CD vs vinyl: time for a reassessment?

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Interesting thread. Previously my ~£1k vinyl set up trounced my ~£1k CD player - now I've added a Dac that was £4k in 1992 (so whats that in noawadays terms, £10k+??) and the CD now trounces the vinyl set up.It's all about how much you spend on each really.

One things for sure, I don't value the "romanticism" of constantly pissing around cleaning records, having to change the side every 3 tracks, and listening to dust being tickled out he way. CD is definably a superior format!
Absolutely not my experience. The performance of a product seems totally unrelated to price.

S

 

Butuz

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 22, 2010
827
8
0
S.Wales.
AKA
Andy
We measure performance based on different methods Serge :rude:

What I am saying is if comparing CD to Vinyl you should be comparing them on equal value equipment be that £100 or £10,000

People who have £10k vinyl rigs and a £500 DAC and say CD sound schit make me chuckle!

 

THOMO

Wammer
Wammer
Aug 10, 2010
967
290
78
Western Australia
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
:doh: Pretty poor post, that doesn't make much sense & is anecdotal at best. Please quote properly & link to any posts/threads as necessary & try & make some cogent points if you can. :roll:
It makes perfect sense if you are prepared to listen.

I could not care less about technical reasons as to why CD might sound better.

Just like I could not care less if there are technical reasons why vinyl should sound better or worse than digital.

Even if you found a technical explanation it would only be an opinion and you could probably find something else which contradicted it because when it comes to digital reproduction it seems that most experts really have no idea how to make really good sounding digital sources.Which is why the vast majority of digital players and DACs sound so poor and even those that do sound decent only do so as a result of their analogue output stage-not their digital processing.The vast majority of them use crappy op amp output stages and that is hardly optimal.

I only care about how things sound and in my experience vinyl sounds best,CD/SACD second and computer audio/streaming third best.

Many of my friends hear it that way too.

 
A

avole

Guest
I do wonder if a better standalone DAC would improve the streaming side of things - I'm assuming it is the circuitry after the conversion that makes the difference - but will probably wait until prices drop as DACs built into amps become the norm.

What I won't do is put any more money into the vinyl side of things, can't justify the expense.

 

Rodney Gold

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 13, 2013
682
50
0
Cape Town SA
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
If you consider price , my $299 Squeezebox front end is , IMO good enough for my $90 000 system.. I would NEVER use a source where SQ is compromised on my system..

At any rate , before selling my transports (theta Jade , Theta data II universal and a ML 31.5) I did a test where I cued up the CD and then a RIP and played them at the same time.. I can tell you there was no difference or if there was , the computer based audio was "maybe" better.. I sold the transports and never looked back...

I have Tidal , for CD quality playback for new music , $19 a month and have ripped my 4000+ cd collection and stored it.. I listen to more and more varied music than ever before..

All my pals , mostly luddites , see how I use an Ipad and a small 13" lappy to control my whole system and find the music they know etc.. and ALL of them have converted to computer based music.. even my one pal close to his 80's and as puter illiterate as they come managed (with a bit of my help) to get it together , now he's a pro...

On pour local forum , we had a poll , who uses what as a source.. and 9o% of all respondents (approx 120) had amongst other formats , computer audio. most used a mix of formats.. like cd , puter, vinyl etc

My 18 yr old daughter has NO physical media at all.. the world moves on...

 

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
We measure performance based on different methods Serge :rude: What I am saying is if comparing CD to Vinyl you should be comparing them on equal value equipment be that £100 or £10,000

People who have £10k vinyl rigs and a £500 DAC and say CD sound schit make me chuckle!
But why? What has price to do with performance, however you measure it?

S

 

dudywoxer

Looking for a bigger stirring stick
Wammer
Jul 19, 2005
10,222
1,256
0
sunny scunny
AKA
colin
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Interesting thread. Previously my ~£1k vinyl set up trounced my ~£1k CD player - now I've added a Dac that was £4k in 1992 (so whats that in noawadays terms, £10k+??) and the CD now trounces the vinyl set up.It's all about how much you spend on each really.

One things for sure, I don't value the "romanticism" of constantly pissing around cleaning records, having to change the side every 3 tracks, and listening to dust being tickled out he way. CD is definably a superior format!
I find that interesting, as usually i find that a 1500 spend on a cd player needs 5000 on vinyl replay to match it, unless the listener has rose tinted lugholes.

 

Chumpy

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 3, 2005
14,040
112
0
Bristol UK
AKA
Charlie
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Analogue vinyl can sound very good, as can diminished digital CD, or full-spec digital files. It is not necessary to overspend, just buy-install-setup-maintain wisely.

The massage, not the modium.

 

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I find that interesting, as usually i find that a 1500 spend on a cd player needs 5000 on vinyl replay to match it, unless the listener has rose tinted lugholes.
A turntable system is a precision-engineered mechanical item, made in small quantities and is therefore expensive. A CD player can be made far cheaper, as can all modern electronics. The manufacturing cost of a CD player, amplifier, whatever, is more in the casework than the electronics, supplemented by a heavy marketing spend including dealer and distributor margins, which are higher for 'prestige' items than for everyday commercial items.

It's perfectly sensible to compare a, say, £10.000 turntable to a, again say, £1000 CD player or £500 streamer as the cost structures are different.

However, I have no idea what differences there are between a £1000 CD player and a £10000 one that would in any way contribute to better audible performance.

S

 

andrew s

Wammer
Wammer
Feb 10, 2014
1,398
1,297
148
Cheshire
AKA
Andrew
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
But why? What has price to do with performance, however you measure it?S
Well it all seems to be down to perceived value. If it costs more our brains tells us it is better. Studies have shown this across a wide range of goods and services. As an example see this on wine: http://www.caltech.edu/news/wine-study-shows-price-influences-perception-1374 . I would love to see the results of a similar study with Hi Fi but I don't think sound reproduction equipment and the stening experience is compatible with fMRI scanning - all those strong magnetic fields.

Regards Andrew

 

f1eng

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 13, 2009
2,550
181
108
Wantage, U K
AKA
Frank
I stick to both the CD and LP systems.

For me the difference in recording quality, overlaid by the amount of manipulation perpetrated by the recording/mastering engineers makes a bigger difference than the difference between LP and CD.

I have fantastic sounding LPs and awful. Ditto CDs.

I have also used both digital and analogue methods to record music and data (music is of course just sound data so they are actually exactly the same)

All the digital recorders I have used, even the most modest, produce a more accurate recording than even the most expensive state of the art analogue recorders. I got useful data from an Ampex recorder the size of a big suitcase, but on an F1 car only the digital systems gave data worth analysing. Analogue recordings were so inaccurate they were pointless.

As an amateur recordist I have used recorders starting with a mono valve reel-to-reel recorder finishing with a Revox B77, which I still have. I have recorded onto cassette using an Aiwa F770 and Nakamichi CR7E. I have recorded to DAT using a Stelladat and both Sony and Pioneer portables.

I bought a Metric Halo ADC/DAC to use as my DAC at one time and have played around with that as well.

What I learned has been that however long you spend aligning for the tape, with all the analogue recorders I have had with off-tape monitoring there is always an audible difference between the microphone feed and the off tape sound.

With the digital recorders if there is a difference it is too subtle for me to consistently hear it. And that goes even for the earliest machines I used.

My conclusions from this are that digital has the potential to produce a more accurate recording than analogue. I am 99.999% certain of this based on 50 years of experience.

I do not believe that CD was compromised much at the beginning, and one of my best sounding CDs was an early product of the Nimbus CD plant, one of the first. In fact I would say most recent CDs sound worse than early ones but, and now we come to opinions I can't verify from personal experience, I believe this is due to the way the sound is close mike recorded and manipulated by recording engineers to suit car and earbud-whilst-walking environments.

I would be pretty confident that using a non-eccentrically engineered DAC that what one hears from a CD or rip is pretty well what the recording engineer chose to put on the CD, and will sound different at home mainly because your speakers and room are different to his.

Now we come to LP.

Already an analogue master tape will not be an accurate reproduction of the microphone feed. I am equally 99.999% sure of this based on decades of experience. But here is the rub. The very inaccuracy which makes the analogue methods less good for data don't matter for sound, since the distortion is euphonic rather than harsh.

Back in the day it was argued that less than 0.1% distortion was inaudible. I have no idea whether it is the case or whether it is 0.05% or 0.5% but the fact is that at some level this distortion is audible, and if liked it is euphonically so.

A quick scan through HiFi News cartridge reviews will not only reveal an astonishing variety of frequency response shapes but also that the distortion tends to be in the 4% to 8% range. The lowest I have seen is 2%. Now both the FR deviations and this added distortion will be blatantly audible, that is, presumably, why people have such a wide range of cartridge preferences.

There are other inevitable changes which have to be made to the tape recorder's output to cut an LP as well due to manufacturing requirements.

My conclusion is that LPs are nowhere near as accurate as CDs at reproducing the sound heard by the recording engineer but, since I love my record player, I have no problem with this and just enjoy the sound that comes out of it accepting there is a lot of euphony, and that I can tune it to taste by changing bits of it.

I listen to, and enjoy, both CDs and LPs, depending what I want to listen to next.

Sometimes I like to sit back and read the sleeve-notes, just like the good old days.

The very worst thing about CDs IMHO is the criminally shittily designed "jewel" case which makes even getting the leaflet out undamaged an irritation.

The second worst is the optimised for on the move listening on releases for the last 5-10 years which make recent CDs sound much worse than the early ones I play.

 

Pussycat

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 9, 2008
1,722
29
78
Norwich
AKA
Mike
Correct.I generally play side 1 on the AEG, Side 2 on the EMT, then Side 1 on the 401, then side 2 back on the AEG as all three are interchangeable as far as I'm concerned. I would be upset if they weren't.

S
Just to add to the incredulity expressed, Gosh!

 

crimsondonkey

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 29, 2008
2,915
107
108
I generally play side 1 on the AEG, Side 2 on the EMT, then Side 1 on the 401, then side 2 back on the AEG as all three are interchangeable as far as I'm concerned. I would be upset if they weren't.

S

More proof that Serge has defective hearing and therefore has no choice but to rely on measurements!

Perhaps one of these might be the most appropriate accessory to aid your listening enjoyment?

d238ca3df765fd751a8d79bd4454f3de.jpg


 

68rednose

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 11, 2013
1,832
47
93
Mainland Europe
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
The very worst thing about CDs IMHO is the criminally shittily designed "jewel" case which makes even getting the leaflet out undamaged an irritation.

The second worst is the optimised for on the move listening on releases for the last 5-10 years which make recent CDs sound much worse than the early ones I play.
Hear, hear.

BTW, I try to get my nail under the staple of the booklet and pull the booklet out at the 'inner' side.

 

Beobloke

Wammer
Wammer
Jul 29, 2005
7,663
1
4,468
158
AKA
Adam
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Funny - I have read many times about people who hate CD jewel cases and can't get either the CDs or the liners in and out. Frankly, I've never found this to be a problem. In fact, LP inner sleeves that don't go easily in and out of the outer sleeves are far more irritating, IMHO!

 
G

Guest

Guest
Nothing wrong with CD.

Nothing wrong with vinyl.

If theres a problem, its mastering.

Choose an album you really like, from around 30 years ago (the pre heavy compression era)

Listen to a modern pressing or modern CD.

Then dig out a 1st pressing, or old CD.

The old album will be less loud & have more dynamics.

Chances are, you'll prefer it.

Compressing music to the max sells more product, so music designed to shift more units, is compressed... to meet the demands of the consumer.

Those of us that dont consume music through a phone, usually prefer vinyl, as the amount of compression is limited by the medium itself.

So, its not the medium, its economics & market forces.

 

khfm865

Wammer
Wammer
May 4, 2009
1,805
16
0
United Kingdom
AKA
Bill
A few thoughts on this subject: if I select the very best recording on each format based on sound quality and compare, the cd is cleaner, more focussed, has tighter well defined bass whereas vinyl wins (by long way) on timbre, dimensionality, realism and engaging me in to the music. I frequently find myself tapping my feet and singing out loud with the vinyl playing but this never happens with cd. Strange but true.

 

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I generally play side 1 on the AEG, Side 2 on the EMT, then Side 1 on the 401, then side 2 back on the AEG as all three are interchangeable as far as I'm concerned. I would be upset if they weren't.S

More proof that Serge has defective hearing and therefore has no choice but to rely on measurements!

Perhaps one of these might be the most appropriate accessory to aid your listening enjoyment?

d238ca3df765fd751a8d79bd4454f3de.jpg
I would need two for stereo!

It's not so much a case of faulty hearing, but a deliberate act to choose components that are as neutral and as similar as possible. The three phono stages I use all have near identical performance, and the cartridges I use have a pretty flat response within the normal variations of cartridges. All three of my turntables are isolated from feedback, both by manufacturer design and by mounting method, so I am not aware of a difference there. My whole approach is to minimise differences in sound between different items as much as possible, and to work for minimum variation from neutrality, by which i mean flat frequency response and low distortion.

Of course I could be deaf, but it's hard to make a career in broadcasting when deaf........

S

 
  • Upvote
Reactions: crimsondonkey

f1eng

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 13, 2009
2,550
181
108
Wantage, U K
AKA
Frank
A few thoughts on this subject: if I select the very best recording on each format based on sound quality and compare, the cd is cleaner, more focussed, has tighter well defined bass whereas vinyl wins (by long way) on timbre, dimensionality, realism and engaging me in to the music. I frequently find myself tapping my feet and singing out loud with the vinyl playing but this never happens with cd. Strange but true.
Back in the day I was involved in a few experiments to see how the various limitations of LPs effected the sound. The extra harmonic distortion added to the instrumental timbre, music correlated noise gave more impressive stereo, as did increasing crosstalk.

A lot of people find LPs sound more "real" to them, though I do not.

Can't comment on foot tapping and singing along :)

In the end I think most people who listen to a reasonably good turntable enjoy the sound. I really don't think a super expensive TT is necessary to enjoy LPs, personally - whatever my kitlist says - with a bit of experimentation and tuning to taste a super-enjoyable sound is available at reasonable prices IME.

 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles