MY vinyl is better than YOUR digital

We all know how dreadful vinyl is. All those scratches, all that distortion, and more. But is there a way it can actually be *better* than digital? (Revivals series)

MORE REVIVALS...

[adam]

Amen to this. My kids have played me some of their favourite more contemporary music (actual bands with actual guitars) and quite a few of the songs I like, but the production and mastering of the recordings is borderline unlistenable. It's so insanely loud and over compressed that it's tiring to listen to and I give up. That's a shame, because the music is often great. I think that well recorded, mixed and mastered digital formats have it all over vinyl but the loudness war has been a blight on modern music.

[andywray]

I'm very technical by background and can relate to the fact that vinyl is inherently flawed compared to digital formats. That said, my wife gave me a decent turntable a couple of years ago as a birthday present and she and I have not looked back. We used to grab dinner in front of the TV; we now put a different LP on every night and sit at a candle-lit dinner table and spend quality time together with quality music in the background. I do think that I've probably spent more time optimising that turntable with the right cartridge and phono amp stage to match my amp and speakers so that it sounds just right; if I'd put as much effort into the digital equivalent, I'm sure I could have got as good, if not better results. There is, however, more of an emotional connection with a physical stylus in a groove on a rotating LP. It makes no technical sense I know.

[joelpoitras]

Agree 100%
Remember your first CD purchase when you looked on the backside where the copyrights were.
CDs all came with this classic note:
"Because of its higher resolution, this compact digital disc can reveal limitations of studio master recordings".
🤷

[rael]

The reasons I left vinyl behind were the same. The reasons I stopped listening to music at all was the digital mastering, so my return to vinyl obey that urgency of listening to music again, not convenience.
Now I'm willing to tolerate the flaws of vinyl, learn things I didn't know back in the day, and finally sit and listen to music again like originally intended..

[jonathangmallender]

As someone born in the 70s and have endured (or enjoyed) every format since then, this video added one of the final pieces of the jigsaw, I was never aware of the loudness war, but it answer so many questions about the quality of CDs over the dates you mentioned. Hence why I've flip flopped between vinyl & digital. Thoroughly enjoying your content and your delivery and passion is outstanding. Thank you

[RepulsiveEchoRecords]

Last reissue we did from the original cd dynamic range was 4 and we took it at 9, sound was so much better and the album was recorded in an expensive and serious studio. Thank you for all the information you give us

[TheMirolab]

Love your comments. Long ago I envisioned a world where the record companies might distribute 2 versions of an album... a loud compressed version, and a dynamic audiophile version. I could see how that idea would be prohibitive in the days of hard media (CD & LP), but now that bits are free, I don't understand why this couldn't be done today. Even on Tidal, many albums have an MQA and a non-MQA version. Unfortunately, the MQA version comes from the same, horrible, over-limited master. Even modern albums are mastered from heavily limited mixes. THIS is why I still love buying old vinyl and old CDs from the 80-90s, before excessive digital limiting.

[Zockopa]

Enjoying music never was about what is better but what is good enough on a individual level.

[danigomb]

you are right: YOUR vinyl sounds better than my digital... but my DIGITAL is a world i live in. Have a great music!

[vimfuego]

Remember, it was 'Bass' that had the biggest problem with mastering vinyl. Because of the bass frequencies creating 'rumble', if a badly mastered vinyl record (not meeting standards) overdone the bass, the stylus was unable to track the vinyl grooves because it 'bounced' on the grooves. Bass frequencies were the fundamental problem of vinyl when mastering and the treble 'boost' needed to transfer the master to vinyl. I remember, if memory serves, the EQ curve for vinyl from the original master tapes was the RIAA curve or T1=3180 μs, T2=318 μs, T3=75 μs:[3] I remember a conversation with Todd Rundgren in the late 70s explaining the limitations of Vinyl when making his very long playing album @Initiation@ over one hour long. The groves were obviously very tight and the bass was very tame, plus the sound level was lower. He (Todd Rundgren) recommended re-recording the album onto reel to reel louder to compensate the limitations.

[michaelkyle]

Yes. Exactly. Vinyl format forces - or perhaps rather ensures - a certain retention of soundstage. I love soundstage. As a focussed and rather obsessive listener, I want to appreciate all the details (and even the occasional crackle!). And soundstage is a detail! Yes vinyl requires moderation of highs and bass, but the bass from any number of records from my collection is enough to vibrate my floors.

I'm yet to hear any good vinyl master that doesn't have bass competitive with digital masters. Luckily, my turntable has nice little feet on it that absorb every ounce of that bass vibration, so no feedback reaches the stylus. And it works even though one of the speakers is on the SAME surface as the turntable! Remarkable stuff. Modern turntables really can provide a listening experience that is quiet and hardy enough to endure incredibly high volumes. And with that volume comes a retained soundstage. What's not to love? I'd take the more restrictive vinyl mastering standard over modern digital mastering standards any day - so long as the artist has providesd bespoke vinyl masters for the record and doesn't just turn the digital master down for the vinyl.

[worthingtonmodelrailway]

I’d like to agree on one thing here - for the most part I prefer listening to vinyl - it’s somehow less tiring to listen to. If I want to show off the capabilities of my system SACD seems to make everything “Pop” but if I just want to listen I’ll grab the vinyl version of the recording over any digital format, even if the studio master is digital the mastering of the vinyl generally is easier to listen to! Purely subjective but perhaps that’s why we are “human”.

[MaxCarola]

Thanks, David! An obvious description of what I do know since the 90s. I was even surprised surprised to hear from clients that they felt the vinyl warmer, even if it lacked information lower than 50Hz! And that was a starting point for my quest for a more "analogue" digital sound. I am now thrilled about my digital master's. And they cut perfectly to vinyl, too.
My masters respect the new streaming standards, but I always send a mix of at least 9dBFS refreferencesr terms for mix approval. And the mixes get approval way more quickly. So then I send a different mix for the mastering, and if I do mastering myself, I do a "web" version conforming to the new streaming standards (I happily use the loudness meter plugin) and a "CD" version at the -9dBFS ref standard (Still quiet, for some dudes).

[miniroll]

What’s interesting is how quiet early CDs were. Now it’s quite refreshing as it means the engineer didn’t compress it to death!

[GrahamDyson-hz]

On a quality well maintained Set-up, Yes, it's infinitely better !

[dmhnc]

My first nice system was built around a Technics turntable back in the early '80's. As cd's became more popular in the late 80's I put together a rather expensive system around an expensive single cd player. It was good but I didn't like the sound as much as I did vinyl. Now I'm back to vinyl and have no regrets. Yes, I have some pops and skips on some of my older albums but that's ok. Vinyl puts a smile on my face like cd's just can't.

[arthurriaf]

Boy, what a mixed set of feelings on this subject.
Back in the 60s, i worked in a record department of a major department store.
I bought records, and i listened to them until they were worn out.
Then came 8 track players briefly. They worked but had limits. Then came cassettes, and i bought them by the dozens. I even had a Nacamichi player to enjoy the sound. It's not too bad but limited by several factors. Tape speed and life of the pads in the cassette were problems.
Then came CDs 💿! Decent range of frequency. Easy to use and store. Damage tolerant to a point, and they don't need 24 hours to cool off after playing, like records!
Today, i use my computer to make playlists off the internet.
My hearing is limited to about 13, 000 hz, so all the negative audio issues with compression and frequency limits or whatever are the latest "problems" with the media I just ignore.
Yesterday, i played from Evita, Dont Cry For me, Argentina. Then Richard Kiley singing "To Dream the Impossible Dream" from an Ed Sulivan show from the 60s.
I've seen both on Broadway live, so I'm familiar with the songs and sound.
In my bedroom where my stereo is set up, I was transported back to the theater and had chills from the sound.
My stereo is different than most as a 16 channel system with 11 subwoofers and 50 plus active speakers 🔊.
I just can't be bothered with records. The space to store and the time spent just preparing to use the record is just too much work for what it's worth.
I can play a dozen songs in the time it takes getting a record out of its jacket, cleaning it, putting it on the turntable, queuing up the song, and playing it is too much like work.
I guess after 60-plus years watching hi fi evolving, I've gone for quantity over cumbersome.
With 2, 700 plus watts of power, i can recreate live performance with the click of a mouse 🐁 🪤 👌.

[AnUndisclosedLocation]

Music mastered on DSD and distributed in flac sounds as good as the best and better than all other vinyl playback equipment. You would have to spend tens of thousands of $s on a turntable, arm, cartridge & pre-amp to get close to the quality of a digital file played through a £150 soundcard.

[zxirjtc]

Also... with my vinyl rig I actually adjust the level of gain saturation going into my amp with my phono stage. Most cd players dont have this ability. Its little things like this that are why I love vinyl.

[philipellis]

I'm a 75 yo, and in the mid 60's started to build up a quality HiFi set up, had the Thorens TD124 Mk 2 deck, SME 3009 + Shure V15 that served me well, then in 1985 I bought the Michell Gyrodec, SME 3009 Series II + Goldring 1042 so a reasonable set up, and over the years bought over 7, 000 (Soul and Jazz) albums and 12" records mainly US and Japanese imports, these were sealed and on occasions the US pressings was somewhat under parr, so I exchanged these at my regular shop (City Sounds London) and sure enough the new copy was ok, the Japanese pressing were perfect every time, the reason I'm mentioning this as I found that during the manufacturing of vinyl that after 300 odd pressings degradation takes place before a new stamp is replaced, so you never know if you have in your collection a low or high count purchase.
Now onto CD's in 1983 I bought the Tania Maria album called 'Come with Me', I also bought the CD at the same time just to compare and I have to say listening through my ATC SCM100 speakers there wasn't a noticeable change, so it's debatable what's best, I reluctantly sold all of my vinyl including the Gyrodec but still have a few thousand CD's mainly from the US and Italy. I now download my music and I can tell you that the quality is fantastic, I'm knocking vinyl but to start again with a decent turntable, arm and cartridge you're looking at north of £3, 000