It’s the time of year for saving money!
Avid readers of AudiophileReview.com and HomeTheaterReview.com know that our stance on vinyl and its so-called resurgence is clear. The nearly 100-year-old music playback format absolutely has its place in AV history. But because of poor performance in dynamic range and endemic distortion based around the pure physics of dropping a stylus into the groove of a record – vinyl simply can’t compete with the near “bit perfect” facsimiles of meaningful master tape material being sold today in places like HDTracks.com at about $20 per title or streamed, often in 24 bit formats and-or using MQA via Tidal.
But is vinyl always bad? No. Not at all. It is just important to remember that vinyl isn’t high performance audio that pushes the limit of musical reproduction be it trying to replicate the live experience or capturing ever musical nuance on the master tape of a recording. The only people who suggest this is possible say that they ignore the facts and “trust their ears” be it old industry executives or Boomer audiophile writers in the print rags. I know its popular to ignore facts in Washington but c’mon people. Selling vinyl as an HD audio format is like denying climate change, measuring your Operating Thetan levels or any other voodoo that people want to sell you that isn’t backed by science and math.
With that said, we live in an often overly-digital world. Everything is a connected device. An unending stream of media comes beaming in via email, text, feeds, flows and whatnot. Many can’t be an hour without the stimulation of their phone. Others, yours truly very much included, spend hours upon hours daily staring into the always captivating world of the computers and the Internet. En route to the recent AXPONA show, my United flight from Los Angeles to Chicago on a relatively new 737-800 didn’t have Internet and I could feel the cold chill run through my veins. I was stuck listening to my new Bowers & Wilkins PX wireless headphones while either listening to music on my Macbook Pro or watching Season 5 of Shameless (perfect to prepare for a trip to Chicago, right?) on my iPad Pro all while my iPhone X was waiting to be fired up the second that I landed. I know, I know I am a digital junkie.
While on my 33 hour trip to AXPONA I did read an analog book by celebrity chef, Eric Ripert called 32 Yolks. And you know what? I loved the time reading an actual paper book. I find it quiets my mind a little versus the more plugged in version of reading books on my iPad which leaves me just as connected as I am when I sit in front of my computer. I am buying more and more books on paper and trying to take the time to pry myself from the addiction of the Internet and my gleaming computers and devices and spend some time listening to music and reading analog books. It seems better for me.
If one wanted to make the same argument about vinyl being a more ritualistic, analog experience – I couldn’t and wouldn’t have an argument. If one wanted to say that the cadence of an album, especially ones that were recorded during the heyday of vinyl, is better on an LP – I would agree too. Seriously, select Electric Ladylandor The Wallon your digital device and hit the all-popular “shuffle” and tell me what the record sounds like now? It’s out of order, missing the needed transitions between songs. On an LP, albums have two acts (or four in the case of the two double albums I mentioned above) where songs are blended to mesh just as the musicians, producers and engineers want. The keys match. The tempo has flow and coherence. The timing between the tracks is carefully considered in ways that shuffle butchers back into a pre-1960s world of singles.
The tactile feel of an album’s sleeve is more engaging that looking at cover flow art work even if its broadcast on a 4K OLED HDTV between your speakers. The ritual of placing a record on the platter and slipping it is somewhat calming in a world of on-demand media everywhere we look. Taking the time to read the liner notes of a record and enjoying the art on the cover and sleeve is a time-tested and beloved act.
One can see why people in an overly digital world might want to revert back to the ways of the past. Our issue is that while vinyl has its calming advantages – it in no way represents high performance audio at a time when the founding generation of audiophiles are aging. Go to a specialty audio show like AXPONA, Rocky Mountain Audiofest, Capital Audio Fest or the like and the demographic is close to 100 male and with a median age of pretty damn old. There are an entire cadre of writers, mostly in print magazines, who have whipped up the fury of vinyl’s so-called comeback into something it simply isn’t. The facts are: the format at the height of its resurgence never really sold that many records. A few million when a “free” video game like Fortnite can do $223,000,000 in accessory sales to a much, much younger audience in one single month.
Shouldn’t audiophiles be focusing on the next generation of enthusiasts? Can they accept that much like Elvis, The Rolling Stones and The Beatles were completely different than the Sinatra’s, Tony Bennetts and Doo-Wop artists that their parents listened too – that Millennials and Generation Z will consume media differently. I question many prominent audiophile companies as to their overall goals as they pander to Baby Boomers selling $20,000 tone arm cables and $40,000 turntables when that format physically cannot reproduce the master-tape level of excellence that today’s digital tracks and digital streaming can do at a fraction of the price.
With Mom and Pop audiophile stores closing left and right – perhaps it’s time to stop bloviating over a 100-year-old format that belongs and should be appreciated as a part of our audiophile history but doesn’t represent the future in terms of high performance playback. As one commenter said as part of the discussion a recent news story “a Toyota Camry can outperform a super-car from yester-year” and he’s correct. That doesn’t make that classic car bad because in so many ways it is super-cool but just don’t sell me on the broken concept that when I am listening to a $300,000 pair of speakers on $150,000 monoblock tube amps using vinyl as a source that I am getting anything better than the experience of gassing up a La Ferrari with 50 octane fuel in a world where for $12 a gallon (yes, our hobby is expensive) you can buy 110 octane fuel. Don’t you want to know how fast the fastest system can go or is a $500,000 plus audio system performing at half its potential good enough for you? I sure do.
I think your man bun is too tight.
No man bun here buddy. No craft beer, messenger bags or Warby Parker unfortunately hip glasses.
Just a love for music that sounds as close to the master as possible.
There are some inaccuracies in this article my friends, most of the vinyl enthusiasts I am friends with are below the age of 40 and some in their 20s, I have been a recording artist for 15 years, I have had music producers come listen to A/B comparisons on my hifi and can hear a difference in audio quality, there is information that is still missing from CDs (16b) that a vinyl record produces, we can all hear it. (granted it’s subtle) This is literally a matter of physics, I understand that vinyl can’t produce much above 17k but that’s about where human ears become incapable of hearing anyway, and most producers roll off much of the frequencies above that because it simply translates as noise, and same applies for anything below about 50hz. Plus, adding harmonic distortion to certain instruments or even vocals is common practice in recordings INCLUDING current/modern music… so yeah, making perfectly crystal clear recordings and reproductions is simply audio nerds jerking themselves off, I have no interest in listening to some artist who wants to record a ukulele through a $10,000 microphone accompanied by a flute JUST for the sake of pristine “audio quality”. Capturing the natural room decay, using tube pre-amps and compressors is what makes it all sound fat and full, and vinyls lend to the reproduction of most of what we do damn near perfectly.
Sadly, this comment is filled with audiophile subjectivity – not fact. Very relevant in our Trump world. Sad at the same time.
Here are the facts people:
1. Vinyl can at its BEST reproduce about 65 dB of dynamic range. A snare drum hit might reach 120 dB. You OK with not getting that dynamic range and still calling it “high performance”? Not me. Not when the solution is a $20 per month stream or a $20 digital 24 bit file.
2. Vinyl is rife with distortion. 2nd degree harmonic distortion from the stylus vibrating in the grooves. Its the physics and 50 years ago it was OK but see comment above for what today’s market offers.
3. Vinyl wears out over time. More noise. More “clicks” and “pops”.
Too many audiophiles don’t listen to the math and science of the argument. They make FULLY SUBJECTIVE opinions on “what sounds better” without the facts in place.
I am trying to change that a little here.
I hope Fremer is reading this, lol
“Very relevant in our Trump world.”
Jerry, do you really need to keep pulling in politics during your reviews? Do you really think that former presidents or members of congress were honest and legit prior to President Trump? I really like your reviews but your liberal hate takes away from great info.
Oh, I disagree. I love reading his angst about President Trump! I can’t wait to hear the Left’s heads explode when another conservative is nominated as SCOTUS!!!!
the irony is that jerry talking about digital sounds like trump talking about almost everything he talks about… fake news….
the “facts” about vinyl’s deficiencies still fail to deal with the fact that a well recorded vinyl disc will sound better than its digital counterpart. digital *has* come a long way since its infancy, but it’s still not quite up to the sonic realism that vinyl provides.
doug s.
First, I hate Donald, He’s full of himself, so what’s this have to do with music?
You can listen to your 2″ tape, I’ll just go listen to the live band.
And Cassettes did a good job if you knew how to run the recording operation. DAT might have been even better.
The recording industry screwed this all up.
Now with that said I don’t listen to my 60’s and 70’s often but if your talking sound degrading over time, every format degrades including ditigtal. Ever have a hard drive fail? Or a ssd fail? I have.
But not just a failed disk but data loss. It happens.
Its pretty funny your talking about lps degrading when you can still play a 78. When’s the last time a 78 was pressed?
Oh look someone trying to be provocative. A digital audiophile nazi no less. The fail of the snowflake fascist on 0’s & 1’s over analogue.
Each to thier own.
Time to take your meds and have your bath.
If you practised really, really hard, I mean applied yourself over a number of weeks then maybe you could be vaguely amusing…
Ian,
Get your facts right please.
Analog can be WONDERFUL. Vinyl sucks. Low dynamic range and high distortion. Can’t compete with a CD and CDs are respectfully dead in 2018.
If you can get access to 2-inch analog master tape – then you are more plugged in than me. The fact that magnetic tape decades over time is only another complicating factor. THEN there is the issue of you can’t really find that Studer A800 tape deck to play it back on. Oh, and there hasn’t been any blank tape to record on for like a decade plus. There’s that too.
IN the case you could pull off both miracles – you could record and or playback music that would be INCREDIBLE. All of the dynamic range that you can get in digital.
THEN analog would rule but then again – just how many readers have ever heard 1-off, two inch analog tape? I bet very few. Its a treat but 100% impractical by today’s standards.
Then again for $20 you can buy a 24/96 file and its 99% plus of that experience from the other side of the tracks.
“Analog can be WONDERFUL. Vinyl sucks. Low dynamic range and high distortion. Can’t compete with a CD and CDs are respectfully dead in 2018.”
vinyl may suck, but digital is worse. vinyl can’t compete w/digital only if you want sound that is less life-like…
you may worship math and science – i do, too. but when it fails to describe what takes place in the ear/brain, i know that it hasn’t gone far enough to explain what is happening regarding recorded music. i don’t blindly (or “deafly”?) just go by the numbers.
The car comparison is almost valid except in real terms vinyl vs digital is more like comparing travelling 1000 km in a 50 year old car to doing it in a modern aircraft. Some people still want to feel in some sort of control, they still need the manual gearbox and the ‘absless’ brakes. Arriving worn out and broke is part of the journey, actually it is the reason for the journey. Digital is all about the destination and the convenience. Having spent 40+ years, $40,000 or more on vinyl rigs and many thousands of hours in demo rooms I, like many, have concluded vinyl is just too expensive, too inconvenient and I cannot overlook surface noise, pops and crackles or the lack of image. Newer formats offer fantastic performance at sensible prices, enjoy it I can, embrace it, perhaps, but in the meantime I have to go, I’m driving from Melbourne to Sydney tomorrow in my 1972 Volvo 1800 ES (stands for Extremely Slow), so need the bedrest.
I’ve had to lock up my automated ABS brakes 2x in the past 5 years in my ML550. Thank GOD that I have that technology.
I need to upgrade my wife’s ML as its 10 years old and while safe – NOT as safe as my 2014 model.
I think we will get a new “used” one off a lease return in the next few months. Gotta sell my house first.
Has snap, pop, tracking errors been all solved yet?
It has.
See the more you play a 100 year old physical format the BETTER it sounds. More patina – like a classic car. See you just “listen around” the distortion!!! 🙂
denying climate change? I dont think anyone on earth would deny that climate changes. life would be boring as hell if it didn’t. did you possibly mean to say anthropogenic climate change ? because that is where the controversy lies.
Trump and Pruitt deny climate change. Its a “hoax” to them.
Its scary as hell to those who try to understand math and science a little.
While I agree with you on the quality of vinyl recordings and their place in the audiophiles library, I find your lemming-like promotion of all things Apple disturbing and feel it negatively impacts your credibility. I’m surprised you didn’t do your listening on Apple ear pods since they “just sound so damn good”.
Depends on the headphones and how you set it up.
Hunh?
Apple? I just unplugged my Apple TV.
I use $2,000 Ultimate Ears Capitol Records Reference custom IEMs and B&W PX (wireless) among many other headphones.
I have no idea what you are talking about John.
I was sarcastically referring to your use of a non-Apple product amongst your iPad Pro, iPhone X, MacBook Pro, and iTunes.
“..vinyl simply can’t compete with the near “bit perfect” facsimiles of meaningful master tape material being sold today…”
it can when you want a better illusion of listening to real live music. in fact, it excels; it’s digital that’s still trying to play catch-up.
when you want to hear the closest thing to real live music – that’s the best time to listen to vinyl…
doug s.
So when the drummer slams into a snare and its 120 live and your vinyl can only reproduce 1/2 of the dynamics -that sounds like the real event?
Or is it somehow OK or more realistic that you hear HALF of the dynamics?
Let me ask you this – if an audiophile salon had a pair of speakers that could play 1/2 of the frequency range that you could hear at full price – would you be interested? But with source components – you are? What’s wrong with this argument?
it’s not what’s wrong w/MY argument, it’s what’s wrong w/YOURS. dynamic range isn’t the be-all end all for what sounds natural in recorded music. the proof is what’s being heard by my ears and in the gray matter in between them. (and i guarantee you, you’d never want to listen to a home stereo that would accurately reproduce that “120 live”.)
the science and math are obviously not able to describe every relevant factor. what’s wrong w/YOUR argument is you think your numbers tell all the info, and it simply is not so. too much is simply not yet discovered regarding the ear/brain mechanism. instead of you admitting that vinyl sounds better, you deafly say the numbers prove it doesn’t.
But digital does not have as large as a frequency range so therefore digital is inferior? That is your anti-vinyl argument.
you always need the $5000 turntable, the $3000 phono stage , the $6000 pre-amp….S.MH.
You always need the $5000 DAC, the $3000 network streamer. SMH. Another fantastic argument!
Your beating this one simple idea to death, so much your about to loose a reader.
Wtf does it matter what I want to listen to, its my friken ears.
You can harp on this smelly stuff till the cows come home. but I’ll play what ever format I see fit and when I choose to. If you want music out of a can so be it. If I want hormonics so be it.
Marshels amps do not sound like they do because they are ditigtal, no in fact they aren’t they have Tubes in them,
Does that mean the guy using one is a bad musian becuse he won’t change to solid state amps?
If that’s the case you’ve got decades of music you should not listen to.
Do you think a Hammond organ from the 60’s suck because they are not solid state?
Do I think digital is perfect, hell no and I’ll tell you why, someone is mixing the music its not what the band did live and hasn’t been for nearly 50 years.
Someone’s always got his hands on the mixing boards, so the music only as good as the guy mixing it.
Most the time its what the band wanted it to sound like.
But the biggest point is most the guys doing it now could not work older equipment and have it sound good, hell halfe of what they do digital sounds like crap.
Wow – threatening to not read a free audiophile blog…
Scary.
Open your mind man. Open it.
jerry, it’s ok to have an open mind – yes. but don’t open it so much that your brain falls out… ;~)
you are like the pot calling the kettle black…
Seriously, did you drink too much on the forth?
Is this a review of audio equipment, am I sick of reading the Spanish inquisition?
Well my grandmother was Jewish on my dads side.
I’ll keep listening to lp’s you listen to whatever you like.
But you better turn it down some because I think your going def.
The music (sound) is only as good as the guy mixing it, of course, but that can be said for every part of the recording process; it’s only as good as its weakest link. The recording medium is no exception. When you record to analog tape, you’re dealing with resolution in terms of molecules. The width of studio master tape also allows for the extended dynamic range Jerry keeps talking about. The best way to capture the extremely high resolution and dynamic range of studio master tape is high-res digital. The analog-to-digital converters at professional studios are of high enough quality that it’s up to your DAC and the rest of your system whether a well-recorded track sounds digital or not. I honestly have a hard time understanding why any true audiophile isn’t embracing high-res.
So you thinking my Avantage
Flagship 3040 isn’t cutting it because it has one of the highest sampling rates on the market with its da converters.
It really doesn’t matter the cost of your equipment,
Stop looking at the numbers and listen with your ears, if its not loud enough turn it up as long as your not clipping your amp your speakers should be just fine. Still not loud enough?
I can build you a subwoofer system that will make you think you’ve got to puke.
If that’s not loud enough at 157db spl you have hearing problems.
Tidal + ScLx501 + Revel F206 destroys vinyl all day all night
Pro-Ject Debut Carbon + Cambridge CXA80 + KEF LS50 destroys digital all day and night. See how pointless that argument is?
It’s OK if you like the way it sounds. While I have no delusions of it being sonically superior overall, it does have its unique characteristics that can sounds very pleasing to my ears. Case in point: Tool on vinyl. While its very limited dynamic range means I won’t be feeling the assault of Danny Carey’s drums or Justin Chancellor’s bass the way I would like, Adam Jones’ distorted guitars sound awesome on vinyl. The notes and chords just have that extra bite to them from the extra distortion provided by the playback medium. That’s just one example, but it’s the most glaring one I have ever heard. Distorted guitars can sound fantastic on vinyl.
Not to mention the continuous playback of an entire album like you mentioned. Epic concept albums like The Wall and Lateralus were meant to be listened to start-to-finish.
Jerry, check your math. 65db is not half of 120. 60db is half as loud as 70db, so…
“Oh, and there hasn’t been any blank tape to record on for like a decade plus. There’s that too.”
I had to jump in on this. The above statement is just wrong. There are at least three, and maybe four, companies manufacturing blank tape for reel-to reel in 1/4, 1/2, 1 and 2 inch sizes.I buy 10″ reels of 1/4 inch tape to do recordings of my band. The tape from these companies has been available for several years now. New cassette tape is also available.
The goal of every audio playback system should be to reproduce the artists’ performance, as mastered by the sound engineer, as flawlessly as possible within a budget constraint. Vinyl is simply inadequate for that task; it is hopelessly inaccurate and the cost of putting together a vinyl playback system that can even graze the outer edge of realism is prohibitive. I view most high-end vinyl systems as vanity or sculpture, but not serious listening machines.
I’ve taken a dozen people to live performances of Stravinsky’s Firebird and they, without exception, jumped at the sudden attack of the Danse Infernal that rises from ca. 40 dB to 110+ dB in a fraction of a second. I’ve had recordings of that piece on digitally-mastered vinyl and no one jumps, but my DSD 256 file (recorded on 24/192 FLAC) recreates the performance well enough to reproduce the effect.
That said, there is a ritual to vinyl that can’t be reproduced digitally. The acts of lovingly removing the album from the sleeve, placing it on the turntable, dropping the stylus, turning the record over, and so on, engage us into listening more intentionally than does the effortlessness of streaming digital. That ritual connects us to our music in a way I don’t know how to replace.
On listening habits, I am endlessly proud that my millenial children choose to listen to whole albums in their recorded sequence. The best artists and producers put thought and energy into presenting their work that way, and we should respect their work enough to listen as they intended.
I was glad to wave goodbye to vinyl when CDs came along, and nothing has made me nostalgiac for the hissy, clicky, poppy, over-compressed bastards since. Listen to something better than 16bit/44.1kHz if you think CDs aren’t that good.