Author Topic: CD v Vinyl  (Read 427 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The Little Waster

  • General Member
CD v Vinyl
« on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 07:00:26 PM »
Which sounds best ? Sold all my vinyl years ago and personally can't tell any sonic difference except that cd doesnt have the old snap crackle and occasional pop of vinyl . Do look longingly at those Kate Bush Vinyl
Box Sets though ...
" We are on the brink of a new era , if only ... "

Offline Troll

  • Book Wanker
  • General Member
  • Get outta here, snail!
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 07:12:11 PM »
After we've figured this out, it's about time we decided whether DVD or VHS was better.

Offline B-more Mag

  • General Member
  • Only here for the GC.
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 07:16:33 PM »
After we've figured this out, it's about time we decided whether DVD or VHS was better.

Betamax.

Offline Si

  • General Member
  • I dont handle change well.
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #3 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 07:19:18 PM »
We just ruling out minidisc?
Bearings Straight!

Offline thomas

  • NO's Best Foreigner - Participant
  • General Member
  • Here's that Portuguese wizard battle you ordered.
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 08:44:43 PM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

Offline cubaricho

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 09:16:22 PM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

Just @ me next time bro
▒▓██ N █ U █ F █ C ██▓▒

Offline Infinitely Content

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 09:21:30 PM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.
It’s not like. Might be closer than some make out, but saying CD is vastly superior is a ludicrous statement.

Offline samptime29

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #7 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 09:24:41 PM »
Jon Moss has a vinyl shop in Headingley called The Vinyl Whistle. Went in with my pal, he loves vinyl and says selection was great.

Jon Moss was sound, loved chatting about music and football.

Offline Doc

  • New Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #8 on: Tuesday 8 October 2019, 10:23:32 PM »
I'm not sure myself but a mate of mine at 586 Records, Commercial union house, Pilgrim street, Newcastle, NE1 6QE (vinyl only) reckons vinyl is best like. :)
 

Offline Tomato Deuce

  • Book Wanker
  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #9 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 03:06:20 AM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

Just @ me next time bro

:lol:

Offline cubaricho

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 06:05:05 AM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

Just @ me next time bro

:lol:

 ;)

For real though. Why would you ever buy a cd again? You can burn them anytime you want. An actual vinyl is a piece of art that you can take and move with you. The sound rules too.
▒▓██ N █ U █ F █ C ██▓▒

Offline hakka

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #11 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 06:25:17 AM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

This may as well be Digital vs Vinyl, or Digital vs Analogue.

I've been a DJ for various forms of dance music for nearly 20 years playing at many events big and small. I spent 8 of those years purely as a vinyl DJ and nearly all of the rest as a digital CD one, and more recently a USB one.

I also produce dance music and have many releaees on labels played over the world.

From experience, vinyl always sounded better for dance music, in particular in a club. It had depth, warmth, a soul and was far more deeper in how it hit you and how it felt.

Digital music in comparison sounds cold, more metallic and hollow. Something in its core is not there and its lost.

You can almost compare it to CGI in films over making a real environment. CGI in recent years is getting very good, but there is always something about CGI which you just can tell over real scenes.

I also have digital and analogue synthesizers instruments. Virtual and hardware ones. The analogue hardware synths always produce a sound that is deeper, richer, fuller and with more presence. Digital ones are thinner and weaker in comparison. The digital world is getting much better at emulating the analogue warm sounds though.

I have two synths by Access know as the Virus. I have a Virus B, in rack format and also a Virus TI Snow which is a more modern digital intergated version. Both produce amazing synth sounds and the TI Snow is far more versatile, however the sound being recorded out of the Virus B are just so much more full of life and depth. I credit that to sound travelling as live sounds through a cable in to a PC to be recorded over TI Snow solution of digitally transferring the sound via USB cable and playing it. The way in which sound is generated and travels digitally makes a big difference to how deep and full it is, even if its the same synthesized sound.

So, vinyl wins for me as in my music world something was lost in the music when it went digital that's never been replaced in full. Vinyl = warm bottom end, soulful and with depth, Digital = thinner and more metallic, but higher chance of clarity accross the spectrum.

There's many reasons why at home listening to music you could argue CD is better though. It's a very tight and accurate format for replaying 44khz 16bit output music. Its a very convenient format. I suppose what music you are listening to and whether its at home, on speakers or headphones or if its in a club. That all makes a difference.

Offline neesy111

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 06:54:45 AM »
Vinyl is better as it's pure sound being recorded. 

Offline neesy111

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #13 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 06:55:32 AM »
CD is vastly superior unless you’ve got severe brainworms telling you vinyl is “richer” or “warmer” in which case take your meds.

That's up there with anything trump has tweeted out as being so stupid.

Offline madras

  • Philosoraptor
  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #14 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 07:50:35 AM »
Vinyl is better as it's pure sound being recorded. 
Much modern vinyl is pressed from digital recordings.

https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/29-does-vinyl-really-sound-better/
Bullshitters misrepresent themselves to their audience not as liars do, that is, by deliberately making false claims about what is true. In fact, bullshit need not be untrue at all.

Rather, bullshitters seek to convey a certain impression of themselves without being concerned about whether anything at all is true. They quietly change the rules governing their end of the conversation so that claims about truth and falsity are irrelevant.

Offline Shadow Puppets

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #15 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 10:36:32 PM »
Vinyl is better as it's pure sound being recorded.

Yeah, that simply isn’t true these days.

I generally agree that vinyl is better but mainly because of a record and a record sleeve being a piece of art in itself. Vast majority of vinyl records pressed these days are pressed directly from the same files that a CD is burned from. The exceptions are few and far between... artists like Jack White being an example of someone who presses completely uncompressed audio onto vinyl.

Offline hakka

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #16 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 10:59:02 PM »
Vinyl is better as it's pure sound being recorded.

Yeah, that simply isn’t true these days.

I generally agree that vinyl is better but mainly because of a record and a record sleeve being a piece of art in itself. Vast majority of vinyl records pressed these days are pressed directly from the same files that a CD is burned from. The exceptions are few and far between... artists like Jack White being an example of someone who presses completely uncompressed audio onto vinyl.

I think the term "better" is the problem with this debate. Are we arguing over which is a more artful product? which is more technically a better sonic representation of the original music creation? or are we saying what is better based on how it feels to listen to in various environments?

Based on various ways to judge either, both can be better in different ways.

From a personal level, vinyl sounds more soulful, warm and deep. It was much more of an art and skill to mix with in a club. It felt better to hear it in a club. The physical item meant something, there was only limited copies pressed so if you got lucky to find it or get hold of it before others, you had an advantage as a DJ over others.

Digital has so many different advantages - you can't lose a digital copy, you can always get another,  it's cheaper (or free), you can transfer it and play anywhere on various devices, you can make your own music and use it to DJ with for free. You couldn't do that with vinyl, it had high costs for pressing minimum orders. Digital is far easier to DJ with, less risks with skips, vinyl warping, physical storage of 1000 vinyl is a lot and heavy. I can store 1000 digital tracks on a USB stick easy, which is very convenient for taking large amounts of music with you for DJ'ing. Doing a DJ set with 200 vinyl selection is a heavy beast to carry in a big case, and so many people report issues with loss of records through theft or at just missing through airport travel etc. - Digital is also completely piracy ridden and dance music sells for roughly £1.75 online, of which the artists only gets around £0.15p per track, and with a minimum volume sell before anything is paid out plus deductions for label costs on art and promotion. Vinyl sold for £7 back in the day, so artist and label got a fair whack of the returns. If something was popular, it got re-repressed and the return was good. Digital world, you can promo a track and suddenly it's available via piracy immediately. Hardly anyone buys and most digital track retailers struggle to balance digital web costs versus the low sales. I see a dance DJ friend saying "yeah my track is number 5 in the charts" well, sometimes that's about 20 sales. Wahoo! - and they've probably bought 5 of them themselves to get it up the charts. Vinyl was way more sink or swim, so made s*** tracks didn't sell. Quality was kept higher in the music production to ensure it sells, and good artists stayed with the genres as it made money. Once the digital world came artists went with the popular genres that made the most money, and the niche genres got flooded with crap digital music as it's cost less to release, and anyone can do it online. This is all my niche world of dance music though, much different from pop music etc. - but probably the same. Streaming services don't sound like they pay out much.

