News from the "analog revival"

[Cholentpot]

Direct-to-disc pressings offer greater fidelity, and are easier to preserve.

Vinyl has better fidelity than a master tape? Come on now.

Look, records are nice, and they have a special sound. But they are not the end all in audio fidelity.

 

[Cholentpot]

Improper care and playback is to blame.

I buy music to play, not to leave in a sleeve. Playing a record wears it out no matter how nice the stylus is. And if you go laser stylus you might as well go digital. These things are consumables, and the record industry thrived on consumables. They loved compact cassettes because they were so prone to breaking that they were pretty near disposable few time use.

Digital audio is buy once and you're done. Why do you think the industry hates MP3? It's an antiquated standard but it's a standard. It works everywhere across many platforms. Consumers feel no need to buy another Beatles or Stones album ever again.

 

[George Mann]

Vinyl has better fidelity than a master tape? Come on now.

You have a thing or two to learn about direct metal mastering.

Look, records are nice, and they have a special sound. But they are not the end all in audio fidelity.

The above pressings played back on a million dollar sound system is!

 

[George Mann]

Playing a record wears it out no matter how nice the stylus is.

I have never worn out a record, and have rarely seen one, but have seen countless damaged ones.

Proper vinyl playback is not for the poor, nor for the uncommitted and faint of heart.

 

[Cholentpot]

I have never worn out a record, and have rarely seen one, but have seen countless damaged ones.

Proper vinyl playback is not for the poor, nor for the uncommitted and faint of heart.

Can't argue with a True Believer.

Enjoy your music how you like it. Currently I'm listening to Sesame Street on a thrift store Fisher Price player with a 10lb arm. The audience loves it, therefore it's the greatest thing ever and nothing can ever top it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Vinyl wears out

That is an Operator Assisted Failure, aka OAF. Usage: The OAF damaged the record.

 

[Cholentpot]

That is an Operator Assisted Failure, aka OAF. Usage: The OAF damaged the record.

User Error.

Issue is between the seat and the keyboard.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have never worn out a record, and have rarely seen one, but have seen countless damaged ones.

Proper vinyl playback is not for the poor, nor for the uncommitted and faint of heart.

I have never worn out a record. I still have my records from 60 years ago and my Dual turntable still works.

 

[awty]

And I just bought a CD player and DAC, cant afford to buy records any more mint CD's are under $10. If the cost of film photography goes up much more I will be looking at digital cameras and a printer.

 

[Cholentpot]

And I just bought a CD player and DAC, cant afford to buy records any more mint CD's are under $10. If the cost of film photography goes up much more I will be looking at digital cameras and a printer.

Digital full frame cameras are really affordable these days. Use it till it dies.

 

[George Mann]

If the cost of film photography goes up much more I will be looking at digital cameras and a printer.

I have entertained this notion a few times, but immediately come back to film as digital does nothing for me.

 

[foc]

If the cost of film photography goes up much more I will be looking at digital cameras and a printer.

Every hobby costs money, some more than others.
It all relative.
Some like playing golf or backing horses, collecting stamps or listening to vinyl records.
IMO film photography was never a cheap hobby but it is more affordable now than it was 30 years ago.
Then again the tern affordable ..................................

 

[awty]

Every hobby costs money, some more than others.
It all relative.
Some like playing golf or backing horses, collecting stamps or listening to vinyl records.
IMO film photography was never a cheap hobby but it is more affordable now than it was 30 years ago.
Then again the tern affordable ..................................

Here in Australia prices in film photography have gone up on average by 50% in the last 4 years and my income has stagnated. So its at a price point where I need to be more discerning than I use to, if it goes up much more it will become unaffordable for me.
Records on average cost $50 now, so ceased buying them. CD's are cheap and take up less room.
30 years ago I couldn't afford any hobbies, hobbies are a luxury.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Discerning wants from needs can free up discretionary income.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

The majority of pressings are 100% analog. Digitally sourced pressings are notably inferior, but easier to listen to than digital formats.

Direct-to-disc pressings offer greater fidelity, and are easier to preserve.

And looking at gelatin silver prints through a loupe reveals how much more "3-D" they are than inkjet prints. LOL

Such absurdities swallowed by gullible people are ultimate illustrations of the principle attributed to P.T. Barnum.

 

[JWMster]

Any of you guys read the NY Times Bestseller: "The Revenge of Analog"? Great read.
But one of the keys why analog recording is coming back is a desire to hear an authentic artist's actual talent rather than a spliced up performance the artist couldn't manage "live". It's a premise. My tastes would tend to call it the "anti-Taylor Swift" sound. But YMMV.

So much for music.

Film is a different aesthetic. For me, film gives a grain bite to the empty space on the photo, and I like it "better". While I know you can simulate this in digital, I've not tried it, and certainly don't see much of it (or at least don't think I have which may be just of a measure of a tasteful application).

 

[flavio81]

Vinyl has better fidelity than a master tape? Come on now.

Well, they do, when there's no master tape involved (direct-to-disc recordings).

Magnetic tapes introduce their own kinds of distortions into the sound. Vinyl records introduce different kind of distortions and I think the direct-to-disc records of the early 80s and the DBX-encoded records of the same era have nearly proven that the vinyl record can be as transparent as a really good master tape, or maybe better (for starters, much less wow and flutter, flatter frequency response (no head 'bumps') and the noise floor is lower, particularly at the higher frequencies where there's none)

 

[flavio81]

I have never worn out a record. I still have my records from 60 years ago and my Dual turntable still works.

Yep. Me too.

Records can be damaged, but they can't be worn if used properly. There were extensive testing done in the '60s.

I own over 650 records, almost all of them bought used but in great shape. They sound just fine.

 

[flavio81]

The first half of 2020 was the first half year since the mid-eighties in which revenue from vinyl record sales in the US significantly surpassed sales revenue from CDs.

I don't want to sound arrogant, but I saw this coming back in ~2005, and that's the year I stated buying a LOT of records at really cheap prices (think 1-7 USD each).

This was because the MP3 craze was getting very established, and it was obvious CD sales were going to drop down to zero. While in my country there was a niche market of records that every weekend had a reasonable amount of steady buyers. I never ever, for a minute, thought the LP record was going to die, for their advantages were obvious (for one, allowing you to listen to the original mixes and original releases of classic recordings, usually with better fidelity than poorly-done CD releases)

.

 

[flavio81]

I buy music to play, not to leave in a sleeve. Playing a record wears it out no matter how nice the stylus is. And if you go laser stylus you might as well go digital. These things are consumables,

Laser turntables are analog, and they are very bad as well. A very bad idea. They pick op a lot of surface noise that wouldn't be picked up by a regular stylus. As I wrote above, record wear isn't a problem with a reasonably good system, not even memtioning a deluxe system. I have my copy of Abbey Road i bought about 15 years ago, brand new, and I have played it uncountable times over the years, easily more than 60 (four times each year), in a lot of different turntables because I have owned a lot of TTs over those years... and it still sounds as good as when new,

As for the "these things are consumables" claim, well, I think it's already known that vinyl records are among the most stable ways to store information. They don't break when dropped, they aren't damaged by humidity or vibration or fumes. They are reasonably resilient to hot climates and immune to very cold climates.

 

[George Mann]

And looking at gelatin silver prints through a loupe reveals how much more "3-D" they are than inkjet prints. LOL

Such absurdities swallowed by gullible people are ultimate illustrations of the principle attributed to P.T. Barnum.

Why don't you contribute something meaningful for once instead of endlessly trolling this forum with baseless conjecture with no facts presented to back it up?

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...one of the keys why analog recording is coming back is a desire to hear an authentic artist's actual talent rather than a spliced up performance the artist couldn't manage "live". It's a premise...

It's another absurdity. Where do you think the word "splice" came from? Ever see a splicing block? A device that, in combination with a single-edge razor blade, is used to put together different sections of tape? From different takes?

There's nothing more "authentic" about the talent of an "artist" whose performance was recorded via an analog medium than one captured using digitizing equipment. One can debate the adequacy of digital standards -- I personally discussed optimal audio sampling rate with Bob Fine, who'd concluded that at least 100k per second was necessary, at an Audio Engineering Society meeting many decades ago -- but claims about vinyl's inherent "superiority" are nonsense on their face.

Today's LP sales provide incontrovertible evidence that catering to suckers is a sure-fire money-making con.

Why don't you contribute something meaningful for once instead of endlessly trolling this forum with baseless conjecture with no facts presented to back it up?

Methinks thou doth project too much.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have entertained this notion a few times, but immediately come back to film as digital does nothing for me.

Amen!

And looking at gelatin silver prints through a loupe reveals how much more "3-D" they are than inkjet prints. LOL

Such absurdities swallowed by gullible people are ultimate illustrations of the principle attributed to P.T. Barnum.

and that is just for starters.

 

[George Mann]

Laser turntables are analog, and they are very bad as well.

When used to play back vinyl pressings, yes. But I have invented a new format that utilizes a laser.

My full spectrum, frequency-modulated optical analog format can provide an exact copy of a studio or location feed.

 

[Cholentpot]

Well, they do, when there's no master tape involved (direct-to-disc recordings).

Magnetic tapes introduce their own kinds of distortions into the sound. Vinyl records introduce different kind of distortions and I think the direct-to-disc records of the early 80s and the DBX-encoded records of the same era have nearly proven that the vinyl record can be as transparent as a really good master tape, or maybe better (for starters, much less wow and flutter, flatter frequency response (no head 'bumps') and the noise floor is lower, particularly at the higher frequencies where there's none)

At the sacrifice of low freq that then gets added back later in the audio line.

Laser turntables are analog, and they are very bad as well. A very bad idea. They pick op a lot of surface noise that wouldn't be picked up by a regular stylus. As I wrote above, record wear isn't a problem with a reasonably good system, not even memtioning a deluxe system. I have my copy of Abbey Road i bought about 15 years ago, brand new, and I have played it uncountable times over the years, easily more than 60 (four times each year), in a lot of different turntables because I have owned a lot of TTs over those years... and it still sounds as good as when new,

As for the "these things are consumables" claim, well, I think it's already known that vinyl records are among the most stable ways to store information. They don't break when dropped, they aren't damaged by humidity or vibration or fumes. They are reasonably resilient to hot climates and immune to very cold climates.

My records get more plays then that in a month.

Then again, I'm not buying pristine records because I know my crowd. PB&J don't come out of the grooves so easily.