but the same thing happens to me when i hear Mozarts Eine Kliene Nacht Music by the Budapest Quartet. The beautiful sweet and quiet, then soaring clarinet, playing in front of the mourning strings, can bring tears to my eyes which a CD cannot do. After hearing this and a few other LPs, I was inspired to sit in on a few chamber music concerts. I loved it so much.
Jean is correct as well. It does not take a huge investment in time nor money, to get HUGE returns in musicality. What it takes is the right approach. One can have wonderful music, for under 1k. I say this because I just gave a turntablle to a friend who has crappy Sony electronics, old Pioneer speakers and he is in love with his 500+ 1950, 1960,1970s vinyl collection all over again because he had never heard the dynamcs and rythm and bloom which were in the grooves before! Lucky for him, most of his LPs are mint- Ellington, Basie, Professor Long Hair, Tatum, Jazz and rock, etc.
His system proves to me that it is really the source that matters. If you have a crappy turntable, it doesn't matter how good the electroncs and speakers and cables are. The source which plays the medium has to be good. Jean has a great recipe for a damn good analog source which has been proven to me and it is not super expensive.
Again, the emotion and musicality are what matters most to us audio nuts. Even with some clicks and noises, I get it most from LPs than with CDs. In large part, CDs were a marketing coup- convenience, noiseless, etc. But what they don't tell us is that it really lacks SOUL.
At our quarterly audio listening sessions, 4-6 audio fools get together and 95% of our precious time is spent spinning vinyl Hardly anyone attempts to play their Wadia, Meridian, Naim CD players. We eagerly pull out LPs because that's where the magic is. The music sound wave.
The question posted is can we live in a world without vinyl? maybe you can.