It's weird debate really unless we narrow in on why either is supposed to be better.

Offline hakka

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #17 on: Wednesday 9 October 2019, 11:07:30 PM »
Actually just realised the question is "What sounds best" :lol:

Well, depends on scenario, environment and criteria to each person still to a degree. For me it's still vinyl. :D

Offline bovineblue

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #18 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 02:37:44 AM »
Just copy your records to CD.

Offline hakka

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #19 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 05:59:24 AM »
Just copy your records to CD.

Done this before. It doesn't translate well. You retain some of the warm analogue and bottom end, but the overall clarity nose dives. It's as if some of the waveform is clipped and compressed once it recorded to digital format. It feels too rounded off in places and something is lost quality wise.

Offline BlueStar

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #20 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 02:08:22 PM »

Offline Gottlob

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #21 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 02:53:27 PM »
I guess a CD can still be a halfway house, offering in compact form some of the tactile qualities of vinyl, cover art and liner notes and sating a desire for collection. Personally though I'd stream for the sake of convenience and buy vinyl for the combination of tactility, warmth of sound, and the sort of ambiance that is provided especially on older albums or jazz by having to take the record out of its sleeve, insert the needle and watch it spin, an ambiance that isn't matched by streaming or the automation of a CD player. It's like drinking wine out of a wine glass versus a beaker.

Offline Lotus

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #22 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 02:57:23 PM »
My friend had a John Reis album on both CD and vinyl and he has a decent system so we A/B'd it.

Much better separation and more focused stereo imaging from the CD. Like each instrument had it's own lane. Everything sounded very present and 'all there, all at once'.

By contrast the band sounded more band-like on the vinyl. The guitar one side didn't occupy a set space on the stereo image, it bled and was less focused. Also, the drums actually sounded like they were physically behind the band. The bass guitar and kick drum were not so obviously and neatly different, you could hear them more as a rhythm section.

The CD was obviously louder but by comparison the vinyl sounded more organic. Like a super-real live experience. A bit of bleed, a bit of stereo wash, some sense of a real sound stage.

I don't use/have vinyl so I have no prejudice. Was surprised at the difference.
The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom, but to set a limit to infinite error.

Offline hakka

  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #23 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 04:41:00 PM »
My friend had a John Reis album on both CD and vinyl and he has a decent system so we A/B'd it.

Much better separation and more focused stereo imaging from the CD. Like each instrument had it's own lane. Everything sounded very present and 'all there, all at once'.

By contrast the band sounded more band-like on the vinyl. The guitar one side didn't occupy a set space on the stereo image, it bled and was less focused. Also, the drums actually sounded like they were physically behind the band. The bass guitar and kick drum were not so obviously and neatly different, you could hear them more as a rhythm section.

The CD was obviously louder but by comparison the vinyl sounded more organic. Like a super-real live experience. A bit of bleed, a bit of stereo wash, some sense of a real sound stage.

I don't use/have vinyl so I have no prejudice. Was surprised at the difference.

:thup: - CD will always be a more accurate representation in principle, its just a degree of unintedned natural change added to vinyl sounds that give it a different feel and complexion. Music can be analysed and critiqued based on how it technically sounds, but ultimately its about how it makes you feel. One or the other may just resonate differently for you, and that's where its less about fact and more about individuality.

Offline Northerngimp

  • Brexit W*nker
  • General Member
Re: CD v Vinyl
« Reply #24 on: Thursday 10 October 2019, 04:44:29 PM »
Vinyl but its a pain in the arse.