Does vinyl sound the same as CD?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 січ 2018
- A popular vlogger suggests that the "truth" is there's no difference between vinyl and CD. Paul explains why that's not only patently false but what those differences are and what it takes to hear them. Have a question for Paul? Go to www.psaudio.com/ask-paul/ and ask your question.
- Наука та технологія
I have cds and vinyl , good and bad in both formats but I would love to see a blind test wherein audiophiles were tested on their ability to differentiate between the two .
I agree. And it would be so easy to do.
Totally agree also.
With the best cartridge. It will not be a cheap turntable. of course be the best preamp too. then the only question is which is the best sounding disc
I read about a blind test. where young people got to listen to different audio formats unfortunately they thought that MP3 sounded is best. one theory is simply that they have grown up with that sound so that they think it should sound that way. that is, low sound has been raised without the high sound being raised. so that musical instruments in the recording that are supposed to sound low sound louder and clear
If you could play just the music, without the clicks or pops, then it would be an interesting experiment. 👍👍👍
Jay: So Mike, what do you think of "Does vinyl sound the same as CD?"
Mike: It reminds me a lot of Star Trek: The Next Generation.
I thought of Half in the Bag too. That jazz piano intro must be in the public domain. lol.
Imagine caring this much about vibrations in the air.. i love it!
I say, it's genuinely heartwarming to see a such a fine old chap in a freshly laundered shirt!
i would say that OVERALL (at least for me) the difference between individual pressings is greater than the difference between formats - all things considered.
Same lol
That is an interesting observation.
Exactly! It has always been about the mastering process.
i have a relatively cheap set up, a Technics receiver from the 70's, balnced on that good Kenwood speakers from the same era and a Technics sl1200 turntable, and i can tell you i hear difference in quality between digital music and vinyl. with "a good" vinylrecord the basses are more deeper but also warmer and the high pitches very sharper. i also can hear some details on the background i dont have digital, unless its a masterrecording in FLAC or such. yeah the ticks and pops sometimes on vinyl are there also but thats the charme of the mdium, you love it or hate it. next to the fact of the music on it itself, i find a record way much pleasable because its a concept, you must take it out, put it on the player, its more like a ritual u know.
I have a decent stereo and listen to music in both formats, CD and Vinyl. I can tell you that if you stacked up (a) a CD transport plus DAC combo against (b) a turntable plus cartridge plus phono preamp, with the same preamp/amp/speaker chain, you’d have to spend quite a bit more on the vinyl setup to match the sound on CD. My vinyl combo costs about twice as much as the digital front end, and it is noticeably better in terms of transparency and how pleasing it sounds across various genres of music. It also depends on the quality of the recording. CDs and records can both sound amazing or flat-out horrible. I mostly use the TT for classical/jazz and the CD player for rock/pop. Keep in mind that your mileage may vary. Cheers, and happy listening. 👍🏼
Good explanation without soap boxing.
Why would he soap box, it is clear he likes both formats, but for different reasons.
Excellent explanation. If I compare a recording of pop or rock, for example Frank Zappa's "Grand Wazoo", between the vinyl and CD versions, they sound remarkably close to each other. In this case the dynamic range of the original recording is not very wide to begin with.
The differences show up with good recordings of symphonic music: Here the CD shows off its greater dynamic range inherent in this type of music. Dynamic range compression is more evident in the vinyl version and surface imperfections are more apparent during low level passages. Also pitch fluctuations occur with an eccentrically pressed LP which is especially noticeable in music having prolonged sustained passages. This defect was fairly common with LPs due to an incorrect stamper setup. The clocked accuracy of the CD is especially rewarding in this instance. I remember returning eccentric vinyl pressings that showed up about once in every five purchases, hoping the replacement would be from a different stamper setup.
Then there was the problem of pre and post echo that occurred fairly frequently with vinyl recordings. This was due to a loudly cut groove being adjacent to a quiet groove. This was also a problem with analog magnetic tape masters that had been stored for an extended period with pre and post echoes having been transferred from adjacent tape layers.
Bruce Taylor nice comment. Thanks!
FIRMLY agree, Paul... the differences are night and day in my experience.
One of the main challenges to determining a difference btw vinyl and CD of the same music is the fact that, first of all, the mastering of an original mix of a recording must be equalized (all music is mastered before being published, and mastering involved EQ and compression, among other things) and this equalization and compression must be done separately for the vinyl vs the CD. So the two formats may sound different because each was mastered independently of one another. Another major difference has to do with old equipment being used to master an old LP recording, and when the mastering was done for the CD from the original material (either remixed, or remastered from the original mix) many decades later, it was done with much cleaner equipment. This was the whole point of buying a CD version of an old LP. So while some CD's might sound close to the LP in tonal balance, others will vary widely. In fact, some CD's of LP recordings I have purchased in the past decade were so terrible in their EQ balance (poor, sloppy job of mastering, I had to take the wave files into a recording program and re EQ them to get them to sound good. Having said all that, of course if the mastering was done for the CD to very closely match the LP (a rare thing) then you can experience differences, both good and bad. The CD eliminates all disc noise, wow and flutter associated with LP's. But the LP retains a warmth and musicality that many CD's lack. But then, the differences re warmth, etc, depend a great deal on the quality of the CD player vs the quality of the phono cartridge. So the whole matter is much more complicated than it may seem.
Then there's all the variability Paul talks about here re ability of a system to reveal the differences.
Vinyl all the way
Thanks Paul for your clear presentations.
I remember hearing about an amplifier that restarted the dynamic range of vinilo applying selectively gain to different frequencies. Is it on par with digital players?😎
I am glad you mentioned the Elac Sprout system, I have been watching you for a while now and learning a lot and have never had the chance to really get into the high end audio with other priorities always it seems and tight budget but this looks like the system that could get me started and I love music since I am also a guitarist, so I am going to see if I can get a start here and dabble with high end, ha, over the standard off the shelf audio systems I have had all my life. I feel it is about time.. Thanks for all the great info, I have learned to really trust you after all I have heard through your great videos here! I maybe be ordering soon hopefully....Larry
I really wish I could afford some ps audio gear . They seem like a awesome company to support !
The dynamic range aspect can easily be demonstrated, vinyl-to-vinyl even, with Mark Knopfler's Shang Ri La album. This is a two record single album where they put half the songs on each side, allowing more needle travel and increased dynamics. It sounds vastly different than your normal vinyl recording, more CDish IMO. Don't know if there are others made like this, it's my only one.
That album on sacd is compressed to death, probably the master is similar?, sad, as I like the album, cannot listen to it, as I get fatigued.
What is purpose of that Dell PowerEdge server inside rack? I have few Dell PowerEdge servers on my workplace.
I just tried listening on my dads system. It seems like vinyl just has next to no background noise.
Can anybody confirm? Is that a common thing? Or just a matter of my comparisson tracks?
I have a good CD recorder and I have noticed that many if not most of the new recordings on CD are so compressed that the VU meter is maxed out at 0 db over the length of the recording. This over compression cause's listener fatigue because of the dynamic range of the CD. Some people are more sensitive to this than others and that is why they prefer vinyl, it is much smoother and less compressed than a poorly recorded CD and easier on the ears.
I own both records and cds. I love them both. CDs sound cleaner, but I feel more of a relationship with my music when I play records. That being said I recently got into CDs again. They're so great. Simplistic and most importantly cheap as hell. Records are great but most labels overcharge for them. Basically I buy more CDs than vinyl records these days.
i'm back into cassette-tapes and high-end cassettedecks.. ;)
I’m doing the same. The prices for used, and original pressing vinyl are getting, what am I saying, have been getting crazy. CDs are a great bargain these days.
funny, I don't know what it is but vinyl sounds more present and alive to me. CD's sound super clean but kind of steril, streaming sounds good too but seems bland and distant
@@RichusRkr Streaming is usually MP3, AAC or Ogg Vorbis, which are lossy formats, except Ogg Vorbis Q10, which is Ogg Vorbis lossless, I believe.
One of the features of CD that was toured back in the day was that the staging of lower frequencies was more versatile, as they were centred on vinyl to prevent skipping. I don’t know how that actually translates to the listener, given how humans find it difficult to isolate the location of low frequencies.
VYNYL vs. CD ? First question I would ask , ---- What turntable do you have ?
I agree there is difference for sure, I prefer listening to CDs, but I buy vinyl too, i love big cover pictures :D
Same xD
Tbh on cheap setups, it is very easy to hear the difference, because the two media's have different "noice" characteristics. However the two media's do "sort of" converge towards similar sound as the quality of the equipment goes up.
Theres IP's and Mac addresesses and login/password stickers stuck to the servers. Not secure to film.
Dang you can make that out? What screen are you using? I'm on a 1080p 55 inch and cant read what that says...
what sounds better?
Great video Paul. What I find most fascinating many folks have opinions and yet many have not actually auditioned both formats. I used to think all turntables and CD players sounded pretty much the same. (I fully admit I was 100% wrong) IMHO, if you're really interested and curious, if possible, go find an audio dealer and go have a listen to both formats.
Paul Demara So you can actually see where most of the sceptics are coming from since your were one once.
Most people misunderstands the effects of compression and may actually mistakenly prefers the less dynamically jarring quality. Such as, easier on the ear or the system hence less harshness and distortions. Thanks for the video!
One little story I'd like to share. Back in the 90's, I lived in LA and had the pleasure of attending several of the hifi shows (before they moved everything to Las Vegas). I brought several of my own cds to listen to (since most booths only had acoustic, jazz or other styles I don't listen to). One of the cds I brought was "The Music Man" recorded in 1962. I had some not well know brand of stereo system play the cd (the spoken and singing parts). The sound stage was shocking. You could "see" where each performer was standing. The clarity and fidelity were amazing. The host enjoyed having something out of the norm to listen to as well. The company that made all the equipment was in California, but I cannot remember their name. Not sure if they're still in business.
Just got into vinyl. Im 33, play in a band and run a studio for the band. I am so glad I did, the difference is astonishing. I absolutely love vinyl.
Okay, I'm a subscriber and I've listened to most of your explanations, this has to be the best. I've always been blessed with the finest stereo equipment and having a cd player after lp' s was just to eliminate the worn vinyl noise. It took some time for cd to accomplish its place, but it can be good. I used my pioneer laserdisc player on my cd s and it's most certainly a huge improvement over typical cd players. You nailed it by telling people that it's necessary to have a good turntable system. A very good T.T. in the past was more affordable in the 70' s than it is now, but it's essential to hear the results of a finely produced, scratch free vinyl record. Thank you, keep up the good work.
CD it is not a scratch free vinyl record if that was what you meant. Then there are analogue fans who think that the sound image on vinyl records is even bigger than on a CD. at least when the source is from analog master tape. a sound said they do not use a CD when creating a vinyl record. he said no the cd is so compressed. we use digital masters that contain more data than a CD when We create a vinyl record, he said. and they use the 32 bit
A pure Pioneer CD player probably sounds better than a Pioneer laser disc. especially CD players that cost $ 300 or more
@@Andersljungberg The record collectors guide said many of the new vinyl records produced today are mastered from available CD's.
@@Andersljungberg The word Probably is not recognized into your summation. I have experienced both ,inside an audiophile listening room at a pioneer dealer showroom. The Laserdisc sounded amazingly better.
@@Andersljungberg Probably? PROBABLY? Do you know what probably means?
Great unravelling and explanation of a long standing mystery, looking forward to seeing your home movie setup :-)
I grew up with vinyl records and once I got my first CD 💿 player I never looked back. The hiss, pops, off speed, and cleaning/caring of records you can have it. Vinyl does have a certain warmth to it but I think way over hyped and not the supreme media.
sorry but vinyl is another level,i have both cd with expencive dac,but the vinyl is the music so simple
Well put.
I hate the word warmth, because it's one of those things that gets thrown around that means nothing. If people don't know how to describe vinyl, try just describe it as "warm".
@@RaveyDavey I do miss the cover art and a physical record to hold. I framed some of my old records in the man cave 👍🏻
@@lancairw867 Do you live in the "Stream Media Age" and dont know that CDs also have the "Cover Art" and the "Physical record to hold"!?
The sound of Vinyl is dynamic, dramatic, vivid, even emotional. It is hard to describe the difference between CD and LP without getting technical, without quoting some data that was measured by a machine. The question is, does the music move you? Does it make you feel something? Vinyl is the format that does that for me.
But would it also if you wouldn't know the type of source the music comes from (vinyl record or CD)? Like in a blind listening.
Digital sound is cold..has no emotion in it..
@@gixxerboy555 That's just CD. It all changes with very hi-res audio like DSD. The higher rate of sampling, the more warmth, clarity, details and pure sound awesomeness and fidelity to the real thing.
@@edfort5704 This is not true. As Zappa once said: "if you polish a turd 💩. You get a shiny 💩". You know, if the source material is sounding cold (say the use of lots of digital synths and plug-ins), higher bit-rate won't make that sound anything warmer. Exchanging that with an analog synth with analog filters will, and THAT will sound warm even on 16-bit. Vinyl sounds even warmer, though.
@@AlexandruBurda definitely. Cds and high resolution flacs sounds harsh and sterile.
Both vinyl and dsd sound full, more like live music, i do not care for numbers, i use the best tool to test them, my hears
I guess everything is a bit of a compromise really, but for me the biggest noticeable sound issue in any format ..is the general lack of good quality recording and mixing these days ...rendering a lot of really interesting and creative music into the so so (Iwishit could have been done better) bin.
John Talbot i agree, but if you like classical, you should try listening to Decca, RCA, Phillips, Deutsch-Gramophone vinyl recording from the early 1960's to late 1970's, there are other labels too but those i mentioned are always amazing recording & pressing quality, they are incredibly good compared to similar vinyl pressings of the 1980's & onwards. I bought around 150 l.p.'s of mainly classical music from all our local charity shops over the past 5 years, i cleaned them out & bought music on speculation at £1 - £2.50 per l.p. I revisit every year or so just in case but they are getting scarcer every year. for some reason & with very rare exceptions, all of those classical records were / are in mint condition, not so with charity-shop punk records & i do like some, like The Dammed & Buzzcocks, Devo & others but condition is rarely any good, probably something to do with the glue-sniffing lifestyles of punks. Rock & pop charity-shop l.p. quality varies, but for classical, charity shops are a veritable gold-mine
@@thespotlightkid4138 Ok, dude. Deutsche Grammophone doesn't always sound so good, even not the big tulip ones. It depends.
I recently got a Rega P10, and besides the very minimal crackles, my vinyl sounds better than my CD version in 9/10 cases. With my old Planar 3, it wasn't even close though. Digital is significantly better than a "cheap" setup.
You guys should be as meticulous with your network cable management as you do when designing PS Audio products!
Good points. The most noticeable difference is the truncated dynamic range. I have a CD that sounds very much like vinyl, but for a reason. The record was one of the "direct to disc" jazz recordings of the late 1970s. Wonderful, compared to most tape-master vinyl recordings. However, they later made a CD from that. You definitely notice the truncated dynamic range, which cannot be fixed after the original cut. Also, the high frequencies are shy from the tracks near the center of the vinyl because of the slower stylus speed in the groove.
Got to say - your facts and figures are all spot on as usual, but vinyl seems to just have that analogue character which is very engaging.
If you like the sound then you know it's good enough for you. Flooding the mind with facts kind of takes the joy out of enjoying music somehow. Always clambering for perfection brings mental exhaustion!
I'm a bit old school and surely my hearing has diminished a little, but I still love a good cassette deck with a well recorded tape.
Like your videos! Most entertaining
What about the recording / mixing process.. maybe vinyl is less compressed recorded (lower dynamic but more loudness), so vinyl sounds different. Not because of vinyl, but because of less compression and digital mixing crazyness in cd / radio production..
Given the way vinyl works, you'd think there will be differences due to losses from scraping a groove, moving magnets/coils, equalisation in the phono preamp etc.
I used to blame the physical medium, but with UA-cam resources such as this video I have found that it all comes down to the recording and how it is mastered for a given media or format. I have had some terrible CDs that sound lo-fi and dark and new digital re-masterings that explode beyond the original vinyl or cassette's dynamic presentation.
I like fiddling with the set up and exploring the way each cartridge sounds on a record player. CD's can't satisfy these proclivities. I do believe a well mastered CD sounds more true. In other words, no matter what I've tried, I can detect the source is from a phonographic recording.
I accept all that is said here except the experience. As a general rule( of course there are exceptions) I find a record grabs my attention when a CD won't. It could well be my system, it could be my old CDs, however I think there is another factor. Our perceptual system works by attending to change. Think about how a bad smell disappears from our perception, if an image is retinal stabilized it also disappears. I suspect the "perfection" of CDs may be working against our perception of the music. A record with the odd dust tick and other faults may be producing a sound that( with respect to our perceptual system) is unexpected and grabs our attention more. To sum up: it may be the case that with CDs we get to hear a better sound, yet with a record we perceive better music.
I am a recording, mixing and mastering engineer and I love TIDAL’s premium service. I gave away all of my vinyls and CDs to a producer friend and he is having a lot of fun with them!! So, what ever makes YOU HAPPY, that is what is important!!
I auditioned dozens of CD players a few years ago, settled on an Audiolab 8200 as it was easily superior to the competition, even a few costing twice as much. I got it home and it got flattened by my old Transcriptors / SME / Ortofon combo never mind the Alphason or the Roksan decks. CD was a huge step forward in terms of convenience but a massive leap back in terms of musical satisfaction.
What a bunch up you know what
Can someone give me an advice for good book articles or video about audio electricity loudness +db - db . Theres a lot of info out there but at the same time a lot of disinformation
4:56 20 db 😖. No entender!
The Internet
I'm still in college and don't have a fantastic set up for playing records, but even still I can tell the difference between CD and vinyl. Just last year, I had my friend over who listened exclusively to Spotify and had no interest in purchasing physical media, and he started collecting vinyl after listening to just one record!
Yup, I agree. I have been enjoying hi-fi, since before I could afford it, some 40 years ago. Got my first CD when the first CD player came out. Thankfully things have improved a lot since then. I now own and operate my own high end recording studio, media labs and have a range of high end gear for creation, acquisition, playback and everything between. In terms of sound quality, the 1” Otari tape sounds best. Not practical, expensive to use, but great, spacious, rich, enveloping and dimensional. Not too far behind is the vinyl. At least for anything that is not primarily electronic music low on any need for natural sounding vocals or other such sources. Now, even with 64x oversampled, dithered 24 or 32 bit analog summed 384 kHz digital run through a few $10,000 worth of DAC’s, a well pressed record is more holographic, less fatiguing, and I’m not afraid to say, can warm my heart and bring a tear to my eye like even the best D/A digital seldom can with anything seriously analog in nature (many vocals, acoustic instruments, etc). Also, great analog is a lot cheaper than top digital.
I’ve found the same thing with guitar amps, where a solid single ended class A tube amp with a seriously over-spec’d transformer can make a much better spec’d on paper digital amp sound quite inferior.
Over time the gap will continue to close, but I heard the same thing that Paul believes since the 80’s, related to digital being better.
@@amdenis Ugh, so many untruths spread by another fossil! Dude, un-botched FLAC files played through any decent affordable Chi-fi DAC (Topping D90, Denafrips Ares II ,700 dollar price range) is EONS ABOVE the nagging pain and quality of Vinyl. If you miss the nostalgia/warmth of your fossilized vinyl memories, connect your DAC output to a good TUBE AMP (push/pull, SET or both). Remember again young padawan, have a listen to Non-botched FLAC + Good TUBE AMP and you will set all your stupid vinly on fire. You can thank me later.
@@wa2368 I can't believe people are even talking about this. He runs a high end recording studio... Don't know what to say. As you said, you want the warmth, get the tube amp and don't say such a flawed format(even tho it is great) sounds better
I owned one of your 400watt stereo amp, I forgot the model. I was sorry I sold it. I was using it for Bi Amping for the bass and a Counterpoint for the rest. My Counterpoint blew some Pwr Trans when I accidently shorted the left channel output and nobody had the replacement. So I decided to replace everything with your class D 400 watt amp. I used it for 12 years.
Vinyl,the care that we take.The experience when we listen to vinyl is much greater than listeing to cd.
I like the sound of cd's over the sound of vinyl. I do not have a resolving sound-system. But I do hear the difference between vinyl and cd's. Vinyl does not sound bad, but when the music is very quiet, cd's sound way better.
That's because your cartridge and phono stage are not up to par.
The answer is Yes, there is a huge difference. Even if the vinyl album is sourced from digital, it is a completely different medium requiring different amplification parameters. The needle's reproduction of the sound is truly analog. Not only that, almost always the digital sources for modern LP's are much higher fidelity than CD quality, except of course for bootleg LP's which are often sourced from inferior CDs or worse.
If i come to colorado, this will be my first stop. Gotta see the IRS in person!
What we are really talking about is has recording arts evolved since advent of digital tech or devolved?
There are complaints that there is basically no dynamics on new CDs because the large companies use digital dynamics compression. everything should sound as loud as possible
Those large companies are very naughty. The people in them who make those types of decisions should have their bottoms smacked.
In that case all entry level amp shouldn't be allowed to use a phono input. I have a Marantz pm5005 and I'm impressed but hearing this makes me doubt my amp can't tell the difference between a cd and a vinyl
I would love to take that tour! “...use their heads more than their ears”! Brilliant!
To simplify this argument. Isn't this at the most basic level arguing you can't hear the difference in source components in general? I guess what I am getting at if it's so easy to get different results between two different cd players in the same system and two different turntable. Wouldn't this argument be crazy?
