[6stringmerc]

Fair point and maybe I can contribute, as I get the hostility in the tone. It’s in the inherent contradiction of the justification of the pursuit, from a music appreciation standpoint. Vinyl does not sound better, and many of the legacy artists mentioned didn’t record great quality (sounding) material in the modern era. It’s most definitely a “splurge” of wastefulness under a decidedly erroneous claim.

[globnomulous]

> Vinyl does not sound better

Have you listened to vinyl on a good system? I have trouble believing anybody who says this has ever listened to a decent record on a decent stereo.

Not all vinyl sounds better in my system. Some really is crap. But when I directly compare, and all other things are equal (or seem to be), vinyl normally sounds better than digital.

This is more often true of more recent records, too, though some of Deutsche Grammophone's Archive Production records from even the 50s sound astonishingly good.

I understand that objectively vinyl doesn't measure as well as CD, but I'll be damned if it doesn't sound better. My partner thinks it does, too, and she has no patience for audiophile nonsense.

[BoingBoomTschak]

> though some of Deutsche Grammophone's Archive Production records from even the 50s sound astonishingly good.

For what it is, i.e. a rock being dragged through a groove. But I'm very surprised to see this used as example, since orchestral music is the worst case scenario for vinyl: the reduced dynamic range makes good reproduction of those peaks simply impossible (labels like BIS would never have been able to engineer their magic such as on this CD - see the warning on the cover - https://www.discogs.com/release/16832175-Carl-Nielsen-Gothen...) and the surface noise really impacts the quieter moments.

Don't get me wrong, some CDs were brickwalled while the corresponding LP got a way saner master (e.g. Celtic Frost's Monotheist), but with similar masters, CD simply always wins as a medium. In this case, I digitize the LP while its surface wear is at its lowest.

[6stringmerc]

Very excellent citation and explanation - one of my main attractions to drum & bass over the years has been the amazing capitalization upon dynamic range possible with modern systems. Why would I listen to Sub Focus on vinyl when the corresponding digital file (even 320 kbps - not to even mention “lossless” being somewhat possible) does not suffer from physical interface complications? I’m glad you brought up mastering and the “loudness wars” who CB is absolutely great reading for those interested in audiophile related endeavors!

[6stringmerc]

Sound being a highly subjective term, I will grant vinyl can sound “warmer” on an A/B test but it does not sound “better” as a standing point. Every system “colors” sound to a certain degree - a la Beats headphones artificially enhancing the bass profile to suit market fit - but when talking quality, no, vinyl is still a problematic medium. Source: 20 years of audio production spanning tape to modern tools, and opinions based on experience and qualitative analysis where possible.

[cjaackie]

Yes I see what you mean, with hobbies sometimes better costs is equal to better quality (probably not in a linear sense). Records are not that, but ig there’s other examples like old cars that fit the same profile. Really the root question might be, what is better quality? There’s definitely a quality of experience with physical media that there isn’t an analog to in the digital world. I’m sure there are other examples on both sides.