• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Vinyl records are still riding that big comeback wave, sales up 38% in a year.

The bad news here (buried in the last paragraph) is that the actual sales figure is 5.6 million units. I was once in the record retail business, and our one store sold more than that.
 
True that vinyl is a small percentage of total sales but the numbers are increasing. 5.6 million units sold was in 2014.
I still own a couple of good turntables. I have digitized some of my vinyl collection (using Adobe Audition).
Even with the occasional clicks and pops, the vinyl pressings do sound good.
 
That's an important thing a lot of boomers miss when they wonder why radio isn't as valued as it was in the 60s. The only other way to take music with you before cassette was with a battery-powered record player. Not the easiest thing to have on the beach.
 
Most programs used for digitizing LPs (SoundForge, Audacity, Groove Mechanic, etc.) have really good algorithms for removing clicks and pops from the digitized sound. No need to listen to clicks and pops.

BTW, I once went and aggressively removed the clicks, pops, and surface noise from a very clean 78. Due to the speed and the wide grooves, once you got the surface noise off, the results were incredible.

Editorial comment. There have been complaints about "CD sound". Listening to a digitized LP on a CD tells me the fault is not in digitization but in the engineering of a new CD initallly.
 
I use Adobe Audition (I was a beta tester for the original Cool Edit Pro). The pop and click removal algorithm is very good.
I agree. When I digitize a vinyl recording, it maintains much of the analog "warmth" which many of the commercially-produced CD's lack.
 
Keep in mind that most of the music recorded in the last 20 years was recorded digitally. Some even go back 30 years. I've talked to recording engineers and mastering engineers about all the changes they made at their end, and it affects the sound of what you hear whether you play it back on vinyl or CD. There are some current artists who still record analog. People like Dave Grohl and Jack White are supporters of analog recording:

http://www.hitfix.com/immaculate-no...l-vs-analog-for-next-foo-fighters-album-watch
 
Digital recordings can sound fantastic.
What concerns me are the CD's which are produced from the same masters as the vinyl records.
To me, the vinyl wins nearly every time. The CD's seem to lack the "soul" of the music.
I can't explain it but I can hear the difference.
Of course, there are exceptions. Some of the CD's actually sound better than the vinyl.

Okay .... I'll step down from my soapbox.
 
Last edited:
I quit buying CDs about five years ago when I realized how heavily the audio is compressed. Spinal cord injury left me fumble-fingered so I don't buy new vinyl, but I've digitized most of my vinyl worth keeping and the turntable gets sent away over my dead body!

Anyway with current pop/country releases on vinyl, is the audio less compressed than the CD version or do you get the same ol crap but with a 1 sq ft cover suitable for framing?
 
Last edited:
joebtsflk1 said:
Anyway with current pop/country releases on vinyl, is the audio less compressed than the CD version or do you get the same ol crap but with a 1 sq ft cover suitable for framing?
Click to expand...

The audio is the same on CD or vinyl. There may be a few audiophile recordings that were remastered for vinyl. Look for those. But as I said, once CDs became popular in the late 80s, all of the mastering was done for CD. The mastering process is where all the final levels are set before pressing. There was a period in the early 90s when mastering engineers were concerned about digital distortion, so they purposely mastered the records at a slightly lower level than they had before. So any records from about 91-94, you'll find they're about 2db or so down from the level of your other records.
 
In the days of Vinyl, engineers worked to get the best sound within the limitations of the medium. At the same time it was assumed that listening would be in a quiet living room on mostly quality equipment (see Stereo Review or High Fidelity from that era).

So when CD came along there was so much dynamic range and such low distortion, that engineering was no longer an issue. Also about that time, electronic instruments became popular. They generally have one output level and that is it. No need to worry about dynamic range, there isn't any. And listening shifted from the living room stereo to portables, boom boxes, and car stereos (all of which require compressed volume).

So the fault is not in the CD medium (or MP3 for that matter). The fault is in the change at the production end and at the listening end.
 
Yes indeed, it's both. Today's young generation prefers the highly compressed audio on modern releases. They don't know any better. The labels should release double sided CDs, one side smashmouth audio, the other side with a little more restraint and headroom. Fat chance that.
 
K6JHU said:
In the days of Vinyl, engineers worked to get the best sound within the limitations of the medium. At the same time it was assumed that listening would be in a quiet living room on mostly quality equipment (see Stereo Review or High Fidelity from that era).
Click to expand...

I have to disagree slightly with that, at least for pop music. Many recording studios in the 60's and 70's were equipped with what were called Auratone speakers (often nicknamed Horrortone or Awfultone.) They were a small, cheap speaker that simulated the sound quality of an AM-only car radio, and pop records were often mixed to sound their best on them, in view of the fact that was how most listeners might first hear a record. (I understand Motown in Detroit used an actual car radio pulled out of some junked Ford or Chevy, appropriately enough.) When Auratone ceased production, a small Yamaha speaker took its place.

You're probably right though about classical or Broadway-cast records, which were much of what magazines like Stereo Review or High Fidelity dealt with.
 
What has failled to be recognised in this thread is the vast majority of the increase is because to hipsters. You know, the kids who are into records because they're "trendy" or "retro" more than appreciation for the technology. Personally I dumped about 85% of my LP collection a few years ago because I already had the bulk of them on CD (factory-pressed), I needed the shelf space and was getting increasingly sick of hauling those stupid things around. 45s, of course, are garbage to begin with so I at least didn't have to worry about getting rid of any of those.

The present "comeback" if it can be so called of records is a fad, like 3D movies and that "paleo" diet. It will die out in a couple years once the hipsters start trashing mini-disks because they think they're "retro".

"The labels should release double sided CDs, one side Smash Mouth audio, the other side with a little more restraint and headroom. Fat chance that."
Click to expand...

Dual Disk was tried some years ago and as far as I can tell, it failled miserably. Not only did they really not bring much added value to the market but since it had to violate several aspects of the red book standard in order to be what it is, it introduced a rather dizzying amount of compatibility issues to the format. Not to mention the "special" storage boxes they often came in were a major PIA to get open without breaking them in some way or other.

I don't know how a double-sided CD (both sides CD like-CD like) wouldn't introduce the same problems the previous attempt did. The industry would have to have either a masochistic side or just be really bloody stupid to deliberately repeat that technological blunder.
 
Last edited:
Darth_vader said:
What has failled to be recognised in this thread is the vast majority of the increase is because to hipsters. You know, the kids who are into records because they're "trendy" or "retro" more than appreciation for the technology. Personally I dumped about 85% of my LP collection a few years ago because I already had the bulk of them on CD (factory-pressed), I needed the shelf space and was getting increasingly sick of hauling those stupid things around. 45s, of course, are garbage to begin with so I at least didn't have to worry about getting rid of any of those.

The present "comeback" if it can be so called of records is a fad, like 3D movies and that "paleo" diet. It will die out in a couple years once the hipsters start trashing mini-disks because they think they're "retro".



Dual Disk was tried some years ago and as far as I can tell, it failled miserably. Not only did they really not bring much added value to the market but since it had to violate several aspects of the red book standard in order to be what it is, it introduced a rather dizzying amount of compatibility issues to the format. Not to mention the "special" storage boxes they often came in were a major PIA to get open without breaking them in some way or other.

I don't know how a double-sided CD (both sides CD like-CD like) wouldn't introduce the same problems the previous attempt did. The industry would have to have either a masochistic side or just be really bloody stupid to deliberately repeat that technological blunder.
Click to expand...

Not a single positive statement in your post. Why are you so bitter?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom