• Alk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    8 months ago

    What is everyone’s opinions on the sound quality of vinyl?

    I understand the collectibility of physical media, and the novelty of owning a vinyl and the machine that plays them. The large art piece that is the case (and often the disc itself). Showing support for your favorite artists by owning physical media from them.

    Those are great reasons to collect vinyl.

    But a lot of my friends claim vinly is of higher audio quality than anything else, period. This is provably false, but it seems to be a common opinion.

    How often have you seen this and what are your thoughts on it?

    • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Technically CD quality digital is superior, but the recording and mixing can have a lot to do with it. For example, it could be that an decades old Dark Side Of The Moon on vinyl (played on proper equipment) could sound better than a modern remastered CD with maximized loudness (See the “loudness wars”).

    • micka190@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Either 0 difference from digital or worse due to skipping/bad record quality. Rap records are especially bad and I stopped buying them.

      Personally, I buy them because my internet is unreliable, it makes for some nice decoration and it’s nice to actually own something in 2024 (especially since Spotify keeps deleting random artists/songs from my playlists).

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I like to buy older albums that were mastered for vinyl, like Steely Dan, some prog rock like Yes or Pink Floyd. It gets a lot closer to listening to how the artists would have been hearing their product

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      First problem would be defining what “quality” means. On one hand vynil just has a continuous grove which needle follows. For this reason it’s infinitely precise, as there’s no interpolation or sample frequency. But on the other hand if master was digital and of shit quality, then benefits of analog mean nothing. Also widely used 44KHz sample rate is no accident, it’s exactly double of what human hearing can perceive. So even if you go higher, average listener wouldn’t be able to hear the difference.

      Music is also mastered differently for vynil. Base is centered and audio is processed to reduce chances of skipping tracks. This is why decent phono amplifier is needed to revert those changes. Digital stays good or shitty no matter how many times you copy the file.

      Overall sound quality is good, in both digital world and analogue. I have both high quality FLACs and some really great records which people would struggle to figure out if the sound they are hearing is digital or not. Personally I prefer vynil because the centered base. It makes other instruments more pronounced and you get to experience same music in a bit of a different way. Vynil being manual as it is also forces you to listen to entire side since it’s not easy to change tracks and authors by clicking next.

    • uienia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Vinyl records sounds great despite their technical inferiority to CDs and streaming (with the right equipment of course, but that applies to all formats). They do not necessarily sound better, but there is an element of customisation with them which you can’t get with CDs or streaming. Most importantly the cartridge on your turntable. Different cartridges have different soundscapes. There is of course an element of quality connected to price of cartridge, but over a certain price you are not necessarily buying a better sound but a different sound. Many vinyl record listeners, especially audiophiles, have different cartridges which they can switch out on their turntable, based on which kind of sound you want coming out of your system.

      I know it may be difficult to comprehend for people who haven’t personally listened to such differences themselves, but I assure you it is not audiophile snake oil, it is a very noticeable phenomenon. That is a pretty unique capability of vinyl which I can’t really compare to anything with other formats.

    • bus_factor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I read somewhere that about 50% of vinyl owners don’t have a player. Presumably that 50% only have very few records and bought them for the looks, but still.

    • datavoid@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Vinyl sounds good, but has too much noise to be the best. Although that could just be my cat’s fault, realistically - i spend a lot time removing hair from records.

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Too much noise? Older records sure. But new stuff? On mine you can’t tell the difference. There’s no hum, no crackling, no noise. It is recommended to brush your records before playing though. Perhaps that’s the problem?

        • datavoid@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The records are new, and I brush them before each use. I’ve used different carts so that’s probably not the issue either. Maybe I just got all bad records… Maybe I could hear a difference on yours. Who knows at this point

    • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Its worse in the best way IMO.

      The main reason I buy vinyl is for the other reasons you mentioned, but the imperfections of vinyl gives it a less robotic and sterile feel. It’s like listening to digital drums vs acoustic drums.

      There’s also the ritual of playing vinyl that’s real satisfying

  • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    8 months ago

    Vinyl, which tends to be pricier than the newer format, also far outstripped CDs in actual money made, raking in $1.4 billion compared to $537 million from CDs.

    Vinyl is definitely overpriced these days. I do love all the art and care that artists seem to put into their vinyl releases, but typically I’m spending $30-$50 on a new vinyl release. But what am I going to do? Not buy that limited edition colored vinyl gatefold with art and lyric pages?

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      I view vinyls as collectors items, not something you actually listen to. I still buy CDs because I hate the idea of subscription services.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Depends really. Seller am buying from has for example AC/DC records for 26$ a piece or 16$ a piece for CD. You simply can’t compare the two and the difference is 10$. They of course have 50th anniversary edition for 42$, but that’s up to you.

    • roofuskit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      There are things like Super Audio CDs and MACDs etc… I believe there may even be some blue ray audio releases.

      • JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Those are kind of rare, though; can they really be outselling CDs by so much? Or maybe the author mislabeled the key and ‘other’ is supposed to be the sliver on top?

        • shikitohno@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I don’t know how widespread it is outside of metal, but I’ve been seeing more and more bands offering tapes. Sometimes a release is only on tape, other times the tape might be $6, the CD $15 and the LP $25, so there are different ties available for those who want a physical copy. I probably got 10 tapes or so within the last year.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    If you’re curious, nearly half a million cassettes sold last year, too, according to Billboard.

    I’m more curious about who’s still selling music on cassette and who’s willing to buy it.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Someone else told me that. What bullshit. “You can’t have audio technology that was developed in the 1980s” is a fucking stupid punishment. Why not just make them listen to Edison cylinders?

        • nameisnotimportant@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Not for sure, but I have a few leads.

          I’ve heard and discussed with artists who mentioned that producing vinyl was very expensive compared to cassettes, which are cheap and easy to DIY.

          Then I’d add that cassettes have a retro appeal nowadays. Lastly, they are an analog format, opposite to the CD which is the 1:1 copy of the downloaded FLAC album downloaded from Bandcamp.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Analog, sure, but very low quality. 1/8" tape is not enough to reproduce sound accurately and there’s a lot of tape hiss. There’s a reason why professional analog multitrack studios use 1" tape.

            • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Ehh, all those 1” tape machines are 8-tracks and designed for editing, not playback. Magnetic tape fidelity has a lot more to do with medium, bias and processing than the width of the tape itself.

              Hell, plenty of analog shops use four and eight track machines that run 1/4” tape!

              Compact cassette also has the potential to sound very good. If you would like a demonstration, look up the vwestlife yt channel or listen to a good tape on a good tape deck.

        • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Cheap short runs. National will do 50 unit orders and you can sell em at 5-7$ and you’re still doubling your money on tour tapes.

            • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              idk how many people have functional tape decks but you can still buy new production component and portable ones and there’s a healthy used market.

    • KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      some bands, and their fans. you can make a cassette look pretty dope.

      and i’ve heard prisoners often only have access to cassettes.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      The only vinyls I buy are from charity shops or because I love an album so much that I want it as a collection (I’d also buy the CD to actually listen to)

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, I haven’t bought a new record in a long time, and one of my most prized albums is a 1970 radio-played copy of The Kinks “Lola vs. Powerman and the MoneygoRound” complete with the dates and times they played Lola."

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      That is definitely something I loved about LPs. I used to have a big book of album cover art. I have no idea what happened to it unfortunately, but I used to pore over it. Liner notes are less of an issue with the internet, but the shrinking of art was a very unfortunate result of CDs.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I remember getting a copy of Jethro Tull’s “Thick as a Brick” that came with a whole-ass newspaper they made folded into the liner with lyrics and pictures. That’s something you can only do with vinyl.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Definitely. Similarly, Negativland’s album Escape From Noise came with both a bumper sticker and a booklet all about the history of Negativland.

  • Skkorm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m a music collector and saw this coming. “Music” went from a product you buy, into a service you pay to gain access to. You don’t pay for music, you pay daddy Spotify for access to HIS music.

    Vinyl has turned back into the only form of physical music collection.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I hate subscription services, for the cost of a Spotify subscription I can but one or two CD albums a month.

      I buy a vinyl here or there but just to collect. I listen to my CDs.

      • bitchkat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I tried Spotify but it only has about 70% of the albums in my collection. I used to love google play music because you could upload your media and it would be included in your library.

        • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I liked Google play too. I was not pleased when they moved to YouTube music and made accessing your own music a total pain in the balls.

            • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll check it out

              Edit: It needed me to sign up with an email address and I saw it had in app purchases that put me off a bit. But when looking for that app I found Musicolet which looks pretty perfect, just a simple ad free music playing app without all the bollocks!

              • bitchkat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                the in app purchases are mainly if you want to buy PlexPass which unlocks additional features. I bought the lifetime pass years ago when it was on sale for $75 so I can’t quite remember which features require plex pass. Its primarily for video but the music section with Plexamp on my phone and laptop is a nice little bonus.

    • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Ever since the RIAA went after consumers with hefty lawsuits in the early 2000s, I didn’t buy music ever again.

  • danielfgom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    That’s because it’s getting harder to find CD’s plus the majority of people buy digital

  • SolNine@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Only a few more years now till the retro sound of CDs comes back into style. I realize vinyl is a great and unique user experience with a specific timber, and more enjoyable to collect.

    It’s kind of funny when you hear about the “analog warmth” when albums were being digitally mastered as early as the late 70s… And pretty much all re-releases are digitally remastered.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Retro sound of a CD?

      They sound exactly the same as the digital releases. Only audiophiles up there own arses believe that they can hear a difference. Vinyls sound different but for obvious reasons.

      • SolNine@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I think you missed my sarcasm…

        Edited to add: most CDs sound the same as their digital releases (assuming they had the same master which I’ve found isn’t always true), but occasionally you can actually get higher resolution, up to 96k/24 bit, which do sound different depending on your playback device.

        Most of the difference is likely due to the nature of the DA filter being applied during playback, as I certainly won’t notice the noise floor between 16-24 bit, and any frequency difference is far far behind my range of hearing.

        If you aren’t familiar with what I’m referring too, different DA implementations use varying filtering techniques, some have a slight roll off in the upper frequency range to improve the accuracy of transient response, while others use a flatter frequency response sacrificing the transient. Newer DAs from some manufacturers allow you to select which option you prefer. At double and quad sample rates this can largely become a moot point as any sacrifice to the frequency response is far out of the range of human hearing.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Vynil is mixed differently. Base is much more centered to help prevent skipping tracks. This makes music sound a bit differently. Also, it’s not easy to change track or author, so you usually end up listening to entire side or record. Overall it’s a different experience.

      I personally never liked CDs. They never lasted for me. Either the case breaks on the first wrong glance of it or the disk starts flaking or being scratched.

      • SolNine@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think the mixing being different is likely dependent upon how good the engineer and mastering engineers are/were. I’d wager a fair number of bands releasing their albums to vinyl these days simply send over a very similar final master (maybe slightly less loud if you are lucky) to the vinyl cutting without much thought, because it’s the hip thing to do.

        You are accurate, that they should ensure that low frequencies are mono compatible, but it is likely less of an issue for the style of music most associated with vinyl releases (indi etc), as stylistically they don’t tend to use stereo widening on low frequency instruments. Generally they have kick and bass down the center channel, or I suppose going mono style out of L/R if they are trying to be really old school, but that would likely take a completely different mix adding to production budget as I can’t imagine if would work to well on phones etc, which a lof of music is mix for unfortunately.

        None of the artists I produce or mix for have requested it yet, but if they did I would send them to Fuller Sound Mastering as Michael has been around for ages and knows how to handle masters for vinyl.

        Vinyl cutting also has an EQ curve offset that is printed into the vinyl itself, cutting the bass and boosting the high frequency, which is then re-applied by the players preamp circuitry, I believe it’s referred to as pre and de-emphasis. Funny enough my mastering DAC actually has this feature for some kind of old early CD technology for some lower resolution digital formats that had issues with noise and filtering and used a similar technology, I had never heard of this until I purchased this particular unit haha.

      • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I agree that some cases are brittle but I’ve not seen a disc get fucked since I was a kid, when I couldn’t be bothered to put them back in the case.

  • Zstom6IP@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    Poeple jerking off CDs here dont understand down sampling and the average quality of CDS. they think that just because it is digitally mastered that it therefore must be the master that is put on CDS, its not.

    • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I can’t hear anything above 20 kHz, and neither can most people. CD audio is passed through a 20 kHz lowpass filter. It is then sampled at 44 kHz. Due to the Nyquist Shannon Spamling Theorum, when sound is digitally sampled at just above twice the rate of the source audio, converting it back to analog perfectly reproduces the original waveform. And I do mean perfectly. The exact same waveform. (The extra 4 kHz is to prevent artifacts in frequencies very close to 20 kHz.)

      Therefore CD audio is perfect unless you think you can hear above 20 kHz. (Spoiler: you can’t) There are a few good YouTube videos on this topic, and the best ones are very mathy.

      Is there something I’m missing? Do I need to educate myself some more?

      • renzev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I don’t know shit about fuck, but you explanation seems correct.

        I do remember hearing that precisely because of the limitations of vinyl compared to CD, music is mastered differently for each medium. So the CD master of a certain song might be more compressed (dynamic compression, not digital compression) to make it sound “louder”, while the vinyl release has a wider dynamic range. So some people might prefer the vinyl version because it actually does sound different to the CD version.

        Keep in mind tho, I might be spreading misinformation here.

        • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          The loudness wars were definitely a thing; you are correct. But that was a choice and not a limitation of the medium. Plenty of CDs were not produced that way. But that’s not what the OC was talking about. They were talking about down sampling, not dynamic range compression.

      • tjsauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        You are correct, CDs can reproduce the human audio spectrum perfectly, IF AND ONLY IF certain rules are followed, and I think that’s why earlier CDs sounded weird. For example: how good were low pass filters when digital sound first arrived?

    • Zstom6IP@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      also the CDs dynamic range is far greater then that present in most music, so it makes little impact in practice. unless you intentionally utilize it.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Keep kidding yourself that you can hear the difference.

      Vinyls have their appeal but they get dusty, scratched, they skip etc. Only snobs truly think that they sound better.

      Digital music can be taken as easily as it can be given.

      CDs are the best compromise. They have sound quality as good as digital but you also get the lyrics and artwork that come with a vinyl, they’re also much easier to store. The best thing though, is that if I get bored of a CD, I can sell it or even just give it away for free, you can’t do that with digital music.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m a (former) audio engineer and I can’t tell the difference. My professors used to laugh at audiophiles who spent hundreds or even thousands of dollars for stereo equipment because we were taught to mix things so that they sound good in a car as well as a perfectly quiet room. In fact, we were told that after we finished a master, we should test it by putting it in our car and driving around to make sure the mix was audible in the ways you and the band wanted.

        I still really like vinyl because I like the ritual of the whole thing, but I don’t spend money on it because it’s way too expensive and everything you hear is almost certainly mastered digitally and likely recorded and mixed digitally, negating the whole “warmth” factor.

      • renzev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Digital music can be taken as easily as it can be given.

        Digital does not always mean DRM. You can pry my bandcamp FLACs from my cold dead hands. Physical media nowadays is more about the experience than functionality. Maybe there are snobs who claim that vinyls are somehow functionally superior, but generally the people who use vinyls or CDs or tapes instead of digital are really just looking for that physical experience in a highly digitalized world.

        They have sound quality as good as digital

        CD quality is actually superior to streaming services like spotify (I personally can’t tell the difference tho).

      • systemglitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s why I use a dedicated music tracker for my music. I own it. I get the exact quality and version I want, and no one can take it from me.

        I’ve had a lot of physical media stolen from me, and I would never try replacing it with more purchased media, because of the he cost and potential for damage and chance it might get stolen again.

      • Zstom6IP@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        yes, but generally the digital master is not what the recordings are made fromm you do not contradict a single thing i said.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Something something piracy doesnt matter, something something make a good product at a fair price, something something provide convenience. What was i talking about again?

  • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is dumb. Just going to be used for collectors editions with different songs and shit.

    To each their own I guess.