Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: [TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener! (Read 3130 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Congratulations on discovering the joys of vinyl. I run both vinyl sources and ripped FLAC streaming through a fairly high end system (at least the wife though it was when she saw how much I spent)

Digitally streamed cd (not from a cd player!) and vinyl can in my experience come very close, or so I thought until I discovered the effect of vinyl pressing quality. With a good original pressing or first reissue, mono or stereo, old vinyl - were talking Blue Note here from the early sixties - is utterrly stunning. Knocks digital out of the water. Its like a concert put on for you in your own front room by four musicians, and its NYC 1963 in a way they never heard, except live. The same album on '80's reissue or cd is like music on the radio - from next door. Only the Japanese also knew how to press.

I gave up on audio theories long ago and the  measurement-based science doesn't help me listen- the only thing you can trust is your ears. If you think it sounds better, then it does to the only person to whom it should matter - you. Never let "knowledge" get between you and the music.

Buy the best equipment you can afford second hand, then spend a lifetime improving it, and treasure vinyl, treat it with respect.

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #1 –
Great first post. Hey, crazy idea, but why not try reading the Terms of Service? You might find #8 especially interesting.

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #2 –
Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon on
...old vinyl - were talking Blue Note here from the early sixties - is utterrly stunning. Knocks digital out of the water.


Can you show any evidence to support your claim?!

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #3 –
I suspect that he may not be keen to provide objective, scientific evidence for the supposed superiority of vinyl.

Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon on
I gave up on audio theories long ago and the  measurement-based science doesn't help me listen- the only thing you can trust is your ears. If you think it sounds better, then it does to the only person to whom it should matter - you. Never let "knowledge" get between you and the music.
 

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #4 –
Quote from: dv1989 on
I suspect that he may not be keen to provide objective, scientific evidence for the supposed superiority of vinyl.
[Original quote of AndrewSouthLondon snipped]

I am not too sure there's reason for him to.

When this thread came up originally, I wrote a lengthy response, covering both the hype-tone perceived by the original message and some of the explanations regarding why such claims as "digital blockyness vs. pure analogue sine wave" are complete nonsense along with theoretical examples.

Then, a second before applying it, I looked at it again and scrapped it all.


The OP didn't really ask whether one media was superior to the other. He asked about recommended Vinyl gear, due to his own recent personal experience, and pursued getting to experience the subject, rather then getting to understand the theory behind it. He didn't attempt to back it up with boasted claims, possibly in part due to his own admitted claim: he's new to this, and clueless (his wordings).
More so, he did that in the Vinyl forum, rather than in some other "general music" forums, as many others have done before him.

I'm pretty new here myself, certainly am not making up the rules and lack the participation in many of the headache-discussions some of our veterans must have already, but as far at is goes, to my eyes it seems like a fair cop. Initial debunking of the claim regarding the LP-sine-pureness vs. DVD-A's-horrid-blocky-digitization was in place - it was stated, it is there, and it carried off to more OT discussion, as far as the OP's intentions were.

Upon getting the discussion back to its course, Andrew stated that as far as personal taste goes regarding what you choose to hear, the only one who can determine one's own preferences are his own ears and taste. Personally, I see absolutely no difference between that and the reply given to each member who asks "so what are the best settings to encode to my preferred lossy format" – test the settings that produce transparency to your own ears and use those.

Nowhere in Andrew's comments did I spot a claim for superiority of one format over the other, in no sense at all - unless you consider one's own ears as a media format.

Again, my $0.02 come with a very low exchange rate, but as far as it goes - I see no reason to backup with scientific-like basis claims which were not aimed to provide a definitive scientific-like answers in the first place. These are not opinions stated in a hinted manner to use them as the best-discovery-since-whole-wheat-bread; these are opinions stated to protect one's own right for their self-opinion. Must the opinions themselves be ABX'd as well?

-- L. Ipsum

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #5 –
Quote from: Lorem Ipsum on
Quote from: dv1989 on
I suspect that he may not be keen to provide objective, scientific evidence for the supposed superiority of vinyl.
I am not too sure there's reason for him to. . . . Andrew stated that as far as personal taste goes regarding what you choose to hear, the only one who can determine one's own preferences are his own ears and taste.
[/size]He could be read as promoting the placebo effect:
Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon on
I gave up on audio theories long ago and the  measurement-based science doesn't help me listen- the only thing you can trust is your ears. If you think it sounds better, then it does to the only person to whom it should matter - you. Never let "knowledge" get between you and the music.
[/size]Perhaps I am being cynical. But if someone trusts their ears that much, they should have no problem using science to conduct a blind test, because they should hear the same difference in quality every time and achieve statistically significant evidence of it (regardless of what they "think", i.e. their preconceptions). Admittedly, as has been said, doing this gets harder when vinyl is involved.

Quote from: Lorem Ipsum on
Personally, I see absolutely no difference between that and the reply given to each member who asks "so what are the best settings to encode to my preferred lossy format" – test the settings that produce transparency to your own ears and use those.
[/size]There's a difference between 'sounds identical' (transparency) and 'sounds better' (claim regarding relative sound quality), which brings me to your next point:
Quote from: Lorem Ipsum on
Nowhere in Andrew's comments did I spot a claim for superiority of one format over the other, in no sense at all - unless you consider one's own ears as a media format.
Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon on
Digitally streamed cd (not from a cd player!) and vinyl can in my experience come very close, or so I thought until I discovered the effect of vinyl pressing quality. With a good original pressing or first reissue, mono or stereo, old vinyl - were talking Blue Note here from the early sixties - is utterrly stunning. Knocks digital out of the water. Its like a concert put on for you in your own front room by four musicians, and its NYC 1963 in a way they never heard, except live. The same album on '80's reissue or cd is like music on the radio - from next door. Only the Japanese also knew how to press.
[/size]Again, perhaps I misread, but this seems a quite decisive dismissal of digital audio. (I'm not sure what's meant by "Digitally streamed CD", or whether the "Japanese" claim has any validity.) If I've misread ASL's post, I apologise. Still, despite the loudness race, I doubt vintage masters, and vinyl editions of any master, are always superior. Audio tech has come a long way in the meantime. Such sweeping claims should come with evidence/support.

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #6 –
Disclaimer: Please note this post gets more OT than its predecessors and more towards philosophical discussions about the discussion itself.
Read at your own discretion.

@dv1989:
Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon on
I gave up on audio theories long ago and the  measurement-based science doesn't help me listen- the only thing you can trust is your ears. If you think it sounds better, then it does to the only person to whom it should matter - you. Never let "knowledge" get between you and the music.
Your emphasis of Andrew's words takes his wording out of context. Displacing your emphasis thus:
Quote
If you think it sounds better, then it does to the only person to whom it should matter - you.
Reflects the original intention, IMO, in a little higher frequency fidelity.

Therefore, in this light:
Quote from: dv1989 on
Perhaps I am being cynical. But if someone trusts their ears that much, they should have no problem using science to conduct a blind test, because they should hear the same difference in quality every time and achieve statistically significant evidence [snip]
Yes, I suspect you are. Andrew does not "trust his ears that much" to give him "better" or "worse" (or "identical?) repetitive results; he trusts his brain to give him a subjective more pleasurable experience than if following the scientific-oriented test-routes expected from someone aiming to promote one media/method/conditions over another.

Personally I see no problem with that, as long as it is stated as such and within context - or rather, not within context of a media/format-war debate incorporating an attempt for such tests.

Quote from: dv1989 on
He could be read as promoting the placebo effect:
The placebo effect needs no promotion. It has its own party, followers, supporters and marketing share. Again, personally I see no problem with it, as long as all parties involved are aware of its existence and the manner in which it may affect their judgement - and their experience.

I once attended a performance of one of my favorite bands, and enjoyed it immensely, to an ecstatic level. I attended the show with a friend, to which I managed to keep secret our destination until about 20 minutes before the show, and the fact I got us tickets to first-row-center until about 2 minutes before the show. The experience of having the band performing less than 2 meters away from us had a very strong role for my extatic state.
 Judging the show from a more objective point of view, it is considered by many to be their worst performance in my country. Rumors has it that their leader was in less than ideal condition healthwise, naturally affecting his stamina and performance. Some of their most-expected numbers were left out. The sound system was less-than-ideal, to my (non scientific) ears.
 Did that change my enjoyment of that evening, even looking back at it, within perspective? Not really. The "perspective" I can gain is about their performance quality in regard to other performances; not over my enjoyment. That – subjective – part has too much to do with too many subjective conditions, few of which have any direct relation to pure comparable judgmental factors, many of which are purely whimsical. I'm fully aware that much of it was, actually, the placebo effect: I expected to have the best performance I could get, therefore it was the best performance I could get. I choose to enjoy it as such.


Quote from: dv1989 on
Quote from: Lorem Ipsum on
Personally, I see absolutely no difference between that and [...the request to...] test the settings that produce transparency to your own ears and use those.
There's a difference between 'sounds identical' (transparency) and 'sounds better' (claim regarding relative sound quality)
True; but no claim regarding sound quality was made – or, to be more precise, about the sound quality inherently possible as for digital vs. analogue route.

Quote from: Lorem Ipsum on
Nowhere in Andrew's comments did I spot a claim for superiority of one format over the other[snip]
Quote from: AndrewSouthLondon, emphasis by dv1989 on
Digitally streamed cd (not from a cd player!) and vinyl can in my experience come very close, or so I thought until I discovered the effect of vinyl pressing quality. With a good original pressing or first reissue, mono or stereo, old vinyl - were talking Blue Note here from the early sixties - is utterrly stunning. Knocks digital out of the water. Its like a concert put on for you in your own front room by four musicians, and its NYC 1963 in a way they never heard, except live. The same album on '80's reissue or cd is like music on the radio - from next door. Only the Japanese also knew how to press.

Judged in a court-room, I stand corrected - yes, indeed, there is claim for overall-experience differences possibly biased towards one media format which can be (clearly?) implied by the above.
However:
  • We are not in court. The choice of each and exact wording and phrasing should be taken, indeed, within context and intention. Come the day, even in court this is done on regular basis: judging whether something said or signed upon was done so upon understanding (and therefore, intending) something slightly different.

  • That said, even the underlined interpreted claims are self-debunked by the last sentence underlined by you: If "only the Japanese know how to press", then we're not talking about something inherently inferior in the digital world per se (unless the Japanese bits are somehow more 1's and 0's than western ones), but his claims actually touch the issue of different mastering – not necessarily different glass-mastering, but simply differences between the master tapes used for each media. It is no secret that for years, many CDs were produced directly from old master tapes, without taking any steps to enhance their sound and take benefit of the capabilities of the digital range/fidelity/quality/what-have-ya. Many were 2nd- and 3rd-generation tapes. Some were, simply put, wrong master tapes. Yes, I can certainly imagine someone comparing an initial LP pressing, made from pristine masters, comparing it to a first CD pressing of the same album.

One of the responses in this thread referred to the exact example given by the OP, as for the Beatles Mono Masters.
Do remember, that one of the (valid, IMO) claims for producing the Mono Masters in the current edition, is that it is "closer to what the fans heard in the 60s when they took the LP from stores and rushed to their homes". Well, aside from the actual differences in the mix, part of what they heard were, indeed, the pops and cracks of the LP. If one feels - note the irrational, subjective terms I use: feel - that they like better the experience of re-living the moment as much as possible, including all what is associated with the sound of LP - who are us to judge their preferences?
 Also remember John Cage's case for 4'33" - all sounds heard during a performance are part of the music. According to that, a recording of 4'33" made for an LP and played on LP, would be valid - but the same recording, captured from LP into digital media in order to be played later reproducing the exact same pops and cracks each time, would not. In saying so, does one claim superiority of one format over the other?

Quote from: dv1989 on
Again, perhaps I misread, but this seems a quite decisive dismissal of digital audio.
The dismissive claim was given by a 17-year old, stating alongside that claim that he is both clueless (his wording) and excited upon finding a new toy (implied by the read tone), and to my non-TOS#8-judgment, I believe it was perceived as such by most readers – and responders, and supporters.
 As stated before - the nonsense in that claim was pointed out, and that was the only relevance as far as the media-war debate went here. From there on, I feel it's pretty much debating whether their personal experience preference is of any validity, and to me, that debate is not really valid.

After all, this is the vinyl forum.

-- L. Ipsum

[TOS #8] From: Need help! First Time Vinyl Listener!

Reply #7 –
My quote re "dismissal of digital audio" referred to ASL, for reasons you acknowledged in the later part of your post. Anyway, this is getting too philisophical for me! Perhaps others have opinions or are more inclined to such discussions. In any case, I concede that we are off-topic, and I may have misread along the way. Still, users like SP and ASL must word carefully, for these very reasons. In the latter's case, until/if he replies with clarification of his statements, there's little point conjecturing about them.