There is some music I just enjoy hearing on vinyl, last night I listened to Pink Floyd Animals. Are they better? No, not than a good master recording CD, but there is something about putting that album on and experiencing it. Its why I have a transport and a decent turntable with my 2 channel system.
Who is this youtuber theyre talking about?
Choa Park I'm wondering the same thing.
Probably Michael Fremer. Very knowledgeable and persuasive but the guy has a (and I’m not kidding) a half million dollar stereo system. Much of his equipment is loaned to him by manufacturers who can then advertise he uses their equipment. This also allows him to upgrade constantly. His UA-cam videos are good but getting everything set to play a record is like launching the space shuttle.
If you are talking sampling rate perhaps most people cant tell the difference, however if you are talking about brick walled compression and and bad remixes and or remasters, yeah, any record will sound better. But I applaud any continued use of vinyl. I believe getting up to turn over record or even space between the sides allows people to think about music. A 7 inch even more so. I think digital music has killed active listening. Moreover music mixed for vinyl turns any stereo into a presentation and or feel of an analog recording studio.
This needs more views!
For most of us i think it's because we have collections of LP's Tapes and other kinds of Music we have spent are Hard cold cash on that keeps these formats alive . But come on the LP art works are still the best lol. I like my last format i bought that i thought would catch on was the sony mini disc player sounds great and i have bought a lot of music for it . So to me its a keeper
All that dynamic range don’t mean squat when a lot of music is brick walled . So in a sense I get where the guy was talking about how the mastering is more important .a lot of people feel vinyl sounds better , not becauSe the format is better , but because of the limitations of the format , which is dynamic range . The mastering has to be done different for vinyl hence less brick walled vs a lot of cd’s . Now if cd mastering wasn’t brickwalled , then there would be no contest , because the cd format is superior spec wise .
When the term "brick walling" is used in a digital context, it usually refers to low-pass filtering. The CD needs to have full content up to 20KHz, but absolutely no content at 22.5KHz because it cannot represent that content and it would corrupt the audio with random noise. So, we need a filter that acts within a tiny fraction of an octave and that is CD's Achilles heel. Such an aggressive filter will have effects down through the pass band. Now, the LP is not immune to the losses of its much more complicated audio chain, but filtering for analog can be done with gentle slopes and fully analog LPs will often have content reaching beyond 30KHz, and CD4 quadraphonic discs required good response to 40KHz.
This sucks this guy
is a fucking ass hole.
@@bryede agreed, but the term "brickwalled" means brickwall-limited (to preveil in the so called loudness-war) as I understand it. What you refer to is called digital filtering. And I agree, most lps (especially older lps from before the digital era) have frequency content way beyond 22.5 kHz (and its not just the transients - I tested with a cartridge that can play up to 60khz) . But it only makes a difference when you use a cartridge/stylus (and gear) , that's even capable of playing this frequency content back. Many of modern styluses stop at 20khz... If you have a very good system it does make a difference - noise and full dynamic range of both mediums aside, vinyl sounds only better because it's not squashed like most modern CDs. But i could be wrong, maybe it has changed again over the years - I bought my last CD 15years ago... Whereas the few files I got hold on during the last 15 years were in 98% squashed and sounded awful comparing to their counterpart on vinyl...
@@eccentricworx But also old vinyl records do not have any content below 80 Hz. That is very rare.
Yes but a very good LP can sound close to the same recording on CD if both are done well.
Problem of LP reproduction is that there is always small amount of interferences which with linear perfect conditions is unnoticeable. Often due to bad gear it is upbeaten and annoying, masking fine sounds. To play LPs highest quaity of whole channel is required to secure against false background. I doesnt mean High End but true Hi fi. My amplifier at 70 -76 dB delivers some 2x 0,5W-2x1 W.. Realy not High End needed if we calculate it. Strangely with lower quality of speaker vinyl reproduction is much more affected than CD. CD seems always like cristall clar vice vinyl may be dull from arm resonances and noisy from cracks. . But it is reproduction problem, not LP.
You know that crystal clear sound people say CDs have is not on the mastertape. Its a cold and cavelike sound I've never heard at a live concert.I have commercial reel tapes from the 50's and 60's that must be copies of the mastertape but low level detail is obscured by his which is not on the LPs so I get more detail from the LPs but I imagine if I had one of the new high speed copies of the mastertape the sound would be better than LP or CD but the cost is around $450 per tape.
May be I wasn't too clear but what I wanted to say is just parallel to what you say. With perfect reproduction which i belive I've gained there are no any popular deficiences from LPs compaired to CD versions. Of course wear of LP if occures may be noteceable. . But I prefer it's presentation of lower range making more thrilling effect. I use top pld gramophone Beogram serviced by me and my preamp I was selecting very long until got synergy with the rest. The rest is transmision line speakers made by me, made by me speaker wiring and Pioneer class AB tube amp also serviced by me. It's own tube preamp sounded not idealy so I found one included in Philips reel to reel 4506 which topped owned others. I use 3 head reels - hiss is not heard because is false - - represents band which supposed to be at much lower level than with not linear multispeaker/amplifier transmission usualy met . I devoted big part of my life to discover right reproduction characteristics in practice. With it "hiss" is never heard - only perfect noise which is very hard to name and much less .
People do this with everything. They find a small truth which points to why its better and then exaggerate about it being better than everything else.
Vinyl is many things, but "perfect" certainly isn't one of them.
@Quincy Breed You mean, your ears say yes cause heart says yes. So you're just biased, not objective at all.
@Quincy Breed No, what Im saying is that your heart is influencing your ears. Psychoacoustics...
If you were objective you would hear all the imperfections of vinyl, cause there's no way you can't hear crackles, surface noise, etc. And if you listen to dynamic music its very apparent, like orchestral music which is highly dynamic, on vinyl it's highly compressed.
@Quincy Breed Lifeless... Or instead, if you want that warmth that lacks or that "soul" you say, sounds like all you need is a tube amp and high res digital and you'll see what those 70s and 80s best stuff can sound
@@nox1cous654 No. CD is compressed
This argument has been going on for years. Both have it's own pro's and cons. Most people couldn't tell a difference anyways unless they are intently listening to the media. The newest cd's made in probably the last 10 years works perfect for newer music since they really relaxed on the compression used. A cd will never compare to an original press from the 70's or 80's given the same type system/speakers.. There is a lot more involved however to people than just the overall music quality..
Try this. I get a new record and record it on my PC at 48000 sample rate at 24bits and it captures the entire frequency range and to my hears I hear NO difference between my copy and the record. I then mix it down to 44100 16bit and put in on a CD and guess what, it sounds exactly the same. Sure you can say that some CDs sound different due to the mastering process but that has nothing to do with the CD technology and sound reproduction. I like to collect different forms or media for listening to music but Vinyl is not a superior format for sound reproduction.
I don't need to try it, because at least one formal study has shown that CD quality is already good enough - exactly as you have observed. They let people compare CD quality to higher resolution & higher sampling rates - they could not hear the difference.
@@gregsullivan7408 but bro, I have heard vinyls just sound warmer!
Great answer..👍
A Crosley vs a cheap CD player, the CD wins
One of the best and most honest assessments yet, Paul.
I love my high end vinyl setup in my analogue listening room, it gives me a great deal of pleasure. Regardless, I understand its limitations.
In my favourite listening room (which has flexible but high end "digital" setup) unless your hearing is damaged, you'd would literally
have to be deaf to not hear the difference.
Even more so if you're replaying a master 24bit 96khz wav unaltered from recording. My digital setup (which is the replay section to a high end recording section from my studio) has a dynamic potential of 127dB.
It can create the illusion of reality with the right recordings. My listening can often be an emotional rollercoaster ride.
I agree. Anyone saying this does not have a transparent system. I just recently added an hdcd player and an sacd player to my system. Playing music on those, in comparison to my vinyl, was shocking. This from a huge fan of vinyl.
At last a sensible answer to this old school question.
The ease and convenience of cds wins for me. Plus, I've never had a cd that was off center or warped. Most cds sound identical to vinyl (at least Carly Simon's cds do) and other nice thing is with much of the older music, when it's put on cds, they turn up the volume. Not all cds sound great, especially the early ones.
the problem is that there is too much crap soundquality on mp3 and CD's..
Thank you Paul, finally someone with some common sense.
yeah, definitely there is some excessive information for hackers - your inner IPs, shown on several devices
I always had to stack a bunch of pennies on the arm. most of my records eventually got scratched up and stuff LOL. All those little pops and hisses made it sound great though.
Absolutely not. I have the same CD and vinyl for a couple of albums and have A/B ed them. The CD is much more brassy and harsh, whereas the vinyl is more musical and sounds more authentic. The vinyl also sounded as though I was sitting in the middle of a concert hall listening to the actual performance.
With older LP’s, I could close my eyes and point out where every instrument was. I miss that. And newer LP’s are just CD’s on vinyl, why bother.
Julia Set dont buy new versions of old records. You can find the old goos stuff used. For the new stuff, buy on CD or stream at a fee, or play the stuff for free on UA-cam
@@galus14436 a used record is always wore out.
@@catsbyondrepair not even. I have like 400. With a good cartage/stylus, just so rewarding
@@galus14436 you can add instruments on stream to make fun of the listerner
true
i personally think lp's sound better then cds , that being said i think its harder to get good sound from lp over cd once done right the lp wins
I couldn't agree more. The vinyl way is not easy, but it's very rewarding.
Vinyl for the win! But the best music out there by far is the music I enjoy listening to without exception and i would expect everyone else for that matter
The Problem with cds is the since 2000 compressed recordings with almost no dynamics.. Listen to cds from the 90s and you will think you have a new audio system..
not buying the 'dynamic range argument' - that would be true IF mastering engineers used expanders to fill up that dynamic range available but it would make most recordings VERY irritating and unlistenable even. RARELY do CDs or SACDs even use all their headroom. especially where 'classic' recordings are concerned - i would also argue that vinyl has MUCH more than 70dB d/r due to the way noise is subtracted ... i would argue that the 'noise' from vinyl is of a very different nature than the program material and is somewhat 'transparent' ... on a good system the 'noise' will be manifested very differently from the music anyhow (for example it might physically appear to be in the background somewhere or out to the sides - depending on the system) - okay that's my two cents .. :)
Excellent video
I am guessing that is sort of maybe true to a brand new vinyl, but there are the physical pickup limitations and eventual degradation.
Some of the new CD's are heavily compressed because volume sells. The quality is bad and that did not happen in the LP days. So sometimes the LP sounds better sometimes the CD but a well master CD will always sound better than a well mastered LP, however LP's can sound quite good overall.
Mastering has become over compressed. Dynamic range is a joke. U-tube videos sound as good. Going out to the car for playback must stop.
Agreed, they need to stop compressing them and let the music breathe
@@45rockinwax I'll have to agree. They really relaxed on the compression the last several years because it was in fact hurting the industry. I still use most vinyl but then again, 80% of my albums are 1975-1990.
No more often well mastered cds and records sound the same if your vinyl rig is good enough.
Your right!
I'm perfectly happy listening to mp3s and can totally enjoy my music, if there is a difference, then it's not enough for me to care. The shear convenience of mp3 files far outweighs any quality that I can detect. That's it.
Good Answer.. leave the inbred fighting to the audiophiles... The best music is the stuff you enjoy!
beyondthegreatdivide six
Well said well said indeed my friend
Personally I enjoy that we have choice.
I don't use vinyl these days, (not since the 1990s, although I look back fondly) I'm a cd guy, but I like the convenience and portability of mp3 (sometimes FLAC). Perhaps the sound quality isn't as good, but when it comes to transit and shopping? It's perfectly fine for me.
If you're going the mp3 route, atleast make the effort to find good FLAC files. Non-botched FLAC will btchslap your mp3 all the way from here to Chinatown.
Listen to this and then say that again
ua-cam.com/video/qGbrnnqETlw/v-deo.html
Eons ago when I used both LP and CD I felt the sound from my LP was better for music with a more consistently high level (rock 'n' pop mainly). However surface noise, reduced dynamic range etc. just kills classical imo. My LP cost a lot more than my CD too (LP12), and this was also at a time when CD hadn't perhaps quite 'come of age' (90's). I think CD is a lot better than it's sometimes cracked up to be, and the physical object is a good size - physical enough, minus the storage/handling headache of LP. Even Audio Note think they've got CD 'almost' right!! There are however some appallingly mastered CD's, (mainly Rock 'n' Pop) and I would say the LP version can sound better in this scenario. For classical, some of the early ADD recordings are great.
Thanks Dear Paul for your contribution to this extremely confusing world of Audio. I'd like to draw your attention though to a point regarding this video. You explain that the CD format has more dynamic range than the vinyl format. That is true only in theory! If you check the measured dynamic range of the majority of recordings you can easily see that the vinyl recording has more dynamic range than its CD counterpart. Check for example Adele 21 on the following link: dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=adele
You'll notice that the vinyl recording has a Dynamic Range of 15 whereas the CD has a Dynamic Range of 8. I have yet to see a CD which has more measured dynamic range than its vinyl ... the reason may be that mastering engineers are seeking loudness in their CD project and thus are curtailing a big chunk of the theoretical dynamic range of a CD to achieve high sound volumes, what has been termed as the "Loudness War". In my opinion, Vinyl sounds better in most cases because it is mastered differently. In my experience, if the vinyl and digital are mastered identically, they will sound identical on equipment of equivalent prices especially if a low jitter DAC (e.g. having Ted Smith's signature!) is used for the digital. Thanks again Paul for your contribution it is very needed!
+ 1... this is what I wrote in the above comments. The reason is the mastering engineer for the vinyl version doesn't have to compensate for playback on mobile, in car, boombox, etc. environments. Vinyl is only played on a home system where the full dynamic range can be utilized. If the mastering engineer doesn't apply compression in the mix for CD, downloads, streaming, etc. the music would be difficult to listen to in noisy or mobile environments. This is why people say vinyl sounds better - in most cases.
Do you think vinyl sounds more like the percussion is being "hit" with a stick instead of like an air hose hissing, like with CD's. Is there any truth in that or is it just purely psychological?
Why isn’t the compression done at the playback level? A chip that will supply compression, limiting, equalization could be put in your portable device for pennies. Why destroy the quality of the original when you can just destroy the sound quality of the playback?
@Bedros Daoudian you mix up medium and mastering skills. Don't use DR numbers on this. And you question Paul? 😂
@@rabarebra dear Rock n Roll genius...... Mastering is the reason those 2 media sound differently..... After 25 years of comparing CDs to Vinyl...... That's my conclusion.... I have many examples when the CD and the vinyl will sound identical.... When they have been made from the same master.... Of course, given that the source of the vinyl sound is digital as is the case with more than 90% of issued Vinyls these days....... That's my experience and I can prove it any day of the week...... If the source for vinyl was tape..... Then that's something else........
My struggles with LP's
1. Decentering Wow
I can't understand why no one talks about this. Turntable manufacturers go to great lengths to reduce wow and flutter, but then it all goes out the window if the center guide hole isn't perfectly centered! This is an area where record manufacturers fall flat on their faces, in my experience. If the goal is to have wow under 0.1% rms, and maintain that for the inner tracks where the radius may be only 2.5" on a 12" LP, the maximum permissible centering error is only 0.09mm. One of the worst offenders that I own, is a direct-to-disc recording which was intended to be one of the highest-quality LP's available since its production skipped the tape mastering stage. I had to take a file to the center hole and offset it more than a full mm, in order to get the wow down - and it's not easy to find the correct position to eliminate the wow. In fact, trying to set this up can be a real short cut to insanity.
2. Tracking distortion
Distortion caused by the cartridge failing to precisely follow a groove at high lateral velocities is annoyingly audible - and very difficult to prevent. I'm convinced that there are LP's which no cartridge can faithfully play without this type of distortion occurring.
3. Clicks and Pops
Take a microscope to the surface of your LP's and you may find little surprises: Gifts from the manufacturer in the form of tiny foreign objects or near-microscopic droplets stuck to your grooves. I've actually been able to find and remove a few of these, but it isn't easy to do a clean job of it.
4. Surface Noise
We all know how important it is to keep LP's clean, but even if that can be done perfectly, there is the issue of material quality since most LP's made from the '70s and on were recycled material that can't produce the same surface smoothness as virgin vinyl.
Additional surface noise can also result if the manufacturer pushes their mother or stamper discs too far.
5. Wear
The albums we love the most, are the first to go noisy and distorted from wear. When I was young, I tried to get around this by copying them to high-quality analog tape when still new, but then of course that introduces other issues.
Marianne Oelund The irony is in your words. That’s what makes it great, it’s not perfect or sterile. Life is littered with surface noise. Even oil paintings look like shit under a microscope.
There is a super cool turntable by nakamichi which centers your records when playing. You can hear the difference. It's amazing. I saw it on UA-cam.
We get so nostalgic for vinyl but I grew up with it and we hated it for all the reasons you listed not to mention all the maintenance of the record, many preferred the sound and convenience of cassettes.
I agree with you on everything you said. I just watched a video on making vinyl records. With all the steps and labor involved, I'm surprised they could press millions of records for one lp i.e. Fleetwood Mac - Rumors. Fyi, I used to buy 2 copies of my favorite Lps. One to play and one to keep pristine. 😸😸😸😸
Boots Armstrong-- you can buy 10 copies of the same album and they can sound different depends upon if they were the first pressed off the stamper or the last or anything inbetween.
Hi Paul!
I certainly agree to your explanation of dynamics. Yes, silent is silent on CD. Love that. Despite of more convenient usage, no change-the-record-side, CD is very practical. Ans it's less expensive. One can buy a very good CD player for let's say from 400 $/€. While a very good vinyl player including cartridge of same quality costs 3000, usually more.
But at the top end I disagree with you listening (and measuring) CD and Vinyl. The output of a high end vinyl is a nuance more accurate more "quicker" than CD. One can hear that only listening to really good recorded music and some Instruments (thinking eg. about Dave Brubecks Unsqare Dance ;) or some recordings with great violins, percussion, organs.
Why? I think it's the unlucky 44.1kHz limit. This means the shortest attack period recordable on CD is 0.027 milliseconds (1/44100 - hope I did not mix up the zeros) The attack period of some instruments is almost 0,014 milliseconds (this is the same as the first max of a sine wave of approx 18kHz). Interestingly the human ear is able to hear these differences in attack time of a noise - even if we are not able the hear the corresponding sine wave given by a Fourier Analysis. Well, the human ear is no MathLab.
So CD is unluckily somewhat too slow, while a very good cartridge is able to grab that. That's may be a reason why some people might say vinyl is (or more correct: has the capability) to be more natural than CD.
Anyhow this is not longer valid for SACD with up to 192kHz. So, finally I think the CD standard was introduced too early, because technology was not ready to grab and pack the full scale of music on a 12cm disc. But still: this is only valid for those 5% or less who love to listen to almost perfect music reproduction.
Now there is a difference depending on who makes the vinyl record. the big record companies they are probably not always as good or as serious when it comes to sound. such as Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab = MOFI or analog production. their vinyl records are considered to have very low noise levels. then you have to maintain the vinyl records also as cleaning and antistatic treatment. NOTE proper cleaning equipment for vinyl records
SACD It came on the market in 1999 I have read. How many were interested not many. The interest in MP3 at that time was much greater. and did not go better for dvd audio
fluance rt85 with orthofon blue costs about $ 500 A denon turntable with Ortofon black costs about $ 1050
@AdMuseum What a lot of nonsense you wrote about attack period and 44.1kHz limit. 😂
@@rabarebra Just do the math before answering confused. 😂😂😂
I prefer digital formats. But love to play a vinyl record at some moments. The charm of see the vinyl spinning, bringing back the good old memories exploring music in the past.
But I have read that the average dynamics of a CD today is about 20 dB. and there are actually examples of albums on vinyl that have better dynamics than on the CD release. maybe it's something to do with loudness war. and maybe you can not always be at maximum volume all the time on a vinyl record. for technical reasons. that they actually have to be some variation in the dynamics. Then there are those who think that the sound image is better on vinyl records. and that the sound sounds warmer and more natural
It is to do with the Loudness War - dynamic range compression.
I can't hear well enough anymore to give a s*** about CD quality anyway. Cassette tapes or just fine for me.
Very good vinyl and analog playback are very good. CD's can be good, too, and they are very convenient. Flash drive with 24 bit transfer from Ampex ATR is best format. Will try DSD from source material "real soon now".
The challenge which so few have taken up is to take the SAME EXACT MASTER of a song or album, and transfer it both to CD and LP('vinyl'). One significant step that applies to the vinyl transfer is the RIAA curve and complementary reverse curve. This should not be audibly significant though.
Sampling rate is an issue as well
I remember Michael Fremer from Analog Planet posing a slightly different analogy...
Despite 99% of my music collection are redbook CDs I would love to try vinyl someday, which are more tangible. Taking out a CD from the case brings you back down memory lane, similar to a vinyl record, which is not doable on digital files. And I would love to try vinyl one day, but it's not very spouse-friendly - "oh another box on the TV rack?" :)
ntone7 it’s completely spouse friendly if you have the right spouse
Get yourself a man cave. Dear God, you guys base your life on your spouse?
Are you sure your IT department and your security like it when you show your server room with network map on UA-cam?
Boston Audio society did listening comparison: 1. SACD 2. SACD -> ADC (44.1/16) -> DAC (44.1/16)