New " digital" vinyl vs old "analog" vinyl

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#101
I've already seen a decline in quality from 5 years back with vinyl. As someone said, greed is in it now and some labels are using CD's to digi as the master source and god knows how many degrees that's seperated from the original.

The good reputable labels are at least transferring from original hi-rez sources. I tend to look for labels that advise the source they used to make the record.

Personally, I don't care if it's digital or analog sourced, if I like, I like it. I'll go for analog first if there's a rare choice available.
 
#102
Well if its DIGITAL SOURCE why bother getting a record buddy?? (Ya wont get any better sound than on a CD which i think is BS and shows they dont really care about the quality they are offering)

RECORDS are thankfully NOT DIGITAL MEDIA and in my opinion SHOULD SOUND BETTER! (In other words: NOTHING DIGITAL IN THE MAKING (Same with VHS movies,cassette tapes... ANY ANALOG MEDIA))
 
Last edited:
#103
PChi said:
I wouldn't say tape was all that good. On some records it was possible to hear tape hiss above the background noise that vinyl produces. Dolby did well out of electronic processing to improve the perceived dynamic range.
On others it was possible to hear tape print through even on on vinyl records.

On many multi-tracked and processed old records the sound quality was poor. Tape is hardly a uniform frequency response / low distortion, wide dynamic range system. Despite this some old recordings could sound pretty good.

I agree that the problem is the way they mix new music. I think that the way it has been used is more important than the technology.

In my opinion records are poor so if it is available on CD it will be generally better than how it sounds on vinyl. Vinyl is also a relatively high distortion, not brilliant dynamic range or particularly well controlled frequency response system. Some people prefer the sound quality of vinyl but I think that it is less realistic than CD. Either Vinyl or CD are OK and probably less of an issue that the loudspeakers used or the mixing process.
Click to expand...

Hilarious .......😀
 
#104
Dude111 said:
Well if its DIGITAL SOURCE why bother getting a record buddy?? (Ya wont get any better sound than on a CD which i think is BS and shows they dont really care about the quality they are offering)

RECORDS are thankfully NOT DIGITAL MEDIA and in my opinion SHOULD SOUND BETTER! (In other words: NOTHING DIGITAL IN THE MAKING (Same with VHS movies,cassette tapes... ANY ANALOG MEDIA))
Click to expand...

Because I have a nice turntable and enjoy everything about playing vinyl on a turntable. It's a simple choice for me. If I owned a Nº 512 CD/SACD player by Mark Levinson, I'd buy the CD or SACD.

I find it funny people automatically question someone buying vinyl if the source is the same as a CD. Well...I own a turntable...why WOULD I buy a CD??
 
#108
Anyone own Talking Heads "Stop Making Sense" on vinyl - original release? Fairly early digital recording. Listening last night - it does not sound right to me. For me, that recording would sound just as good on a mp3. Right after, I listened to Bryan Ferry "Bete Noir" - recording is amazing - not sure if it is analog recording.

The Dick's Picks Grateful Dead series is being released on vinyl. 1 and 2 were mastered from the CDs as they had lost the master tapes. 3 and 4 were converted to digital from the masters before going to vinyl. Very dumb IMHO - not paying $$$ for those.
 
#110
Glad to see the same old misunderstandings are still going strong. Dither is still to be invented and analog still has infinite bandwidth. And a vinyl master doesn't go through an A/D/A preview yet. We're still in the seventies, except the war has changed and the drugs will kill you.

Thanks,
Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom