In theory CD is the vastly better medium in just about every way, especially over time And perfect CD reading is a lot easier to attain than a perfect record reading. Most audiophiles confuse distortion with character
I've been at this for 40 years...vinyl is the better sounding medium. Vintage equipment like a marantz or pioneer makes the difference in terms of sound as well.
When I record a sound digitally these days and I take care to position everything correctly, I can not tell the difference between the recording and the original. When I used to record onto tape I would lose some attack transient and there would be a sort of slight phasing type difference to the sound.
He's quick to dismiss the ceremony of listening to vinyl, but that is nearly my entire reason for doing so. It requires you to set aside time to listen to music. Physically selecting the album, removing it from the stack, removing it from the sleeve, carefully removing any dust with a brush, setting it on the spindle, laying down the needle. That first moment, the crackle of the lead-in. You sit down on your couch and take in the album art, reading the liner notes as your favorites play in warm imperfection. This ritual is what it's all about to me. Digital has all but destroyed our appreciation of music. Listening to digital music is almost always accompanied by other activities, distracting our attention. Listening to vinyl IS the activity. The process of listening carves the music out of the mundanity of life and brings it to the forefront. If you love music, you owe it to yourself to spend more time appreciating it instead of finding ways to make it more convenient.
Agreed re the importance of dedicated, focused listening. But the listening ritual you describe applies equally to optical disc formats, too. Picking the disc from a physical collection, handling the disc, appreciating the disc art, handling by the edges like vinyl, walking over to a quality disc player or transport, powering up connected dac, amps, preamp, ie all the same as vinyl process. Sit in sweet spot and read liner notes, booklet. Yea, smaller than vinyl, though actual print type may be same or larger than any given vintage lp. If you use a vintage disc player with VFD or similar dedicated display with track, time, and track calendar display, there is similar visual nostalgia to watching spinning vinyl.
@@jakefootball9402re Harsh and trebly cd Could be that particular mastering and or the disc player or dac you are using. Dedicated external dacs can sound far less harsh than low end cd or dvd player analog outs
I think he is right. It is about the sound more than the rituals. Most of the ultrasonic frequencies emitted by musical instruments have been stripped away from the CD, but vinyl still retains those frequencies. Those ultrasonic frequencies have been shown to have a positive effect on the human mind. I could tell there was something wrong when I tried my first CD back in the 1980s. People knew about the problem even back then. Luckily, there are ways you can add those ultrasonic frequencies back into the digital files. I do it all the time and I'm satisfied with the results now.
I converted to CD and within a few years stopped listening to music and went with talk radio. Now, a new turntable and recreating my old album collection . . . I'm listening/enjoying/rapturing in music again.
Same here. Just bought a new turntable 2 weeks ago, and just got a amp and speakers given to me for my new set up. I'll be buying a lot of cleaning stuff and sleeves in a week or two. I'm finding my love of music, (that I had lost years ago), once again.
I've heard vinyl played on super expensive systems - yes, it sounds fantastic, but who has that money? I've heard cds in a car, and for the price, they sound damned good. Of course your average consumer doesn't care because the average consumer doesn't have $50,000 to spend on their home stereo. I'll just keep enjoying both: cds and vinyl. No one can force you to choose one of the other. You are free to listen to whatever you want.
Well i did invest in a vacuum tube preamp for my turntable and put my turntable in another room suspended from the ceiling on cloth covered window springs . That way i can enjoy the full effect of the bass pipes when i listen to Bach Fuge in Dmin.full volume on the subwoofer. Giggles
@Michael Shultz 5.1 sucks for music...….and 600 watt??? no one cares about the power of the amp. numbers don't care one bit … just listen to it and what you think sounds better.. my 15 watt 70's sansui au 101 rapes my 5.1 harman kardon shit box...
I have the same opinions of very expensive hi fi equipment; then there is the topic of the space; the acoustics of a room, and any obstructions from a wall that could potentially affect the sound within the music
1. The dynamic range of a direct-cut vinyl record may surpass 70 dB. 2. Analog studio master tapes can have a dynamic range of up to 77 dB. 3. A 16 bit analog-to-digital converter may have a dynamic range of between 90 and 95 dB.
I've been a fan of Fremer since I ordered his "It's a vinyl World, after all." dvd with my Music Hall mmf 2.2 last year. I just tossed it in the order for giggles and I'm happy I did. The guy is just cool and can communicate his knowledge so well. Needless to say I'm now hooked on vinyl. At first, you just sort of know that it sounds better. After a while and some tuning you also start to realize that everything BESIDES vinyl just sounds a bit empty.
I mean really? He says what he thinks and on any argument or other opinion he says "I don't care". How to take him seriously when he is so arrogant. I replied once on Analog Planet because he was rude about guy with another opinion. Narrow minded and arrogant attitude. IT'S ALL ABOUT MUSIC. Vinyl and CD are good formats and they are able to sound FANTASTIC! And really? There is just one example of CD. And I agree that first CD pressing of Roxy Music is bad. Maybe it's just flat transfer of... production tape for vinyl cutting. Of course this man won't mention about many bad vinyl releases. I've heard once bad lp pressing. The whole fomat is crap and sounds worse than CD. The same logic. And it's very "smart" to take judgement when the format has its premiere. If he doesn't care then I don't care too.
ALL, yes all, early CD/digital sounded like ASS. Period. It wasn't until innovators (Like Mike Moffat at Theta back then, and others) started figuring out WHY.... and started fixing the filters, and upsampling, and a bunch of other stuff that the OG "theory" said wasn't needed... but turns out it was... In my experience, only in the last 10 or so years, have DACs gotten transparent enough to give the same recording, from the same master tapes, the ability to give proper LP a run for the money. These are just the facts of the situation. It was never "Perfect sound, forever".... it is now, good enough... more convenient? certainly. but better - measured by "does it sound like reality"? nope. But nobody I've played LP versus CD on my system has ever, not once, preferred the CD... there's a few recordings where it is close... but on most (most especially properly recorded Jazz and Classical), it's not remotely close. I've used the same Turntable and Arm since 1990; 34+ years now, and it still kicks most CD/digital's butt. By today's high-end standards, it's not crazy expensive (in fact my entire system - TT/Arm/Pre-Amp/Power Amp/Speakers has ended up costing me right around $1 a day when amortized over all that time. All I've had to do is buy new cartridges over the years (about once every two years). I prefer low-output Moving Coil designs, and there are some crazy good bargains out there to be had. LIFE is analog, not digital Music (sound) is analog, not digital Emotion is analog, not digital... Word
If you're hearing significant differences between the analog and digital versions of a given recording, you can blame that on (or credit that to) the mastering engineer(s). I have both formats of a number of my albums and in some cases, the LP wins... in some cases, the CD wins. BTW, kids are not embracing LPs because the sound is better. LPs are just more fun. Simple as that.
Mark Colegrove Very well put, and true. I'm old, so I started with vinyl. Now, the majority of my music is digital. Once in a while I will have an album in each format, though I try not to do that, and sometimes I can't tell the difference between the two, sometimes one is better than the other. Why do I even have vinyl? Why do I, once in a while, buy a vinyl copy of an album I already have on CD? Because vinyl is just more fun. Oh, and sometimes it's all about that big ole cover art!
I think you’re right. I admit it begrudgingly, though. I really WANT vinyl to sound superior. For reasons I won’t bore people with, I’m beginning to wonder if the emperor has no clothes. That said, as you hint at, there’s something almost sacred about the process of taking a record from its (modern nonstatic rice parchment) sleeve, placing it delicately on your (acrylic, hell, Chihuly blown glass) TT, gently running a (mink scrotum) brush lightly dabbed with (1 part Absinth, 2 parts ferret urine) solution along the grooves, delicately balancing then lowering the (16th century Jade, carried by Sherpa) needle on the (blessed by a Monk) vinyl record. It’s a ritual. And for some, pressing “play” just isn’t the same. Maybe that’s it. Just a thought.
Both systems have virtues and failings. CD is very easy. Vinyl needs a lot of work to get right. It can be very frustrating. It has a sweet-spot that needs to be found and there is where the magic happens. It's a real fiddle once the intentions of the playback system become serious. The mastering is different in the two media and that can play into the impression we get of an album. Vinyl shouldn't sound better because it has too many processes between the master tape and the sound emerging from the speakers as the record is played. CD vs vinyl is down to taste and is far from the binary decision. You could do more extreme things in CD mastering that would take us somewhere new but, the aesthetic remains close to what a vinyl LP produces. Both systems wear their artefacts on their sleeves and can both become flawed because of them. The music is what matters and we need to serve that. MP3 and other compressed media allow people to listen to more music, more of the time. However it may have made people immune to more challenging music. The quality of equipment has improved so there are people improving their music listening by finding out how to listen better. The best turntables built to the highest standards, playing through the best electronics make magic. The same is true of the best CD. Both systems have virtues and failings.
I had a cheap turntable and still thought vinyl was way better. The CD technology is flawed as it doesn't retain the ultrasonic frequencies that are emitted by real musical instruments. Vinyl does retain those frequencies even on a cheap turntable.
I get a kick out of people still arguing this. Preference is different for everyone. I thought CDs sucked too until recently. I found a dac that doesn't sound bad and now i can hear why some people prefer CDs. I still prefer vinyl simply because I find it less fatiguing. Mastering IMO makes more difference than the format.
I love Fremer. I love that his approach is that he doesn’t care why it sounds better to him. To the people who think he is just pushing magazine sales...Have you seen his set up? A man who does not genuinely feel the way he says he does would not invest the time and money into a set up like that. Anyways look you don’t need a super high end system to hear what he is talking about. CDs and digital formats, to some peoples ears, are much harsher sounding. Perhaps looking at data would indicate CDs are more accurate or even contain more information...However the warmth and more lifelike, in the room presentation of vinyl is undeniable. Also it is worth mentioning that regardless of format, if you have a poorly mixed or mastered album it doesn’t matter how great your set up is or what you’re listening to it on. Vinyl being better is almost always dependent on really knowing your shit and finding out which pressings are good. The same can go for CDs but to a lesser extent IMO. Vinyl is without a doubt the best way to experience (recorded) music for me, but I also know that I am willing to spend time doing research on pressings, to set up and maintain vintage hifi gear, and yes...I am willing to spend more as well and I am not wealthy by any means! Most people simply do not care about music enough to subject themselves to that, it sounds like work and it can be but as you get more into it the digging and the search for the best pressings becomes apart of the experience and when you spin a record you’ve been looking for for the first time it is so much more rewarding. You feel like you are apart of the music more because you have a relationship with it and understand where it comes from more and why it sounds better than other pressings. Vinyl is DEFINITELY NOT something anyone could or should just jump into because the appeal of it tangled up in other things besides just sound. There’s a genuine emotional attachment to records that I could not see happening with CDs, and definitely not digital files lol. The benefits of vinyl come with an equal amount of things that are a pain in the ass but I think that’s just how life works sometimes.
That’s actually a pretty sweet comment! 👌 You point out exactly that it is a journey and it comes with certain experiences that aren’t always pleasing and that it simply isn‘t served to you on a silver platter...I have played music to so many friends and family members on my setup (which took me some time to „grow“ and continues to evolve) and most of them state that they have never experienced music in such an engaging way or didn‘t even know that they could be touched that way by music....but in the end - for most of them - it seems like too much effort (research/expense/time)...“I could never blablabla“, „you have too much time on your hands blablabla“. In essence: it‘s (more than) a hobby! :-)
Agree with you. I spend lots of time researching pressings and always buy the best I can afford. I won’t bother buying a record if there is no pressing that will improve on the digital version.
Yeah you heard that everyone. Sound is not iportant . Emotional attachment to nostalgic media is what vinyl nerds love. they dont care that cd sounds bettet lol
The problem with CD is that the engineers stripped most of the ultrasonic frequencies from it that real musical instruments emit. So it holds much less information than vinyl because vinyl retains those frequencies. Ultrasonic frequencies have been shown to have a positive effect on the human mind. So this is why vinyl sounds better to many. It's because it is better. Luckily, there are easy ways to add those frequencies back into the digital files. That's what I do and I'm happy with the results.
@@dzenacs2011 you are being hubristically foolish in depriving yourself of the opportunity to experience something of which you not only have no knowledge, but no desire to GET knowledge... Bet you haven't been to much live - acoustic (not amplified) - music (e.g. Jazz, Folk, Classical)... Arguing from intentional ignorance isn't particularly convincing
Every Audiophile seems to have amnesia, when it comes to remembering the good ol days back in the early 70's ( what i really mean is during the oil embargo ) record companies started cutting corners; cheaper grade of vinyl, smaller amount of vinyl went into each individual disc...........etc. the result was crap. With competition ( like lowly mp3, cd's , hi res digital ) came major improvements. Why do you think they actually advertise the weight of a record now? So, now the industry is trying to lure you back to a technology they crapped on, Marketing, it drives me bonkers.
@ReaktorLeak I think CDs are brilliant, and they're so cheap now. You can get far better sound from a CD than you can from most streaming services. With the exception of perhaps Qobuz.
I know this comment is 3 years old but I will reply anyway :) There are some pressings today 2020 which are absolutely rubbish. I bought a colored vinyl and over speakers it sounds much more distorted than even the MP3 version. Over headphones it is even worse because you hear every imperfection in the surface. By the way my turntable has been setup highly accurately and most of my LPs sound great. But every once in a while I buy something and I am shocked at the pressing quality.
@@MrSouzy This is true - and has been so going back to at least 2007/2008 pressings - in my own experience - during the first phases of the resurgence. Manufacturing, materials and especially quality control are oftentimes all over the place.
True,I spent $600 on my first turntable setup and that's more than enough to make me stopped listening to CD the difference is really noticeable.Well CDs are still for my car and bedroom...
6:50 - Wait, is he saying CD has frequency cut offs? I just heard the opposite on another video like this - they said that frequencies have to be cut from vinyl.
Yeah. But Cut off on CD has to be before 22 050 Hz no matter what or you allow aliasing. It depends on filter you will use. But there is no ideal, square filter. These filters doesn't appear in the universe. On vinyl you can cut off high frequency higher, it depends on engineer's choise. The more you're close to inner groove, the less highs you're able to prevent.
@@User-7847 CD's don't sound sterile and compressed. If they mastered the CD well, it compares or even surpasses the vinyl record. When a CD of digital master isn't mastered properly it will sound worse compared to the vinyl record, because they are using a different master. An example is the first pressing of Thriller on CD. This Japanese master sounds like a vinyl record without pop and clicks. The later digital/CD versions suck in comparison
remember folks. this is a man who has a $30,000 cable between his phono preamp and amps that he mortgaged his home to buy. as well as a $30,000 tone arm on his turn table. What im saying is that he is certifiably insane, so anything he says is suspect.
Oh yeah, we may all see Michael's eccentricity here, but we know his love for vinyl is real and knows no bounds. This is his life, his work, and I for one are not in any position to question the man's sanity. He adores sound created by the intricacies of analog, it's purity, it's natural distortion, and a sense of the real world this gives him. This is a man that would even love a Croz if you gave him one. They may be vastly inferior to high end models but this is Mike's World, that warming feel as the needle hits the vinyl and it's intricacies of progressively natural distortion, not phoney distortion due to digitization. It's a sheer delight for the man.
@@beyondonethousand Not true. I am a member of the largest audiophile club in the world, and most of the members I know are format agnostic. In other words, whatever format has the best sound quality for a particular recording, is the one to listen to. It just so happens that many older recordings sound better on vinyl, and it is not my fault that I want to spend the $$ to hear them sound as good as my budget will allow. I am completely convinced that hi-res digital (24/192 PCM and DSD) recordings are the best sounding format ever developed. But by the same token, I believe that the vast majority of digital only listeners, that denigrate vinyl fans, are pretty unaware how good vinyl actually sounds.
The vinyl they are using wobbles very bad in (3.39), you can almost hear it in your head. Also digital has caught up a long time ago, he is living in the past and builds his facts on emotions. Nothing entirely wrong with that because we are humans after all, right?
Early CD players were 14-bits and sounded a bit woolly. I really do miss tri-spot tracking which helped with certain discs. (even more so nowadays with CD rot) I did prefer vinyl sound until the industry got around to re-mastering and we had more choices in the CD player technologies, oversampling and dual-DACs etc. Storing 12" vinyl is also a huge commitment.
Early CD players came in two camps: 14bit with 4x oversapling, or 16bit no oversampling. 16bit with oversampling came later, it is now the norm. While some early DACs might have sounded mediocre, the seemingly "few" 14bits aren't to blame. Vinyl has a DR equivalent of 12bits on a good day.
The high end of today's turntable are getting better but the low end are getting worse. Today's low end turntable has a plastic platter and the pitch starts to became unreliable as the motor starts to overheat. Those cheap budget turntables from the 1970s still has a metal platter and the DC motor's speed is regulated by a centrifugal switch. The pitch remains stable even I played several LPs continuously which are over an hour total.
centrifugal switch??? Are you refering to the hall effect sensors that act as the commutators and are used to regulate the three phase power that controls the motor?
I'd rather pay the money for the sound quality of vinyl then a compressed digital cd. just compared the jazz song Take Five on 180 gram vinyl to a cd copy and there is no comparison. the vinyl makes me feel like I'm in the recording session watching them play it.
+Çerastes yep that is so true. i have had enough of this hot mastering of most modern digital. if i buy any CDs these days they are usually the ones released before 2000. Now those earlier mastered CDs sound better than any half speed vinyl. Btw, the author of this video talks absolute nonsense.
You have no idea. I work in recording studios and I can tell you if I copy a finished recording I've just produced in the studio onto CD and play it back in that studio it sounds exactly the same. If I was to cut a laqurer disc and press it to vinyl and play it back in the same studio it would not even sound close to the original. Vinyl just has so many limitations you have to compromise the audio signal so much to make it work as a playable format.
I guess it's due to the preference of the person really. I have heard quality digital recordings on disc that have sounded extremely well. I'm not making shit up anyway. No matter what you tell me I prefer the vinyl rendition of it better. If you think the digital is better then so be it. This will always be a he said she said debate.
I guess I've heard the original pressing and the song is on the inner most groove where you have the lowest sound quality on the album. I'd have to hear a version on the outer groove, but that almost proves that vinyl can be very limiting when quality degrades as you get closer to the inner groove. I agree though, its a never ending debate. I want to like vinyl more, but when I play songs back to back, the tightness of the bass disappears. I also have a $600 table so its not a total piece of junk. The fact is, that many who claim that vinyl is superior are the ones that have a $10,000 turntable. Its just not realistic in many cases. Also I apologize for the straightforwardness of my last comment
Ruben Davis such things should be mentioned. Too often, vinyl folks like to compare today's audiophile label pressings to mass market CDs from the 1980's.
A lot of digital fans like to use test equipment as a means of "proving" digital's superiority. However, I'll remain skeptical of those results until those devices match or exceed the processing power of the human brain. Analog sound seems to not only stimulate the sense of hearing, but the sense of touch as well. There is a certain room filling sound that only analog seems to have.
A CD cannot possibly be as good as the source. The sampling rate isn't high enough. I think hi fi is so subjective, the point is to create what is pleasing to your own ears. If you want a steak to taste like the source, then eat it raw. If you want it to taste pleasing to your particular tastes season it and cook it a certain way. Creating distortions in the food makes it taste better to some. I've invited many people over to hear my system. Not a single person said they preferred listening to the CDs than the LPs. Trust the ears and the body to what sounds good. Sound is processed by the most powerful supercomputer in existence, the human brain. Until sound test equipment can exceed or even replicate the processing power of the human brain, I will be skeptical if its findings.
Mr. Chris Here's a meaningful test: Take your favourite vinyl record, play it on your favourite turntable that sounds just peachy to you, and make a digital copy of it at 16 Bits/44.1 kHz in a non-compressed format such as DAT, your computer's soundcard to WAV, some standalone USB ADC to WAV, a CD recorder or whatever you have. Then, do a double blind test: The original vinyl vs. the digital copy playing. There have been many tests done in this manner, and the results have always been consistent: The listernes guess the sources 50/50 right/wrong, i.e. not better than throwing a dice. That means no-one, not even claimed golden ears, can tell the difference. The digital copy always sounds exactly like the vinyl record playing on the turntable used for recording, and it has all that "vinyl warmths" that analogue fans love. This proves two things: 1. Vinyl acts like an effects processor. It adds certain artefacts that weren't actually present in the original recording. The fact that these artefacts sound pleasing to many people notwithstanding, the "vinyl warmths" is not a strength but a kind of defect. It could be added to any signal using a simple DSP, and actually there are such devices. 2. Non-compressed, well at 16/44.1 done with any half-decent AD/DA-converters is transparent to human ears. Its distortions - while undeniably there - are low enough not to matter for practical purposes. It can even preserve that "vinyl warmth" that many of you think digital is uncapable off. Fact is, the "vinyl warmths" is just an added effect, and as digital will record anything with very high fidelity, it'll also preserve the vinyl effect. Now the question which specific commercial release has better quality is a completely different cup of tea. The only meaningful judgment of fidelity would be comparing the copy against the master tape, but consumers can't do that. The subjective quality of this or that release can't tell us about that. It can't tell us about the merits of each format either, because most differences will be down to different mastering, not the formats themselves. Only if you have a vinyl and a CD of which you know for certain they were made from the same master, you can tell the properties of the formats. Even then you still can't tell which one is more faithful to the original, because you don't have that. The difference you hear could be either due to vinyl changing something, or CD changing something, or both. With my above test, you can tell though. They could easily make CDs sound like vinyl if they'd simply make the vinyl fist and then the CD from that vinyl playing through some high quality turntable. But I hope they never do that, that would be missing the point of digital. But they could market vinyl-sound postprocessors.
+Mr. Chris 24/96 digital can be a bit for bit perfect copy of the master. CD, or 16/44, can also be a bit for bit perfect copy of the master within the bounds of human hearing. It is impossible for vinyl or other analogue playback formats to be perfect copies of anything.
prep74 Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that digital music is less pleasant to listen to. Listening to music on a big stereo like the one in the video encompasses the sense of touch as well. Those vibrations we can't hear can be felt.
Mr. Chris So it is not just about the music? Different strokes for different folks I suppose, me personally, I like to listen to the music and not the stereo, though it is well understood in the field of psychoacoustics that eye candy stereo can create a sort of placebo effect that the sound is better than it actually is. The only vibrations we can feel but not hear are subsonic bass tones, which is not really the tone but vibrations of things around you. Even so, this is more likely to be accurately portrayed through accurate digital whereas it may result in rumble distortion on turntables through feedback - that is why many good phono pre-amps have subsonic filters to remove subsonic content.
At 4:40 the interviewer guy says "well, it was close" then he gets gradually bullied by Fremer into effectively talking as if the vinyl was substantially better than the CD.
The main criteria for CD was to be able to put a full concerto on one side of a playback format and fit it in the car dash. Original CD couldn't resolve anything over 8k properly. All you experts who say that doesn't really matter cause our ears really cant perceive much over 10 k, well stick to that and forgot about 2nd and 3rd order harmonics. Transients cue the ear and the CD format lacks that detail. I was in the HIFI trade for 35 years and I have one CD. I use it as a beer coaster. In regards to well mastered CD and SACD vs Vinyl, the Vinyl has to be well mastered and well Pressed as well. I still after all these years cant understand why somebody would take an Analogue wave form and transform it into a Square Wave and then try and transform it back into an Analogue wave form. Ohh, most people went to digital because of hick pops and cracks. Fine. Thats understandable for a lot of reasons.
+quinto34 Buy a belt-drive turntable with heavy platter. The spinning of the platter will balance out the unstable pitch. You may also check if the belt with MMF9.1 is loosened.
I've tried to get back into cd collecting a bit, but the mastering choices that are made with many many cd's now render them almost unlistenable. Look up the loudness war. A lot of digital music sounds verifiably awful now. They sound so harsh
Michael, modern music is almost universally digitally recorded, regardless if the consumer end product is transferred to a digital file, CD or an analog LP. So are we stuck searching for vintage records that were recorded on tape or direct to disc?
I can explain it. But it takes a number of graphics that I can not post here. I was also around at the introduction to digital in the Audio industry. Living in Nashville repping some of the top audio lines. I met Dr. Thomas Stockham, Jr. at an AES meeting in Nashville. We did a comparison of "The Grab Bag" which was released as Direct to Disk but the two track mix was fed simultaneously to an Apex 1/2 track and the Soundstream. We listened to the just released DtoD on the cutting lathe along with the 1/2 track and Soundstream on their West Lake designed and installed system to compare them. Everyone picked the DtoD as far superior. I also met Japanese engineers from Sony and JVC that were showing their new digital audio converters that recorded to video tape (Beta or 3/4). I showed them what I had found and they agreed it was just one more of the problems with digital. But it shows why there is a linear time shift that becomes more produced in higher frequencies that causes a dissociation of time domain relationships. Such as making the click of a guitar pick dissociate from the vibration of the string.
This reminds me of the people who say laserdisc is better than Blu Ray. I have the original vinyl of Yes - Time and a Word, sounds great. I have the CD and it sounds just as good. It's pure audio foolery
In some aspect Laserdisc is still better than Blu-Ray. The smooth fast forward and rewind,frame by frame play and of course the artwork,and better audio mix for TV and smaller speakers.
Let's not fool ourselves. Young people are buying records to play on their cheap suitcase players. Anything that comes after is a bonus for the vinyl community.
I believe his story about the Roxy album sounding terrible on the first CD ever pressed. Everything after that isn't to be believed because, science. The other thing audiophiles need to understand about people and music is, the song is what is important to almost everyone and it always has been. I have a seeburg 1973 jukebox filled with 45's. It sounds like crap, no doubt exactly like it did in the 70's, and how I remember jukeboxes sounding back then.. but the songs it plays are great like they always have been.
CD's serve their purpose as well, they can be or could be played in car stereos, used in the work place "now MP3", and such...records are enjoyed when you're chilling home, I listen to some beautiful old songs via MP3 with 64 kbs, it's a terrible sound but the melody is there so I enjoy them and hope one day I'll find them on CD's or records. But the fact remains, Vinyl is the way to go to enjoy music to the fullest, I like to look at the spinning record while the music is being played, and after all these years I still find that magical...
I'm a little confused by this video.4.23-"it was close"-Thomas Mulready .. but then he started to doubt himself ,agreeing more and more with Fremer, until, it's not close at all "it's such a difference".Why did you change your mind? No disrespect Mr Fremer ,I can see/hear you are passionate about this subject,but you seem to want to "exert" your passion ( what you believe in) onto everyone, and it seems more so if people disagree in what "you" hear or "your" belief . If people want, and enjoy listening to music when doing other things, then what's wrong with that? Why be so intense? it's just about enjoyment.
So you compare a 100+ years developed and established Technology to "the" first CD?? Did I understand that right?? Society started understanding digital Music, especially CD, not before 35 years ago. Try some FIM K2HD stuff on gear like yours there to compare, if you wont to stay on 44.1/16. "Happy coat" in K2HD version for example. Then you have "Lesson learned" on CD. But that comparison is ridiculous....
I remember being super excited to hear my first CD in a store when the players were very expensive. I took in my Audio Technica headphones, expecting to hear much more of Dire Straits "Love Over Gold" and was amazingly disappointed. CD's have improved a lot since then, but good vinyl still sounds mean. I believed the hype about CD's being the original master tape playing in your living room, but they weren't.
In my opinion it's very simple to explain, apart from the brickwalled filter with analog you hear the recording as a whole! The full envelope of sound, with digital it sounds to me like lots of pieces of the music torn apart and then glued back together but you're no longer getting the full envelope of the recording, an example with abbey road on cd, it sounds detailed and clean, you can hear everything but with the original analogue vinyl, the thing that struck me was the feeling of the environment it was recorded in, the sense you were in the studio with the Beatles playing, it just sounds more believable, but it's true vinyl isn't an easy format to enjoy, it takes a lot more effort and in most cases expense but to me it's worth it.
I'm an expert. I can explain how digital audio works. Sound is just a wave going up and down, and nothing else. Digital tears the music apart and glues is back together BUT it recreates the full up-down movement of the wave (in the audible range), so it recreates the whole sound. There is no such thing as a "full envelope" that gets lost in the process - whatever a "full envelope" is, it's not an up-and-down motion so it's not a sound. Likewise, the idea that the recording can be "whole" or "not whole" is not even real since it doesn't even translate into an up-down movement of the wave (in the audible range).
Mr Fremer speaks for his parish .... You can spend thousands of dollars in an analog system that may not satisfy you too much but a wise choice of a digital system that will surprise the sceptics. The marriage of both analog and digital systems are at the service of real music lovers whatever your bank account!!!
Funny.. Avalon was one of my favorite albums way back.. I put on the CD recently and I couldn't get into it. I suppose the sound of the LP was half of the pleasure I'd get from it. And my system is way better than what I had back then.
The title song, and "More than This" are mesmerizing. Hauntingly enchanting. For years, I hoped Yanick Etienne was half as beautiful as she sounded, and that I could meet her!
I think cd will work better with transistor amplifier instead tube amplifier. Therefore it will be more fair to compare cd+ transistor vs tube amplifier + vinyl. But comparison will be not apples with apples because it is comparison between precision and air. At least this is my experience. By the way about DAT?
We have an artist playing music in studio. That's the truth and what it's supposed to sound. Then we have recording engineers who try to record the music as accurately as possible to the selected medium. Then we have the playback system that tries to turn the recording back to soundwaves as accurately as possibly. If the engineers get it 100 % right, and the playback system gets it 100% right, we hear it exactly as we would hear it at the studio (If we forget the acoustics). Of course, that's not possible, but that's the aim in HIFI. That's what the the words High Fidelity mean. I love both CDs and LPs but saying that adding distortion makes it more real is just stupid. You may like it, and there's nothing wrong with it but that's not what the HIFI is supposed to do.
Holy crap Charles and effect are so unbelievably wrong. Yeah you guys know more than Fremer, look into his background losers....and if you think digital is better than analog, then god help ya
@@andreasleonlandgren3092 Dude, that is yesterday's stale milk... it is 2019, not 1984. Since the advancements in processing power, CDs don't sound harsh anymore... get yourself an upsampling CD player, and just as is true for vinyl, quality recorded or remastered CDs.
As it was explained to me by an audio engineer when CDs were first marketed, The difference between CDs and vinyl is in the differences in creation. Vinyl consists of a vinyl disc with grooves. The stylus travels through the grooves and reproduces the sound of the grooves. The sound is consistent as the groove is continuous. CDs reproduce sound from small holes punched through an aluminum disc. the space between those holes is silence, so the sound is not continuous. Our brain registers the silences and fills in with what the sound should be (subjective?) and compensates for the silences. This is why CDs often sound much brighter and harsh than vinyl. I always thought this was an interesting and plausible explanation.
That is not how CDs or digital audio works. The pits on a CD store bits, either a one or zero, which work like the bits in your computers hard drive and describe a digital PCM file, which is a way of storing the audio. This audio can be prefectly recreated as a continuous wave by your cd player (look up shannon-nyquist), meaning there is no "silence" it's the same exact wave form
Most of the newly released vinyl today is using the exact same master as the remastered CD. You aren't getting anything different, you're just buying a more expensive product.
No its isnt. That's and audio myth. Lps and cds come from the same session tape or first lay to tape but lps need remastering differently to remove the high distortion peaks and to work on the master to get the optimum settings for LP which you cannot do from the initial lay down to tape. Cd uses less care and often the distortion peaks are left in then the whole lot compressed in a way that couldnt be played on lp. One of my clients is a studio mastering chief engineer and deals with this stuff every day. He can tell you that lp bizarrely is more faithful to the live feed bar the dynamic range whilst most initial masters by his clients include stuff added or messed with to get the sound they want...often with loads of distortion and his job his to deal with it to produce decent recordings. Cds with the conversion to digital then to analogue uses things like brick wall filters that cause ringing and other problems. Cd isn't any more faithful or accurate than LP which most people cannot grasp because they focus on comparions with digital potential. Truth is that LP still sounds more real because oddly however flawed it remains better in simply sounding more realistic and 3D. Cd doesn't. Use your ears. Listen to a really good vinyl front end and decent LP...it blows CD out of the water.
“So if you take a digital recording and make a record out of it and it ends up sounding more real, that’s all that matters.” Micheal Fremer, dose this apply to MoFi records now that we know they where digital for a step??
Been listening to cd's for a long time, but bought my first Turntable 5 months ago and leaves the cd's for dead well for my taste in music it does. Records for me just sound so much more open and sounds real to life and if you got music from the analog tapes like a few miles Davis it's a whole another experience, cd is cold with full of harshness and tend not to listen to the whole album as its just annoying.
Digital music is more tiring than analogue.Certain genres,such as reggae and jazz sound better on vinyl,but classical is generally better on digital formats.
Lord Toffington I agree with you about classical music. One of the things we all hated about classical music on vinyl were the changes in dynamics in a piece would make it almost impossible to hear. Of course, if you jumped up and hiked the volume, the music then was too loud once the pianissimo section ended.
I don't understand all the rude comments about Michael Fremer. Can't people disagree without using derogatory language? This guy is clearly very knowledgeable about records and music. Is he opinionated? Yes but so are most people in this hobby. I think this video was entertaining and I'll bet his audio system sound amazing. So will all the trolls here please go back into their holes or learn how to behave on these comments sections.
With my project turntable and great.cartridge im so glad. Kept and took care of over 300 records Cds ok but if you listen to music alone i get more lifelike sensation with my beautiful records .
It's not even about CD anymore, it's LP Vs high Res. A well mastered, digitally recorded album sounds incredible in high resolution formats, but vinyl still has its place and can produce a warm natural sound even if it's transferred from digital format. The act of engraving the album is a digital to analogue process, it will always be appreciated.
Why does CDs sounds minor to high resolution SACDs ? Or the human brain has the absolute ability to detect the any diference if there is ? For me i love CDs and LPs but CDs is what best to listen to music and collecting albums and creating a music Library Plus that CDs if we take good care of them like not scratching them and e.t.c even in a dailly basis play-backs they can last a whole human lifetime seriouslly
@@Badassvidsz CDs have their issues. Early ones were mastered badly because the technology was new and engineers were adapting. They sounded cold and thin. Late ones were mastered badly because the mastering removed the dynamic range. The were just loud and fatiguing. Badly pressed discs suffered from rot, where the aluminium coating containing the pits and lands delaminates from the disc. There was about a period of 2 years where the mastering was spot on. LPs have their issues. They have a more limited frequency response in recording (to avoid the stylus jumping out of the groove), they suffer with harmonics (although a good mastering engineer can exploit this to make the LP sound better). Played with a worn stylus or with too much tracking force they will permanently be damaged. They suffer from inner groove distortion unless you use an exotic stylus. They suffer from static, from dust and can be scratched easily. But the sound has a warm quality, for most of the time has dynamic range and if you sit and listen to it, you are almost drawn into the music. It is one of the best feelings ever to be lost in music. CD was ruined by the loudness war, just after they had got it right.
@@cjmillsnun Agreed 100% but still is the best format ! { Although i'm also a very audio cassette listener } i do listen music very often from cassettes and especially when they are very good recorded they sound great but yet again CDs are the best format if done properlly of course .
I think the difference is vinyl has what I would describe as a natural noise floor that is created while playing. Playing a vinyl record creates an organic noise element that fills in all the holes of the recording. A cd can only contain recorded noise and it never changes. Like how he describes sounds blending and continuing. To a certain extent this is also just as dubious as wine tasting.
I've had to live with a certain mild level of deafness most of my life and I can't reliably tell the difference between CDs and vinyl. However when it comes to pop or rock music I mostly buy vinyl, because the CD version is more likely to be ruined by the loudness wars.
+Divertedflight I have some hearing loss from too much loud music, but I can't tell if it's harmed my ability to appreciate music. One thing I've noticed is that I don't seem to notice as large a difference as other people do when comparing music that is a victim of the loudness wars to the better mastered recordings.
Vinyl takes up too much space and has annoying surface noise, pop, clicks. they scratch easier and it is awkward if you only like 2 songs on the LP to play those songs without scratching the record. CD's can just be ripped say into Uncompressed Flac files and then put into Storage. My rips of CD's sound great through my music streamer into the stere
"Uncompressed Flac" LMAO ... FLAC *is* a compression just like MP3 is compression, except that MP3 is *highly* compressed and FLAC is lightly compressed. The original storage format is wav which has no compression.
@@dreamingmusic3299 Yes it is compressed, or else it would be a pointless exercise... obviously he meant to say lossless, not uncompressed... you know, the "L" in FLAC (likewise Apple)... duh. Btw, it pains me to see that people still use any form of compression. If you have 1000 CDs, that is 700 GB as WAV / uncompressed - it is hardly possible to find 1 TB HDDs today (with contemporary connections), so you would buy 2 TB or 4 TB anyway, so to hell with compression.
@@Baerchenization - "To hell with compression". Well said. Which means that with the advent of DVD audio and Bluray audio I hardly see any reason to distribute music on CD any more.
@@dreamingmusic3299 Err... the CD format had been drafted such, that you cannot hear a difference anymore anyway... which is precisely why nobody wanted SACD - you could not hear a difference, or so the story goes.... SACD releases, like vinyl releases, are often lim ed novelty releases nowadays. And so what is DVD audio gonna do for you? You'll have to buy all your shit again, and to take advantage of any actual benefit, if any, you'd have to upgrade your stereo as well.... it is already enough that I feel I have to buy releases on CD and vinyl, so to hell with DVD ;)
Mr. Fremer is absolutely right, records sound much better than cds, although they are not perfect (scratches, background noises etc., which can be real annoying), but that is another point, right now, there is no perfect medium for music
CD for the first 15 years sounded like a flat wall of sound. This was due in part to the players themselves. I have Naxos CDs from the late 80's & they sound really good with a modern player. Vinyl turntables & ancillaries have improved & I can now get a great sound out of old records.
What was your take on the cassette tape? I never liked them with that hiss in the background. But when I was in high school back in the Eighties, all the kids loved them. I can see why, because they could record other people's tapes and save on money. Personally, I never cared for that. I loved buying the LPs.
I have a really good Denon cassette deck from the 90's with a built-in Dolby NR. It makes cassettes sound as good as they can, even records well. But it's the same with vinyl, or should I say the equipment you are using. A Crosley all-in-one turntable = destroy your records, where as a High-end turntable with a good receiver and speakers will make your records sound superb. Trust me, I learned the hard way.
I have a theory based purely on feeling that vinyl effects us in a more pleasurable way because we are hearing a continuation or extension of the original sound vibrations of whatever instrument/voice has produced. Vinyl from an analogue master holds this energy whereas a digital copy is just that...a copy and devoid of that energy. Vinyl from a digital source doesn't have this obviously and it is noticeable.
Vinyl is dynamically compressed (roughly like 13-bit digital audio). Vinyl has much lower channel separation than CD. Vinyl is subject to noise and clicks. Vinyl has wow and flutter problem. Vinyl cannot reproduce the sound of a violin... Vinyl sucks.. but still for unexplained reason, it sounds better than a CD...
I feel like this about the subject. Remember when EQ’s were all the hype on audio. Then we found out it’s really not that great. We are clipping our amps pushing our speakers past the limits and ultimately flat response is superior. Digital audio in a sense is compression driven then eq’ed in a studio for us to hear at the engineering tuning, personal preferences and to their equipment. We will reproduce that sound on different equipment and it’s been modified. Vinyl is the recording in a sense is purest format. It’s not lossless by any means but it’s all there. Look at daft punks recording of Random access Memories. They wanted ALL real instruments look at how fantastic this record sounds on vinyl. It’s an intimacy of the imperfections that records reproduce that sound natural perfection is not natural. The kind of distortion that records have is an audible reflection of realism. Kinda like watching something in cgi. It’s got to the point that it looks real but at times it’s so perfect it looks unrealistic.
It can reproduce the sound of a violin astronomically and significantly more than any CD I've ever heard in my life. When paired with the right gear, vinyl is virtually the best audio format, period.
I bought my first CD player, a Sony in 1986 and I felt the same way after about a month that CDs sounded flat with no dynamics. Fremer is spot on, however mastering of CDs have gotten better where I’ve been happy with the medium for quite some time. Listen to any CD that came out in the 80s and you will instantly hear what it sounded like in the early days.
Digitizing sound can only appropriate the original, i.e. real, analog signal. BTW, although there were few made, have you listened to a very good direct-disc? They're astonishing!
I threw away all of my vinyl (including a first pressing DSotM) in 2000 when I had to move to a different city. I started buying CDs in the 80s when they first hit the market and the improvement in sound was profound. No more hissing, popping and rumble from my turntable. No more zapping with an ion gun to try and remove static electricity. No more wiping the disk with a little brush to try and remove the dirt. Also, no more having to get up and flip the disk over to hear the rest of the music on the other side! The only negative to me was the cover art. But whatever. I would look at the cover art once when I first got an album and that was that. And most times I'd copy my albums over to cassette in order to not have to wear out the album with repeated plays! CD's were so amazon in comparison. And FYI, my opinion as just as valid as Mr Fremer's! I also "don't care" what he has to say.
Hissing popping and rumble? Not on my relatively cheap turntable. I play clean records and my turntable is set up correctly - took 30 mins. It's really not that complicated. Looking after CDs in order to keep them in playable condition is a different matter.
Vinyl is arguably superior. I've seen alot of debate where people would say, "Oh, CD has a higher frequency." or perhaps that, "Oh, Vinyl has pops and clicks." and to answer that simply. First off, the frequency range of vinyl, the top and lowest cycle threshold is something that LITERALLY no piece of music goes either below that threshold or above. So the higher frequency range of CD is quite frankly, irrelevant. Additionally, if you want no pops or clicks on a vinyl record then there's this little thing called cleaning your record! It's understandable that vinyl records are indeed so, harder to maintain but that's the work that you must put into a record into constantly get the sweet, warmth of a record. Its more than noticeable and I would take a record any day rather than a CD. I prefer performance rather than compactness for neatness. I will admit, however, that vinyl records are more expensive and even some hard to find to say the least. Nevertheless, despite my praise for vinyl. I feel deeply that it depends on which type of music you happen to be listening to. If it's classical, vinyl is the way to go. If it's anything other than classical then CD and for Jazz, vinyl is most likely also the way to go. Really, it comes down to music preference as what I think. Personally, I choose classical music and jazz but thats more of a personal choice rather than a controversial debatable topic. So it depends on your liking.
Its good to know your source material when picking a record press it distinguishes a good or mediocre press. Thanks Mark for your diluted info. Could you explain what acurate to what means. If hes not joking its the master which is essentially extremely important. If you dont care if your vinyl is eq correct fine any ol 3rd gen eques production master will do. How can this info be integral
I used LP12 Ittok and VPI until late 90s, then got CD with Tube Preamp. The CD/Tube sounded as good, but cleaner. Move on a bit to mid 2000s and i got rid of Turntable but spent about 20K on a passive Naim system, sounded great-didnt miss records! A bit further on i sold the Naim and bought Streamer and some Active speakers, wow! the best i had ever had in my home! Then i got all nostalgic and with the resurgence of records, i thought "lets get a turntable and spin some of my records" Wow i was surprised! Surprised at how bad they really were! Not noise or dynamics, just slow and thick with way less detail. Vinyl was a fantastic format when Digital was new and poorly understood, just like records in the 20s,30s,40s,50s when that technology was new. However, digital in not new and very well understood. Also, as many people have commented, virtually all new Vinyl and most Vinyl from the late 80s onwards was cut from digital masters. All that cutting a new record from a digital master is doing, is adding loads of second harmonic distortion, just as valves do. Vinyl did sound better than Digital formats for a long time, but not now. Enjoy what you enjoy, but there is no justification for the premis that Vinyl is better, both scientificaly or subjectivly.
@@SanathanDharm Hi. i was a bit evasive as people have "high spirited views". I had my own hifi shop in the 90s, so had much time to mess with equipment and cables. I now use Kef LS50W, they are without doubt the best 2k speakers you can buy. Realistically you would need to spend 5k or much more to get anything close. I had a naim CD2 555PS with 282 and Hicap plus 250 power amp Speakers cost 2k and i cant remember the name, sounded good, cost 18k but not anywhere close to the Kefs. Go to a dealer and listen, you will be amazed, i was and still am! problem is where do i go next? So much bull in this industry. Cheers Alex
@@alexdewsbery3832 Many thanks for sharing your system setup. Sharing your system info keeps it real on the forum and I find these snippets of information the real gems which one can actually put to some actual use. Naim and Tannoy are UK's best kept audiophile secret. What are you thoughts on Klipsch rp 600M or Klipsch RP 8000f?
Michael is spot on! I've been spinning albums since the 70s. I have over 900 CDs and almost 500 albums. Wished I could trade in each CD for it's albums counterpart and not be out any $$$. I have some duplicate CDs of some albums and I prefer my albums.
Mr. Fremer lives in his own fantasy world. I cannot take him seriously. I'm happy with my cd's and Meridian 808 player. Once awhile a play vinyl album on my Linn and I like that too. The difference is not so big as to make a fuss about it. But I do think CDs are obsolete and hires streaming has the future. I also find vinyl soft- and hardware highly over priced and unpractical.
He should play The Move: "I can hear the grass grow". Only works with a worn out Mono 45 out of an old juke-box. Then he can even see rainbows in the evening and feel a magnetic wave of sound....
Why does this guy get so mad about someone listening to digital doesn't he stream movies or does he still marvel about vhs .so basically if I like digital I'm wrong. And your right because you like analog. Wake up buddy why are you right .so let me get this straight if I like oak trees and you like pine trees I'm wrong because you don't agree lol
The comparison doesn't make sense because youtube sound is DIGITAL so both media ( vinyl and cd ) sound digital and almost the same. You can't hear the analog warmth, 3D ...etc.. on UA-cam
You don't hear in digital. When you listen to compact disc you are not hearing digital. You are hearing analog sound that has been stored digitally. When its played back its a perfect representation of the wave form that is feed to it. To make a record the original wave for is tweaks many times to make is sound as good as possible once its carved into plastic and then needs to be re-eque'd and amplified to make it audible. You can like what ever format you want. But vinyl is not superior in sound reproduction PERIOD. I collect CDs and records and I find more enjoyment out of records but they do not sound better than a well mastered CDs and are by no means convenient. How the hell am I supposed to listen to a record in my car or on the train?
I used to listen to records and then CD appeared and it was much better only for one reason, among others: You can play it millions of times. With records they are scratched and lose details, no matter how careful you are, adter listening to them many times. These idiots spent crazy amounts of money as if that made a difference and it is all subjective. And the worst part is that he cannot give any objective reason...
Why do audiophile/analog people do not have any problems with looking at digital screens?
In all honesty I can’t hear the difference between the two at peak performance. With that said: 12 inch cover art. That’s just awesome.
In theory CD is the vastly better medium in just about every way, especially over time
And perfect CD reading is a lot easier to attain than a perfect record reading.
Most audiophiles confuse distortion with character
@@ericmiller254 I can change your mind with an a/b test in about 15 minutes. Not on UA-cam-in person
@@scottkasper6378 That's just proving the CD player is adding distortion, lol
I've been at this for 40 years...vinyl is the better sounding medium. Vintage equipment like a marantz or pioneer makes the difference in terms of sound as well.
Cd sales are down, vinyl sales are up up up.
When I record a sound digitally these days and I take care to position everything correctly, I can not tell the difference between the recording and the original. When I used to record onto tape I would lose some attack transient and there would be a sort of slight phasing type difference to the sound.
He's quick to dismiss the ceremony of listening to vinyl, but that is nearly my entire reason for doing so. It requires you to set aside time to listen to music. Physically selecting the album, removing it from the stack, removing it from the sleeve, carefully removing any dust with a brush, setting it on the spindle, laying down the needle. That first moment, the crackle of the lead-in. You sit down on your couch and take in the album art, reading the liner notes as your favorites play in warm imperfection. This ritual is what it's all about to me. Digital has all but destroyed our appreciation of music. Listening to digital music is almost always accompanied by other activities, distracting our attention. Listening to vinyl IS the activity. The process of listening carves the music out of the mundanity of life and brings it to the forefront. If you love music, you owe it to yourself to spend more time appreciating it instead of finding ways to make it more convenient.
That's not the CDs fault. That's on you.
Agreed re the importance of dedicated, focused listening.
But the listening ritual you describe applies equally to optical disc formats, too.
Picking the disc from a physical collection, handling the disc, appreciating the disc art, handling by the edges like vinyl, walking over to a quality disc player or transport, powering up connected dac, amps, preamp, ie all the same as vinyl process.
Sit in sweet spot and read liner notes, booklet. Yea, smaller than vinyl, though actual print type may be same or larger than any given vintage lp.
If you use a vintage disc player with VFD or similar dedicated display with track, time, and track calendar display, there is similar visual nostalgia to watching spinning vinyl.
@@jakefootball9402re Harsh and trebly cd
Could be that particular mastering and or the disc player or dac you are using.
Dedicated external dacs can sound far less harsh than low end cd or dvd player analog outs
Do you get nostalgic about old [SLOW] steam trains too?
I think he is right. It is about the sound more than the rituals. Most of the ultrasonic frequencies emitted by musical instruments have been stripped away from the CD, but vinyl still retains those frequencies. Those ultrasonic frequencies have been shown to have a positive effect on the human mind. I could tell there was something wrong when I tried my first CD back in the 1980s. People knew about the problem even back then.
Luckily, there are ways you can add those ultrasonic frequencies back into the digital files. I do it all the time and I'm satisfied with the results now.
I converted to CD and within a few years stopped listening to music and went with talk radio. Now, a new turntable and recreating my old album collection . . . I'm listening/enjoying/rapturing in music again.
Awesome!
Weird.
Nice! That’s exciting!
I hope the music will undo the damage of listening to talk radio.
Same here. Just bought a new turntable 2 weeks ago, and just got a amp and speakers given to me for my new set up. I'll be buying a lot of cleaning stuff and sleeves in a week or two. I'm finding my love of music, (that I had lost years ago), once again.
I've heard vinyl played on super expensive systems - yes, it sounds fantastic, but who has that money? I've heard cds in a car, and for the price, they sound damned good. Of course your average consumer doesn't care because the average consumer doesn't have $50,000 to spend on their home stereo.
I'll just keep enjoying both: cds and vinyl. No one can force you to choose one of the other. You are free to listen to whatever you want.
You don't need a super expensive system to have Vinyl sound fantastic . But yes you do need to spend more than with CDs to get good sound .
Not nessisarily ! I only spent $180.00 on a 5.1 600watt rms output amplifier including all the speakers and I bought it all at thrift stores.
Well i did invest in a vacuum tube preamp for my turntable and put my turntable in another room suspended from the ceiling on cloth covered window springs . That way i can enjoy the full effect of the bass pipes when i listen to Bach Fuge in Dmin.full volume on the subwoofer. Giggles
@Michael Shultz 5.1 sucks for music...….and 600 watt??? no one cares about the power of the amp. numbers don't care one bit … just listen to it and what you think sounds better.. my 15 watt 70's sansui au 101 rapes my 5.1 harman kardon shit box...
I have the same opinions of very expensive hi fi equipment; then there is the topic of the space; the acoustics of a room, and any obstructions from a wall that could potentially affect the sound within the music
When you are the only one with an extreme opinion you might not be as credible as you thought
1. The dynamic range of a direct-cut vinyl record may surpass 70 dB.
2. Analog studio master tapes can have a dynamic range of up to 77 dB.
3. A 16 bit analog-to-digital converter may have a dynamic range of between 90 and 95 dB.
In practice, a vinyl can’t do better than 45 Db in dynamic
That dynamic range is digital was wasted by brickwalling the sound.
I've been a fan of Fremer since I ordered his "It's a vinyl World, after all." dvd with my Music Hall mmf 2.2 last year. I just tossed it in the order for giggles and I'm happy I did. The guy is just cool and can communicate his knowledge so well. Needless to say I'm now hooked on vinyl. At first, you just sort of know that it sounds better. After a while and some tuning you also start to realize that everything BESIDES vinyl just sounds a bit empty.
Fremer strikes me as a deeply insecure man, who constaly wants to show off how much he paid to listen to such an inferior sound source.
@@RobCCTVYou're simply wrong. He's a leader in his field. He's unfiltered at this point in his career. We like that
He thinks CDs have a sound to them. The sound comes from the DAC and you can have a good one or a bad one :)
They are Still Red Book Compressed no matter what You play them through.
I mean really? He says what he thinks and on any argument or other opinion he says "I don't care". How to take him seriously when he is so arrogant. I replied once on Analog Planet because he was rude about guy with another opinion. Narrow minded and arrogant attitude. IT'S ALL ABOUT MUSIC. Vinyl and CD are good formats and they are able to sound FANTASTIC! And really? There is just one example of CD. And I agree that first CD pressing of Roxy Music is bad. Maybe it's just flat transfer of... production tape for vinyl cutting. Of course this man won't mention about many bad vinyl releases. I've heard once bad lp pressing. The whole fomat is crap and sounds worse than CD. The same logic. And it's very "smart" to take judgement when the format has its premiere. If he doesn't care then I don't care too.
Bullshitters are around every corner. Most of the bullshitters pose as anti-bullshitters.
ALL, yes all, early CD/digital sounded like ASS. Period. It wasn't until innovators (Like Mike Moffat at Theta back then, and others) started figuring out WHY.... and started fixing the filters, and upsampling, and a bunch of other stuff that the OG "theory" said wasn't needed... but turns out it was...
In my experience, only in the last 10 or so years, have DACs gotten transparent enough to give the same recording, from the same master tapes, the ability to give proper LP a run for the money.
These are just the facts of the situation. It was never "Perfect sound, forever".... it is now, good enough... more convenient? certainly. but better - measured by "does it sound like reality"? nope.
But nobody I've played LP versus CD on my system has ever, not once, preferred the CD... there's a few recordings where it is close... but on most (most especially properly recorded Jazz and Classical), it's not remotely close. I've used the same Turntable and Arm since 1990; 34+ years now, and it still kicks most CD/digital's butt. By today's high-end standards, it's not crazy expensive (in fact my entire system - TT/Arm/Pre-Amp/Power Amp/Speakers has ended up costing me right around $1 a day when amortized over all that time.
All I've had to do is buy new cartridges over the years (about once every two years). I prefer low-output Moving Coil designs, and there are some crazy good bargains out there to be had.
LIFE is analog, not digital
Music (sound) is analog, not digital
Emotion is analog, not digital...
Word
If you're hearing significant differences between the analog and digital versions of a given recording, you can blame that on (or credit that to) the mastering engineer(s). I have both formats of a number of my albums and in some cases, the LP wins... in some cases, the CD wins. BTW, kids are not embracing LPs because the sound is better. LPs are just more fun. Simple as that.
Mark Colegrove Very well put, and true. I'm old, so I started with vinyl. Now, the majority of my music is digital. Once in a while I will have an album in each format, though I try not to do that, and sometimes I can't tell the difference between the two, sometimes one is better than the other. Why do I even have vinyl? Why do I, once in a while, buy a vinyl copy of an album I already have on CD? Because vinyl is just more fun. Oh, and sometimes it's all about that big ole cover art!
I think you’re right. I admit it begrudgingly, though. I really WANT vinyl to sound superior. For reasons I won’t bore people with, I’m beginning to wonder if the emperor has no clothes. That said, as you hint at, there’s something almost sacred about the process of taking a record from its (modern nonstatic rice parchment) sleeve, placing it delicately on your (acrylic, hell, Chihuly blown glass) TT, gently running a (mink scrotum) brush lightly dabbed with (1 part Absinth, 2 parts ferret urine) solution along the grooves, delicately balancing then lowering the (16th century Jade, carried by Sherpa) needle on the (blessed by a Monk) vinyl record. It’s a ritual. And for some, pressing “play” just isn’t the same. Maybe that’s it. Just a thought.
Also: vinyl exclusive content that never got transferred to other formats.
Both systems have virtues and failings. CD is very easy. Vinyl needs a lot of work to get right. It can be very frustrating. It has a sweet-spot that needs to be found and there is where the magic happens. It's a real fiddle once the intentions of the playback system become serious. The mastering is different in the two media and that can play into the impression we get of an album. Vinyl shouldn't sound better because it has too many processes between the master tape and the sound emerging from the speakers as the record is played. CD vs vinyl is down to taste and is far from the binary decision. You could do more extreme things in CD mastering that would take us somewhere new but, the aesthetic remains close to what a vinyl LP produces. Both systems wear their artefacts on their sleeves and can both become flawed because of them. The music is what matters and we need to serve that. MP3 and other compressed media allow people to listen to more music, more of the time. However it may have made people immune to more challenging music. The quality of equipment has improved so there are people improving their music listening by finding out how to listen better. The best turntables built to the highest standards, playing through the best electronics make magic. The same is true of the best CD. Both systems have virtues and failings.
Very well said .Thank you.
I had a cheap turntable and still thought vinyl was way better. The CD technology is flawed as it doesn't retain the ultrasonic frequencies that are emitted by real musical instruments. Vinyl does retain those frequencies even on a cheap turntable.
I get a kick out of people still arguing this. Preference is different for everyone. I thought CDs sucked too until recently. I found a dac that doesn't sound bad and now i can hear why some people prefer CDs. I still prefer vinyl simply because I find it less fatiguing. Mastering IMO makes more difference than the format.
I love Fremer. I love that his approach is that he doesn’t care why it sounds better to him. To the people who think he is just pushing magazine sales...Have you seen his set up? A man who does not genuinely feel the way he says he does would not invest the time and money into a set up like that. Anyways look you don’t need a super high end system to hear what he is talking about. CDs and digital formats, to some peoples ears, are much harsher sounding. Perhaps looking at data would indicate CDs are more accurate or even contain more information...However the warmth and more lifelike, in the room presentation of vinyl is undeniable.
Also it is worth mentioning that regardless of format, if you have a poorly mixed or mastered album it doesn’t matter how great your set up is or what you’re listening to it on. Vinyl being better is almost always dependent on really knowing your shit and finding out which pressings are good. The same can go for CDs but to a lesser extent IMO. Vinyl is without a doubt the best way to experience (recorded) music for me, but I also know that I am willing to spend time doing research on pressings, to set up and maintain vintage hifi gear, and yes...I am willing to spend more as well and I am not wealthy by any means! Most people simply do not care about music enough to subject themselves to that, it sounds like work and it can be but as you get more into it the digging and the search for the best pressings becomes apart of the experience and when you spin a record you’ve been looking for for the first time it is so much more rewarding. You feel like you are apart of the music more because you have a relationship with it and understand where it comes from more and why it sounds better than other pressings. Vinyl is DEFINITELY NOT something anyone could or should just jump into because the appeal of it tangled up in other things besides just sound. There’s a genuine emotional attachment to records that I could not see happening with CDs, and definitely not digital files lol. The benefits of vinyl come with an equal amount of things that are a pain in the ass but I think that’s just how life works sometimes.
That’s actually a pretty sweet comment! 👌 You point out exactly that it is a journey and it comes with certain experiences that aren’t always pleasing and that it simply isn‘t served to you on a silver platter...I have played music to so many friends and family members on my setup (which took me some time to „grow“ and continues to evolve) and most of them state that they have never experienced music in such an engaging way or didn‘t even know that they could be touched that way by music....but in the end - for most of them - it seems like too much effort (research/expense/time)...“I could never blablabla“, „you have too much time on your hands blablabla“.
In essence: it‘s (more than) a hobby! :-)
Agree with you. I spend lots of time researching pressings and always buy the best I can afford. I won’t bother buying a record if there is no pressing that will improve on the digital version.
Yeah you heard that everyone. Sound is not iportant . Emotional attachment to nostalgic media is what vinyl nerds love. they dont care that cd sounds bettet lol
The problem with CD is that the engineers stripped most of the ultrasonic frequencies from it that real musical instruments emit. So it holds much less information than vinyl because vinyl retains those frequencies. Ultrasonic frequencies have been shown to have a positive effect on the human mind. So this is why vinyl sounds better to many. It's because it is better.
Luckily, there are easy ways to add those frequencies back into the digital files. That's what I do and I'm happy with the results.
@@dzenacs2011 you are being hubristically foolish in depriving yourself of the opportunity to experience something of which you not only have no knowledge, but no desire to GET knowledge...
Bet you haven't been to much live - acoustic (not amplified) - music (e.g. Jazz, Folk, Classical)...
Arguing from intentional ignorance isn't particularly convincing
Every Audiophile seems to have amnesia, when it comes to remembering the good ol days back in the early 70's ( what i really mean is during the oil embargo ) record companies started cutting corners; cheaper grade of vinyl, smaller amount of vinyl went into each individual disc...........etc. the result was crap. With competition ( like lowly mp3, cd's , hi res digital ) came major improvements. Why do you think they actually advertise the weight of a record now? So, now the industry is trying to lure you back to a technology they crapped on, Marketing, it drives me bonkers.
@ReaktorLeak I think CDs are brilliant, and they're so cheap now. You can get far better sound from a CD than you can from most streaming services. With the exception of perhaps Qobuz.
I know this comment is 3 years old but I will reply anyway :) There are some pressings today 2020 which are absolutely rubbish. I bought a colored vinyl and over speakers it sounds much more distorted than even the MP3 version. Over headphones it is even worse because you hear every imperfection in the surface. By the way my turntable has been setup highly accurately and most of my LPs sound great. But every once in a while I buy something and I am shocked at the pressing quality.
@@MrSouzy This is true - and has been so going back to at least 2007/2008 pressings - in my own experience - during the first phases of the resurgence. Manufacturing, materials and especially quality control are oftentimes all over the place.
True,I spent $600 on my first turntable setup and that's more than enough to make me stopped listening to CD the difference is really noticeable.Well CDs are still for my car and bedroom...
6:50 - Wait, is he saying CD has frequency cut offs? I just heard the opposite on another video like this - they said that frequencies have to be cut from vinyl.
Yeah. But Cut off on CD has to be before 22 050 Hz no matter what or you allow aliasing. It depends on filter you will use. But there is no ideal, square filter. These filters doesn't appear in the universe. On vinyl you can cut off high frequency higher, it depends on engineer's choise. The more you're close to inner groove, the less highs you're able to prevent.
Cd's can sound wonderfull, if they are mastered properly. Cd has no clicks, pops and surface noice like vinyl records
Agree, this guy is talking bollocks
They don't have any noise, and that's the problem. That's why they don't have the presence that analog has.
@@User-7847 CD's don't sound sterile and compressed. If they mastered the CD well, it compares or even surpasses the vinyl record. When a CD of digital master isn't mastered properly it will sound worse compared to the vinyl record, because they are using a different master. An example is the first pressing of Thriller on CD. This Japanese master sounds like a vinyl record without pop and clicks. The later digital/CD versions suck in comparison
I can’t believe I’m reading diametrically opposing opinions on analog vs digital in the comments. Would never have seen that coming!!
nothing beats the 12" format and the visual experience of a vinyl record/sleeve
synaProductions Agreed! Vinyl is the Best Music Format.
remember folks. this is a man who has a $30,000 cable between his phono preamp and amps that he mortgaged his home to buy. as well as a $30,000 tone arm on his turn table. What im saying is that he is certifiably insane, so anything he says is suspect.
Oh yeah, we may all see Michael's eccentricity here, but we know his love for vinyl is real and knows no bounds. This is his life, his work, and I for one are not in any position to question the man's sanity. He adores sound created by the intricacies of analog, it's purity, it's natural distortion, and a sense of the real world this gives him. This is a man that would even love a Croz if you gave him one. They may be vastly inferior to high end models but this is Mike's World, that warming feel as the needle hits the vinyl and it's intricacies of progressively natural distortion, not phoney distortion due to digitization. It's a sheer delight for the man.
He’s def not insane but nor is he about to do a 180 on vinyl after 50yrs, we all,suffer from confirmation bias to one degree or another
fakiirification
1000% agreed. Vinyl is his religion or cult worship.
No the $30k cables mean that he can listen with clarity 😂
@@beyondonethousand Not true.
I am a member of the largest audiophile club in the world, and most of the members I know are format agnostic. In other words, whatever format has the best sound quality for a particular recording, is the one to listen to.
It just so happens that many older recordings sound better on vinyl, and it is not my fault that I want to spend the $$ to hear them sound as good as my budget will allow.
I am completely convinced that hi-res digital (24/192 PCM and DSD) recordings are the best sounding format ever developed. But by the same token, I believe that the vast majority of digital only listeners, that denigrate vinyl fans, are pretty unaware how good vinyl actually sounds.
The vinyl they are using wobbles very bad in (3.39), you can almost hear it in your head. Also digital has caught up a long time ago, he is living in the past and builds his facts on emotions. Nothing entirely wrong with that because we are humans after all, right?
Early CD players were 14-bits and sounded a bit woolly. I really do miss tri-spot tracking which helped with certain discs. (even more so nowadays with CD rot)
I did prefer vinyl sound until the industry got around to re-mastering and we had more choices in the CD player technologies, oversampling and dual-DACs etc.
Storing 12" vinyl is also a huge commitment.
Early CD players came in two camps: 14bit with 4x oversapling, or 16bit no oversampling. 16bit with oversampling came later, it is now the norm. While some early DACs might have sounded mediocre, the seemingly "few" 14bits aren't to blame. Vinyl has a DR equivalent of 12bits on a good day.
The high end of today's turntable are getting better but the low end are getting worse. Today's low end turntable has a plastic platter and the pitch starts to became unreliable as the motor starts to overheat. Those cheap budget turntables from the 1970s still has a metal platter and the DC motor's speed is regulated by a centrifugal switch. The pitch remains stable even I played several LPs continuously which are over an hour total.
Most 70s budget TT have AC motor
centrifugal switch??? Are you refering to the hall effect sensors that act as the commutators and are used to regulate the three phase power that controls the motor?
@@larryownbey7764 A centrifugal switch is simply a pair of breaker governors that regulate the speed in early tape deck motors and the like
I'd rather pay the money for the sound quality of vinyl then a compressed digital cd. just compared the jazz song Take Five on 180 gram vinyl to a cd copy and there is no comparison. the vinyl makes me feel like I'm in the recording session watching them play it.
+Çerastes yep that is so true. i have had enough of this hot mastering of most modern digital. if i buy any CDs these days they are usually the ones released before 2000. Now those earlier mastered CDs sound better than any half speed vinyl. Btw, the author of this video talks absolute nonsense.
You have no idea. I work in recording studios and I can tell you if I copy a finished recording I've just produced in the studio onto CD and play it back in that studio it sounds exactly the same. If I was to cut a laqurer disc and press it to vinyl and play it back in the same studio it would not even sound close to the original. Vinyl just has so many limitations you have to compromise the audio signal so much to make it work as a playable format.
I have, and the digital version blows it away. Quit making shit up
I guess it's due to the preference of the person really. I have heard quality digital recordings on disc that have sounded extremely well. I'm not making shit up anyway. No matter what you tell me I prefer the vinyl rendition of it better. If you think the digital is better then so be it. This will always be a he said she said debate.
I guess I've heard the original pressing and the song is on the inner most groove where you have the lowest sound quality on the album. I'd have to hear a version on the outer groove, but that almost proves that vinyl can be very limiting when quality degrades as you get closer to the inner groove. I agree though, its a never ending debate. I want to like vinyl more, but when I play songs back to back, the tightness of the bass disappears. I also have a $600 table so its not a total piece of junk. The fact is, that many who claim that vinyl is superior are the ones that have a $10,000 turntable. Its just not realistic in many cases. Also I apologize for the straightforwardness of my last comment
Mastering and the digital to analog converter (DAC) in the realm of digital audio deserve a mention
Ruben Davis such things should be mentioned. Too often, vinyl folks like to compare today's audiophile label pressings to mass market CDs from the 1980's.
A lot of digital fans like to use test equipment as a means of "proving" digital's superiority. However, I'll remain skeptical of those results until those devices match or exceed the processing power of the human brain. Analog sound seems to not only stimulate the sense of hearing, but the sense of touch as well. There is a certain room filling sound that only analog seems to have.
A CD cannot possibly be as good as the source. The sampling rate isn't high enough. I think hi fi is so subjective, the point is to create what is pleasing to your own ears. If you want a steak to taste like the source, then eat it raw. If you want it to taste pleasing to your particular tastes season it and cook it a certain way. Creating distortions in the food makes it taste better to some. I've invited many people over to hear my system. Not a single person said they preferred listening to the CDs than the LPs. Trust the ears and the body to what sounds good. Sound is processed by the most powerful supercomputer in existence, the human brain. Until sound test equipment can exceed or even replicate the processing power of the human brain, I will be skeptical if its findings.
Mr. Chris Here's a meaningful test: Take your favourite vinyl record, play it on your favourite turntable that sounds just peachy to you, and make a digital copy of it at 16 Bits/44.1 kHz in a non-compressed format such as DAT, your computer's soundcard to WAV, some standalone USB ADC to WAV, a CD recorder or whatever you have.
Then, do a double blind test: The original vinyl vs. the digital copy playing.
There have been many tests done in this manner, and the results have always been consistent: The listernes guess the sources 50/50 right/wrong, i.e. not better than throwing a dice. That means no-one, not even claimed golden ears, can tell the difference. The digital copy always sounds exactly like the vinyl record playing on the turntable used for recording, and it has all that "vinyl warmths" that analogue fans love.
This proves two things:
1. Vinyl acts like an effects processor. It adds certain artefacts that weren't actually present in the original recording. The fact that these artefacts sound pleasing to many people notwithstanding, the "vinyl warmths" is not a strength but a kind of defect. It could be added to any signal using a simple DSP, and actually there are such devices.
2. Non-compressed, well at 16/44.1 done with any half-decent AD/DA-converters is transparent to human ears. Its distortions - while undeniably there - are low enough not to matter for practical purposes. It can even preserve that "vinyl warmth" that many of you think digital is uncapable off. Fact is, the "vinyl warmths" is just an added effect, and as digital will record anything with very high fidelity, it'll also preserve the vinyl effect.
Now the question which specific commercial release has better quality is a completely different cup of tea. The only meaningful judgment of fidelity would be comparing the copy against the master tape, but consumers can't do that. The subjective quality of this or that release can't tell us about that. It can't tell us about the merits of each format either, because most differences will be down to different mastering, not the formats themselves. Only if you have a vinyl and a CD of which you know for certain they were made from the same master, you can tell the properties of the formats. Even then you still can't tell which one is more faithful to the original, because you don't have that. The difference you hear could be either due to vinyl changing something, or CD changing something, or both. With my above test, you can tell though.
They could easily make CDs sound like vinyl if they'd simply make the vinyl fist and then the CD from that vinyl playing through some high quality turntable. But I hope they never do that, that would be missing the point of digital. But they could market vinyl-sound postprocessors.
+Mr. Chris 24/96 digital can be a bit for bit perfect copy of the master. CD, or 16/44, can also be a bit for bit perfect copy of the master within the bounds of human hearing. It is impossible for vinyl or other analogue playback formats to be perfect copies of anything.
prep74 Maybe, but that doesn't change the fact that digital music is less pleasant to listen to. Listening to music on a big stereo like the one in the video encompasses the sense of touch as well. Those vibrations we can't hear can be felt.
Mr. Chris So it is not just about the music? Different strokes for different folks I suppose, me personally, I like to listen to the music and not the stereo, though it is well understood in the field of psychoacoustics that eye candy stereo can create a sort of placebo effect that the sound is better than it actually is. The only vibrations we can feel but not hear are subsonic bass tones, which is not really the tone but vibrations of things around you. Even so, this is more likely to be accurately portrayed through accurate digital whereas it may result in rumble distortion on turntables through feedback - that is why many good phono pre-amps have subsonic filters to remove subsonic content.
At 4:40 the interviewer guy says "well, it was close" then he gets gradually bullied by Fremer into effectively talking as if the vinyl was substantially better than the CD.
You don’t see that he’s laughing after he said that? Of course he hears the difference
Hey Fremer, would you please share your opinions about the SHM SACD of this album? Thanks for the video!
The main criteria for CD was to be able to put a full concerto on one side of a playback format and fit it in the car dash.
Original CD couldn't resolve anything over 8k properly. All you experts who say that doesn't really matter cause our ears really cant perceive much over 10 k, well stick to that and forgot about 2nd and 3rd order harmonics. Transients cue the ear and the CD format lacks that detail. I was in the HIFI trade for 35 years and I have one CD. I use it as a beer coaster.
In regards to well mastered CD and SACD vs Vinyl, the Vinyl has to be well mastered and well Pressed as well.
I still after all these years cant understand why somebody would take an Analogue wave form and transform it into a Square Wave and then try and transform it back into an Analogue wave form.
Ohh, most people went to digital because of hick pops and cracks. Fine. Thats understandable for a lot of reasons.
I now use a Music Hall 9.1 which is fine for what it costs but the pitch isn't stable enough for solo piano..I would welcome any suggestions :)
+quinto34 Buy a belt-drive turntable with heavy platter. The spinning of the platter will balance out the unstable pitch. You may also check if the belt with MMF9.1 is loosened.
I love CDs. They'll come back just as vinyl has. Decent system makes all the difference and I've never had a problem with them.
so true i
I've tried to get back into cd collecting a bit, but the mastering choices that are made with many many cd's now render them almost unlistenable. Look up the loudness war. A lot of digital music sounds verifiably awful now. They sound so harsh
5:40. Why can't Fermer explain the big "why" question?
Michael, modern music is almost universally digitally recorded, regardless if the consumer end product is transferred to a digital file, CD or an analog LP. So are we stuck searching for vintage records that were recorded on tape or direct to disc?
Or an excellent re-issue. There are many from which to choose.
LP's for older stuff, stream for new. Is there that much new music that is worth evem buying anyway?
I can explain it. But it takes a number of graphics that I can not post here. I was also around at the introduction to digital in the Audio industry. Living in Nashville repping some of the top audio lines. I met Dr. Thomas Stockham, Jr. at an AES meeting in Nashville. We did a comparison of "The Grab Bag" which was released as Direct to Disk but the two track mix was fed simultaneously to an Apex 1/2 track and the Soundstream. We listened to the just released DtoD on the cutting lathe along with the 1/2 track and Soundstream on their West Lake designed and installed system to compare them. Everyone picked the DtoD as far superior. I also met Japanese engineers from Sony and JVC that were showing their new digital audio converters that recorded to video tape (Beta or 3/4). I showed them what I had found and they agreed it was just one more of the problems with digital. But it shows why there is a linear time shift that becomes more produced in higher frequencies that causes a dissociation of time domain relationships. Such as making the click of a guitar pick dissociate from the vibration of the string.
This reminds me of the people who say laserdisc is better than Blu Ray. I have the original vinyl of Yes - Time and a Word, sounds great. I have the CD and it sounds just as good. It's pure audio foolery
In some aspect Laserdisc is still better than Blu-Ray.
The smooth fast forward and rewind,frame by frame play and of course the artwork,and better audio mix for TV and smaller speakers.
Let's not fool ourselves. Young people are buying records to play on their cheap suitcase players. Anything that comes after is a bonus for the vinyl community.
I believe his story about the Roxy album sounding terrible on the first CD ever pressed. Everything after that isn't to be believed because, science.
The other thing audiophiles need to understand about people and music is, the song is what is important to almost everyone and it always has been. I have a seeburg 1973 jukebox filled with 45's. It sounds like crap, no doubt exactly like it did in the 70's, and how I remember jukeboxes sounding back then.. but the songs it plays are great like they always have been.
CD's serve their purpose as well, they can be or could be played in car stereos, used in the work place "now MP3", and such...records are enjoyed when you're chilling home, I listen to some beautiful old songs via MP3 with 64 kbs, it's a terrible sound but the melody is there so I enjoy them and hope one day I'll find them on CD's or records. But the fact remains, Vinyl is the way to go to enjoy music to the fullest, I like to look at the spinning record while the music is being played, and after all these years I still find that magical...
Just like any old guy, he touts the good ole days, when things were better. Selective memory, hates progress.
the video was a big waste of time, fremer clearly does *not* understand any technology.
Amen my old friend, this guy explains it so well.
I'm a little confused by this video.4.23-"it was close"-Thomas Mulready .. but then he started to doubt himself ,agreeing more and more with Fremer, until, it's not close at all "it's such a difference".Why did you change your mind?
No disrespect Mr Fremer ,I can see/hear you are passionate about this subject,but you seem to want to "exert" your passion ( what you believe in) onto everyone, and it seems more so if people disagree in what "you" hear or "your" belief .
If people want, and enjoy listening to music when doing other things, then what's wrong with that? Why be so intense? it's just about enjoyment.
"It was close" and then he laughs. Do you understand making a joke?
I'd like to see someone do a comparison between 24 bit and vinyl. We know we can hear 21 bits so there's a lot of the loss on cd explained.
So you compare a 100+ years developed and established Technology to "the" first CD??
Did I understand that right??
Society started understanding digital Music, especially CD, not before 35 years ago.
Try some FIM K2HD stuff on gear like yours there to compare, if you wont to stay on 44.1/16. "Happy coat" in K2HD version for example.
Then you have "Lesson learned" on CD.
But that comparison is ridiculous....
which catalog number is that roxy music cd? i wanna hear that awful pressing
I remember being super excited to hear my first CD in a store when the players were very expensive. I took in my Audio Technica headphones, expecting to hear much more of Dire Straits "Love Over Gold" and was amazingly disappointed. CD's have improved a lot since then, but good vinyl still sounds mean.
I believed the hype about CD's being the original master tape playing in your living room, but they weren't.
Yeah and hupe about vinyl even worse. Cracka and distortion even on new vinyl records cause its imerfrect material
How did he "win" if very little new stuff is recorded with analog?
By the mid 80s, mostly all LPs were pressed from a digitally recorded source.
In my opinion it's very simple to explain, apart from the brickwalled filter with analog you hear the recording as a whole! The full envelope of sound, with digital it sounds to me like lots of pieces of the music torn apart and then glued back together but you're no longer getting the full envelope of the recording, an example with abbey road on cd, it sounds detailed and clean, you can hear everything but with the original analogue vinyl, the thing that struck me was the feeling of the environment it was recorded in, the sense you were in the studio with the Beatles playing, it just sounds more believable, but it's true vinyl isn't an easy format to enjoy, it takes a lot more effort and in most cases expense but to me it's worth it.
Çerastes oh and you are an expert, please care to explain how it works?
that's probably due to the mastering
Agreed..digital is only parts..one day it will be great perhaps, though always different from analog
I'm an expert. I can explain how digital audio works. Sound is just a wave going up and down, and nothing else. Digital tears the music apart and glues is back together BUT it recreates the full up-down movement of the wave (in the audible range), so it recreates the whole sound. There is no such thing as a "full envelope" that gets lost in the process - whatever a "full envelope" is, it's not an up-and-down motion so it's not a sound. Likewise, the idea that the recording can be "whole" or "not whole" is not even real since it doesn't even translate into an up-down movement of the wave (in the audible range).
You’re an “expert” who just expended a sizable paragraph to express little more than opinion, sans modesty to admit it’s merely your view...next..
Mr Fremer speaks for his parish .... You can spend thousands of dollars in an analog system that may not satisfy you too much but a wise choice of a digital system that will surprise the sceptics. The marriage of both analog and digital systems are at the service of real music lovers whatever your bank account!!!
Funny.. Avalon was one of my favorite albums way back.. I put on the CD recently and I couldn't get into it. I suppose the sound of the LP was half of the pleasure I'd get from it. And my system is way better than what I had back then.
The title song, and "More than This" are mesmerizing. Hauntingly enchanting. For years, I hoped Yanick Etienne was half as beautiful as she sounded, and that I could meet her!
I think cd will work better with transistor amplifier instead tube amplifier. Therefore it will be more fair to compare cd+ transistor vs tube amplifier + vinyl. But comparison will be not apples with apples because it is comparison between precision and air. At least this is my experience. By the way about DAT?
We have an artist playing music in studio. That's the truth and what it's supposed to sound. Then we have recording engineers who try to record the music as accurately as possible to the selected medium. Then we have the playback system that tries to turn the recording back to soundwaves as accurately as possibly. If the engineers get it 100 % right, and the playback system gets it 100% right, we hear it exactly as we would hear it at the studio (If we forget the acoustics). Of course, that's not possible, but that's the aim in HIFI. That's what the the words High Fidelity mean.
I love both CDs and LPs but saying that adding distortion makes it more real is just stupid. You may like it, and there's nothing wrong with it but that's not what the HIFI is supposed to do.
+TubularBell I'm not saying that digital is better, they are different ways and both have porblems, but reasoning here is completely illogical.
... Digital is better lol It's just common sense.
Can't hear the difference. Why? because I am listening through an MP3/MP4 UA-cam video.
I love vinyl but this guys understanding of digital audio is laughable at best. 0/10
High res sounds cleaner but harder
Holy crap Charles and effect are so unbelievably wrong. Yeah you guys know more than Fremer, look into his background losers....and if you think digital is better than analog, then god help ya
@@andreasleonlandgren3092 Dude, that is yesterday's stale milk... it is 2019, not 1984. Since the advancements in processing power, CDs don't sound harsh anymore... get yourself an upsampling CD player, and just as is true for vinyl, quality recorded or remastered CDs.
what does he need to understand about that that digital sounds like shit?
As it was explained to me by an audio engineer when CDs were first marketed, The difference between CDs and vinyl is in the differences in creation. Vinyl consists of a vinyl disc with grooves. The stylus travels through the grooves and reproduces the sound of the grooves. The sound is consistent as the groove is continuous. CDs reproduce sound from small holes punched through an aluminum disc. the space between those holes is silence, so the sound is not continuous. Our brain registers the silences and fills in with what the sound should be (subjective?) and compensates for the silences. This is why CDs often sound much brighter and harsh than vinyl. I always thought this was an interesting and plausible explanation.
That is not how CDs or digital audio works. The pits on a CD store bits, either a one or zero, which work like the bits in your computers hard drive and describe a digital PCM file, which is a way of storing the audio. This audio can be prefectly recreated as a continuous wave by your cd player (look up shannon-nyquist), meaning there is no "silence" it's the same exact wave form
Most of the newly released vinyl today is using the exact same master as the remastered CD. You aren't getting anything different, you're just buying a more expensive product.
No its isnt. That's and audio myth. Lps and cds come from the same session tape or first lay to tape but lps need remastering differently to remove the high distortion peaks and to work on the master to get the optimum settings for LP which you cannot do from the initial lay down to tape. Cd uses less care and often the distortion peaks are left in then the whole lot compressed in a way that couldnt be played on lp. One of my clients is a studio mastering chief engineer and deals with this stuff every day. He can tell you that lp bizarrely is more faithful to the live feed bar the dynamic range whilst most initial masters by his clients include stuff added or messed with to get the sound they want...often with loads of distortion and his job his to deal with it to produce decent recordings. Cds with the conversion to digital then to analogue uses things like brick wall filters that cause ringing and other problems. Cd isn't any more faithful or accurate than LP which most people cannot grasp because they focus on comparions with digital potential. Truth is that LP still sounds more real because oddly however flawed it remains better in simply sounding more realistic and 3D. Cd doesn't. Use your ears. Listen to a really good vinyl front end and decent LP...it blows CD out of the water.
“So if you take a digital recording and make a record out of it and it ends up sounding more real, that’s all that matters.” Micheal Fremer, dose this apply to MoFi records now that we know they where digital for a step??
Been listening to cd's for a long time, but bought my first Turntable 5 months ago and leaves the cd's for dead well for my taste in music it does. Records for me just sound so much more open and sounds real to life and if you got music from the analog tapes like a few miles Davis it's a whole another experience, cd is cold with full of harshness and tend not to listen to the whole album as its just annoying.
Vinyl is superior and far more ritual and involving
Digital music is more tiring than analogue.Certain genres,such as reggae and jazz sound better on vinyl,but classical is generally better on digital formats.
Lord Toffington
I agree with you about classical music.
One of the things we all hated about classical music on vinyl were the changes in dynamics in a piece would make it almost impossible to hear. Of course, if you jumped up and hiked the volume, the music then was too loud once the pianissimo section ended.
I don't understand all the rude comments about Michael Fremer. Can't people disagree without using derogatory language? This guy is clearly very knowledgeable about records and music. Is he opinionated? Yes but so are most people in this hobby. I think this video was entertaining and I'll bet his audio system sound amazing. So will all the trolls here please go back into their holes or learn how to behave on these comments sections.
fremer's the rude scumbag , check out his *&^% off replies
charming man
Recorded years ago and still relevant today. 👍
Paul McGowan of ps audio loves digital and his whole reference system is all digital lol
Like Michael said in the video, his opinion is totally subjective which means it's not a real review. You are allowed to disagree with him.
With my project turntable and great.cartridge im so glad. Kept and took care of over 300 records Cds ok but if you listen to music alone i get more lifelike sensation with my beautiful records .
It's not even about CD anymore, it's LP Vs high Res.
A well mastered, digitally recorded album sounds incredible in high resolution formats, but vinyl still has its place and can produce a warm natural sound even if it's transferred from digital format. The act of engraving the album is a digital to analogue process, it will always be appreciated.
Why does CDs sounds minor to high resolution SACDs ?
Or the human brain has the absolute ability to detect the any diference if there is ?
For me i love CDs and LPs but CDs is what best to listen to music and collecting albums and creating a music Library
Plus that CDs if we take good care of them like not scratching them and e.t.c
even in a dailly basis play-backs they can last a whole human lifetime seriouslly
@@Badassvidsz CDs have their issues. Early ones were mastered badly because the technology was new and engineers were adapting. They sounded cold and thin. Late ones were mastered badly because the mastering removed the dynamic range. The were just loud and fatiguing. Badly pressed discs suffered from rot, where the aluminium coating containing the pits and lands delaminates from the disc. There was about a period of 2 years where the mastering was spot on.
LPs have their issues. They have a more limited frequency response in recording (to avoid the stylus jumping out of the groove), they suffer with harmonics (although a good mastering engineer can exploit this to make the LP sound better). Played with a worn stylus or with too much tracking force they will permanently be damaged. They suffer from inner groove distortion unless you use an exotic stylus. They suffer from static, from dust and can be scratched easily. But the sound has a warm quality, for most of the time has dynamic range and if you sit and listen to it, you are almost drawn into the music. It is one of the best feelings ever to be lost in music.
CD was ruined by the loudness war, just after they had got it right.
@@cjmillsnun
Agreed 100% but still is the best format !
{ Although i'm also a very audio cassette listener } i do listen music very often from cassettes and especially when they are very good recorded they sound great but yet again CDs are the best format if done properlly of course .
@@cjmillsnun It's still not right.
I think the difference is vinyl has what I would describe as a natural noise floor that is created while playing. Playing a vinyl record creates an organic noise element that fills in all the holes of the recording. A cd can only contain recorded noise and it never changes. Like how he describes sounds blending and continuing. To a certain extent this is also just as dubious as wine tasting.
5:57 the best part :)
Great show
I've had to live with a certain mild level of deafness most of my life and I can't reliably tell the difference between CDs and vinyl. However when it comes to pop or rock music I mostly buy vinyl, because the CD version is more likely to be ruined by the loudness wars.
+Divertedflight
I have some hearing loss from too much loud music, but I can't tell if it's harmed my ability to appreciate music. One thing I've noticed is that I don't seem to notice as large a difference as other people do when comparing music that is a victim of the loudness wars to the better mastered recordings.
Anyone else notice the vinyl is warped ?
Anyone notice the warped sensibilities of pro-digital people? Stunning.
Vinyl takes up too much space and has annoying surface noise, pop, clicks. they scratch easier and it is awkward if you only like 2 songs on the LP to play those songs without scratching the record.
CD's can just be ripped say into Uncompressed Flac files and then put into Storage.
My rips of CD's sound great through my music streamer into the stere
"Uncompressed Flac"
LMAO ... FLAC *is* a compression just like MP3 is compression, except that MP3 is *highly* compressed and FLAC is lightly compressed.
The original storage format is wav which has no compression.
With proper care, surface noise can be negligible.
@@dreamingmusic3299 Yes it is compressed, or else it would be a pointless exercise... obviously he meant to say lossless, not uncompressed... you know, the "L" in FLAC (likewise Apple)... duh. Btw, it pains me to see that people still use any form of compression. If you have 1000 CDs, that is 700 GB as WAV / uncompressed - it is hardly possible to find 1 TB HDDs today (with contemporary connections), so you would buy 2 TB or 4 TB anyway, so to hell with compression.
@@Baerchenization - "To hell with compression".
Well said. Which means that with the advent of DVD audio and Bluray audio I hardly see any reason to distribute music on CD any more.
@@dreamingmusic3299 Err... the CD format had been drafted such, that you cannot hear a difference anymore anyway... which is precisely why nobody wanted SACD - you could not hear a difference, or so the story goes.... SACD releases, like vinyl releases, are often lim ed novelty releases nowadays. And so what is DVD audio gonna do for you? You'll have to buy all your shit again, and to take advantage of any actual benefit, if any, you'd have to upgrade your stereo as well.... it is already enough that I feel I have to buy releases on CD and vinyl, so to hell with DVD ;)
I would like to know what do you think of Sweet Vinyl's SugarCube SC-1 real-time pop and click remover. I am from Kolkata, India.
Why didn't he have the Estonian pressing????!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's the very best one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Which one is that?
You mean the one that the Rolling Estonians owned?
Mr. Fremer is absolutely right, records sound much better than cds, although they are not perfect (scratches, background noises etc., which can be real annoying), but that is another point, right now, there is no perfect medium for music
All I know is that early CD sound quality rendered the final movement of Beethoven 9th symphony as shallow, congested and shrill!
CD for the first 15 years sounded like a flat wall of sound. This was due in part to the players themselves. I have Naxos CDs from the late 80's & they sound really good with a modern player. Vinyl turntables & ancillaries have improved & I can now get a great sound out of old records.
Everyday people just dont understand how amazing it is to hear that noise floor in the background of your music
What was your take on the cassette tape? I never liked them with that hiss in the background. But when I was in high school back in the Eighties, all the kids loved them. I can see why, because they could record other people's tapes and save on money. Personally, I never cared for that. I loved buying the LPs.
I have a really good Denon cassette deck from the 90's with a built-in Dolby NR. It makes cassettes sound as good as they can, even records well. But it's the same with vinyl, or should I say the equipment you are using. A Crosley all-in-one turntable = destroy your records, where as a High-end turntable with a good receiver and speakers will make your records sound superb. Trust me, I learned the hard way.
Cassettes sounded soft and I kinda liked that the problem is those tiny tapes didn't cope well with hot humid weather.
CD can sound boring and 2 dimensional. Vinyl just sounds real
I have a theory based purely on feeling that vinyl effects us in a more pleasurable way because we are hearing a continuation or extension of the original sound vibrations of whatever instrument/voice has produced. Vinyl from an analogue master holds this energy whereas a digital copy is just that...a copy and devoid of that energy. Vinyl from a digital source doesn't have this obviously and it is noticeable.
Vinyl is dynamically compressed (roughly like 13-bit digital audio). Vinyl has much lower channel separation than CD. Vinyl is subject to noise and clicks. Vinyl has wow and flutter problem. Vinyl cannot reproduce the sound of a violin... Vinyl sucks.. but still for unexplained reason, it sounds better than a CD...
I feel like this about the subject. Remember when EQ’s were all the hype on audio. Then we found out it’s really not that great. We are clipping our amps pushing our speakers past the limits and ultimately flat response is superior. Digital audio in a sense is compression driven then eq’ed in a studio for us to hear at the engineering tuning, personal preferences and to their equipment. We will reproduce that sound on different equipment and it’s been modified. Vinyl is the recording in a sense is purest format. It’s not lossless by any means but it’s all there. Look at daft punks recording of Random access Memories. They wanted ALL real instruments look at how fantastic this record sounds on vinyl. It’s an intimacy of the imperfections that records reproduce that sound natural perfection is not natural. The kind of distortion that records have is an audible reflection of realism. Kinda like watching something in cgi. It’s got to the point that it looks real but at times it’s so perfect it looks unrealistic.
It can reproduce the sound of a violin astronomically and significantly more than any CD I've ever heard in my life. When paired with the right gear, vinyl is virtually the best audio format, period.
I bought my first CD player, a Sony in 1986 and I felt the same way after about a month that CDs sounded flat with no dynamics. Fremer is spot on, however mastering of CDs have gotten better where I’ve been happy with the medium for quite some time. Listen to any CD that came out in the 80s and you will instantly hear what it sounded like in the early days.
This is audiofool bullshit.. .im a engeneer.. and a cd has way more dynamic vs a vinyl wich top at 70db...
digital is at a point now where it can greatly exceed CD and LP but record companies and mixers and mastering houses wont adopt it.
Digitizing sound can only appropriate the original, i.e. real, analog signal. BTW, although there were few made, have you listened to a very good direct-disc? They're astonishing!
on roxy music vinyl why there is india written is it some ones name or any connection with india
I threw away all of my vinyl (including a first pressing DSotM) in 2000 when I had to move to a different city. I started buying CDs in the 80s when they first hit the market and the improvement in sound was profound. No more hissing, popping and rumble from my turntable. No more zapping with an ion gun to try and remove static electricity. No more wiping the disk with a little brush to try and remove the dirt. Also, no more having to get up and flip the disk over to hear the rest of the music on the other side! The only negative to me was the cover art. But whatever. I would look at the cover art once when I first got an album and that was that. And most times I'd copy my albums over to cassette in order to not have to wear out the album with repeated plays! CD's were so amazon in comparison. And FYI, my opinion as just as valid as Mr Fremer's! I also "don't care" what he has to say.
Hissing popping and rumble? Not on my relatively cheap turntable. I play clean records and my turntable is set up correctly - took 30 mins. It's really not that complicated. Looking after CDs in order to keep them in playable condition is a different matter.
@@boogiewoogie9770 Easy, put the cd back in its case when your done. It gets scratches because you leave it on the table.
you should have done the comparison with a newer release instead of that back in the day cd.
So a guy who makes his living from mastering vinyl states CD's are crap............AMAZING!!
If you get a really good DAC that sounds more analog there is no benefit to vinyl at all.
Vinyl is arguably superior. I've seen alot of debate where people would say, "Oh, CD has a higher frequency." or perhaps that,
"Oh, Vinyl has pops and clicks." and to answer that simply. First off, the frequency range of vinyl, the top and lowest cycle threshold is something that LITERALLY no piece of music
goes either below that threshold or above. So the higher frequency range of CD is quite frankly, irrelevant. Additionally, if you want no pops or clicks on a vinyl record then there's this little thing called cleaning your record! It's understandable that vinyl records are indeed so, harder to maintain but that's the work that you must put into a record into constantly get the sweet, warmth of a record.
Its more than noticeable and I would take a record any day rather than a CD. I prefer performance rather than compactness for neatness.
I will admit, however, that vinyl records are more expensive and even some hard to find to say the least. Nevertheless, despite my praise for vinyl. I feel deeply that it depends on which type of music you happen to be listening to. If it's classical, vinyl is the way to go. If it's anything other than classical then CD and for Jazz, vinyl is most likely also the way to go. Really, it comes down to music preference as what I think. Personally, I choose classical music and jazz but thats more of a personal choice rather than a controversial debatable topic. So it depends on your liking.
Its good to know your source material when picking a record press it distinguishes a good or mediocre press. Thanks Mark for your diluted info. Could you explain what acurate to what means. If hes not joking its the master which is essentially extremely important. If you dont care if your vinyl is eq correct fine any ol 3rd gen eques production master will do. How can this info be integral
??????, Is that a comment or a turrets sydrome tick?
I've got both a high quality turntable and a good CD player, not by much but I prefer the CD.
idiot@Peaches Peaches
I used LP12 Ittok and VPI until late 90s, then got CD with Tube Preamp. The CD/Tube sounded as good, but cleaner. Move on a bit to mid 2000s and i got rid of Turntable but spent about 20K on a passive Naim system, sounded great-didnt miss records! A bit further on i sold the Naim and bought Streamer and some Active speakers, wow! the best i had ever had in my home! Then i got all nostalgic and with the resurgence of records, i thought "lets get a turntable and spin some of my records" Wow i was surprised! Surprised at how bad they really were! Not noise or dynamics, just slow and thick with way less detail. Vinyl was a fantastic format when Digital was new and poorly understood, just like records in the 20s,30s,40s,50s when that technology was new. However, digital in not new and very well understood. Also, as many people have commented, virtually all new Vinyl and most Vinyl from the late 80s onwards was cut from digital masters. All that cutting a new record from a digital master is doing, is adding loads of second harmonic distortion, just as valves do. Vinyl did sound better than Digital formats for a long time, but not now. Enjoy what you enjoy, but there is no justification for the premis that Vinyl is better, both scientificaly or subjectivly.
Would you care to share your system details please?
@@SanathanDharm Hi. i was a bit evasive as people have "high spirited views". I had my own hifi shop in the 90s, so had much time to mess with equipment and cables. I now use Kef LS50W, they are without doubt the best 2k speakers you can buy. Realistically you would need to spend 5k or much more to get anything close. I had a naim CD2 555PS with 282 and Hicap plus 250 power amp Speakers cost 2k and i cant remember the name, sounded good, cost 18k but not anywhere close to the Kefs. Go to a dealer and listen, you will be amazed, i was and still am! problem is where do i go next? So much bull in this industry. Cheers Alex
@@alexdewsbery3832 Many thanks for sharing your system setup. Sharing your system info keeps it real on the forum and I find these snippets of information the real gems which one can actually put to some actual use. Naim and Tannoy are UK's best kept audiophile secret. What are you thoughts on Klipsch rp 600M or Klipsch RP 8000f?
Michael is spot on! I've been spinning albums since the 70s. I have over 900 CDs and almost 500 albums. Wished I could trade in each CD for it's albums counterpart and not be out any $$$. I have some duplicate CDs of some albums and I prefer my albums.
I love this video but I wish the comparison could have been longer. He is correct according to my ears.
Mr. Fremer lives in his own fantasy world. I cannot take him seriously. I'm happy with my cd's and Meridian 808 player. Once awhile a play vinyl album on my Linn and I like that too. The difference is not so big as to make a fuss about it. But I do think CDs are obsolete and hires streaming has the future. I also find vinyl soft- and hardware highly over priced and unpractical.
He should play The Move: "I can hear the grass grow". Only works with a worn out Mono 45 out of an old juke-box. Then he can even see rainbows in the evening and feel a magnetic wave of sound....
Why does this guy get so mad about someone listening to digital doesn't he stream movies or does he still marvel about vhs .so basically if I like digital I'm wrong. And your right because you like analog. Wake up buddy why are you right .so let me get this straight if I like oak trees and you like pine trees I'm wrong because you don't agree lol
VHS tapes were 30 frames/ sec.; analog sound recording is continuous.
The comparison doesn't make sense because youtube sound is DIGITAL so both media ( vinyl and cd ) sound digital and almost the same. You can't hear the analog warmth, 3D ...etc.. on UA-cam
You don't hear in digital. When you listen to compact disc you are not hearing digital. You are hearing analog sound that has been stored digitally. When its played back its a perfect representation of the wave form that is feed to it. To make a record the original wave for is tweaks many times to make is sound as good as possible once its carved into plastic and then needs to be re-eque'd and amplified to make it audible. You can like what ever format you want. But vinyl is not superior in sound reproduction PERIOD. I collect CDs and records and I find more enjoyment out of records but they do not sound better than a well mastered CDs and are by no means convenient. How the hell am I supposed to listen to a record in my car or on the train?
L+you are hearing digital+cope
I used to listen to records and then CD appeared and it was much better only for one reason, among others: You can play it millions of times. With records they are scratched and lose details, no matter how careful you are, adter listening to them many times. These idiots spent crazy amounts of money as if that made a difference and it is all subjective. And the worst part is that he cannot give any objective reason...